Why was the Confiteor changed? Should it have been?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Onthisrock84
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Onthisrock84

Guest
Extraordinary Form :
I confess to Almighty God, to blessed Mary ever Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to you, brethren, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word and deed: through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore I beseech blessed Mary ever Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and you, brethren, to pray for me to the Lord our God.

Ordinary Form :
I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,
through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God.

Does anyone feel like the old text is somewhat more beneficial since it takes use of the Church Triumphant?
 
Last edited:
As long as people don’t say “greiv-ee-ous”, instead of “grievous”, I’m happy. 🤣
 
Last edited:
The second one for OF actually encompasses a boatload more members of the Church by including ALL the angels and saints.
The first one has all the saints but not all the angels.
 
Last edited:
How does repeatedly naming a handful of saints differ from invoking Mary and all the angels and saints?

I’m pretty sure St. Michael is not so vain that he needs to be named, much less twice
 
Yes I apologize got terms wrong. Fixed it. Thanks for pointing out my error.
 
Vatican II called for a simplification of the Mass and for the removal of repetitiveness, so that’s probably why the Confiteor was simplified and the repetitive naming of the saints removed. I definitely prefer the original Confiteor.
 
Some people see Protestants hiding behind every rock hatching conspiracies :roll_eyes:
 
“Brothers and sisters” includes the Church Triumphant! In our age of nonsense and disorder, a certain romantic sentiment may be expected. But, it is helpful? Rather, it calls into question the leaders of our faith - which is not a good default.
 
Last edited:
That’s Sedevacantist conspiracy theories. I have no use for the Modernists: In fact I’ve spoken out against them. But there’s no grand conspiracy hatched by the Masons (or Protties, ect) going on.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
How does repeatedly naming a handful of saints differ from invoking Mary and all the angels and saints?
Click to expand...
Research the old confiteor and the Old Mass in general. Nothing was done by accident. Every aspect of the Mass had a purpose and was deliberately chosen. The “handful of saints” were invoked for a reason. I don’t want to get into a discussion about the specifics because I’ll be accused of comparing the Masses and saying one is better than the other. I don’t want to be flagged or suspended again.
 
deMontfort said:
That’s Sedevacantist conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...
It’s all recorded in the history books. It is not conspiracy. Read the books by Michael Davies. Read Iota Unum. Read the Ottaviani Intervention. Read the Una Voce Position Papers. Read Bugnini’s own book. Read Ratzinger’s book and comments. It’s all written in black and white.
 
Onthisrock84 said:
Well of course that is obvious. I’m not sure the Church hides that fact. The fact of using a table, common place utensils, communion in the hand under both kinds, priest facing the people, etc; is clearly constructed to help Protestants not feel constricted to coming back. I believe it was one of the chief architects of the Novus Ordo, Fr. Annibale Bugnini in 1965 said, "We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren—that is, for the Protestants.”

Whether or not that is bad is probably argumentative and I don’t intend that by this post.
Click to expand...
The biggest divider is still there.

That pesky Mary. If you really want to appease the Protestant (said the ex-Protestant), take her out.

Why would we care what anyone else thinks about what goes on inside OUR Mass?

Sorry, but your theory doesn’t hold water with me. What someone says and what gets done doesn’t mean correlation equals causation.
 
The answer to that is another question: What you could have brought to the Second Vatican Council that Blessed Paul VI and the Bishops were unable to bring? (I suspect the answer is, Not much.)
 
The quote cited is one that was poorly translated—and referred to the seventh prayer of the Good Friday liturgy. But thank you for the assumption that I am ignorant or lying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top