>>Since we are temporal creatures by God’s design, those who are living in the era after Vatican II should seek to live in accordance with all laws, rules and rubrics that are currently valid. These are post-Vatican II laws, rules and rubrics.
Any Mass that is valid under the post-Vatican II laws, rules and rubrics is a post-Vatican II Mass.<<
When the “Liturgical Committees” stop dinking around with the Post Vatican II mass, People will stop begging for the TLM.
Sorry my FRiend, but you can have a perfectly licit Mass that is still crass and distasteful when run by certain Liturgical committees. People don’t want that and long for the olden days.
>>When we refer to something as “pre-Vatican-II” and praise it, we give the impression that Vatican II is somehow not legitimate.<<
And that is simply your opinion. It is much easier to write TLM and NO, but some do not know what you are talking about. Vatican II ushered in the hippies and libs to our Holy Masses. Mother Angelica helped people to see why we were uncomfortable there and start the long process back to a historic NO. To use VII and Pre-VII defines the innovation or non-innovation in the Holy Mass. Only the “Happy Catholics” prefer we not speak in this way.
Actually it is the happy catholics that coined the false and derogatory term “pre-Vatican II” as a slur.
Almost as if in retaliation, some people use the term “post-Vatican II” as a reverse slur.
I repeat: Vatican II was a legitimate event led by the Holy Spirti. It is wrong to use it as a dividing line to split the church into two camps and two eras.
Such short-hand is harmful, regardless of who uses it.
When you bitch, please bitch intelligently and with charity.
Here we are, about 3 months before the official launch of the corrected translation of the Mass, with plenty of diocese seeing the old regime of faux and elitist “liturgists” being retired and losing influence, and you are claiming that nothing has worked and therefore an in-your-face attitude is appropriate.
I suppose you have been dealing with entrenched libtards at your parish (in your chancery), so you are not as inclined to see all the progress? Is that it? I certainly understand that it is bad in some areas - I left a very bad parish situation in 2000 and have never looked back. I suppose I would not see the basis for hope if I was still there. But it is hard to deny progress has been made if you follow the official acts of B16. Regardless of how much your local priest seems to ignore them, the Church’s rubrics will prevail and you local priest will be dead some day.