/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

> No Baptists allowed like in the last thread

Yeah. That'll work.

What is the difference in missals? I heard that FSSP and SSPX use post Vatican II missals, doesn't that defeat the purpose? Or they aren't allowed to use older ones?

wait, if you have a Catholic general why do you need this thread?

>>671635

Only the 1962 office can fulfil clergy obligations. This is still a modernist office as it was reformed by Bugnini. SSPX will not do any earlier forms whereas FSSP are pushing towards the Pius X office and have been given permission to experiment with the pre 1955 holy week.

Basically the pre 1910 office is the unchanged one of the early church. Pius X did a new psalter and removed a lot of festive liturgy in favour of more ferias, which is boring IMO as the office is great about learning about the feasts and seeing what scripture correspond to them rather than just praying the same thing over and over. This is the first big break from tradition and arguably paved the way for bugnini to start cutting the office to pieces and remove perfidious Jews and add a genuflection to them.

Check out divinumofficium.com to see the original office.

>>671521

>the last thread that sowed divisions and discord was deleted

>can I have this new thread that sows division and discord ?

Let me ask you this one question: Do you speak Latin perfectly fluent or at least fluently enough to have a thorough conversation on a variety of topics and the casual life ? Because if you don't, then "muh TLM" is a larp. It says alot about how people lost track of their love for God and put alot of faith in their own opinions and personal taste. The Pope adressed exactly that in Gaudete et Exsultate (with reference to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) - https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20180319_gaudete-et-exsultate.html :

New pelagians

57. Still, some Christians insist on taking another path, that of justification by their own efforts, the worship of the human will and their own abilities. The result is a self-centred and elitist complacency, bereft of true love. This finds expression in a variety of apparently unconnected ways of thinking and acting: an obsession with the law, an absorption with social and political advantages, a punctilious concern for the Church’s liturgy, doctrine and prestige, a vanity about the ability to manage practical matters, and an excessive concern with programmes of self-help and personal fulfilment. Some Christians spend their time and energy on these things, rather than letting themselves be led by the Spirit in the way of love, rather than being passionate about communicating the beauty and the joy of the Gospel and seeking out the lost among the immense crowds that thirst for Christ.[63]

58. Not infrequently, contrary to the promptings of the Spirit, the life of the Church can become a museum piece or the possession of a select few. This can occur when some groups of Christians give excessive importance to certain rules, customs or ways of acting. The Gospel then tends to be reduced and constricted, deprived of its simplicity, allure and savour. This may well be a subtle form of pelagianism, for it appears to subject the life of grace to certain human structures. It can affect groups, movements and communities, and it explains why so often they begin with an intense life in the Spirit, only to end up fossilized… or corrupt.

59. Once we believe that everything depends on human effort as channelled by ecclesial rules and structures, we unconsciously complicate the Gospel and become enslaved to a blueprint that leaves few openings for the working of grace. Saint Thomas Aquinas reminded us that the precepts added to the Gospel by the Church should be imposed with moderation “lest the conduct of the faithful become burdensome”, for then our religion would become a form of servitude.[64]

>>671990

>about lay reader and shit

Not all lay catholics can do it. The priest must approved therefore its still OK even although I personally don't like it

>communion under both specimens

Where the hell do you live?

Either way no one ever (but prots) said the Church was wrong in this subject. And she wasn't pressure by no one. In fact most normies would pass the eucharistic bread if their grandmas weren't by their side unfortunately.

>Canon mass errors

Lol this is the best one. Do you know Latin mass suffered changes from the 15th century up to the 20th? And that doesn't mean it was wrong in any way. With permission a priest can do the old rites which would be stupid if they were wrong in any way

>the language

It is talking about the rite. If I say that the Byzantine rite should be celebrated in another language I would be anathema as well.

And btw Latin used to be vernacular once, so early catholics were heretics? It just proves its talking about the new roman rite aka tridentine mass

>mass changes

Would like the source on the new mass side. Lmao.

Ignoring the retardness of pic related priests aren't allowed to change the prayers of the rite such as consacration.

Although I too don't like the new roman rite and believe it needs serious reforms I don't make false accusations.

>>671990

Playing devil's advocate, that list refer to what layman and priests and even bishops may not do of their own initiative or for personal preference if it violates the law of the Church.

It is something quite different if the Church itself permits amendment or alteration to the rites.

>>671651

>Let me ask you this one question: Do you speak Latin perfectly fluent or at least fluently enough to have a thorough conversation on a variety of topics and the casual life ? Because if you don't, then "muh TLM" is a larp.

This is a bad argument and you know it.

Even though the new mass is in the vernacular, do you think that most layfolk even know half of what is going on before their eyes? The significance of what is being performed, or even why, right in front of them?

It's not an issue of Latin or vernacular in this case, it's just plain bad catechism.

>>671990

As much as I like the TLM, the person who made that image actually makes the new mass look good and traditional with how poor their arguments are…

>>672016

>The significance of what is being performed, or even why, right in front of them?

THIS

The Rite needs reform ASAP.

>>671651

>Do you speak Latin perfectly fluent or at least fluently enough to have a thorough conversation on a variety of topics and the casual life ? Because if you don't, then "muh TLM" is a larp

The whole reason why us radtrads want the Tridentine Mass is because it's immune to heresy.

Every word and prayer, every act and vestment is carefully written down and explained why it has to be like this.

You cannot change any of this else you're not doing the Tridentine rite.

Furthermore, the Latin text is also devoid of heresy and thus guarantees a proper and valid mass.

Meanwhile the Novus Ordo is so liberal and open into how you can perform it that a lot of parishes have invalid masses.

>B-but it's a dead language, you can't understand it!

Get the frick out you filthy casual pleb.

3 years of Latin mass, enough knowledge of Romance languages and literally an IQ above 90 and I can understand 50+% of what the priest is saying at times.

Not that this is even needed because you got the translation of the liturgy right in our breviary.

Besides the whole point of the Latin text is it's pureness and correctness, not that we understand it.

You're probably the kind of guy that would argue that performing a mass throughout the day is useless because nobody else is there to attend it.

>>671635

>>671649

As far as the mass itself, the official missal prescribed for the TLM is the 1962 missal. I don't know the exact time of that, but Vatican II started in October 1962 and went through 1965, so it's at least not post-Vatican II. Depending on the priest, the mass in practice may incorporate elements of earlier missals.

>>671651

Even if you think we should agree with that incoherent nonsense uncritically, that passage nowhere names Latin or the TLM. In my opinion those words more aply apply to those with such a "punctilious concern" for the Church's liturgy that they feel the need to attack the TLM and push the Novus Ordo everywhere they go (such as "Traditional Latin Mass Discussion" threads).

1 Corinthians 14:19

Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

I mean, even you guys compare other apostolic liturgies with the NO, you will find that other rites like those of syriacs, ethiopian, coptic, etc are closely related to the TLM.

Some of thr example is that, in the apostolic liturgies, they have prayer for the vestment, which emphasize prayerful attitude of the priest as he prepare for the mass, this is absent in the NO.

Other characteristic is that the priest have set of prayers more before proceed to the next step/ritual of the mass. This is also absent in the NO, what the lay people pray, is what also the priest pray. And there are other things

>>672286

In case my ID changed I'm the Bapdiss

I guess I should clarify what I mean; is the Sunday service, as spoken of by Justin Martyr, still celebrated? The Pre-Tridentine Mass seems to be the closest, although not exact.

>On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.

>>672286

A good book to read is "The Shape of the Liturgy".

Short answer: no

>>672286

Depends on the rite used honestly. The Liturgy of St. Tikhon is the most recent, created for Anglican converts. The rest of rites vary in age.

https://orthodoxwesternrite.wordpress.com/a-liturgy-general/

>>672191

Latin is not an unknown tongue. It's a very well known language. If you want to learn Latin, there is no shortage of resources freely available online for you to learn it. Furthermore, if you don't know Latin, you can easily learn the meaning of the small set of Latim texts that make up the ordinary of the mass, just as the Jews of Jesus' time knew poeces of liturgical Hebrew, even though Hebrew was no longer spoken as a vernacular language. If I go to a Latin mass anywhere in the world, I easily understand what is said. If I go to a non-English vernacular mass somewhere, I only know broadly what is said by the familiar structure of the mass. Bad argument all around.

>>671651

>implying your grandparents knew any latin

Come on now. You literally don't need to know any latin because you can't hear the priest anyway. You just pray during mass, there was no such thing as the participation of the faithful, the faithful only say et cum spiritu tuo 2 times during the entire mass. You don't seem to know what you're talking about

If you really want to keep up with the priest, they give you small missals with latin on one side and vernacular on the other and you can follow it easily.

And learning basic prayers in latin and the creed takes a few days.

Late fr. Amorth, the lead Vatican exorcist for several decades said that he always does his exorcisms in Latin because the demons can't stand it.

>>672303

Thanks, I will check that out.

>>672309

I appreciate the links, that was helpful. My interest in the Divine Liturgy of Saint Gregory has been piqued, too.

The mass of Paul VI has nothing to do with Vatican 2.

>if it weren't for these gosh darned Vaticans 2 we'd good

No.

>>672286

Surviving form? The latin Roman rite's latest revision is from 1962. The roman missal went through a series of additions and changes since the 3rd century but you can't really find a video or a missal how it looked like.

https://youtu.be/jqkqc2-iteQ?t=6m17s

This is what the roman rite has looked like for the past 1400 years or so.

>>672354

Some of the WRO liturgies are based on Anglican service books, others on the TLM. I believe that none of the TLM-based liturgies are necessarily older forms of the latin mass than used in the Catholic Church. The name "Liturgy of St. Gregory" does not mean that it is the form of the Roman Rite used at the time of Pope St. Gregory. That attribution comes because Greogory I is supposedly the last pope to have made any major changes to the "canon" of the mass (what is referred to in the Novus Ordo as the eucharistic prayer). The WRO liturgies also, as I understand, generally have new additions to bring them in line with Byzantine sensibilities. The most obvious example I can think of is the addition of a Byzantine epiklesis to the canon Some Eastern Orthodox hold that an epiklesis is necessary for validity of the liturgy (i.e. no epiklesis = no transubstantiation), which is a problem since the Roman Rite historically never had one.

If you're interested in the history of the mass, I highly recommend this book. It also gives an overview of liturgy prior to the Roman Rite and some overview of the non-Roman (and non-Latin) liturgies.

https://archive.org/details/massstudyofroman00fort

Does anyone have some links to good website with missals in several languages and info about how to behave in the Latin Mass?

>>679944

If that's this important to you, become part of their confraternity and pray for them to expand to a place near you: https://fssp.com/confraternity-of-saint-peter/