Oh No!!! Modernists take aim at Old Roman Missal
#31
Una Voce also released position papers in anticipation of an updated Missal:

http://fiuv.org/dossier_liturgy.html
Reply
#32
Rumours, speculatop, panic.

And of course the like/dislike discussion begins.

Based on... Rumours and speculation.
Reply
#33
(08-16-2012, 07:10 PM)salus Wrote: They are playing games with the traditional Latin Mass like they have done with the Novus Ordo constantly

Exactly. Change for the sake of change because reality isn't good unless its changing.

There are perfectly good reasons to alter or amend certain aspects of the traditional Mass; and then there are perfectly evil reasons for doing so, too. With the Novus Ordo still perfectly acceptable according to the liturgical Revolutionaries, why should we think that their reasons for changing the traditional Mass are any better than their reasons for creating the new one?

The problem with the liturgical changes is not the changes themselves, per se,* lest our personal opinions regarding liturgical development should act as some sort of pseudo-magisterium; rather, the problem is with the reasons and principles behind the changes, which were authoritatively condemned by the Church's magisterium.

This is why these "reforms" do not solve the problem, regardless of how cosmetically superior they may appear, since they modify the purity of the Roman rite with the tarnish of condemned principles. In principle, it is no different than what we have been opposing all of these years.


* In effect, however, it is not surprising that many of the reforms themselves are problematic.


Reply
#34
(08-16-2012, 07:44 PM)Dmorgan Wrote: I still have a copy of the "St. Joseph Sunday Missal" published in 1965. It is an exact merging of the 1962 Missal and what became the Missal of 1970. It will be a remarkable, ironic step if this is the final destination of the "reform of the reform". The Missal is a far better Liturgy than the NO, but it still is not the Original.

In "65, the missal was for the Mass of Pope Paul VI, which lasted until the Mass of Bugnini. They"re seperate Masses, one ended and the other began.
The Mass of Pope Paul VI omitted the Last Gospel and allowed the Epistle and the Gospel in the vernacular from the altar, so they needn't be read in the vernacular from the Pulpit at the banns and the homily.

tim
Reply
#35
Whether rumors or outright lies today, there's always tomorrow.

The agents of "change for the sake of change" will get their way, it's a matter of when, not if. I bet they regret not adulterating the Missal when they could have done it with zero fanfare, before FSSP.

Whoever thinks otherwise is naive to the point of absurdity. I mean, what is there of the Catholic faith left to change other than the very Mass and Missal they banned? They've left nothing alone, nothing untouched - and have changed everything from the sacraments to the actual Lord's Day and everything in between - somethings have changed many times over.

Now that the NO has better control over the TLM, it's just a matter of time before they turn it into something as unrecognizable as the NO Liturgy of the Word. Corruption of the highest is the worst. 

Anyone remember when the only difference between the True Mass and the New "mass" was only supposed to be that the New "mass" was to be said in the vernacular?

Yep, all they're going to do is revise a few minor things. And if you believe that, I have a custom made bridge I can sell you cheap, with a great view over the River Kwai and everything!
Reply
#36
(08-17-2012, 01:31 PM)Stubborn Wrote: Whether rumors or outright lies today, there's always tomorrow.

The agents of "change for the sake of change" will get their way, it's a matter of when, not if. I bet they regret not adulterating the Missal when they could have done it with zero fanfare, before FSSP.

Whoever thinks otherwise is naive to the point of absurdity. I mean, what is there of the Catholic faith left to change other than the very Mass and Missal they banned? They've left nothing alone, nothing untouched - and have changed everything from the sacraments to the actual Lord's Day and everything in between - somethings have changed many times over.

Indeed. They can't even leave their own modernistic mass alone. They are already "reforming" it and it's only 50 years old.
Reply
#37
(08-17-2012, 01:31 PM)Stubborn Wrote: Whether rumors or outright lies today, there's always tomorrow.

The agents of "change for the sake of change" will get their way, it's a matter of when, not if. I bet they regret not adulterating the Missal when they could have done it with zero fanfare, before FSSP.

Whoever thinks otherwise is naive to the point of absurdity. I mean, what is there of the Catholic faith left to change other than the very Mass and Missal they banned? They've left nothing alone, nothing untouched - and have changed everything from the sacraments to the actual Lord's Day and everything in between -

There are 7 Sacraments, so that hasn't changed fundamentally.  The Lord's Day is still Sunday.  The Saturday evening Mass is the vigil Mass for the Lord's Day.  So, what's all the in between stuff?
Reply
#38
Was gonna say, the idea of Sunday beginning at First Vespers of Saturday evening predates Vatican II....
Reply
#39
That is what happens when trads trust the Roman promises.
Their aim is to infect the missal with modernism. It is not enough for them that the new rite had to be accepted.
A good lesson for the ralliés. Take heed.
Reply
#40
It is all a ridiculous rumor.

The Missal of 1962 will stay as it is and the FSSP ICRS etc. will always use it or the 1955 version.

What could possibly happen is the NO Missae might come to be a lot more like the Missal of 65.
As bad as this is, it is a lot better than what is offererd in 99% of Catholic parishes.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)