SOS To PCED

  • Thread starter Thread starter universalindult
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
U

universalindult

Guest
· · · — — — · · · SOS to PCED · · · — — — · · ·

The Gregorian Rite Blog
summorumpontificum.net
So, when can we anticipate the publication of the “clarification” from PCED on Summorum Pontificum?
Click to expand...
Priests are desperately waiting for this “clarification,” especially in those dioceses in which the “little tittle rules” set up by their local ordinary to undermine Summorum Pontificum have put a concrete stop to all efforts to establish a public celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass (i.e., Gregorian Rite Mass.)
Click to expand...
Recently, a courageous priest came forward and submitted himself to the “little tittle rules” set up by the local ordinary here, only to be told he had passed the rubrics/Mass part of the exam, but failed an intensive (punitive?) Latin exam.
Click to expand...
The local ordinary gloated at a recent presbyteral council meeting that the TLM is not being celebrated in this diocese – since no one has passed the exams.
Click to expand...
,
Click to expand...
Now it is apparent that some bishops are actively applying their “little tittle rules” – namely, intensive/punitive Latin exams that are impossible for average post-VII educated priests to pass – to put up a concrete barrier to any attempt by faithful local diocesan priests to start celebrating public Gregorian Rite Masses.
Click to expand...
Other local priests who know and yearn to offer Gregorian Rite Masses have told me they refuse to submit themselves to these "little tittle " exams that constitute such an obvious violation of the spirit and letter of Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum. They are desperately waiting for the publication of the “clarification” from PCED on Summorum Pontificum, assuming that these punitive “little tittle rules” and exams will be overturned by sensible universal rules regarding the application of Summorum Pontificum.
Click to expand...
They are heartened by the words of Archbishop Ranjith and Cardinal Hoyos that seem to indicate that these local punitive rules will be made moot by the publication of the “clarification” from PCED on Summorum Pontificum.
Click to expand...
But they are not going to stick their necks out over mere words. There must be a concrete document that gives them protection from these “little tittle rules” before they can implement Summorum Pontificum in their own parishes.
Click to expand...
We’ve had “clarifications” that the new lectionary can be imposed upon the Gregorian Rite Mass and that the readings can be done in the vernacular, that the Novus Ordo observance of Holy Days of Obligation can be imposed on the old calendar, we’ve heard opinions that the discipline of kneeling to receive Holy Communion on the tongue cannot be enforced in celebrations of the Gregorian Rite Mass, and we’ve had the whole “Good Friday Prayer” fiasco.
Click to expand...
So, why is the anticipated PCED clarification of Summorum Pontificum being delayed so long, while the enforcement of these “little tittle rules” becomes more entrenched?
…
Click to expand...
 
ethelzguy said:
So, it is “inappropriate” to test priests to verify their knowledge of Latin prior to turning them loose with a TLM?

Especially in light of all the nit-picking done by those who prefer the TLM?
Click to expand...
No kidding…I’m sure that pre-Vatican II priests had more than just a cursory knowledge of latin. Why is it acceptable to think that a priest who offers the TLM today should only know “enough” latin to get him through?

Oh yeah, I forgot that there’s no such thing as a liturgical abuse in the TLM.
 
ethelzguy said:
So, it is “inappropriate” to test priests to verify their knowledge of Latin prior to turning them loose with a TLM?

Especially in light of all the nit-picking done by those who prefer the TLM?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. If a priest has received faculties from his bishop to celebrate the Roman Rite, that applies equally to both forms of the Rite, the OF and the EF. Cardinal Hoyos has already stated repeatedly that no permission from a bishop or Rome is necessary now. That means no “Latin tests.” Because such tests explicitly deny the fact that no permission need be asked or obtained from the diocese or its bishop.

Furthermore, how many post-VII educated priests have a detailed and working knowledge of Latin? Very few.

Which is very convenient for those who would like to undermine Summorum Pontificum. Fortunately, our Pope knows this, and therefore does not require any such detailed and working knowledge of Latin.

As Cardinal Egan has stated,*** “Priests who choose to celebrate Mass in the “extraordinary” form must have a sufficient knowledge of the Latin language to pronounce the words correctly**.”*

To which Fr. Z. noted, "Excellent. The priest does not have to be an expert Latinist. He must have sufficient knowledge to pronounce the words. That is what* idoneus** is all about: it is minimum qualification, not expertise."*
 
Timothysis said:
Why is it acceptable to think that a priest who offers the TLM today should only know “enough” latin to get him through?
Click to expand...
Because that’s what the Pope said, and that should be good enough for faithful, obedient Catholics. See my post above.
 
ethelzguy said:
So, it is “inappropriate” to test priests to verify their knowledge of Latin prior to turning them loose with a TLM?

Especially in light of all the nit-picking done by those who prefer the TLM?
Click to expand...
Then why is it not inappropriate to test priests to verify their knowledge of English, prior to turning them loose with a NO? Our Bishop has this rule about Latin and the EF, but he has no such rule about English or Spanish. There was a Vietnamese Priest right up the road who seemed almost completely ignorant of English and he offered Mass regularly. There he was every week stumbling, mumbling and stuttering his way through a supposedly English Mass, though I couldn’t pick one word out of ten myself.

I suppose there is a good reason for this though since there are no Latin Masses offered around here at all. There are hundreds of English Masses though, and that is what all the Catholics rely on here for their spiritual sustenance, and so why should any standard be applied there. What would be the point? Why should the priest know any English to say Mass in that language, and why should I be able to understand what he is saying? That would just be plain silly.
 
Just as the SSPX clergy are labeled “schismatic” , so should these bishops. Disobedience is disobedience.

Double standards and “about faces” are the whole problem. This is where the division is enabled.

A bishop should indeed be concerned if a priest is stumbling through the Liturgy, I agree. At the same time, what about the reading comprehension of the bishops regarding plain english ? Pro multis translates correctly to “for many”. What is the deal with the continued use of “for all” ?

The Pauline Mass has been revised over and over. It is being revised as we write. Perhaps these disobedient bishops should focus on BXVI’s praiseworthy efforts to get the OF right, and leave the EF to those who cherish it.

While they are at it, perhaps they should consider the words of Cardinal McIntyre.
“In recent times, even in materialist North America, the growth of the Church was magnificent with the liturgy being kept in Latin. The attempts of the Protestants have failed, and Protestantism uses the vernacular. We ask again: Why the change, especially since changes in this matter involve many difficulties and great dangers? All of us here at the Council can recall the fundamental changes in the meaning of words in common use. Thus it follows that if the Sacred Liturgy were in the vernacular, the immutability of doctrine would be endangered.
The introduction of the vernacular should be separated from the action of the Mass. The Mass must remain as it is. Grave changes in the liturgy introduce grave changes in dogmata.”
-James Cardinal McIntyre addressing the Second Vatican Council.
Click to expand...
Just because the EF was suppressed wrongly for many years, does not justify it’s continued suppression. The truth is, the EF IS the ordinary Liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church. (thank you Cassius Longinus). We are seeing the fruits of BXVI’s SP, and will continue to see them.

The cry of the anti traditionalists has always been, “how dare one defy a pope”. Perhaps today’s disobedient bishops should be asked, “how dare you ignore your pope ?”.

Sorry folks, double standards don’t cut it.
 
cothrige said:
Then why is it not inappropriate to test priests to verify their knowledge of English, prior to turning them loose with a NO? Our Bishop has this rule about Latin and the EF, but he has no such rule about English or Spanish. There was a Vietnamese Priest right up the road who seemed almost completely ignorant of English and he offered Mass regularly. There he was every week stumbling, mumbling and stuttering his way through a supposedly English Mass, though I couldn’t pick one word out of ten myself.

I suppose there is a good reason for this though since there are no Latin Masses offered around here at all. There are hundreds of English Masses though, and that is what all the Catholics rely on here for their spiritual sustenance, and so why should any standard be applied there. What would be the point? Why should the priest know any English to say Mass in that language, and why should I be able to understand what he is saying? That would just be plain silly.
Click to expand...
Good point.
 
universalindult said:
Because that’s what the Pope said, and that should be good enough for faithful, obedient Catholics. See my post above.
Click to expand...
So you are telling me that when the priest says “Agnes dei qui tollis peca ta mundi” it doesn’t matter that he actually knows what he’s saying, just as long as he pronounces it correctly?

I can say “E Pluribus Unum” and basically know what it means. Would you say that I can speak latin?
 
I_Believe said:
Pro multis translates correctly to “for many”. What is the deal with the continued use of “for all” ?
Click to expand...
The Vatican issued a statement in the early '70s saying that “for all” is an “acceptable” rendering of “pro multis” when seen in the light that Christ’s sacrifice was made “for all” the world, but efficacious only “for many.” Since the theology behind it is consistent with Church tradition there is no contradiction. Yes, Pope Benedict has ordered the new missal use the “for many” translation, because it keeps more in line with traditional ecclesiastical linguistics.
 
Timothysis said:
So you are telling me that when the priest says “Agnes dei qui tollis peca ta mundi” it doesn’t matter that he actually knows what he’s saying, just as long as he pronounces it correctly?

I can say “E Pluribus Unum” and basically know what it means. Would you say that I can speak latin?
Click to expand...
Actually it’s: Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi :cool:
 
Timothysis said:
So you are telling me that when the priest says “Agnes dei qui tollis peca ta mundi” it doesn’t matter that he actually knows what he’s saying, just as long as he pronounces it correctly?

I can say “E Pluribus Unum” and basically know what it means. Would you say that I can speak latin?
Click to expand...
Why would a priest not know what he’s saying ?

How many times must one hear Oremus to learn it means Let us pray ?

Do you think priests are stupid ? Why can a priest not read the english translation of an introit before mass and not know what he’s praying in latin during Mass ?

A priest not need to be able to hold a conversation on mundane matters to qualify him to pray the Mass in latin. We are talking ecclessiastical latin here, not classical latin.

These disobedient bishops are using the inability to speak classical latin as an excuse to suppress the EF, against BXVI’s wishes. It’s blatantly obvious.
 
I_Believe said:
Why would a priest not know what he’s saying ?

Do you think priests are stupid ? Why can a priest not read the english translation of an introit before mass and not know what he’s praying in latin during Mass ?

A priest not need to be able to hold a conversation on mundane matters to qualify him to pray the Mass in latin. We are talking ecclessiastical latin here, not classical latin.
Click to expand...
There is more to speaking a language than just pronouncing the individual words. Try speaking english without conjugating your verbs and see what you sound like.

It is a strange idea that a priest should read an english translation of the introit before mass so he’ll know what he’s saying when the latin comes around. It seems very novel to me.
 
Timothysis said:
There is more to speaking a language than just pronouncing the individual words. Try speaking english without conjugating your verbs and see what you sound like.

It is a strange idea that a priest should read an english translation of the introit before mass so he’ll know what he’s saying when the latin comes around. ** It seems very novel to me.**
Click to expand...
There you go then, Novelty is right up your alley aint it. 😛
 
Timothysis said:
What difference does it make if I pronounce it correctly!😉
Click to expand...
We could always ponder the scandal of the Middle Ages, when priests were found to be mumbling the Mass, because lack of literacy prevented them from actually knowing the words…
 
ethelzguy said:
We could always ponder the scandal of the Middle Ages, when priests were found to be mumbling the Mass, because lack of literacy prevented them from actually knowing the words…
Click to expand...
There are many things from the middle ages that could be pulled up as well that would suit a variety of opinions… The scandal of reception in hand for one:)
 
I suppose what drives this argument is what the Latin test is like.

I agree that priests should be able to prove they can say the words of the Mass in Latin. They should know already what most of it means, becuase its all in the same order as the English NO. There are some added prayers, but not many.

However, what it sounds like is that they have to prove they are fluent(write an essay or something similar?) that isnt needed. Becuase they dont need to be able to make anything up in Latin, its all written down. I can read Spanish just fine, and through context, understand pretty much anything, even if I only actually know 1 or 2 words out of 10, using context, cognates, and related roots. But I dont consider myself fluent, I couldnt make an impromptu speech in Spanish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top