New priests' group hopes to preserve vision of Vatican II

[cjmclark]

Originally Posted by mymamamary

Oh boy, Im 16 years old, and i dont want modern. I think most of my generation doesnt want modern either. We are enhcanted by the mystical, the beautiful, the transcendent power, of the Latin Mass. The NO is very beautiful as well, but i would prefer the EF. The NO can be a very beautiful Mass, if it isnt abused. Please go back to Tradition, after all....

Sacred Scripture

Magesterium

TRADITION

Just be careful here not to equate the little-t "traditional" practices of the EF with big-T "Tradition" that all Catholics are required to observe. You can be obedient to Tradition and never attend an EF Mass in your life.

[Cristiano]

Originally Posted by mymamamary

I love the NO as i grew up with it. I love it, it is beautiful and still transcendent. However, The NO tends to lend itself to abuse, unfortunatley, as the rubrics arent as objective as the EF was (at least, thats my theory). Im sure they were abuses with the EF, but not as many, no changing the words. No altar girls, no COMMUNION on the hand etc. I have nothing against girls, and i dont think it is exclusive. People will say that because girls should get into the liturgy too, i dont think so. I may sound exclusive, im not trying to be, but whats next, oh well, we dont want women excluded, so lets let them become Priests? Women have a very critical life in the Church, always had, always will. We should thank them for their awesome contributions (Mother Angelica, i love you!!!), but feminism has ruined the dignity of womanhood, and in the process, manhood. The Liturgy is the one area where secularism doesnt get it, i want to keep it that way. So please, Lets move back to Tradition, Lets not become protestants. Watering down HOLY MASS, doesnt help the Faithful. HOLY MASS, both forms and both rites (EF and NO, and Eastern and Western repsectvley) are very potent, lets keep it at full strength. Holy Mother Church has always weathered the world, lets not fit in, WE ARE FROM THE WORLD, BUT NOT OF IT!! Im a Catholic, my country is Heaven, my sovereign is JESUS CHRIST, my head of state is The Pope and my officials are the Bishops and Cardinals of the Magesterium. My guidebook and moral code is the Holy Bible, and my rulebook is the Cathecism of the Catholic Church. So please remember, Sacred Scripture, Magesterium and TRADITION!!!

Be careful of what you wish for. The EF is not immune from abuses, if you read the history of the Church with references to the history of the liturgy of the Roman Rite you can see that about 200 years ago about 80 out 120 French bishops were abusing the liturgy, that is not an isolated case. Catholic tradition is not based on slogans but on proper education.

[Swiss Guy]

Originally Posted by mymamamary

Oh boy, Im 16 years old, and i dont want modern. I think most of my generation doesnt want modern either. We are enhcanted by the mystical, the beautiful, the transcendent power, of the Latin Mass. The NO is very beautiful as well, but i would prefer the EF. The NO can be a very beautiful Mass, if it isnt abused. Please go back to Tradition, after all....

Sacred Scripture

Magesterium

TRADITION

Never been to an EF, but as a Protestant, teenager, and future Catholic I want anything BUT modern. I find the NO beautiful.

[ringil]

These priests certainly have the right to work together for what they believe in, but I believe their efforts are misguided.

Vatican 2 was a great and far reaching council. It is taking time for us to digest and to give a more accurate vision of what was intended.

The liturgical experiments of the 70's and 80's went too far I believe. These priests are likely feeling left out as they grow older.

[ProVobis]

Originally Posted by ringil

Vatican 2 was a great and far reaching council. It is taking time for us to digest and to give a more accurate vision of what was intended.

The liturgical experiments of the 70's and 80's went too far I believe. These priests are likely feeling left out as they grow older.

The seeds of the Mass reform were planted in 1948, if not 100 years before. This was evidenced by the Holy Week changes in 1955 and then the change in the Canon of the Mass itself in 1962. I'm of the opinion more changes were already on the drawing boards in the 50's with only the right opportunity left to implement them.

[Cristiano]

Originally Posted by ProVobis

The seeds of the Mass reform were planted in 1948, if not 100 years before. This was evidenced by the Holy Week changes in 1955 and then the change in the Canon of the Mass itself in 1962. I'm of the opinion more changes were already on the drawing boards in the 50's with only the right opportunity left to implement them.

They started to really come out immediately after WWI and bloomed after WWII.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by ProVobis

The seeds of the Mass reform were planted in 1948, if not 100 years before. This was evidenced by the Holy Week changes in 1955 and then the change in the Canon of the Mass itself in 1962. I'm of the opinion more changes were already on the drawing boards in the 50's with only the right opportunity left to implement them.

Agreed. The warning signs were evident during the Reign of Pope Leo XIII and Pope St. Pius X. The warnings about modernism and the treachery that was being inserted into theological disertations was not unwarented. Reading Pascendi Dominici Gregis now, 100 + years later, the Encyclical seems prophetic beyond description. The Father of all lies will do anything, use any means, and a distort all truths in order to divide and destroy the Church. Our modern age, with it's questioning of all Dogmas, is fertile soil for Satan to continue to divide the Body of Christ. Too many are fooled into thinking this is old fashioned hand-wrigging, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Pray for Unity, and Pray continuosly for The Holy Father. The wolves are at the Gate.

[Julia Mae]

Originally Posted by mymamamary

Women have a very critical life in the Church, always had, always will.

No kidding. If we all stayed home, maybe one church could remain open in a diocese.

Maybe.

[PaulinVA]

The last gasp of the sandalistas.

[YoungTradCath]

No cincture!!!

[archangel04]

Interesting how most of those people in that pic are old folks. Yep, most of us young folks could care less about this "spirit."
You can take your spirit to your warehouse place of worship we will gladly worship where the true Spirit is, that is the spirit that connects us to the past with our saints, the apostles, and of course our Lord!

[barb finnegan]

Originally Posted by Equites Christi

I agree.

I think maybe the reason so many of us young, serious Catholics love traditional Catholicism is because we've had to grow up with modern Catholicism.

Maybe a modernized version of the faith was appealing to baby boomers, but our generation was raised on it, so we know very well that it's pretty ******.

Well, I'm a baby-boomer, and I don't like a 'modernized version of the faith'!

So don't paint ALL baby-boomers with the same brush!

There are baby-boomers who LIKE (even LOVE) 'traditional Catholicism'!

So there!

[trials]

At his recorded message played in the International Eucharistic Congress today in Dublin (Long live the Pope!) Pope Benedict actually talked about Vatican II and how there had been many "misunderstandings and irregularities" about interpreting what it was trying to achieve in the renewal of the liturgy. Here's the excerpt:

At our distance today from the Council Fathers’ expressed desires regarding liturgical renewal, and in the light of the universal Church’s experience in the intervening period, it is clear that a great deal has been achieved; but it is equally clear that there have been many misunderstandings and irregularities. The renewal of external forms, desired by the Council Fathers, was intended to make it easier to enter into the inner depth of the mystery. Its true purpose was to lead people to a personal encounter with the Lord, present in the Eucharist, and thus with the living God, so that through this contact with Christ’s love, the love of his brothers and sisters for one another might also grow. Yet not infrequently, the revision of liturgical forms has remained at an external level, and “active participation” has been confused with external activity. Hence much still remains to be done on the path of real liturgical renewal. In a changed world, increasingly fixated on material things, we must learn to recognize anew the mysterious presence of the Risen Lord, which alone can give breadth and depth to our life.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...eaking102.html

Is it coincidental that many of these misunderstandings and irregularities are happening here in Ireland right now?

If I understand him correctly he's saying that active participation means appreciating what is going on in the liturgy at a deep spiritual level - not merely taking part in meaningless ritual for participation's sake. For some reason, I'm reminded of a quote from Michael Voris, and I know very little about the man, but one clip I saw of him spoke of "an army of laypeople" doing various things during the Mass, so much so that it would distract you from the sacredness of what is happening.

Either way, God bless Pope Benedict for telling it like it is.

[JaMc]

Originally Posted by Cristiano

Be careful of what you wish for. The EF is not immune from abuses, if you read the history of the Church with references to the history of the liturgy of the Roman Rite you can see that about 200 years ago about 80 out 120 French bishops were abusing the liturgy, that is not an isolated case. Catholic tradition is not based on slogans but on proper education.

Well, I don't think the French Church, especially in the last 200 years (or 230 years) is really a good example of anything...

Anyway, yes, no doubt there were abuses in the EF. But the EF rubrics were pretty hard and fast, so it was clear if something was an abuse. WIth the OF rubrics being pretty much a "Chinese Menu", one person's "abuse" is another person's "incultration" or "pastoral creativity."

[Heavy Cross]

I like how everyone here is an expert, and thinks Vatican 2 is erroneous. Everyone has different tastes in how the Mass is given, but I disagree in condemning the other form. Is everyone here a expert or just heavily biased?