V
- Status
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
It took forever to load but it was very, very interesting. Father implies that the Motu Proprio is not about restoring the TLM as it was but rather to restore the TLM in such a way as to do what the second Vatican council intended or as he says that which has been imperfectly done.
Interesting, very, very interesting.
Interesting, very, very interesting.
V
VociMike
Guest
I have no doubt that Benedict’s goal is not to keep the TLM frozen in time, but (among other goals) to allow a cross-fertilization between the two versions of the rite which will bring both in closer conformity to the true will of the Council Fathers.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
If that’s the case, then some “traditionalists” are going to be as disappointed in this as some liberals and progressivists.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
Oh, indeed. Bring back the TLM and try to do what was the original intent of the Second Vatican Council. I was in high school when we transitioned from the TLM to the NO. There was no rhyme or reason why thing were done the way they were done. One week we were singing Parce Domine and the next Bridge over Troubled Waters. All of it was done in three years time.
So, if the HF intends to use the wider use of the TLM to spur the thoughtful change which should have been done forty years ago instead of the rush for out with the old and in with the new, I say, bravo.
So, if the HF intends to use the wider use of the TLM to spur the thoughtful change which should have been done forty years ago instead of the rush for out with the old and in with the new, I say, bravo.
B
BobP123
Guest
I seem to be hearing “Give Vatican II another chance, please!”
At least Fr. Fessio is honest and seemingly fair to both sides, except the progressives aren’t listening. In fact, most Catholics couldn’t care less.
I’m beginning to feel sorry I ever asked for the M.P. to begin with. As they say, “Be careful for what you ask…”
At least Fr. Fessio is honest and seemingly fair to both sides, except the progressives aren’t listening. In fact, most Catholics couldn’t care less.
I’m beginning to feel sorry I ever asked for the M.P. to begin with. As they say, “Be careful for what you ask…”
B
BobP123
Guest
My understanding of several years ago when he was Cardinal Ratzinger that he didn’t want the TLM to be frozen in time. New saints were to be added to the calendar, maybe a prayer or two added, etc. That sounds organic.
Once you start eliminating things like the propers in Latin, you’re opening the doors to something perhaps even worse than what you have now. I would have no problems in hearing some of the readings also in the vernacular as they are done now right before the homily. But only in the vernacular is not OK.
V
VociMike
Guest
I once heard a theory (read it online, actually) that the Holy Spirit allowed the NO as a way to “protect” the TLM from the inevitable ravages of the 60s and 70s. Now, whatever one may think of that, I think that our collective experience of the last 40+ years puts us in a vastly superior position today to consider what the Council truly called for, what should be done and what should not be done.
The issue of what has happened regarding sacred music is a very large part of those deliberations. We never got our sung vernacular Propers and there’s no reason to think we ever will. I doubt the Council Fathers had a clue as to the damage that “vernacular fever” would do to the liturgical music of the Church, but now we have the record before us.
B
brotherhrolf
Guest
Mike, I have to tell you that when I listened to Father’s interview, it really resonated with me. Forty years of “muppet music” and “muppet liturgy”…Reintroduction of TLM…significant numbers of us who remember, large numbers of young folks…The HF may be calling for let’s revisit what we’ve done in the last 40 years. And after 40 years of what we’ve seen…I think we’re seriously ready to reform the Mass according to what the Second Vatican Council wanted.
B
BobP123
Guest
For the same reason operas (and German cantatas) lose their appeal when sung to the same melody in some translated form, those Latin chants should remain in Latin. And nothing can beat those Epistles sung in Latin by the subdeacon at a Solemn High Mass. Put the ICEL on a mission to translate Russian or something. On second thought, better not.
As to the preservation of the Missal of 1962, I think the Church and all the splinter groups have done an outstanding job, much to the chagrin of many I suspect. (I think it was Fr. McLucas, from whom I heard that the God gave us the NO to protect the Church’s real treasure.) Maybe each and every Catholic should be given a copy of the 1962 Missal in both Latin and in the local vernacular, whether he ever intends to go to a TLM or not. After all the Truth is inside and intact. And the Pope knows that.
B
BobP123
Guest
This SSPX video has the readings in the vernacular.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1872714663680800365
Is this what Fr. Fessio is talking about?
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1872714663680800365
Is this what Fr. Fessio is talking about?
R
rien
Guest
I think this gives lots of credence to reports the MP will not be what traditionalists had hoped for. its looking more that way when you read stuff from “insiders” like Fessio.
P
patrick457
Guest
Well, that’s life; not everything you expect will come in the way you wanted it, but how the Issuer willed it to be.
- Status