Karl Keating's E-Letter of July 17, 2007

[pprimeau1976]

Originally Posted by trth_skr

I'll answer my own question. Here are two:

JoseMaria Escriva died in 1975

María Maravillas de Jesús died in 1974.

I presume both attended the Novus Ordo. Anyone know of others?

Here is the Vatican list of recent canonizations.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

After 38 years, I would think that even that amount of time is too soon...even for the fast track method. Afterall, it took Padre Pio 34 years to get canonized.

[trth_skr]

As for Escriva, the wikipedia article I linked says:

"When the new rites were adapted by the Catholic Church after Vatican II, Echevarria said that Escrivá "accepted the reform with serenity and obedience." Since his prayer was much integrated with the liturgy for the past 40 years, Escrivá found the shift difficult and asked Álvaro del Portillo, one of his assistants, to coach him in celebrating the new rites. Although he missed the practices of the old rites, he prohibited del Portillo to ask for any dispensation for him "out of a spirit of obedience to ecclesiastical norms." However, when Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, Secretary of the Consilium for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Liturgy, found out about Escrivá's difficulties, he granted Escrivá the possibility of celebrating the Mass using the old rite. Escrivá celebrated this rite only in private.[14][15][16]"

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

[donalddon5]

Originally Posted by qmvsimp

What is your current religious affiliation? What part of Catholicism do you object to since you're not a member?

There is no part of Catholicism that I disagree with; are you assuming? as far as religious affiliations..none(unless you consider donations and reading material then it is Catholic related...I seek, and if the Holy Spirit concurs I know that I have found the answer. In the case of The Catholic Church, concurrence has been numerous, rather through visions, dreams, apperance of Saint Mary, or the many of gifts and expieriences that has occur in my life. As far as other churches, yes I have seen some amazing things in pentecostal style churches, but I believe they will fall under when Jesus say to the ones that say that they have heal and perform many other miracles evoking his name he replies that he knows them not. As far as not being Catholic Today, well think not my friend that the devil is not still around. Good day and may God bless you.

[pprimeau1976]

Originally Posted by trth_skr

As for Escriva, the wikipedia article I linked says:

"When the new rites were adapted by the Catholic Church after Vatican II, Echevarria said that Escrivá "accepted the reform with serenity and obedience." Since his prayer was much integrated with the liturgy for the past 40 years, Escrivá found the shift difficult and asked Álvaro del Portillo, one of his assistants, to coach him in celebrating the new rites. Although he missed the practices of the old rites, he prohibited del Portillo to ask for any dispensation for him "out of a spirit of obedience to ecclesiastical norms." However, when Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, Secretary of the Consilium for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Liturgy, found out about Escrivá's difficulties, he granted Escrivá the possibility of celebrating the Mass using the old rite. Escrivá celebrated this rite only in private.[14][15][16]"

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

Interesting. This SSPX site implies that the Novus Ordo is bad because Padre Pio never said it and was allowed to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. But what does that or commenting about the few number of Novus Ordo saints say? I think it says nothing about the Tridentine Rite or the Novus Ordo.

There are saints that probably never in their lifetime attended a Tridentine Mass. There were the Apostles, there were the Early Church Fathers (especially those of the East), and there are saints of other rites. Click here to check out the Maronite Catholic Liturgy and some of their saints.

[trth_skr]

Originally Posted by pprimeau1976

Interesting. This SSPX site implies that the Novus Ordo is bad because Padre Pio never said it and was allowed to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. But what does that or commenting about the few number of Novus Ordo saints say? I think it says nothing about the Tridentine Rite or the Novus Ordo.

Interesting too, that the SSPX article is for the Aug-Oct 2002 time frame, and Escriva was canonized in Oct of 2002. A reaction?

I agree, it is too early to say anything. Still we know the Tridentine rite (and other rites) has produced many, many saints. One wonders if the Novus Ordo will have been a transient blip on the radar screen say 300-400 years from now. In that case, we may never have a real tally of the saints it could produced.

Originally Posted by pprimeau1976

There are saints that probably never in their lifetime attended a Tridentine Mass. There were the Apostles, there were the Early Church Fathers (especially those of the East), and there are saints of other rites. Click here to check out the Maronite Catholic Liturgy and some of their saints.

This is true. Clearly many rites have produced Saints, and likely the truth is that the rite is not the governing factor. It is the heart of the Saint and the grace of God.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

[amdg123]

Originally Posted by pprimeau1976

Karl:

I have to say that I really don't understand why Latin is so important in the liturgy other than to keep an ancient language alive. To me, the way Mass is celebrated is much more important than what language it is in. Although I am WAY post Vatican II (born in 1976), I am still trying to figure out why the mass was changed so drastically. Why couldn't the 1962 missal just have been translated into English and the rubrics remained the same?

My pastor explained to me that Latin is a very exact language, unlike many modern languages. If understood and translated correctly, it leaves little to "interpret." Perhaps that is why all official documents from the Holy See are still written in Latin?

[dcnlgjms]

Originally Posted by jrz

In my opinion people want to go back to the "Latin Mass" because they feel it was celebrated more reverantly then the Mass is today.

I disagree totally with this statement. It is my experience that there are not a lot of people who want the TLM. In my parish only about 2% said they would enjoy it once in awhile but not as a regular thing. Our 'ordinary' masses are very respectful and full of spiritual celebration. I grew up on the TLM and was an altar boy, etc. I am now ordained as a deacon (21 years) and my wife and I do not enjoy the TLM. We are perfectly happy with the 'ordinary' mass. I once served as a deacon at a TLM and was most uncomfortable about it and told my priest friend that that was the first and last TLM I would be a deacon at. So, I think that the ordinary form will remain as the norm.

[JMMazza53]

While I certainly have no problems with TLM, as it was what I learned as a child and young altar server, I don't think it is the direction that the church needs to go. Yes, I think all Catholics need to remember our roots, but I think it's more important that we know where we are going. The vision of Jesus as spoken by the recent Popes has not been made clear to the people.

This I what I think the proponents of TLM are looking for, they are looking back at a time when if you were Catholic it meant that you 1. believed in the sanctity of marriage 2. believed abortion was wrong. 3. beleive that you ought to be at Mass on Sunday 4. believed that you ought to receive the sacraments regularly 5. believed that you need to pray with your children, etc. They want to go back to that. However, the Latin Mass will not bring us back to that. Only when we begin to Evangelize those who do not know and follow Jesus (whether they are Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or atheists) are we going to have that kind of world to live in. The answer is not going back. The answer is that we must begin to have priests who fearlessly preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ clearly and understandably from the pulpit and call the people to repentance and teach them what and how the Holy Spirit will accomplish in us what He wants to accomplish if we will only allow Him to do so.

John

[Philothea53]

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

While I certainly have no problems with TLM, as it was what I learned as a child and young altar server, I don't think it is the direction that the church needs to go. Yes, I think all Catholics need to remember our roots, but I think it's more important that we know where we are going. The vision of Jesus as spoken by the recent Popes has not been made clear to the people.

Pope Benedict is a very good and very holy man. I trust him to lead us in the way we should go. We need to support him and pray for him. When we say "We believe in the Holy Catholic Church" we are saying we believe what we are taught by the Magisterium of the Church.

[DustinsDad]

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

...This I what I think the proponents of TLM are looking for, they are looking back at a time when if you were Catholic it meant that you
1. believed in the sanctity of marriage
2. believed abortion was wrong.
3. beleive that you ought to be at Mass on Sunday
4. believed that you ought to receive the sacraments regularly
5. believed that you need to pray with your children, etc. They want to go back to that. However, the Latin Mass will not bring us back to that.

Correct - this is what proponents of the TLM are looking for.

But why do you think the Latin Mass "won't bring us back to that" - or at least not play a big part? I mean, the strange thing is, at every indult parish/location I've been to (4) - these things do seem to be held by all and do seem to be practiced by all.

Either the TLM attracks those people who take their faith seriously, or the TLM helps folks to take their faith seriously - or both (I think both). Anyway you look at it, the TLM can only help the curent life of the Church - it certainly and absolutely can't hurt!

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

...Only when we begin to Evangelize those who do not know and follow Jesus (whether they are Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or atheists) are we going to have that kind of world to live in. The answer is not going back.

It's as if you think the Church just invented evangelization in the last 40 years! How in the world do you think the Church grew and converted peoples and nations and entire continants for almost 2000 years??? Yes, absolutely we must evangelize - but I think conversion stats historically prove we're more effective when we don't try to hide or water down who we are - and that includes not being embarassed of all the beautiful and glorious liturgical traditions of Holy Mother Church - don't hide them under a bushel basked. They are, after all, there for us - to help us lift our hearts and minds to God.

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

...The answer is that we must begin to have priests who fearlessly preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ clearly and understandably from the pulpit and call the people to repentance and teach them what and how the Holy Spirit will accomplish in us what He wants to accomplish if we will only allow Him to do so.

And again, one of the main reasons I regularly attend the TLM is because that is the one place I can always count on for the type of preaching you describe. Doesn't matter which priest offers Mass, I don't have to "wait for a good one" or hope to get an "orthodox priest" - they all are good and faithful and orthodox. And the preaching I receive has consistantly been excellent and on target and fearlessly proclaiming the One True Faith.

Give 'em a shot. What can it hurt??? As the Holy Father said - what was once sacred can not suddenly become forbidden and "unsacred". You may be surprised.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

[JKirkLVNV]

Originally Posted by fxavier

What is rarely mentioned and is of prime importance in releasing the Motu Proprio is that the Traditional Rite (Missal of St. Pius V / Bl. John XXIII) is of Apostolic origin. As such, it is part of the deposit of faith, and can never be abrogated. It may develop organically with the Church, but may never be taken away.

One can say that the Missale of 1962 / 1965 is clearly the V2 Mass. Why? Because V2's Sacrosanctum Concilium asked for an organic change in the Mass, thus preserving its Apostolic character.

This is still not true, FXavier. The Pope does indeed have the authority to abrogate a Mass. Would he ever do so in the case of the Tridentine? No. He does, however, have the authority to do so.

This is a history of the liturgies of the Chuch. Particularly interesting is the section "The Parent Rites: From the Fourth Century" as well as the sections immediately before it.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09306a.htm

Does the Tridentine have elements reaching back to the Apostles? Certainly (the words of institution/consecration, for example). Is it ancient and venerable? Certainly. Immutable? No.

[JKirkLVNV]

Originally Posted by DustinsDad

Correct - this is what proponents of the TLM are looking for.

But why do you think the Latin Mass "won't bring us back to that" - or at least not play a big part? I mean, the strange thing is, at every indult parish/location I've been to (4) - these things do seem to be held by all and do seem to be practiced by all.

Either the TLM attracks those people who take their faith seriously, or the TLM helps folks to take their faith seriously - or both (I think both). Anyway you look at it, the TLM can only help the curent life of the Church - it certainly and absolutely can't hurt!



It's as if you think the Church just invented evangelization in the last 40 years! How in the world do you think the Church grew and converted peoples and nations and entire continants for almost 2000 years??? Yes, absolutely we must evangelize - but I think conversion stats historically prove we're more effective when we don't try to hide or water down who we are - and that includes not being embarassed of all the beautiful and glorious liturgical traditions of Holy Mother Church - don't hide them under a bushel basked. They are, after all, there for us - to help us lift our hearts and minds to God.



And again, one of the main reasons I regularly attend the TLM is because that is the one place I can always count on for the type of preaching you describe. Doesn't matter which priest offers Mass, I don't have to "wait for a good one" or hope to get an "orthodox priest" - they all are good and faithful and orthodox. And the preaching I receive has consistantly been excellent and on target and fearlessly proclaiming the One True Faith.

Give 'em a shot. What can it hurt??? As the Holy Father said - what was once sacred can not suddenly become forbidden and "unsacred". You may be surprised.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

I do think the TLM will HELP bring us back to that. I think the TLM will (I hope and I think the pope hopes) have a positive effect on the way in which the Pauline Rite is offered. And the more properly it is offered, the more people will respond and the more our priests will realize that we don't want them playing with the Mass.

[JMMazza53]

It's as if you think the Church just invented evangelization in the last 40 years! How in the world do you think the Church grew and converted peoples and nations and entire continants for almost 2000 years??? Yes, absolutely we must evangelize - but I think conversion stats historically prove we're more effective when we don't try to hide or water down who we are - and that includes not being embarassed of all the beautiful and glorious liturgical traditions of Holy Mother Church - don't hide them under a bushel basked. They are, after all, there for us - to help us lift our hearts and minds to God.

Of course I don't think evangelization began with Pope Paul VI and Vatican II. Be he and his successors have declared it the number 1 priority of the church. Is it spoken about as it's the number one priority in your church? Is it spoken about as being the number 1 priority at the Latin Masses?

I just know that a few months ago, I was in Montreal and visited the Notre DameCathedral there. They said that in the year 1900, almost 100% of the people attended Mass on Sunday. Now it is less than 5%. My question is did those other 95% really know why they were going to Mass (the Latin Mass) so that they could effectively teach it to their children, or were they going for some other reason?

It appears in the past (as well as the present) there are 3 levels of Catholics. The first level is cultural. Some people are Catholic because they were raised in or around Catholics. They may do Catholic things (pray the rosary, have a statue of a saint in their home), but may not really know much beyond that. The second level is the convicted Catholic. They have done some studying about the faith, read good books on apologetics, and comprehend and accept that the Catholic faith is the faith handed down from the apostles. But only a few people appear to be in the 3rd category, which is experiencial. They have surrendered their lives to Jesus and the Holy Spirit has touched their lives and is leading their lives and actions. It is only when people are fully evangelized to this experiencial stage that the faith they are leading becomes contagious, and people want to follow them. This is what the saints of the past and present had (and lived) and this is where we need to be leading people.

I grew up in a very Catholic home. We prayed regularly and received the sacraments regularly. However, it wasn't until many years later that I was invited to surrender my life to Jesus and ask the Holy Spirit to guide my life that I entered this 3rd stage. When I told my mother and parish priest about this, the answer I got back was, "God doesn't do things like that anymore."

YES, HE DOES!

The other thing I had NO idea how to do was present my faith to someone who knew nothing about God. Now I can and do regularly.

John

[DustinsDad]

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

Of course I don't think evangelization began with Pope Paul VI and Vatican II. Be he and his successors have declared it the number 1 priority of the church.

If by evangelization you mean preaching the gospel WITH that NECESSARY call to conversion to the the One Holy Catholic Church, I'd have to ask you where this has been proclaimed as the number one priority since VII.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic here either, I'm genuinely curious. I think ecumanism has been the number one priority (at least in practice) - but you have to kind of read between the lines to get to the part about conversion ,.

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

Is it spoken about as it's the number one priority in your church? Is it spoken about as being the number 1 priority at the Latin Masses?

Seems to me, the number one priority at the Latin Masses is "gettin' to heaven".

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

I just know that a few months ago, I was in Montreal and visited the Notre DameCathedral there. They said that in the year 1900, almost 100% of the people attended Mass on Sunday. Now it is less than 5%. My question is did those other 95% really know why they were going to Mass (the Latin Mass) so that they could effectively teach it to their children, or were they going for some other reason?

Those 95% may have had an alterior motive..."gettin' to heaven".

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

It appears in the past (as well as the present) there are 3 levels of Catholics. The first level is cultural. Some people are Catholic because they were raised in or around Catholics. They may do Catholic things (pray the rosary, have a statue of a saint in their home), but may not really know much beyond that. The second level is the convicted Catholic. They have done some studying about the faith, read good books on apologetics, and comprehend and accept that the Catholic faith is the faith handed down from the apostles. But only a few people appear to be in the 3rd category, which is experiencial. They have surrendered their lives to Jesus and the Holy Spirit has touched their lives and is leading their lives and actions. It is only when people are fully evangelized to this experiencial stage that the faith they are leading becomes contagious, and people want to follow them. This is what the saints of the past and present had (and lived) and this is where we need to be leading people.

I happen to be of the opinion that the old TLM more explicitly teaches just exactly that - that in the Mass itself we are surrendering are lives to Christ and letting the Holy Spirit lead our lives and actions henceforth as we leave..."Ite Missa Est" and all that. What your are "calling for" I see lived out in a wide scale in the TLM communities of Holy Mother Church.

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

I grew up in a very Catholic home. We prayed regularly and received the sacraments regularly. However, it wasn't until many years later that I was invited to surrender my life to Jesus and ask the Holy Spirit to guide my life that I entered this 3rd stage. When I told my mother and parish priest about this, the answer I got back was, "God doesn't do things like that anymore."

They were either very wrong or there's more to the story than you are sharing with us.

One possible area of confusion is that you are seeing this "third stage" as being somehow different than your upbringing in the faith - somehow seperated from the Mass and the Sacraments and the Church...but being properly catechized, you should have known that at each and every Mass, in each and every Sacrament of Confession, and each and every day really, you surrender to Christ and all that.

It sounds like you had an adult "reconversion experience" where you began to take your faith more seriously and really to heart. That is awesome and congratulations! But the way you present it may be setting you up for misunderstanding.

Originally Posted by JMMazza53

...The other thing I had NO idea how to do was present my faith to someone who knew nothing about God. Now I can and do regularly.

That is great. Welcome to Catholic apologetics!

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

[JMMazza53]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMMazza53
...The other thing I had NO idea how to do was present my faith to someone who knew nothing about God. Now I can and do regularly.

That is great. Welcome to Catholic apologetics!

It's quite obvious to me that you have a wonderful HEAD knowledge about the Catholic Church, but I really question whether or not you have a HEART knowledge of Jesus?

Apologetics is great and has it's place, but only Jesus and the Holy Spirit can change a person's heart. All the apologetics in the world can't do that! I present Jesus to them, the teachings of the Catholic Church follow.

John