History and tradition

An interesting article.

It seems that a particular view of interpreting history had a significant influence on the development of the Roman liturgy after 1962. Pope Pius XII warned of archaeologism but it seems that this is exactly what led to the 'de novo' and tectonic creation of the new lectionary rather than something that developed with an organic order.

Did the Roman Rite Anciently Have Three Readings? http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2013/11/did-roman-rite-anciently-have-three.html#.Uo_5ruJCrK0

sort of apropos of this is a quote I saw on a photography blog which I really like:

"Everything I write is a personal opinion. Even when I quote facts, they are the facts I personally choose to accept."

The other oldie but goodie: "If it isn't broke, don't fix it"

 

Comments

[Paul]

One of the biggest lies of the post Vatican II era was that the novus ordo (new liturgy) was going back to something of the ancient Church. This evil lie also had a built-in attack that the Traditional liturgy was somehow inauthentic because it had deviated from the early Church.

The novus ordo only had one precedent, and that was the heresy we call protestantism.