Sola Liturgia? Will we see TLM Protestants?
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 978
    And that editio typica was amended multiple times before Vatican II - as many here have freely admitted.

  • dad29
    Posts: 2,073
    Cdl Newman on the "language question":

    "To me nothing is so consoling, so piercing, so thrilling, so overcoming, as the Mass, said as it is among us. I could attend Masses for ever, and not be tired. It is not a mere form of words - it is a great action, the greatest action that can be on earth. It is, not the invocation merely, but, if I dare use the word, the evocation of the Eternal. He becomes present upon the altar in flesh and blood, before whom angels bow and devils tremble. This is that awful event which is the end, and is the interpretarion, of every part of the solemnity. Words are necessary, but as means, not as ends; they are not mere addresses to the throne of grace, they are instruments of what is far higher, of consecration, of sacrifice. They hurry on as if impatient to fulfil their mission".


    That is quoted by Fr. Hunwicke from Newman's novel "Gain and Loss." The above is from a Catholic character talking to his Prot friend.

    More:

    Willis explains that Catholicism and Protestantism are essentially two different religions. "The idea of worship is different ... for, in truth, the religions are different. Don't deceive yourself, my dear Bateman: it is not that ours is your religion carried a little further - a little too far, as you would say. No, they differ in kind, not in degree: ours is one religion and yours is another".


    Now, then. Cdl. Mueller remarked that the reforms of VatII were designed to eliminate the 'rote rattling' (I paraphrase) often found in low-Mass EF celebrations. It might be interesting to ask +Mueller about +Newman's remark.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,542
    The survey is squat... it has nothing to do with the actions of the vatican... it was just a ruse to give it more (false) credibility.
    Thanked by 3CCooze dad29 CHGiffen
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,791
    Yes, but the Ordo Missae was never touched until John XXIII added St. Joseph to the Canon.

    Adding Feast Days doesn't constitute the creation of a new Rite.

    Pius XII's rightly-detested Holy Week deforms were never liked by many, even John XXIII, himself, never used them; they were also rolled back in the Novus Ordo. Pre-55 Holy Week is actually closer in some ways to the Novus Ordo than '62.
    Thanked by 3tomjaw CHGiffen francis
  • KARU27
    Posts: 151
    As Obama used to say "I've got a pen, and I've got a phone".
    That's what this reminds me of, one executive decides something, the next one comes along and reverses it.
    It's like my neighborhood OF parish. "Don't like our priest? Just tolerate him, we'll outlast him, and the next one might change everything again".
    The whole essence of the Church, it seems to me, is changed since Vatican II, because each pope seems to make rather drastic changes, rather than incremental changes. Flip, flop, it's like American politics.
  • KARU27
    Posts: 151
    Also, having read so much about this new Motu proprio, I haven't read much about the highest authority of all.
    My own conscience.
    I think my conscience doesn't want me to attend OF Mass in general because of the garbaggio that is passed off as music, and I don't want my children exposed to it. I also feel that it violates my conscience when I see laypeople handling the Host.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • MarkB
    Posts: 670
    Also, having read so much about this new Motu proprio, I haven't read much about the highest authority of all.
    My own conscience.

    Ah, so now some trads are invoking the false "primacy of conscience" justification, just like Fr. James Martin, S.J. does. How rich.

    Your conscience is not the highest authority of all.
  • I think Karu is making a point, not actually invoking the primacy of conscience.
  • KARU27
    Posts: 151
    Vatican II tells me that I shouldn't violate my conscience, doesn't it? Is that false? Have I misunderstood it MarkB?
  • How many people throw Church teaching to the dogs because "my conscience" tells "me" that it's ok. How much is this encouraged by Amoris Laetitia
    Mark is absolutely right, but in being right, he's contradicting His Holiness. Now, if His Holiness were predicting the victor at the Olympic Games or the the World Series or anything of the sort, that wouldn't be infallible, of course, but... hmmm.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw KARU27
  • pfreese
    Posts: 138
    Quick side note about AL, it’s important to note that it’s an Apostolic Exhortation, NOT an encyclical. Ergo it doesn’t declare doctrine, and that’s kind of the point, and no doubt the Holy Father knew this.
  • Pfreese,

    No doubt he knew it, but how many people, having read it, are now declaring that the Holy Father is on their side on the subject of divorce, remarriage, sodomite unions and the rest?

    Furthermore, since the declarations of the Vatican Council don't proclaim doctrine, why do some insist on making others accept Vatican II? [I think the answer is that "there's more in the oath than that", to borrow and paraphrase a line from A Man for All Seasons]
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,073
    Someone asked about Milwaukee's response to the letter.

    "Steady as she goes" is the summary.

    Intriguing side-note: the ICK purchased its church (and property) from the Archdiocese within the last several weeks, so ICK (St. Stan's) will NOT be affected at all by TC.

    Just co-incidence that the transaction went down recently, of course.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,791
    I have noticed many bishops saying "We don't understand this. No change.", and not just ones we'd expect like +Cordileone; even +Gregory of Washington, D.C., and +Reinhardt Marx are saying "no change".
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • KARU27
    Posts: 151
    We'll see if this is still the case, "No change", in all those dioceses a year from now. Two years from now, etc.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,691
    The responses to the equivalent questionaire sent in 1980 were tabulated in Notitiae. The "problem" then was largely confined to France, the USA, and Britain.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • MarkB
    Posts: 670
    Indeed, the past two weeks have demonstrated sufficiently to me that a significant number of people ostensibly in union with the Church have been clandestine schismatics whose schismatic attitudes and tendencies were able to be concealed because they were attending an approved pre-conciliar Mass.

    Now with Pope Francis clamping down on the pre-conciliar Mass, for one reason to halt such threats to Church unity, there have been calls from the TLM crowd for disobedience saying, "That doesn't apply to me/us."

    The Pontifical Mass that had been scheduled to take place at the Basilica of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception is a fine example. It was scheduled to take place and permissions had been given. In unfortunate timing for the organizers, prior to the date of celebration, Traditionis Custodes went into effect. In accord with that new liturgical legislation, Cardinal Gregory required that explicit permission to use the Missal of 1962 be requested, which he subsequently denied because celebrating such a Mass would not be in harmony with TC.

    Well, the Paulus Institute (organizers of the Mass), just sent an appeal to Cardinal Gregory to change his mind, in which they claim the faithful have a right to Mass using the 1962 Missal. (Note: they do not have such a "right".)
    https://www.thepaulusinstitute.org/

    The organizers could celebrate Mass using the Novus Ordo, in Latin, with Gregorian Chant. If they refuse to do that because they'd rather have no Mass if they can't celebrate using the 1962 Missal, well then we have a pretty clear case of making an idol out of the TLM and a schismatic attitude that rejects Vatican II's liturgical reforms.

    I have read on other sites and from other authors that the new liturgical legislation does not have to be received, and if it is not received then it is not binding. Many problems with that. First, it's not true that laws need to be received in order to be binding. Second, the laity are not the ones the new laws apply to: it's directed to bishops to apply and enforce. Third, the pope certainly does have the authority to regulate the Church's liturgy, including approving, regulating and suppressing liturgical forms and options.

    So many authors and websites that previously could maintain an appearance of thinking with the Church during the era of Summorum Pontificum are now being exposed as having harbored schismatic, anti-Vatican II, anti-liturgical reform attitudes this whole time.

    The big test is coming: will these people choose the TLM over the Church, if it comes to that in their dioceses? Some have already said they will and are. That's TLM Protestantism.

    [Would you please review the Forum Etiquette Guidelines, in particular the point that excludes using the forum to accuse other people of schism, heresy, etc.? That's not our purpose here.--admin]
  • Chrism
    Posts: 804
    The organizers could celebrate Mass using the Novus Ordo, in Latin, with Gregorian Chant.


    Normally, it would require heroic work to change a fully planned Mass from Tridentine to Novus Ordo. The music would need to be replanned and re-rehearsed, the servers would need to be re-trained and re-rehearsed, etc. I do not begrudge the decision to cancel on this account alone, nor the lament that arose in hearts at all the work and planning and funding that has gone for naught - both for planners as well as pilgrims.

    in which they claim the faithful have a right to Mass using the 1962 Missal. (Note: they do not have such a "right".)


    At the same time, I think you're right that "right" language is a provocatory distraction which may doom the letter's hopes and needn't have been included. One expects better from a Board of Directors.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw WGS
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,145
    @MarkB
    Fr. Hunwicke has reminded us all of this,
    The cruel decree Veterum Sapientia had ordered the sacking of thousands of men, and some women, from Catholic seminaries throughout the world. Papa Roncalli, "Good Pope John XXIII" as he had ironically been called, in full consciousness of His authority, Decreed and Commanded eight important rules. Rule 5 ordered that the major sacred sciences should be taught in Latin, that the professors of these sciences in universities or seminaries be required to speak Latin and to make use of textbooks written in Latin. "Those whose ignorance of Latin makes it difficult for them to obey these instructions shall be gradually replaced by professors who are suited for this task. Any difficulties which may be advanced by students or professors must be overcome ..."

    Hence the world-wide sackings. The Pope had spoken. Petrus locutus est.

    Fiat Latinitas, ruat caelum.

    S John XXIII ended with the impressive words "In virtue of our Apostolic Authority, We will and command that all the decisions, decrees, proclamations and recommendations of this Our Constitution remain firmly established and ratified, "anything to the contrary notwithstanding, even things worthy of special note". Gosh!! Nobody would disregard something as definite as that, would they?

    What a persecution was then unleashed! Spies and informers abounded; Gestapo-like bands of thugs went around seminaries collecting evidence and listing names. Unspeakable cruelties were perpetrated upon these hungry, workless, men; upon their unfed women and their emaciated catamites. Since the elimination by burning of the Cathars, nothing like it had been seen in the Catholic Church.

    In Argentina, no bishop was more rigorous than Bishop Bergoglio in enforcing the decrees of S John XXIII. If ever he heard of a seminary professor giving a single lecture in Spanish rather than Latin, he was instantly on the phone demanding that the man be sacked. He had the reputation of being the strictest bishop in Latin America in implementing Veterum Sapientia.

    Of course, the relentless pressure of the Bishops and of the Seminary Management Boards proved ... as they must ... successful. Vernacular teaching totally disappeared from our seminaries; and as the succeeding Popes enforced the same rules, even the memory of Vernacular Seminary Teaching has disappeared. The world feels, somehow, so much cleaner, so much safer.

    And how right all this has been. Veterum Sapientia was an Apostolic Constitution, signed, for greater emphasis, on the High Altar of S Peter's. Catholic clergy and Laity know their duty of submission to the authority of the Roman Pontiff. When we hear the Pope's voice, it is S Peter that we hear. This knowledge calls us to unquestioning obedience. "Do all your seminary teaching in Latin", he cries. Our response is "Certainly, Holy Father. Pronto!!".

    Our privilege today, in 2021, is that we are being given a very similar opportunity for total and unthinking obedience, Jesuit style. Pope Francis possesses precisely and exactly the same authority as S John XXIII. When he decrees the extermination of the Old Mass, that decree comes to us with precisely and exactly the same force as the requirement of S John XXIII that all Priestly Formation in seminaries should be done entirely in Latin ... er ... except that possibly a motu proprio may not have ...um ... quite the authority of an Apostolic Constitution ... er ... . I wouldn't know about that sort of thing; I'm only a 'convert'.

    Just suppose that 1962 decree had been ignored! Just suppose that the Rectors and the Episcopal Boards running seminaries had taken not the slightest bit of notice of those Decrees of S John XXIII!

    It just doesn't bear thinking about, does it?
    Your conclusion, corrected by the admin, cannot be true. Now if we applied your same argument and conclusion to Veterum Sapientia the result is unthinkable...
  • Mark,

    That one can be required to choose between the Mass which the Church promulgated and being a loyal son of the Church says volumes about the present situation.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,217
    TLM Protestants? I don't know what would be accurate to call them, but some who protest a bit too much are already out there. Where they go from here is anybody's guess.

    ...says volumes about the present situation.

    Yeah, I haven't seen a similar situation before.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 924
    Loyalty! *

    Obedience!! *



    (*Except to centuries of unbroken tradition.)

    I do not feel the slightest bit—truly, not one iota—of guilt about my continued support of the TLM any and everywhere it may still be found. I consider this a higher form of obedience; one that transcends time and unifies me with the saints. If we are going to invoke the omnipresent argument of “conscience” then allow me to rephrase my thoughts: my conscience tells me it is better to obey tradition than one pontiff who seems hell-bent on wiping it from the face of the earth.
  • Serviam,

    There's Thomas More's argument with the king. Look at all the learned men in England vs. Look at the constant witness of the Church.
    Thanked by 2ServiamScores tomjaw
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,542
    TLM Protestant

    The ultimate oxymoron
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 924
    PF literally allowed an icon of a pagan goddess to be processed up to the high altar of St. Peter’s basilica on the shoulders of bishops.

    I say I’m going to support what has been held as sacred since time immemorial and I am the nutter? Lol. I’m protesting alright… but it’s not authentic Catholic belief and custom… it’s everything that is opposed to it.

    “The world groaned and awoke to discover itself modernist.” (And suddenly überultramontane, apparently.). We will apparently follow the pope right off a cliff (but with our contraception and planB pills in our back pockets.)

    Sancte Athanasi, ora pro nobis.
    Sancte Ioannis Fisher, ora pro nobis.
  • trentonjconn
    Posts: 191
    .
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,686
    Please don't speculate about motives. As the Forum Etiquette Guidelines (peace be upon them) remind us:

    Do Not Defame
    Members may not level insinuations of heresy, bad faith, or criminality against members; members should also avoid such inflammatory language against non-members.
  • MarkB
    Posts: 670
    I was bringing up a relevant, real-life example that had just occurred, whereas before it had been a hypothetical possibility.

    And a new development in the matter just published: Cardinal Gregory replied the very next day with a reaffirmation of his decision not to give permission for the celebration of Mass using the 1962 Missal, also stating that the group is welcome to celebrate using the new Missal:
    https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/images/2021/Ltr_Crdl_Gregory_to_Paul_King_20210730.pdf

    No doubt there will be more similar examples in the weeks and months ahead, but this one was noteworthy for its prominence and suddenness.

    So now we will see what the organizers decide to do. I hope they decide not to cancel the Mass but instead celebrate it according to the Novus Ordo in union with the archbishop/cardinal and the Church.

    They are between a rock and a hard place. Celebrating a Novus Ordo Mass would show humility, obedience, a desire for Church unity and an acceptance of the Church's liturgical reforms. But it would probably destroy their credibility with many in the radical trad faction.

    And the focus of this thread, as opposed to the one about TC the document itself, is what the ramifications will be for Church unity or potential splintering as TC is implemented. That's going to be a recurring item of news over the upcoming weeks and months as more bishops reach decisions about whether and which TLMs are permitted to continue.
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,542
    Unity does not arise from celebrating the same form of rite. It arises from the creed.
  • Mark,

    Protestants are in one form of heresy or schism, separated from Holy Mother Church.

    It makes no sense whatsoever to have the present situation in which, adhering to what the Church as taught for longer than anyone on this forum has been alive, people can be accused of being disloyal sons and daughters of Holy Mother Church.

    So, no, you won't see TLM Protestants, because being a faithful Catholic who is a Protestant is oxymoronic.

    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,686
    It may be helpful to see the web page for the Paulus Institute, in which its purposes are stated.
    A couple of them are:
    • Advance the unity, harmony, and catholicity of Holy Mother Church, through the Solemn Pontifical Mass as expressed by His Holiness Benedict XVI in his apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum
    • Encourage appreciation of Sacred Liturgy for its mystery and transcendence, particularly associated with the Traditional Mass

    If the purpose of the event is the celebration of the Solemn Pontifical Mass in support of the objectives expressed in SP, then using the old Missale does seem to be a sine qua non.

    As a fallback, I wonder if it might be tolerable for the Archbishop to let the Mass take place at Old St. Mary's or some other parish where the TLM is normally celebrated, at a time when it is normally celebrated.
    Thanked by 4Elmar CHGiffen tomjaw WGS
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 924
    I hope they decide not to cancel the Mass but instead celebrate it according to the Novus Ordo in union with the archbishop/cardinal and the Church.

    This statement would almost seem to imply that their original plan of saying the TLM was somehow not in union with the Church, or the simple fact that the event, as planned, had to be canceled indicates their disunion... both of which are simply untrue.

    Again, preparing for a novus ordo liturgy and a solemn TLM are two totally different things, so it's not as simple as switching gears on a dime. To say nothing of the fact that these solemn missa cantatas fill a different void than a standard (even jazzed up) N.O.

    As someone who has both attended and directed both, I can assure you it is not the same. The music is not the same, the choreography is not the same... as you've regularly reminded us, Mark, the novus ordo is a revised liturgy.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • OraLabora
    Posts: 208
    @Chrism:

    Normally, it would require heroic work to change a fully planned Mass from Tridentine to Novus Ordo.


    Not in this case. I just did a quick check of my pre- and post-VII Roman Graduals and this is the Vigil Mass of the Assumption, which in both the TLM and NO have the same chants for the propers. So no need to re-rehearse anything new if the Mass is switched to the NO.

    Ora
    Thanked by 2Chrism MarkB
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,691
    Ora, I can't check the program, but perhaps they were planning a polyphonic Ordinary. We can't assume that they were doing what Pius X wanted, or what you or I might want.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw WGS
  • Schönbergian
    Posts: 850
    Nothing stops you from doing a polyphonic Ordinary at a Latin NO Mass, either.
    Thanked by 3Elmar MarkB CHGiffen
  • Elmar
    Posts: 370
    Of course there is the (rather esthetic IMHO) drawback that the Kyrie can only begin after the Confiteor and the Sanctus-Benedictus (composed to cover the Canon) might considerably lengthen the Eucharistic prayer - but hey, this just further 'solemnizes' a NO Mass!
    Thanked by 2tomjaw dad29
  • Don9of11Don9of11
    Posts: 508
    I think it's important to remember especially in parishes like mine where both forms, EF and OF are celebrated, that many are rightly concerned. It seems we are taking sides, tensions are rising, accusations are being flung around, false narratives, peoples feelings are truely being hurt by hurtful words said by both sides, etc, etc., We are all members of the same body of Christ, we need to pray for one another. If one member in the church is hurting, we are all hurting. Whatever the outcome we need to be willing to help each other move forward.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 924
    I find it fascinating that there has been talk of both rites “informing each other” but at the same time we are warned “[not to] mix the rites!”. All I know is that 99.9999999% of the novus ordo masses I have ever attended my entire life have been in dire need of some of the solemnity and Eucharistic piety that I observe by default at even the most humble tlm.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,542
    Yea, that whole mutual enrichment line was, for me, a bunch of b****** (balogna). It’s a one way street. The NO has NOTHING to offer the TLM. And remember, I have been in the NO for 50 years. So don’t mess with me.

    the novus ordo is a revised liturgy.
    Correction. It is a NEW liturgy.
  • trentonjconn
    Posts: 191
    Ora, while music may be more or less the same, choreography most certainly is not. There would be a lot of prep necessary to convert a Pontifical Solemn High into its NO form.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Don9of11Don9of11
    Posts: 508
    The NO has NOTHING to offer the TLM. And remember, I have been in the NO for 50 years. So don’t mess with me.


    The NO has a lot to offer the TLM provided our Bishops, priest and musicians dedicate themselves to celebrating the mass as it was intended to be celebrated. I've experienced many NO Latin masses that were celebrated by Holy priest and musicians and they were beautiful expression of the old and new.
    Thanked by 2MarkB Elmar
  • One doesn't need to find lay faithful to read the lessons or the petitions, and there's no need to make sure there's a requisite number of girl altar boys or microphones.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,691
    If you have instituted adequate numbers of lectors and acolytes, this is no problem in the NO
  • OraLabora
    Posts: 208
    @ServiamScores

    All I know is that 99.9999999% of the novus ordo masses I have ever attended my entire life have been in dire need of some of the solemnity and Eucharistic piety that I observe by default at even the most humble tlm.


    By default at even the most humble post-Conciliar tlm. It was by no means always the case before the Council. It's just that the TLM is now in the hands of, shall we say, "enthusiasts" or more charitably, specialists. My 83 y.o. Benedictine spiritual director told me of many irreverent TLMs back in the 50s when he was in seminary.

    On the other hand, *all* of the Benedictine OF Masses at our abbey are beautiful, reverent, and in Gregorian chant with a degree of solemnity (incense, organ) befitting the occasion. And 100% faithful to the rubrics. No innovations or creativity. It's do the red, say the black within the allowable options.

    It can be done, and it has nothing to do with the form of the Mass, but rather the heart(s) of the celebrant(s) (yes, they concelebrate). Unfortunately at the parish level, we've often been told "if you want that sort of thing (chant), go to the TLM across town. That should not be. I agree the average parish Mass (around here too) leaves a lot to be desired, especially musically.

    Ora
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 924
    the novus ordo is a revised liturgy.
    Correction. It is a NEW liturgy.


    I was using Mark’s language.

    I agree it was cut if wholly new cloth.

    I would accept the argument that it was a “revised” liturgy if they started with the old missal and simply made some changes but otherwise preserved the majority of it. That is self-evidently not what happened.
    Thanked by 2rich_enough tomjaw
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,542
    The NO has a lot to offer the TLM provided our Bishops, priest and musicians dedicate themselves to celebrating the mass as it was intended to be celebrated. I've experienced many NO Latin masses that were celebrated by Holy priest and musicians and they were beautiful expression of the old and new.
    So have I. It still proves my point that anything worthwhile was lifted from the TLM. Why try to sacralize the NO? Just celebrate the MOTA. What are y’all so afraid of? What is so offensive? What is so unacceptable that one prefers a counterfeit? In the words of BXVI, “banal fabrication”
    Thanked by 2ServiamScores tomjaw
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,691
    ServiamScores - the last VO 'edition' is in 1967, the first NO is promulgated in 1969. There is very little change in the sequence of actions between these two. Contrition(Confiteor), Kyrie, Gloria, Collect, ... all follow in the same order, the very noticeable change is where the celebrant stands, which clarifies that the Mass of the Catechumens is different from the Mass of the Faithful, the altar is used for the Holy Sacrifice not for the readings at Low Mass. It is evident to me that Paul VI is correct in saying that 1969 is just a revision.
    Certainly there are simplifications of some things and elaboration of others, and frequently alternatives, and I do not think it was all well done, but there is no rupture.
    Thanked by 1Schönbergian
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,686
    Francis writes:
    What is so unacceptable that one prefers a counterfeit? In the words of BXVI, “banal fabrication”

    There is a problem of translation here. In English, something "fabricated" is counterfeit; but in German, it means "manufactured": a Fabrik is a factory. Pope Benedict XVI was in no way calling the modern form of Mass counterfeit.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,542
    fab•ri•ca•tion ►
    n. The act of framing or constructing; construction; formation; manufacture.
    n. The act of devising or contriving falsely; fictitious invention; forgery: as, the fabrication of testimony; the fabrication of a report.
    n. That which is fabricated; especially, a falsely contrived representation or statement; a falsehood: as, the story is a fabrication.


    (More for comparison)

    Merriam Webster

    Definition of fabrication
    1 : the act or process of fabricating
    2 : a product of fabrication
    especially : LIE, FALSEHOOD

    Cambridge

    fabricate
    verb [ T ]

    UK /ˈfæb.rɪ.keɪt/ US /ˈfæb.rɪ.keɪt/


    to invent or produce something false in order to deceive someone:
    He was late, so he fabricated an excuse to avoid trouble.
    He claims that the police fabricated evidence against him.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 924
    AFH—
    The postures were changed. The wording of the confiteor was altered. Chant was abandoned (albeit not on paper). The calendar was changed. Collects were changed. Propers were moved around. Prayers were slashed.

    The two masses resemble each other inasmuch as man and ape resemble each other. Their skeletons look very similar, but we all know they aren’t the same. Yes, there is much shared DNA, but we are ultimately talking about two different species here.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw dad29