TLM misconceptions

[utah_rose]

Well… that’s why I said because they see it all the time. The vast majority of people can’t tell if something is right or wrong in the Mass just because they’ve seen it all, and the more vocal ones will tend to give excuses from these precedents, or bring up something totally unrelated (a schola chanting…but it’s the choir’s intentions that count! a woman with a veil? Well what kind of person are they outside of Mass?)

And trads who do this are being uncharitable :dts: opinions are nothing when they’re not backed up by Church documents or other legitimate sources. The best is to use some Vatican II on them

As a senior I’ve seen it all in the NO Mass, and tried to understand why the folk Masses, why the child’s Masses (as if they couldn’t understand) why the priest posturing as if he was the center of the Mass. I’ve also seen the result of wrong interpretations of Vatican !1, such as statues being removed, devotions like Forty Hours being dumped, and some Marian devotions such as May Crownings out the window.

I’ve also seen as a result the utter lack of real religion taught to the children, and this has resulted in many leaving the faith, including my daughter. I’ve had enough of the “wrong” Vatican 11 inflicted on the people, thank you very much, and the results of this on our so called “Catholic” politicians now in office.

I feel I can fairly (since I grew up in the TLM) Mass compare this with the NO Mass. First of all, the NO Mass we attend about once a month is a “low” Mass, that is no chanting. The only hymns are before Mass and afterwords. Plus 1 for me, although I love to sing, I feel that many of the songs are secular and don’t have the beauty of the old Latin hymns.

Secondly, it is not an obligation for a woman to wear a veil, but it is a sign of reverence. Chapel veils in this church are optional, but you can use ones they have in the back of the Church.

Finally, they have kneelers where you receive Communion on the tongue. If you are against this, you need to know that Pope Benedict began this about a year ago, and shows more reverence, particularly among the young.

Also, I feel the homilies are more geared to dogmatic things than the homilies that we at least have in our Parish Church.

It is very easy to follow the Missal–they are there in the back of the Church and have both Latin and the English translation.

I might add I went to parochial school, and we attended Mass every day before school, and we learned Latin the same way. I never had a formal course in it.

And, you will find in the Latin Mass most of the prayers in the NO, although some of them have been condensed in the NO Mass. such as the Last Gospel is omitted and psalms and readings have been added.

I do enjoy NOT having to hold hands in the Our Father (The priest says this in Latin) and shaking hands at the sign of peace, I think both of these practices have been overdone in some of our Churches, and the result is a lot of distractions.

So, I for one enjoy the traditional TLM Mass, and if there are people there attending out of rebellion, then this is God’s business not mine.

Both of these Masses have a beauty when properly celebrated. I think the best NO Masses I’ve seen though are on EWTN.

 

[VetA]

Are you saying that “organic” development of the Roman liturgy should have been halted in its tracks at Trent and further development over the next 500 years was unnecessary and undesirable? Obviously, that didn’t happen. If it had, would we not have had Catholics demanding the Novus Ordo 450 years ago?

What I wanted to know, are there groups offering the TLM today whose liturgy IS their strong point. If you know of such a group, who are they, where can one assist their mass?

In your view, what makes one 2010 TLM superior to another? Is it your position that a Trent-era re-enactment, performed in a theater, by professional actors, should be scored higher than a living TLM offered in a church, by real clergy, assisted by the faithful?

Just asking.

Substantiate your claims madame, give me proof, irrefutable proof is what i ask for.

 

[magdalina]

Originally Posted by magdalina View Post
Are you saying that “organic” development of the Roman liturgy should have been halted in its tracks at Trent and further development over the next 500 years was unnecessary and undesirable? Obviously, that didn’t happen.** If it had, would we not have had Catholics demanding the Novus Ordo 450 years ago?**

Substantiate your claims madame, give me proof, irrefutable proof is what i ask for.

Claim? You have set bold print on a rhetorical question I asked earlier in the thread. It was asked during an ongoing exchange with IntegraCatholic. The discussion began with post #56 and continued thu 61-62-64-67-68. You may wish to review them at your convenience.

If you would be so kind as to ask a specific question, I would be pleased to walk you through this.

 

[SunnaB16]

For me, the use of EM’s, CITH, lay Lectors, the NOISE, NOISE, noise, the MOVING ABOUT, etc. create an atmosphere that is NOT condusive to prayer…to the actual “connecting” to God, with our whole heart, our whole mind & our whole soul.

Being highly strung, all of that got on my nerves.

Cardinal Ratzinger, now our Pope, wrote in the intro to the Spirit of the Liturgy:

“Let us become always more clearly conscious that the liturgy also implies silence…"

The TLM. is the sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest,** offers Himself to God **in an unbloody manner under the appearance of bread & wine.

Annibale Bugnini’s Mass is a celebration of the Last Supper, a communal meal…

And those horrible looking varnished timber affairs which look more like dining room tables than altars reinforce that false idea.

What today’s society seems incapable of knowing is the fact that God DEMANDED such a Sacrifice…that of His own Son…so that the gates of heaven would be open…

…He is upright as Priest, yet He is prostate as Victim. His Mass is about to begin.”

Perfectly put.
But in todays plastic, alien society, it doesnt make sense.
There has to be continuous ACTION (along with noise)! No peace.
A shallow society wouldn`t recognise depth even if it fell into it.

At the risk of sounding like an idiot:
i reckon you can see a parallel with motion pictures: eg
The differences between the “The Lord of The Rings” books and P. Jackson and Cos (per)version go far beyond necessity. The increased ACTION, ACTION, ACTION was sickening. Along with CRASH, BANG, WALLOP. Childish. Is that the only way to keep the attention of todays adults?
Thanks be to God, i don`t have television.

 

[Robert_Burns]

As a senior I’ve seen it all in the NO Mass, and tried to understand why the folk Masses, why the child’s Masses (as if they couldn’t understand) why the priest posturing as if he was the center of the Mass. I’ve also seen the result of wrong interpretations of Vatican !1, such as statues being removed, devotions like Forty Hours being dumped, and some Marian devotions such as May Crownings out the window.

I’ve also seen as a result the utter lack of real religion taught to the children, and this has resulted in many leaving the faith, including my daughter. I’ve had enough of the “wrong” Vatican 11 inflicted on the people, thank you very much, and the results of this on our so called “Catholic” politicians now in office.

I feel I can fairly (since I grew up in the TLM) Mass compare this with the NO Mass. First of all, the NO Mass we attend about once a month is a “low” Mass, that is no chanting. The only hymns are before Mass and afterwords. Plus 1 for me, although I love to sing, I feel that many of the songs are secular and don’t have the beauty of the old Latin hymns.

Secondly, it is not an obligation for a woman to wear a veil, but it is a sign of reverence. Chapel veils in this church are optional, but you can use ones they have in the back of the Church.

Finally, they have kneelers where you receive Communion on the tongue. If you are against this, you need to know that Pope Benedict began this about a year ago, and shows more reverence, particularly among the young.

Also, I feel the homilies are more geared to dogmatic things than the homilies that we at least have in our Parish Church.

It is very easy to follow the Missal–they are there in the back of the Church and have both Latin and the English translation.

I might add I went to parochial school, and we attended Mass every day before school, and we learned Latin the same way. I never had a formal course in it.

And, you will find in the Latin Mass most of the prayers in the NO, although some of them have been condensed in the NO Mass. such as the Last Gospel is omitted and psalms and readings have been added.

I do enjoy NOT having to hold hands in the Our Father (The priest says this in Latin) and shaking hands at the sign of peace, I think both of these practices have been overdone in some of our Churches, and the result is a lot of distractions.

So, I for one enjoy the traditional TLM Mass, and if there are people there attending out of rebellion, then this is God’s business not mine.

Both of these Masses have a beauty when properly celebrated. I think the best NO Masses I’ve seen though are on EWTN.

Well Said. I think its a misconception that we who grew up with the Tridentine Latin Mass have suddenly become “protesters” for simply wanting to worship GOD with the Mass that is thousands of years old. Its not that we dont understand the new mass , (which is about to change again I understand)- its that we simply prefer to kneel for Holy Communion and Sing Come Holy Ghost , Oh Sacrament most Holy - Do the First Friday’s with Adoration and First Saturdays and to simply practise the same faith we did in our youth the way we did it in our youth. Its not a hatred for things new nor is it nostagia. I think that unles you grew up in that time - you really dont understand what the Church was like in those days. Certainly nothing like it is like today.

Pax

 

[CradleCath]

Well Said. I think its a misconception that we who grew up with the Tridentine Latin Mass have suddenly become “protesters” for simply wanting to worship GOD with the Mass that is thousands of years old. Its not that we dont understand the new mass , (which is about to change again I understand)- its that we simply prefer to kneel for Holy Communion and Sing Come Holy Ghost , Oh Sacrament most Holy - Do the First Friday’s with Adoration and First Saturdays and to simply practise the same faith we did in our youth the way we did it in our youth. Its not a hatred for things new nor is it nostagia. I think that unles you grew up in that time - you really dont understand what the Church was like in those days. Certainly nothing like it is like today.

Pax

It’s seems as if I’m part of your generation. I graduated from an all girls Catholic high school in 1959. I think that you mentioned something very important…it’s not nostalgia that draws us to the TLM., nor has it anything to do with “turning the clock back”. That can’t be done. (I would like nothing better than to see the streets safe enough for my Grandchildren to walk for blocks & blocks without fear…as I did. That’s not going to happen.)

The truth is that we, who honor the MASS of 1962, have had nothing to compare it with except the Novus Ordo & I consider that a dismal affair to say the least. Perhaps if the New Mass had been awe-inspiring, perhaps if the music had been Catholic, perhaps if it had lifted us to even greater heights instead of indulging in the mundane, the ordinary, the banal…we would be as content as those who have never known the grandeur of the TLM.

Instead, we were just pushed aside, branded as “malcontents” & left with the choice to take the Mass written by Bugnini or leave. I stayed & endured. Many of my generation didn’t.

 

[CradleCath]

Magdalina, just a bit of advice…when you post your remarks within the quote lines of another’s message, no one can quote yours & reply in kind. You’ll see what I mean if you try to reply to the post in question.

 

[magdalina]

Magdalina, just a bit of advice…when you post your remarks within the quote lines of another’s message, no one can quote yours & reply in kind. You’ll see what I mean if you try to reply to the post in question.

My apology. Still new to this.

Maggie.

 

[Bibbit]

I am a person who attends the EF about once a month, and absolutely loves it. But I must say that I agree with JP II when he stated the following in Vicesimus Quintus Annus:

1. It must be recognized that the application of the liturgical reform has met with difficulties due especially to an unfavorable environment marked by a tendency to see religious practice as something of a private affair, by a certain rejection of institutions, by a decrease in the visibility of the Church in society, and by a calling into question of personal faith. It can also be supposed that the transition from simply being present, very often in a rather passive and silent way, to a fuller and more active participation has been for some people too demanding. Different and even contradictory reactions to the reform have resulted from this. Some have received the new books with a certain indifference, or without trying to understand or help others to understand the reasons for the changes; others, unfortunately, have turned back in a one-sided and exclusive way to the previous liturgical forms which some of them consider to be the sole guarantee of certainty in faith. Others have promoted outlandish innovations, departing from the norms issued by the authority of the Apostolic See or the bishops, thus disrupting the unity of the Church and the piety of the faithful, and even on occasion contradicting matters of faith.
   I got the above from Adoremus, a group which first got my attention and money when it started. I think that many people go overboard in their preference regarding which Mass they attend. Personally I would love to always be able to attend a reverently celebrated OF Mass, such as is done at EWTN. I like many of the changes made, particularly the new cycle of readings (to my mind THE biggest improvement, it’s no longer the Gospel of John, the Gospel of John, the Gospel of John). I also like the more active participation of the faithful. I truly believe the OF can be celebrated as reverently as the EF.

But finally, and most importantly, it seems to me that folks who hate and rail against the OF are essentially saying they do not believe the Holy Spirit was present in the Magisterium when the OF came about. They don’t trust the Spirit to guide the Church into all truth, and often seem to think Vatican II was not a valid council. Unfortunately, I know many folks who are EF exclusive that are also border line (or actual) sedevacantists. That is not a good thing.

 

[garyfigurski]

Agree. Good comparison!

There seems to be a general belief that, because the vast majority of us dont know Latin, we should stay well clear of the TLM. ***Absolute baloney!*** i dont know Latin, and never will; but just to be there, and soak up the reverence, the dignity and the beauty of it overwhelms any (imaginary) minuses.
Theres a real fear of the "dead language". And theres the stupid belief that only the elderly want it.

When we understand what the Mass is, and what its various parts mean, language doesnt mean much. Its our Lord`s time-transcending Ultimate Sacrificial Act that matters.

If only we could lasso some of the well meaning but mistaken TLM opponents, and cart them off to the TLM! Hoe right you are. so many times we as Americans want the whole world to speak and understand english. I learned latin as a child being an altar boy. and later took it in high school and college. How lazy can people be anyway not to learn a 2nd langauge? Why not latin, it is "the langauge of the Church. How great to be able speak and pray with Catholics all over the world. Just a thought.

A lot of folks are also happy in their laid back, often very liberal, comfort zone…
… “Do Not Disturb”

 

[sparkletina]

So true.
Also, I don’t understand the ‘argument’ that Latin makes it impossible to understand what’s going on. It is so easy to use the missal. Most people these days know how to read, right? I’m sure everybody is capable of holding a book and following the text. I’m convinced it’s just a question of laziness.

I completely agree! Going through my mother’s belongings after her death, I came across a couple of old small leather missals that my parents used when attending the old Latin Mass (before Vatican 2). They knew a little Latin, but not much. I am French, and noticed that one missal had Latin on one side of the page/French on the other, and the other missal had Latin on one side/English on other. They were well-thumbed, so I know my parents used them all the time. Obviously, since we were French-speakers in America, they were comfortable with both French/English and could follow along. I don’t see any reason why that is so hard to understand today, even if you don’t know Latin. Just follow along in your language!!! I plan to use one of these missals if we ever get a TLM in my area (not available at this time). And I took 2 years of Latin, but can’t remember enough any longer to understand fully now, only just enough to know where we are in the Mass. Lack of wanting to do this is indication of our spoon-fed convenience mentality.

 

[Victorious]

I completely agree! Going through my mother’s belongings after her death, I came across a couple of old small leather missals that my parents used when attending the old Latin Mass (before Vatican 2). They knew a little Latin, but not much. I am French, and noticed that one missal had Latin on one side of the page/French on the other, and the other missal had Latin on one side/English on other. They were well-thumbed, so I know my parents used them all the time. Obviously, since we were French-speakers in America, they were comfortable with both French/English and could follow along. I don’t see any reason why that is so hard to understand today, even if you don’t know Latin. Just follow along in your language!!! I plan to use one of these missals if we ever get a TLM in my area (not available at this time). And I took 2 years of Latin, but can’t remember enough any longer to understand fully now, only just enough to know where we are in the Mass. Lack of wanting to do this is indication of our spoon-fed convenience mentality.

I found that it helped buying a 1962 Missal (Baronius Press has one in print) and then reading the Ordinary of the Mass ahead of time, so that I would be better able to follow along during Mass. The only part where it gets a little dicey following along is during the Canon of the Mass, which is said silently: you and the priest may not be reading at the same pace. But I usually set the Missal aside for the consecration, so I can pay attention to what’s happening at the altar.

Still: it’s really. Not. Hard. Latin on one side; English on the other. And you can use the priest’s gestures to help you keep your place.

 

[CradleCath]

Victorious;6852248]I found that it helped buying a 1962 Missal (Baronius Press has one in print) and then reading the Ordinary of the Mass ahead of time, so that I would be better able to follow along during Mass. The only part where it gets a little dicey following along is during the Canon of the Mass, which is said silently: you and the priest may not be reading at the same pace. But I usually set the Missal aside for the consecration, so I can pay attention to what’s happening at the altar.

Still: it’s really. Not. Hard. Latin on one side; English on the other. And you can use the priest’s gestures to help you keep your place./

You are SO right. It isn’t hard at all & one must remember that one doesn’t have to be “in sync” with the priest at all times…especially if the TLM is new to that person.

Your words re. the Latin Mass (I’ts not hard; read the Mass before Church, etc., etc.) have been posted on these forums so many times…I’m beginning to think that the language thing is just an excuse & that the fear of the TLM. goes much deeper.

Have you noticed how many of CAF’s posters have a role in the governing of the parish & the execution of the Mass? These boards are** filled **with DREs, RCIA teachers, liturgists, parish secretaties, permanent deacons, lectors. EEMs & on & on. Of course, many of these are not needed for a TLM. Mass. One wonders what would become of these “ministries” if the TLM. & vocations to the ordained priesthood really became commonplace again???

 

[Ockham]

I know many folks who are EF exclusive that are also border line (or actual) sedevacantists. That is not a good thing.

If you are EF exclusive you are not necessarily border line or actual sedevacanist. I know many people who are OF exclusive and de facto schismatic with their disbelief in the Real Presence and laws regarding marriage, and support of married priests. There are extremes on both sides so the key is to focus on the middle. If pressed, I’d support the extreme dedicated to preserving and following the traditions of the Church over those seeking to ‘reform’ or modernize it. The Truth doesn’t change.

 

[Ockham]

Have you noticed how many of CAF’s posters have a role in the governing of the parish & the execution of the Mass? These boards are** filled **with DREs, RCIA teachers, liturgists, parish secretaties, permanent deacons, lectors. EEMs & on & on. Of course, many of these are not needed for a TLM. Mass. One wonders what would become of these “ministries” if the TLM. & vocations to the ordained priesthood really became commonplace again???

Bingo.

The laity should be participating in other forms of life in Christ such as volunteering for the needy (Bingos perhaps), demonstrating against abortion and the gay agenda, and supporting our priests.

This notion that a select few get privlidged status during the liturgy hasn’t served us well other than their own egos.

 

[CradleCath]

But finally, and most importantly, it seems to me that folks who hate and rail against the OF are essentially saying they do not believe the Holy Spirit was present in the Magisterium when the OF came about. They don’t trust the Spirit to guide the Church into all truth, and often seem to think Vatican II was not a valid council. Unfortunately, I know many folks who are EF exclusive that are also border line (or actual) sedevacantists. That is not a good thing.

I don’t like to see the word “hate” when speaking of any Mass, but it “seems to me” that when someone tries to have a logical discussion comparing the two Masses…the actual prayers, the meaning of the movements of the priest, internal participation & external participation, the role of the laity at both Masses, etc. “the folks who rail against” the EF usually find a place to use that word.

I, a traditional Catholic believe that, the council was valid (as were all of them), pastoral & that the Holy Spirit was present. In fact, I believe that the Trinity is present in all of our lives. Each of the council Fathers, however, can choose to accept the guiding Spirit or not, just as we the laity can accept God as primary in our lives.

From a letter sent by Cardinal Ottaviani to the Pope after the council was over:

Most Holy Father:

Having carefully examined and presented for the scrutiny of others the New Order of Mass (Novus Ordo Missae) prepared by the experts of the Committee for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, and after lengthy prayer and reflection, we feel obliged before God and Your Holiness to set forth the following considerations:

1. The accompanying Critical Study is the work of a select group of bishops, theologians, liturgists, and pastors of souls.** Despite its brevity, the study shows quite clearly that the Novus Ordo Missae–considering the new elements widely susceptible to widely different interpretations which are implied or taken for granted–represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass **as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent. The “canons” of the rite definitively fixed at that time erected an insurmountable barrier against any heresy which might attack the integrity of the Mystery.

1. The pastoral reasons put forth to justify such a grave break, even if such reasons could still hold good in the face of doctrinal considerations, do not seem sufficient. The innovations in the Novus Ordo and the fact that all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place–if it subsists at all–could well turn into a certainty the suspicion, already prevalent, alas in many circles, that truths which have always been believed by the Christian people can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic faith is bound forever. The recent reforms have amply demonstrated that new changes in the liturgy could not be made without leading to complete bewilderment on the part of the faithful, who already show signs of restiveness and an indubitable lessening of their faith. Among the best of the clergy, the result is an agonizing crisis of conscience, numberless instances of which come to us daily.

ON THE OTHER HAND.

From Archbishop Bugnini:
“We must strip 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 Prostestants.” - Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, main author of the New Mass, L’Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965

Since these two Council Fathers disagreed vehemently on the New Order of the Mass, which do you believe was led by the Holy Spirit…both of them, neither of them, one of them??

I know many folks who are EF exclusive that are also border line (or actual) sedevacantists

BTW. If you are saying that traditional Catholics are schismatic, that is an oxymoron.

 

[Victorious]

If you are EF exclusive you are not necessarily border line or actual sedevacanist.

Yeah. Let me nail my colors to the mast:

1. The Novus Ordo is valid. An individual Mass may be invalid because of something that happens at that particular Mass; but a priest does not celebrate an invalid Mass merely by celebrating the Novus Ordo.
2. Now that I have had the opportunity to compare and contrast, I think the EF Mass is preferable. To me, it’s like listening to a symphony in a silent concert hall, versus trying to listen to it in a noisy concert hall with everybody laughing and yakking and carrying on; or looking through a clear windowpane versus looking through one that is fogged up. I’d attend the EF Mass exclusively if I could.
3. I am not a sedevacantist. Pope Benedict XVI is the real Pope. So were JPII; JPI; Paul VI; and John XXIII. (I think that covers all the Popes the sedevacantists have problems with.)
4. For years, the only EF Mass within 300 miles of where I live was offered by the SSPX. Liturgical abuses in my diocese, and particularly where I live, are more the norm than the exception. Yet I have refrained from attending Mass with the Society, because their priests are under suspension, and because I don’t want to get involved in the whole mess associated with their irregular status.
5. Now that there is an EF Mass 50 miles away, offered by a priest in good standing with faculties from his bishop (it’s outside my diocese), I go there. Unfortunately, there is only one Sunday EF Mass per month, so I bite the bullet at home on the Sundays I can’t get the EF Mass. (It wouldn’t be biting the bullet so much if I could get Mass by the book at home.) I have not quit going to Mass just because I can’t get the rite I prefer on every Sunday and holy day of obligation.

So I don’t think there’s any need for me to be regarded with suspicion or hostility just because I think the Mass according to the 1962 Missal is better than the Novus Ordo.

 

[Bibbit]

If you are EF exclusive you are not necessarily border line or actual sedevacanist. I know many people who are OF exclusive and de facto schismatic with their disbelief in the Real Presence and laws regarding marriage, and support of married priests. There are extremes on both sides so the key is to focus on the middle. If pressed, I’d support the extreme dedicated to preserving and following the traditions of the Church over those seeking to ‘reform’ or modernize it. The Truth doesn’t change.

I don’t think unbelief in the Real Presence or anything else that bad is a result of the Mass, I think it’s a result of poor catechesis. And I can back that up with some pretty basic logic. The Church teaches she is led by the Holy Spirit, and that councils are particularly led by the Spirit. That being the case, as a Catholic I believe the Spirit led Vatican II, and the Spirit led the Church the promulgate the OF. I can’t imagine the Spirit leading the Church to adopt a form of the Mass that would lead people astray, I do not believe that, but it appears many here do.

As to the quote I emboldened, see my prior paragraph. Those who love the OF are indeed following tradition, tradition with a caital T. That Tradition is what I said in the prior paragtraph, that is, they believe the Spirit led the Church to adopt the OF, and so they are following the Spirit’s leading.

As I said in my original post, I attend the EF about once a month and love it. LOVE IT! But, I do not and will not go down the road othes here tread, the road that says the EF is wonderful and the OF a mistake practically wrought by Satan himself. I believe the Spirit gave us the OF, and so I will embrace it. Now, as to how it’s celebrated, that’s another issue altogether, but I do believe our current pope is working hard to raise the level of reverance and sacredness with which that happens. Give him, and the Spirit, time. This period of diffuculty too will pass.

 

[mick321]

I don’t think unbelief in the Real Presence or anything else that bad is a result of the Mass, I think it’s a result of poor catechesis. And I can back that up with some pretty basic logic. The Church teaches she is led by the Holy Spirit, and that councils are particularly led by the Spirit. That being the case, as a Catholic I believe the Spirit led Vatican II, and the Spirit led the Church the promulgate the OF. I can’t imagine the Spirit leading the Church to adopt a form of the Mass that would lead people astray, I do not believe that, but it appears many here do.

As to the quote I emboldened, see my prior paragraph. Those who love the OF are indeed following tradition, tradition with a caital T. That Tradition is what I said in the prior paragtraph, that is, they believe the Spirit led the Church to adopt the OF, and so they are following the Spirit’s leading.

As I said in my original post, I attend the EF about once a month and love it. LOVE IT! But, I do not and will not go down the road othes here tread, the road that says the EF is wonderful and the OF a mistake practically wrought by Satan himself. I believe the Spirit gave us the OF, and so I will embrace it. Now, as to how it’s celebrated, that’s another issue altogether, but I do believe our current pope is working hard to raise the level of reverance and sacredness with which that happens. Give him, and the Spirit, time. This period of diffuculty too will pass.

Whole Lotta Spirits flying around this post.

At what point did the Holy Spirit become the “Spirit of Vatican 2”?

Are you saying that the “Spirit of Vatican 2” is the Holy Spirit?

 

[Bibbit]

Whole Lotta Spirits flying around this post.

At what point did the Holy Spirit become the “Spirit of Vatican 2”?

Are you saying that the “Spirit of Vatican 2” is the Holy Spirit?

My point is this, just as the Spirit led the early Church she leads today. The Mass celebrated 2,000 years ago had no organ music, no chant, none of what is loved and cherished in the EF. Yet the Church grew! The Spirit can and IS doing the same thing today. And I by no means am saying that all here hate the OF or say JP II wasn’t a valid pope, but I am saying the language used by many I personally know who will only attend the EF is often very, very harsh towards the OF. The Spirit led the Church to the OF, He will lead her into an even deeper appreciation of it, I am sure.