Wanting to Explore Traditional Catholicism

[Francis]

I do appreciate your concern,all you said are facts,you can be devote ,we are all called to be saints,there is nothing wrong to attend the Traditional Latin Mass,At the same time, we should remember, to be baptized a Catholic ,mean you also have to die as a Catholic,To be faithful till the end,To the Catholic Church, the Pope,and to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church .Though you may find them compromised at times ,we have to pray and do penance,for the present condition of the Church is going through.We Have a solid hope the gates of hell will nor prevail against the Catholic Church!

Matthew 16:16-1816 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.(the Catholic Church) You have to in St Peter"s Boat as Jesus preached from their, God Bless!

QUOTES FROM THE SAINTS ON THE MASS
The Mass is the most perfect form of prayer!

Pope Paul VI

For each Mass we hear with devotion, Our Lord sends a saint to comfort us at death.

(revelation of Christ to St. Gertrude the great).

A single Mass offered for oneself during life may be worth more than a thousand celebrated for the same intention after death.

St. Anself

"If someone said to us, “At such an hour a dead person is to be raised to life, " we should run very quickly to see it. But is not the Consecration, which changes bread and wine into the Body and Blood of God, a much greater miracle than to raise a dead person to life? We ought always to devote at least a quarter of an hour to preparing ourselves to hear Mass well; we ought to annihilate ourselves before God, after the example of His profound annihilation in the Sacrament of the Eucharist; and we should make our examination of conscience, for we must be in a state of grace to be able to assist properly at Mass. If we knew the value of the holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or rather if we had faith, we should be much more zealous to assist at it.”

St. John Vianney
One Mass before death may be more profitable than many after it.

St. Leonard of Port Maurice

“The Holy Mass would be of greater profit if people had it offered in their lifetime, rather than having it celebrated for the relief of their souls after death”

Pope Benedict XV

Once, St. Teresa was overwhelmed with God’s Goodness and asked Our Lord “How can I thank you?” Our Lord replied, “ATTEND ONE MASS.”

Jesus Christ

"The Blessed Virgin Mary once told Her faithful servant Alain: “My Son so loves those who assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that, if it were necessary He would die for them as many times as they’ve heard Masses.”

The Virgin Mary

“When we receive Holy Communion, we experience something extraordinary - a joy, a fragrance, a well being that thrills the whole body and causes it to exalt.”

 

[Bataar]

Mary_Veronica:

I see a lot of support for a schism within the church coming from Traditional Catholics

All that means is that they are allowing the devil to influence them.

No matter how problematic a certain teaching of the Pope may seem, it’s not an excuse for schism.

That’s not necessarily true. The church is the pillar of truth. The church and the Vatican may not always be the same. If the Vatican, at some point, breaks away from that pillar, the pillar of truth will still be there and there will still be people, priests and bishops who adhere to it, so the church will still be true, it just won’t be lead by the Vatican. There could definitely be a schism at some point, but if the Vatican is breaking away from the church and pillar of truth, I don’t believe it would be sinful not to follow.

 

[Mary_Veronica]

Thank you! Is the St Andrew’s Daily Missal the same as the St Andrew’s Bible Missal?

 

[Reuben_J]

Sound Protestant. We believe in a visible Church with Peter as the head. There are different levels of teachings, ranging from the deposit of faith to Pope’s letters, personal opinion and press statements. Schismatic, nevertheless, is a sin. Both types of mass, EF or OF, are the same that give the same grace. The latter is a valid mass. It is not holier than the other.

 

[StGerardMajella]

No, I don’t believe so. The one I am referring to is called “The St. Andrew Daily Missal” by Dom Gaspar Lefebvre O.S.B. St. Bonaventure Publications carries copies or you can find a copy on Amazon.

If you do decide to purchase and use for Mass, I would recommend considering the purchase of a leather missal cover to protect the book from wear and tear. You can find these at some Catholic bookstores or online as well.

The St. Andrews takes some acclimation. It has several ribbons so you can keep your mark for the readings of the Mass, and the canon of the Mass, etc.

The Baronius Press Missal is very nice as well, but less thorough than the St Andrews. It is easier to read visually, but has less content.

 

[otjm]

I have no clue as to where you picked up the idea that the OF is “Protestant”.

I have been to a high Lutheran Mass; and they essentially copied from us, not we from them.

The same for the Anglican/Episcopalian.

Differences in both, but they did not lead with us following.

And from there, liturgy pretty much disintegrates, so there is no comparison to the weekly Methodist service, or Presbyterian, or any others of what are considered to be “mainline” churches. And beyond that, the gulf is vast.

And it was not for something close to 1,000 AD that we really started to find all the additions being made, a piece here and a piece there.

In short, the difference between the OF and the EF are far, far less than the similarities. There is an entrance, confiteor, a collect, an epistle and Gospel, a homily, an Offeratory, an epiclesis, Consecration, prayers after Consecration, Lamb of God, Communion, and prayer after Communion.

 

[goout]

R_H_Benson:

I believe these reasons you listed above are what catalyzed Pope Francis to declare in August “After this magisterium, after this long journey, we can affirm with certainty and magisterial authority that the liturgical reform is irreversible” . The “old guard” sees just what you have described: young people are rejecting feel-good theology and liturgical novelty and flocking to Tradition. The Pope, in hopes of assuaging the fears of those who created the New Liturgy, had to assure them before they go to their reward that their legacy will remain intact. That this had to even be declared smacks of desperation.

I’m not sure what the context of his statement was, but liturgical reform is most certainly possible. It’s happened not a few times in the Church history. Regardless, returning to the Traditional Latin Mass is necessarily not a reform. It’s a revert.

If you’re going to do restorationism you need to back further than the Latin Mass.

 

[omgriley]

If you’re going to do restorationism you need to back further than the Latin Mass.

The Latin Rite has been the official liturgy of the Church since the Council of Trent, when the Church enacted a universal liturgy. Though before that it was still the most common liturgy used. Prior to the Reformation, different peoples and geographical areas could adopt liturgical practices that fit their cultures, so long as the basics were still present.

However the Latin Rite has been around since the late 2 century, so…

 

[goout]

goout:

If you’re going to do restorationism you need to back further than the Latin Mass.

The Latin Rite has been the official liturgy of the Church since the Council of Trent, when the Church enacted a universal liturgy. Though before that it was still the most common liturgy used. Prior to the Reformation, different peoples and geographical areas could adopt liturgical practices that fit their cultures, so long as the basics were still present.

However the Latin Rite has been around since the late 2 century, so…

I get that.
You were talking about reverting. True reversion, if we are going to restore to original languages, is the last supper.
I have nothing against Latin.

Why Latin now and not Aramaic. Why not Greek now?
The language of the Mass has practical aspects. It’s not given by divine edict. It’s not like scripture in it’s sacredness.
Literacy level.
Communication.

 

[omgriley]

I get that.

You were talking about reverting. True reversion, if we are going to restore to original languages, is the last supper.

I have nothing against Latin.

Why Latin now and not Aramaic. Why not Greek now?

The language of the Mass has practical aspects. It’s not given by divine edict. It’s not like scripture in it’s sacredness.

Literacy level.

Communication.

Well yeah, you’re referring to an extreme reversion: A reversion to a liturgy that hasn’t developed with Tradition. Latin, not Greek or Aramaic, is the official language of the Church because Rome has been the seat of the Pope since the beginning. We agree that the liturgy can change to suit different cultures. But I support the Trad-Latin because of the universality in that form of the liturgy.

So when I propose a revert, I’m speaking of a revert to the traditional form of the mass, not necessarily the oldest.

 

[Mary_Veronica]

I just got back from a Saturday Vigil Mass at my home parish (an OF parish) that was solemn and beautiful. It is indeed truly the celebrant who was affects the atmosphere of the Mass. So NO isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and I see that now.

I’m still going to work on learning more about the Traditional Catholic way of living and worshipping because it feels right, and I will still seek out a TLM, but I will not necessarily leave NO. I will just not participate in the more modern changes. I also ordered a St Andrews Daily Missal and have started praying the Liturgy of the Hours.

Hope everyone is having a blessed evening!
God bless!

 

[Maximilian75]

Solemn, good NO is always nice. It is a good happy medium.