Of course those several posters you speak of are the usual bunch who pushes the same agenda, pats each other on the back for posts, attacks anyone who doesn’t agree with your viewpoint on how the Mass should be said.
The pagan Cyrus was a messiah. Crucifixion was a pagan punishment, but God seemed quite content to use it.
I hope you know that Veterum Sapientia, was written before Vatican II opened, and it was in Vatican II, that the vernacular was allowed to be used in the Mass.
Always? Hardly. If I did that I’d have a post count higher than an elephant’s eye.You always say you’re not wasting your time with me but it seems you always reply to my posts, even misinterpret them and try to turn it against me.
Say whatever, think whatever. It’s of no consequence to me. I’m on my way to the ignore list.
Now that’s just silly – He instituted the Divine Liturgy in Aramaic, not the Mass!
The point is, its not a Sacred Language from the Cross, as stated.
Of course we know this. We know the dates of these documents, and we can do simple math. Veterum Sapientia is from February of 1962, and the Council opened later that year.
He instituted the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, which is the Mass.Now that’s just silly – He instituted the Divine Liturgy in Aramaic, not the Mass!
Plans and agenda of Vatican II were made and set well before Veterum Sapientia was written. But should it have mattered since VS was a timeless document with still existing force.
That’s not an excuse for people to walk out the door upon the sound or utterance of a single Latin response, is it? How are they ever going to understand it with that attitude? And we’re not necessarily talking the TLM here. The OF was promulgated in Latin as well.
That’s only speculation but it doesn’t matter. The Church promulgated its Latin Rite liturgies in Latin.
Yes, quite so. But the inverse seems not to be true: it appears that there are those who argue against the use of Latin (or, by extension, any other of the ancient and venerable liturgical languages of the Church) in any way, shape, or form.
Lets be realistic here. We are on the internet, we have computers, we obviously have the disposable income for internet access. We are well educated. We can learn Latin if we want to. But the rest of the world out there doesn’t have what we have. Not the financial capacity, not the resources, not the opportunities, not the time. If you give a Liturgy in a foreign language to these people, then what now?
You know what I call that? Nit-picking. It’s universal within the Latin Church. If we were speaking at ALL about the other rites…this conversation would not be happening.
The New Mass was promulgated in Latin in 1969.
That’s exactly what many of us are arguing about. It wouldn’t hurt us to see the original language, would it? Why hide it?
Couldn’t be worse than the way some of them mangle the English. Not so many homophones anyway.
Look at the bright side. Maybe they’ll finally learn some grammar. I know I did before I learned English.
Whether its me or someone else, you know nitpicking is the norm in these forums. That is why I ask that we keep our use of words precise.
Well the only reason I have such a high post count is when a pack of wolves, ie 3-5 users, would attack my posts. Its mostly 1 on 5, the same 5. I should be called the Kobe Bryant of CAF
Only now? I’m disappointed. Didn’t you say this was going to happen some time ago, several times? I bet you just couldn’t resist meSay whatever, think whatever. It’s of no consequence to me. I’m on my way to the ignore list.
I spent July in western Tanzania, very near the Serengeti. I heard Mass there in Latin. I still remember the Gloria that was sung there with great fondness ( a Missa Luba type)
The precision of our language as to the exclusion or inclusion of the other 22 rites of the Catholic Church have nothing to do with this thread or it’s topic.