Pope Benedict and the Reform of the Reform

[JRKH]

I hope that you are right but I believe in this instance there would have to be a near total changing of the guard before any meaningful change can occur that lasts.

And lets be honest. I adore the Holy Father, but he is not a young man. Who knows who will replace him and what direction they will want to take the Church in?

Someone mentioned recently about how Fr. Ratzinger and others were saddened by the lurching changes after Vatican II. Instead of an organic growth through incremental changes in the Church which many had hoped for, there was wholesale change and experimentation. Instead of evolution, there came revolution. Pope JP-II and noe B-XVI have placed the church on a new more steady course. JP-II, in many ways prepared the soil. Relatively young, JP was the perfect combination of vigor and stability, progressive and conservative. He saw what was needed and moved the Church in theright direction.
B-XVI is now planting seeds. His request that every parish have an EF mass is one seed. His desire that priests be properly prepared to say both forms is another. The founding of the FSSP is yet another seed. Over time these various seeds will give us a crop of priests, bishops and cardinals and laity who are not worried of concerned about which form of mass is said.
I certainly hope that The Holy Father Benedict is with us for a long time. However, if these changes are the will of the Holy Spirit, then it will not matter who the Pope is.
That is my take on it.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I do not like the idea of reform. The switch back to latin is not going to be a welcome one. Though I personally think latin is beautiful as a language it is not the preferred language in this country. I would feel as if getting less out of mass by having to speak in latin and disrupt the natural flow of the language I have learned. The religious experience is based on the english vernacular for me, and other native languages depending on where you are from. This is what makes the church accessible.

The Holy Father can do what he wishes, but I do think that bringing back latin and changing things back to reflect “the old way” is counter productive in the measure to ensure the church will endure the test of these times.

1. I respect your opinion on these matters
2. I too have no problem with vernacular masses, or the OF
3. I also have no Problem with the Latin in the EF.
4. We get out of the mass precisely what we are willing to put in.
5. The holy Father is not Changing things back to reflect the “old way”, but rather is encouraging the use of both forms to reflect the “full way”.
6. No need to worry about the Church standing the test of these times. She has the protection of the Holy Spirit.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I don’t speak Latin, don’t want to learn Latin, am not going to learn Latin and am happy with French or English.

Rome is gone, Latin with it. No?

Not sure what you mean by “Rome is Gone”, but as far as Latin being Gone that is incorrect. Oficial documents of the Church are still written in Latin first and then translated into other languages. Oh and just to be clear, Rome is still there too.

As for not learning Latin, I don’t know Latin either and I still Enjoy the Latin mass. I simply pray in English from my, Latin on one side and English on the other side, missal.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Why not Aramaic.

That’s the language that Jesus spoke. What’s so special about Latin?

If the Church decided to use Aramaic that would be OK with me also.

Others have addressed the issue of why Latin is special to the Church, I will only say that, one of the unifying things about the Latin Mass is that it was alwasy celebrated in the same way everywhere in the world. Thus you could travel anywhere and be right at home in any Catholic Church and understand what was going on. This can be more difficult in the vernacular.
Just one small point.

Peace
James

 

[onetimeposter]

Not sure what you mean by “Rome is Gone”, but as far as Latin being Gone that is incorrect. Oficial documents of the Church are still written in Latin first and then translated into other languages. Oh and just to be clear, Rome is still there too.

As for not learning Latin, I don’t know Latin either and I still Enjoy the Latin mass. I simply pray in English from my, Latin on one side and English on the other side, missal.

Peace
James

Rome is gone ( The Roman Empire is gone)

Latin is gone ( Latin is a dead language) The Church using it to write papers does not change the fact that it is not a dead language…not an extinct language, but a dead language.

I don’t know why the Pope would move away from the vernacular and move to a language the Church believes holds a special place in the Church’s heart…

I suspect in North America, if Latin were used exclusively, people will love Latin at first ( because it will be new to many people) and then after a few years, people will grow tired and seek a place to worship where the vernacular is spoken.

 

[JRKH]

Rome is gone ( The Roman Empire is gone)

Latin is gone ( Latin is a dead language) The Church using it to write papers does not change the fact that it is not a dead language…not an extinct language, but a dead language.

Thanks for the clarification.
Yes the Roman empire is Gone, though I don’t know what that has to do with the discussion since Latin was the language of diplomacy for centuries after the Fall.
As to Latin being dead language, my understanding is that it is precisely this quality that makes it valuable in the Church. Because it is no longer in common use, it is not subject to change. Vernacular languages are.

I don’t know why the Pope would move away from the vernacular and move to a language the Church believes holds a special place in the Church’s heart…

There can be many reasons for this. First is the idea that Latin was never abrogated from the mass. In fact, if I am not mistaken, Latin is still considered THE language of the mass with the use of the vernacular being permitted. The fact that you seem to believe otherwise is just one of the reasons the Holy Father is trying to reinforce what is true teaching from Vatican II.

I suspect in North America, if Latin were used exclusively, people will love Latin at first ( because it will be new to many people) and then after a few years, people will grow tired and seek a place to worship where the vernacular is spoken.

You may well be right. On the other hand you may be completely wrong.
Given that, in the 40 some years that the vernacular and “New Mass” have been in existance the desire for Latin has not died out, it seems unlikely that it ever will.
Likewise there are many people who love the vernacular mass, newer music etc. so I don’t see that dying out either.
So would you agree that, if the mass is widely offered in both forms the OF and EF, there would be greater satisfaction within the Church?
People can “get tired” of either form. They could go to whichever gives them the greatest satisfaction that week, or day, for that matter.

I just don’t understand why there are people who are so opposed to the EF that they would challenge and defy the Holy Father’s wishes in this matter.
It saddens me.

Peace
James

 

[prodigal-sun]

I don’t understand the resistance from people like onetimeposter (no disrespect intended) towards the Latin mass being available. It is not like the NO is going to be abolished. Our Holy Father is just securing it’s future so it will never be completely lost.

Peace!

 

[benedictgal]

I don’t understand the resistance from people like onetimeposter (no disrespect intended) towards the Latin mass being available. It is not like the NO is going to be abolished. Our Holy Father is just securing it’s future so it will never be completely lost.

Peace!

Actually, the Holy Father is simply reminding us of what is in the Constution on the Sacred LIturgy has repeatedly noted that, while there are allowances for the vernacular, the use of Latin remains in force.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by prodigal-sun
I don’t understand the resistance from people like onetimeposter (no disrespect intended) towards the Latin mass being available. It is not like the NO is going to be abolished. Our Holy Father is just securing it’s future so it will never be completely lost.

It is surprising how many people do not know that, including myself up until about a year or so. (I’ve learned so much since coming back to the church)

The resistance that prodical references is one of the reasons I try to always address this with charity and tact. Those who take a radical position on either side, only serve to do damage to the Body of Christ. Anyone who wishes to see wider use of the EF needs to realize that we must comfort and encourage our brethren. While persistance is admirable, we must not give the impression that we’re out to “Roll Back the Clock” or negate Vatican II. Rather we are simply trying to give even greater Glory to God through the use of this Glorious Liturgy.

Peace
James

 

[Our_Refuge]

=benedictgal;3907977]

Mind you, neither Wiegel, nor the Holy Father, are saying that the OF is bad. Neither are many of us in these threads. ** The problem lies in the misinterpretation of many things, **as indicated in the bolded, italicized and reddened portion of Wiegel’s article.

Of course the Constitution was misinterpreted. But that misinterpretation was approved by Pope Paul VI. The Reform of the Reform is a rejection of Pope Paul VI and the Consilium that made all of the changes which were approved by Pope Paul VI.
Paul VI was Pope until 1978. He never corrected any of the 'misinterpretations"

:

 

[JRKH]

Of course the Constitution was misinterpreted. But that misinterpretation was approved by Pope Paul VI. The Reform of the Reform is a rejection of Pope Paul VI and the Consilium that made all of the changes which were approved by Pope Paul VI.
Paul VI was Pope until 1978. He never corrected any of the 'misinterpretations"

:

Be that as it may, since you agree that the Constitution was mis-interpreted, then you accept that Pope Paul VI approved a misinterpretation.
Benedict XVI is simply correcting that mis-interpretation. Can this be bad?

Peace
James

 

[Our_Refuge]

Be that as it may, since you agree that the Constitution was mis-interpreted, then you accept that Pope Paul VI approved a misinterpretation.
Benedict XVI is simply correcting that mis-interpretation. Can this be bad?

Peace
James

No. It can only be good. But if the Constitution was mis-interpreted and there needs to be a reform of the reform then the Council cannot be blamed. Pope Paul VI had the final say on the reforms and he approved of them.

 

[JRKH]

No. It can only be good. But if the Constitution was mis-interpreted and there needs to be a reform of the reform then the Council cannot be blamed. Pope Paul VI had the final say on the reforms and he approved of them.

I suppose if one is looking to “lay blame” then the buck certainly stops with the Pope. Frankly those were turbulent times and many mistakes were made by many people. In all cases I’m sure they felt they were acting in the best interest of the church.
In calling Vatican II, John XXIII inadvertantly, yet with all fatherly love, unleashed great forces in the Church. The fact that he died well before the end of the council certainly did not help the situation. Yet Paul VI, an administrator, was as good a man to finish the work as could be found at that time.
Now we have seen the results of Vatican II and the various uses and abuses. Now the Holy Father is seeking to keep the positives and rein in the negatives without repeating the mistakes of the '60’s and '70’s.
God be with Pope Benedict XVI.

Peace
James

 

[cdfost]

Seeing as how I was never exposed to the latin portions of mass, how will us youngins’ get the proper responses memorized? I have other friends who have never had exposure to the latin mass responses…

 

[JRKH]

Seeing as how I was never exposed to the latin portions of mass, how will us youngins’ get the proper responses memorized? I have other friends who have never had exposure to the latin mass responses…

This is a good question.
The simple and short answer is the same way that we memorize anything. By simple repetition.

The longer and more serious answer is that parishes and book stores etc will provide books/booklets/leaflets etc. with the proper latin prayers and responses.
I also suspect that parishes will likely provide “phonetic” prayer cards such as we use to have for servers to learn the prayers from.
Another way is that, before mass, some of the responses can be reviewed in the same way as the organist might review a new song, or new musical response.

I was born into the Latin mass, but it was changed when I was about 10 or 11. So I have had to relearn the Latin mass (EF) myself. Although I suspect you are refering to the greater use of Latin in the OF, the principle remains the same.

Hope this eases your mind a little.

Peace
James

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I do not like the idea of reform. The switch back to latin is not going to be a welcome one. Though I personally think latin is beautiful as a language it is not the preferred language in this country. I would feel as if getting less out of mass by having to speak in latin and disrupt the natural flow of the language I have learned. The religious experience is based on the english vernacular for me, and other native languages depending on where you are from. This is what makes the church accessible.

The Holy Father can do what he wishes, but I do think that bringing back latin and changing things back to reflect “the old way” is counter productive in the measure to ensure the church will endure the test of these times.

Don’t worry, the Pope isn’t doing away with Mass in the vernacular, nor changing anything in the rubrics, as they are now printed.

This is merely wishful thinking and misinterpretation by neo-conservative Catholics, on what Pope Benedict XVI is actually saying and doing.

One thing I’ve come to learn, after reading two of Pope Benedict’s books, is how liberal he actually is. He quotes the Tao, and even criticizes political conservatism.

Jim

 

[cdfost]

Don’t worry, the Pope isn’t doing away with Mass in the vernacular, nor changing anything in the rubrics, as they are now printed.

This is merely wishful thinking and misinterpretation by neo-conservative Catholics, on what Pope Benedict XVI is actually saying and doing.

One thing I’ve come to learn, after reading two of Pope Benedict’s books, is how liberal he actually is. He quotes the Tao, and even criticizes political conservatism.

Jim

That’s good news. I was talking with a priest that said the Holy Father’s goal is to bring latin back. It was actually rather humorous how the conversation started. I attended mass at his parish and they had the latin responses, and I said, “it caught me off guard–where did that come from.” I made the comment, "We are version 2.0 at my parish, we do not use latin at all during mass…you all were like v1.5. I was joking, and he knew it. He said that he was version 2.5 since the church was moving back to latin…it was interesting.

 

[JRKH]

Don’t worry, the Pope isn’t doing away with Mass in the vernacular, nor changing anything in the rubrics, as they are now printed.

This is merely wishful thinking and misinterpretation by neo-conservative Catholics, on what Pope Benedict XVI is actually saying and doing.

One thing I’ve come to learn, after reading two of Pope Benedict’s books, is how liberal he actually is. He quotes the Tao, and even criticizes political conservatism.

Jim

Ah Yes - the spin doctors and others are always at it aren’t they?

The things that the Holy Father is trying to accomplish, he is doing so in an organic and steady way. He is trying to move the Church into an even more united and embrasing Church. The re-embrasing of the Latin and the EF is just one of these. We have to remember that Both JP-II and B-XVI were participants at V-II. If anyone knows about the truths and intentions of that council they should.

Peace
James

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Ah Yes - the spin doctors and others are always at it aren’t they?

The things that the Holy Father is trying to accomplish, he is doing so in an organic and steady way. He is trying to move the Church into an even more united and embrasing Church. The re-embrasing of the Latin and the EF is just one of these. We have to remember that Both JP-II and B-XVI were participants at V-II. If anyone knows about the truths and intentions of that council they should.

Peace
James

If you believe that the Pope is moving the Church back to having Latin only Masses, I think you’re going to be disappointed.

He has brought Latin into Papal Masses, because, his Masses are attended by the Bishops and visitors of the world, who may not understand German, English or whatever, but might be more familiar with Latin as a celebrating community. If I’m not mistaken, Bishops, must know Latin. Official communication between them and Rome, is often sealed with Latin.

Don’t confuse this with him doing away with the vernacular use in the Mass, celebrated at parishes around the world. It ain’t going to happen.

Jim

 

[JRKH]

If you believe that the Pope is moving the Church back to having Latin only Masses, I think you’re going to be disappointed.

He has brought Latin into Papal Masses, because, his Masses are attended by the Bishops and visitors of the world, who may not understand German, English or whatever, but might be more familiar with Latin as a celebrating community. If I’m not mistaken, Bishops, must know Latin. Official communication between them and Rome, is often sealed with Latin.

Don’t confuse this with him doing away with the vernacular use in the Mass, celebrated at parishes around the world. It ain’t going to happen.

Jim

Not to worry, I’m neither confusing it, nor am I particularly desiring it.
My personal “ideal”, as it were, would be a situation where reverent, vernacular OF’s are the norm, with a sufficiently broad use of the EF to allow anyone who wishes, to attend without having to drive a great distance.
Actually I guess I would like to see just one EF offered at each parish on a regular basis.
Will it ever Happen? Maybe not. Certainly not in my lifetime.

Of course don’t confuse my desires with the strident demands of some others here. I believe you’ve read enough of my posts to know that I am not a “Take us back to Latin” guy.

Peace
James