T
Timothysis
Guest
So am I, friend, so am I!!!
- Status
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
A second Vatican Council. My post about the two sides of Popes could also be used when talking about other things in the Church today that was originally considered wrong before Vatican II.
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
Ok. So why not tell me what your whistle face meant there? Why not tell me why you’re so confused about my post about the New World Order?
P
pnewton
Guest
I see. It is important not to paint with too broad of a brush. For example, two hundred popes did not know of the Second Vatican Council. When it comes to many of the issues, like language in the vernacular, one does not have 200 against 5. Additionally, it is purely speculative to think we know what any Pope, from Peter to Pius X would have done in the year 2000. It reflects far more on our own thinking than anything else to speculate.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I don’t know a single Pope who was against using Latin, though.
L
Lujack
Guest
Except that on the issue of Vatican II, it is at worst 5 vs. 5, since the only popes who possibly could have opposed a second Vatican Council were those who came after the first. And even that is suspect; the fact that Leo XII didn’t call a Second Vatican Council means that he was opposed to a second Vatican Council during his pontificate, not that he would have been opposed to Pope John XXIII calling a council during his pontificate.
P
pnewton
Guest
You note I said vernacular for that very reason. The first leaders had liturgy in Aramaic, maybe Greek (Didache was in Greek). Then the universality of the Latin caused to its rise, which lasted until today. There is no a single Pope that is opposed to the Latin since Vatican II.I don’t know a single Pope who was against using Latin, though.
I just like to take each issue on its own merit. In this regard, I do not think there is a single “best” argument for promoting the TLM. Different reasons will appeal to people in different circumstances.
L
Layman
Guest
Something that leaves the personalities of the participants out of it would be good.
That uses a language that cannot be bowdlerised by changes in meaning.
That retains ancient hymns for their beauty, their emotional uplift and expression of faith.
That sort of thing.
**Not something made up on the spot and mutated by mediocre ‘liturgists’ into a get-together in a church stripped of symbols. **
I mentioned Sarum tongue-in-cheek but if it was said locally and allowed by the Bishop/Pope and the alternative was a ‘sisters and brothers’ ‘people’s Mass’, I know where I’d be going.
K
kms48045
Guest
This is a simple one. Read the prayers of the TLM.
They so rich in orthodox teaching and spirituality.
There’s no comparison.
At my parish we celebrate both forms throughout the week.
I love them both, but to my initial point, the TLM prayers are so rich in their expression of the faith.
Kevin.
They so rich in orthodox teaching and spirituality.
There’s no comparison.
At my parish we celebrate both forms throughout the week.
I love them both, but to my initial point, the TLM prayers are so rich in their expression of the faith.
Kevin.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I’ll agree with you to the extent it is difficult to promote the TLM in an established church where people are basically set in their ways and would see the TLM as a threat. However, churches who are devoted 100% to the old liturgy, such as the SSPX or the Institute, seem to have little problem in drawing attendees.
L
Lujack
Guest
I like that point, though, that a lot of people have tried to make in this thread is that with the right argument, the EF doesn’t have to be seen as a threat. One way to make sure that they will is to imply that it is by denigrating the OF in your argument. Except there’s no need to go down that road.
Besides, isn’t this the ideal-not one church for people who like the EF and one for those who like the OF, but both, together? And if you believe that the EF truly uplifts the OF (and to a point, I’ll agree with you there, since the presence of the EF can improve the architecture of the church’s interior and push the celebrants of the OF to do it even better), then isn’t it very important that the EF “touch” the OF?
O
Ockham
Guest
Because the calendars are different there are times when one form would take priority in a local church.
You are correct that the best way to attract people to the TLM is to not insult the NO. There are however people who do see the TLM as a threat (EMHCs, lectors, gay marriage agents, etc).
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
Paul VI. John XXIII may have been as well.I don’t know a single Pope who was against using Latin, though.
P
ProVobis
Guest
It should work that way and I’m sure it would please the Holy Father. However, and perhaps I’m being a devil’s advocate here, the other side of that argument is that if all these other outward traditional signs are present, why bother with the TLM and its more complex rubrics? The Latin OF would be just as good, no? And most people wouldn’t know the difference.
P
ProVobis
Guest
You should know better than that, SS. John XXIII wrote the beautiful Veterum Sapientia and had he lived through the second part of the council, I doubt if he would have approved ANY vernacular in the Latin Rite, save for the sermon.
Then again, there might not have been a second part of the council.
As for Paul VI, he did promulgate the Novus Ordo in Latin.
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
Key words in my post were “may have been”.You should know better than that, SS. John XXIII wrote the beautiful Veterum Sapientia and had he lived through the second part of the council, I doubt if he would have approved ANY vernacular in the Latin Rite, save for the sermon.
Then again, there might not have been a second part of the council.
As for Paul VI, he did promulgate the Novus Ordo in Latin.
And Paul VI was clearly against it, because the protestants didn’t like it, so he had it thrown out. Thus why very few Novus Ordo Masses today have Latin, the main reason any do is because of Benedict XVI.
T
Timothysis
Guest
Spiritus,
Making up your own “facts” doesn’t work in academia and it also doesn’t work here. As much as it may bother you, your opinions are not “fact.”
O
otjm
Guest
have you actually read the documents? Or, for example, the documents of Trent?
There is nothing to divide. The Holy Spirit guides the Church, and when the Church speaks as Magisterium (and Vatican 2 certainly fits within the definition), then if one does not understand the intent or meaning of the documents, one goes back to the fact that the Church cannot err in teaching about the faith or morals. As both John Paul 2 and Benedict 16 have said and said repeatedly, the documents must be interpreted in light of the 2000 year Tradition of the Church. Implicit in that statement is that they can be so interpreted.
The fact that various individuals - some theologians and a lot of laity - can’t seem to find their way through it is not proof of much of anything other than that they either don’t get it, or don’t want to. It helps to keep in mind that many of the heresies in the past were due to some theologians not getting it. Putting one’s trust in a theologian or a lay person, no matter how good they may sound, as against the Magisterium of the Church is not a good bet.
V
valient_Lucy
Guest
I am a convert to Catholicism, and I still have not attended the EF of the Mass. I was never opposed to attending it; in fact, I had thought about attending it. (I’m hoping to get the chance to attend one within the next month or so.)
However, this is actually the most convincing argument I have read for the EF of the Mass. It made me want to attend the EF, and I’m hoping to do so sooner rather than later. I may not become a Traditional Catholic, but I now want to learn more about the EF (and read the 1962 missal that I bought by accident, but kept just in case.)
Check it out; it might surprise you.
All Your Church Are Belong to Us.
insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7688&Itemid=48
However, this is actually the most convincing argument I have read for the EF of the Mass. It made me want to attend the EF, and I’m hoping to do so sooner rather than later. I may not become a Traditional Catholic, but I now want to learn more about the EF (and read the 1962 missal that I bought by accident, but kept just in case.)
Check it out; it might surprise you.
All Your Church Are Belong to Us.
insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7688&Itemid=48
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
And what you just said is your opinion. I don’t make up my own facts, do you?
- Status