My most recent Novus Ordo experience

[Ockham]

So we have to accept at face value about abuses from the constant moaners and groaners who frequent these forums??
What happened to innocent until proven guilty? In this forum it seems the priest is always guilty without having a chance to defend himself. The moaners and groaners say they didn’t name the priest. Big deal. They are simply cowards. I haven’t heard any of those people tell us they spoke to a priest after a Mass to politely ask about their concerns. They just rush home, log-in and start a thread complaining and complaining and the gullible here assume they are telling the truth.
Shame on people who do this to the priests.

The “moaners and groaners” don’t name the priest out of respect to the priesthood and to abide by forum integrity.

Liturgical abuse and poorly said Masses should not be condoned, as per the Church.

"The Rights of Catholics to Complain about Abuses
Given that the Supreme Pontiff’s authority through the Church is ordinary and immediate, Redemptionis Sacramentum reminds Catholics that they have the right to appeal to the Holy See in any ecclesiastical matter. Good order and charity suggests that complaints in so far as possible be first directed to the local Bishop or to the Religious Superior as appropriate, before being referred to the Holy See. This is consistent with how Our Lord asks us to give fraternal correction (cf. Mt. 18:15-17). Certainly, when such appeals have been shown to be fruitless, direct appeal to the Holy See is justified.

[184] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.[290] It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

[290] Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution, Pastor bonus 52, CIC 1417 § 1"

more…ewtn.com/expert/answers/cdw_liturgical_abuses.htm

 

[ConstantineTG]

Thank you.

From the Baltimore Catechism:

You always love taking my comments in context and using it for your point don’t you

Again, the entire Church is not Latin only. Latin is limited to the West. We need to be united not only within the Roman Church but the entire Church, East and West included. As Pope John Paul II said in his Apostolic Letter, Orientale Lumen:

"Since, in fact, we believe that the venerable and ancient tradition of the Eastern Churches is an integral part of the heritage of Christ’s Church, the first need for Catholics is to be familiar with that tradition, so as to be nourished by it and to encourage the process of unity in the best way possible for each.

Our Eastern Catholic brothers and sisters are very conscious of being the living bearers of this tradition, together with our Orthodox brothers and sisters. The members of the Catholic Church of the Latin tradition must also be fully acquainted with this treasure and thus feel, with the Pope, a passionate longing that** the full manifestation of the Church’s catholicity be restored to the Church and to the world, expressed not by a single tradition**, and still less by one community in opposition to the other; and that we too may be granted a full taste of the divinely revealed and undivided heritage of the universal Church which is preserved and grows in the life of the Churches of the East as in those of the West."

 

[zab]

I don’t understand these types of complaints. Latin is seldom heard in Churches. Sort of wimpy if you can’t tolerate a simple Agnus Dei or O Salutaris Hostia in Latin while you have almost your entire Mass in a “language you can understand” excluding folks who don’t speak that language.

I don’t understand these types of complaints that totally misrepresent what a person has said.

 

[pnewton]

That’s how Martin Luther felt too.

Indeed.

As did Archbishop Cranmer and all the other Reformers.

But Hitler liked the TLM.
In his childhood, Hitler had admired the pomp of Catholic ritual and the hierarchical organisation of the clergy. Later, he drew on these elements, organizing his party along hierarchical lines and including liturgical forms into events or using phraseology taken from hymns

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler’s_religious_views#cite_note-76
So what?

 

[OraLabora]

Thank you.

From the Baltimore Catechism:

There was a time though, when Latin was universally taught in all schools, even secular or protestant schools, in Canada.

That is no longer the case. I started public high school in 1971, and by then, Latin had been eliminated from the curriculum.

So everyone who went through the public system (in Canada) knew at least rudimentary Latin to help them through the Mass.

Also, for someone like myself who is of French origin, Latin is relatively easy to assimilate. As the Church grows beyond the boundaries of Western Europe, it is reaching out to Catholics for whom Latin is a much greater obstacle than for those schooled in the European languages. Those of the Latin-based European languages have it even easier.

So while Latin may once have been unifying, that may no longer be the case, for many it may be a very large obstacle. We mustn’t take the chauvinistic approach of viewing the Church through strictly Western eyes especially as it grows.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the liturgy in Latin, I even chant the Divine Office daily in Latin, but… I am not the Church.

 

[pnewton]

St John of the Cross has a description of people like you.

QUOTE

Some souls suffer from another kind of spiritual anger. They watch over others with a kind of restless fervor, perpetually annoyed by the transgressions they perceive. The impulse arises to reprove the other souls in an angry way. Sometimes they indulge this nasty urge, elevating themselves as masters of virtue. This is all quite contrary to spiritual meekness.

UNQUOTE

This is the attitude we should all have for each other, especially those who do not see things as we do. Yet in light of this, the Holy Father has set down a specific method by which the faithful can address an abuse that is directly contrary to the GIRM. The humility comes in accepting the decision of the Bishop, or in some cases, the Papal Nuncio.

 

[Ockham]

But Hitler liked the TLM.

Reductio ad Hitlerum, also argumentum ad Hitlerum, (dog Latin for “reduction to Hitler” or “argument to Hitler,” respectively) is an ad hominem or ad misericordiam argument, and is an informal fallacy. It is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone’s origin rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. Hence this fallacy fails to examine the claim on its merit.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

 

[pnewton]

Reductio ad Hitlerum, also argumentum ad Hitlerum, (dog Latin for “reduction to Hitler” or “argument to Hitler,” respectively) is an ad hominem or ad misericordiam argument, and is an informal fallacy.

Exactly! And in the Catholic realm, every thing is reducable to Luther, another ad hominem. Ditto the rest of your post.

I am sorry if this looks like baiting. I thought my previous point was obvious.

Reductio ad Luther.

 

[Ockham]

Exactly! And in the Catholic realm, every thing is reducable to Luther, another ad hominem. Ditto the rest of your post.

I am sorry if this looks like baiting. I thought my previous point was obvious.

Reductio ad Luther.

Except Luther wasn’t a diabolical murderer.

Nice try.

The Church has adopted many of Luther’s “reforms” and suffered greatly from the consequences. To the best of my knowledge no Hitler changes have taken place.

 

[ProVobis]

But Hitler liked the TLM.

As did many good and bad leaders in the Western world. Thanks for admitting to the bait.

 

[ProVobis]

So while Latin may once have been unifying, that may no longer be the case, for many it may be a very large obstacle.

You may be right, but the all-vernacular Mass which is more national and exclusive inter alia is hardly a cure for the divisiveness of the Church and even parishes. And this is not only my opinion.

 

[PatrickSebast]

Except Luther wasn’t a diabolical murderer.

Nice try.

The Church has adopted many of Luther’s “reforms” and suffered greatly from the consequences. To the best of my knowledge no Hitler changes have taken place.

The Church insisted on sticking to the Latin only mass even when the coucil of trent recognized the use of the mass being in a person native language and suffered greatly from the consequences!

See how bad that sounds.

 

[Bbigam]

I don’t understand these types of complaints. Latin is seldom heard in Churches. Sort of wimpy if you can’t tolerate a simple Agnus Dei or O Salutaris Hostia in Latin while you have almost your entire Mass in a “language you can understand” excluding folks who don’t speak that language.

I think you may have misunderstood me. I wasn’t complaining, I was saying I appreciate the fact that the (OF) Mass can be said in the vernacular. What I don’t understand is people who demand that the Mass always only be entirely in Latin (or those to want to completely ban Latin!).

I wouldn’t mind a bit if there was always some or even a lot of Latin in the Mass; I wish we at least heard it a whole lot more often. I love it that in Advent and Lent in my parish, the Sanctus and Agnus Dei, and sometimes the Pater Noster, are chanted in Latin.

 

[ProVobis]

So while Latin may once have been unifying, that may no longer be the case, for many it may be a very large obstacle.

You may be right, but the all-vernacular Mass which is more national and exclusive inter alia is hardly a cure for the divisiveness of the Church and even parishes. And this is not only my opinion.

 

[pnewton]

As did many good and bad leaders in the Western world. Thanks for admitting to the bait.

But I didn’t mean to! I just meant to draw the point that there are good and bad people we can always point to. Whether there is a valid comparison is just begging the question. None of it proves nothing. I cringe every time I see the over-used reductio as Lutherum here, which, by the way, is most often directed at traditionlist when they do not obey this or that.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You may be right, but the all-vernacular Mass which is more national and exclusive inter alia is hardly a cure for the divisiveness of the Church and even parishes. And this is not only my opinion.

I can’t understand why language is the source of unity in the Church and not the faith? Saying that Latin unites the Western Church is like saying White Americans must be united. Forget the non-white Americans, they’re in the minority anyway. Aren’t Americans united because they are Americans and not just because of the color of their skin or their language? The entire Church is not Latin only. So why concern for a language that, at best, will only unify one portion of the Church? Besides, Jesus didn’t give us Latin, he gave us faith in Him. That is what unifies us, no matter of tradition or language.

 

[Ockham]

You may be right, but the all-vernacular Mass which is more national and exclusive inter alia is hardly a cure for the divisiveness of the Church and even parishes. And this is not only my opinion.

Good point. How can the universal and official language of the Church not be unifying? Try going to a Novus Ordo in a language you don’t speak and see how unified you feel towards those who do.

 

[ProVobis]

Again, the entire Church is not Latin only. Latin is limited to the West. We need to be united not only within the Roman Church but the entire Church, East and West included.

Again you’re right. As Pope John XXIII said in Veterum Sapientia:

The Church has ever held the literary evidences of this wisdom in the highest esteem. She values especially the **Greek and Latin languages **in which wisdom itself is cloaked, as it were, in a vesture of gold. She has likewise welcomed the use of other venerable languages, which flourished in the East. For these too have had no little influence on the progress of humanity and civilization. By their use in sacred liturgies and in versions of Holy Scripture, they have remained in force in certain regions even to the present day, bearing constant witness to the living voice of antiquity.

A primary place

But amid this variety of languages a primary place must surely be given to that language which had its origins in Latium, and later** proved **so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity throughout the West.

And since in God’s special Providence this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire – and that for so many centuries – it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See.3 Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.

The nature of Latin

Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.

Nor must we overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin for mal structure. Its "concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity"4 makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.
Preservation of Latin by the Holy See

For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority "as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws."5 She further requires her sacred ministers to use it, for by so doing they are the better able, wherever they may be, to acquaint themselves with the mind of the Holy See on any matter, and communicate the more easily with Rome and with one another.

Thus the “knowledge and use of this language,” so intimately bound up with the Church’s life, "is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons."6 These are the words of Our Predecessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church’s nature. "For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular."7

 

[Ockham]

At Vatican II the bishops from around the world spoke to each other fluently in Latin. Not English, Italian, Spanish, or Greek, but the official language of the Church. You can go to an EF anywhere in the world and be able to actively participate. Not so in the Novus Ordo. The unifying language and liturgy is a Latin EF.

 

[ProVobis]

At Vatican II the bishops from around the world spoke to each other fluently in Latin.

With the Missal of 1962 said every day the council was in session. And yet the new Mass of 1970 was called the Mass of Vatican II. How disingenuous.