Differing Views

MisguidedMissal Team responses are in RED.


Vatican II was poorly implemented at various times. This is being corrected. If you are so unhappy with the Church there are many others. You should not ask that the Roman catholic Church change just for your thinking. Those of us that believe will follow the Church’s teaching, you may not and can not ask every thing be changed just so you are happy. Please find another Church. Thank you and God Bless

St. Paul, in the Acts of the Apostles, challenged the early Church’s understandings concerning admission of the Gentiles into the Church.

St. Thomas Aquinas asked that the Church change her views on its disallowing any connection to the teachings of Greek philosophers, particularly Aristotle.

St. Catherine of Siena asked, no, urged Pope Gregory XI to reform the clergy and return the Papacy from Avignon, France to Rome.

Throughout the Church’s history, men and women of faith have spoken up when their consciences required them to challenge a teaching or practice within the Church.  It is in that tradition that we feel it necessary to speak our concerns aloud!

[Please note well:  In the annals of history, only the actions of those who are the “greats” of history get recorded.  There are many times in the Church’s history when the sensus fidelium, the sense of the faithful – the people in the pews, has led to change in our Church. For this to have happened, however, someone had to speak up and then others joined in making their same opinions known.  The person or persons who first spoke up may never be known, but the changes that they spoke up about were made.]


I am one of the older educated Catholics who has know both the TLM and the Novus Ordum. Having seen the liturgical wreckage that has occurred over the past 40 years I await with great anticipation the coming of the new translation this fall. My initial enthusiasm after Vatican II began to feel like bitter ashes in my mouth over the years as we were orientated away from a grateful, reverent remembrance of Christ’s sacrificial death and the sacrament of His Body and Blood, and toward a kind of free-wheeling, ever-changing experience of sitting around the table of our buddy, the Lord. I would compare it to having replaced a fine dining restaurant with a fast-food experience.

I pray that you all are graced to embrace the divine mystery that is the Church and accept this new directive out of love and obedience.

And by the way, I am not afraid to reveal my name. I find it strange that you ask for mine but will not publish yours.

Many, in our Church, share your experience of the current translation’s impact, Stephen. Many have had wonderful, inspiring, prayerful experiences with it as well.  In our unity as Church there is great diversity.

About Anonymity:  See MM’s About Us – unfortunate but all too true!  Please note – we have received emails with “Anonymous” as the name. 


If you are so frustrated with the new missal, and in “HOW BAD IS IT?” you cite “tradition” many, many times. If you love tradition so much, and hate the new missal, why don’t you just use the latin?


I like the new translation. I think this is much ado about nothing. KP  As people, who were upset about the changes that occurred after the Second Vatican Council, made their concerns known, we are making our concerns known, and hopefully, helping others to do the same.


If you had real love for the Church, you would accept this revised translation as a gift and not ridicule it and make accusatory statements. This revised Roman Missal is far superior to the 1973 ICEL debacle. Whether you choose to admit it or not, it does follow the parameters set forth by Liturgiam Authenticam. Yes, the new Roman Missal does follow the parameters set forth in LA.   See our concerns about Liturgiam Authenticam.  We will respectfully disagree with your assessment of both.