[baseballmom]

I'm not one of them. The only change I want is a return of the Latin mass.

Ditto that. My sister and I were discussing this the other day. She made an excellent point, IMHO, that Latin was the common language of the Catholic Church. We all knew what the Latin meant, it was drilled into us. She lamented that each country taking on their native tongue in the Mass loosened the bonds to each other, and our Catholic heritage. I agree.

[Schwaeky]

Not just the geographical/linguistic differences loosening the bonds, but also a temporal shift. Post Vatican II i have seen about 2-3 changes, albeit minor, in the Liturgy, and a LOT of changes in the music. It went from the reverent Mass In Honor of Pope Paul VI to the Guitarzan mass (barf alert on the latter). The Tridentine mass was intended to be the same not only no matter where you go, but no matter WHEN you are. It was offically promulgated in the 1500s, but had been in practice since the early Church. In almost 1700 years there were NO siginificant changes where one would see a substantial difference in the Mass. Come along 1962 and John XXIII et voila, lots of liturgical experimentation, etc etc etc.

[The Iguana]

Agreed, but I would settle for just lifting the indult requirement.

But having talked to a conservative papabile just a few weeks ago (I won't say who), I don't think that's in the cards.

[GatorGirl]

Hi BBM!! Long time, no see!

I agree completely. I was born post Vatican II but I love the Latin Mass. Unfortunately, it's so far away and said at 6:00 am I can't attend regularly.