Why was there hostility to the Latin Mass in 1960?

[johnnykins]

Ya know…to show my point, every Sunday at my parish… we had Solemn High Mass (Priest, Deacon and Subdeacon…the whole schmear) at 10:15 followed by Benediction…It was always over by 11:15 to clear out for the 11:30 Mass to follow.

I remember daily Masses that were 20-25 minutes…I served a few private Masses where it couldn’t have been 15 minutes…The usual Sunday Low Mass was 45 minutes

 

[BornInMarch]

Indeed. And it’s the main reason why non-Traditionalists are so reluctant to give Traditionalists even an inch. They have bitten the hand that feeds them.

I will admit that some of my distrust towards traditionalists is caused by this; they’re the first to complain about the Pope and Vatican II and they seem to be the part of the flock that borderline-schismatic groups like SSPX emerge from.

 

[27lw]

stpurl:

So for this age, and for these people, we need to get to the root of why at this particular era disobedience has so flourished. I think part of it relates to the great ambiguity that our clergy have either formulated or disseminated and which have distorted their, and the laity’s, understanding.

To me disobedience is rooted in this modern idea that you can pick and choose what you follow and that the Magisterium and the Pope aren’t infallible. That modern belief cuts across the traditional/liberal spectrum. There is a real loss of the virtues afforded by simple obedience and ‘thinking with the Church’.

Modern belief, modern thought.
The Church herself became modern after Vatican II, right?
The way that the Church thought, spoke, celebrated liturgy all changed drastically from, say 1905, to 1965.
Which Church does one follow - the ancient Church, or this:

Watch: Music Archive | Church of the Nativity