Because of the ghastly behavior, simony, superstition, filthy lucre gained for saying multiple Masses, etc, Trent had to condemn the very things existing in the old Liturgy that rad trads say the old liturgy will prevent. However, such illogic is lost on those who judge Holy Mother Church.
DECREE CONCERNING THE THINGS TO BE OBSERVED, AND TO BE AVOIDED, IN THE CELEBRATION OF MASS.
What great care is to be taken, that the sacred and holy sacrifice of the mass be celebrated with all religious service and veneration, each one may easily imagine, who considers, that, in holy writ, he is called accursed, who doth the work of God negligently; and if we must needs confess, that no other work can be performed by the faithful so holy and divine as this tremendous mystery itself, wherein that life-giving victim, by which we were reconciled to the Father, is daily immolated on the altar by priests, it is also sufficiently clear, that all industry and diligence is to be applied to this end, that it be performed with the greatest possible inward cleanness and purity of heart, and outward show of devotion and piety. Whereas, therefore, either through the wickedness of the times, or through the carelessness and Corruption of men, many things seem already to have crept in, which are alien from the dignity of so great a sacrifice; to the end that the honour and cult due thereunto may, for the glory of God and the edification of the faithful people, be restored; the holy Synod decrees, that the ordinary bishops of places shall take diligent care, and be bound to prohibit and abolish all those things which either covetousness, which is a serving of idols, or irreverence, which can hardly be separated from impiety; or superstition, which is a false imitation of true piety, may have introduced. And that many things may be comprised in a few words: first, as relates to covetousness:--they shall wholly prohibit all manner of conditions and bargains for recompenses, and whatsoever is given for the celebration of new masses; as also those importunate and illiberal demands, rather than requests, for alms, and other things of the like sort, which are but little removed from a simonical taint, or at all events, from filthy lucre.
In the next place, that irreverence may be avoided, each, in his own diocese, shall forbid that any wandering or unknown priest be allowed to celebrate mass. Furthermore, they shall not allow any one who is publicly and notoriously stained with crime, either to minister at the holy altar, or to assist at the sacred services; nor shall they suffer the holy sacrifice to be celebrated, either by any Seculars or Regulars whatsoever, in private houses; or, at all, out of the church, and those oratories which are dedicated solely to divine worship, and which are to be designated and visited by the said Ordinaries; and not then, unless those who are present shall have first shown, by their decently composed outward appearance, that they are there not in body only, but also in mind and devout affection of heart. They shall also banish from churches all those kinds of music, in which, whether by the organ, or in the singing, there is mixed up any thing lascivious or impure; as also all secular actions; vain and therefore profane conversations, all walking about, noise, and clamour, that so the house of God may be seen to be, and may be called, truly a house of prayer.
Lastly, that no room may be left for superstition; they shall by ordinance, and under given penalties, provide, that priests do not celebrate at other than due hours; nor employ other rites, or other ceremonies and prayers, in the celebration of masses, besides those which have been approved of by the Church, and have been received by a frequent and praiseworthy usage. They shall wholly banish from the Church the observance of a fixed number of certain masses and of candles, as being the invention of superstitious worship, rather than of true religion; and they shall instruct the people, what is, and whence especially is derived, the fruit so precious and heavenly of this most holy sacrifice. They shall also admonish their people to repair frequently to their own parish churches, at least on the Lord's days and the greater festivals. All, therefore, that has been briefly enumerated, is in such wise propounded to all Ordinaries of places, as that, by the power given them by this sacred and holy Synod, and even as delegates of the Apostolic See, they may prohibit, ordain, reform, and establish, not only the things aforesaid, but also whatsoever else shall seem to them to have relation hereunto; and may compel the faithful people inviolably to observe them, by ecclesiastical censures and other penalties, which at their pleasure they may appoint; any privileges, exemptions, appeals, and customs whatsoever, to the contrary notwithstanding.
*So, the old Liturgy did not prevent those actions Trent was compelled to condemn. In fact, back in the day, in the old Liturgy, scandals, abuses and abominations were worse than the abuses in the Pauline Rite.
Also condemned were the wandering priests, mass celebrated without permission, mass celebrated in another's Jurisdiction etc etc.
In other words, virtually everything the liberal traditionalists (libertrads) promote and defend has been condemned by Trent.
That these condemned actions are defended and promoted as Tradition illustrates the Libertrads understanding of Tradition is self-annihilating.
Try to prove this ridiculous assertion.
It also condemns what many of the Pauline Rite people do in their churches:
"They shall also banish from churches all those kinds of music, in which, whether by the organ, or in the singing, there is mixed up any thing lascivious or impure; as also all secular actions; vain and therefore profane conversations, all walking about, noise, and clamour, that so the house of God may be seen to be, and may be called, truly a house of prayer."
Because of your liberalism, you resort to name calling such as "rad trads", etc... and have presented a flawed case. First of all, how does the old liturgy not prevent abuses that occurred? In your own words, of course. Secondly, I would like to point out that this is BEFORE the standardization of the Latin rite (in its entirety, at least) so your arguement that the Tridentine Rite is more flawed than the Pauline Rite is baseless. For we see historically, that after Trent, the Church seems to have gone pretty well, despite political problems which involved mainly France (through several centuries). I would also like to point out that last I checked, I never had to pay a traditional Priest to say Mass.
Please inform me as to what a "liberal traditionalist" is? I find that phrase to be contradicting itself.
The posted article was written by Alfons Cardinal Stickler.
Is the good cardinal one of your perceived "wandering priests", one of your so-called "libertrads" who has been condemned by Trent?