More evidence the universal indult is immanent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Godefridus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
RobedWithLight said:
Why?

Did people speak Latin prior to the Tower of Babel incident?
Click to expand...
No. Latin was the language of the Empire that Jesus brought down. To occupy its capital city and take over its language is a profound sign of our unity.
 
Hesychios said:
I am sorry to seem so contrary here. I do not mean start any fuss, but that (see emphasis) is impossible.
  • Cardinal Hume may object
  • The Pope may listen to advice
    But the Cardinal (Memory Eternal) may not prevent the Pope from carrying out any action he has decided upon.
The Cardinal works for and reports to the Pope, whatever authority he posesses is delegated to him by the bishop of Roma. He has no power or authority to overrule the Pope on any issue whatever, even within the CBCEW.

Blessings,
Michael
Click to expand...
You’re not married, are you?
 
I could be completely wrong, but I am betting that section 62 (ironic paragraph number, by the way) in Sacramentum Caritatis is as close as we will see to a Universal Indult. He is endorsing Latin and traditional elements but keeping the Missa Normativa. I would venture he is hoping to bring about traditionally themed Masses that will help quell some of the call for the old Mass.

I also wonder if Paragraph 63 is making some reference to the separation that does seem to exist between the majority of Catholics and those who seek the old Mass.

I find paragraphs 62 and 63 to be a bit cryptic and I wonder if originally this was the part of the document that would have issued a universal indult.

Anyway…what are your thoughts on these paragraphs?
 
Ham1 said:
I could be completely wrong, …
I also wonder if Paragraph 63 is making some reference to the separation that does seem to exist between the majority of Catholics and those who seek the old Mass.
…
Anyway…what are your thoughts on these paragraphs?
Click to expand...
Actually, it’s the majority of Catholics who’r seekn the old Mass. Just like the majority were seeking to keep kneeling for Communion, but the “other” hold the power.
It’s the power that looks like a majority. The power demands obedience, so the majority just follow…the sheeple.
 
TNT said:
Actually, it’s the majority of Catholics who’r seekn the old Mass. Just like the majority were seeking to keep kneeling for Communion, but the “other” hold the power.
It’s the power that looks like a majority. The power demands obedience, so the majority just follow…the sheeple.
Click to expand...
With respect, TNT, are you saying that the majority of the world’s billion + Catholics are seeking the restoration of the old Mass?
 
Don_Quixote said:
**

Is the Latin mass better than a mass in the venacular and why?**
Click to expand...
No, a Latin mass is not better than a mass in the vernacular. A Latin mass could, however, beneficially serve the Church in certain situations (gatherings that are universal or multilingual in character, for example, papal masses, World Youth Day, etc.). The vernacular mass can also serve a good purpose as well, ie, the people having Mass in the language in which they think and reason. Latin is the official language of the Church and it is important. Contrary to what you may hear, it doesn’t have to be an either/or situation.
 
From Zenit tonight:

Pius V Missal

When presenting the document to journalists today, Cardinal Angelo Scola, patriarch of Venice, answered questions on the possibility of a papal document aimed at re-establishing the Pius V Missal. Cardinal Scola, who was relator general for the synodal assembly, said that he did not have information on such a document, and added that the key to using this missal is that it not become a source of division within the Church. He explained: "It would be a contradiction of terms if the liturgical act became a beginning of division of the Church.

Cardinal Scola continued: “In the history of the use of the rites in the Church it has never happened that the introduction of a new rite coincided with the abolition of the preceding one.”

"This means balancing the path of the Eucharist with respect for the objective indications … none of the above observations should cast doubt upon the so-called Paul VI rite, or on the meaning, worth or decisive importance of the liturgical reform.
 
Malcolm_McLean said:
No. Latin was the language of the Empire that Jesus brought down. To occupy its capital city and take over its language is a profound sign of our unity.
Click to expand...
Of course, Latin was indeed the language of the Roman empire. This is already common knowledge, although I don’t really see the relevance here of Bob’s Tower of Babel comment on the Latin mass’ supposed superiority over a mass in the vernacular. The point is that Latin is beneficial in certain situations, and the vernacular in others. It simply isn’t just a matter of Latin OR vernacular, which is actually a false and simplistic dichotomy being imposed upon us.
And the LORD said, ‘Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; and nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.’ So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.’ Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of all the earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth." (Genesis 11)
Click to expand...
 
TNT said:
Actually, it’s the majority of Catholics who’r seekn the old Mass. Just like the majority were seeking to keep kneeling for Communion, but the “other” hold the power.
It’s the power that looks like a majority. The power demands obedience, so the majority just follow…the sheeple.
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure what your basis is for saying that it is the “majority” of Catholics who are seeking the Old Mass. After all, we don’t subject to a popular vote matters of disciplne or even doctrine, unless we view the Church as a democracy which honestly, it isn’t.
 
Sagefrakrobatik said:
Is it really that deep. Ive been to a Orthodox synagouge where the service was in Hebrew and a Coptic service where it was in Arabic. Does it really matter?
Click to expand...
There’s Hebrew Catholics (mostly in Israel and Palestine who are under the authority of Latin bishops) which have the Mass in Hebrew and celebrate Jewish holy days, as well as Coptic Catholics who celebrate according to the Alexandrian Rite as well.
 
RobedWithLight said:
Of course, Latin was indeed the language of the Roman empire. This is already common knowledge, although I don’t really see the relevance here of Bob’s Tower of Babel comment on the Latin mass’ supposed superiority over a mass in the vernacular. The point is that Latin is beneficial in certain situations, and the vernacular in others. It simply isn’t just a matter of Latin OR vernacular, which is actually a false and simplistic dichotomy being imposed upon us.
Click to expand...
So sundered tongues are a sign of our disobedience to God. A Church of one language is a sign of the unity that was lost at Babel, now restored.

Note, I don’t accept the tower of Babel as a historical episode. It has a deeper, mythological meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top