Missale Romanum

If you ever read Pope Paul VI's Apostolic Constitution on the New Roman Missal, ask yourselves the following questions:

1. If the Roman Missal of 1570, promulgated by Pope St. Pius V, has been so beneficial and fruitful, how could it have been suppressed until Pope John Paul's II indult and even now remain unknown to the greater part of the faithful?
2. What is the present day mentality and can it be reconciled with Catholic beliefs and practices? In asking this question keep in mind or consult the writings of the same, Pope Pius XII, and his two previous namesakes, especially on Modernism.
3. Has the text and rites of the New Roman Missal actually expressed more clearly the holy, therefore divine, things which they signify?
4. How much can liturgical sources discovered today have added to what those entrusted with preparing the Roman Missal of 1570 used? In asking this question keep in mind the world had not been subject to the revolutions which resulted in countless documents being destroyed.
5. What bearing do liturgical formulas of the Orient have on the liturgy of the West? In asking this question keep in mind the Oriental Churches have their own distinct theology of the Mass, which naturally will be reflected in their liturgical formulas, and themselves have not made use of these discoveries.
6. Did the faithful actually know about these hidden treasures let alone desire their introduction into the Mass? Keep in mind the bishops did not ask the faithful if they wanted their Mass changed but only theologians, including non-Catholics.
7. If the Western Church as early as the fourth century settled on a single anaphora (read Eucharistic prayer) what does it matter that the Eastern Church has several?
8. How can the Pope justify taking the words "mysterium fidei" from their original context? Keep in mind that previously these words were part of the consecration of wine and were a reference to the mystery of transubstantiation, by which Christ is made present body and blood on the altar. Today they are used as an invitation to consider Christ's death, resurrection and second coming.
9. How can anything be added to the Mass without advantage either to God or the faithful by making the Mass more beautiful, good, holy or true?
10. What does the Pope mean when he refers to suffering "injury through accidents of history"?
11. Why doesn't the Pope refer to that other Word of God, made flesh upon the altar, which is the true bond of charity, food of souls and source of grace? Keep in mind that since Protestants do not believe in the sacrifice of the Mass or sacrament of Communion, their "services" focus only on scripture and sermons.
12. Following from the last question, why does the Pope appear to be advocating the Protestant doctrine of Sola scriptura?
13. What are the new needs for which new texts must be provided?
14. Can the words "instrument of unity and witness to the purity of worship" be applied to the New Roman Missal, when improvisation, inculturation and optionalism has made it almost impossible to observe the same rite in two Churches?
15. Did not God Himself create the diversity of languages as a punishment for men trying to reach to heaven by their own hands and make their name famous? Keep in mind that the Mass is meant first and foremost to be an act of worship.

NB This is not meant to be a tirade against the New Roman Missal but an attempt to rouse Catholics, who like the blogger, have not being properly catechized in the liturgy.