Karl Keating's E-Letter of September 4, 2007 - Page 5

passioncrosslov · #61 Sep 15, '07, 9:09 am

[quote=Traditional Ang;2723744][quote=As I said in a previous post, "for all" is a wretched mistranslation of the Aramaic our Lord originally said this in, the Greek the Gospels were written in and the Latin the Catholic Church has used for some 1600+ years in the West. It can't possibly represent what our Lord said, and it's presumption of the worst sort to say that it's what He meant.

Although out Lord died for all, we recognize that many will reject His gift of eternal life and others give up and leave the "Straight and Narrow Way" because they find it to be too hard or inconvenient.[QUOTE]YOU HAVE SAID IT, MY BROTHER!

[quote]Regarding, "Why bother becoming a Catholic?" I refer you to the following article published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...tiones_en.html[quote]This is only a notion, not necessary a fact and if is, not always the case. Let us continue to pray that our non-Catholic brothers and sisters will come to see the beauty of the Truth we hold.

Quote:

Think of it, If we're obedient, during the Divine Liturgy, God gives us a fortaste of heaven.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

DEFINITELY!

Protestant101 · #62 Sep 16, '07, 3:16 pm

In Keeting's E-letter, he makes the following claim:

Quote:

The problem with Hemrick's argument is that there is no need for priests to be expert in the classics or even in Latin. I know any number of priests who celebrate the new Mass in Spanish, even though they hardly can get through a Spanish homily (which they laboriously write out beforehand) and cannot at all get through a Spanish conversation. But they celebrate Mass just fine. They know what is going on, what the words of the Mass mean, and even how to pronounce them reasonably well.

If that works for one language, why not for another?

Don't people need to know what is being said at one of your Masses? How can they get something out of it if they do not understand it?

Hemrick stated, according to Keeting:

Quote:

The problem nowadays, says Hemrick, is that few priests know Latin or have been trained in the old rubrics. "What concerns me ... is the manner in which the Tridentine Mass will be celebrated. ... What concerns me is a younger generation that is not Latinized enough to make the Tridentine Mass truly reverent and meaningful. Most have not endured the rigors of learning Latin, speaking and studying it. The language and culture of Cicero and the early Church are foreign to them." Hemrick is afraid that priests taking up the old Mass for the first time will end up play-acting, and that's a bad thing.

I think Hemrick has a good point. I would be interested to hear from Keeting and others, the reasons why your Church wants to re-instate this Latin mass, which hardly anyone even understands? it would be kind of like giving my 13 year old a King James Bible. he wouldn't exactly know what to do with it!

How do Catholics fulfill the following Scripture with a Mass they do not understand what is being said?

Quote:

1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

Pax et Caritas · #63 Sep 16, '07, 5:35 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Protestant101

Don't people need to know what is being said at one of your Masses? How can they get something out of it if they do not understand it?

Fair question. I'll give you the long answer...

The Catholic Mass is nothing less than the representation of the sacrifice of Calvary. It is not another sacrifice, but rather then one and only sacrifice of Jesus transcending time and space.

This greatest event in human history was the attoning sacrifice of our Lord. God, who can do all things, has made it possible for true Christians of all ages to be present at this one and only sacrifice, and thus to benefit, in a special way, from Its merits.

Have you ever wondered why Jesus is said to be a Priest according to the order of Melchesidech? Like our Lord, Melchesidech was both a King and High Priest. A Priest is someone who offers a sacrifice to God. What kind of sacrifice did Melchesidech offered to God? It was a sacrifice a bread and wine.

The sacrifice of the Mass - which is a representation of the sacrifice of Calvary - is likewise offered to God under the appearances of bread and wine. The wine turns into the Blood of Christ, and the bread into His body. Under the forms of bread and wine, the sacrifice of Jesus is offered to God. That is why Jesus is said to be a Priest according to the order of Melchesidech.

This sacrifice of the New Covenant is a continual offering, as was
predicted by the prophet Malachias who wrote the following:

"I have no pleasure in you,saith the Lord of hosts; and I will not receive a gift of your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clearn oblation: for my name is great among the Gentlies, saith the Lord of hosts" (Malachias 1:11)

From the beginning of the Church age, this prophecy has been understood to refer to the Catholic Mass.

St. Justin Martyr: "...God speaks through Malachias, one of the twelve, as follows: 'I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices from your hands: for from the rising of the sun until its setting, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles; and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a clean offering: for great is My name among the Gentiles, says the Lord; but you profane it.' It is of the sacrifices offered to Him in every place by us, the Gentiles, that is, of the Bread of the Eucharist and likewise of the cup of the Eucharist, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name; while you profane it." (St. Justin Martyr - Dialogue with Trypho, 41:8-10, circa 135AD)

St. Irenaeus: "He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, 'This is my body.' The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood. He taught the new sacrifice of the new covenant, of which Malachi, one of the twelve [minor] prophets, had signified beforehand: 'You do not do my will, says the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept a sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is my name among the gentiles, says the Lord Almighty' [Mal. 1:10-11]. By these words he makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; but that in every place sacrifice will be offered to him, and indeed, a pure one, for his name is glorified among the Gentiles." (Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 4:17:5 [A.D. 189])

The sacrifice of our Lord was prefigures in the Old Testament under many "types", of which the sacrifice of Our Lord was the fulfillment. On the day of attonement (which prefigured the Sacrifice of Jesus), at the high point of the sacrifice, the Priest went behind a curtain, and performed his duties on behalf of the multitude. This sacrifice was performed without being seen, and in a language that was non vernacular (Hebrew). The people's sins were taken away by the actions of the priest, which were hidden behind a curtain.

continue...

Pax et Caritas · #64 Sep 16, '07, 5:35 pm

continuation

Some people who did not understand what was taking place at this event may have thought "why is the Priest going behind a curtain to offer the sacrifice? What do the people get from this? The priest needs to talk to the multitued in a language they can understand, and not go behind some curtain."

Those who were not of the true religion probably would not have understood how the multitude benefited from the actions of the priest. After all, the people could not even hear what was taking place.

What such a person would not understand is that what the people received from this sacrifice was something greater than can be perceived by the senses. The primary benefit of the actions performed by the priest was much greater than a lesson in the law. It was the sacrifice that gained for them the remission of their sins; and this sacrifice was performed without their being able to see or hear it.

We find similarities with regard to the sacrifice of the Mass, which the sacrifice of the Old Testament prefigured. In fact, in many of the Eastern Rites, the sacrifice of the Mass is actually performed behind a curtain. This curtain is called the "ocinostasis". The priest goes behind this curtain to offer the sacrifice, just as the Priest under the Old covenant went behind a curtain to offer the sacrifice.

So, to answer you question: The sacrifice of the Mass, as with the sacrifice of the Old Covenant, is something that the Priest offers to God on behalf of the people. There is a certain amount of mystery, which signifies the greatness of the event.

And just as the Old Testament sacrifices were performed in a non vernacular language (Hebrew) so too is the Mass to be performed in a non vernacular language (Latin). Just as Hebrew was the language that united those under the Old Covenant, so too Latin is the language that unites those under the new Covenant.

We should not consider the Mass as something like a Protestant service. It is infinitely greater than a mere sermon. In the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass the "once for all sacrifice" of Jesus himself is made present and renewed, with the infinite merits applied to those present. It is a mystery that requires faith to believe in; and blessed are those who believe.

dessert · #65 Sep 16, '07, 5:52 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Protestant101

In Keeting's E-letter, he makes the following claim:

Don't people need to know what is being said at one of your Masses? How can they get something out of it if they do not understand it?

Hemrick stated, according to Keeting:

I think Hemrick has a good point. I would be interested to hear from Keeting and others, the reasons why your Church wants to re-instate this Latin mass, which hardly anyone even understands? it would be kind of like giving my 13 year old a King James Bible. he wouldn't exactly know what to do with it!

How do Catholics fulfill the following Scripture with a Mass they do not understand what is being said?

Well let's hope that there will be missals with the translations if I should ever visit a TLM. The mass is pretty universal so they are not changing the meanings. We are familiar with it unlike your 13 year old the bible.

If you should come into a church not knowing the mass and it is in latin you should look at a missal and there is a lot of repeat so you would pick it up easy.

We are to be charitable so actions can speak as loud as words.

If someone needs a cup of water or bowl of food would you hand him a bible? The name of Jesus Christ is pretty well known

Dessert

eileenmm · #66 Sep 16, '07, 8:36 pm

I am most fortunate as I attend St.Anthony Chapel in the Newark Archdiocese, New Jersey. This the traditional Latin Mass Chapel. I travel 20 to 25 minutes to get there, I don't mind the travel time. I would welcome parishes in my town to offer the Latin Mass.

People talk as if it's a popularity contest. They like it or don't like it. The Novus Ordo is nothing compared to the Latin Mass. It is truly the true worship.

I remember when the changes happened, I feel that we were all lied to, I remember all the reasons that were given to get rid of the Latin Mass. Our Bishops should not have listened to the reformers.

The Bishops should be obedient and do what they are told to do.

Change things back.

The altar rails should be brought back.

The Novus Ordo Mass is nothing more than Protestanism.

Protestant101 · #67 Sep 16, '07, 8:42 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by eileenmm

The Bishops should be obedient and do what they are told to do.

Change things back.

The altar rails should be brought back.

The Novus Ordo Mass is nothing more than Protestanism.

Maybe the "Novus Ordo" proponents should use "altar rails?" What are those? ("altar rails" that is).

passioncrosslov · #68 Sep 16, '07, 10:37 pm

For the TLM I would really love to have the celebrant pray the consecration out loud with clarity. That would be nice. All other prayers can remain silent since they're too lengthy.

Anyway, I think discussion here doesn't do any good. Maybe we should submit a petition letter to Rome or something...

ACL · #69 Sep 16, '07, 11:37 pm

having read the comments on this thread i would like to add a few....
1) Please remember that the Catholic church is present in other geographical regions too like India, China, Africa and other countries than US/EU
2) Learning Latin in addition to the languages the population already have to learn is a burden. In India, learning English itself is a big deal to some.
3) worship in a language which the people understand helps gather everyone to the table like family.
4) Currently, thanks to legacy of the British Empire and American media, English is the most spoken/understood language worldwide.
5) In some churches in India, at least in the ones I've been to, we have only one Missal in the regional language and in a few parishes English. This Missal is used for all years and thus doesn't have the Bible Readings by date as seen here in the US (or atleast as I've seen in Sunnyvale CA).

I've been to places in India where we had to sit on the ground during Mass since there were no benches.

Having to print a new missal in Latin with subtitles in English/vernacular language is a cost which some parishes may not have the money to bear.

6) Having been in Masses in India and in the US, i can say that the faithful would find the Novus Order mass to be same wherever they went. In different languages of course, but the structure would be the same and the faithful would know what was going on.

Having said that, I understand that a some people might prefer the old Latin mass and would prefer to have a service in Latin. The Pope has given them an avenue for it.

@eileenmm:
To make statements about "Bishops listening to liberals and that the New Order Mass is Protestantism" is taking it too far and is an affront to the decisions of the Bishops of the Catholic Church in Vatican 2. I can say, atleast for me, the Novus Order Mass is/was/will be a source of spiritual nourishment.

The shepherds of the Church need to think about the entire folk and the Novus Order Mass was a step in the right direction for countries in which English/Latin wasn't the local language

I can say this: If the Pope wants to impose Latin mass on everyone, I will support it. If the Pope wants to impose vernacular language masses on everyone I will support that too. If the Pope wants to give people the option to attend Masses in either Latin or in the New Order, I support it. I believe that the Pope and the Magesterium are guided by the Holy Spirit and I will support the decisions they take.

God be with us all. God help us to be more humble each day and be open to His word. Praise be to God

dessert · #70 Sep 17, '07, 2:21 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACL

having read the comments on this thread i would like to add a few....
1) Please remember that the Catholic church is present in other geographical regions too like India, China, Africa and other countries than US/EU
2) Learning Latin in addition to the languages the population already have to learn is a burden. In India, learning English itself is a big deal to some.
3) worship in a language which the people understand helps gather everyone to the table like family.
4) Currently, thanks to legacy of the British Empire and American media, English is the most spoken/understood language worldwide.
5) In some churches in India, at least in the ones I've been to, we have only one Missal in the regional language and in a few parishes English. This Missal is used for all years and thus doesn't have the Bible Readings by date as seen here in the US (or atleast as I've seen in Sunnyvale CA).

I've been to places in India where we had to sit on the ground during Mass since there were no benches.

Having to print a new missal in Latin with subtitles in English/vernacular language is a cost which some parishes may not have the money to bear.

6) Having been in Masses in India and in the US, i can say that the faithful would find the Novus Order mass to be same wherever they went. In different languages of course, but the structure would be the same and the faithful would know what was going on.

Having said that, I understand that a some people might prefer the old Latin mass and would prefer to have a service in Latin. The Pope has given them an avenue for it.

@eileenmm:
To make statements about "Bishops listening to liberals and that the New Order Mass is Protestantism" is taking it too far and is an affront to the decisions of the Bishops of the Catholic Church in Vatican 2. I can say, atleast for me, the Novus Order Mass is/was/will be a source of spiritual nourishment.

The shepherds of the Church need to think about the entire folk and the Novus Order Mass was a step in the right direction for countries in which English/Latin wasn't the local language

I can say this: If the Pope wants to impose Latin mass on everyone, I will support it. If the Pope wants to impose vernacular language masses on everyone I will support that too. If the Pope wants to give people the option to attend Masses in either Latin or in the New Order, I support it. I believe that the Pope and the Magesterium are guided by the Holy Spirit and I will support the decisions they take.

God be with us all. God help us to be more humble each day and be open to His word. Praise be to God

Since you are in India can you tell us why the muslems here say that Jesus went to India and died there. They think a lot of people traveled to India, they act like they have some proof but only Muhammed's word as far as it seems.

I don't think the Pope Benedict XVI will impose the Latin mass it is just available for those who want it, no worry.

You are right the older missals did not fluctuate year to year as I remember so I watched on EWTN today that they don't know if they will go back to that or not. I like the cycle of ABC years, we are in year C now but you should check with getting a magnificat it has the mass and follows along with the saints feast days. I have three years of older copies and just follow the days of the month but don't pay attention to the correct day of the week. It doesn't always have the correct Psalm but at home I read it and if I can participate in mass on EWTN I just listen to the correct readings.
Dessert

dessert · #71 Sep 17, '07, 2:37 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Protestant101

Maybe the "Novus Ordo" proponents should use "altar rails?" What are those? ("altar rails" that is).

The altar is a platform like with one or two ( maybe three) small steps up in front all across. Ours is a large platform like a stage.
The altars used to have a rail across the front leaving an opening in the middle. I can barely remember but we did have an apron covering over the rail to put your hands under incase the hostfell and there was a person to hold the plate under in case to catch any fragments of the host. The rail had a kneeler to kneel to recieve communion so the priest had to bend over to serve.

On one side of the altar was the votive candles for prayers and special intentions on the other was the baptismal font.
Many churches took out the rails which is too bad because they were beautiful at weddings but they were pretty good at letting the laypeople know that you were not suppose go beyond the rail.

I'm sure ours are still in storage somewhere, not my church but the oldest one in our city that is 180 years old.
Dessert

ACL · #72 Sep 17, '07, 7:38 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by dessert

Since you are in India can you tell us why the muslems here say that Jesus went to India and died there. They think a lot of people traveled to India, they act like they have some proof but only Muhammed's word as far as it seems.

I haven't met any Muslims in India who had such an idea. I think it is a generalization we cannot make that all Muslims in India say that.

Anyways I did some research on Google and found this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuz_Asaf which says what you mentioned, but I don't think it is a view held by all Muslims.

Anyways, all of the above comes with a rider, I'm not a Muslim and I haven't studied the Quran so I cannot answer that question.

dessert · #73 Sep 18, '07, 10:45 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACL

I haven't met any Muslims in India who had such an idea. I think it is a generalization we cannot make that all Muslims in India say that.

Anyways I did some research on Google and found this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuz_Asaf which says what you mentioned, but I don't think it is a view held by all Muslims.

Anyways, all of the above comes with a rider, I'm not a Muslim and I haven't studied the Quran so I cannot answer that question.

Thank you the link, it may have been on other threads but I missed it, it explains where they are getting their beliefs.
I copy it just to keep as reference.

Shonne · #74 Sep 19, '07, 4:16 pm

Dear Karl,

I have been faithfully reading your E-Letters for the past four years. Most I have agreed with others I had reservations about. This newsletter was interesting but I have a few comments to make as I know Father Peter Daly.

When I was fallen away from the Catholic Church, he took my hand and brought me back. He is a fine pastor and teacher. I understand his thoughts about Latin in the Mass - it will be an up-hill struggle.

However, I will also say, that those areas where the Tridentine Mass has been said regularly, there is growing number of people who are attending at least once a month. In Portland, OR, Holy Rosary Church, the Dominicans conduct a Tridentine Mass at 11 am every Sunday, and that mass is well attended. They also have one of the largest First Communion classes every year, which is held with the decorum that I remember as a child.

We have given up so much in an effort to be parishioner friendly that many of our young people don't have the reverance or knowledge we once had. I feel there is a need for experiecing some of the older forms as well as using the newer forms of the mass. Growth and wisdom has alway found its foundation in the past!

God Bless, Shonne

BobP123 · #75 Sep 23, '07, 11:52 am

Quote:

2. According to "De Eucharistia", the required words are, "This is my body," and "This is my blood". It doesn't matter whether the priest says "for many" or "for all".

Nonsense. If Christ's words "this is my body" were qualifed with "only for people of German descent" (for example) you bet it would be invalid.

Personally, I can accept the Vatican's motives for allowing the "for all" translations in the Mass; however, I have yet to read or see any convincing arguments in its favor. Even the most Protestant Bible does not use the words "for you and for all." I'm sorry, it may be valid but why the ICEL chose to do it is really mind-boggling and attempts to know better than Christ, which is really a slap in His face.