Actually I believe Fellay just lost all credibility, also. I clicked on the link. First, Fellay did not have the discussion with Arinze. Fellay stated “I was told of a conversation with Cardinal Arinze…” Add one more link to the heresay, and add one more gossip.
Which may just happen with the upcoming “retranslation”.
You know once we actually did have multiple uses of the Mass. The Gallican, Mozarbic, Roman, and Sarum Rites were each used in a different geographical region of the western Church. Now that i think on it, this is sort of the same as wqhat we have now, except for one difference. Back then each Mass had the same basic attributes no matter where you went. They were all in latin, all in versus deum, and all offered on the tongue exclusively. If these changes were made to the Novus Ordo, I would be happy and content. Although i do understand the need for a vernacular Mass, Latin does help in uniting the Church, though some will claoim that it is devisive. Well, all I can say is that it held us together for almost 20 centuries, whats to stop it from doing so now?
Amen, once they destroy themselves, for that is al that EVIL and HERESY will ever be capable of, then the TRUE CHURCH can come in and finally save those lost souls! Gloria in excelsis Deo!
Ok when I first saw this website, I was shocked and immediately left it. But i came back a few days later and actually read some stuff on Salvation from the website, including the EX- CATHEDRA section. and well this really isnt his opinion. He does nothing but quote Scripture and Church Fathers, and Popes, and Saints. Very little of that website is the man’s own writing. Im sorry but the TRUTH speaks for itself. But this isnt a debate over Salvation, its a debate over the Mass…which gives us the only key to salvation, the Body Blood Soul and Divinty of Our Lord Jesus Christ. without that there is no hope. That is why Christ gave us the gift of the Eucharist, and the gift of the Holy mass in which to Offer it. That is why we need a True Mass. (The NO can be said in a way that it is just as reverant as the TLM)
It’s horribly divisive, horribly polemical and profoundly ignorant website. Worse it’s wrong. This is the sort of misinformation that leads Catholics to the fringes of the Church at best, or all the way away from the Church at worst.
funny that you are still arguing wether or not the website is credible, but you refuse to comment on my actual post, particularly the part about THRUTH speaking for itself. if you wnat to talk about Salvation, lets talk, but before we do, lets just remember a few ex-cathedra decrees shall we…
Being a sort of devil’s advocate at times and no way that I’d ever go but why are clown Masses a problem exactly? I’m sure there are probably a few that do consider it reverent. Who knows what they’re used to.
It was Latin that held us together? I always thought it was the Holy Spirit. BTW, Latin was not the language of the Church at first, so your 20 centuries is inaccurate.
No way.
The Western Church most definitely had Latin from the beggining, yes the Orthodox use Greek, Aramaic, and Syriac, and Coptic too, but in the west, Latin served as a common language among clergy from all different lands, and even the peasantry, up until the Crusades knew some basic Latin. Liturgically we were held together by a common language of praise to God. that is what i meant. I did not intend to discredit the Holy Spirit. See when we use the vernacular we sometimes end up with bad translations, which, if they are in the “right” places, can seriously impair the ability of Grace to come to us. I heard a priest from the Institute of Christ the King say this at a Lenten Mission in my diocese. He explained this in more detail and it made perfect sense. He did not say that the Novus Ordo was invalid or heretical, he simply said that in some languages, the translation was so butured, that the prayers are almost completely different. That is divisive, maybe not so noticeably, but more spiritually. That is why Benedict has begun the re-translation of the Novus Ordo.
well first of all it was the people of Rome who still spoke Latin, and there isnt any real evidence to say that the Mass of Rome at that time (500-600) was silent, as the people would easily be able to follow the priest, because it was there language. actually, until the Council of Trent, im not even sure if we really know how a Medieval Mass would have sounded. if anyone knows a way to find it please tell me, id be very interested."The integrity of the Mass was considered so sacred that when Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604) sought to add the words "diesque nostros in tua pace disponas"to the Hanc Igitur of the Canon the Catholics of Rome were so outraged that they threatened to kill him! "
My question would be, how did they know? News didn’t travel as fast as it does today and, besides, who understands Latin anyway? And a Latin Mass that is supposed to be silent at that.
15 centuries… in any case, there is something to be said of a language that was selected by the holy spirit for the use of keeping unity.
When did the Holy Spirit tell you that only Latin was acceptable?. The Magisterium is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and it is they that said the vernacular is OK. I don’t know about you, but for me that seems pretty persuasive. Thats the basket I will put all my eggs in…
When did I say the Holy Spirit told me anything? Heck, I don’t even think I’ve shared my stance on Latin.
Fancy that, our eggs are in the same basket.
Let us rejoice and be glad in it. I tried to be smart and put it in Latin, but the spelling was so bad I decided English would get my response off just a tad better.
Gaudeamus et exultemus!