Hello,

1. Are the pre and post 1962 missals the same?
2. I understand that the liturgy for the Latin Mass too was changed in 1962. Am I wrong?

I found a wonderful 1905 missal with ordinary and proper and I wonder if, calendars, rite, etc., are the same.

Tommaso

Hello,

1. Are the pre and post 1962 missals the same?
2. I understand that the liturgy for the Latin Mass too was changed in 1962. Am I wrong?

I found a wonderful 1905 missal with ordinary and proper and I wonder if, calendars, rite, etc., are the same.

Tommaso

1) The Roman Missal changes nearly every year from 1951 on (and not organic changes, but experimental and novel innovations, which vandalized a Rite which had survived intact substantially since the time of St. Gregory the Great, and some parts since the immediate post-Apostolic era).

Here is a good starting point:

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2010/07/reform-of-holy-week-in-years-1951-1956.html?m=1

Also: Google “Monsignor Gromier Roman Rite vandalism tradition in action.”

Also: “Dr. Byrne plea for silence in liturgy dialogue mass traditioninaction”

2) Refer to #1.

See also Fr. Didier Bonneterre, SSPX, liturgical revolution.

These are starter materials that will get you off and running.

Thank you Sean, I am reading and studyig what you recommended.

After reading only thus far, I understand that the FSSPX (and I presume this community too) regards the 1969 emendments to the Roman missal, in its extraordinary form, as being legitimate liturgy while those of the novus ordo to be in error.

So, for the sole purpose of participating in the celebration of a traditional Mass, I would have to look for a post 1969, Roman missal, in Latin.

Is my deduction correct?

PS: it is remarkable how the military (the translator is a military chaplain) always have greater respect and love for traditions. I served for many years and my commander instilled in me respect for such principles to honour those who died before us to defend our same values. It is not a coincidence that Jesus did the same for us...

... ???

... by reading the docuмent one can see how liturgical amendments are closely related to doctrine and canon changes. I can appreciate why one would resist both.

One example would be the 1956 OHS suppression of the preface which speaks of Christ's authority over the kingdoms and powers of this world which I assume was conceived in preparation for later interfaith dialogue. If my assumption is correct, then both the FSSPX and this community would be incoherent to accept the 1969 rite that does not correct this preface suppression and only approve the pre 1952(6) rite.

One of my greatest concerns, as I mentioned, is Rome's surrender to islamic aggressions, to the point that our Holy Father recently affirmed that we worship the same God. I cannot reconcile with big and small incidents... from Catholic Schools teaching also the coran to my daughter, only because there is one muslim pupil in the class to a bishop requesting that our traditional tortellini (*) be made with chicken, just in case a muslim may stop by to watch a Catholic religious festival.

I appreciate the importance of such extreemely specialistic liturgical and theological concerns that, eventually, influence everyday practical life.


(*) they are traditionally made with pork.