And I Quote:
Please show me in the documents where such prohibition of the TLM is stated. To imply that the indult of Pope John Paul II was somehow an aberration of the Council is fallacious in the extreme. The Pope via Ecclesiae Dei was simply insuring that the Council directives be carried out, recognizing the provision for worship via the Tridentine Rite in the Council documents. The truth is that such an idult would not have been necessary had the bishops of this country been obedient to the Council and to Rome.
There was a mysticism about the old rite which could be visibly felt. There was an atmosphere created in Churches where high altars and glorious golden tabernacles conveyed in unmistakable terms that God WAS TRULY PRESENT, BODY, BLOOD, SOUL AND DIVINITY.
**To say that the laity weren’t fully participating in that liturgy is to convey a misunderstanding of same. Full participation doesn’t demand constant verbalization, singing, swaying in the pews. Someone mentioned how silence can be indicative of the most fervent participation imaginable in Church liturgies. This was particularly true of the old Latin Rite. There was a solemnity that told all that something SPECIAL was happening in the Church. God Almighty was present there and, as such, deserved our respect. **
There was no leaving Mass talking to one’s friends as if you were in a Mall. There was no “Our Lady of Perpetual Dins.” I’ll tell you what there was. There was a feeling that you were just privileged to be in the real presence of God with the symbolism of the rite unmistakably conveying that. You knelt at the Holy Communion rails and waited for the principal celebrant to bring God to you, not Joe or Sally down the street. **You stayed after Mass and said the prayer to St. Michael because you believed that the devil existed. **You wouldn’t dream of touching the host with your hands because you were “unworthy” befitting the prayer said before receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus in the host, “Lord, I am not worthy for Thou to come under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.”
There was nothing “disjointed” about the “old” Mass. It was beautiful in its simplicity, in its regard for the most accurate translation of the Word of God, and in particular, in its SENSE OF THE SUPERNATURAL which has been lost with the Novus Ordo. That is not only my humble opinion but that of an increasing number of Catholics who have come to realize that the “old” Mass wasn’t broke but, somehow, that fact didn’t seem to enter into the minds of progressive liturgists who were bound and determined to “fix” it anyway. It is a fact that the problems in the liturgy today are a result of ICEL’s introduction of inane vertical/horizontal inclusive language with the blessings of the BCL of the NCCB.
Why are we so reticent to consider the beauty of the Tridentine Mass? Why do liturgical “experts” and clergy feel obliged to go out of their way and say that we most certainly must not go back to that beautiful liturgy? **Maybe one of the “experts” could explain that to a poor simple “Joe six-pack in-the-pew” who is minus degrees in Theology and Scripture Studies but who has noticed that the Churches were filled before Vatican II and are empty now. **
.
**What we’ve witnessed since Vatican II is the piecemeal destruction of our Churches, our liturgy - in effect the Protestantization of our Faith. **
We’re told in Sacred Scripture that “At the very name of God every knee shall bend on Earth, in Heaven, and under the Earth.” Isn’t it sad that even the demons must kneel at the name of God, yet some Roman Catholics find that impossible!
**You mess with the liturgy, you’re messing with the beliefs of the Faithful. You change the language, you change the ideas. I wouldn’t want that on my soul when I meet my Maker. **
