Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5

Author Topic: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?  (Read 3985 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LeDeg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 785
  • Reputation: +543/-136
  • Gender: Male
  • I am responsible only to God and history.
1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
« on: February 11, 2021, 03:22:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • If the Novus Ordo is rejected in part by many because it was novel, Protestant or a product of Mason's, by what basis is the 1955 Holy Week accepted if the same men who produced it also produced the Novus Ordo? 
    Logged
    "You must train harder than the enemy who is trying to kill you. You will get all the rest you need in the grave."- Leon Degrelle

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12764
    • Reputation: +8138/-2505
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #1 on: February 11, 2021, 03:28:10 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • You accept it because a valid pope (Pius XII) told you to.  Secondarily, the evil intent of modernism is only a sin for those who implemented it.  The actual Holy Week changes are not evil in themselves.  Are they 100% Traditional?  No.  Are they perfect?  No.  Heretical/evil?  No.
    Logged

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3852/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #2 on: February 11, 2021, 03:30:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I think sedes should celebrate the revised holy week, while non-sedes should celebrate the old one. Similarly, I think sedes should celebrate St. Joseph the Worker, while non-sedes should not.

    But Pax, I thought you were not a sede?
    Logged
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11527
    • Reputation: +6478/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #3 on: February 11, 2021, 03:33:09 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 11, 2021, 03:28:10 PM
    You accept it because a valid pope (Pius XII) told you to.  Secondarily, the evil intent of modernism is only a sin for those who implemented it.  The actual Holy Week changes are not evil in themselves.  Are they 100% Traditional?  No.  Are they perfect?  No.  Heretical/evil?  No.
    But every non-sede here thinks the Vatican II popes are true and valid.  Why aren't they accepting their Novus Ordo liturgy?
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12764
    • Reputation: +8138/-2505
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #4 on: February 11, 2021, 03:39:25 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Holy Week was included in the 1962 missal and is binding/law, being a lawful revision of Quo Primum.  The 1969 missal is neither binding nor lawful, being at odds with Quo Primum and also, secondarily, the 1969 law does not command anyone attend/say the new mass.  But all this has been discussed before...
    .
    The true question is, why does a sede think that Pius XII wasn't the pope?  Or why didn't he have the authority to slightly change Holy Week? 
    Logged

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3852/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #5 on: February 11, 2021, 03:44:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 11, 2021, 03:39:25 PM
    The true question is, why does a sede think that Pius XII wasn't the pope?
    Perhaps he wasn't a true pope because he believed in evolution. Grasping for straws. If you reject the Novus Ordo, you can reject other changes as well. However, it is hard to know where to draw the line. You yourself do not believe the answer is the will of the Pope.
    Logged
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline LeDeg

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 785
    • Reputation: +543/-136
    • Gender: Male
    • I am responsible only to God and history.
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #6 on: February 11, 2021, 03:46:29 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 11, 2021, 03:39:25 PM
    Holy Week was included in the 1962 missal and is binding/law, being a lawful revision of Quo Primum.  The 1969 missal is neither binding nor lawful, being at odds with Quo Primum and also, secondarily, the 1969 law does not command anyone attend/say the new mass.  But all this has been discussed before...
    .
    The true question is, why does a sede think that Pius XII wasn't the pope?  Or why didn't he have the authority to slightly change Holy Week?
    I thought that Quo Primum forbid the introduction of New Rites into the existing Missal. The new Holy Week is exactly that. It is as much against the law as what you state about the 1969. 
    Pius XII did not "slightly change" Holy Week. From Palm Sunday to Easter Vigil, it was massively altered.
    Logged
    "You must train harder than the enemy who is trying to kill you. You will get all the rest you need in the grave."- Leon Degrelle

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3852/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #7 on: February 11, 2021, 03:48:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: LeDeg on February 11, 2021, 03:46:29 PM
    Pius XII did not "slightly change" Holy Week. From Palm Sunday to Easter Vigil, it was massively altered.

    Yes, I caught that also. I thought it was a sign that Pax either never learned about the changes or is of bad will. I am not an expert but I remember reading about the changes in traditional articles and thinking that they were a big deal.
    Logged
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12764
    • Reputation: +8138/-2505
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #8 on: February 11, 2021, 03:54:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    I thought that Quo Primum forbid the introduction of New Rites into the existing Missal. The new Holy Week is exactly that. It is as much against the law as what you state about the 1969. 
    Pius XII did not "slightly change" Holy Week. From Palm Sunday to Easter Vigil, it was massively altered.

    1.  I do not intend to start an anti-sede feud.  Most people on this thread (at least 2Vermont should know because we've debated many times) that I'm partial to many sede arguments.  So i'm making an honest attempt at civil debate.
    .
    2.  "Massively altered" is not the same thing as "essentially" altered.  Pope St Pius X massively altered the breviary but the essence of it was not changed.  The new Holy Week, in the opinion of many Trad clerics, is not perfect but it's also not substantially different.
    .
    3.  An argument can be made that the Holy Week rites are more human/church created than divinely inspired (i.e. they aren't the mass).  The liturgy (outside of the essential, Apostolic parts of the Mass) organically developed over the centuries.  It can be changed quite a bit, in theory.
    Logged

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3852/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #9 on: February 11, 2021, 03:56:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 11, 2021, 03:54:24 PM
    It can be changed quite a bit, in theory.
    Pius XII was the embryo, John XXIII was the newborn child Paul VI was the young adult.
    Logged
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11527
    • Reputation: +6478/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #10 on: February 11, 2021, 03:57:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 11, 2021, 03:39:25 PM
    Holy Week was included in the 1962 missal and is binding/law, being a lawful revision of Quo Primum.  The 1969 missal is neither binding nor lawful, being at odds with Quo Primum and also, secondarily, the 1969 law does not command anyone attend/say the new mass.  But all this has been discussed before...
    .
    The true question is, why does a sede think that Pius XII wasn't the pope?  Or why didn't he have the authority to slightly change Holy Week?
    99% of sedes think he was pope and most still follow his liturgical reforms. Those that do not follow his reforms see these reforms as the beginning of the Novus Ordo (since they too come from Bugnini).  I happen to follow his reforms and do not consider them evil because he is a true and valid pope.

    If Paul VI was also a valid pope like Pius XII, then his liturgy shouldn't be heretical/evil.

    But you're right: we have been through this before (and I'm not interested in arguing about it). I just thought it odd that you started with (essentially) "Well, you have to because he is a valid pope". In my mind, it stops there.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12764
    • Reputation: +8138/-2505
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #11 on: February 11, 2021, 03:57:51 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Perhaps he wasn't a true pope because he believed in evolution. Grasping for straws.

    You believe he was pope or not.  That's a big decision.  The Holy Week decision flows from the first decision.  Not the other way around.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12764
    • Reputation: +8138/-2505
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #12 on: February 11, 2021, 04:00:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    If Paul VI was also a valid pope like Pius XII, then his liturgy shouldn't be heretical/evil.

    There's many reasons to doubt Paul 6 being valid.  But, even if he was valid, I debate HOW he LEGALLY issued his new missal.  But we've been over this.  Don't want to rehash it...
    Logged

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3852/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #13 on: February 11, 2021, 04:01:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 11, 2021, 03:57:51 PM
    You believe he was pope or not.  That's a big decision.  The Holy Week decision flows from the first decision.  Not the other way around.
    I do not think you are being consistent unless you are a sede. However on examination I bet most of our positions are not consistent.
    Logged
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12764
    • Reputation: +8138/-2505
    • Gender: Male
    Re: 1955 Holy Week-Why accept it?
    « Reply #14 on: February 11, 2021, 04:04:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • The question of Holy Week is separate from the question of the New Mass.  2 different popes, 2 different liturgical changes, 2 different legal docuŠ¼ents.  If you can't answer the 1955 liturgical question without referencing a different liturgical question, then your reasons/arguments aren't strong.
    Logged
    Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
    « previous next »