Tridentine in english ?

[AJV]

Hmmmm…I’m not sure of a book that will tell you “Luther was one of the last to use the vernacular” but if you look at the history time line you will see that verncular texts were prepared before him by Bucer, Kantz, Wissenburger, etc. In fact he criticised initally Munzter (and there was no love lost between them judging by the phrases the used to describe each other) use of the vernacular as hasty, etc. And his Greek, Hebrew, Latin comments are found in the Deutsche Messe. The psalms (and sometimes readings) at his Matins are to be in Latin.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Hmmmm…I’m not sure of a book that will tell you “Luther was one of the last to use the vernacular” but if you look at the history time line you will see that verncular texts were prepared before him by Bucer, Kantz, Wissenburger, etc. In fact he criticised initally Munzter (and there was no love lost between them juding by the phrases the used to describe each other) use of the vernacular as hasty, etc. And his Greek, Hebrew, Latin comments are found in the Deutsche Messe. The psalms (and sometimes readings) at his Matins are to be in Latin.

Thank you, AJV!

 

[St_Isidore]

Maybe one of the reasons why it was even brought up at Trent was that every one of Martin Luther’s tenets was to be addressed. Martin Luther, of course, was a big champion of the vernacularists.

I don’t know how much Latin other than the Mass that they had at the time, but except for the Mass itself, almost everything else, homily, prayers after Low Mass, confession, Church bulletins, etc., IS done in the vernacular today, so I don’t know what the big deal is. Perhaps Vatican II wanted to extend the vernacular to the readings but certainly not the entire Mass. Maybe it seems overwhelming today, but there were a lot of people back in the preVatican II who memorized quite a lot of the Mass prayers, if not the entire Mass. Not a bad idea, since the Latin, unlike vernacular, never changes.

Very good points. I think it is mostly North America that has problems learning prayers in another language, let alone one language that is rooted somewhat from the other. Most countries in South America, Africa, Europe and Asia (most of the worlds populace), learn more than one language (not just prayers). So I do not know know what the big deal is either.

Having said that, will it be long before the Blackberry vernacular Mass starts? 5 minutes and you’re done.

I hope this does not occur but from what I have seen and heard, the younger just do not want to attend mass or even care to hear about it. At Novus Ordo ritual they lack care, concern, or attention. Most go for reasons not pertaining to participation in the Eucharist. This does not occur in our TLM which is growing steadily. So the ENGLISH TRIDENTINE is of no consequence.

 

[St_Isidore]

That doesn’t make the venacular protestant or Lutheran or wrong. It’s a morally neutral question, depending on WHY it’s sought.

It also does not make the vernacular (not) protestant, or not Luther, or right. Especially since you and AJV are using Luther as support.

The advantage of the Tridentine in Latin is obvious, a standard mass (the TLM) in Latin, allows anybody to participate in a mass anywhere in the world at any time . If you look at the small picture the vernacular is only good as the confines to which it extends geographically. Latin was the standard before the Novus Ordo ritual was introduced and it is now at the TLM masses around the world. The modernists fail to admit that there is no standard like the TLM in Latin. In addition, other world religions have a standard language and not the vernacular. The reason being just as I have mentioned above, that one can participate in any service/ritual anywhere in the world (e.g. Islam).

 

[AJV]

It also does not make the vernacular (not) protestant, or not Luther, or right. Especially since you and AJV are using Luther as support.

The advantage of the Tridentine in Latin is obvious, a standard mass (the TLM) in Latin, allows anybody to participate in a mass anywhere in the world at any time . If you look at the small picture the vernacular is only good as the confines to which it extends geographically. Latin was the standard before the Novus Ordo ritual was introduced and it is now at the TLM masses around the world. The modernists fail to admit that there is no standard like the TLM in Latin. In addition, other world religions have a standard language and not the vernacular. The reason being just as I have mentioned above, that one can participate in any service/ritual anywhere in the world (e.g. Islam).

Excuse me?..where did I use Luther as a support?

I know you might not have much time, but please read my posts a little slower. I was pointing out that Luther was not the first Protestant to use the vernacular, nor such an enthusiastic vernacular advocate, nor was the vernacular discussed at Trent as result of him, but due to the insistence of the French and German delegates to the Council. Unfortunately, he gets tagged with everything. Nowhere have I said we should use the vernacular because Luther did.

Why should we care about, or determine our standards by, what the pagans use, whether they have a sacred language or not?

I hope this does not occur but from what I have seen and heard, the younger just do not want to attend mass or even care to hear about it. At Novus Ordo ritual they lack care, concern, or attention. Most go for reasons not pertaining to participation in the Eucharist. This does not occur in our TLM which is growing steadily. So the ENGLISH TRIDENTINE is of no consequence.

Blanket and unwarranted.

 

[AJV]

I hope this does not occur but from what I have seen and heard, the younger just do not want to attend mass or even care to hear about it. At Novus Ordo ritual they lack care, concern, or attention. Most go for reasons not pertaining to participation in the Eucharist. This does not occur in our TLM which is growing steadily. So the ENGLISH TRIDENTINE is of no consequence.

Blanket and unwarranted.

 

[AJV]

It also does not make the vernacular (not) protestant, or not Luther, or right. Especially since you and AJV are using Luther as support.

Excuse me?..where did I use Luther as a support?

I know you might not have much time, but please read my posts a little slower, pedantic as they are . I was pointing out that Luther was not the first Protestant to use the vernacular, nor such an enthusiastic vernacular advocate, nor was the vernacular discussed at Trent as result of him, but due to the insistence of the French and German delegates to the Council. Unfortunately, he gets tagged with everything. Nowhere have I said we should use the vernacular because Luther did.

Speaking of Trent: you know if I really wanted to be legalistic, the final draft of the canon of Trent doesn’t say anything directly about using Latin. It only says “not seemed expedient…celebrated in the vulgar tongue”. I could go to a Mass in Sanskrit or German which don’t happent to be the vulgar tongue here, or my vulgar tongue, and be in compelete conformity, no? .

The advantage of the Tridentine in Latin is obvious, a standard mass (the TLM) in Latin, allows anybody to participate in a mass anywhere in the world at any time . If you look at the small picture the vernacular is only good as the confines to which it extends geographically. Latin was the standard before the Novus Ordo ritual was introduced and it is now at the TLM masses around the world. The modernists fail to admit that there is no standard like the TLM in Latin. In addition, other world religions have a standard language and not the vernacular. The reason being just as I have mentioned above, that one can participate in any service/ritual anywhere in the world (e.g. Islam)

Why should we care about, or determine our standards by, what the pagans use, whether they have a sacred language or not?

I hope this does not occur but from what I have seen and heard, the younger just do not want to attend mass or even care to hear about it. At Novus Ordo ritual they lack care, concern, or attention. Most go for reasons not pertaining to participation in the Eucharist. This does not occur in our TLM which is growing steadily. So the ENGLISH TRIDENTINE is of no consequence.

Blanket and unwarranted.

 

[BobP123]

Speaking of Trent: you know if I really wanted to be legalistic, the final draft of the canon of Trent doesn’t say anything directly about using Latin. It only says “not seemed expedient…celebrated in the vulgar tongue”. I could go to a Mass in Sanskrit or German which don’t happent to be the vulgar tongue here, or my vulgar tongue, and be in compelete conformity, no?

Trent doesn’t mention Latin per se (maybe because there were rites other than in Latin?). However, Vatican II specifically mentions Latin.

As far as “in complete conformity” goes, only for rites that existed prior to 1370 AD as later defined by Pius V. Anything later was considered a “new” rite per Session 7 Canon XIII, unless you find a reliable (preferably pre-Vatican II) source to the contrary.

Why should we care about, or determine our standards by, what the pagans use, whether they have a sacred language or not?

We’re only talking about the reverent ones.

 

[St_Isidore]

Excuse me?..where did I use Luther as a support?

I know you might not have much time, but please read my posts a little slower, pedantic as they are.

I must say, I really enjoyed your sense of humor with the pedant and all.
You are correct I do not have much time (vocation allots little), but since you do you may want to read (not in the sense of velocity but ) with circumspect .

I was pointing out that Luther was not the first Protestant to use the vernacular, nor such an enthusiastic vernacular advocate, nor was the vernacular discussed at Trent as result of him, but due to the insistence of the French and German delegates to the Council. Unfortunately, he gets tagged with everything. Nowhere have I said we should use the vernacular because Luther did.

Luther Luther Luther I have no care of Luther. What is it about Luther that compels the Modernist movement to innumerably mention him ?:hypno:

Speaking of Trent: you know if I really wanted to be legalistic, the final draft of the canon of Trent doesn’t say anything directly about using Latin. It only says “not seemed expedient…celebrated in the vulgar tongue”. I could go to a Mass in Sanskrit or German which don’t happent to be the vulgar tongue here, or my vulgar tongue, and be in compelete conformity, no? .

um no?

Why should we care about, or determine our standards by, what the pagans use, whether they have a sacred language or not?

It is a shame that the Holy Pontiff cares very much about the pagans and what they use and you do not. Please review his published books and the Vatican website, they are inundated with this grandiloquent language.

Examples include but are definitely not limited to:

(1)Benedict XVI, Homily, Sept. 10, 2006: “We do not fail to show respect for other religions and cultures, we do not fail to show profound respect for their faith…”
(2)**Benedict XVI, Address to Representatives of Islam, August 20, 2005: **“The believer – and all of us, as Christians and Muslims, are believers – knows that, despite his weakness, he can count on the spiritual power of prayer… You, my esteemed friends, represent some Muslim communities from this Country where I was born, where I studied and where I lived for a good part of my life. That is why I wanted to meet you. You guide Muslim believers and train them in the Islamic faith. Teaching is the vehicle through which ideas and convictions are transmitted. Words are highly influential in the education of the mind. You, therefore, have a great responsibility for the formation of the younger generation. I learn with gratitude of the spirit in which you assume responsibility.” (L’Osservatore Romano, August 24, 2005, p. 9.)
(3)Benedict XVI, Catechesis, August 24, 2005: “This year is also the 40th anniversary of the conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate, which has ushered in a new season of dialogue and spiritual solidarity between Jews and Christians, as well as esteem for the other great religious traditions. Islam occupies a special place among them.” (L’Osservatore Romano, August 31, 2005, p. 11.)

So as you can visualize, I hope, that Benedict XVI has great care as to other religions traditions. And since his authority quite easily supersedes yours, well nuff said.

St Isidore wrote:

I hope this does not occur but from what I have seen and heard, the younger just do not want to attend mass or even care to hear about it. At Novus Ordo ritual they lack care, concern, or attention. Most go for reasons not pertaining to participation in the Eucharist. This does not occur in our TLM which is growing steadily. So the ENGLISH TRIDENTINE is of no consequence.

AJV wrote:

Blanket and unwarranted.

St. Jn 8:32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free

 

[St_Isidore]

Poor little mini-popes, it must be tough when the big pope, the real one with the authority and the charism, doesn’t get all of the little memos.

I do not understand this suggestion and furthermore it is insignificant for this thread. Please let us try and be Christian and curtail insults, judgemental mentality, etc., as it is of unproductive nature. This profits nobody, can hurt persons emotionally and damage your capacity to, or quality of, inspiring belief.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

It also does not make the vernacular (not) protestant, or not Luther, or right. Especially since you and AJV are using Luther as support.** You are mistaken, neither AJV nor I are using Luther as a support.**

The advantage of the Tridentine in Latin is obvious, a standard mass (the TLM) in Latin, allows anybody to participate in a mass anywhere in the world at any time . If you look at the small picture the vernacular is only good as the confines to which it extends geographically. Latin was the standard before the Novus Ordo ritual was introduced and it is now at the TLM masses around the world. The modernists fail to admit that there is no standard like the TLM in Latin. In addition, other world religions have a standard language and not the vernacular. The reason being just as I have mentioned above, that one can participate in any service/ritual anywhere in the world (e.g. Islam).

I can’t speak for modernists, since I’m not one, nor have I downplayed the universality of Latin. I simply believe, with
**Pope Benedict, that the vernacular Mass is helpful. I think that it is good for the people to hear their worship in the language in which they think and reason. **

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Trent doesn’t mention Latin per se (maybe because there were rites other than in Latin?). However, Vatican II specifically mentions Latin. Bob, Bob, Bob! You’ve been posting the Tridentine anathema all this time! It’s been all ABOUT Trent and Latin. As for VII, you have to understand that Popes do not have to trim their action to any council’s dictates in the area of any dicipline. Pope Paul VI acted COMPLETELY within his writ in allowing an expansion of the vernacular. It’s kind of ironic that those who self-describe as “traditionalist” eviscerate VII except for the bit about Latin.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Luther Luther Luther I have no care of Luther. What is it about Luther that compels the Modernist movement to innumerably mention him ?:hypno:

** AJV didn’t mention Luther. BOBP123 mentioned Luther. AJV merely refuted him. **

Examples include but are definitely not limited to:

(1)Benedict XVI, Homily, Sept. 10, 2006: “We do not fail to show respect for other religions and cultures, we do not fail to show profound respect for their faith…”
(2)**Benedict XVI, Address to Representatives of Islam, August 20, 2005: **“The believer – and all of us, as Christians and Muslims, are believers – knows that, despite his weakness, he can count on the spiritual power of prayer… You, my esteemed friends, represent some Muslim communities from this Country where I was born, where I studied and where I lived for a good part of my life. That is why I wanted to meet you. You guide Muslim believers and train them in the Islamic faith. Teaching is the vehicle through which ideas and convictions are transmitted. Words are highly influential in the education of the mind. You, therefore, have a great responsibility for the formation of the younger generation. I learn with gratitude of the spirit in which you assume responsibility.” (L’Osservatore Romano, August 24, 2005, p. 9.)
(3)Benedict XVI, Catechesis, August 24, 2005: “This year is also the 40th anniversary of the conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate, which has ushered in a new season of dialogue and spiritual solidarity between Jews and Christians, as well as esteem for the other great religious traditions. Islam occupies a special place among them.” (L’Osservatore Romano, August 31, 2005, p. 11.)

So as you can visualize, I hope, that Benedict XVI has great care as to other religions traditions. And since his authority quite easily supersedes yours, well nuff said.

**As interesting as these quotes ARE, they do not mention the use of Arabic as a sacral language (and it’s not simply a sacral language in areas where Arabic is spoken, though I’m sure the Arabic of the Koran is the equivalent to Elizabethan English), so they’re hardly germane to the topic. **

 

[BobP123]

Luther Luther Luther I have no care of Luther. What is it about Luther that compels the Modernist movement to innumerably mention him ?:hypno:

Actually you’re right. I tend to overuse him as an example of how bad things have turned in the Church but there were more like him at the time. Henry VIII, for example, had a very strong role in the Reformation. Maybe we trads should start using him as the bad example. Along with Archbishop Cranmer.

Having said that, it seems both Luther and Henry VIII (eventually) had an impressive following. I just hope the Catholic Church doesn’t end up using the same marketing tools as those churches have used.

 

[St_Isidore]

AJV didn’t mention Luther. BOBP123 mentioned Luther. AJV merely refuted him.

Like I said Luther Luther Luther. As you can see in one line you mentioned him twice.:hypno: :banghead:

As interesting as these quotes ARE, they do not mention the use of Arabic as a sacral language (and it’s not simply a sacral language in areas where Arabic is spoken,(-that is irrelevant, you have again missed the point) though I’m sure the Arabic of the Koran is the equivalent to Elizabethan English- actually far superior), so they’re hardly germane to the topic.

you are entitled to your opinion of course, this is your right, even if you disagree with the supreme Pontiff. You obviously did not read the quotes** or take the the advice of checking the Vatican website for similar quotes, and there are ‘many’ (not ‘all’)**

I do not know who I am replying to anymore JKIRK or AJV. Come on be honest you two are the same person, right?

 

[AJV]

Like I said Luther Luther Luther. As you can see in one line you mentioned him twice.:hypno: :banghead:

Umm, that was because you know, Bob mentioned him first and I like to discusss the viewpoints that do get posted onto to board even regarding He-Who-must-Not-Be-Named.

As regards You-know-who mentioned by the Modernrists–nope–you know, quite a few times I see everyone “refuting” various aspects of the NO with a “You-know-who did this…”

I do not know who I am replying to anymore JKIRK or AJV. Come on be honest you two are the same person, right?

I confess! I confess! Pardon me, O my lord high inquisitor.

http://orangecow.org/pythonet/linus/photos/noparrot/spanish6.jpg

Fourscore and some months I have succeeded in circumventing the minds of pious people here and now it comes to an end (sniff) :crying: . I thought, well you know, maybe someone will catch on- the link between the Middle East and Las Vegas…our shiekhs going there secretly to gamble and all.

Moderator, could you please bump off my alter ego, JKirk? I kind of like this one better.

 

[AJV]

We’re only talking about the reverent ones.

To use my alter-ego’s classic phrase: subjective.

St. Jn 8:32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free

And what is the truth?..I find no crime… *St. John 18:38 *

 

[AJV]

As far as “in complete conformity” goes, only for rites that existed prior to 1370 AD as later defined by Pius V. Anything later was considered a “new” rite per Session 7 Canon XIII, unless you find a reliable (preferably pre-Vatican II) source to the contrary.

While I think of a nice explanation to circumvent that …

Jusque-la je m’en tiendrai au principe reconnu universellement, savoir, que la valeur d’une Liturgie procède de l’autorite qui la confirme. J’ai dejaeu l’honneur de convenir avec vous, Monseigneur, que si le Saint-Siege confirme à votre demande la Liturgie d’Orleans… la Liturgie d’Orleans prendra des lors une valeur dogmatique considérable.

• DOM PROSPER GUERANGER regarding a composed liturgy.

 

[bear06]

Like I said Luther Luther Luther. As you can see in one line you mentioned him twice.:hypno: :banghead:

you are entitled to your opinion of course, this is your right, even if you disagree with the supreme Pontiff. You obviously did not read the quotes** or take the the advice of checking the Vatican website for similar quotes, and there are ‘many’ (not ‘all’)**

I do not know who I am replying to anymore JKIRK or AJV. Come on be honest you two are the same person, right?

I think they’ll fess up to that when someone else fesses up to their true identity.

BTW, the Novus Ordo in Latin would be just as unifying in worldwide use. I agree that Latin can be unifying, that said, I don’t think its use is exclusive to the TLM. I’d love to see the spread of the Novus Ordo in Latin as well as the TLM alongside with the Vernacular Novus Ordo which still retains the use of some Latin and Greek as called for in Mediator Dei.

 

[St_Isidore]

And what is the truth?..I find no crime… *St. John 18:38 *

Here is some truth for you:

St. Jn 1:17 For the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ
St. Jn 8:45 But if I say the truth, you believe me not.
St. Jn 14:6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.
Romans 9 :1 I speak the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost:
2 Corinthians 4 :2 But we renounce the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor adulterating the word of God; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience, in the sight of God.