tridentine MAss

won’t the tridentine mass split up the church? do you the think that Pope J.P II would be pleased by this? Isn’t it a reversal of vatican 2?

In response to your question, no, this won’t split up the church at all. Far from it, it was implemented, in part, to be a source of unity in an attempt to bring the semi-schismatic SSPX group back into full union with the Catholic Church. There are many different ways, besides the Novus Ordo, to present a Catholic service already. We have 22 Eastern Catholic Churches in union with us, all with different liturgies, and that hasn’t broken up the church. There are also Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites available in a few places (Spain, Italy), and religious communities have their own versions of the liturgy (Dominican, Carthusian, etc.)

Would JP II be pleased by this decision? Absolutely, since it was his idea! He was the one who created the indult for the Tridentine Mass years ago and asked for “broad availability”. Because this broad availability never really happened, Benedict XVI had to strengthen the response.

And finally, this is not a rejection of Vatican II, but a continuation of the reform! If anything, it proves that Vatican II is alive and well, in a way. Forty years later, we are now able to look at what changes in the Mass worked, and which parts have failed to be implemented properly. One of the biggest concerns with the NO Mass has been the “loss of reverence and respect” for the Eucharist. Releasing the TLM, along with other reforms that have occurred (Sacramentum Caritatis), and are about to occur (the new translation of the English Mass) should continue the process of updating the Mass so that it remains accessible, and yet reverent. Allowing the TLM gives parishoners the option of attending whichever Mass they find most satisfying, as well as preserving some of the great traditions of our faith.

In response to your question, no, this won’t split up the church at all. Far from it, it was implemented, in part, to be a source of unity in an attempt to bring the semi-schismatic SSPX group back into full union with the Catholic Church. There are many different ways, besides the Novus Ordo, to present a Catholic service already. We have 22 Eastern Catholic Churches in union with us, all with different liturgies, and that hasn’t broken up the church. There are also Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites available in a few places (Spain, Italy), and religious communities have their own versions of the liturgy (Dominican, Carthusian, etc.)

Would JP II be pleased by this decision? Absolutely, since it was his idea! He was the one who created the indult for the Tridentine Mass years ago and asked for “broad availability”. Because this broad availability never really happened, Benedict XVI had to strengthen the response.

And finally, this is not a rejection of Vatican II, but a continuation of the reform! If anything, it proves that Vatican II is alive and well, in a way. Forty years later, we are now able to look at what changes in the Mass worked, and which parts have failed to be implemented properly. One of the biggest concerns with the NO Mass has been the “loss of reverence and respect” for the Eucharist. Releasing the TLM, along with other reforms that have occurred (Sacramentum Caritatis), and are about to occur (the new translation of the English Mass) should continue the process of updating the Mass so that it remains accessible, and yet reverent. Allowing the TLM gives parishoners the option of attending whichever Mass they find most satisfying, as well as preserving some of the great traditions of our faith.

It hasn’t thus far, why would it do now now?

By what?

The Tridentine Mass? No, it is not a reversal of Vatican II.

In response to your question, no, this won’t split up the church at all. Far from it, it was implemented, in part, to be a source of unity in an attempt to bring the semi-schismatic SSPX group back into full union with the Catholic Church. There are many different ways, besides the Novus Ordo, to present a Catholic service already. We have 22 Eastern Catholic Churches in union with us, all with different liturgies, and that hasn’t broken up the church. There are also Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites available in a few places (Spain, Italy), and religious communities have their own versions of the liturgy (Dominican, Carthusian, etc.)

Would JP II be pleased by this decision? Absolutely, since it was his idea! He was the one who created the indult for the Tridentine Mass years ago and asked for “broad availability”. Because this broad availability never really happened, Benedict XVI had to strengthen the response.

And finally, this is not a rejection of Vatican II, but a continuation of the reform! If anything, it proves that Vatican II is alive and well, in a way. Forty years later, we are now able to look at what changes in the Mass worked, and which parts have failed to be implemented properly. One of the biggest concerns with the NO Mass has been the “loss of reverence and respect” for the Eucharist. Releasing the TLM, along with other reforms that have occurred (Sacramentum Caritatis), and are about to occur (the new translation of the English Mass) should continue the process of updating the Mass so that it remains accessible, and yet reverent. Allowing the TLM gives parishoners the option of attending whichever Mass they find most satisfying, as well as preserving some of the great traditions of our faith.

The late Pope John Paul II celebrated the Classical Use of the Roman Rite both as a Priest and a Bishop. Every single Priest, Bishop and Cardinal in the Second Vatican Council also celebrated this Mass. As Pope, John Paul II also broadened the permission for its use.

Will it split the Church? No simply because the Missal of Blessed John XXIII and the Missal of Paul VI are of one and the same Roman Rite. It will however expose the banality of the various liturgical abuses that are occurring in the Missal of Paul VI.

Reversal of Vatican II? It is not possible to see the Council and Sacred Tradition as being in conflict. There is a hermeneutic of continuity between the two. What would reverse would be the erroneous interpretations that have become so widespread and the liturgical abuses that are simply just so alien to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Why would it split the church? THe church may become smaller and purer as the pope has indidcated in the past.

Yes since he told the world in his motu proprio Ecclesia Dei in 1988 that the Latin Mass she be allowed Generously

Nope its actually with long delay finally part of the implementation of VII. You do realize that Vatican II ended in 1965 and the Novus Ordo didn’t come aroun until 1969…and guess what Mass was celebrated at the council?

There is a real danger of a schism. However there was an even worse danger of the Church In Europe simply withering away, if Pope Benedict took no action.
I don’t think that JP II would be pleased, in the same way that grandad isn’t pleased when the son finally decides to sell the unmaintainable family pile in the country. However grandad might well recognise that he should have done it years ago.

Traditionalist movements, and conservative movements like Opus Dei, are very much in the spirit of Vatican II. A bigger role for laypeople doesn’t necessarily mean more privileges for laypeople, certainly Vatican II never intended that there should be less commitment by laypeople. If a stable group of the faithful ask for a Mass in an extraordinary rite to better represent their vision of the faith, that is very much the kind of thing Vatican II had in mind.

There is still going to be the NO. It will be the “ordinary” or normative Mass. Why don’t you get yourself a beverage of choice, and sit down and read the document. It might help you.

People who want to leave will find any excuse to do so. People who want to stay will stay.

It is sad to see that whoever intends to promote the use of Latin the the Church with the impressive Latin (‘Introibo ad altare Dei’ etc) logo appears not to know enough Latin to know when to use ORA and when to use ORATE.

I hope it divides the Church right down the center. We have been waiting for this for 30 years.

It is not a reversal of Vatican II. IT IS A LIBERATION OF IT.

After Vatican II the progresives who felt that the Vatican II documents did not go far enough in reform, decided to use the ambiguous documents to initiate changes not authorized by the Council.

There are many errors possibly held by oficial teaching at the local level, that claim “Vatican II” that are not Vatican II. Benedict XVI is here to straighten it all out. Watch and pray for him.

An example of this was most recently ironed out concerning the innacurate teaching of the Church that claimed that the Catholic Church was only a part of the Church and not THE Church.

Ken

I hope it does not divide the Church, right down the center or any other way. I’m not inclined to set myself as judge of others as being sheep or goats or even to long for the dread day of judgement. We should leave that to the Lord.

I don’t think that there will be a schism in the sense of Archbishop Lefebreve’s schism because, frankly, I don’t see any dissident bishops with his gumption (and whether anyone thinks I dump on the SSPX or not, I do recognize gumption). At the very least, he had the courage of his convictions (he was wrong, but that’s another thread). I can’t think of any bishop, offhand, like that. They’ll squeak a bit about this and that, but I doubt anyone will thumb their nose at the Holy Father formally.

I DO believe that there will be an exodus from the Church, but I don’t think it will be the fault of the Tridentine Rite. I think it has simply been a long time coming and as Vatican II is further clarified, as abuse is less and less tolerated, there will lots of folks who just kind of drift away. You may get a dramatic denunciation of the Pope and Magisterium a la Matthew Fox from a few sundry folks, but mostly people will just sort of drift out of the Church into other ecclesial communites (I think there’s going to be a big exchange between us and the Anglicans, for example, we get their orthodox and they get our liberals). You may see a few splinter “churches” along the lines of the Immani Temple, but nothing big.

In two generations, I predict that we won’t have the ordinary and extraordinary rites anymore, either. I predict that with organic development, we will have the Tridentine, offered in every parish in both Latin and in the vernacular.


Our late Pope JP II --wanted a wide and **generous **application of the Tridentine Mass. So I do not believe our late Pope would be displeased.

I think the traditional mass was the logical reaction to a novus ordo mass that is much more focused on we the people than God. If one will attend a traditional mass the focus is all on our Lord, lots of prayer, it feels almost like a workout when mass is over. The new mass is designed for us, to make feel comfortable, come in , sing amazing grace, shake hands with your neighbor etc. Im not saying the new mass is not valid, I attend the novus ordo, I just like the traditional better. Perhaps the sspx priests are in heresy, but they take their religion seriously, I have seen novus ordo priests while not in heresy clearly not worried about carrying out the rubrics as handed down by Rome.

\The new mass is designed for us, to make feel comfortable, come in , sing amazing grace, shake hands with your neighbor etc.\

**Can you tell me a prayer, rubric, or teaching that says the “new mass is designed for us” or where it directs to “sing amazing grace”?

The “shake hands with your neighbor” is a rather decadent modern version of the Kiss of Peace, which was originally a ceremonial embrace, preserved in the Extraordinary Form when celebrated as a Missa Solemnis with Deacon and Subdeacon.**

Everyone might want to note that the original post on this thread was made over 2 1/2 years ago… :rolleyes:

1)won’t the tridentine mass split up the church?
The Church is united no matter what happens “for the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” I would say that there are various preferences, disagreements and points of views. For instance I believe that the NO Mass and TLM Mass are both valid and pleasing to God BUT I prefer the latter right becuase it is rich in tradition and contains several things unseen in the NO.
2)do you the think that Pope J.P II would be pleased by this?
Probably so. He was more of a philosophical pontiff rather than liturgical
3)Isn’t it a reversal of vatican 2?
The objective of vatican 2 was to be more ecumenical w/ other faith traditions; however we have a liturgy that mimicks the Protestant communion service several wreckovations have occured et cetera…but on a positive note Anglicans are coming home to Rome and more converts are being recieved…

I was a protestant for about 7 years so I know that kind of liturgy. I suppose we can sing protestant hymns but why? I say dig deep into that rich history of sacred music, however, the sacred music is more fitting at the TLM. The shaking hands thing happened once at the beginning of a mass when the priest came in asked that everybody turn to their neighbor and say hi or shake hands, this was something we always did as protestants.

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.