What was the traditional Latin Mass like?

[James_Cody]

Dph:

What was the traditional Latin Mass like? I know it was latin but can somebody give me a relatively detailed overview of the latin mass??

The Mass was very long. Everybody chanted in unison. There was complete silence during the service, even in a crowded Church you could hear a pin drop. Nobody had to be told how to reply to the Priest in Latin. Everybody knew their Latin and replied in one loud voice to the Priest.

I was a choir boy and I remember the huge size of the organ pipes, which reminded me of rockets standing at Cape Canaveral. The organ was huge and the organ pipes where titanic. Only the choir sang, everybody else listened silently.

Even at 8am on every Sunday, the Church was full. There was a mid-night Mass on Saturday night, but that was it. You didn’t dare miss a Mass, because you would see the Priests or Nuns walking around the neighborhood the next day, and had to explain yourself in broad daylight in the middle of the street. (There was never just a single Priest saying the Latin Mass, there were always several Priests and Nuns in attendence sitting in the pews around the Church.)

The Latin Mass was beautiful, mysterious, and powerful; there was no doubt that you were in the presence of God when the altar boy rang the chimes, and the Eucharist was raised. That was the high point of the Mass and everybody waited for that moment. You could see people moving their heads out of each others way to get a clear view of the Priest raising the Eucharist. That was so cool.

You received communion at the communion rail while kneeling. The Priest had two of his fingers on one had specially consecrated so that only he could touch the Body of Christ, and no others! Woe be onto you and your soul if you should ever be stupid enough to touch the Host.

And when the Priest announced that the Mass had ended, it was always treated as a special pronouncement and not just the end of an ordeal. Going to the Latin Mass was considered an event and not just a duty or obligation.

 

[ddimitro]

James-

That was a wonderful post! An honest description, on topic, and accurate.

I pray that others can do the same with their responses. The board is getting out of hand, as anyone can clearly see.

DD

 

[amasimp]

Hesychios:

Back in the day (50’s and 60’s are my recollection) an awful lot of people found the Mass to be boring. That’s why the rosary beads were out, prayerbooks too.

It was considered enough to be in the presence of the ‘event’, but it was not a participatory experience, except for the actual reception of the Eucharist at the rail.

Funny you should say that because I find the current form of the Mass to be unbelievably boring. For me, it does not stimulate the intellect, the senses, the music is banal, and it only mildly invogarates the spirit. I often find myself staring at the stained glass or the statue of St. Therese. On the other hand, I can “get fed”, as it were, at a Tridentine Mass even if it is only a 30 min. Low Mass. A High Mass will put me on “cloud 9” for at least a week.

Maybe that is just me…

 

[brotherhrolf]

I’ve re-read the thread. I was an altar boy pre VII, during the transition, and post VII. Pre-VII, I started at the end of third grade. Learned my Latin. I was extremely cognizant of serving “at a higher level”. Altar boys represented the people of God. I have seldom felt the profound sense of reverence I had then. It was so weird during the transition…the Mass was partially in Latin and partially in English. To make it worse, our new parish had been split off from the old. Mass was said in a public gym and then we moved to a country club auditorium before the new church was built. With the new church we moved from the sonorities of Latin to the new folk mass - we went from Tantum Ergo to “Sons of God, hear His holy word” in about a year’s time - from the sublime to the… Everything was thrown out for the sake of the modern.

The full transistion came between my sophomore and junior year in HS. We went from the hybrid 1965 Mass to the NO . From O Salutaris Hostia to Bridge over Troubled Waters and “They’ll know we are Christians by our love”.

I’ve really never gotten over it. I recognize that there are now more of you who have never experienced what it was like back then then there are of us that have. I wrestle with the whole experience even to this day. I believe that the laity needed to have a larger role but the cultural richness that was unfortunately became the protestant blandness that ofttimes is.

 

[JimG]

brotherhrolf:

. . . we moved from the sonorities of Latin to the new folk mass - we went from Tantum Ergo to “Sons of God, hear His holy word” in about a year’s time - from the sublime to the… Everything was thrown out for the sake of the modern. . . .We went from the hybrid 1965 Mass to the NO . From O Salutaris Hostia to Bridge over Troubled Waters and “They’ll know we are Christians by our love”.

I also remember the transition. It was too abrupt.

When I heard that the Mass would be in Engllish, I thought it would be the English translation right out of my old missal. Instead, we got the ICEL English stripped of majesty. Now, I did think that the pre Vat-II liturgical language tended to be a little too flowery and sort of Elizabethan, but the post Vat-II language went overboard in the opposite direction to near banality.

I liked the language of the old Mass, but I wanted to hear it aloud, not have to follow along in translation.

Still, I’ve grown accustomed to the new Mass. And the thing is, the new Mass CAN be celebrated with solemnity, with incense, with Gregorian chant, and in Latin. All you need is a parish which will do it.

 

[Kielbasi]

benedictusoblat writes:

The question is a misnomer. “What was the traditional Latin Mass like?” should read “what IS the traditional Latin Mass like?”

Those are two very separate and unique questions, both of which can be answered.

The TLM’s celebrated in the current era , from what I’ve been able to fathom, are quite different than the normative pre-1965 TLM.

Today’s TLM includes a lot more vocal participation than the old TLM, its a lot more likely to be sung rather than spoken in a fast Latin. Further, and most importantly in my estimation, today’s TLM are said to a self selected few of the Catholic faithful, instead of all Catholic good, bad and ugly . This would make it seem to attract a more elite congregation than in traditional days, pre 65.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Jim, I thank you. Let’s hear it from some of the other folk who went thru the “great transition”. We were kids when this happened. I don’t mind the NO. I’ve sung in a really good cathedral choir for over 18 years. But one thing really stuck out: In 1992 our parish celebrated its 200th year. We had the Cardinal of Lyon come to con-celebrate our Mass (Lyon being the mother church for our diocese). The Cardinal gave the apostolic blessing “Adjutorium Nostrum”
. Totally unexpected. There were about three of us in the choir that knew the correct response. I can’t but help think we threw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Sean_O_L]

Lux in Tenebris wrote:

The Latin mass is entirely different from the Novus Ordo. The main aspect and thrust is Theocentricity. (God centered) The last Gospel of St.John is read immediately AFTER the last blessing. not before. The current Mass is Called "Novus Ordo Missae) New Order of Mass

Demeaning the normative Masses fell under the anathemas of Canons I, VI and VII On the Sacrifice of the Mass of The Council of Trent - and which, if still applicable, would morally cover all Rites of Mass from the Last Supper to 2005. Here are the Canons:

Canon I: If anyone saith that in the Mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God… let him be anathema.

Canon VI: If anyone saith that the canon of the Mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

Canon VII: If anyone saith that the ceremonies and outward signs which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of Masses are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema.

For YOUR information, “Lux”, the “mass of All Ages” is the Mass as celebrated by Our Lord, Jesus Christ, while they reclined on couches in the simplicity of the Last Supper environment, and as authorized by all of the Apostles in the varying Rites emanating from them – including the Roman Rite which have received the approval of the successors of St Peter from his time to that of the currently reigning Pope! Period!

For your further information, the current normative liturgy is NOT officially known as the “Novus Ordo”, but, as the Missals show - are the Roman Rite of Mass - or, in latin, Missale Romanum, just like its predecessors.

“Qui parcit nocentibus innocentes punit”!

 

[Lux_in_Tenebris]

Sean O L:

Lux in Tenebris wrote:

Demeaning the normative Masses fell under the anathemas of Canons I, VI and VII On the Sacrifice of the Mass of The Council of Trent - and which, if still applicable, would morally cover all Rites of Mass from the Last Supper to 2005. Here are the Canons:

For YOUR information, “Lux”, the “mass of All Ages” is the Mass as celebrated by Our Lord, Jesus Christ, while they reclined on couches in the simplicity of the Last Supper environment, and as authorized by all of the Apostles in the varying Rites emanating from them – including the Roman Rite which have received the approval of the successors of St Peter from his time to that of the currently reigning Pope! Period!

For your further information, the current normative liturgy is NOT officially known as the “Novus Ordo”, but, as the Missals show - are the Roman Rite of Mass - or, in latin, Missale Romanum, just like its predecessors.

“Qui parcit nocentibus innocentes punit”!

Chill, modernist. no one is attacking your beloved “Novus Ordo”
Since you have enlightened me about the 1st century liturgy, I will be sure and contact the pastor down the street. I have an old sectional i was about to throw out. But looks like they are going to need it down at St.Marys. So they can “recline” during the “Mass”

A non Catholic friend recently went to Mass with an acquaintance of ours. I asked later, “Well what did you think”
Her reply: “It was like watching paint dry”

I sense from your posts, you are antagonistic to the SSPX
Let me state here: I am not a member of the SSPX
I do not support them in ANY way
I do not agree with their position
I believe they are Schismatic.

 

[Sean_O_L]

Lux in Tenebris wrote:

Chill, modernist. no one is attacking your beloved "Novus Ordo"

To which I reply to the second claim: “And pigs might fly”!

As to the accusation that I am a “modernist”, I reply – why ought I not expect such an accusation from an obvious ignoramus? I grant that you may be an inculpable ignoramus – but an ignoramus nonetheless.

Just for the short record:
For approximately 60 of my 70 years I have attended the liturgy of the Roman Rite as authorixed by the Roman Pontiffs.

From 1972 onwards, I participated in activities towards the establishment of Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX in Australia, contributing modestly towards the first Australian seminarian at Econe, who would become the first SSPX District Superior in Australia (and who, ultimately, would leave the SSPX twice.

In the 1980’s, when Hutton Ginson (Mel’s father) was National Secretary of the Latin Mass Society of Australia – I was Vice-President of the body, and possess congratulatory correspondence from the them World President of Una Voce, Dr. Eric de Saventhem.

I was an adherent to the SSPX for approx. 23 years, and an occasional contributor of “Catholic” which is now published by the Transalpine Redemptorists (who are also now schismatic and excommunicated.)

I thank God that I was eventually given the Grace to break-free of the SSPX cultic hold, and to become fully reconciled with the Catholic Church. I am now doing my penance for my sins against the Unity of the Catholic Church, through my website and by attempting to provide information to my former SSPX companions. I add that my six best friends in this world are current SSPXers with whom my wife and I regularly fraternize and love dearly.

I was a “traditionalist” and by the Grace of God am now privileged to be a “Traditionalist” – all accusations to the contrary nothwithstanding.

Since you have enlightened me about the 1st century liturgy, I will be sure and contact the pastor down the street. I have an old sectional i was about to throw out. But looks like they are going to need it down at St. Marys. So they can “recline” during the “Mass”

These are, purely and simply “smart a… “ comments!

A non Catholic friend recently went to Mass with an acquaintance of ours. I asked later, “Well what did you think”
Her reply: “It was like watching paint dry”

So, you asked a Protestant. So what did you expect?

I sense from your posts, you are antagonistic to the SSPX

Wow! I guess that you did not SEE the URLS at the bottom of mu posts – but have “sensed” my “attitude”. Correction: I love SSPXers; hate the destructive of Catholic Unity of the SSPX.

Let me state here: I am not a member of the SSPX

OK, I acknowledge that you attend an Indult Mass within the Archdiocese of New Orleans, and that you are 34 years old. I know many sede-vacantists who attend either an SSPX or Indult Mass. You might also be a Thucite – for all your claim says is that you are “not a member of the SSPX.” But, you sound and act like a person who is not in full communion with Rome.

I do not support them in ANY way
I do not agree with their position

 

[Sean_O_L]

I repeat: “And pigs might fly”!

1. “One sunday morning the New Pastor walked in (Franciscan)” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=52181 #38]… “an idiot.” [Ibid. #40] Insult towards a Catholic Priest.

1. The Tridentine Mass (so called) does not “date” from the 1500’s. It was codified in the 1500’s under Pope St. PiusV. You may read the Apostolic Letter Quo Primum, online. This is the form of Mass that in its essentials goes back to a much earlier time. Possibly to the beginning. The Pauline Mass ie Novus Ordo. is a complete Modern confection. Representing A solid break with the organic past. It has more to do with 60’s and 70’s feel good “Hokeyism” than Theocentricity. I hardly think the early Church was gathered around singing “Yaweh the faithful one”… forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=52442 #23] Remember what you claimed? “Chill, modernist. no one is attacking your beloved ‘Novus Ordo’" If you are a faithful Catholic, the Liturgy of Pope Paul VI is also YOUR Mass. Thanks to Pope John-Paul’s Indult – you and many more are permitted to attend an alternative Mass of your preference, subject to the further largesse of the local Bishop. Which is another matter entirely.

1. “The Latin mass is entirely different from the Novus Ordo.” … The current Mass is Called "Novus Ordo Missae) New Order of Mass.” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=51158 #36 ] No! It is NOT, and NO it is NOT!

That is: both the liturgies of St Pius V AND Paul VI are precisely the same: the Mass, offered by the same High Priest (Our Lord, Jesus Christ), Who offers the same Sacrifice (Himself), to the same Father, for the same reasons. If you deny this, then you deny truths of the Catholic Church which must be believed by anyone wishing to be known as a Catholic!

1. To ByzCath you
   “I humbly suggest” (APMF again!) … “This is a weighty Tome. Not your garden variety “dumbed down” revisionist History, politically correct. Load of ****. …

You then attempt to demean him, an Eastern Rite Catholic who is far more knowledgeable and charitable than you will ever be, wit “Though why this would in the least, interest an Eastern rite Catholic, Is anyone’s guess.” … I sense a little of a snarl.” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=51158 #47] Well, “tenebris” (for that is your “real” name, the only snarls have come from you!

1. To Parish Pariah, you snarl:
   “Do you get my drift???
   Or are you Just ‘trolling’ on this Board to be argumentative???
   GO “LURK” ON SOME OTHER BOARD” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=52181 #46]

1. “1962 Missal… I just this past week ordered 3 brand new 62 Missals, They are now available from Angelus press.
   forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=52910 #7 ]

1. “Cardinal Hoyos… is quoted as saying ‘We need you in the church to fight modernism’ This letter can be accessed on the SSPX homepage. accordingly the response from one of the SSPX Bishops was ‘Eminence in many places we are now 2 different Religions’. I couldn’t agree more.” THAT is YOU, ‘tenebris” saying there are “2 different Religions”!

“A contributor to the Latin Mass Magazine. Has written “Their are 2 Religions fighting for the soul of one Church.”
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=53111 #3 ]

(continued]

 

[Sean_O_L]

1. Well I never understood, why JPII would excommunicate someone for ordaining Bishops.” You write, “Especially Bishops devoted to the preservation of Catholic truth. And the reverent celebration of Holy Mass.

When you consider the widespread abuse and downright “craziness” infecting the Church today.
You would think everyone would find a welcome in the Church of JPII
Given His own religious Syncretism, It makes you wonder.
After all this is the Pope who kissed Korans!
Worshiped with the Animists in the groves of Togo!
Was adorned,with the Mark of the Adorers of Shiva!
But don’t you dare say one little tridentine Mass! For that you will be cast into outer darkness!”

Of course, it does not matter to you that, in fact, the Pope is somewhat more qualified than you to make such judgements – he is, after all, the Supreme Pontiff, Supreme Lawmaker and Law Interpreter, and possessor of the Power of the Keys.

You do not care that what you write is a load of radical traditionalist propaganda – e.g. that the Pope “worshipped with” Animists; that he was NOT adorned with the Mark of the Adorers of Shiva, nor that he was not against the so-called “Tradentine” Mass but was the granter of an Indult for the same!, etc.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=43231 #168 ]

You do not appear to understand the English language when you say: “I do not support them in ANY way,” and “I do not agree with their position.”

I believe they are Schismatic.

Well, “tenebris” – from the way that you have posted, there is good reason for believing that YOU are possessed of a similar spirit as the SSPX.

What are you going to DO about it?

 

[Sean_O_L]

A&O wrote:

Novus Ordo is the name for the current Mass as promulgated by Paul VI. Just as the Tridentine is the name for the Mass promulgated by Pius V.

All of the above is, simply, folk-lore!
These are facts:

1. The Council of Trent wound-up in 1564.
2. Pope St Pius X promulgated the mandated reformed Liturgy of Mass in the Bull Quo Primum Tempore
3. The Missale containing the reformed liturgy was called (and has continued to be called throughout time) the Missale Romanum - in English: the Roman Missal.
4. The Second Vatican Council wound-up in 1965.
5. Pope Paul VI promulgated the mandated reformed Liturgy of Mass (with the self-same Power of the Keys of St Peter) in the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum
6. The Missale containing that reformed liturgy continued to be called Missale Romanum - in English: the Roman Missal.

In both cases, the Liturgy is the self-same Mass as celebrated by Christ at the Last Supper. They all contained the required elements mandated by Christ, are performed by Christ (through an unworthy 'alter Christus"), and give the Graces of the Sacrament. There are, I suggest, different garments covering the Body.

Just as the Mass of St Pius V was the “Novus Ordo” of that era, I believe that, after 35 years, the Mass of Paul VI is only described as the “Novus Ordo” as a derogatory term, and that “practice” ought to have ceased by now.

ALL Rites of the Mass - whether Roman, Byzantine, Eastern, etc. deserve respect. If one cannot respect every Mass - then why be Catholic?

 

[benedictusoblat]

Sean - you are too old and life is too short for you to get so worked up! You have some very good ideas, most of which are shrouded by the acrimonious smoke of their delivery.

I am a Roman Catholic. I also speak of myself as a “traditional” Catholic since that term, in modern parlance, communicates a great deal about where I come from.

I go to the Mass of our fathers and grandfathers, the saints and blessed. It is not bad company. I don’t go in order to be something other than a faithful son of Rome, but in order to better accomplish that goal. I tell you and all the world I have been to the, so-called, “Novus Ordo” mass many, many times and it is a true stumbling block for me in my faith. Offered under the best of circumstances it can be beautiful. But the best of circumstances for the Novus Ordo Mass are harder to find than an Ethiopian Rite liturgy or a traditional Pontifical Latin High Mass with an Archbishop presiding from the faldstool. And when was the last time you even saw a faldstool?

“Chill out” as Lux would say.

I know a thing or two about cults and I also know the term wouldn’t come up in a discussion about the traditional Latin Mass if it wasn’t for the impious brutality that characterized the destruction of the Roman Rite and its rebirth as the Novus Ordo Missae. This malignant enterprise brought many old people to an early grave and drove millions from the Church. Of those who remained during the liturgical nuclear winter that followed, a few sought to find the truth, unambiguously expressed, as it is in the traditional Latin Mass. They were (and are) vilified to no end by modernists and pugilistic conservatives. This frequently creates a “bunker mentality” in people who develop too great an attachment to the personality of those who lead them. Not a good thing. But these same cultic people will doubtless be first in line to fall under the sword to protect the Pope if he will but reach out to them and accept them for what they are and always have been - Catholics.

Since you are such a genius and we are such gulls and fools, imbeciles and ignoramuses, I look forward to your brilliant analysis that will explain why it is that all too many “modern” Catholics know little or nothing about their faith and often seem unwilling to abide by it while “traditional” Catholics are zealous defenders of that faith who (sinners though they are) try very hard to live it.

Benedicite,
Benedictusoblatus

 

[Sean_O_L]

Sean - you are too old and life is too short for you to get so worked up! You have some very good ideas, most of which are shrouded by the acrimonious smoke of their delivery.

Inasmuch as your first sentence is correct AND that I have a duty of reparation for MY sins - I will just have to say to the latter part of your second sentenceL “tough! Life wasn’t meant to be easy!”

Since you are such a genius and we are such gulls and fools, imbeciles and ignoramuses, I look forward to your brilliant analysis that will explain why it is that all too many “modern” Catholics know little or nothing about their faith and often seem unwilling to abide by it while “traditional” Catholics are zealous defenders of that faith who (sinners though they are) try very hard to live it.

This “genius” took 23 plus years to discover that there is no good reason to be in schism. "Brilliant - I do not claim to be.
Why “a” and not “b”? Perhaps Satan “works” both parties. “Zealous” also are radical Muslims, Mormons, Pentecostalists, etc. etc. Very many are the so-called “traditionalists” who, I believe, qualify for the epethets - “hypocrites” and “brood of vipers” of the (acrimonious??) Christ. (No comparison intended.)

I am by no means contra faithful Catholics who wish to fulfill their religious duties in ANY approved Rite of Mass. I DO wish to “snap” dissidents quickly out of their un-faithful activities and opinions. I do the same in respect of abuses. If you don’t like my “acrimonious” style - then why do you not “pray harder” for me?

 

[benedictusoblat]

Actually Sean, I like your style. It is invigorating. Other people may find it offensive, but not me.

Rather than figuratively casting these people into the fires of hell, why not at least give them the benefit of the doubt that they probably do what they do for a good intention?

There is simply no way you can read the encyclical letters of Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII, Piux XI, and Pius XII regarding modernism, liberalism, the Mystical Body of Christ, Ecumenism, and the liturgy and have any sanguine feelings about what direction many modern Catholic congregations are heading. One solution to this problem is to simply step back and embrace what is known to be good and holy - the Mass as it was offered before Bugnini and his minions carved it up and served it up for the Holy Father’s blessing. Another solution is to hold to the truth in doctrine, put up with modern practice and wait for the Holy Father to step in and explain how the Church today in no way contradicts the Church of yesterday. When he does this we will have an orthodox understanding of the decrees of the Second Vatican Council, the abuses in the sacraments will be history and you and I can peacefully enjoy a bottle of The Dead Arm Shiraz from d’Arenberg’s winery.

Benedicite

 

[Sean_O_L]

Addenda to post #74

While my literary “style” may well be described as “acrimonious” - which is a cross that, at my age, I must carry - I am not alone in the “sarcastic” league: you, “benedictusoblat” ask, sarcastically: “Since you are such a genius and we are such gulls and fools, imbeciles and ignoramuses, I look forward to your brilliant analysis…” C’est la vie, eh?

I am happy to have finally “come to my Catholic senses” in 1997 together in the company of some other very good former SSPX adherents who have become very good friends and associates: Bill Grossklas, Shawn McElhinney and Pete Vere, J.C.L. (now studying for his Masters.

Shawn kindly credits me as his Editor in his huge opus
A dynamite treatise by I. Shawn McElhinney on the SSPX and “traditionalism.” Explodes many of the myths held by the pseudo-traditionalists who continue to call themselves Catholics but have more in common with Protestants and other schismatics. This is an excellent link for anyone wanting indepth information on the Society of St. Pius the Tenth, Lefebvre and all the bogus arguments which are used by so-called “traditionalists” and their allies against the Catholic Church. This site provides the details which show that, without a doubt, the Society is out of communion with Rome and is, in fact, both de facto and de jure, in schism and its bishops excommunicated. As time goes by, it becomes even more apparent that the Society does not have either an ecclesiastic or theological leg upon which to stand. Except for blinder-wearing, die-hard, Society supporters and their hangers-on, Shawn McElhinney’s work will dispel all doubts on the subject. "A Prescription Against Traditionalism: [Outline of Treatise: A Prescription Against Traditionalism Outline of Treatise: A Prescription Against Traditionalism](Outline of Treatise: A Prescription Against Traditionalism Outline of Treatise: A Prescription Against Traditionalism)

The credit is shown in his Acknowledgements section at http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/treatise1.html

Pete credits me in his and Parric Madrid’s recent booklet “More
Catholic Than the Pope” p.186.

During those early clarifying years, in addition to frequent group e-mails, Pete would ring me in the early hours of the morning from Canada or USA and discuss many matters.

I have been privileged to receive communications from many former radical traditionalists, including SSPX, extreme Feeneyite and sede-vacantist who have also reconciled with Rome and returned to full communion with Her.

On the other hand, I have also received correspondence in the opposite direction as is evidenced in this file:jloughnan.tripod.com/pxhatred.htm - scroll down to SOME COMMENTS FROM SSPX TYPE “traditionalists”. You may enjoy some of the comments. I treat them as a badge of honor.

I am always happy to be advised of any objective untruth or error that I may have written. Please feel free to look for them.

Personally, I favor Australian wines, but, perhaps you could mail ne a bottle?

Benedicamus Domine, benedistusoblat

 

[Dr.Bombay]

benedictusoblat:

Rather than figuratively casting these people into the fires of hell, why not at least give them the benefit of the doubt that they probably do what they do for a good intention?

Hmmm…I seem to remember reading somewhere that the road to hell is paved with…

Oh, never mind. :nope:

 

[CanonAlberic]

Can’t remember the trad. Latin masses all that well, it’s been too many years. Suffice to say that I thought they were just SO majestic, spiritual and beautiful. Too bad they aren’t available around here any more (with the exception of an occasional mass @ Sacred Heart, but even this isn’t the same as the old, traditional mass).

Peace.

 

[benedictusoblat]

Re: my new and dear friend Sean’s previous missive -

d’Arenberg’s “The Dead Arm” IS Australian. I was hoping you would have some! It really is wonderful - I recommend it and all of d’Arenberg’s wines to anyone who is of age (in moderation, of course!).

Oh, monsieur! It is impossible that what was good before the council can be bad now. Impossible means, in this sense, “it can’t be” in the eyes of God. Mean-spirited people exist on both sides of this argument. Crazies exist on both sides of this argument. Jesus made a point one day of telling us about the good shepherd who leaves the 99 sheep and searches high and low for the one missing. Do you think our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI is going to allow this ridiculous excommunication nonsense to continue much longer? You must understand the profundity of illogic there is behind a group of clerics being excommunicated because they refuse to give way on traditional practice and belief. These are not “Old Catholics” who deny the Primacy of Peter in the person of the Pope. They aren’t any kind of heretics, because they deny no truth required of belief by the Church. You will doubtless point to consiliar decrees they hold in contempt. But the contempt they have for “novelties” that were previously condemned by popes in the last hundred years. Where are the anathemas required to make these decrees binding? Where is the solemn language in the decrees of the Council that demands assent OR ELSE? Loopholes, my friend! Loopholes abound in the web of magisterial documents that give the horrible schismatics cover. Loopholes in the council - it’s vagueness cuts both ways! Loopholes in canon law. The Holy Spirit makes possible for them the seemingly impossible: they can be obedient while appearing to be something other.

But in the end, unless your name was once Joseph Ratzinger, neither of us has the right to finally judge them either in this world or the next. I will give them (and you) the benefit of the doubt and call them and you Catholic.
Benedicite