I’m not sure I understand your question. Isn’t it already the extraordinary form of the Latin Rite (the Pauline Mass being the ordinary form)? Are you asking if it would be good if the universal indult was given? If so, I say “yes,” but I thought that question had already been asked.
It is exactly this kind of derogatory comment that so endears those proclaiming themselves to be “traditionalists” to those who happen to prefer the normative Mass of the Church, and creates such suspicion and division.
That’s exactly what I thought, too, so I didn’t vote either. I would LOVE for the TLM to be the ordinary form for all Masses.
Sometimes people mistakenly use the term modernists when they really mean to say liberals or innovators. Modernism is a defined heresy, and most people here have learned not to use that term.It is exactly this kind of derogatory comment that so endears those proclaiming themselves to be “traditionalists” to those who happen to prefer the normative Mass of the Church, and creates such suspicion and division.
I’m sure there are a great many who prefer the N.O. Mass that will be very surprised indeed to learn that that defines them as “modernists”.
[Edited by Moderator]
I believe it will happen, that the TLM once again becomes the Mass of the Church. It will happen very slowly, and probably not in our lifetime, but I think it will happen.
Ok, maybe it’s a semantics issue. The English Mass isn’t normative/ordinary either in the strict sense for it too is an indult that has to be approved by the bishop. In America that is indeed likely but in some foreign diocese it may not be.
In statistics, that would be a regression curve.
Those who prefer what the Church herself gives us as the norm are just liberals and innovators rather than outright heretics. Gee, that’s much more consoling.
Is orthodox just not good enough any more?Read here, for the Church herself used the term some 100 years ago in September.It is exactly this kind of derogatory comment that so endears those proclaiming themselves to be “traditionalists” to those who happen to prefer the normative Mass of the Church, and creates such suspicion and division.
I’m sure there are a great many who prefer the N.O. Mass that will be very surprised indeed to learn that that defines them as “modernists”.
[Edited by Moderator]
:hypno:
I’m quite familiar with what a modernist is. People who support the valid normative Mass of the Church don’t qualify as heretics.
That isn’t what I or anyone else said. The term modernism was questioned and I urged all to read what the Church teaches. Or do we outright reject this document because our “understanding” has changed.
OK, so who are you referring to as “modernists” here? Anybody who does not favour the 1962 missal?
I meant exactly that. I said nothing about heresy in the Church. Please don’t confuse the two. The heresy of Modernism runs rampant in our world today. In our educational institutions(especially public), in our society as a whole.
Sorry I bothered with an attempted explanation at why some people still say modernist.Those who prefer what the Church herself gives us as the norm are just liberals and innovators rather than outright heretics. Gee, that’s much more consoling.
There is yet another very disturbing air of superiority sweeping through.