[Clemenza]

Knee-Jerk "anti-Protestantism" is not a good reason for retaining Latin, the language of the Roman Empire. I no longer have a dog in this fight, although much of my family does.

I agree that most of the rituals from Pre-Vatican II (the sequel!) should have been retained, but the ONLY negative of getting rid of the Language of the ROMAN EMPIRE is the lack of a universal lingua franca. As I said, the Church in that case could use Aramaic or English. The latter is unlikely due to certain Euro-Peons at the Vatican who have a cultural prejudice against "Anglo Saxons."

[murphE]

Knee-Jerk "anti-Protestantism" is not a good reason for retaining Latin, the language of the Roman Empire.

[sigh] You didn't read the article that I posted a link to did you?

I no longer have a dog in this fight, although much of my family does.

OK but you still want to offer an opinion, don't you think it would be better to offer an informed opinion rather than an uninformed opinion? I provided a way for you to inform yourself, yet you seem to have ignored it.

[NYer]

A question for the SSPXers ... The Society was established as a "pious union of the faithful" ad experimentum, by Bishop Charriere, Bishop of Lausanne, Geneva, and Fribourg, Switzerland, for a period of six years. Was that period ever extended and by whom?

[TradicalRC]

The three languages of Christianity were Greek, Latin and Hebrew: all there at the beginning, all used in spreading the Gospel, all found on the Cross itself.