New "Tridentine" missal in 2018?
#11
Here's what I don't get about this rumor... who would be knowledgeable enough about the old Missal to be making these changes if not the FSSP/ICKSP (since it says that they would apply for exceptions, they wouldn't be involved)? I doubt there are very many people in the Vatican these days who pray the old Office and offer the old Mass daily to know how to even rearrange things in a way that wouldn't turn out to be a disaster.
Blood of Christ, relief of the burdened, save us.

“It is my design to die in the brew house; let ale be placed in my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may say, “Be God propitious to this drinker.” – St. Columbanus, A.D. 612

[Image: 2lq3.png]
Reply
#12
(10-08-2017, 10:50 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote:
(10-08-2017, 09:58 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-08-2017, 04:47 PM)Credidi Propter Wrote: I don’t put too much faith in this, but there are a few feast days on which I absolutely refuse to attend the Novus Ordo. Aside from the obvious differences between the two liturgies, the readings themselves seem to have been chosen in a way so as to intentionally distort the Church’s teachings. Two particularly strong examples would be the Requiem Mass and the feast of St. Mary Magdalene.
How about the Feast of Christ the King? Not only did they move it, they changed the prayers and readings to eviscerate the traditional doctrine that Christ should reign as King of our hearts, our homes, our societies, and our nations.

That’s another one. I’ll make sure to go to the Traditional Latin Mass that day. I don’t mind that feast day as much in the Novus Ordo, since it is placed at a different time and I won’t be choosing it over the traditional feast, but if I had to choose one over the other there’d be no doubt I would attend the Traditional Latin Mass.

Not to sidetrack but if you all have not read this article before, it is worth it- a great short explanation of the doctrine behind the Feast and the shameful gutting of it after VII.  The fallout from dethroning Christ is immense. And yet, hardly any Catholics know of the Doctrine of Christ the King, even  proclaiming "religious freedom" while unaware that this Americanist doctrine has replaced Christ's acknowledgement from the nations..

The Reign of Christ the King, Michael Davies

https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archive...e_king.htm
Reply
#13
(10-10-2017, 10:56 AM)BC Wrote: Not to sidetrack but if you all have not read this article before, it is worth it- a great short explanation of the doctrine behind the Feast and the shameful gutting of it after VII.  The fallout from dethroning Christ is immense. And yet, hardly any Catholics know of the Doctrine of Christ the King, even  proclaiming "religious freedom" while unaware that this Americanist doctrine has replaced Christ's acknowledgement from the nations..

The Reign of Christ the King, Michael Davies

https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archive...e_king.htm

Don't worry about sidetracking to mention Davies' booklet! I should have thought to mention it myself. It is an amazing little pamphlet. It is actually the slightly edited transcript of the keynote speech at a Traditional Catholic conference in Chicago in 1990 or '91, which I was lucky enough to hear in person. I was a speaker at the conference as well, and I was privileged to have dinner with Mr Davies the evening before the conference began!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


Reply
#14
(10-10-2017, 11:53 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-10-2017, 10:56 AM)BC Wrote: Not to sidetrack but if you all have not read this article before, it is worth it- a great short explanation of the doctrine behind the Feast and the shameful gutting of it after VII.  The fallout from dethroning Christ is immense. And yet, hardly any Catholics know of the Doctrine of Christ the King, even  proclaiming "religious freedom" while unaware that this Americanist doctrine has replaced Christ's acknowledgement from the nations..

The Reign of Christ the King, Michael Davies

https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archive...e_king.htm

Don't worry about sidetracking to mention Davies' booklet! I should have thought to mention it myself. It is an amazing little pamphlet. It is actually the slightly edited transcript of the keynote speech at a Traditional Catholic conference in Chicago in 1990 or '91, which I was lucky enough to hear in person. I was a speaker at the conference as well, and I was privileged to have dinner with Mt Davies the evening before the conference began!

Very interesting that is.  You seem to have a lot of history.
Reply
#15
(10-10-2017, 01:03 PM)BC Wrote: Very interesting that is.  You seem to have a lot of history.
It comes of being 70 years old and having spent the last 30 of them as an 'activist' (what the French would refer to as a militant) Traditionalist, Integrist Catholic and monarchist. In fact, I was invited to speak at the conference because of my monarchism. I managed to end up on a panel with the hyper-republican National President of the John Birch Society. That was interesting!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


Reply
#16
(10-10-2017, 06:16 AM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(10-10-2017, 05:35 AM)Pro Tridentina (Malta) Wrote: Whatever the reason, it should not come to this. Already division is occurring.

...or you're just making it a flashy and controversial story to get some traffic and relevance.

Instead of following the forum rules (Cf. No. 2 here) and etiquette in which you would cite and post the articles in question, you're just posting cryptic links directing more people to your website, just as you did with the first post. Give that you're running ads on that site, this is a great way to earn a little extra money.

I tend to agree with RC, since as your original post suggested these changes were coming and you knew the SSPX would be given a "temporary exemption" in order to make an "agreement" work. Why would the SSPX agree to something under those conditions, since if you know it's "temporary" then surely the SSPX would know that?

Care to reveal your "sources" since, as you say, if we check with them we will find out your rumors are correct? Who do we write or call to get the facts?

In all fairness, it was Rorate that started to state that the news was fake, hogwash, etc.

Does anyone reveal sources? What trust would there be if we mention their names?

At most, what can be said is that they originated from different persons who not connected to each other. And they are not Maltese.

Enough said.
Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Francesco. Dominus conservet eum, et vivificet eum, et beatum faciat eum in terra, et non tradat eum in animam inimicorum. Amen.

Remember, priest of God, celebrate this Mass as if it were your first time, as if it were your last time, as if it were your only time.
Reply
#17
(10-11-2017, 02:22 AM)Pro Tridentina (Malta) Wrote: In all fairness, it was Rorate that started to state that the news was fake, hogwash, etc.

Does anyone reveal sources? What trust would there be if we mention their names?

At most, what can be said is that they originated from different persons who not connected to each other. And they are not Maltese.

Enough said.

In your blog post you asserted it was true, and if only we would ask the sources we would find that it is true.

That's impossible if you won't name names and while I don't expect you will do so, saying such things is just sophistry.

All we have is your assertion that some "sources" say there is this new Missal, couple that with the headline and links to your site (against forum rules) and it just looks to me like an effort to attract site traffic, be relevant and possible increase your ad revenue.

Then you take shots at Rorate because of one of it's blogger's nationalities. While I have no connection to them, that kind of argumentation is telling.

In the meantime others with well-known Vatican connections (e.g. Fr. Z) have debunked your gossip.

Add to the whole story makes no sense, especially on the claim with the SSPX, and is more-or-less a repackaging of similar rumors back in 2013, which also were "confirmed" by sources, and never happened.

To quote Donald Trump: "Your're Fake News."
Reply
#18
(10-10-2017, 01:40 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-10-2017, 01:03 PM)BC Wrote: Very interesting that is.  You seem to have a lot of history.
It comes of being 70 years old and having spent the last 30 of them as an 'activist' (what the French would refer to as a militant) Traditionalist, Integrist Catholic and monarchist. In fact, I was invited to speak at the conference because of my monarchism. I managed to end up on a panel with the hyper-republican National President of the John Birch Society. That was interesting!

It is knowing things like that that I wish we all could know and meet each other to discuss these critical religious points in real life.  Around where I live, traditionalists are pretty much non existent as far as I know.
Reply
#19
(10-10-2017, 06:16 AM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(10-10-2017, 05:35 AM)Pro Tridentina (Malta) Wrote: Whatever the reason, it should not come to this. Already division is occurring.

...or you're just making it a flashy and controversial story to get some traffic and relevance.

Instead of following the forum rules (Cf. No. 2 here) and etiquette in which you would cite and post the articles in question, you're just posting cryptic links directing more people to your website, just as you did with the first post. Give that you're running ads on that site, this is a great way to earn a little extra money.

I tend to agree with RC, since as your original post suggested these changes were coming and you knew the SSPX would be given a "temporary exemption" in order to make an "agreement" work. Why would the SSPX agree to something under those conditions, since if you know it's "temporary" then surely the SSPX would know that?

Care to reveal your "sources" since, as you say, if we check with them we will find out your rumors are correct? Who do we write or call to get the facts?

This is not something intended to make it flashy and controversial. Check here another article that is being referred that seems to have been largely ignored. And it was in January ...

We are only authorised to reveal this - the sources are independent of each other - one is close to Francis and is an Argentinian national. The other is highly placed in the Archdiocese of Milan and travels regularly to Rome for Holy See matters.
Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Francesco. Dominus conservet eum, et vivificet eum, et beatum faciat eum in terra, et non tradat eum in animam inimicorum. Amen.

Remember, priest of God, celebrate this Mass as if it were your first time, as if it were your last time, as if it were your only time.
Reply
#20
(10-25-2017, 02:29 AM)Pro Tridentina (Malta) Wrote:
(10-10-2017, 06:16 AM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(10-10-2017, 05:35 AM)Pro Tridentina (Malta) Wrote: Whatever the reason, it should not come to this. Already division is occurring.

...or you're just making it a flashy and controversial story to get some traffic and relevance.

Instead of following the forum rules (Cf. No. 2 here) and etiquette in which you would cite and post the articles in question, you're just posting cryptic links directing more people to your website, just as you did with the first post. Give that you're running ads on that site, this is a great way to earn a little extra money.

I tend to agree with RC, since as your original post suggested these changes were coming and you knew the SSPX would be given a "temporary exemption" in order to make an "agreement" work. Why would the SSPX agree to something under those conditions, since if you know it's "temporary" then surely the SSPX would know that?

Care to reveal your "sources" since, as you say, if we check with them we will find out your rumors are correct? Who do we write or call to get the facts?

This is not something intended to make it flashy and controversial. Check here another article that is being referred that seems to have been largely ignored. And it was in January ...

We are only authorised to reveal this - the sources are independent of each other - one is close to Francis and is an Argentinian national. The other is highly placed in the Archdiocese of Milan and travels regularly to Rome for Holy See matters.

I point out again, you are violating the forum rules by posting links to your site without quoting the content here, or at least summarizing it. (Cf. Rule No. 2)

I would also point out that you're bumping the thread again almost two weeks after it's been dead. That's also a violation of forum rules (Cf. Rule No. 6)

Again, those things smacks of trying to attract traffic to your site and increase ad revenue, and are simply not proper etiquette here.

If the information is so important, why not just post it here. Why make us come and read your site? Why bump posts that have lost attention?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)