On the Four Qualities of the Liturgy: Validity, Licitness, Fittingness, and Authenticity

A lecture given at Queen of Peace Parish in Patton, Pennsylvania, on September 21, 2020. Liturgical discourse nowadays is typically limited to only two categories (validity and liceity or legality). Although much attention is paid to fittingness in the realm of sacred art, it deserves to be considered a liturgical category alongside the aforementioned pair; and finally, joining these must be the category of authenticity or legitimacy, as an irreducibly distinct perfection. Only by considering all four qualities can we arrive at an adequate assessment.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Website: www.peterkwasniewski.com/
Substack: traditionsanity.substack.com/
Composer site: cantabodomino.com/
Publishing site: osjustipress.com/

[@KenDelloSandro7565]

Absolutely brilliant Dr K.
You always had a special way of explaining things when you teach. It's a unique Talent. Thank you for all your hard work over the years, I've learned so much... and
I Thank our Blessed Lord that we have ya . God bless.

[@DrKwasniewski]

Thanks for the kind words! Pray for me.

[@TruthSeeker-333]

Thank you for defending the truth

[@laurenti_8108]

May God reward you

[@thomasjorge4734]

Thank you Doctor for the Prescription.
My Heart-Ache seems to be dissapating.

[@agbordaniel5369]

Thank you for this

[@IpCrackle]

Incredible

[@m.proximus1930]

Thank you, Dr. Kwasniewski, for this informative and edifying presentation! Question, by way of illustration, about validity: If the bar for validity is so low that a priest can hold a poor or even heretical opinion about what he is doing, then why - in the Her own reasoning - did the Church decide that Anglican clerics don't effect sacraments and apostolic succession is not handed on in them? Don't main stream Anglicans hold themselves to be the particular catholic church in England and intend to do what the Church does even though they teach heretical things about Her?

[@peterkwasniewski9003]

Thanks for your kind words and your question.
One thing necessary for validity is that the rite itself has to express unambiguously the sacrament to be performed or conferred. The Catholic Church has judged that the Anglican rite (and this would be true of many another Protestant rite) does not adequately signify what is being done, and therefore it doesn't matter if the minister thinks he's confecting the sacrament; he isn't. Whereas if you look at the Novus Ordo rites, as defective as they are in most respects, they do adequately signify what is being done, and therefore all a cleric has to do is follow what is given in the rite, and have the intention to do what the Church does.

[@fuerzadesalvacion]

this one is now subtitled into Spanish as well:
ua-cam.com/video/CI5EyVlXN6Q/v-deo.html

[@m.proximus1930]

Listening again...
RE: Intent and validity
If the bar for intent (e.g. "It need only be virtual...") is so low for the sacraments in general when it comes to a priest who has theological and pastoral training, why is the bar for intent and validity so high when it comes to the Sacrament of Matrimony and non-theologian and non-pastorally-trained lay people? Good grief: even with a tradition-oriented, conservative-minded reading of the canons on matrimony, a catholic who has lived for decades with a putative spouse can wiggle out of it!