Progressive Philippines Catholicism

[Ockham]

End of debate.

Really? I’ll tell you a secret: you can end a debate here anytime simply by not posting.

My point in this thread has never been Latin vs Venacular - that’s someone else’s tangent. However, keep in mind the Pope and several Archbishops (including this one) are trying to get some Latin back in the OF. As I asked earlier, I believe the Novus Ordo was originally designed to be all Latin.

In the OP I provided two links: one from the Archbishop of Manilla in 2009 and the other from a recent liturgists conference. The liturgists are promoting things like no Latin in the OF and altar girls. The Archbishop is against altar girls. Later I provided a link to a letter by the Archbishop of Ozamis who makes it clear the ‘spirit of V2’ liturgists destroyed the original intentions of the OF.

The liturgists are calling for a “Filipino liturgy”. Archbishop of Ozamis is clearly opposed to that idea. That’s the topic of this thread.

At least you have addressed the Archbishop’s letter. It would be interesting to see a rebuttal from you and Constantine.

 

[Hesychios]

Perhaps they are aiming for something akin to the Eastern Catholics?

I doubt that.

They are just being modern Catholics.

 

[malphono]

Despite Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict himself has only celebrated the ordinary form of the Mass in public, “facing the people” in the manner of the Novus Ordo

And all the while using his signature “Benedictine altar arrangement” which is quite a far cry from the usual.

using modern languages, all as stipulated in the Liturgical Books of the different countries where he celebrated.

If the recent ceremonies in the UK are any indication, that seems to be morphing into something a bit different, doesn’t it?

 

[mardukm]

Latin is now a sacred language. It’s set aside for religious use. One rarely hears it in day-to-day life. Thus, it’s perfect for transmission of our worship. It can’t accrue vulgar meanings. It’s musical and simple to learn. It has the history.

You must be an expert in Latin, because it is plainly one of the hardest languages to learn. But I can imagine it would only be “easy” if you are talking about the rote memorization of responsorials and hymns. I don’t know why you can’t comprehend that people want to understand what they are hearing and saying.

I can’t wait 1500 years for the local lingo to go likewise. Dropping Latin is very short-sighted.

Refusing a country of Catholics the right to celebrate in their own language would be viewed by many in the same light.

Blessings

 

[Hesychios]

Dropping Latin is very short-sighted.

That is probably true. Latin certainly has value.

Latin is now a sacred language. It’s set aside for religious use.

Latin was not ‘set aside for religious use’. The process was more like most people abandoned it for daily use. In fact it was not a conscious or planned thing, it just happened.

The church retained it for the same reasons the legal and scientific continued to use it. We don’t say it was ‘set aside for scientific use’ because it was not. We don’t say it was ‘set aside for legal use’ because it was not. This is organic development. The common people developed new forms of expression for everyday speech and the scholarly community retained an older written form.

 

[Layman]

Two things.

• Sure, it wasn’t specifically set aside for religious use. But that’s what’s happened.
• I did a bit of Latin in school, where I was told it was simpler than many other languages. Also, French, Spanish, Italian have a Latin root. English contains a percentage of Latin. So that covers quite a bit of the world. It’s a truly internatinal language also as it was/is the language of scholars.

So you have a simple, musical language, with beautiful prayers, in a Mass that evolved naturally and expressed our faith well, dropped for something made by a committee in the 1960’s.

The only reason given is that the laity must understand everything said and sung. When in truth, given what a Mass is and what it is for, they don’t.

 

[ProVobis]

The church retained it for the same reasons the legal and scientific continued to use it. We don’t say it was ‘set aside for scientific use’ because it was not. We don’t say it was ‘set aside for legal use’ because it was not. This is organic development. The common people developed new forms of expression for everyday speech and the scholarly community retained an older written form.

Fair point. You could probably say the same about the Greek alphabet as well.

α β γ δ ε ζ η θ ι κ λ μ ν ξ ο π ρ σς τ υ φ χ ψ ω

You could imagine the outcry from mathematicians, physicists, and college fraternities all over the world if they decided to scrap this alphabet, which has been used universally. Yet they want to scrap Latin which has been the basis of international law, science, and our Western civilization since the early centuries without a fight?

 

[ProVobis]

English contains a percentage of Latin.

Well over 50%. English, of Germanic descent, was not able to convey the same understanding as those of more Latin origins (Such as the Romance languages) so it had to borrow (and still is borrowing) from the Latin. A good example of this is in the newer translation of *consubstantialem Patri *where it was simply just left as “consubstantial.” If they want to scrap Latin, they might as well scrap 50% of the English vocabulary.

 

[malphono]

In the OP I provided two links: one from the Archbishop of Manilla in 2009 and the other from a recent liturgists conference. The liturgists are promoting things like no Latin in the OF and altar girls. The Archbishop is against altar girls. Later I provided a link to a letter by the Archbishop of Ozamis who makes it clear the ‘spirit of V2’ liturgists destroyed the original intentions of the OF.

The liturgists are calling for a “Filipino liturgy”. Archbishop of Ozamis is clearly opposed to that idea. That’s the topic of this thread.

Yes, indeed, it’s all true, but apparently a waste of time (both yours and the bishops) since it doesn’t seem to sink in. How could the bishops even think to contradict the so-called “liturgists” by having the chutzpah to so much as suggest that it would be preferable not to have female altar servers? Or to include at least some Latin in the OF? Horrors! Fie! Naughty bishops! How dare they not rubber-stamp the so-called liturgists?

 

[Ockham]

True. These modern liturgists seem to think they are ‘up against a brick wall’ which in reality is 2000 years of tradition from Jesus Christ as enforced by his legal representative on Earth.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Don’t understand you here. Like traditionalists are to blame for there being all this progressive thinking in megachurches and now in the Filipino Catholic Church for the past 50 years?

I did not say that. I’m just saying you guys are being alarmed by the terminologies used. Truth is, while Filipinos are English speakers, the deeper meaning and context of words can be subtly different. One great example is swearing. If you hear a Filipino in the Philippines (one in North America may have a different appreciation) speaking in profanity in English, its not to be taken as serious as if he was cursing out in Filipino. While we understand what the words mean, it carries a different weight to us than if an American would have spoken those words.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Who told you this? Sounds like another progressive party line. Frankly, I doubt it. Latin had become already vulgarized into Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, etc. Saying Latin was common would probably be more accurate. Maybe the Latin Mass was a way of saving Latin in the Western Rite back then too?

This was already at the time the Tridentine Mass was established. Wasn’t Latin used from the time the Church was established in Rome, or shortly after that?

 

[ProVobis]

True. These modern liturgists seem to think they are ‘up against a brick wall’ which in reality is 2000 years of tradition from Jesus Christ as enforced by his legal representative on Earth.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[Ockham]

I did not say that. I’m just saying you guys are being alarmed by the terminologies used. Truth is, while Filipinos are English speakers, the deeper meaning and context of words can be subtly different. One great example is swearing. If you hear a Filipino in the Philippines (one in North America may have a different appreciation) speaking in profanity in English, its not to be taken as serious as if he was cursing out in Filipino. While we understand what the words mean, it carries a different weight to us than if an American would have spoken those words.

Instead of going off on tangents such as the difference in English versus Filipino cursing, how about offering your counter argument to the Archbishop’s letter?

 

[Ockham]

As my offer for a counter argument to the Archbishop has not been taken here is a letter by one of the leading progressive Filipino liturgists, Rev. Anscar Chupungco.

praytellblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Anscar-J.-Chupungco-Talk2.pdf

*"Springtime fittingly describes the liturgical renewal before, during, and the twenty or
so years after Vatican II. Firmly grounded on historical research, theological
investigation, and pastoral consciousness, the framers of the postconciliar liturgy set out
to implement the decisions of the Council. Across the globe local churches experienced
the flowering of liturgical worship. The noble simplicity of the revised rites and the use
of the vernacular helped immensely to promote full, intelligent, active participation,
which the Council had declared as the primary aim of the liturgical reform.

But even before we could, with satisfaction, gather the flowers and harvest the fruits
of summer, a cold wind has begun to blow on the face of the postconciliar reform. The
autumn leaves are starting to fall. No less than the papal master of ceremonies, Msgr.
Guido Marini, announced on January 6, 2010 that there is need for a new reform of the
liturgy. He intimated that the postconciliar experts did not grasp fully the meaning and
intention of the liturgy constitution, which they had drafted and presented to the council
fathers. He claimed that as a result, the postconciliar reform has “not always in its
practical implementation found a timely and happy fulfilment.”

What are the possible implications of a reform of the postconciliar reform? What
remedy does it offer for a reform that according to some Catholics has gone bad? What
agenda does it put forward so that liturgical worship could be more reverent and
prayerful?

The agenda is, to all appearance, an attempt to put the clock back half a century. It
seems to conveniently forget that since Vatican II, the Church has been marching with
the times, acknowledging the changes in social and religious culture, and adopting new
pastoral strategies. Will Latinised English make the liturgy more awesome? It will
certainly sound mysterious, but will it be more prayerful? Will the silent recitation of the
Eucharistic Prayer, preferably in Latin, evoke more vividly the Last Supper of Jesus? Is
receiving Holy Communion on one’s knees and on the tongue more reverent than
receiving it standing and in the hand? Will the priestly role of mediation be reinforced by
praying at the altar with the back to the assembly?"*

 

[malphono]

As my offer for a counter argument to the Archbishop has not been taken here is a letter by one of the leading progressive Filipino liturgists, Rev. Anscar Chupungco.

praytellblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Anscar-J.-Chupungco-Talk2.pdf

My, my … well, at least the lay so-called “liturgists” are not alone.

 

[ProVobis]

"…The agenda is, to all appearance, an attempt to put the clock back half a century.

The agenda? And progressives don’t have an agenda?

 

[ConstantineTG]

The agenda? And progressives don’t have an agenda?

Everyone has an agenda.

 

[ConstantineTG]

My, my … well, at least the lay so-called “liturgists” are not alone.

I wonder what’s so overtly bad about the statement? He never really said anything about how a reform would be made. All he objected to is Latin. There has been virtually no Latin in the Philippines the past 40 years at least. Granted there are places where the EF is celebrated, but if you compare it to the number of other parishes that celebrate the OF at least 5 times every Sunday, its safe to say that 99% of Mass is in the vernacular (English, Filipino or a local dialect).

 

[Ockham]

I wonder what’s so overtly bad about the statement? He never really said anything about how a reform would be made. All he objected to is Latin. There has been virtually no Latin in the Philippines the past 40 years at least. Granted there are places where the EF is celebrated, but if you compare it to the number of other parishes that celebrate the OF at least 5 times every Sunday, its safe to say that 99% of Mass is in the vernacular (English, Filipino or a local dialect).

No, that’s incorrect. He said more than just ‘no Latin’. He is a chief architect of the “Filipino Liturgy” and advocates continual changes to keep up with modern times. Could it be he is one of the ‘liturgical terrorists’ the Archbishop was referring to?