My feelings are if the old translation is wrong, then why didn’t they get it right the first time? The old translation was plenty good enough before, and now all of a sudden it’s not? Give me a break.
The answer to this can be found in the writings of the Latin Mass Magazine, Michael Davies, Dr Geoffrey Hull, Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, the Adoremus bulletin, The Catholic Truth Society, Eastern Churches Journal, Pastoral and Homiletic Review, SSPX, FSSP and plenty of eastern catholic/orthodox websites and traditional organizations.
The simple answer is that most of the western christian world went crazy with modernist/liberal influences in the mid 60’s thats the answer period. Thats why even today people are still building churches in odd designs, the shape of giant iconoclastic triangles and dioceses buy weird “crystial cathedrals” and think they’re good for catholic masses. The influences are less prominent now and the hierarchy has apparently gradually come to it’s senses.
Apparently the average Catholic is aloof to much of this and has to turn to those more educated traditional ones for explanations. The ones who were once mocked and persecuted as being outdated are now the ones more and more in a position of respect and leadership.
That’s why this thread was started by someone with a username “young traditionalist”
Young traditionalists like us…we are the future, we are the new cutting edge . We are the embodiment of the history of the fathers of the church, saints and ancestors before us. The students who’ve spent their years reading the matins lessons now become the teachers to help restore the church to God’s holy wisdom and humility.
Yesterdays moderate conservative/catholics may very well become the future “liberal” catholics if they can not keep up with understanding and obeying the current mandate of correcting the abuses and experiments deemed faulty.