Author Topic: Why did we need a new mass? (Read 7354 times)

s2srea · « **on:** December 02, 2011, 07:52:01 AM »

These two questions are for Pax and Santo Subito specifically.

Why was there a need to change the Mass of Pope St. Pius V?

Do you think this was beneficial to the Church?

Trads- please restrain from answering, until SS and Pax are giving an opportunity.

pax · « **Reply #1 on:** December 02, 2011, 08:13:17 AM »

Quote from: s2srea

(1). Why was there a need to change the Mass of Pope St. Pius V?

(2). Do you think this was beneficial to the Church?

Well, even though I am a traditionalist, I will nonetheless answer your questions.

(1). Not my call to make.

(2). On the contrary, IMHO it was harmful to the Faithful, which is probably why Rome is now beginning the long process of reeling it all in.

s2srea · « **Reply #2 on:** December 02, 2011, 08:18:44 AM »

Thanks for the responses pax.

LordPhan · « **Reply #3 on:** December 02, 2011, 11:19:43 AM »

Quote from: pax

Quote from: s2srea
(1). Why was there a need to change the Mass of Pope St. Pius V?

(2). Do you think this was beneficial to the Church?

Well, even though I am a traditionalist, I will nonetheless answer your questions.

(1). Not my call to make.

(2). On the contrary, IMHO it was harmful to the Faithful, which is probably why Rome is now beginning the long process of reeling it all in.

It is not the Pope's call either, I refer you to Doctor of Theology and Doctor of Canon Law Father Hesse who will explain to you that there is an anathema on anyone including the Pope who omits from the Mass or Changes the Mass into a New Rite.

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Father-Hesse-on-the-Mass

Santo Subito · « **Reply #4 on:** December 02, 2011, 06:17:51 PM »

Just now seeing this. Thanks for the question.

The ideas behind the New Mass are no secret. They are right there in Sancrosanctum Concilium in VCII.

There were a few ideas I have heard. They wanted the Mass easily intelligible to the average layman, the the vernacular.

They wanted more participation on the part of the laity. There was perceived a passivity in the Old Rite and people saying rosaries, etc. and not saying the prayers of the Mass as the Priest silently recited Latin with his back to them.

There was a perception that the Old Mass had people showing up and going through the motions, not really involved or interested.

I personally think they could have simply put the TLM in English and made the Canon audible instead of changing the whole thing.

Obviously the innovators took the Mass of Paul VI , slapped a bad translation on it, added altar girls out of disobedience and CITH as well, EM's, lay lectors, bad music. none of which was mandated by VCII.

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 02, 2011, 06:53:23 PM »

I remember in my early Catholic Prochial School years, Sister would say
during Catechism Class that more Santifying Grace is in your Soul, more
you understand the Mass.
In other words, the Mass is a mystical experience. I was always so
sad with the gradual changes that begun with the first Sunday of Advent
in 1964. And, the shocking experiments starting in 1965 that some Priests
did on their own.
I have photographic proof that the first communion in the hand took
place in a Detrot, Michigan Parish in June 1965.
To sum up, the toying with the Mass has lead many Catholic's to
loose the Faith, and leaving the Church.

pax · « **Reply #6 on:** December 02, 2011, 07:50:10 PM »

Quote from: LordPhan

Quote from: pax
Quote from: s2srea
(1). Why was there a need to change the Mass of Pope St. Pius V?

(1). Not my call to make.

It is not the Pope's call either

You shoot yourself in the foot as Pope Saint Pius V also made changes to the existing liturgy.

St Jude Thaddeus · « **Reply #7 on:** December 02, 2011, 08:59:21 PM »

Quote from: pax

Quote from: s2srea
(1). Why was there a need to change the Mass of Pope St. Pius V?

(2). Do you think this was beneficial to the Church?

Well, even though I am a traditionalist

:roll-laugh2:

Quote

(1). Not my call to make.

Ja wohl! Just following Mein Fuhrer's orders!

Quote

(2). On the contrary, IMHO it was harmful to the Faithful, which is probably why Rome is now beginning the long process of reeling it all in.

:roll-laugh1:

Another pathetic Newchurch snake!

Why don't you read some of the thousands of threads on this same forum and others and hundreds of REAL traditionalist websites and see that your inane whining about "I can't depose a Pope" has been debunked over and over again, in language so simple that even a bottom-feeding shill for pedophiles and embezzlers like you should be able to understand.

Go back to Un-Catholic Non-Answers with your rubbish!

St Jude Thaddeus · « **Reply #8 on:** December 02, 2011, 09:03:18 PM »

Quote from: pax

You shoot yourself in the foot as Pope Saint Pius V also made changes to the existing liturgy.

No, he didn't, snake.

He standardized for the whole Latin Church an already existing rite. Any changes made by Popes previous to Vatican 2 were minor and didn't conflict with traditional Catholic teachings.

How utterly dishonest of you to compare the wreckovation of Montini with the saintly actions of St. Pius V.

St Jude Thaddeus · « **Reply #9 on:** December 02, 2011, 09:05:52 PM »

Oops. Sorry, s2rea! I guess I forgot about the "restraint" part.

It's just that these pederast enablers and apologists for apostates get me a little riled up in my old age.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #10 on:** December 03, 2011, 02:14:39 AM »

Pax's philosophy really epitomizes false obedience, or fearful ostrich-like superstition that some people confuse with true obedience.

pax · « **Reply #11 on:** December 03, 2011, 07:47:21 AM »

Quote from: St Jude Thaddeus

Oops. Sorry, s2rea! I guess I forgot about the "restraint" part.

It's just that these pederast enablers and apologists for apostates get me a little riled up in my old age.

What a wonderful thing this sedevacantism is in that it allows you to cast off all humility and be the god of your own universe.

pax · « **Reply #12 on:** December 03, 2011, 07:48:57 AM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Pax's philosophy really epitomizes false obedience, or fearful ostrich-like superstition that some people confuse with true obedience.

I recall a legend of Saint Francis who, when confronted with the fact that an apostate bishop was coming to see him, said that his reaction would be to kneel before him and kiss his hands, which were given the power to both consecrate and ordain.

See? Humility. Get some.

s2srea · « **Reply #13 on:** December 03, 2011, 09:09:46 AM »

Quote from: pax

Quote from: Raoul76
Pax's philosophy really epitomizes false obedience, or fearful ostrich-like superstition that some people confuse with true obedience.

I recall a legend of Saint Francis who, when confronted with the fact that an apostate bishop was coming to see him, said that his reaction would be to kneel before him and kiss his hands, which were given the power to both consecrate and ordain.

See? Humility. Get some.

Pax, you're right, your story is indeed a legend, as it is twisted on a significant point. The truth is, is that St. Francis did indeed fall to the feet of a priest who was living with a concubine, not an apostate; completely changes your scenario. Or should we do the same for all validly ordained Schismatics?

To quote hobbledehoy:"St. Francis never faced the possibility of reverencing Episcopi vagantes or clerics who may have ostensibly imperiled their salvation in risking the possibility of incurring serious censures and scandal, as well as committing sacrilege and mortal sin in having attained to the sacred Episcopacy contrary to the norms of Canon Law (cf. Can. 953)"

True humility is to God, Pax, not men.

pax · « **Reply #14 on:** December 03, 2011, 09:14:23 AM »

Quote from: s2srea

Quote from: pax
Quote from: Raoul76
Pax's philosophy really epitomizes false obedience, or fearful ostrich-like superstition that some people confuse with true obedience.

I recall a legend of Saint Francis who, when confronted with the fact that an apostate bishop was coming to see him, said that his reaction would be to kneel before him and kiss his hands, which were given the power to both consecrate and ordain.

See? Humility. Get some.

Pax, you're right, your story is indeed a legend, as it is twisted on a significant point. The truth is, is that St. Francis did indeed fall to the feet of a priest who was living with a concubine, not an apostate; completely changes your scenario. Or should we do the same for all validly ordained Schismatics?

To quote hobbledehoy:"St. Francis never faced the possibility of reverencing Episcopi vagantes or clerics who may have ostensibly imperiled their salvation in risking the possibility of incurring serious censures and scandal, as well as committing sacrilege and mortal sin in having attained to the sacred Episcopacy contrary to the norms of Canon Law (cf. Can. 953)"

True humility is to God, Pax, not men.

And who appointed you to be God's spokesman?

It is through the Church, and only through the Church that God speaks to us.