Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Apr 8, '08, 6:51 am
elt1956 elt1956 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2008
Posts: 1,014
Religion: Unorthodox Catholic
Default Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

I have never understood the reasoning behind this. I am a Cradle Catholic and although I have attended the Novus Ordo since its inception, I have questions about why it was started in its present form. No arguing please. Peace.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Apr 8, '08, 7:06 am
stmaria stmaria is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: June 2, 2007
Posts: 1,266
Religion: catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by elt1956 View Post
I have never understood the reasoning behind this. I am a Cradle Catholic and although I have attended the Novus Ordo since its inception, I have questions about why it was started in its present form. No arguing please. Peace.

The answer is simple. Ecumenism.
In the words of Annibale Bugnini the chief architect of the New Mass.
"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants.”
(Archbishop Bugnini before the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae, quoted in “Osservatore Romano”, March 19, 1965)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Apr 8, '08, 7:15 am
elt1956 elt1956 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2008
Posts: 1,014
Religion: Unorthodox Catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stmaria View Post
The answer is simple. Ecumenism.
In the words of Annibale Bugnini the chief architect of the New Mass.
"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants.”
(Archbishop Bugnini before the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae, quoted in “Osservatore Romano”, March 19, 1965)
Do you think it was the form of the Mass in Latin that turned Protestants away? I know many Traditionalist Catholics think this change has lead to many errors. ie. a loosening of Doctrine and Dogmas? I think the loosening of much of the Faith of the World whether it be through the Catholic Church or another is endemic of a world situation.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Apr 8, '08, 7:34 am
stmaria stmaria is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: June 2, 2007
Posts: 1,266
Religion: catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by elt1956 View Post
Do you think it was the form of the Mass in Latin that turned Protestants away? I know many Traditionalist Catholics think this change has lead to many errors. ie. a loosening of Doctrine and Dogmas? I think the loosening of much of the Faith of the World whether it be through the Catholic Church or another is endemic of a world situation.
Of course the Latin turned Protestants away. One of the first things that Martin Luther did to his Mass was to abolish Latin.
The New Mass has nothing to do with a loosening of Doctrine or Dogma. That has been done by theologians that teach in seminaries and in Catholic Universities.
Protestants have always wanted to destroy the Latin Mass.
Consider this quote from the year 1840 by Dom Prosper Gueranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France and first abbot of Solesmes,he wrote the following in Liturgical Institutions


“ Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the hearts of all the enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond among Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit… We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in ever destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace.”
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Apr 8, '08, 7:51 am
Neil_Anthony Neil_Anthony is offline
Regular Member
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2007
Posts: 4,876
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stmaria View Post
The answer is simple. Ecumenism.
In the words of Annibale Bugnini the chief architect of the New Mass.
"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants.”
(Archbishop Bugnini before the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae, quoted in “Osservatore Romano”, March 19, 1965)
Dear Stmaria,

I want to point out for you and for other readers that you have unintentionally spread slander against Archbishop Bugnini:

Quote:
Critics falsely attribute to Annibale Bugnini, secretary of the body that Pope Paul VI set up to implement the Second Vatican Council's decree on the liturgy, the statement: "We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants", and claim that this was published on L'Osservatore Romano of 19 March 1965.

The bad-faith attribution to Father Bugnini of these words is evident, when they are compared with what he actually wrote on that issue of L'Osservatore Romano: "Love of souls and the desire to facilitate in every way, by removing anything that could even remotely be an impediment or make them feel ill at ease, the road to union on the part of separated brethren, has induced the Church to make even these painful sacrifices" (page 6, column 4).

The sacrifices that Father Bugnini felt were painful to make concerned some familiar words omitted from one particular prayer in the Good Friday liturgy. This prayer, previously titled "For the unity of the Church", is now headed "For the unity of Christians" (the Church is always one). Instead of "heretics" and "schismatics", it now speaks of "all our brethren who believe in Jesus Christ" and asks "that God may gather and keep together in his one Church all those who seek the truth in sincerity."
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Apr 8, '08, 7:53 am
elt1956 elt1956 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2008
Posts: 1,014
Religion: Unorthodox Catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stmaria View Post
Of course the Latin turned Protestants away. One of the first things that Martin Luther did to his Mass was to abolish Latin.
The New Mass has nothing to do with a loosening of Doctrine or Dogma. That has been done by theologians that teach in seminaries and in Catholic Universities.
Protestants have always wanted to destroy the Latin Mass.
Consider this quote from the year 1840 by Dom Prosper Gueranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France and first abbot of Solesmes,he wrote the following in Liturgical Institutions


“ Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the hearts of all the enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond among Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit… We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in ever destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace.”
Wow!! That makes sense. Peace.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Apr 8, '08, 8:02 am
Genesis315 Genesis315 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2005
Posts: 8,874
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

The best place to look would be in the official explanation given by the Pope who promugated that missal. It can be read here:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pa...omanum_en.html

I think Neil makes a good point too.
__________________
"Let prayer delight thee more than disputations, and the charity which buildeth up more than the knowledge which puffeth up."--St. Robert Bellarmine
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Apr 8, '08, 8:23 am
stmaria stmaria is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: June 2, 2007
Posts: 1,266
Religion: catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil_Anthony View Post
Dear Stmaria,

I want to point out for you and for other readers that you have unintentionally spread slander against Archbishop Bugnini:
How so? Your translation is simply different that the one that I have. But let's take a look at yours.


: "Love of souls and the desire to facilitate in every way, by removing anything that could even remotely be an impediment or make them feel ill at ease, the road to union on the part of separated brethren, has induced the Church to make even these painful sacrifices"

Now mine"
"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants"

The meaning is the same. The Mass was changed for ecumenism. The Latin Mass was an "impediment" it made the Protestants feel "ill at ease".


Here in his own words is what Bugnini though of the Mass of countless saints and martyrs and over 250 Popes.
“Signs and rites are likely to become incrusted by time, that is, to grow old and outmoded. They may therefore need to be revised and updated, so that the expression of the Church’s worship may reflect the perennial youthfulness of the Church itself…the Liturgy feeds the Church’s life; it must therefore remain dynamic and not be allowed to stagnate or become petrified
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Apr 8, '08, 8:24 am
Dan-Man916 Dan-Man916 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2004
Posts: 1,311
Religion: Catholic
Send a message via AIM to Dan-Man916
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stmaria View Post
Of course the Latin turned Protestants away. One of the first things that Martin Luther did to his Mass was to abolish Latin.
The New Mass has nothing to do with a loosening of Doctrine or Dogma. That has been done by theologians that teach in seminaries and in Catholic Universities.
Protestants have always wanted to destroy the Latin Mass.
Consider this quote from the year 1840 by Dom Prosper Gueranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France and first abbot of Solesmes,he wrote the following in Liturgical Institutions


“ Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the hearts of all the enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond among Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit… We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in ever destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace.”
I am simply amazed by this kind of thinking.

One must wonder about all of those Ukrainians who celebrate the divine liturgy in Ukrainian, then.

Catholicism exists outside of Rome, people. Latin is not the universal language of the Church; only western Catholicism.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Apr 8, '08, 8:29 am
stmaria stmaria is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: June 2, 2007
Posts: 1,266
Religion: catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-Man916 View Post
I am simply amazed by this kind of thinking.

One must wonder about all of those Ukrainians who celebrate the divine liturgy in Ukrainian, then.

Catholicism exists outside of Rome, people. Latin is not the universal language of the Church; only western Catholicism.
Did Martin Luther and Thomas Cranmer abolish Latin in their Mass or not?
The quote comes from the year 1840. Dom Prosper Gueranger was not spouting conspiracy theories. He was writing the truth.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Apr 8, '08, 8:30 am
Dan-Man916 Dan-Man916 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2004
Posts: 1,311
Religion: Catholic
Send a message via AIM to Dan-Man916
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stmaria View Post
it must therefore remain dynamic and not be allowed to stagnate or become petrified
If one finds a problem with this statement, then one must think ill of the Fathers of Trent, who "updated" the liturgy to make it uniform for all of latin rite Catholicism.

There is no pristine liturgy that we can all hearken back to at the beginning of the Church. Liturgy always develops to the needs of the people and the culture.

Reform of the liturgy isn't code for some conspiracy by modernists to subvert the One True Church. The liturgy has been reformed and has developed over time.
The Tradition of the Church is not stagnant. It is living.

I don't understand why people take such a simplistic view of the development of liturgy throughout 2000 years by turning it into a boogeyman, by making the tridentine reform tha standard by which to judge that which came both before as well as after.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Apr 8, '08, 8:35 am
Dan-Man916 Dan-Man916 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2004
Posts: 1,311
Religion: Catholic
Send a message via AIM to Dan-Man916
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stmaria View Post
Did Martin Luther and Thomas Cranmer abolish Latin in their Mass or not?
The quote comes from the year 1840. Dom Prosper Gueranger was not spouting conspiracy theories. He was writing the truth.
Who cares what they did.
The point is that one needs to look beyond Rome to see Catholicism as a whole. Look at the Catholic Churches of the Eastern and Oriental Rites. Their liturgies have always been in the native tongue.

There is no magic in Latin. While there certainly may be better translations of the liturgy in latin, the fact that you clamor for Latin only is a preference. Latin never has been the official language of the Church. The Byzantine Rite never had the universality of Greek.

There is nothing inherently heretical about using other languages for the liturgy.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Apr 8, '08, 9:06 am
japhy japhy is offline
Forum Supporter
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2007
Posts: 5,739
Religion: Catholic (Roman Rite)
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

I think it's important to read what Sacrosanctum Concilium (the Vatican II Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy) mandated, and to note what they did NOT mandate. Many changes were made which were never called for, and some things were taken so far as to appear to be a rupture with the traditional Rite of the Church. Where did the Latin go? Where is the Gregorian Chant? Vatican II reaffirmed these, it did not call for their removal.

Also read this address by Pope Paul VI. In it, he calls the new liturgy of the Mass a "liturgical innovation", a "many-sided inconvenience", a "novelty" that is "no small thing". It's not an encouraging read, especially when you look back, 40 years later. He mentions the loss of Latin and Gregorian Chant... but, like I said before, Vatican II did not call for their removal or foresee their loss from the liturgical reform!
__________________

My first book: The Prayers of the People
My second book: The Prayers of the Priest (now in print!)

My Blog: The Cross Reference
Follow me on Twitter @PrayingTheMass
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Apr 8, '08, 9:13 am
chrisb's Avatar
chrisb chrisb is offline
Regular Member
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: June 17, 2004
Posts: 1,693
Religion: Mertonian Catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis315 View Post
The best place to look would be in the official explanation given by the Pope who promugated that missal. It can be read here:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pa...omanum_en.html

I think Neil makes a good point too.
I honestly don't see any real ground for criticism...

What has changed since then that causes us to question this? The abuses?
__________________

O Lord, I humbly beseech thee to guide me to that form of religion
which is most pleasing to thee for me to follow upon earth,
in order to fulfill thy will here, and obtain everlasting happiness,
in the name of Jesus Christ thy Son.

Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Apr 8, '08, 9:14 am
stmaria stmaria is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: June 2, 2007
Posts: 1,266
Religion: catholic
Default Re: Why was The Latin Mass Changed after Vatican II ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-Man916 View Post
There is no magic in Latin. While there certainly may be better translations of the liturgy in latin, the fact that you clamor for Latin only is a preference. Latin never has been the official language of the Church. The Byzantine Rite never had the universality of Greek.

There is nothing inherently heretical about using other languages for the liturgy.
Latin is a sign of unity. No one has said there is something heretical about using other languages. Traditionalist prefer the Traditional Mass not for just the Latin. Please check out the following which asked that very question. It clearly shows that you have a misconception.


http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=231079
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is Latin's place? Claudius Traditional Catholicism 0 Feb 13, '08 3:37 am
French Clerics Criticize Pope's Latin Mass plans OMI Traditional Catholicism 15 Oct 24, '06 3:53 am



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8481Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: SueZee
5154CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: UpUpAndAway
4429Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: daughterstm
4037OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: eschator83
3864SOLITUDE
Last by: Prairie Rose
3764Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: DesertSister62
3334Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: Amiciel
3288Poems and Reflections
Last by: tonyg
3227Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: Rifester
3118For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: SueZee



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 5:32 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.