Extraordinary ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter banished
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Timothysis said:
To show just how empty your attempts are to denigrate the Ordinary Form of the Mass.
Click to expand...
timothysis: it often appears that you have almost a hatred for the tridentine mass. ive read several of your answers in forums and you sound angry and bitter towards people who enjoy this mass and are happy to have it back because of our deep love for Catholic history and tradition. im curious why?
 
Timothysis said:
To show just how empty your attempts are to denigrate the Ordinary Form of the Mass.
Click to expand...
Well, there’s no denying that except for the OF, all the liturgies of the Church are organic developments from the same event. The OF was literally created (in the manner of a Frankenstein monster) in the 1960s by a few people, and as such (an on-the-spot creation) it really does show itself to be categorically deficient compared to the TLM in all except the consecration.

People often say about the OF “well, it’s still a valid Mass and I still get the Eucharist”, and I just have to laugh because if that’s the best that somebody can say about a Mass, that it’s a valid form, basically says it all.

On the other hand, the TLM has been described as the most sublime thing this side of heaven. I happen to agree with that, and I imagine thousands upon thousands of saints throughout the years would agree. Padre Pio certainly agreed.

PS - your attempts at showing people “just how empty” their opinion of the NO is are likely to strengthen others’ resolves about avoiding it. From what you say to how you say it, your posts are not particularly conducive to winning people’s hearts or minds. Just sayin’.
 
A lot of people would have never become Catholic (from other denominations) had they never interacted with the OF. Many have “come into” the Church via the OF, then learned about the EF or Eastern Churches and then fell in love with the Church through them more.
 
SyroMalankara said:
A lot of people would have never become Catholic (from other denominations) had they never interacted with the OF. Many have “come into” the Church via the OF, then learned about the EF or Eastern Churches and then fell in love with the Church through them more.
Click to expand...
freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/925806/posts
In 1965 there were 126,000 adult baptisms - converts - in 2002 there were 80,000.
Click to expand...
Seems a lot less people converted from with the OF than the EF…
 
CassiusLonginus said:
That’s what a missal is for.

Also, I personally strongly disagree that the OF is or can be as lovely as the EF. Growing up I attended 2349028305 OF Masses, and not a one of them came close to the very first time I went to the TLM. It’s like comparing the desert and the forest. “Austere” is another word for barren.

IMHO
Click to expand...
I personally and AS STRONGLY disagree that the OF can’t be as lovely as the EF. I went to the TLM and was unmoved. It’s a matter of subjective opinion. And if you’ve never been in the desert at sunset, or at night, or at sunrise, you’ve no idea of it’s beauty. The most moving mass I’ve attended was an “austere” offering of the OF in a monastic setting. Blew the TLM I atended right off the map.

BTW, the number you quote only goes to demonstrate the difference between visceral response and informed response. You must be well over several thousands of years old.
 
weepixie71 said:
timothysis: it often appears that you have almost a hatred for the tridentine mass. ive read several of your answers in forums and you sound angry and bitter towards people who enjoy this mass and are happy to have it back because of our deep love for Catholic history and tradition. im curious why?
Click to expand...
This is plain absurd. Where, WHERE, has timothysis EVER uttered an invective against the Tridentine Mass? And who else has posted things that might be construed as angry and bitter? Would you admit that ANY “traditionalists” have? Would you admit that you have?

I prayed for the libertation of the EF so that people like you might have their hearts desire and that there might be reconciliation between the factions in the Church. I was happy when it came. Why can’t you simply stop your constant carping at the Church and the OF? Did you read the letter the Holy Father sent the bishops to prep them for the MP? You should.

Many of us love Catholic history and tradition…including the OF.
 
CassiusLonginus said:
PS - your attempts at showing people “just how empty” their opinion of the NO is are likely to strengthen others’ resolves about avoiding it. From what you say to how you say it, your posts are not particularly conducive to winning people’s hearts or minds. Just sayin’.
Click to expand...
Neither is the bitterness and intransigence of many “traditionalists” doing the OF any favors. Just sayin’.

Please read what Pope Benedict said to the bishops when he liberated the EF.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Correlation does not prove causation. There was major social upheaval in every area of society. We’ve no idea how those figures relate to the Mass.
Click to expand...
I’m aware of the correlation business. But then, if I cannot say we had more converts with the EF, then too can one not say we would have lost converts without the OF.
 
OraProNobisIHM said:
I’m aware of the correlation business. But then, if I cannot say we had more converts with the EF, then too can one not say we would have lost converts without the OF.
Click to expand...
I agree…I try not to make statements like that!🙂

I WILL say that the first Catholic Mass I attended as an adult choked me up and made me, a guy, weep like a big ole girl…and it was an OF…in a monastic setting, but the OF nonetheless.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
I agree…I try not to make statements like that!🙂

I WILL say that the first Catholic Mass I attended as an adult choked me up and made me, a guy, weep like a big ole girl…and it was an OF…in a monastic setting, but the OF nonetheless.
Click to expand...
I know you didn’t (at least here), I’m just hoping for consistency. 😉

I do have a friend who cried at Mass once, before his conversion, during his conversion, or immediately after his conversion. I forget, either way, he did. And it was at an OF that is by no means perfect (or close to the rubrics, or anywhere near orthodox). And this guy was… ah… late 20s? Early 30s?
 
OraProNobisIHM said:
I know you didn’t (at least here), I’m just hoping for consistency. 😉

I do have a friend who cried at Mass once, before his conversion, during his conversion, or immediately after his conversion. I forget, either way, he did. And it was at an OF that is by no means perfect (or close to the rubrics, or anywhere near orthodox). And this guy was… ah… late 20s? Early 30s?
Click to expand...
At some point, I believe the EF will develop and the OF grow “backward” (in the recovered recognition for the need for reverence in how it is celebrated) and we will once again have one single rite. I pray for that day.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
At some point, I believe the EF will develop and the OF grow “backward” (in the recovered recognition for the need for reverence in how it is celebrated) and we will once again have one single rite. I pray for that day.
Click to expand...
That’d be nice.

I, myself, am just rootin’ for the eventual “dying off” of the OF, but your idea would work too. 👍
 
I don’t have a problem with the OF in theory:
  • Nowhere does it say the Priest must use the vernacular.
  • Nowhere does it dictate he must face versus populum (towards the people).
  • Nowhere does it mandate the moving of the Tabernacle.
  • Nowhere does it dictate the use of EMHCs.
  • Nowhere does it mandate Communion in the hand.
  • Nowhere does it suppress Gregorian Chant.
  • Nowhere does it mandate the use of female altar servers.
  • Nowhere does it mandate the removal of chapel veils.
The problem with the OF is that it gives the Priest too many options. And when you have bad Priests that are just doing things to be popular with the people (Cutie ring a bell?) you get this:
youtube.com/watch?v=_UXlXG2uL0c
youtube.com/watch?v=khco_N-uEOY
youtube.com/watch?v=7aLLsJa9xYY
youtube.com/watch?v=Fv_y47x9kSk
youtube.com/watch?v=j0yfdbxr7qM&feature=related&pos=0
youtube.com/watch?v=sbM18BaSklE

Notice that while none of these invalidate a mass (the last one is gravely illicit, however the form “This is my Body” and “This is my Blood” are mentioned, however one can doubt the intent). They are certainly not what Pope Paul VI intended.

I go to the EF, I’m a Traditional Catholic, I believe the Vatican II was a legitimate Council, but it has been stretched so far beyond it’s parameters. What is needed is a crackdown on the widespread liturgical abuse.

Laus Deo
 
Timothysis said:
I have posted this for you so many times that you should know it by heart:

“On July 4, 1976, the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship unequivocally declared: “The Protestant observers did not participate in the composition of the texts of the new Missal.” (Documentation Catholique #58, 1976, page 649).”

Either you have your head in the sand or you refuse to acknowledge something that you seem to wish to be all too true.

It is most interesting that those who hail the “truth” of the pre-Vatican II Church will resort to known falsities when attacking the Church of today.
Click to expand...
There is a book by Archbishop Marini (the former MC of the Pope) called “A Challenging Reform” that tells all about the concilium formed to revise the Missal. It is an interesting read, which gives all the names of those involved and speaks of the Protestant observers and just that, observers. He goes into a lot of detail of the meeting (as much as could be put in one book) and the contorversies involved. I found it an interesting book to help understand the process of the reform of the Missal.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Look it up in the Catholic encyclopedias that are online.
Click to expand...
Well, if piety has negative infallibility as prescribed by Trent, what about the condemnation of new rites and the all-vernacular liturgy? Or are we just picking and choosing for our own agendas.
 
Timothysis said:
Either you have your head in the sand or you refuse to acknowledge something that you seem to wish to be all too true.
Click to expand...
Head in the sand? Six heretics (you call them Protestants) formed a committee headed by Bugnini, and you say they said nothing over all the time they were rewritting Catholic liturgy? Or maybe there was no committee and all those pictures lie? Sorry, but the presence of the heretics is the truth.
 
Timothysis said:
His criticisms of Pope Paul VI’s missal was the “basis for his being elected to the Papacy?” Do you have a source for this? So why, exactly, was Pope John Paul II elected? (I can’t wait for this one…)
Click to expand...
I suggest you start another thread for JPII then. You’ll probably get better responses from others.

Cardinal Ratzinger’s criticisms of Paul’s missal were widely known. Do you want to tell me or are you confident enough that he was elected despite or overlooking those criticisms?
 
Timothysis said:
Do you mean this “new rite?”

"This new rite alone is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See…"

Pope Pius V Quo Primum 1570
Click to expand...
How can this be if Trent condemned all new rites?

More to the point, was the ancient Latin Mass a new rite?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top