FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: One of the things about UE that should satisfy Trads.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I think that one of things we should most welcome about UE is that it has settled the question regarding "mutual enrichment of both rites." This makes it clear that the enrichment is only one way as it puts a freeze on any type of abuse that some who hate tradition would try to implement in order to poison the proverbial well. That being of course

1. Altar girls
2. versus populum
3. communion in the hand

Or other abnormalities and abominations that may have come after 1962. This makes it quite clear that the TLM is to function as a gravitational pull of the NO. I know I am using the Father Z language here but it makes sense.

Some of the open questions however remain the two calendars which is kinda of problem though I am sure a future papacy will have to tangle with, however by that time due to natural progression the question would be rather more weather the new should be abrogated and reconcile to the old rather then other way around.
It does not make it entirely one way, because in UE §25, it envisions new prefaces and Saints being added to the Missal. (As you alluded to in your post)

It will be interesting to see how this situation develops over the years, especially pertaining to conflicting dates for feasts (Holy Days of Obligation?), and to the addition of new feasts in a way that fits properly into both calendars.

In Christo Rege,
    -Steven
(05-14-2011, 06:35 PM)Steven Wrote: [ -> ]It does not make it entirely one way, because in UE §25, it envisions new prefaces and Saints being added to the Missal. (As you alluded to in your post)

However, these new Prefaces and new propers for new Saints would presumably be newly composed for the 1962 Missal ... as opposed to importing something already present in the NO.
I don't mind newly canonized saints being incorporated into the 1962 Missal as long as it causes no major disruptions in the sanctoral cycle of the kalendar. Ideally, the propers for such feasts would be taken from the common, so that we wouldn't have to worry about dubious compositions finding their way into the traditional rite.

With regard to prefaces, though, I see no reason to add new ones. The 1962 Missal has plenty already. I definitely don't want to see some Buginini prefaces being added to the traditional rite.
I agree with you, Unum Sint, that there are positives, at least in the sense that UE firmed up some ground, such as in the instances you mention (altar girls, CITH, versus populum.)

(05-14-2011, 05:25 PM)Unum Sint Wrote: [ -> ]Some of the open questions however remain the two calendars which is kinda of problem though I am sure a future papacy will have to tangle with, however by that time due to natural progression the question would be rather more weather the new should be abrogated and reconcile to the old rather then other way around.

This was my primary sticking point on my first reading.  My perspective is that it would have been better to not address this topic because there is going to be a messy, comfortable confrontation associated with it that.  As long as the Novus Ordo rite is allowed, I don't see the advantage to really broaching this.

Joshua brought up an important matter that I missed.  UE appears to state that it is not until ordination to the diaconate that one is incardinated, which apparently runs counter the formula used in the minor orders according to the older books.

On the balance, not much was gained and we now have a point of conflict regarding the minor orders.  Over the course of this decade, I think the issue of adopting the 1954 books will become more prominent. 

As I see it, a draw is better than a loss.
Some of the traditional latin scholars should begin working on the new prefaces and saints prayers before the Novus Ordo hands us theirs
(05-14-2011, 10:12 PM)salus Wrote: [ -> ]Some of the traditional latin scholars should begin working on the new prefaces and saints prayers before the Novus Ordo hands us theirs

Or we could just leave the prefaces as they are.
(05-14-2011, 05:25 PM)Unum Sint Wrote: [ -> ]1. Altar girls
2. versus populum
3. communion in the hand

Those are not actually part of the NO. They are things which are allowed selectively by the bishops. That they are widespread does not change that fact.