S
Sean_O_L
Guest
Thanks Keith.
- Status
S
Sean_O_L
Guest
More on "In Perpetuity?
Section 1
What is a Chronology of the Chinese Missions? And of the Jesuits’ Condemnation?
FLUCTUATING “PERPETUITY”
Nicholas IV {189th P.} (22 Feb. 1288 - 04 Apr. 1292) - the first Franciscan to become pope.
He earned the title of missionary pope by sending (1289) Giovanni di Monte Corvino, a Franciscan friar, to the court of the great Kublai Khan (1260-94); this mission led to the first establishment of the Catholic church in China, where previously only Nestorians had been influential.
Clement V {193rd P.} in 1307, appointed Giovanni first archbishop of Peking.
Paul V {231st P.} (16 May 1605 - 28 Jan 1621) encouraged the missions, approving (June 27, 1615) the use of the vernacular in the liturgy in China.
Innocent X {234th P.} took a stand in the keen debate on the propriety of adapting certain traditional Chinese rituals in the mission field, approving a decree of the Propaganda (Sept. 12, 1645) condemning the practice.
Alexander VII {235th P.} (7 Apr. 1655 - 22 May 1667)
By a decree of Mar. 23, 1656 he accepted the viewpoint of Jesuit missionaries in China, permitting the performance of certain indigenous rites as being effectively civil ceremonies, and (Sept. 9, 1659) relieved native Chinese clergy of the duty of reading the office in Latin.
Alexander VII {235th P.} (7 Apr. 1655 - 22 May 1667)
and Bl. Innocent XI {238th P.} both condemned 110 of the Jesuit casuists’ propositions after Blaise Pascal’s Provincial Letters.
became involved in the controversy over “Probabilism”, ie. the theory (supported by the Jesuits) that, where the propriety of an action is in doubt, it is lawful to follow a solidly probable opinion favouring it even when the case against it is more probable.
he did not condemn Probabilism as such but, notwithstanding his partiality for Jesuits, formally condemned forty-five propositions savouring of laxity (Sept. 24, 1665 and Mar. 18, 1666)
Bl. Innocent XI {238th P.} With his moral earnestness, he had Jansenist leanings and was critical of the Jesuits; on Mar. 2, 1679, without naming the Probabilism prevalent in Jesuit circles, he condemned sixty-five laxist propositions savouring of it. Innocent endorsed “probabiliorism”, ie. the view that in cases of doubt about the licitness of an action the opinion which seems more probable should be followed.
Clement XI {241st P.}
1704, Nov. 20: approving a sentence of the Holy Office, he ruled against the use by missionaries of Chinese rites, especially the cult of Confucius and ancestors.
1715, Mar. 19: he reiterated the ruling in the constitution Ex Illa Die putting an effective end to the Chinese Mission.
These prohibitions led to the persecution of Chinese Christians and the closure of the missions; the prohibitions were finally lifted by Pius XII in 1939.
Innocent XIII {242nd P.} having had a deep aversion to the Jesuits was minded to suppress the order when he learned that its missionaries were not complying with Clement XI’s ban on the Chinese rites. Instead he forbade it to receive novices unless within 3 years he had satisfactory proof of its obedience.
Clement XII {244th P.} (12 July 1730 - 8 Feb. 1740) renewed (Sept. 26, 1735) Clement XI’s prohibition of Chinese rites and started a fresh inquiry into the whole issue.
(continued)
Section 1
What is a Chronology of the Chinese Missions? And of the Jesuits’ Condemnation?
FLUCTUATING “PERPETUITY”
Nicholas IV {189th P.} (22 Feb. 1288 - 04 Apr. 1292) - the first Franciscan to become pope.
He earned the title of missionary pope by sending (1289) Giovanni di Monte Corvino, a Franciscan friar, to the court of the great Kublai Khan (1260-94); this mission led to the first establishment of the Catholic church in China, where previously only Nestorians had been influential.
Clement V {193rd P.} in 1307, appointed Giovanni first archbishop of Peking.
Paul V {231st P.} (16 May 1605 - 28 Jan 1621) encouraged the missions, approving (June 27, 1615) the use of the vernacular in the liturgy in China.
Innocent X {234th P.} took a stand in the keen debate on the propriety of adapting certain traditional Chinese rituals in the mission field, approving a decree of the Propaganda (Sept. 12, 1645) condemning the practice.
Alexander VII {235th P.} (7 Apr. 1655 - 22 May 1667)
By a decree of Mar. 23, 1656 he accepted the viewpoint of Jesuit missionaries in China, permitting the performance of certain indigenous rites as being effectively civil ceremonies, and (Sept. 9, 1659) relieved native Chinese clergy of the duty of reading the office in Latin.
Alexander VII {235th P.} (7 Apr. 1655 - 22 May 1667)
and Bl. Innocent XI {238th P.} both condemned 110 of the Jesuit casuists’ propositions after Blaise Pascal’s Provincial Letters.
became involved in the controversy over “Probabilism”, ie. the theory (supported by the Jesuits) that, where the propriety of an action is in doubt, it is lawful to follow a solidly probable opinion favouring it even when the case against it is more probable.
he did not condemn Probabilism as such but, notwithstanding his partiality for Jesuits, formally condemned forty-five propositions savouring of laxity (Sept. 24, 1665 and Mar. 18, 1666)
Bl. Innocent XI {238th P.} With his moral earnestness, he had Jansenist leanings and was critical of the Jesuits; on Mar. 2, 1679, without naming the Probabilism prevalent in Jesuit circles, he condemned sixty-five laxist propositions savouring of it. Innocent endorsed “probabiliorism”, ie. the view that in cases of doubt about the licitness of an action the opinion which seems more probable should be followed.
Clement XI {241st P.}
1704, Nov. 20: approving a sentence of the Holy Office, he ruled against the use by missionaries of Chinese rites, especially the cult of Confucius and ancestors.
1715, Mar. 19: he reiterated the ruling in the constitution Ex Illa Die putting an effective end to the Chinese Mission.
These prohibitions led to the persecution of Chinese Christians and the closure of the missions; the prohibitions were finally lifted by Pius XII in 1939.
Innocent XIII {242nd P.} having had a deep aversion to the Jesuits was minded to suppress the order when he learned that its missionaries were not complying with Clement XI’s ban on the Chinese rites. Instead he forbade it to receive novices unless within 3 years he had satisfactory proof of its obedience.
Clement XII {244th P.} (12 July 1730 - 8 Feb. 1740) renewed (Sept. 26, 1735) Clement XI’s prohibition of Chinese rites and started a fresh inquiry into the whole issue.
(continued)
S
Sean_O_L
Guest
(continued)
Benedict XIV {245th P.}
published in 1741 a Bull in which he described the Jesuits as “disobedient, contumacious, crafty, and reprobate men.”
by the Bull Ex quo singulari (July 11, 1742) he finally suppressed the Chinese rites - following it with the Bull Omnium sollicitudinum (Sept. 12, 1744) extending the ban, in milder terms, to Malabar rites in India.
Ex quo singulari: “…we condemn and detest their practice as superstitious…we revoke, annul, abrogate and wish to be deprived of all force and effect, all and each of those permissions, and say and announce that they must be considered for ever to be annulled, null, invalid and without any force or power.”
Clement XIII {246th P.} defended the Jesuits, reaffirming the position of the Society in his Bull Apostolicum pascendi of Jan. 7, 1765: “…using the plenitude of the Apostolic power…whose effect shall be perpetual…”, but it had no effect; the following states expelled the Jesuits:
Portugal in 1759;
France in 1762;
Spain, Naples, Sicily and from the Republics of Genoa and Venice in 1767;
Malta, the Duchy of Parma, and the Kingdom of Naples in 1768;
Paraguay 1769.
Clement XIV {247th P.} suppressed the Jesuits on Aug. 16, 1773 “perpetually” in his Bull Dominus ac Redemptor noster.
Pius VI {248th P.} In deference to the Bourbon courts, he tried to put pressure on Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine II of Russia, in whose domains many Jesuits had found refuge, to apply Clement XIV’s brief of suppression; but he failed to persuade Catherine, who set up a noviciate for Jesuits in 1780. In 1783-4 he gave secret approval to the continued existence of Jesuits in Russia.
Pius VII {249th P.}, in Solicitudo Omnium Ecclesiarum of Aug. 7, 1814, RESTORED THE JESUITS AFTER 40 YEARS OF “PERPETUAL” DISSOLUTION!!! Years earlier (1801 and 1804) he had regularised their existence in Russia and Naples. Cardinal Manning very much disliked them.
Pius XII {258th P.} 1939: The Sacred Congregation of Propaganda reversed Clement XI’s decision on the Chinese rites.
From jloughnan.tripod.com/sec1_17.htm
Benedict XIV {245th P.}
published in 1741 a Bull in which he described the Jesuits as “disobedient, contumacious, crafty, and reprobate men.”
by the Bull Ex quo singulari (July 11, 1742) he finally suppressed the Chinese rites - following it with the Bull Omnium sollicitudinum (Sept. 12, 1744) extending the ban, in milder terms, to Malabar rites in India.
Ex quo singulari: “…we condemn and detest their practice as superstitious…we revoke, annul, abrogate and wish to be deprived of all force and effect, all and each of those permissions, and say and announce that they must be considered for ever to be annulled, null, invalid and without any force or power.”
Clement XIII {246th P.} defended the Jesuits, reaffirming the position of the Society in his Bull Apostolicum pascendi of Jan. 7, 1765: “…using the plenitude of the Apostolic power…whose effect shall be perpetual…”, but it had no effect; the following states expelled the Jesuits:
Portugal in 1759;
France in 1762;
Spain, Naples, Sicily and from the Republics of Genoa and Venice in 1767;
Malta, the Duchy of Parma, and the Kingdom of Naples in 1768;
Paraguay 1769.
Clement XIV {247th P.} suppressed the Jesuits on Aug. 16, 1773 “perpetually” in his Bull Dominus ac Redemptor noster.
Pius VI {248th P.} In deference to the Bourbon courts, he tried to put pressure on Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine II of Russia, in whose domains many Jesuits had found refuge, to apply Clement XIV’s brief of suppression; but he failed to persuade Catherine, who set up a noviciate for Jesuits in 1780. In 1783-4 he gave secret approval to the continued existence of Jesuits in Russia.
Pius VII {249th P.}, in Solicitudo Omnium Ecclesiarum of Aug. 7, 1814, RESTORED THE JESUITS AFTER 40 YEARS OF “PERPETUAL” DISSOLUTION!!! Years earlier (1801 and 1804) he had regularised their existence in Russia and Naples. Cardinal Manning very much disliked them.
Pius XII {258th P.} 1939: The Sacred Congregation of Propaganda reversed Clement XI’s decision on the Chinese rites.
From jloughnan.tripod.com/sec1_17.htm
P
Psalm45_9
Guest
You mean for listening to what the succesor of Peter and the Magesterium? Give me a break people, start your own heretical church if you don’t like what’s going on.
F
Franze
Guest
I haven´t seen any TLM mass, and it´s a pity, a huge pity, I hope and pray for more seminarists to FSSP and other organisations and could exist a bishop for traditional rite depended of the Pope, without the permision of bishops.
I think that it´s possible and will arrive soon.
I think that it´s possible and will arrive soon.
A
Angels_Watchin
Guest
Podo, how Christian of you!
A few corrections:
1.) Christ IS NOT physically “EVERYWHERE!!!” The church teaches that Christ is present *physically, (body blood soul and divinity) * ONLY in the consecrated host (which is present in the tabernacle). We are directed by the GIRM to genuflect to Christ in the tabernacle when we pass by it. Because He is PHYSICALLY there.
2.) Which means you are stating that for about 1500 years the church got it wrong. ??? The church says there IS a NEED to Genuflect toward the tabernacle- do you suggest we do this with our back to it? there must be something special in there*!*
3.) First, I’m a girl and second, with whom are you grouping me, and 3rd, it was His preference LONG before it was mine.
And, -----we’ve also got priests (who act “in the person of Christ” on the altar) molesting children. I’m pretty sure He opposed that, but…here we are.
4.) If we went back to the apostles celebration, we would be losing the wisdom and dogma of the church, papal infallibility, Immaculate Conception, Fatima, ALL the saints, Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, etc, etc, etc. Forcing us to stay in the “in the beginning” is taught AGAINST in an encyclical (help me out, here, somebody with the name of the document and the Pope)
5.) For you. - But ALL the saints, ALL THE SAINTS prayed the Tridentine mass and ONLY THE TRIDENTINE MASS! Must have been SOMETHING good in there! Must have been the source of SOME GREAT GRACES!
6.) Again, there has been silence in EVERY church for centuries, up until about 40 years ago. Silence is a contemplative form of prayer - practiced, most often, by the saints (which we are all hoping to be someday, yes?)
And look at the “fruits” of the new mass. Approx 1/3 of the people who call themselves Catholic don’t believe in the true presence, vocations have deteriorated to practically non - existance, the rate of abortions is almost as high in Catholics as everyone else, divorce by Catholics is almost as high as everyone else. ALL since Vatican II. Do you think He wants THAT? Again, here we are.
“You will knw them by their fruits”.
7.) Sorry, Podo, you misunderstood the ‘chat session’ comment.
The ‘chat session’ I refer to is between people (the priest facing the people). Worship of God, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, is US (including the priest) worshipping HIM. There is the communicating that must occur in the mass. (and, by the way, Vatican II did NOT turn the priest around!)
I say this with all kindness, …you really need to do a little reading. It appears you don’t know much about the history of the Tridentine or of the teachings of Vatican II.
As Pope Benedict XVI says, (I’m paraphrasing here)"we are in the dark days of the church’.
(dark – not lit (with understanding) or dark – evil)??
God help us,
Angel
C
cargopilot
Guest
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
Oh My!! Wht a stunningly BEAUTIFUL picture! I wish I could attend such a beautiful church! I hope you can continue to do so!
S
Sean_O_L
Guest
Angels Watchin wrote:
There is no such Mass as the “Tridentine Mass.” The Mass throughout the ages from the Last Supper is purely and simply, the Mass. It is and has been celebrated in a variety of Rites and Liturgies.
For Latin Rite Catholics, the normative liturgy of Mass was contained in the Missale Romanum - the Roman Missal and THAT was the Missale authorized by Pope St Pius V in 1570.
It is an oxymoron to say “Tridentine Mass” - just as much as it would be to describe the normative Liturgy of Mass authorized by Pope Paul VI in 1969 as the “Vatican II Mass.”
It is also blatently untrue to claim that “ALL THE SAINTS prayed the Tridentine mass and ONLY THE TRIDENTINE MASS” - for there WERE Saints prior to the 1570 Liturgy of Pope St Pius V, AND there most certainly HAVE been Saints who have prayed at and in the (approx.) 23 other Catholic Rites currently approved by the Catholic Church. Your claim excludes, for example, saints of the Byzantine, Maronite, etc. Rites.
Well - how charitable for you to demean Podo’s Christian status - particularly as the reference you quote does NOT at all claim that “Christ IS physically everywhere” - despite the multiple exclamation marks.
No! That only means that that is YOUR mis-interpretation of what Pope HAS said. In any event, how does genuflecting with the back to the Tabernacle come into the matter. That could only be done by the congregation if the Tabernacle was in the rear of the Church - or, by the Priest at a Pauline Mass at the time of the Consecration, etc. when, in fact, Our Lord, Jesus Christ is “physically” directly in front of his and the eyes of the congregation.
It does not help the argument if demonstrably false of inaccurate claims are made.
There is no such Mass as the “Tridentine Mass.” The Mass throughout the ages from the Last Supper is purely and simply, the Mass. It is and has been celebrated in a variety of Rites and Liturgies.
For Latin Rite Catholics, the normative liturgy of Mass was contained in the Missale Romanum - the Roman Missal and THAT was the Missale authorized by Pope St Pius V in 1570.
It is an oxymoron to say “Tridentine Mass” - just as much as it would be to describe the normative Liturgy of Mass authorized by Pope Paul VI in 1969 as the “Vatican II Mass.”
It is also blatently untrue to claim that “ALL THE SAINTS prayed the Tridentine mass and ONLY THE TRIDENTINE MASS” - for there WERE Saints prior to the 1570 Liturgy of Pope St Pius V, AND there most certainly HAVE been Saints who have prayed at and in the (approx.) 23 other Catholic Rites currently approved by the Catholic Church. Your claim excludes, for example, saints of the Byzantine, Maronite, etc. Rites.
S
SHEMP
Guest
Read Ratzinger’s “The Spirit of the Liturgy”. All are facing East. All are facing the Eucharist! All see God in the Eucharist together.
S
Swiss_Guard
Guest
Sean O L:
*"I was dismayed by the prohibition of the old missal, since nothing of the sort had ever happened in the entire history of the liturgy. The impression was even given that what was happening was quite normal. *
**
"[we had been led to believe that] the previous missal had been created by Pius V in 1570 in connection with the Council of Trent; and so it was quite normal that, after four hundred years and a new council, a new pope would present us with a new missal. But the historical truth of the matter is different. Pius V had simply ordered a reworking of the Missale Romanum then being used, which is the normal thing as history develops over the course of centuries.
"Many of his successors had likewise reworked this missal again, but without ever setting one missal against another. It was a continual process of growth and purification in which continuity was never destroyed. There is no such thing as a “Missal of Pius V”, created by Pius V himself. **There is only the reworking done by Pius V as one phase in a long history of growth. **The new feature that came to the fore after the Council of Trent was of a different nature [than the Novus Ordo" (Milestones, Cardinal Ratzinger).
Just as a person organically develops throughout his life, so the Mass organically develops through the ages. While you and I have developed since we were born, we are not different persons. I am the same person as when I was born, but I have grown. My appearance has changed but my essence is still the same. So it is with the Tridentine Mass.
We have many “experts” on this forum who really need to research the topics they think they are experts on.
I don’t like lies being told about the Mass, no matter the rite. The Mass is still Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary re-presented in an unbloody manner. Remember this the next time anyone wants to lie about the Mass.
There is what’s called organic development of the Mass, as RSiscoe pointed out in his post.
RSiscoe said:
*"I was dismayed by the prohibition of the old missal, since nothing of the sort had ever happened in the entire history of the liturgy. The impression was even given that what was happening was quite normal. *
**
"[we had been led to believe that] the previous missal had been created by Pius V in 1570 in connection with the Council of Trent; and so it was quite normal that, after four hundred years and a new council, a new pope would present us with a new missal. But the historical truth of the matter is different. Pius V had simply ordered a reworking of the Missale Romanum then being used, which is the normal thing as history develops over the course of centuries.
"Many of his successors had likewise reworked this missal again, but without ever setting one missal against another. It was a continual process of growth and purification in which continuity was never destroyed. There is no such thing as a “Missal of Pius V”, created by Pius V himself. **There is only the reworking done by Pius V as one phase in a long history of growth. **The new feature that came to the fore after the Council of Trent was of a different nature [than the Novus Ordo" (Milestones, Cardinal Ratzinger).
Just as a person organically develops throughout his life, so the Mass organically develops through the ages. While you and I have developed since we were born, we are not different persons. I am the same person as when I was born, but I have grown. My appearance has changed but my essence is still the same. So it is with the Tridentine Mass.
We have many “experts” on this forum who really need to research the topics they think they are experts on.
I don’t like lies being told about the Mass, no matter the rite. The Mass is still Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary re-presented in an unbloody manner. Remember this the next time anyone wants to lie about the Mass.
S
Sean_O_L
Guest
Swiss Guard wrote:
If you do not hold that the Mass using the Liturgy of Pope Paul VI IS the same Mass - then you are in BIG trouble, I suggest! Not only you, but the Catholic Church, for the Gates of Hell WOULD have prevailed, and Christ would have been a liar.
On the other hand, the liturgy and the Rites over the years HAVE differed and, yes, there has been organic development - but the substance has been retained - as it has in the Pauline Liturgy
.
However, I would like you to point me to a Missal prior to the 1960’s which describes itself as being “Tridentine Mass” or, in the Roman Rite - the Missal of the Tridentine Mass? Being the expert, I guess you should have no problem doing that?
Well, I agree with what RSiscoe wrote in partially quoting then Cardinal Ratzinger. But, there is basically nothing in that quote which is contrary to what ByzCath wrote, and to which I responded:
The “MASS” is always the same - and I have frequently pointed out in these forums that “The Mass of the Ages” is the exact same Mass as that offered by Christ at the Last Supper, the years 800, 1000, 1300, 1570, 1650, 1962, 1969, 2005 - exactly the same: offered by the same High Priest, the same Victim, the same Father to whom the Sacrifice is offered.
If you do not hold that the Mass using the Liturgy of Pope Paul VI IS the same Mass - then you are in BIG trouble, I suggest! Not only you, but the Catholic Church, for the Gates of Hell WOULD have prevailed, and Christ would have been a liar.
On the other hand, the liturgy and the Rites over the years HAVE differed and, yes, there has been organic development - but the substance has been retained - as it has in the Pauline Liturgy
.
I agree! I have been saying this precisely myself.
However, I would like you to point me to a Missal prior to the 1960’s which describes itself as being “Tridentine Mass” or, in the Roman Rite - the Missal of the Tridentine Mass? Being the expert, I guess you should have no problem doing that?
S
Scotty_PGH
Guest
:yawn: 
How far this post has drifted from the OP’s statement:
How far this post has drifted from the OP’s statement:
P
Pandora
Guest
Is it possible for once not to start fighting about the TLM. This thread is to show pictures of the TLM not to make uninformed commnets about what you think. I do not go onto other threads about NO Mass and start a fighht.
Let’s keep this thread on topic by posting pictures of the TLM or talking about it’s beauty not trash it.
Kathy
Let’s keep this thread on topic by posting pictures of the TLM or talking about it’s beauty not trash it.
Kathy
S
Scotty_PGH
Guest
I agree!!! Unfortunately, there are about three posters who will routinely jump on any thread in which the TLM is mentioned and start up the same…old…tired…discussions. Again. And again. And again.
G
God_saves
Guest
Angels Watchin said:
G
God_saves
Guest
Angels Watchin said:
I agree with you PLUS the priest facing the congregation makes an actor of him. However, that being said the Norvus Ordo is still an acceptable Mass and the one I attend almost exclusively. I grew up on the Tridentine Mass and praise the reverence it imparts and encourages, but I also believe that hearing Mass celebrated in the vernacular has its advantages. Who among you can pray in Latin? Think in Latin? What I really dislike is the Priest leaving the ambo and moving to the center of the church after the Gospel reading to give his Homily.
God saves
S
Sean_O_L
Guest
Amen!
L
Lucania
Guest
This is such a travesty! What a beautiful place to worship God. I don’t understand why this is happening around the Country. I will keep you and your glorious Church in my prayers. Please keep us informed.
D
dcs
Guest
Sean O L:
They were very likely facing the same direction.
Obedience to what? Card. Ratzinger – now Pope Benedict XVI – has said on a number of occasions that the old Mass was never abrogated. Therefore there is no question of obedience.
- Status