[BlackElk]

Actually, the really interesting division among the bishops on allowing the Tridentine is that it is more often than not the LIBERAL bishops who have been most generous in allowing the Tridentine and the more conservative bishops who seem to feel that allowing the Tridentine may undermine their authority in some way. Roger McCaffery, former publisher and founder of The Latin Mass magazine has written extensively in that magazine on exactly that point. Obviously there are exceptions in each group.

This is one where the more liberal among Catholics have earned credit. It tends to be the more conservative Catholics who want, often, to abolish the Novus Ordo with all the unnecessary pain that would entail for those devoted to the NO, pain that would echo the intense pain suffered by their Tridentine predecessors in the 1960s.

Each Mass is valid. Neither Mass should ever be said in such a way as to fail in reverence. Each should be said according to its own reverent rubrics. Finally, it is a bad idea for Tridentine Catholics to ghettoize themselves self-indulging in all the bells, smells and whistles and caring less about what happens in the rest of the Church. I dare say it would be a good idea for Novus Ordo Catholics to atend an occasional Tridentine Mass. In this way abuses may be restrained on each side and better relations may be fostered among all Catholics.

[sinkspur]

Actually, the really interesting division among the bishops on allowing the Tridentine is that it is more often than not the LIBERAL bishops who have been most generous in allowing the Tridentine and the more conservative bishops who seem to feel that allowing the Tridentine may undermine their authority in some way

Interesting. I didn't know that.