God doesn't speak Latin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Isa_Almisry
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But while I was looking, I did find this, where Cardinal Ratzinger alludes to the fact that we could have the TLM in the vernacular:

latinmassjax.org/augustnewsletter.htm
Thanks for this great site!! Here is what Pope Benedict said

b. The Cardinal speaks of a step-by-step progression, implying that he has a plan in mind and wishes to move deliberately and carefully to combat the ignorance and hostility to our sacred Tradition in the liturgy.
"Further, applying logic to the Cardinal’s statement, we note a significant tacit admission: the Mass of the future will be based on the Traditional Latin Mass, not on the current Mass of Paul VI.
 
Originally Posted by Walking_Home
Yes he does—but he did say the return of the Mass (which is in latin) contibutes to establishing closer links with the Orthodox Churches. So in truth—it does affect the bigger fish that are to be fried.

“The patriarch opined that the pope’s decision might contribute to establishing closer links with the Orthodox Churches, the daily said.”

Your link shows my post on this. I agree, I just disagree (with the posters here) why.

You are Orthodox–so go ahead and disagree. Why not just leave it as Patriarch Alexy II said --strong adherence to tradition and the value of the Church re-introducing her ancient liturgical form.
 
Can you speak for the future?

Just a few posts up we get the statement that the HS is leading the Church back to her !] language Latin, and that there will be more, not less Latin.

I know that there must be millions of illiterate Latins (from poverty and the expansion of Latin missions. I do not imply the Latin church spreads illiteracy. Quite the contrary). What of them?
Tell you what. If the Roman Rite goes to Latin-only I’ll buy you the best dinner in your town. If it doesn’t, you buy me the best dinner in my town. Whichever one of us turns 80 first. 🙂
 
So your ignorance and ineptitude with a missal nullifies the holiness of the Traditional Latin Mass? Should we ban it again to ensure that those darn cult-like traditionalists don’t get their way?

I can’t believe that these cruel words are coming from a good practicing Catholic! How mean and cruel.

Nonsense. Following along in the missal ensures that we’re focused on the prayers. I suppose those who bring a missal to the NO are just doing some distracting reading duing the Mass, are they?

Why would you need a missal except for the singing? You can understand everything that is being said, you don’t have to read along.

Over time, as you become familiar with the language, it becomes easier to do both. If you really don’t like multi-tasking, don’t go to a TLM. Problem solved.

Why would anyone want to be multi-tasking when they can be “Praising God” instead?

Oh yeah… the children always pay attention during the english Masses. They really know what’s going on when it’s in the vernacular. Give me a break. I didn’t know what the Eucharist was until I was 17 (yes, well after first communion). Children can be taught. They can be given the basics of the Mass.
**Evidently they can’t be taught much until there 17 years old in the TLM. This is rediculious. My 9 year old that also just became Catholic at Easter loves to watch the priest. He always taps my shoulder when the priest raises the bread and the bells ring. Then he smiles and tells me “look mom, now Jesus is up there”. Why would you suppose that you didn’t understand it until you were 17? Children don’t need just the basics of the Mass. They need the entire concept of the Mass in its entirety.

Unfortunately, it appears that too many “cradle” Catholics take their faith for granted. Some are more worried about the tradition of Latin instead of the tradition of Praise.**

 
I have known people who were illiterate–yet could converse in both English and Spanish. Being illiterate did not diminish their capability of learning to communicate in a second language.

I was addressing the missal “solution.”

I don’t think anyone will be doing much communicating in Latin. I remember stories of how much was done during the recent conclave.

To which as I said–being illiterate is really no impediment to learning to converse in a second language . Being able to converse in a second language also entails understanding said language. An illiterate person does not need a manual (since he/she can’t read) to learn. So there is really no reason for a person not to be able to learn what is being said in a Latin Mass and understand it.

One more thing—understanding the Mass in Latin—does not necessarily mean one needs to be a Latinist.
 
**Evidently they can’t be taught much until there 17 years old in the TLM. This is rediculious. My 9 year old that also just became Catholic at Easter loves to watch the priest. He always taps my shoulder when the priest raises the bread and the bells ring. Then he smiles and tells me “look mom, now Jesus is up there”. Why would you suppose that you didn’t understand it until you were 17? Children don’t need just the basics of the Mass. They need the entire concept of the Mass in its entirety.

Unfortunately, it appears that too many “cradle” Catholics take their faith for granted. Some are more worried about the tradition of Latin instead of the tradition of Praise.**

Well, you still refer to the Eucharist as “bread”, so I wouldnt talk if I were you…
 
**Evidently they can’t be taught much until there 17 years old in the TLM. This is rediculious. My 9 year old that also just became Catholic at Easter loves to watch the priest. He always taps my shoulder when the priest raises the bread and the bells ring. Then he smiles and tells me “look mom, now Jesus is up there”. Why would you suppose that you didn’t understand it until you were 17? Children don’t need just the basics of the Mass. They need the entire concept of the Mass in its entirety. **

Unfortunately, it appears that too many “cradle” Catholics take their faith for granted. Some are more worried about the tradition of Latin instead of the tradition of Praise.
I didn’t understand it because it was never taught, and the liturgy didn’t make it evident that I was present at a sacrifice. I had always assumed that the Mass was a symbolic representation, and a ‘community gathering’. The point is, the vernacular doesn’t give people any greater an understanding of the Mass. People have to be taught, and it’s much easier to learn the Latin Mass than you may think.

In fact, if I had attended TLMs for my entire youth, I would probably have known what the Eucharist was. I would have been moved to ask questions by the beauty, reverence, and other-worldliness of the Mass. Today, Catholics are much more ignorant of their faith than in times when the Mass was in a language nobody spoke. Why do you think this is?
 
And that is exactly what it is until it is consecrated by the priest.
Wrong. The priest doesn’t consecrate the Eucharist; Christ does. Apparently, the Mass being in the vernacular hasn’t led you to a full understanding of the sacrifice.
 
Wrong. The priest doesn’t consecrate the Eucharist. Christ does. Aparently, the Mass being in the vernacular hasn’t led you to a full understanding of the Mass.
You know exactly what I meant. If there is not priest needed to consecrate the bread and wine then why don’t you do it? You hold it up and speak and pray over it. You are being very childish and not very Christ like.
 
Wrong. The priest doesn’t consecrate the Eucharist. Christ does. Aparently, the Mass being in the vernacular hasn’t led you to a full understanding of the sacrifice.
The Priest does, in persona Christi. You wouldn’t expect a freshman Math major to understand advanced set theory, so why do you expect a new convert to understand the intricacies of the Faith that took the Church centuries to understand?
 
You know exactly what I meant. If there is not priest needed to consecrate the bread and wine then why don’t you do it? You hold it up and speak and pray over it. You are being very childish and not very Christ like.
The priest needs to be present, but he doesn’t consecrate the Eucharist.
 

You are Orthodox–so go ahead and disagree. Why not just leave it as Patriarch Alexy II said --strong adherence to tradition and the value of the Church re-introducing her ancient liturgical form.
Because that not all that’s being re-introduced.
 

The Priest does, in persona Christi. You wouldn’t expect a freshman Math major to understand advanced set theory, so why do you expect a new convert to understand the intricacies of the Faith that took the Church centuries to understand?/QUOTE]​

Maybe–because the Church already has the understanding now–it should be a priority of the programs that bring in the converts to teach this important part of our Faith.
 
The Priest does, in persona Christi. You wouldn’t expect a freshman Math major to understand advanced set theory, so why do you expect a new convert to understand the intricacies of the Faith that took the Church centuries to understand?
It’s true that the Eucharist is consecrated in persona Christi, but it’s still innacurate to say that “the priest consecrates the Eucharist”.

In persona Christi isn’t really that advanced a topic…
 
The church never refers to the Eucharist simply as “bread”.
**Neither did I. But it is bread before it is consecrated. Nothing more.

You are trying to take this thread off topic I believe.**
 
Tell you what. If the Roman Rite goes to Latin-only I’ll buy you the best dinner in your town. If it doesn’t, you buy me the best dinner in my town. Whichever one of us turns 80 first. 🙂
I’m not sure how good Naples compares with Chicago pizza, but if it happens in, say, a November, you have a deal.😛
 
**Neither did I. But it is bread before it is consecrated. Nothing more. **

You are trying to take this thread off topic I believe.
"He always taps my shoulder when the priest raises the bread and the bells ring. "

It sounds to me like you called the Eucharist “bread”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top