Pope to Reintroduce Latin into the Novus Ordo and Move the "Sign of Peace"

[ethelzguy]

To be honest I am agnostic on all of this/ I really don’t care what language the Mass is in as long as the end result I get to receive the Body & Blood of Jesus Christ… I don’t care if he is put in my hand or put on my tongue and I don’t care if it is a Priest or a layperson who puts it there.

I am somewhat amused by the attitude that the TLM was somehow perfect and not subject to liturgical abuse. I can recall Msgr. Spurlock throwing the hand cloth back at me after I gave it to him the wrong way -I can recall how all of us Teens would flock to a certain Church on Sunday morning because the Priest got you in and out in 30 minutes. And of course if the priest was omitting something in the EP who would know as it was in Latin and said inaudibly.

The Church has far deeper problems facing of it ,none of which are going to be solved by this endless bickering over style when we should be worrying about substance
.

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

 

[ethelzguy]

Julianna;:

Don’t kid yourselves. It’s not about solemn, reverant worship…it’s about…dare I say… …CONTROL.

What a wonderful post

Where have you been all my life? :hug3:

 

[Joysong]

Ethelzguy:

Originally Posted by Julianna;
Don’t kid yourselves. It’s not about solemn, reverant worship…it’s about…dare I say…:eek …CONTROL.

What a wonderful post

Where have you been all my life? :hug3

Yes, I too send my thanks, Julianna!

This is simply first century christianity repeating itself here. Who were the ones who were most opposed to the gentile converts? Of course, the pharisaic Jews who took offense that the neophites were not following the Mosaic law as they had known it. The contention was so heated that it caused the convening of the first council of the Church, where the Jews were finally instructed to lay off, so to speak. The converts were NOT required to follow the old way of doing things, very much to the dismay of the Jews who “knew the law.” (Acts 15-16)

Meanwhile, you can imagine the persecution the gentiles received. I see it here, the good guys vs. the bad guys. If you make it on the wrong list, look out!

So much for unity!

In the same way that the Jews held for certain that the gentiles would be made to conform, expectations are similarly held that Pope Benedict is going to meet the desires of traditionists. We’ll see what happens, and meanwhile remain in peace that there is a choice for those who prefer either form of mass.

God is still sitting on His throne.

 

[benedictgal]

It amazes me that there are people who would seem to deride the use of Latin in the Mass. Some call it just rumors, others make fun of those who support the Holy Father.

The fact remains is that the opponents of this issue do not realize that the liturgical language of the Church remains Latin. The Liturgy of the Eucharist in the OF was meant to be celebrated in Latin. The Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy holds that position, as well.

The vernacular was inserted by indult and by permission. It is an option, a valid one, but, the norm remains Latin.

Furthermore, I would challenge the opponents to read what the Holy Father has said in his books regarding the Mass. Just about everything he wrote back then is now coming to fruition under his papacy.

 

[Dauphin]

In the same way that the Jews held for certain that the gentiles would be made to conform, expectations are similarly held that Pope Benedict is going to meet the desires of traditionists. We’ll see what happens, and meanwhile remain in peace that there is a choice for those who prefer either form of mass.

This is a very poor analogy. People who desire a reform of the Mass and a return to liturgical tradition aren’t even close to heretics who say that the Old Law is necessary for salvation.

What’s disappointing and frustrating about posts like yours is that they fail to make any kind of argument. Instead of telling us why you disaprove of Latin in the liturgy, or other traditional elements, you simply dismiss the ones proposing it as heretics, pharisees, or control freaks.

When you have to resort to ad hominem, or namecalling instead of refutation, you can be sure that you’ve lost the argument.

 

[japhy]

I’ve had it with this thread. Joysong, Julianna, and ethelzguy, are you serious about this “control” argument? Are you seriously comparing this to first-century discord between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians?

Can we please start over here? What are the reasons you folks fear Latin so much? What is this “control” issue?

Or should I just report this thread and get it locked?

 

[ethelzguy]

I’ve had it with this thread. Joysong, Julianna, and ethelzguy, are you serious about this “control” argument? Are you seriously comparing this to first-century discord between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians?

Can we please start over here? What are the reasons you folks fear Latin so much? What is this “control” issue?

Or should I just report this thread and get it locked?

It is certainly starting to take root. It seems that the tradtionalist crowd is intent on forcing their brand of cafeteria Catholicism on the rest of us…as if the Church was a democracy to begin with

 

[LRThunder]

It is certainly starting to take root. It seems that the tradtionalist crowd is intent on forcing their brand of cafeteria Catholicism on the rest of us…as if the Church was a democracy to begin with

No, the “traditionalist crowd” is not forcing their own brand of cafeteria Catholicism.

The mistake you and others have made is equating all traditionalists with the SSPX (or worse groups).

What the “traditionalist crowd” wants is for the Mass to be celebrated properly, where the celebrant does not play with it like a child plays with toys. What’s cafeteria about wanting a reverent Mass?

 

[japhy]

This is simply first century christianity repeating itself here. Who were the ones who were most opposed to the gentile converts?

I am NOT opposed to the vernacular, so stop putting words in my mouth and stop analogizing me into a villain. I support “something old and something new” like the scribe of Matthew 12:52. I support the Second Vatican Council, including how it said the liturgy should be reformed. I support the use of the vernacular in the Mass as well as the use of Latin. I am not a first-century pharisaic Jewish Christian who holds a grudge against the Gentiles for “getting off easy”. For the love of God, stop making this an attack on people’s character and please answer the issues, answer the questions, provide support for your allegations.

I see it here, the good guys vs. the bad guys. If you make it on the wrong list, look out! So much for unity!

Tell me, Joysong, how am I being a “bad guy”. Give examples. Be specific. Condemn me, please. If you’re going to make such allegations, stand behind them and defend yourself. I am serious about this: either provide proof or stop attacking character. Better yet: discuss the ISSUE.

In the same way that the Jews held for certain that the gentiles would be made to conform, expectations are similarly held that Pope Benedict is going to meet the desires of traditionists.

Why is this about traditionalists again? Is it possible the Pope could desire the use of Latin in the Ordinary Form for some other reason than to appease the traditionalists? Could it be that he thinks it is beneficial for the WHOLE Church, not just the people who prefer the older form of worship?

We’ll see what happens, and meanwhile remain in peace that there is a choice for those who prefer either form of mass.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT GETTING RID OF THE ORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS! God help me, this rhetoric is getting more and more frustrating by the hour. This thread is about the USE OF LATIN in the Ordinary Form! Not the abolishing of the Ordinary Form! PLEASE take your off-topic rhetoric to ANOTHER THREAD!

God is still sitting on His throne.

Is that code-language for “but none of this really matters, anyway”?

If this thread does not get BACK ON TOPIC soon, I’m just going to report it and ask to have it locked. This is just one frustration on top of another.

 

[nightwalker]

It is certainly starting to take root. It seems that the tradtionalist crowd is intent on forcing their brand of cafeteria Catholicism on the rest of us…as if the Church was a democracy to begin with

How is hoping that the Pope implements the Council cafeteria Catholicism?

 

[japhy]

It is certainly starting to take root. It seems that the tradtionalist crowd is intent on forcing their brand of cafeteria Catholicism on the rest of us…as if the Church was a democracy to begin with

DESCRIBE this “brand of cafeteria Catholicism”, please. Stop making comments without support, please. What is the “control” issue? Who is trying to control whom? Are the “traditionalists” trying to control the “others”? Are they trying to control the Pope? Please, make concrete statements and arguments so that we don’t need to be kept guessing. This ambiguity is killing me.

And the “democracy” comment is laughable. The folks who are after a democratic Church want women priests and homosexual priests and homosexual marriages and abortions and contraception, etc.

 

[TobyLue]

Beckers

I like how the Anglican Use mass does it.

I belong to an AU parish and I love it…Never have to worry about some shennigans going on. We have great organist and great choir. We also have the mass in Latin Sunday evenings; not the TLM though but still very lovely…

 

[estesbob]

Hey great…have the whole Mass in Latin…makes no nevermind to me. Latin isn’t more reverent or solemn…or better. I doubt God is looking down and thinking…“hmmmm the Latin Mass…they are good people…and oh, those ghastly english speaking masses…”

Vatican II was a breath of fresh air. I agree with others in that it should be followed correctly.

This isn’t about “parts” of Mass in Latin…this about total immersion into it. Don’t kid yourselves. It’s not about solemn, reverant worship…it’s about…dare I say… …CONTROL.

What we are see is mirror image of the arguments used by those who want the Church to change its teachings on abortion, homosexuality,female priest,contraception, etc. They make the exact same argument we seen from the capital TLM advocates. , only the solutions differ, that is that the Church is in crisis and the only way that we can save it is embrace their reforms. Those who support the TLM . however, agree the church is in crisis but claim the solution is merely to return to the TLM. In fact the Catholic Church is one of the few churches that has thus thus far remained steadfast against embracing elements of secular humanism. The Episcopal Church, for instance . has got itself an right fine mess and has using the same language in its services all along.

As I said before I do not care what language the Mass is said in. What I dismiss out of hand is the idea that it is crucial we return. to the LATIN Mass and/or that those who don’t see this are hurting the church.

 

[Joysong]

This is a very poor analogy. People who desire a reform of the Mass and a return to liturgical tradition aren’t even close to heretics who say that the Old Law is necessary for salvation.

The Jewish converts in the first century were NOT heretics, and for the record, I did NOT say they were, nor does the scripture I cited say a word about their being heretics. Clearly, you did not read the two chapters of Acts. These Jews did not believe that the Old Law was necessary for salvation. They wanted the new dispensation to continue with the myriads of rubrics they were used to, and which had little merit for the gentiles. The analogy is fitting for this topic, IMO. Some traditionists wear the same colors in wanting their customary traditions to be continued and oppose the new, sometimes vehemently, I would say. Too many old rubrics to discuss here, but any trip to the TC forum will disclose them.

What’s disappointing and frustrating about posts like yours is that they fail to make any kind of argument. Instead of telling us why you disaprove of Latin in the liturgy, or other traditional elements, you simply dismiss the ones proposing it as heretics, pharisees, or control freaks.

Never did I say I disapprove of latin. Would you like a list of my posts to check my words? I merely expressed the opinion that for ME, I prefer the vernacular, as latin is a hindrance to fully engage all three of my mental faculties. The only faculty that would be praying, is the will. The pundits then jumped all over my post and tried to convert me to “liking” latin, as if I was entirely wrong to hold this opinion.

It is not necessary to give an argument why I prefer what I prefer. It’s like saying why do I like red instead of blue - a personal opinion that does not at all consist of ‘hating’ red or denying others the right to enjoy ‘red.’ Get it?

Show me a single post where I labeled anyone a heretic, pharisee, or control freak. It is nonexistent.

 

[Dauphin]

What we are see is mirror image of the arguments used by those who want the Church to change its teachings on abortion, homosexuality,female priest,contraception, etc. They make the exact same argument we seen from the capital TLM advocates. , only the solutions differ, that is that the Church is in crisis and the only way that we can save it is embrace their reforms. Those who support the TLM . however, agree the church is in crisis but claim the solution is merely to return to the TLM. In fact the Catholic Church is one of the few churches that has thus thus far remained steadfast against embracing elements of secular humanism. The Episcopal Church, for instance . has got itself an right fine mess and has using the same language in its services all along.

The liturgy used by Anglicans was deliberately stripped of Catholic content. It is not a Catholic liturgy - there’s simply no comparison.

Nobody is making the argument you’re attacking. There’s simply nothing to respond to, since you’re attacking a strawman position.

Any Catholic should be able to acknowledge that the way we pray affects our faith, and that reverent liturgy leads to greater reverence toward God, especially in the Eucharist. Obviously, it’s not the entire solution. Clear instruction in the doctrines of the faith which have been undermined by modernism is essential also. However, good liturgy is central to a sound Catholic faith. Why do you find this so difficult to accept?

As I said before I do not care what language the Mass is said in. What I dismiss out of hand is the idea that it is crucial we return. to the LATIN Mass and/or that those who don’t see this are hurting the church.

If you think Latin is the principal issue, then you haven’t been paying attention.

 

[estesbob]

If you think Latin is the principal issue, then you haven’t been paying attention.

So we go back to the TridentineMass but it is said in English instead of Latin you have no problem with that?

 

[nightwalker]

Never did I say I disapprove of latin. Would you like a list of my posts to check my words?

No, you just disapprove of people promoting it.

 

[Dauphin]

So we go back to the TridentineMass but it is said in English instead of Latin you have no problem with that?

Are you kidding? That would be a dream come true. It’s not ideal - the use of Latin has many benefits, but it’s far better than what I have now.

 

[estesbob]

Are you kidding? That would be a dream come true. It’s not ideal - the use of Latin has many benefits, but it’s far better than what I have now.

Great. The only difference between you and I is I don’t think it matters.

 

[Brendan]

I merely expressed the opinion that for ME, I prefer the vernacular, as latin is a hindrance to fully engage all three of my mental faculties. The only faculty that would be praying, is the will. .

Are you claiming that your Intellect cannot be involved if the priest is praying the Eucharistic Prayer in Latin? How so. This is not a prayer that the faithful say. It is not even required that the faithful even hear it. The role of Intellect is to Adore and Ponder the Mysterys of God, why can you not do that if the priest is saying prayers in Latin?

How about the other faculty, Memory, do you forget how to pray if the priest is saying prayers in Latin? Do you forget who you are praying to, or what prayer is? Do you forget that you have experienced prayer in the past?

How exactly is your intellect and memory excluded from participation of the priest is saying prayers in Latin?