TLM and Lutherans History

[Credo]

Was there a general outcry from the faithful over the traditional Mass?

No, but there was the nagging suspicion on the part of Churchmen that the Mass and especially the Divine Office were under-appreciated and poorly understood among the Faithful.

While there were Modernists at the Council, and definitely among the Concilium after VII, there were men of good will who believed that a simplified Mass (and Office, let's not forget) would aid in the re-emphasis of the Liturgy in the life of the Church. That being said, who's to say the traditional Liturgy wouldn't also go over well?

For a number of reasons, not the least of which was a changing culture in Europe and North America, this hope seems to have largely fallen flat in the aforementioned regions of the world. Elsewhere the revised Liturgy has been met with some success (parts of Africa and Asia come to mind).  

Why did John 23 call V2 in the first place?

Europe and American cultures were changing rapidly. This had been the case even in the Nineteenth Century, but following the Second World War the pace of social and intellectual change increased rapidly. 

After the fall of Nazi Germany in May 1945 the Western world, Europe in particular, was really teetering between going totally secular and re-embracing Christianity. After all, the arrogant gods of nationalism, National Socialism and communism had been disproved, and people were already beginning to voice opposition to the growing consumerism of society. The pope was hoping to make a new invitation to the world for Christianity at this crucial time. For a number of reasons, of which Modernists, Masons and a generally unenthusiastic laity all factor in, this never came to pass. 

[TerraMariana]

As a post V2 Catholic just discovering the Tridentine Mass along with many other traditions, I'm frustrated with the lack of information regarding the motivation for the NO. Was there a general outcry from the faithful over the traditional Mass? Why did John 23 call V2 in the first place? Why did Paul 6 take it upon himself to introduce the NO?

The book The Rhine flows into the Tiber by Fr. Wiltgen (who was present at V2) is a very good source of information about what some of the more "innovative" Vatican II Fathers thought about bringing in changes that the faithful did not want or need, namely, just go ahead and impose them from above. This just highlights the duplicity of V2: on the one hand impose changes contrary to the sensus fidelium from above, on the other protest loudly that the laity should have more say in church matters.

It was very interesting to observe this approach in action when the Cathedral of my Diocese was being wreckovated many years ago. Some of the faithful had got wind of what was about to happen and tried to do something about the impending changes. One person wanted to carry out a survey of all the Cathedral-goers at his own expense to gauge the general attitude of the laity involved but he was forbidden to do so. The changes went ahead exactly as planned.

It is also very interesting to observe how the resistance of the faithful can be broken down gradually over time, in this case concerning the Rosary. When Paul VI was approached (it was Bugnini if I remember rightly) about making changes to the Rosary the Pope replied that he did not want that because it would cause great scandal amongst the faithful. Many years later, the faithful having been "acclimatised" to accept without question more and more radical changes in the spirit of V2, John Paul II changed the Rosary without any sign of scandal amongst "mainstream" catholics.

[Reichsjager]

My best friend is a Lutheran, and is consequently my ride to the TLM (weird, I know.) She's been to both NO and TLM, and says that the TLM is more like the Lutheran services she's used to. I'm not sure if I actually believe it, but its certainly weird. Could be she just attends some kind of "high church" liturgy ( I don't know, I of course have never accompanied her to any Lutheran services.)

Really? that's odd.


I've been to a few lutheran "services" in the past and aside from the occasional female "celebrant" it was like NO 2.0.  All the lutherans I know who have been to the NO also comment on the striking similarities.