The Ef

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920063' date='Jul 14 2009, 05:42 PM']The next pope could just as easily abrogate the newer form of the Mass (which I hope he will do) as he could the 1962 Missal.[/quote]
Yes, he could also do that.

I just was looking through my copy of the book "Documents on the Liturgy 1963-1979" and there are multiple documents issued by the Congregation for Worship that speak of the suppression, supplanting, abrogation, etc., of the older Roman Missal.

That is why I do not buy into the historical revisionism that says the older Roman Missal was not suppressed.

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920063' date='Jul 14 2009, 05:42 PM']If the EF were to be abrogated, I would become an Eastern Catholic as soon as possible.[/quote]
That would not be the best reason to change autonomous ritual Churches.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920012' date='Jul 14 2009, 04:24 PM']Even if one does not follow along using a hand-missal, he can better see that the Church teaches that the substance of the bread is converted into the substance of Christ's body at the consecration and that the Mass is a sacrifice when Communion is distributed only on the tongue and when Mass is celebrated[i] ad orientem[/i].[/quote]
this is your [b][u]opinion[/u][/b] only. an opinion that i believe should earn you your tag back.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1920070' date='Jul 14 2009, 05:54 PM']this is your [b][u]opinion[/u][/b] only. an opinion that i believe should earn you your tag back.[/quote]
I wouldn't go that far. Certainly it is an opinion, but it hardly makes him disobedient to the Church.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1920066' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:47 PM']Yes, he could also do that.

I just was looking through my copy of the book "Documents on the Liturgy 1963-1979" and there are multiple documents issued by the Congregation for Worship that speak of the suppression, supplanting, abrogation, etc., of the older Roman Missal.

That is why I do not buy into the historical revisionism that says the older Roman Missal was not suppressed.[/quote]

The CDW obviously got it wrong.

I trust the Pope's judgment on the issue: "[T]his Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted." (Explanatory Letter of the Pope accompanying [i]Summorum Pontificum[/i])

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1920066' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:47 PM']That would not be the best reason to change autonomous ritual Churches.[/quote]

I think that it would.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920076' date='Jul 14 2009, 05:59 PM']The CDW obviously got it wrong.[/quote]
Since some of its decisions have Pope Paul VI's approval, he evidently got it wrong too.

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920076' date='Jul 14 2009, 05:59 PM']I trust the Pope's judgment on the issue: "[T]his Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted." (Explanatory Letter of the Pope accompanying [i]Summorum Pontificum[/i])[/quote]
Let's be precise . . . you trust Pope Benedict XVI's present judgment on the matter, while rejecting the previous judgment of Pope Paul VI. Alas, neither you nor I know what the next pope's judgment will be on the matter.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1920070' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:54 PM']this is your [b][u]opinion[/u][/b] only. an opinion that i believe should earn you your tag back.[/quote]

I guess Archbishop Ranjith, former secretary of the CDW, should get a tag for what he wrote in a book that was published by the Libreria Editrice Vaticana:

"At the same time, speaking of communion in the hand, it must be recognized that the practice was improperly and quickly introduced in some quarters of the Church shortly after the Council, changing the age-old practice and becoming regular practice for the whole Church. They justified the change saying that it better reflected the Gospel or the ancient practice of the Church [. . .] Some, to justify this practice referred to the words of Jesus: "Take and eat" (Mk 14, 22; Mt 26, 26).

"Whatever the reasons for this practice, we cannot ignore what is happening worldwide where this practice has been implemented. This gesture has contributed to a gradual weakening of the attitude of reverence towards the sacred Eucharistic species whereas [b]the previous practice had better safeguarded that sense of reverence[/b]. [. . .]

"Now I think it is high time to review and re-evaluate such good practices and, if necessary, to abandon the current practice that was not called for by [i]Sacrosanctum Concilium[/i], nor by Fathers, but was only accepted after its illegitimate introduction in some countries. Now, more than ever, we must help the faithful to renew a deep faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species in order to strengthen the life of the Church and defend it in the midst of dangerous distortions of the faith that this situation continues to cause." (Archbishop Malcom Ranjith, foreward to [i]Dominus Est[/i] by Bishop Athanasius Schneider, emphasis added)

Edited July 15, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1920079' date='Jul 14 2009, 07:04 PM']Let's be precise . . . you trust Pope Benedict XVI's present judgment on the matter, while rejecting the previous judgment of Pope Paul VI. Alas, neither you nor I know what the next pope's judgment will be on the matter.[/quote]

I am sure that many of the documents in your book were, in fact, approved by Paul VI, though you would have to show me a document that he explicitly approved saying that the 1962 Missal was abrogated to prove that was his view.

If a future Pope decided to declare the 1962 Missal abrogated, I would certainly consider it so.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920065' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:45 PM']What is this experience of which you speak? I thought you said that you hadn't heard an EF Mass for years?[/quote]

I wasn't specifically speaking of the Latin mass, but rather from the experience of dealing with those who do not speak English trying to follow along to a mass they do not understand. You also seem to think that every parish is wealthy enough to buy all these missals and vestments. Ours isn't, and can't. We can't even buy new sheet music. The old ones are taped together. Buying new Latin missals would force us to turn off the electricity.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920085' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:10 PM']I am sure that many of the documents in your book were, in fact, approved by Paul VI, though you would have to show me a document that he explicitly approved saying that the 1962 Missal was abrogated to prove that was his view.[/quote]
Are you saying that you would only accept a curial document's authority if it has the explicit approval of the pope? The documents I have were all published in the [i]Acta Apostolicae Sedis[/i], which in the past you have said was juridically sufficient, but now you will only accept things with the pope's signature. Goodness, you do play fast with authority.

What a tangled web is created when the liturgy (and the faith itself) is reduced to juridical categories.

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920085' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:10 PM']If a future Pope decided to declare the 1962 Missal abrogated, I would certainly consider it so.[/quote]
It's been abrogated before, so who knows what the future holds.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1920087' date='Jul 14 2009, 07:13 PM']I wasn't specifically speaking of the Latin mass, but rather from the experience of dealing with those who do not speak English trying to follow along to a mass they do not understand. You also seem to think that every parish is wealthy enough to buy all these missals and vestments. Ours isn't, and can't. We can't even buy new sheet music. The old ones are taped together. Buying new Latin missals would force us to turn off the electricity.[/quote]

The parish in my city where the EF Mass is said (which is not my actual parish) is wealthy by no means, tet it still had the funds to buy a couple hundred of [url="http://www.fraternitypublications.com/labomi.html"]these[/url] $6 hand-missals. They are are well-made, so they last several years. That can't be said about many of the publications that many parishes buy several times a year.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1920090' date='Jul 14 2009, 07:16 PM']Are you saying that you would only accept a curial document's authority if it has the explicit approval of the pope? The documents I have were all published in the [i]Acta Apostolicae Sedis[/i], which in the past you have said was juridically sufficient, but now you will only accept things with the pope's signature. Goodness, you do play fast with authority.[/quote]

If you read what I said, the document would have had to have Pope Paul VI's explicit approval for you to say that it was [b]his view[/b] (which, I believe, is what you had stated earlier)

It certainly would have been correct for someone living in the 1970s to have said that the 1962 Missal was abrogated, but since Pope Benedict XVI has clarified that it was not, it is no longer correct to say that.

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1920090' date='Jul 14 2009, 07:16 PM']It's been abrogated before, so who knows what the future holds.[/quote]

The opinion that the 1962 Missal was abrogated is no longer correct.

Pope Benedict has explicitly stated that it was "never abrogated" ([i]Summorum Pontificum[/i], Art. 1)

Edited July 15, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
if they can't afford new sheet music, what makes you think they can afford $800 for missals?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920098' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:22 PM']If you read what I said, the document would have had to have Pope Paul VI's explicit approval for you to say that it was [b]his view[/b] (which, I believe, is what you had stated earlier)

It certainly would have been correct for someone living in the 1970s to have said that the 1962 Missal was abrogates, but since Pope Benedict XVI has clarified that it was not that is no longer correct to say.[/quote]
So it was abrogated, but now it is not. Although, Pope Benedict thinks it was never abrogated. Ah, the confusion that is caused by reducing the liturgy to juridical enactments.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1920099' date='Jul 14 2009, 07:23 PM']+J.M.J.+
if they can't afford new sheet music, what makes you think they can afford $800 for missals? [/quote]

I wasn't necessarily speaking of Catherine's parish, but many poor parishes could indeed afford $800 that one would only need to pay every 8-12 years.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
and we've [u][b]never[/b][/u] seen bishops, archbishops, and cardinals say/teach/write things that are contrary to what the Church teaches, right?
[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1920082' date='Jul 14 2009, 06:07 PM']I guess Archbishop Ranjith, former secretary of the CDW, should get a tag for what he wrote in a book that was published by the Libreria Editrice Vaticana:[/quote]

when you say, over and over again, that one form of the Mass is inferior to another form, you are wrong. this is not what the Church teaches. and you've been saying this since your other sn, St. Thomas More, which is what got you the tag to begin with. seems like you haven't learned anything in 4 years.