@REVTHREE......

you have a choice to attend wherever you like. Maybe listen again to Michael's video on what Cardinal Burke said about the new mass. I think he knows a bit more than you.?

And Cardinal Arinze has said "One has to question the validity of the new mass today."

Novus ordo priests have told me nightmare stories, which I have also witnessed myself, ONE being the use of MARGARINE and BAKING SODA in the making of the hosts. Valid mass? NOPE The list goes on and on and on.

For me I'll choose the DIAMOND rather the Pepple.

HolyRope: I am not a huge fan, of the TRUE MODERNISTS, in the Church, but Vatican II, and the N.O. Mass, have nothing to do, with the concept, of Modernists. Only the teachings of VII which reiterated previous infallible teaching are infallible. The rest are not; they are reformable. This shouldn't surprise you. The popes can teach error, even on matters of the faith, when they are not exercising the charism of infallibility. When VI was formulating the definition of papal infallibility, it found over 40 errors made by popes on faith and morals over the years. The gift of infallibility is limited to either ex cathedra statements or the exercise of the universal and ordinary Magisterium, when a teaching was taught "by all, always and everywhere." The pastoral teachings of VII, especially regarding ecumenism, dialogue, religious liberty, and even the “subsist” ecclesiology are not infallible because they are undefined concepts and were not taught by the Church "by all, always and everywhere." That is why the Holy Ghost prevented the Church from binding Catholics to them. They are subject to reform. And in the future, they will be reformed. So don't let it worry you too much. God is still in charge. I believe He is using VII to sift out the heretics and to purify the Church.
Pope Paul VI did NOT impose the NO on the universal Church. He offered it as an alternative in the Latin Rite of the Church. Second, because the pope didn't bind the universal Church to use the NO, his act does not invoke the charism of infallibility. Most Catholics believe that a pope cannot impose a harmful rite upon the Church. The Council of Trent disagrees with you. Trent anathematized anyone who would create a new rite, so it obviously contemplated that such could occur. Nicea II also anathematized anyone who would set aside the ecclesiastical traditions of the Church. The pope was never excepted from these possibilities, because he too can do such a thing. The fact that Paul VI did not invoke his authority to bind the universal Church (he couldn't for the Holy Ghost wouldn't allow it) should put you at ease, at least somewhat.

Hopefully the traditional Latin Mass will be in All Churches with no more modern novus ordos...before 50yrs time. It just has to get better, don't know how it can get any worse than it is now. But the modernist innovators will always have something new and inventive to try.

Surely if ALL seminarians MUST learn Latin and the Latin Mass...that is a Must, in order to begin to restore some sanity back into the Liturgy.

This has many benefits that even the bishops opposing the Traditional Latin Mass will benefit from one being-More Money! I believe that priests who will begin using the Traditional Latin Mass in their parishes will get more parishoners attending mass and thus contributions will be greater in these parishes. A higher level of education will be occurring in seminaries preparing priests in Latin and Church history and greater reverence being shown and experienced by Catholic congregants! All possitive effects of this freedom from "bishop bias" against tradition.

A good message.

i48.photobucket.com/…/justinmichael.j…