NON-traditional Tridentine Mass?

[quote=jtnova]I am not judging anyone who attends the Novus Ordo, as that would be calumny, but there is nothing sacred, nothing religious, nothing pius, nothing that came from our Lord that is part of this travesty that you call a Mass

I hope you see yourself clear to go back to the one true mass as our founding apostles and saints instituted and not a Mason such as Bugnini and John XXIII
[/quote]

What you call a travesty happens to be where I go and receive my Savior’s body and blood. How dare you insult my Lord and His holy Mass! On another thread you were slandering the HOly Father and now Jesus. If you do not like the Mass, then don’t attend.

BTW -Have you always had this tendancy to see liberals and conspirators at every juncture?

[quote=ByzCath]I really grow weary of your need to correct me…

[/quote]

Then don’t post erroneous information…

[quote=pnewton]What you call a travesty happens to be where I go and receive my Savior’s body and blood. How dare you insult my Lord and His holy Mass! On another thread you were slandering the HOly Father and now Jesus. If you do not like the Mass, then don’t attend.

BTW -Have you always had this tendancy to see liberals and conspirators at every juncture?
[/quote]

Amen.

[quote=misericordie]We must admitt that even CARDINAL RATZINGER has said that THEOLOGICALLY speaking the NO mass is not as ACCURATE as the TRIDENTINE MASS theologically. I beleive that’s why well, the Holy Father has given ALL CATHOLICS the right to attend the Tridentine Latin mass(Motu Propio ecclesia dei) and I heard through a source in Rome, that he will soon grant ALL priests the right if they so choose to offer the Tridentine Latin Mass without anyone’s “permission” provincials or bishops.
[/quote]

What the heck does that even mean? Are you making this up as you go a long?

No we must not admitt (sic) that the good cardinal said this. Cardinal Ratzinger is a brilliant man and this is nothing but sewage.

As for the Tridentine Mass. It’s up to the local ordinary whether or not to allow (publically) in his given (arch)diocese…

[quote=Marines]Well said, that says it all.

  • Joe
    [/quote]

    Marines, we all know we are dealing here with (the author of the thread) an aultra angry and neo-liberal “catholic.” Thank God there are as yourself still well educated and brilliant catholics.

[quote=misericordie]Marines, we all know we are dealing here with (the author of the thread) an ultra angry and neo-liberal “catholic.” Thank God there are as yourself still well educated and brilliant catholics.
[/quote]

Franciscum: With respect, how would you feel if suddenly (and in the Church, “suddenly” can be two decades!), the Mass of Paul VI was radically changed? I can’t think of anything radical, except perhaps the priest celebrating from the back of the church, and instead of “amen,” the congregation responded by saying “word, bro!” I take that back…an elephant’s circus stool being used as the Altar of Sacrifice. That’s radical! At any rate, I know I would be upset, because I love the Mass of Paul VI…it is the Mass of my “birth” into the Church (at the age of 26). I do wish the rad trads (if the label doesn’t fit, don’t try it on) wouldn’t trash the Mass of Paul VI, but you know what? Even if they do, it doesn’t make it true. They’re not desecrating an altar, they’re not desecrating the Blessed Sacrament, they’re not walking in and disrupting a Mass. These are just words on “paper.” The Sacrifice is still confected on the altar. We can defend the Mass of Paul VI without fanning the flames, surely? I think that we should support our brothers and sisters who desire the TLM in their efforts to get it…licitly. I’m not talking SSPX. In fact, we should pray for the bishops to be generous in the Indult for that very reason, so that these folks won’t feel the need to give material aid to schism. God bless.

[quote=misericordie]Marines, we all know we are dealing here with (the author of the thread) an aultra angry and neo-liberal “catholic.” Thank God there are as yourself still well educated and brilliant catholics.
[/quote]

You were less offensive (albiet no more accurate) when you expressed yourself with emoticons…

Unsupportable positions like the ones you suggest do nothing but cast a very nasty pall over the entire “traditionalist movement.”

[quote=Franciscum]What the heck does that even mean? Are you making this up as you go a long?

No we must not admitt (sic) that the good cardinal said this. Cardinal Ratzinger is a brilliant man and this is nothing but sewage.

As for the Tridentine Mass. It’s up to the local ordinary whether or not to allow (publically) in his given (arch)diocese…
[/quote]

I take it you are not familiar with the Papal document(yes, THIS POPE) “Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei”?? I don’t think so according to your past posts which do nothing but TRY to be-little the Intelectual arguments posters here post with your PERSONAL opinions and worse, your rudeness and by being CRASS. Again, logic would be needed here. By being agressive here as you are, all your arguments become a FALLACY: any good college teacher teaches that to his or her students in fresman year.
No, no, it seems you really do NOT beleive Cardinal Ratinger is a “good” man, after all his positions with reagrd to tradition and your OPINIONS differ as night and day. Lets be honest here.

[quote=JKirkLVNV]Franciscum: With respect, how would you feel if suddenly (and in the Church, “suddenly” can be two decades!), the Mass of Paul VI was radically changed? I can’t think of anything radical, except perhaps the priest celebrating from the back of the church, and instead of “amen,” the congregation responded by saying “word, bro!” I take that back…an elephant’s circus stool being used as the Altar of Sacrifice. That’s radical! At any rate, I know I would be upset, because I love the Mass of Paul VI…it is the Mass of my “birth” into the Church (at the age of 26). I do wish the rad trads (if the label doesn’t fit, don’t try it on) wouldn’t trash the Mass of Paul VI, but you know what? Even if they do, it doesn’t make it true. They’re not desecrating an altar, they’re not desecrating the Blessed Sacrament, they’re not walking in and disrupting a Mass. These are just words on “paper.” The Sacrifice is still confected on the altar. We can defend the Mass of Paul VI without fanning the flames, surely? I think that we should support our brothers and sisters who desire the TLM in their efforts to get it…licitly. I’m not talking SSPX. In fact, we should pray for the bishops to be generous in the Indult for that very reason, so that these folks won’t feel the need to give material aid to schism. God bless.
[/quote]

I guess that the CATHOLIC Mass according to Franciscum (funny his name here is in latin for a person that despises the OFFICIAL language of the Church) was before 1968 nothing but (to use his own word) “sewage.”

[quote=Munda cor meum]Perhaps, perhaps not. I recall nothing in the Vatican II documents that I can find indicating that the purpose was to bring the Church out of the “Dark Ages”. Be careful here though, slinging the “Dark Ages” epithet about is often used to discredit the Catholic Church itself. I recommend that you read and understand more about this period. Perhaps then you, like many historians, will begin to refer to it as the “Age of Faith”.

You must admit, though, that the Tridentine Mass had a much longer period of development than the Pauline Mass. The Mass codified at Trent really did reflect the sense of the faith of the people as they grew, matured and became more educated. The same cannot be said of the Pauline Mass. It was a radical ( not gradual as the Tridentine) departure from current practices and came about not to reflect current understanding but to appease Protestants.
[/quote]

You’re absolutely right. Good posting…

[quote=ByzCath]Provide the proof of this.

Actually you may have the right but it is up the the bishop to provide the Trad Latin Mass. As for the hearsay information you have heard from a friend who heard it from someone in Rome (more conspiricy theory bunk) I do not believe it.

The bishops can fix this easily, by not granting facilities to a priest who wants to publicly celebrate a Mass he doesn’t want.

I have nothiing against the Trad Latin Mass, I have attended it before. I just do not prefer it and I take exception when people act like as you do. That is they act as if the Mass of the Church is not valid, you might not say it but you act like it.
[/quote]

Well if the Bishops are more concerned about fixating on a priest offering the Tridentine mass, rather than focus on most issues such as fixing in his diocese the sexual abuse coverups, than that says something about the particular bishops allegience to the POPE. Of course a Bishop would really be a little senile if he did what you mention about the facilities. After all, that will not stop well informed priests who know their CANONICAL rights from still offering the Mass, and I am sure the bishop would not want more of his sheep fleeing to the SSPX.

[quote=misericordie]I guess that the CATHOLIC Mass according to Franciscum (funny his name here is in latin for a person that despises the OFFICIAL language of the Church) was before 1968 nothing but (to use his own word) “sewage.”
[/quote]

I haven’t read anything by him that states that, Misericordie. Really, let’s all of us, TLM and MPVI, remember that we are CATHOLIC brothers and sisters. The Traditionalists should not disparge the MPVI anymore than we should disparge the TLM. I gratefully confess that in the TLM, the Holy Sacrifice ot the Mass is truly confected and offered. I would not deny that any more than I would deny My Lord. Surely the traditional folk can say the same about the MPVI?

[quote=Munda cor meum]Perhaps, perhaps not. I recall nothing in the Vatican II documents that I can find indicating that the purpose was to bring the Church out of the “Dark Ages”. Be careful here though, slinging the “Dark Ages” epithet about is often used to discredit the Catholic Church itself. I recommend that you read and understand more about this period. Perhaps then you, like many historians, will begin to refer to it as the “Age of Faith”.

You must admit, though, that the Tridentine Mass had a much longer period of development than the Pauline Mass. The Mass codified at Trent really did reflect the sense of the faith of the people as they grew, matured and became more educated. The same cannot be said of the Pauline Mass. It was a radical ( not gradual as the Tridentine) departure from current practices and came about not to reflect current understanding but to appease Protestants.
[/quote]

So in other words you are stating that POPE JOHN PAUL II has taken the Church back to “the dark ages” by saying in Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei that all Bishops should grant the Tridentine Mass as widely as possible?? Have ou even read Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei? If you have, is the POPE therefore wrong and archaic for so writing it??

[quote=misericordie]So in other words you are stating that POPE JOHN PAUL II has taken the Church back to “the dark ages” by saying in Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei that all Bishops should grant the Tridentine Mass as widely as possible?? Have you even read Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei? If you have, is the POPE therefore wrong and archaic for so writing it??
[/quote]

[quote=JKirkLVNV]Franciscum: With respect, how would you feel if suddenly (and in the Church, “suddenly” can be two decades!), the Mass of Paul VI was radically changed? I can’t think of anything radical, except perhaps the priest celebrating from the back of the church, and instead of “amen,” the congregation responded by saying “word, bro!” I take that back…an elephant’s circus stool being used as the Altar of Sacrifice. That’s radical! At any rate, I know I would be upset, because I love the Mass of Paul VI…it is the Mass of my “birth” into the Church (at the age of 26). I do wish the rad trads (if the label doesn’t fit, don’t try it on) wouldn’t trash the Mass of Paul VI, but you know what? Even if they do, it doesn’t make it true. They’re not desecrating an altar, they’re not desecrating the Blessed Sacrament, they’re not walking in and disrupting a Mass. These are just words on “paper.” The Sacrifice is still confected on the altar. We can defend the Mass of Paul VI without fanning the flames, surely? I think that we should support our brothers and sisters who desire the TLM in their efforts to get it…licitly. I’m not talking SSPX. In fact, we should pray for the bishops to be generous in the Indult for that very reason, so that these folks won’t feel the need to give material aid to schism. God bless.
[/quote]

My primary beef with a great many self-described “traditionalists” is how they divide the Church by denigrating the Pauline Mass. My secondary beef is that they are horrid spokesmen for the Tridentine Mass. Their erroneous claims almost ensure that the Tridentine Mass will never be anything more than a tiny movement in the overall Church.

Even with the preceeding Dialogue Mass, the Pauline Mass (along with much of V2) was implemented in a very poor manner during a particularly septic period in secular society.

It was also a poor move not to allow the indult from the very beginning as this allowed the Tridentine Mass to gain an artificial mystique that many now hail as a cure-all for the Church…

[quote=katherine2]I thank you for the first paragraph.

On the second, two comments. First, as even many neo-traditionalists will admit, was of the problems from Trent onwards was the inability to have a true, organic development of the Mass. Trent over-regulated and made more gradual reform impossible.

Second, still, the Roman Mass of today stands firmly within Roman liturgical tradition. While it was not to ‘appease’ Protestants, if you are going to make that claim, you might add to the believability by saying it was to appease the Orthodox (concelebration, communion in both forms, standing for communion, no fake deacons and subdeacons, varitable eucharistic prayers, vernacular liturgy, etc.).

It should also be noted that a liturgical movement had been going on for some time preparing the Church for the liturgical renewal. What’s so interesting is that many of the principles of the pre-Counciliar liturgical movement – late reforms to Tridentine practice – are now embraced by neo-traditionalists, often unwittingly as they frequently speak as if these were long standing practices.

On another board, a dear, dear little neo-trad boy was shocked to learn that Gothic chasubles were unauthorized innovations of progressive liturgicalists. He was astounded to learn that conservatives used to send nasty letters to Rome about their unauthorized use (pre-1957). We have talked about the conservative crusade against Latin/Vernacular Missals (a cause they lost around the turn of the century) and the absence of Gregorian Chant from Catholic worship until its 19th century revivial by the progressives.

Lastly, I can remember the 1950’s. Two worship activities pegged you as a liberal – you worshiped at High Mass and/or you worshipped with Negros. And if you did BOTH of those things, God help you – you may as well as had “Commonweal reader” tatooed on your forehead. :smiley:
[/quote]

There is NO ROMAN RITE in the present NO mass.

[quote=Franciscum]My primary beef with a great many self-described “traditionalists” is how they divide the Church by denigrating the Pauline Mass. My secondary beef is that they are horrid spokesmen for the Tridentine Mass. Their erroneous claims almost ensure that the Tridentine Mass will never be anything more than a tiny movement in the overall Church.

Even with the preceeding Dialogue Mass, the Pauline Mass (along with much of V2) was implemented in a very poor manner during a particularly septic period in secular society.

It was also a poor move not to allow the indult from the very beginning as this allowed the Tridentine Mass to gain an artificial mystique that many now hail as a cure-all for the Church…
[/quote]

Funny how you demand respect for the NO mass but degrade the Tridentine Mass (to use your own words) as something from the “dark ages.”

[quote=misericordie]I take it you are not familiar with the Papal document(yes, THIS POPE) “Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei”?? I don’t think so according to your past posts which do nothing but TRY to be-little the Intelectual arguments posters here post with your PERSONAL opinions and worse, your rudeness and by being CRASS. Again, logic would be needed here. By being agressive here as you are, all your arguments become a FALLACY: any good college teacher teaches that to his or her students in fresman year.
No, no, it seems you really do NOT beleive Cardinal Ratinger is a “good” man, after all his positions with reagrd to tradition and your OPINIONS differ as night and day. Lets be honest here.
[/quote]

You seem to be a gifted wordsmith, philosopher and theologian. Have you thought about becoming an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion at a Novus Ordo Mass, perchance?

[quote=Franciscum]You seem to be a gifted wordsmith, philosopher and theologian. Have you thought about becoming an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion at a Novus Ordo Mass, perchance?
[/quote]

No, I would rather not be an Extraordinary Minister of Communion, I prefer staying catholic.

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.