Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Welcome aboard, Cosmos.

You were in your early 20's when Vatican II took place.  What was the general attitude of your fellow parishioners when the Mass was changed?  

How old were you when your parish started using Communion in the Hand?

How did you discover the FSSP?

Observably it was very subtle. I just did what I was told as regards to anything about my religion. To understand why, you need to live through the "Angela's Ashes" days of the early 50's. There was none of this liberal permissive free thinking that there is now.

My first in-hand I recall, but it wasn't significant to me. When the changes were fed to us peacemeal, it would be hard to read that has a premonition of disaster. Again, I guess some would say that it and other changes were a part of the grand conspiracy, and perhaps that is true.  Back in the 70's I recall someone questioned the facing the congregation altar, and it was then that I felt the first indicators something was wrong as I agreed to the reasoning that we should face God, and He should not see our backs. Maybe wrong is not the word, but it was not UNLIKE the protestant churches I attended a few times.

Cosmos is the same age as my mother, and what he describes sounds very famiiar to me - It sounds just like what my mother and aunts and uncles describe the changes being like - a veritable boiling of frogs if ever there was such a case.

This also puts me in mind of a passage from The Great Sacrilege, where Fr. Wathen describes the insidious manner in which the Novus Ordo was implemented, and his prophetic description of how the children of that generation who watched the changes occur passively (that generation of children being my genertion, and most of us here on CI) would be better able to see the NO for what it is, not having been raised with the TLM, and therefore not "reading into" the NO what actually is not there...

For the record, my mother (and one aunt) who actually now decry those changes and long for the days of the ubiquitous TLM, paradoxically are still unable to pull themselves entirely away from the NO. It's absolutely disheartening and maddening for me as a son, and I think Fr. Wathen perfectly describes the psychology behind this phenomenon as well in this passage:

One can analyze the “New Mass” properly only by
comparing it with that which its creators claim it is, the
Mass of the Roman Rite. When Catholics now go to “mass,”
their habit is to see what is not there. The reason is, they have all
but forgotten the True Mass, and what they see is a resemblance of
it. They read meanings into words which the words they hear
do not say, while they fail to advert to what the words do say.
In this way, the real objectives of the “vernacular movement”
are realized. It does not occur to the faithful that their children,
not having the mental background they do, are better able to
see the thing as it is, for they see only what is there, and hear
only the words which are spoken. The people do not wish to
awaken to what has happened (and is still happening). They
live in a fictitious world, and they resent any effort to jolt them
out of it. Such an awakening would cause them a great
problem, a great host of problems, every kind of friction,
inconvenience, and readjustment. And it would impose such
noisome burdens.

While the True Mass was being withdrawn from them, the
people watched and endured it helplessly, uncomprehendingly,
resignedly. And all the while it was being done, they were being
“re-educated”: on the one hand, while the True Mass was being
hidden from view, erased from their memory, every kind of
irreverent, pseudo-liturgical, and specious criticism was being
made against it by their clerical indoctrinators; on the other
hand, as the parts of the Replacement were being eased in,
various and sundry equally implausible rationalizations were
being pumped into their bewildered brains. Those who
showed mistrust and suspicion or who raised objections were
subjected to withering scorn. Even now, most Catholics are
unaware of the immeasurable dissimilarity between the True
Mass and its perfidious Plagiarism. They really think that the
main differences are a change in language and the turning
around of the altar. Three other factors contributed to their
subversion. For one thing, the language of the “New Mass”
sounds truly pious and prayerful. For another, everything
about the “new religion” is decidedly easier, pleasanter,
friendlier, more casual—and, at times, simply great fun! And
most insidious of all is the argument that the changes are good
if you like them. “If you like them!” This means you are
praying better. If the new way makes you feel better, your
worship is bound to be better. The one question never allowed
was whether God approves of this “New Religion.” Of course,
it does not matter, for “The People is Baal.”

Quote from: Cosmos

I have read all of Archbishop Lefebvre's papers to the community, and the story of the insurgent activity in the Vatican, such as the Masonic infiltration and such. I'm not sure if all that is true. Is there any citation of the validity of this, even from neutral upper ecclesial echelon.? If true, there should be some.

Quote from: Nadir

What does this - neutral upper ecclesial echelon - mean? Just who did you have in mind.

 

Sorry for confusion. Like bystanders in a dispute, I thought there might be some neutral magesterium as observers/insiders, who through their correspondence to others could shed a detached point of view on the matter.

Well I guess we are all bystanders. It's just that not all bystanders are taking notice.

There is not such thing as a neutral magisterium.

As I said earlier, if you wait for today's regime to acknowledge and condemn the ʝʊdɛօ-masonic influence in the Church, you might wait a while.

However there are many trustworthy sources to confirm the infiltration of the Church by ʝʊdɛօ-masonry. Jesus Himself told Padre Pio that he had singled out don Luigi Villa for fighting Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ in the Church. You can't have a higher recommendation than that. So if you want the truth on this subject, and it is crucial in understanding the state of the Church, you can't go past Fr Villa's writings.

Others here I am sure have other suggestions. I would suggest also that you read
Vicomte Leon de Poncins, Freemasonary and the Vatican
You can buy it through Matthew by clicking the link on the home page:
Click here to start your Amazon.com session so CathInfo gets credit!