A
AJV
Guest
:nope: Uh oh…
- Status
L
Leeta
Guest
Prof. Dr. Robert Spaemann attended the Old Mass with my family and others in Stuttgart every Sunday and often during the week. He even gave us a lift in his car to or from Mass sometimes when the train or bus was not running like on Christmas Eve. He is a retired Philosophy prof from Munich.
He is often called to Rome to consult with the Holy Father , both John Paul II and now Pope Benedict. I heard on Vatican radio, German division, that Professor Spaemann was in Castelgondolfo the beginning of August for the study conference on evolution.
We often heard him say that the Old Mass should be kept and that slight revisions such as inserting all the new saints’ feast days and having more readings would be desirable revisions. He had no question about the central place of the Latin language as the best vehicle to transmit the truths of our faith to all generations in the liturgy.
The vernacular comes and goes, but the Latin remains unchanged, as do the truths of our faith. German for example will be a dead language in a 100 years, if the Germans don’t convert.
He is often called to Rome to consult with the Holy Father , both John Paul II and now Pope Benedict. I heard on Vatican radio, German division, that Professor Spaemann was in Castelgondolfo the beginning of August for the study conference on evolution.
We often heard him say that the Old Mass should be kept and that slight revisions such as inserting all the new saints’ feast days and having more readings would be desirable revisions. He had no question about the central place of the Latin language as the best vehicle to transmit the truths of our faith to all generations in the liturgy.
The vernacular comes and goes, but the Latin remains unchanged, as do the truths of our faith. German for example will be a dead language in a 100 years, if the Germans don’t convert.
L
Leeta
Guest
The readings do not always start with ‘fratres’! Many from St. Paul do. Not all the readings are from St. Paul. Paul was writing to the brethren in various places. He was not writing for the liturgy. It was eventually used for it.
Here is a reading form Hosea. It begins, “Haec dicit Dominus Deus…”, not with ‘fratres’.
Here is a reading form Hosea. It begins, “Haec dicit Dominus Deus…”, not with ‘fratres’.
A
AJV
Guest
As I noted Leeta it is only the readings from the Epistles of the apostles which begins with ‘fratres’ irrespective of whether it is in the originial text or not. Either that or Carisimmi (for St. Peter, James, etc.). The Old Testament lections used on Ember days and certain others (like the one you cited form Good Friday) obviously do not have this. The NT lections outnumber the OT ones.
My point is that the very fact that Fratres is said even when not in the orginal text shows that the Epistle is instruction directed to the laity.
And regarding the reading from Hosea you cited: here it is using the Douay. Why would we read this to God?
W
Walking_Home
Guest
Heretics exists----and we do them no favors by watering down the truth of our Faith. If we ourselves do not speak in a manner that reflects our true belief in our Church—then we cannot offer anyone the truth.
C
Caesar
Guest
Here is a quote from a very interesting book on the Holy Week Celebrations in Rome, c.1854:
A
AJV
Guest
You know, this really reminds me of the debates at the time of the Apostles ot the Slavs, Ss. Cyril and Methodius. When they negan preahcing in the vernacular and (horror of horrors! 
) celebrating Mass in Slavonic they were charged by their opponents with peverting true doctrine because since Latin, Greek and Hebrew were written on the cross, only those could be used. Whereupon they set out for Rome where the Pope approved St. Methodius sending him back as Archbishop. Again controversy arose on the subject and Rome was resorted to where the Pope declared in June 880: (words from the online CE except for the bracketed words which are not found in the CE)
) celebrating Mass in Slavonic they were charged by their opponents with peverting true doctrine because since Latin, Greek and Hebrew were written on the cross, only those could be used. Whereupon they set out for Rome where the Pope approved St. Methodius sending him back as Archbishop. Again controversy arose on the subject and Rome was resorted to where the Pope declared in June 880: (words from the online CE except for the bracketed words which are not found in the CE)St. Cyril wrote a defense of his position to the clergy. I will try and find it and link to it.
W
Walking_Home
Guest
Yes and No.-----that commentary was made at some pt. at the end of the Council when he was still I believe—Fr. Joseph Ratzinger.
He has come a long way since then:
unavoce.org/tenyears.htm
Ten Years of the Motu Proprio “Ecclesia Dei”
by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.
translated by Fr. Ignatius Harrison, Brompton Oratory, London
A lecture given at the Ergife Palace Hotel, Rome on Saturday 24th October 1998, to an audience of some 3000 traditional Catholics.
. Before anything else, the Council gave a definition of what liturgy is, and this definition gives a valuable yardstick for every liturgical celebration. Were one to shun these essential rules and put to one side the normae generales which one finds in numbers 34 - 36 of the Constitution De Sacra Liturgia (SL), in that case one would indeed be guilty of disobedience to the Council!
The difference between the liturgy according to the new books, how it is actually practiced and celebrated in different places, is often greater than the difference between an old Mass and a new Mass, when both these are celebrated according to the prescribed liturgical books.
A
AJV
Guest
Apologies, the part I typed was too full of spelling errors. Here it is correctly:
". And the Apostles full of the Holy Spirit spoke in all languages the wonderful works of God. Hence Paul when blowing the celestial trumpet teaches us that that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Of this too, he admonishes us in his first Epistle to the Corinthians that speaking with tongues we ought to edify the Church]. Nor is it in anywise opposed to wholesome doctrine and faith to say Mass in that same Slavonic language or to chant the holy gospels or divine lessons from the Old and New Testaments duly translated and interpreted therein, or the other parts of the divine office: for He who created the three principal languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, also made the others for His praise and glory
L
Leeta
Guest
Yes, you are right about the Low Mass having the Latin be audible. I had forgotten, since we are not allowed to attend a daily Old Mass.
In the NO, the priest hardly ever tells which consecration prayer he will use. Also, he doesn’t tell you whether saint of the day or daily Mass readings he will use. I 've never seen a Missal that has all the possiblities in it. .
Although there is a Low Mass where everything is practically silent. My sons served such silent Masses at various side altars, for example, when the priest needed to say a Mass to fulfill his daily Mass requirement.
The readings at the Old Mass are much less varied and so after awhile you don’t even have to look in the Missal. So It is an excellent way to know the readings and meditate on them in a deeper way during the Mass where the Holy Spirit can really speak to one’s heart through them and the prayers.
That’s great that your NO Mass is celebrated in a God-centered way. It will sooner or later be stopped by the bishop or his liturgy committees though or through the next adaption of the GIRM. I’ve seen that happen over and over again in several different parishes. The bishops and their committees are on a campaign to stamp out even vestiges of a traditional Mass, traditional belief. and practice.
Why aren’t there any Latin NO Masses here? No permission is needed. Priests, even orthodox ones, just won’t celebrate them in Latin.
I have to drive an hour to attend either a Latin NO or Old Mass.
In the NO, the priest hardly ever tells which consecration prayer he will use. Also, he doesn’t tell you whether saint of the day or daily Mass readings he will use. I 've never seen a Missal that has all the possiblities in it. .
Although there is a Low Mass where everything is practically silent. My sons served such silent Masses at various side altars, for example, when the priest needed to say a Mass to fulfill his daily Mass requirement.
The readings at the Old Mass are much less varied and so after awhile you don’t even have to look in the Missal. So It is an excellent way to know the readings and meditate on them in a deeper way during the Mass where the Holy Spirit can really speak to one’s heart through them and the prayers.
That’s great that your NO Mass is celebrated in a God-centered way. It will sooner or later be stopped by the bishop or his liturgy committees though or through the next adaption of the GIRM. I’ve seen that happen over and over again in several different parishes. The bishops and their committees are on a campaign to stamp out even vestiges of a traditional Mass, traditional belief. and practice.
Why aren’t there any Latin NO Masses here? No permission is needed. Priests, even orthodox ones, just won’t celebrate them in Latin.
I have to drive an hour to attend either a Latin NO or Old Mass.
L
Leeta
Guest
You cite the Cyril and Methodius. Yes, and as a result the Eastern church took a much different development. More nationalist and limited die to the celebration in vernacular languages. Now some do still celebrate in Old Slavonic.
But we are discussing, I thought the Latin rite, which has a different cultural approach, practicality and simplicity, from that of the Eastern rites. It doesn’t seem to be apropro to the use of Latin in the liturgy. The eastern rites went a different direction. So why is the Eastern rite model supposed to be normative for the Latin rite?
Just look at some of the difficulties they have had in going beyond their own borders. The eastern rites are wonderful, but they are not our rite. It would be like telling the Eastern rite that they should adopt Latin rite customs. The Latin rite is a different way to breathe so to speak. But don’t ask us to stop being Latin and become another Eastern Rite. Maybe the bishops have that in mind.
By the way, the Mass is not meant to be directly didactic, as you seem to think. It is the worship of God, not an overt catechism class.
“Beginning at Jerusalem: Five Reflections on the History of the Church”, by Glenn W. Olsen, Ignatius Press, 2004 discusses some of these liturgical misunderstandings.
But we are discussing, I thought the Latin rite, which has a different cultural approach, practicality and simplicity, from that of the Eastern rites. It doesn’t seem to be apropro to the use of Latin in the liturgy. The eastern rites went a different direction. So why is the Eastern rite model supposed to be normative for the Latin rite?
Just look at some of the difficulties they have had in going beyond their own borders. The eastern rites are wonderful, but they are not our rite. It would be like telling the Eastern rite that they should adopt Latin rite customs. The Latin rite is a different way to breathe so to speak. But don’t ask us to stop being Latin and become another Eastern Rite. Maybe the bishops have that in mind.
By the way, the Mass is not meant to be directly didactic, as you seem to think. It is the worship of God, not an overt catechism class.
“Beginning at Jerusalem: Five Reflections on the History of the Church”, by Glenn W. Olsen, Ignatius Press, 2004 discusses some of these liturgical misunderstandings.
A
AJV
Guest
I will check up on it indeed, but as far as I know it was not the Divine Liturgy of Constantinople that was being celebrated when St. Methodius went back as Archbishop of Moravia but the rite of the Latin Church. I would note that the opponents wanted the use Latin when the charges were brought St. Methodius which would point to the fact that he had translated the Latin liturgy.They did of course use translated versions of the Divine liturgy when both were in the area initially.
I’m not asking you to stop being Latin and become Eastern. I think it would take a lot more than a translation into the vernacular for the Latin Church to become Eastern. Becuase I cite an example from Bulgaria it does not mean that it automatically applies to an Eastern way of thinking. I would actually think that the issue of the vernacular is not an Eastern issue: or something permitted only for the East (and the quote I provided was from the Pope to the German clergy, or more directly the bishop and the duke,regarding Latin) . If so, it definitely begs the question why? Why is the Pope condoning something which should not be done? It was not until the year 1100 and even then some, that the whole of the West used Latin for the Mass. A deriviation of Slavonic, Glagolitic had the distinciton of being the only non-Latin language in use for the Mass and Divine Office in the 14th-mid 20th century.
Far from the Divine Liturgy being limited due to its various national languages, I would argue that it is no such thing. The reason for the prevalence of the Roman liturgy is because the Latin Rite was the primary liturgy of the West after around the 15th century. No Eastern nations, except perhaps for Russia, and for it only later, have exercised such a great sphere of influence, as have the nations of the West. Certain people even at times suppressed native liturgies to introduce the Latin liturgy.
I am sorry I will be unable to read the book. Could you please elaborate on the issues- I will be very greatful.
I do not necessarily view the whole of the Mass as didatic. But I still think that the Epistle and Gospel are directed to the laity not to God. I’m ready to change my opinion but the interpretations put forward have not really made much sense to me.
A
AlexV
Guest
Knowledge of liturgy is so lacking among some prelates that I have seen firsthand a bishop claim (erroneously) that he needed to give his permission for a Novus Ordo according to the 2002 Latin Missal. When it was quite specifically clarified that the priest meant the Novus Ordo, not the Tridentine, the bishop continued to insist that it would require his permission. False, wrong, sorry, try again. But such attitudes are not, I suspect, all that rare among some prelates. In part it’s a product…as is much of this whole debate…of the collapse of education. If you have priests and bishops who don’t know Latin, don’t know ancient Greek, don’t know Catholic history (the average American seminary offers a deplorably third-rate academic education) - then not surprisingly you will have problems.
R
Rykell
Guest
Folks,
I have been around these fora a long time, primarily as a lurker, occasionally as a poster. Over the many years of internet, the latin advocates have absorbed not a shred of information that posters submit. These just continue to begin new and everlasting threads to do more and more of the same:
http://bestsmileys.com/argue/1.gif
http://bestsmileys.com/argue/2.gif
http://bestsmileys.com/notlistening/2.gif
“By this will all men know that you are NOT my disciples, that you have NOT love for one another.”
Time to shake the dust. [You know whom I mean]
To those who contribute worthy charitable discourse, I thank you! God bless your efforts!
I have been around these fora a long time, primarily as a lurker, occasionally as a poster. Over the many years of internet, the latin advocates have absorbed not a shred of information that posters submit. These just continue to begin new and everlasting threads to do more and more of the same:
http://bestsmileys.com/argue/1.gif
http://bestsmileys.com/argue/2.gif
http://bestsmileys.com/notlistening/2.gif
“By this will all men know that you are NOT my disciples, that you have NOT love for one another.”
Time to shake the dust. [You know whom I mean]
To those who contribute worthy charitable discourse, I thank you! God bless your efforts!
T
TradyDaddy
Guest
- Voodoo practitioners, Wiccans, and members of many other false religions believe they can “feel” their gods presence. Maybe you should read your “Act of Faith Prayer”, which states…“I believe these and ALL the truths that the Holy Catholic Church teaches because Thou has REVEALED them…”
- "those who think like EDIT Catholic Nick "… Do you mean all the Popes and Saints for the first 1965 years of the Churches existence?.. Keep up the good work Catholic Nick…
A
AlexV
Guest
Latin is the official language proper to our Rite. Some people…including prelates…have sought to marginalize or even eliminate it from the de facto liturgical life of a majority of Catholics. You bet I will gladly see strife and dissension before I silently sit by and let that happen without protest.
Christ came to bring a sword. The advocates of Latin don’t need to defend or justify their cause; they have the weight of tradition on their side. It’s the vernacular that is by indult.
Christ came to bring a sword. The advocates of Latin don’t need to defend or justify their cause; they have the weight of tradition on their side. It’s the vernacular that is by indult.
W
Walking_Home
Guest
How about Card. Arinze—Rykell. He is not then—considered a disciple. Unless you believe that he spoke out of turn–without the approval from Pope Benedict ---- his words reflect the change in direction that our Pope wants the Church to take.
stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/religion/story/F8C1067C0A06539986257224001663ED?OpenDocument
In his address on Saturday, titled, “Language in the Latin Rite Liturgy: Latin and Vernacular,” Arinze said … “The Roman rite has Latin as its official language,” he said. The great religions of the world all “hold on” to their founding languages…
“Is it a small matter,” he asked, for priests or bishops from around the world to be able to speak to each other in universal language of the church? Or for “a million students” who gather for World Youth Day every few years “to be able to say parts of the Mass in Latin?”
…Latin “suits a church that is universal. It has a stability modern languages don’t have,” he said.
A
AJV
Guest
Sorry, TradyDaddy but I don’t think it will tell me what the Protestant advisors DID or proposed. It will probably tell me why the writers feel the Mass has been Protestanised.The Ottaviani Intervention (so called because it was not written by Cardinal Ottiviani) I have read. In any case , I have yet to see a book that goes through Protestant texts at the time and shows how the NO conforms. But thank you very much all the same
A
AJV
Guest
Oh no. The Pope gave permission for the Latin liturgy to be translated into Slavonic. The use of Slavonic spread from the Greek to the Latin rites. Disregarding the Pope’s instruction, newer German prelates and monks hindered the Slavonic priests and began agitating again against St. Methodius and Slavonic either in the Latin or Greek rites. They were unhappy because they felt that Moravia came under the jurisdiction of bishop of Passau and hence should conform to the German way [the German liturgy was not a pure Roman rite, but a Frankish Use].
You can just see the result when Pope Alexander II was petitioned by the Slavs. What did he tell them? St. Methodius was an Arian and a heretic as his venerable brother Maynard (Cardinal Bishop of Splato) had informed him, the Cyrillic script was a language of depravity used by Arians (read: St. Methodius and his priests). Of course, certain scholars hold this letter to be a fogery. St. Methodius had already condemned as heretical by the Council of Spalato which mnade no distinction between the Arian Gothic writings and his Slavonic. It appears from the writings of the Popes of that time that they mixed up St. Methodius with his Arain predecessor Ulfius. John X barely 40 years after St. Methodius visited Rome and received the favour of John VIII wrote of St. Methodius to John of Salona “an upstart who has never been heard of”
Nevertheless, ultimately Innocent IV upheld the judgment of John VIII in a letter dated March 19, 1248 and gave permission to Bishop of Zengh to translate the liturgical books into Glagolitic (by that time, the impression had spread that all Slavonic books were tainted with Arianism- a charge that has been shown to be untrue by comparison). This permission remained throughout until the 20th century and is the only case of a non Latin language being used entirely for the public offices of the Church.
In fact though the Popes increasingly mandated the use of Latin, the Epistle, Gospel and a few other parts such as the Gloria in excelsis were said in the vernacular. It was only at the late 13th century that in most parts outside Rome, Italy and a part of the kingdom of the Franks that the Mass was said entirely in Latin.
Far from the Divine Liturgy being limited due to its various national languages, or that the Latin liturgy spread better because of the unified Latin, I would argue that it is no such thing. One of the reasons for the prevalence of the Roman liturgy is because the Latin Rite was the primary liturgy of the West after around the 15th century. No Eastern nations, except perhaps for Russia, and for it only later, have exercised such a great sphere of influence, as have the nations of the West. It is not the only factor, but it is an important one. Certain people even at times suppressed native liturgies to introduce the Latin liturgy. Let us indeed look at the difficulties they have had in going beyond their borders: the Islamic nations surrounding Ethiopia, the Zoroastrian persecutions in Armenia and Persia, followed by the Turks which pretty much prevented the spread of any of the Churches of Asia Minor. If you look earlier when Constantinople was still very strong the Greeks had more success than the Latins and Franks in spreading the faith- to Russia, Poland, Moravia and so on. (contd.)
- Status