TLM misconceptions

  • Thread starter Thread starter magdalina
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bibbit said:
The Spirit led the Church to the OF, He will lead her into an even deeper appreciation of it, I am sure.
Click to expand...
But could you say the Holy Ghost led the Church to the OF? I think this was the previous poster’s point.
 
ProVobis said:
But could you say the Holy Ghost led the Church to the OF? I think this was the previous poster’s point.
Click to expand...
Geez, no, I am not a “Spirit of Vatican II” guy. Geez, are there any of those left? A bit insulting to even be asked, I must say.
 
Bibbit said:
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.
Click to expand...
The way the Mass is said , people standing around priest doing his best at showmenship Communion handed out like crackers at a tea party, on an altar that lookes like it came from my kitchen! If Queen Elizabeth II came to your church you would put out the finest china, gold with more pomp then any tritentine high Mass! AND THIS IS JUST A PERSON. So then how should we worship our God!
 
garyfigurski said:
The way the Mass is said , people standing around priest doing his best at showmenship Communion handed out like crackers at a tea party, on an altar that lookes like it came from my kitchen! If Queen Elizabeth II came to your church you would put out the finest china, gold with more pomp then any tritentine high Mass! AND THIS IS JUST A PERSON. So then how should we worship our God!
Click to expand...
If I drive a top of the line Corvette (cost: $100,000+) like it’s a Yugo (cost: $0) it doesn’t mean that the Corvette is bad, it means my driving stinks.
 
Layman said:
I don’t see your point :confused:
Click to expand...
and from a previous post
Layman said:
The way the Mass is said , people standing around priest doing his best at showmenship Communion handed out like crackers at a tea party, on an altar that lookes like it came from my kitchen! If Queen Elizabeth II came to your church you would put out the finest china, gold with more pomp then any tritentine high Mass! AND THIS IS JUST A PERSON. So then how should we worship our God!
Click to expand...
*You seem to be saying that the OF itself leads to bad practices. I am saying I disagree.

As to the bold above, we worship God through the Mass, preferably reverently and properly celebrated. The OF done properly is very reverent.
 
Contra_Mundum said:
Hm, that’s quite a strange and unlikely scenario here. I mean, it is not possible today not to be familiar with the NO. It is hardly something unknown. It is the *only *thing most Catholics know. Traditionalists who strongly dislike the NO normally feel that way because of negative experiences they had.
Complete opposite can be said about those who are against TLM. There are not many resources to learn about it out there unless people follow Catholic blogs or something like that. Many priests openly preach against the tradition and depict it as being something backward and unecessary to hold on to. In this case ignorance is indeed one of the reasons for the ideological opposition to TLM.
Click to expand...
I so agree! 40 years the NO was "rammed down your face there were no pols no debate The "sprit of Vatican II rammed on, not what the Fathers intended, mind you but this so called sprit that was used not renew but to give us a whole new church. Has anyone read the papers of Vatican II? I believe in Vatican II not the mess they made of it. You don’t need to ramble prayers and play "ring around the altar to have "active partisapation.
 
Bibbit said:
and from a previous post

**You seem to be saying that the OF itself leads to bad practices. I am saying I disagree.

As to the bold above, we worship God through the Mass, preferably reverently and properly celebrated. The OF done properly is very reverent.
Click to expand...
You are entitled to your opinion, as we all are. However, it would help a LOT if you would answer the questions I asked in post #86.

Thanks so much.
 
Bibbit said:
and from a previous post

**You seem to be saying that the OF itself leads to bad practices. I am saying I disagree.

As to the bold above, we worship God through the Mass, preferably reverently and properly celebrated. The OF done properly is very reverent.
Click to expand...
I agree with that statement but around here that is few and far between. We have a bishop (set to retire, thank God) who will not hang up his “hippie beads” Really, this NO mass is a product of those times any norm or tradition was thought to be “establishment” and to be tossed out, These are the times that this present form of Mass was created. The NO in my way of thinking, anyway back to bascis back to what the Vatican II Fathers intended.reverently or not is NOT the issue.
 
CradleCath said:
You are entitled to your opinion, as we all are. However, it would help a LOT if you would answer the questions I asked in post #86.

Thanks so much.
Click to expand...
I didn’t think your question in 96 actually called for an answer, I thought it was rhetorical. I also think it’s a bad question. Irregardless of the intent of some of those who fathered the OF, the fact is the Spirit allowed it to come into being. I do not believe the Spirit would have given us the OF were it in and of itself against His will. The Spirit guides the councils and the magisterium, not this cardinal or that cardinal. It’s quite possible that some day an African will be pope, and he may decide that our understanding of reverential music is incorrect and then seek to “Africanize” the Mass. I believe he, as pope, would have the right to do that. You may not like it, I may not like it, but it is how Christ set up the Church. He didn’t say “he who hears the guy in the Catholic answers Forums hears Me.” He said “He hears hears you hears Me.” Meaning he who hears the Church leaders. I am listening to the leaders and following their lead. In doing so I believe I am following Christ. Now, were they to tell me to buy a different brand of tires for my car I’d tell them they have no right to do so. But they do have the right to tell me how to celebrate the Mass.
 
garyfigurski said:
I so agree! 40 years the NO was "rammed down your face there were no pols no debate The "sprit of Vatican II rammed on, not what the Fathers intended, mind you but this so called sprit that was used not renew but to give us a whole new church. Has anyone read the papers of Vatican II? I believe in Vatican II not the mess they made of it. You don’t need to ramble prayers and play "ring around the altar to have "active partisapation.
Click to expand...
The mainstream media also played a major role, calling the new all-vernacular Mass the Vatican II Mass, the relaxation of fasting and abstinence rules a major accomplishment of Vatican II, and even calling the new practices of facing the people and standing and CITH the greatest thing Vatican II called for. The suppression of Latin was most welcome in the self-serving world. All this, of course, disingenuous to the council but that’s the fallacy people now live with.
 
That’s just the point: None of the changes to the Mass, apart from the creation of the N. O. itself, which so irk people, were authorised by ‘The Magisterium’. They just happened. CITH got an ‘after the fact’ approval, under strict circumstances, which seem to have been ignored.

Just found this:

catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/ordo.htm
 
CradleCath said:
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.
Click to expand...
A big AMEN to that! I really pray that on day again we can become ONE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH. I grew up with my “foot” in both world,Learned the old in grade school and new in high school and college.I studied Vatican II and did my own papers on the subject.NOWHERE did I see the intent of the Fathers as being what we have today."“The use of latin is to be retained in the latin rite”."The people are to be taught (latin) those parts of the Mass that pertain to them) This is another form of "active partisapation. God Bless
 
Bibbit said:
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. .
Click to expand...
Your logic is questionable. Perhaps the Spirit gave us the Novus Ordo as a test.

Are you saying if the NO hadn’t been created yet catechesis declined anyway, the TLM would have the same disbelief today?

The new Mass shifts attention from Calvary to the Last Supper. While an important event this makes the new Mass more of a communal supper among bretheren rather than witnessing the Holy Sacrifice.
 
CradleCath said:
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.
Click to expand...
I was a small kid when we had the TLM. Very soon that was Paul VI’s Mass, still in Latin then. A few years after, we started having the mass in our own language. Now it seems to me that musically speaking, until we came to have it in our own language, it still was Gregorian Chant. I remember I kind of had the impression that the mood changed a little bit when it became sung in our language: the melody of the Kyrie and the Gloria switched from D Major to A minor… I remember it felt strange back then. But otherwise, if properly done, the Mass still can be lived with reverence.
 
Ockham said:
Check the Bible.
Click to expand...
You’ve got examples of the Spirit testing via the worship of God the Father? Please, do tell, I am seriously interested. I’m no Fr. Mitch Pacwa, so I’d love to be shown where. It may just change the way I view all this. But I honestly doubt you can. 😦
 
Here’s an example of God testing us: Genesis 3.

There are others as you should know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top