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

[Dauphin]

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.

It’s very clear that you haven’t read Acts 15. It’s also pretty disturbing that you’d misuse scripture in this way.

Acts 15:1 clearly says: “Then some men came down from Judea and taught the brothers, ‘Unless you have yourself circumcised in the tradition of Moses you cannot be saved’”

That’s a heresy, because it claims salvation is impossible without adherence to the old law. This is a denial of the Church’s teaching on a matter of faith and morals. This isn’t a liturgical matter at all. It concerns the mosaic law, not rubrics of the liturgy.

The analogy is fitting for this topic, IMO.

No, it clearly isn’t, since the scripture you quoted has absolutely nothing to do with liturgy.

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.

I grew up in the liturgical wasteland brought on by the reforms, and I know that the Church had a responsibility to give me something better. The traditions of the Church are something that must be passed on - the proper inheritance of every Catholic. The endless parade of novelty has to end and a return to time-tested liturgical tradition is desperately needed - because we know it works.

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.

This isn’t a matter of preference. It’s about the objective benefits of Latin.

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

Your post just before this one compared traditionalists to pharisees and heretics who said that the Old Law is necessary for salvation.

 

[Joysong]

I see the wagons are still circling, and the list of targets is now drawn up with names: Julianna, Joysong, and Ethelzguy.

Yes, Japhy, please do use your power and close the thread.

 

[japhy]

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.

Could you explain why you could never be able to pray with “all three of [your] mental faculties” in Latin? Can you explain how saying Et cum spiritu tuo is inferior (for you) to saying “And with your spirit” (or “And also with you”, as the current translation renders it)? Is saying Kyrie, eleison inferior (for you) to saying “Lord, have mercy”? Can you simply not get your heart into it? Please explain the obstacles.

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

Perhaps you did not label, but you applied an analogy (1st century Pharisaic Jewish Christians vs. Gentile Christians) to the current situation of “good guys” and “bad guys”.

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.

…

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!

Doesn’t this imply that the “good guys” here (in this thread, perhaps) are the persecuted Gentiles (representing, for example, you, Julianna, ethelzguy, Jim-OCDS, etc.) and the “bad guys” here are the jealous and domineering Jewish Pharisees (representing, I guess, me, benedictgal, Dauphin, etc.).

I think this issue needs to be ironed out. I don’t think ANYONE on this thread is against the use of the vernacular in the Mass. Vatican II promoted it. However, there DO appear to be some people who are against the use of Latin in the Mass (at least, a Mass they’d be attending), despite the fact that Vatican II promoted that as well. No one here is arguing for a mandatory all-Latin Ordinary Form of the Mass. The topic at hand is the restoration of some Latin to the Mass.

 

[japhy]

I see the wagons are still circling, and the list of targets is now drawn up with names: Julianna, Joysong, and Ethelzguy.

Stop making yourself out to be a victim here.

Yes, Japhy, please do use your power and close the thread.

(Don’t you mean “exercise your control”?) No, I’d rather bring it back on topic.

So, who would like to discuss the possibility of restoring SOME Latin to the Ordinary Form of the Mass, such as during the Eucharistic Prayer (as the rumored commission might investigate)?

What are the pros? What are the cons? How would the Church best catechize the faithful to this potential change? What are some obstacles? How would we overcome them?

(P.S. Who wants to ban and reprobate all vernacular from the Mass for all time, under penalty of death, since that’s really the topic here?)

 

[Joysong]

Dauphin, please read my post again, this time with glasses on.

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.

I was referring to the general attitude of the Pharisees who in Acts 15:5 said “they must be circumcised and also told to observe the Law of Moses” – that is, the myriads of rubrics I referred to above. It was not necessary for the gentiles, and they were dispensed from observance in the Council’s decision. Seems like a jealous indignation on their part that they wanted all men to live strictly like themselves.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Wow-what a thread!

I’m one of those rare Catholics who can find beauty in BOTH the OF and the EF forms of the Mass.

I started attending the EF out of pure curiosity, it was the Mass that my great grandmother and great aunt attended. They were role models to me in Catholicism and I really wanted to know how they worshipped. From the first time I went, I had ZERO problem knowing what was going on. There were missals available should I wish to read along, but I have to admit that the first few weeks I merely prayed along-kind of attaching my prayers to those of the Priest. The readings were done in English, and the simple responses the people made such as “Gloria Tibi Domine” weren’t really a mystery. After a couple of weeks, I had learned the Our Father, the Sanctus and the Lamb of God. I wasn’t really trying, it just sort of happened by osmosis-just like I learned the responses in the OF as a kid.

I don’t understand why people are so afraid of even a small amount of Latin slipping into the OF.

 

[ethelzguy]

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?

Reading the commentary of the traditionalist crowd, I feel like I’m working behind the counter at Luby’s…

"I want :

Mass in this language
With the Priest facting that way
Reciving Communion this way
While singing songs played with that organ
With altar servers of this gender…"

Yes, I have come to believe that it is about control. The traditionalist crowd wants everything THEIR way, and are more than happy to hang about like a pack of panting dogs clamoring for the Pope to deliver it to them…with no reservations about cramming it down the throats of everyone else because THEY are “right” after all.

It never ceases to amaze me, how the traditionalist crowd has no qualms whatsover about church shopping for one that suits their tastes…because they have a “right” to…but the very reason they DO shop, is because the clergy is exercising the latitudes that THEY have the “right” to…Like facing the congregation, using the vernacular, female altar servers, communion in the hand, and guitar accompaniment, singing songs out of the Gather hymnal.

Yes, it is about control. The thing is, the control lies with Rome and works its way down. The authority doesn’t boil up from the congregation. People of Faith and Humility know this.

What should be boiling up from the congregation is prayer.

 

[ethelzguy]

Wow-what a thread!

I’m one of those rare Catholics who can find beauty in BOTH the OF and the EF forms of the Mass.

I started attending the EF out of pure curiosity, it was the Mass that my great grandmother and great aunt attended. They were role models to me in Catholicism and I really wanted to know how they worshipped. From the first time I went, I had ZERO problem knowing what was going on. There were missals available should I wish to read along, but I have to admit that the first few weeks I merely prayed along-kind of attaching my prayers to those of the Priest. The readings were done in English, and the simple responses the people made such as “Gloria Tibi Domine” weren’t really a mystery. After a couple of weeks, I had learned the Our Father, the Sanctus and the Lamb of God. I wasn’t really trying, it just sort of happened by osmosis-just like I learned the responses in the OF as a kid.

I don’t understand why people are so afraid of even a small amount of Latin slipping into the OF.

We already have a good bit of Latin in our parish Masses now. And I ain’t skeered…

 

[Joysong]

Doesn’t this imply that the “good guys” here (in this thread, perhaps) are the persecuted Gentiles (representing, for example, you, Julianna, ethelzguy, Jim-OCDS, etc.) and the “bad guys” here are the jealous and domineering Jewish Pharisees (representing, I guess, me, benedictgal, Dauphin, etc.).

Not at all in the slightest. The ‘bad guys’ are the four of us on the black list who have been subject to continual disrespect for nonconformity to the pevailing belief system of the ‘good guys.’

Stop making myself a victim? Then stop victimizing.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.