What's the story behind Vatican ii?

[floresco]

Why is it that nearly every thread in this forum erodes into EF vs. OF of the mass, which one I (you) prefer, and how it is in some way superior to the other?

Can we not accept that there are currently at least two different forms of the mass in the Latin Rite of the church, and both are valid, and should be held in high esteem by all (even though we may not enjoy the esthetics of one or the other)?

I understand preferences, but to constantly badger the point and degrade the “other” form is uncharitable, to say the least.

(my two cents…thank you)

There are people like myself who have problems with the OF that go beyond its esthetics. I drive triple the distance I would need to get to the OF in order to get to the EF. I don’t do this just because I like the music better. I have serious concerns.

I accept that the OF is valid because this is what the Church teaches. I hold Christ in high esteem and He is present in that Mass, so for His sake I value it. But I do not hold the OF itself in high esteem. I do not think that you have a right to demand that of me.

 

[ProVobis]

I understand preferences, but to constantly badger the point and degrade the “other” form is uncharitable, to say the least.

In a perfect world it wouldn’t happen but many do take preferences (other than what they prefer, such as one parish over another, etc.) personally. There is no escaping disagreements. You probably already know that, though.

 

[agnes_therese]

Sure, I have a strong preference for the TLM. But I also have concerns about the NO, including those voiced by our present Holy Father: namely that it is a banal, on-the-spot product that represents a break with tradition. I’m quite certain that I’m allowed to hold this view.

Of course you’re allowed to have concerns. Again, what many of us have a problem with is those who say it’s not valid. That’s different.

 

[agnes_therese]

I accept both are valid.

And your right in that we are not to pit one form of the mass against the other.

Am I obligated to hold both in “high esteem”?

My personal opinion only, which holds no weight in the Magisterium: what you’re obligated to do, is to allow that others may hold either form in high esteem, and still be good Catholics.

 

[floresco]

My personal opinion only, which holds no weight in the Magisterium: what you’re obligated to do, is to allow that others may hold either form in high esteem, and still be good Catholics.

I can do that.

 

[agnes_therese]

I can do that.

Thank you. That’s all I ask.

 

[TrueLight]

I can do that.

I can do that too.

 

[Tridentinum]

Of course you’re allowed to have concerns. Again, what many of us have a problem with is those who say it’s not valid. That’s different.

As I said earlier in the thread, the only people who think it isn’t valid are schismatic sedevacantists. No one here is a sedevacantist, so we don’t even need to discuss it’s validity.

 

[Leon_Bloy]

One reason I feel so strongly about the importance of acknowledging that the OF is completely valid, and is completely the mass as much as the EF, though people might respectfully and privately observe different qualities between them and assess them (after all, the EF itself was revised many many times prior to 1962, and may be again one day), is that an older priest I know - a very devout, “orthodox” priest who has done much work to promote making the EF more accessible, and when celebrating the OF incorporates as much as he can from the EF “style,” told me that he had a community of people who attended a EF mass at his parish but refused to receive hosts from the tabernacle that had been consecrated at the OF!

I have also heard of people who attend the EF but refuse to receive communion from priests who were ordained in the revised ordination rite promulgated by Paul VI. They actually go and look up the ordination lineages before they pass judgment about the validity of the priest’s ordination.

Enough to make a person sick.

The devil must be enjoying all this.

 

[Big_Feet]

One reason I feel so strongly about the importance of acknowledging that the OF is completely valid, and is completely the mass as much as the EF, though people might respectfully and privately observe different qualities between them and assess them (after all, the EF itself was revised many many times prior to 1962, and may be again one day), is that an older priest I know - a very devout, “orthodox” priest who has done much work to promote making the EF more accessible, and when celebrating the OF incorporates as much as he can from the EF “style,” told me that he had a community of people who attended a EF mass at his parish but refused to receive hosts from the tabernacle that had been consecrated at the OF!

I have also heard of people who attend the EF but refuse to receive communion from priests who were ordained in the revised ordination rite promulgated by Paul VI. They actually go and look up the ordination lineages before they pass judgment about the validity of the priest’s ordination.

Enough to make a person sick.

The devil must be enjoying all this.

The fact that this is occurring is absolutely absurd!!! I pray for these people and that their hearts may be converted! This is a wonderful example of poor catechesis at the other extreme.

 

[ProVobis]

I have also heard of people who attend the EF but refuse to receive communion from priests who were ordained in the revised ordination rite promulgated by Paul VI. They actually go and look up the ordination lineages before they pass judgment about the validity of the priest’s ordination.

Something doesn’t sound right here. How can one refuse to recognize a valid priest while at the same time attend his Mass? I would question some of these people a little further.

As far as ordination lineages, there are people who do exactly this with some independent priests. In fact, there is a local priest who celebrates the EF at a private chapel but is married with kids. I think it would behoove everyone to check out his lineage, don’t you?

 

[floresco]

One reason I feel so strongly about the importance of acknowledging that the OF is completely valid, and is completely the mass as much as the EF, though people might respectfully and privately observe different qualities between them and assess them (after all, the EF itself was revised many many times prior to 1962, and may be again one day), is that an older priest I know - a very devout, “orthodox” priest who has done much work to promote making the EF more accessible, and when celebrating the OF incorporates as much as he can from the EF “style,” told me that he had a community of people who attended a EF mass at his parish but refused to receive hosts from the tabernacle that had been consecrated at the OF!

I have personally witnessed this and also heard a priest from another parish describe it. I suspect this problem is widespread (although three data points aren’t much to go on ).

Thanks for explaining where you are coming from. I’m inclined to take for granted that the OF is valid, but I can see now that it is worth stating it.