My understanding is that the SSPX must accept the entirety of the Second Vatican Council,
This is one of the greatest heists in all of history.
This is impossible, either each person chooses for themselves and cacaphony ensues, or an extra item is introduced to direct the people to a particular choice.Pr. Mysterium fidei.
The people continue, acclaiming one of the following:
If the pause is brief how can I have time for recollection?... invitation to the faithful by the Priest
Fratres, agnoscamus ...
A brief pause for silence follows.
And GIRM explains: Silence 45 ... For in the Penitential Act ... individuals recollect themselves.
The people continue, acclaiming one of the following:
To do other than begin again at the Ordo of St. John XXIII is to begin on a weak branch, rather than at the trunk.
We can lament about things from the EF that were left out or recreated in the OF; or we can simply "do the red, say the black," and worship reverently with chant, hymns, polyphony etc. and make the best of what is the Ordinary form of the Roman Rite
As to your response that "we only use 'A'".... that's going beyond the rubrics, which was the point. It's not going against the rubrics, but beyond the
No one needs new and borrowed authority anymore to use the so-called EF. It would be very simple.
just a thought - maybe each of them has one or more family members who are impacted by the watered down NO
Granted, many criticisms of the OF tend to be criticisms of abuses - but even those aside, I think many supporters of the EF - myself included - are truly sad to see a Liturgy in the OF which is so unlike that of the whole history of the Roman Rite. That is to say, truly sad that there is so much lack of knowledge, or indifference - not to mention in many cases, so much hatred for - the traditions of our beloved Roman Rite Mass.It seems to me too many people latch on to the most flagrant and obnoxious abuses in the OF, and don't try to look for much that is good. I see many good people, making an honest attempt to worship God, and be good Catholics every Sunday.
If all you're ever served is a rubber chicken you'll only ever expect rubber chicken. I would go to Mass daily if it was beautiful and worthy of God. But these days I wind up enduring an hour a week out of obligation. How sad is that.
What do you mean that they don't go back in time much before Trent? Especially with regards to Gregorian Chant, its flourishing is in the middle ages, well before Trent. The "elaboration" of the Roman Rite in general goes way back into, what, the 7th and 8th centuries, and especially in the time of Charlemagne, does it not? I'm not one to argue that everything we see in the 1962 Missal/Rubrics is ancient, from the time of the first centuries of the Church, but even if it is true what you say (which I am not sure it is), I see no reason to disgregard what was organically and beautifully/meaningfully developed up to and in the time of Trent.Those "traditions of the Roman Rite" often don't go back in time much before Trent. The mass in the first 1,000 years was not the high Renaissance liturgy mandated by Trent, although some earlier practices certainly did carry over.
Well, absolutely "missionary activity" is essential, and by "arguing" about the Mass, I don't mean to give the impression that I don't care about it - in fact, I have had many discussions with friends about this, that evangelization/being a missionary/witness and Liturgy are both extremely important and must go hand in hand. So sure, you're right that "the form of the Mass is not going to solve this" - insofar as yes, it alone will not solve it. But if you stop there, then I would disagree with you - because it absolutely has to be a part of the solution; whatever the solution may be, it will involve the Liturgy, and it will involve a Liturgy which is in conformity to tradition. Will it be the 1962 Missal? I don't know, but if I had to hazard a guess, I would say it will be much more like the 1962 Missal than the 1970 one, and that it would not be what most Catholics experience/are offered today. I could definitely be wrong about that, and if I am, well, then I will submit to whatever Liturgy really and truly accompanies a renewal of the Catholic faith. I'm not a strictly anti-OF person; but as of yet, the OF has not done so, as far as I can see. Certainly good things have happened in the past 50 years while the OF has been the "mainstream" Liturgy - I am sure, however, that there are many solid arguments to be made that (maybe not all, but certainly many) such things happened in spite of the mainstream liturgy, not because of it.Missionary activity - anyone remember that - has for all practical purposes died out and is even frowned on as disrespectful to other cultures. ... The church has become too inwardly focused on itself and fiddles over the insignificant while the world if not burns, at least smolders. No, the form of the mass is not going to solve this.
I'm not convinced that the problem is the mass in either form.
The secular culture has become stronger and stronger and has, in essence, infiltrated everything including the church.
Please note that Catholics in general are not required to believe every statement written in every document of Vatican II: some of the documents are hortatory in nature, with no intention to make definitive statements.
Is there an official reference to this reasoning?
Many of the documents are called Decrees, and lay down rules and guidelines, not beliefs (and could presumably be changed). Two are called Dogmatic Constitutions, one a Pastoral Constitution, one just a Constitution (that's SC). Three are Declarations, including those on religious liberty, and on relations with other faiths, both of which upset SPSSX. There must be a siginificance to these appellations.Is there an official reference to this reasoning?
Those "traditions of the Roman Rite" often don't go back in time much before Trent. The mass in the first 1,000 years was not the high Renaissance liturgy mandated by Trent, although some earlier practices certainly did carry over.
Those "traditions of the Roman Rite" often don't go back in time
Charles,
Following the principle that the Second Vatican Council enunciated: any new forms should grow organically from those already existing. The Ordo of Paul VI is many things, but an organic growth from anything within the earlier Ordo isn't the first description I would give it.
The Ordo of Paul VI is many things, but an organic growth from anything within the earlier Ordo isn't the first description I would give it.
The Ordo of Paul VI is many things, but an organic growth from anything within the earlier Ordo isn't the first description I would give it.
Am I just unclear, or are you saying I am attempting to start a new rite? As far as I am concerned I am promoting the ORIGINALLY condoned and presently enforced Roman rite and am calling everyone to reexamine the newly innovated NO. Presently I ONLY attend the NO out of necessity and obligation. There is no EF within hours of my location.Francis, whatever it is, it is approved by competent Roman authority as the normative rite for use in the parishes. You have no authority to change it or promulgate your own rite and neither do I.
I think what a lot of this comes down to, is that we are always free to work to get rules changed that we don't agree with. That's fair, and I support that. We are not free...
There is no EF within hours of my location.
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.