Article: A new look at the Old Mass

“A new look at the Old Mass”

From Homiletic and Pastoral review:

pittsburghlatinmass.org/sblm/sermons/images/myers.pdf

Brilliant…absolutely brilliant.

It was a well written article and it was interesting to read his observations. I don’t agree with all of his conclusions or rather I’m not sure that I agree with how he arrives at them. Yet I’m glad that he was able to experience renewal in his ministry. That is always a cause for thanksgiving.

I also agree that we certainly re-examine renewal within the Church.

Great, great article. Thanks for posting it. And God bless this Priest. It’s good to come across a Priest who is so honest.

Ditto X 2. So glad it is posted for us to read.

Completely agree with everything Fr. had to say. So true, all of it.

Thanks for posting the link.:thumbsup:

drools over article

…Its so good, this article…
My desires and sentiments expressed in words…

It sucks not having a TLM near you…

great article. i just read a article in the neo-conservative publication *the catholic register *on “what happened to the indult?”. in it, it quotes cardinal schola who says that a universal traditional latin mass indult would “be a contradiction of terms” because the liturgy would be a cause of division.

this is laughable. according to his logic, liturgical diversity is a bad thing.

1209 The criterion that assures unity amid the diversity of liturgical traditions is fidelity to apostolic Tradition, i.e., the communion in the faith and the sacraments received from the apostles, a communion that is both signified and guaranteed by apostolic succession.

how can anyone say that the traditional latin mass was not signified and guaranteed by apostolic succession? it had been handed down to us through the ages by apostolic succession but was nearly abrogated shortly after vii.

what i find so frustrating is that most traditional loving catholics are not trying to force the latin mass on everyone. they generally respect liturgical diversity, especially the ancient rites of the east which share much in common with the traditional latin mass. I don’t care that some like the charismatic movement. It’s not my cup of tea but who am I to judge?

why are these bishops in france, whose country is completely secular, so worried about the tridentine mass? the traditional movement in france is the only thriving catholicism left in that pagan country. why do so many catholics, especially the bishops and cardinals, find the tridentine mass threatening?? It’s almost scary.

Sorry, but “neo-conservative”? That’s funny.

Does anyone have a link that is not to a PDF file? The PDF files tend to crash the computers where I am at.

Sorry, but “neo-conservative”? That’s funny.

Why? :confused:

Because neo-conservative is a political term. A more appropriate adjective would be orthodox.

“neo-conservative” is a more polite term for “neo-Catholic” when used in this way.

I suggest you read this:

latinmassmagazine.com/conservative.asp

Quite informative.

No, Ham’s correct, orthodox it should be, orthodox it has to be. In *Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, *Pope Benedict XV stated this:

“It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself.”

""Neo-conservative is simply a term used by some who self-identify as “traditionalists” to bash Catholics who are orthodox and obedient (and, for that matter, traditional…just not “tradtional”).

I tried for the longest time never to say anything negative about the Mass of Pope Paul VI. In fact, I offer it almost every day because I can not offer the traditional Mass. I never doubt its validity and I always offer it with as much devotion as I can muster. However, I am not blind. I can make comparisons between the new and the old, and I can see the theological and spiritual shortcomings of the new rite: it’s failure to express the fullness of Catholic Faith about the Eucharist and the priesthood, its inability to raise up heart and mind from the profane to the supernatural, its confusion on the role of the priest, and its unfaithful and banal translations of the original Latin text. How do we hold on to what we believe in without making these negative comparisons? It is a difficult task.

We all agree that it is wrong to go as far as to stop being obedient to the pope and bishops in order to be able to celebrate the old rite of the Mass. And we also agree that both the old and the current rite are valid. But do indult Mass attendees generally have the above view, that there are “theological and spiritual shortcomings” of the current rite that makes it objectively inferior to the old? That, no matter how worthy a celebration of the current rite of the Mass is offered - even if it is in latin and ad orientem - it can never come close to the old one? Are there even those that, though they are in full communion with the Church, still think that the old rite is more pleasing to God than the current, and that it would have been better if it had not been promulgated at all?

I totally agree with what Cardinal Bertone’s recently said in an interview, that

The merit of the conciliar liturgical reform is intact. But both [for reasons of] not losing the great liturgical heritage left by Saint Pius V and for granting the wish of those faithful who desire to attend Masses according to this rite, within the framework of the Missal published in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, with its own calendar, there is no valid reason not to grant to every priest in the world* the right to celebrate according to this form.

I have no problems with those attending indult Masses for reasons of personal taste. What I have a problem with is the idea that it was a mistake of the Church to promulgate the new Missal.

I applaud the Holy Father’s statement. Otherwise, we risk becoming like the Jews belonging to different groups with different rules (i.e. Orthodox, Conservative and Reformed).

Let’s just leave it at Catholic and recognize that some have a prefererence for the Traditional Latin Mass, which will hopefully be much more available soon. And, I have no problem with people encouraging their fellow Catholics to attend a TLM and working to remove abuse from the Pauline Mass at some parishes.

I’m even trying to minimize the use of “cafeteria” Catholic, though I am guilty of using it on these fora. From my personal experience, I think most people who choose not to follow Church teaching, do so out of ignorance rather than obstinance. There certainly are some who know the truth, understand it, and still rebel; but, many are just poorly catechized. It is our job to fraternally correct in love and charity…as difficult as that may be. :o

God bless,

Robert

Yeah…

Because that FSSP priest who wrote that, is really a “traditionalist” as you like to put it…

I agree to an extent. The real mistake was to “suppress” the Old Rite and ram the new Missal down everyone’s throat.

Now now, be content with your latin in a cemetery chapel in the corner of the diocese, remember, Mass starts at 7:30pm, and is on Monday.

Like it, otherwise you’re schismatic, or a “traditionalist”

:o

Agreed. I believe that is why the last Pope did some and the current Pope is doing more to repair that.

Actually it’s called a crypt chapel. The New Order is upstairs. If that doesn’t feel like you’re stepped on…, ah, what’s the use?:frowning:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.