"No it is not and the 1962 Missal is not safe for our soul."
Based on what information? What is your expertise in the matter of determining which Missal is safe for one's soul and which one is not?
This is exactly why Our Lord established His Church: because we as individuals do not possess the competence -- or the right -- to determine these things on our own.
Not speaking for anyone else in this thread, but my own answer is that obviously there is reason to object to the revisions made by Pius XII's 'reform' agency, steered by our old friend, the freemason - Bugnini (the 'g' is silent).
Some, like Coomaraswamy, objected early on. I don't know that those like Hildebrand, Davies, and others who are known to have objected to the new Roman Protestantism, later on and as many now refer to it, were so vocal, nor Fulton Sheen, who was so prominent, nor many others. That doesn't mean they didn't object, as well, but I can't recall that they did.
It was an effort, as people say, by Bugnini to see what he and the Modernists could slip through without objection. Many changes had been made in the 1950s, and then carried forward to the changes made in 1962.
The point is that the largest, most well-organised, and most consistent traditionalist organisation (from which nearly all traditionalist organisations have sprung) uses the 1962 Missal.
And they also confess the Roman Protestant version of Canon Law, contrary to a tradition of Canon Law stretching back almost two millenia. Even contact with the corrupt Roman Protestant breeds corruption of ones own. One cannot try to 'make nice', or else be destroyed. The Fellayist faction make it clear that Lefebvre was torn on these issues, and so the SSPX is torn between those considering the Pope a fraud, and those who prefer to continue 'resisting to the face'. There will have to be a shakeout, as I've said here, previously. It would be to the benefit of all, and would make the SSPX categorically Catholic, faithful and orthodox, as those preferring the 1962, and the 1983 Canon Law, and all the rest of Roman Protestantism will follow Fellay and his clique and will embrace heresy and apostacy almost entirely, I would think, as apparently was done in Campos.
You have to remember that, in the distant past, Catholics stood against clerics who claimed to be Catholic but who had lost the Faith or were preaching another. You know of St. Athanasius, who ultimately triumphed because God wished His Church to triumph. That was also a time of Emperors exercising control over eastern and western churches. Athanasius was persecuted. But others less known were persecuted, exiled or jailed - and that was it, until a new Emperor might come along. They stood heroically for the Faith, rather than just 'go along'. It's the very example of Christ, His example for us, for true and faithful Catholics. You might reply that the 'resist to your face' stuff is precisely that, refusing to simply 'go along'. But it's not complete. It a half-way approach, particularly as they wish to reconcile, or at least Fellay does, with the phony sect that has seized what properly belongs to Catholics.
Topic: The '62 Missal (Read 1024 times)