Please explain differences in Masses

  • Thread starter Thread starter HistoryTeacher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
khkhk:
Being 13 can and can’t make a difference…a lot of these people may have extensive knowledge…just because they’ve had more “life experience”…and made more mistakes and learned from them…but they have to admitt, that they probably were never as wise as you are when they were 13…and if they didn’t listen to you, would you be getting answers???🙂
P.S. I think everyone needs to a deep breath, and remember that this is a CATHOLIC website, and we should be brotherly (or sisterly) towards each other…just a thought…:whacky:
Click to expand...
Wonderfully put Sarah… I think that many of us who are posting here take our faith very seriously. I admire both you and Podo because you take your faith seriously. It is often good to get a 13 year olds perspective on things. People need to remember through our confession we are returned to the same point, where we were at our baptisim… We all are children at that point, and Jesus uses children as examples becuase they have no past. Youth isn’t a bad thing… I think many will agree with me in saying that the two of you are more wise than some adults. Hey, I am 31 and feel like a child still myself. 🙂 We are all learning.
 
40.png
Podo2004:
Excuse me, I know what Im talking about . Just because I’m 13 it makes no difference! That’s why you guys never listen to me because I’m 13!!!
Podo
Click to expand...
It’s not your age Podo, at least not here. Alot of people didn’t know your age. There are people here by the way they’ve commented I would have thought they were younger than you.

That being said, there are people here with more life experience and it not fair to discount then because their ideas are “old fashioned”. The Catholic church is the one church with a history that dates back to Christ. I’ve tried to state this before. It doesn’t have to be an either or situation. Both are licit Masses (TLM / NO). This mine is better than yours, ourside is going to win in the end - sounds pretty grade schoolish to me and your getting this from adults that I’d have thought would have grew out of that by now.

If it’s any consolation adults didn’t listen to me when I was 13 either. ( And there’s a lot that still don’t and I’m a sage at 32! 😃 Their loss!) Some people get this amazing case of amnesia when they become adults - they forget what it’s like to be 13. Just pray you don’t get it when you get older, it seems pretty contagious! 😃
 
Life experience, eh???
I wonder where I got that from being born about 20[well 19] years after the introduction of the New Mass… 1969+19= you guess
 
40.png
AmyS:
…People need to remember through our confession we are returned to the same point, where we were at our baptisim… .
Click to expand...
Actually, we are at the Baptisimal level of sanctity and justification after a worthy confession, **AND ** attain a Plenary Indulgence, which should always be sought after a worthy confession.

God Bless
 
40.png
TNT:
There can be no truthful denying that the NOM was designed to please the protestant mainline sects, primarily Anglican and Lutheran. Nearly all that was exclusively Roman Catholic was expunged. The few things that remained were made optional.
It was intended to be a “universal christian worship service”, acceptable to both Catholic and protestant. It was a calculated risk to bring members into the “universal church” by removing the Catholic obstacles. You’ll have to decide if it was a success or failure in that regard.

Try, if you will, reading this factual comparison of the NOM and the TLM
coomaraswamy-catholic-writings.com/Traditional%20Mass%20vs.%20NOM.htm
It’s about 32 pages of direct comparisons, step by step from beginning of mass to the end.
It only covers the ordinary of the mass.
Then come back and discuss it.
The Readings also, were redone to expunge frequent references to hell, soul, angels, communion of saints, fate of the obstinate jew, and exclusive salvation.
God Bless
Click to expand...
How about we take a look at what someone who actually participated in the council said? To my nowledge,Coomaraswamy wasn’t there. This is a very good tape series on Vatican II from someone who is critical of its implementation. saintjoe.com/p/prod_desc.pl?id=388 You and Coommaraswamy are wrong in your assumptions.
 
40.png
bear06:
How about we take a look at what someone who actually participated in the council said? To my nowledge,Coomaraswamy wasn’t there. This is a very good tape series on Vatican II from someone who is critical of its implementation. saintjoe.com/p/prod_desc.pl?id=388 You and Coommaraswamy are wrong in your assumptions.
Click to expand...
Neither one of us assumed anything of the facts.They are simply layed out.
Your suggestion is helpful:
The Site You offered:
In this candid interview with Abbot Boniface Luykx, one of the last surviving authors of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy at the Second Vatican Council, you’ll discover the inside story and how the Council’s noble ideals for Liturgical reform went astray during the following disasterous years of implementation. (That says a lot in few words.)
Click to expand...
I was not referring directly to the Council… I was referring to the NOM construct well after the Council.How is it Different from the TLM which is on point with the title of this thread…not the Council. I did not mention the Council in my post, or did I?
The site I offered was on the NOM vs TLM Ordinary…step by step.
The site makes no assumptions on the prayers of each of those masses as they are constructed.
 
There can be no truthful denying that the NOM was designed to please the protestant mainline sects, primarily Anglican and Lutheran.
Click to expand...
This was the quote I was referring to and the dear abbot makes it clear that this is not true nor did the protestants have (name removed by moderator)ut into the council concerning the Mass.
 
40.png
bear06:
This was the quote I was referring to and the dear abbot makes it clear that this is not true nor did the protestants have (name removed by moderator)ut into the council concerning the Mass.
Click to expand...
Proof: From the horse’s mouth:
"We must strip
Click to expand...
from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants " (Annibale Bugnini, co-author of the New Mass. L’Osservatore Romano, 19 March, 1965) We pray as we believe …lex orandi, lex credendi.
In 1967, Cardinal W. W. Baum, who was executive director of the American Catholic Bishop’s Commission on Ecumenical Affairs, admitted in the June 27, issue of The Detroit News:

**
**

"They (the six Protestant ministers) are not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participate fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed." The December 22, 1972 issue of The London Catholic Herald quoted a prominent Anglican minister as stating:
**
**

"Today’s liturgical study has brought our respective liturgies to a remarkable similarity, so that there is very little difference in the sacrificial phrasing of the prayer of oblation in the Series Three (Anglican “Mass”) and that of Eucharistic Prayer II in the Missa Normativa (New “Mass”)" M. G. Siegvalt, a professor of dogmatic theology in the Protestant faculty at Strasbourg:
**
"… nothing
Click to expand...
** in the renewed Catholic Mass need really trouble the Evangelical Protestant "(* Le Monde*, 22 November, 1969).
Jean Guitton, a close friend of Pope Paul VI and a lay-observer at Vatican II, quoted a Protestant journal as praising the manner in which the new Eucharistic prayers had :
“dropped the false perspective of a sacrifice being offered to God” (La Croix
Click to expand...
, 10 December, 1969).
"If one takes account of the decisive evolution of the Eucharistic liturgy
Click to expand...
of the Catholic Church, of the option of substituting other Eucharistic prayers for the Canon of the Mass, of expunging (l’ effacement) of the idea that the Mass is a sacrifice, and of the possibility of receiving communion under both kinds, then there is no further justification for the Reformed Churches forbidding their members to assist at the Eucharist in a Catholic Church" (Le Monde, 10 September, 1970). This Site is a virtual tirade against Trads who deny the validity of the NOM. …which is NOT my point in this post
matt1618.freeyellow.com/detection1-3.html

BUT:
He uses many of the above quotes, and does not deny ANY of them as untrue.

My point that the NOM was designed with protestant acceptance in mind, be it by intelligent design or a massive amount of coincidence, stands unafflicted.

God Bless
 
40.png
TNT:
Proof: From the horse’s mouth:We pray as we believe …lex orandi, lex credendi.
In 1967, Cardinal W. W. Baum, who was executive director of the American Catholic Bishop’s Commission on Ecumenical Affairs, admitted in the June 27, issue of The Detroit News:

The December 22, 1972 issue of The London Catholic Herald quoted a prominent Anglican minister as stating:
****M. G. Siegvalt, a professor of dogmatic theology in the Protestant faculty at Strasbourg:
Jean Guitton, a close friend of Pope Paul VI and a lay-observer at Vatican II, quoted a Protestant journal as praising the manner in which the new Eucharistic prayers had :
This Site is a virtual tirade against Trads who deny the validity of the NOM. …which is NOT my point in this post
matt1618.freeyellow.com/detection1-3.html

BUT:
He uses many of the above quotes, and does not deny ANY of them as untrue.

My point that the NOM was designed with protestant acceptance in mind, be it by intelligent design or a massive amount of coincidence, stands unafflicted.

God Bless

Once again, listen to the tape series. He’s got some interesting things to say about people like Bugnini, et. al. and the Mass of Vatican II.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top