The good things about the N.O

[ethelzguy]

I don’t wonder about it at all my friend. I know exactly why you guys hate it so much. The exact same reason that the alleged reformers Luther, Huss, Wycliff etc., did and the same reasons protestants today do. There is no real difference.

We don’t dislike “it”…what we dislike is the pompous, arrogant, more-Catholic-than-you attitudes such as those displayed above…Like calling those who favor the NO “protestants”

The Church has spoken. The Mass of Paul VI stands as the OF.

Even further, the Holy Father recently stated in an interview that the expanded use of the TLM was basically an accomodation, and not to be construed as a phasing out of the MofPVI in favor of the TLM (paraphrased).

 

[palmas85]

**We don’t dislike “it”…**what we dislike is the pompous, arrogant, more-Catholic-than-you attitudes such as those displayed above…Like calling those who favor the NO “protestants”

The Church has spoken. The Mass of Paul VI stands as the OF.

Even further, the Holy Father recently stated in an interview that the expanded use of the TLM was basically an accomodation, and not to be construed as a phasing out of the MofPVI in favor of the TLM (paraphrased).

You certainly could have fooled me. It sure seems like a lot of you guys dislike it, hate it in fact. In fact one of the more vociferous anti traditional posters on this board threw one up yesterday in which he actually came out and stated that he didn’t like it and detailed why he didn’t like it. While I don’t agree with what he said I do respect him because he had the strength of his convictions to stand up and tell the truth about how he feels unlike many others who try to tiptoe around the issue. You know being charitable and all that good stuff.

Indeed the Church has spoken. I attend the Pauline Rite or as it is now called the Ordinary Form much more often than I do the Traditional. I have never questioned the validity of the Pauline Rite.

Of course, pompous, arrogant and more Catholic than you attitudes are hardly confined to traditionalists my friend.

Not by a long shot.

You above many others should know that.

And I hope that you are not lumping me in with those who call Catholics protestants due to their preference for the Pauline. I merely stated that many protestant reformers including Martin Luther and probably some protestants today would agree with you. Thats a long way from calling you or anyone else a protestant.

 

[stephraim]

While I do feel more reverent at an EF mass, I feel that some aspects of the Mass of Paul VI are worthwhile. Like others, I prefer the expanded lectionary. I also prefer Eucharistic Prayer II, based on St. Hippolytus’ Apostolic Tradition. I prefer its explicit epiclesis. I appreciate the sign of peace, knowing that St. Justin mentions it in his First Apology. I do feel, however, that it should be moved to a less intrusive position in the liturgy, and that is precisely what is being considered by Rome at the moment. I even would like to see the inclusion of St. Clement’s Great Prayer from his Epistle to the Corinthians. Most scholars believe it to have been a part of the Eucharistic Prayer used by the Roman church. I like Latin, and I feel that the Church should go back to it. Still, I feel that the majority of people just wouldn’t understand what’s happening at the altar, and perhaps catechesis and some basic translational explanations by the presbyter could solve that issue. At least the new translation is more reverent. As a musician, I appreciate both chant and folk music, and I realize that both are beneficial in moving the hearts of the congregation closer to the Father and Son by the power of the Holy Spirit.

 

[utunumsint]

When I first started attending the EF mass four years ago, I loved it. There was such a sense of connectedness to the ancient and venerable catholic tradition. The Gregorian chant at this church was beautiful and wonderfully given. I rejoiced at having such a rich mass available in my parish, and my wife and I started to attend the church.

But then, I began to notice the disdain the parishoners felt towards the OF and the hatred they had for Vatican II and Bugnini. I was shocked at the distrust they had of our bishop, and of the pope. The longer I stayed at that parish, the more I realized I did not share their feelings on these matters. Of course, they were not all like this, but enough of them fell into that category that I felt like by the mere fact I was attending this church, I was also tacitly agreeing with their point of view. Now I can no longer enjoy this beautiful mass.

That being said, I have learned enough about the history of Vatican II and the implementation of the OF to realize that those who were attached to the EF had a legitimate claim to being disgruntled. There were liturgical abuses, and the repression of the EF was dissastrous, as Cardinal Ratzinger expressed in his memoirs. The wounds they suffered will take a long time to heal.

I pray for the day when the acrimony will abait and those who love the EF will also tolerate and even learn to appreciate the OF. But I believe this resolution will be very long in coming. Luckily, the church plans thing in the long term. Ecclesia Dei will be around for several centuries at least. Then hopefully the OF mass will attain the respectibility and the reverence that it deserves, by those who love the EF and by those who use it. I think the first step will be for them to start trusting the magisterium again. Pope Benedict will hopefully make this possible.

God bless,
Ut