They want to maintain the right of veto against the use of the Tridentine missal. But Benedict XVI is set to liberalize it. Arinze’s harangue against the postconciliar liturgical abuses
ROMA, November 13 – The French bishops met in plenary assembly last week, in shock over the news that Benedict XVI is about to grant wider authorization to the celebration of the Mass ‘of Saint Pius V.’
Since it appears that any Bishop can forbid the Tridentine Mass once it is approved I am not exactly sure what the problem is. Unless it that the French bishops don’t want to go on record banning the Tridentine Mass. Having read the comments of Cardinal Anzine it appears France has much deeper problems with their liturgy than whether or not the Tridentine Mass will be allowed.
These French bishops that protest the possible Motu Proprio are stalwarts of orthodoxy. Just look how many vocations they have. There churches are overflowing on Sunday morning. Same with Cardinal Daneels, you all know what a hardcore supporter of tradition he is.:rolleyes: :rotfl: :whacky:
I can’t remember where I read the post, but someone made an excellant point that if the Modernists are so sure that the general rank and file catholic loves the liturgical changes that the 60’s revolution brought about, they should be happy to allow the traditional Mass go on and let the people decide which they want to attend. After all, the modernists tell us that it was the people who influenced thier Bishops back in the late 50’s early 60’s to push for the dialogue masses in the vernacular. This would prove that axiom beyond the shadow of a doubt.
But, indulterers… I don’t think they’re going to chance it…good luck anyway…I’ll be praying for you at the daily Latin High Mass that I go to.
I think you hit it. As it is now, a bishop can supress the TLM without going on record against it. If this goes through, the bishop will have to explicitly forbid it and probably have to give a defense for it which can be picked apart, etc.
Personally I’m for more free permission to use the mass. Not because I think it is a magic bullet that will solve all the Church’s problems, but because I want to see which mass the laity will flock to.
This is exactly what I’ve been arguing all along, TradyDaddy. If the people are so in love with their vulgar language Mass then, in a simple side-by-side comparison and all things being equal, the Traditional Rite would simply wither on the vine and eventually die.
Of course, that hasn’t happened over the past 40 years despite the best efforts to suppress, ignore and harass the Old Roman Rite out of existence.
So, I say, do not quench the Spirit. Let the voice of the people be heard. Side by side with no roadblocks and we’ll see which Mass is attracting the most congregants in 20 years.
I am wondering if someone can please explain to me how having Mass in “the vulger tongue” makes it less of a Mass? Especially considering the fact that all of the Eastern Rites celebrate the Divine Liturgy in their “vulgar tongues”. Is their Mass less of a Mass? Now I’m all for having Latin in the Mass, but I don’t think that the vernacular makes it any less of a Mass.
The last name of the archbishop of Paris is Vingt-Trois (twenty-three) what a bizarre last name…almost as bizarre as his comments on the liturgy, for example, "sometimes clumsy or crude [liturgical developments], which may have given the impression of a rupture with tradition.” :rolleyes: Hey, this may look like a complete rupture from tradition but it ain’t, we are just being clumsy!
I’ll try this one. The Orthodox churches schismed out a long time ago so what they do shouldn’t really matter or come into the discussion in any way… With the exception of the Maronites I believe that all of the Eastern Rite Churches in communion with Rome came about as a result of an incomplete communion with their Orthodox forbearers… In other words, they all left the Orthodox realm and churches to come back to Rome. Those of the Orthodox who came back to the Mother Church were allowed to continue using their own languages. Thats all.
One of the great battle cries of the early Protestants was use of the vernacular. They saw the use of Latin as keeping them from a deep personal relationship with God. I would submit that idea is debatable at best and specious at worst…
So what you really have are two groups who left the Church, the Orthodox and the Protestants who decided to use the vulgar tongue. Is that any reason for us to do the same? I have yet to see anyone point out how the use of Latin is detrimental in any way to the Mass. It worked and worked well for a long long time. The old Protestant criy of I want to hear and understand everything doesn’t really cut it.
That being the case, I fail to see any reason why the sacramental use of Latin should not be used in the Catholic Church. After all it still is the language of the Church, and served as a unifying factor for most of its history. The same as Arabic and Hebrew unifies the Muslims and the Jews respectively, most of whom don’t speak the languages either, Latin unified the Catholics of the world into a common faith, a common worship and common understanding…
Actually, with the Easterners, they’ve had the long standing tradition of using either the vernacular tongue or some other “Church” language like Greek or Old Church Slavonic. It is an ancient and legitimate tradition that has nothing to do with the schism between east and west.
However, the Latin Rite had been using Latin for more than a 1000 yrs. It is also an ancient and venerable tradition that should be more often observed.
The Eastern Church used the vernacular for centuries before the schism. Use of the vernacular, while certainly one of the cries of the Protestants, was a non-issue in the East-West split. That was not one of the reasons the Orthodox left communion with Rome.
And, like I said in my post, I like Latin in the Mass. You are arguing against my post as if I want Mass only in the vernacular and like I’m against using Latin. That is not the case at all. I have NEVER once said or even believed that Latin should not be used in the Mass. In fact, I continually argue with more modern Catholics that it SHOULD be used in the Mass. All I am saying is that use of the vernacular (unless it’s done for the express reason of getting rid of Latin) is not a bad thing and does not make the Mass any less of a Mass.
Once again, I want Latin to be used in the Mass. I prefer Latin to be used in the Mass. I want to make that very clear before anyone tells me I’m a modernist who is against Latin.
“I want to hear and understand” is hardly an old Protestant cry. I want both of those things and I’m not a Protestant (I believe everything that I’m called to believe in as a Roman Catholic and I don’t protest against the Church). Even Pope Benedict (in an interview with Raymond Arroyo) said that the vernacular Mass was “helpful.”
And Rand, you’re not guilty of the heresy of modernism. Advocacy for the use of the vernacular in the Mass is not modernism.
I know that the Eastern Church used the vernacular or Greek before the split and was not one of the reasons for the split which was basically for lack of a better word a p***g contest and a control issue… I merely pointed out a fact and asked that simply because they and the Protestants use the vernacular, why should we?
If anyone can point out one good reason for it, just one, I’ll listen and if it makes sense I’ll adjust my opinion. I did that with the use of Extraordinary Ministers for communion to the homebound, , but I’ve never seen a good explanation or rationale for the virtual disappearance of Latin in the Mass… I’ve really gotten tired of the standard, No one knew what was going on, no one participated no one at all. Laughable nonsense. And in all honesty, many of the loudest advocates against its return are people who weren’t even around when it was used anyway. So I really don’t understand the strident opposition in some quarters to it.
Most of the opponenets I have met tend to be converts, and I’m very sad to say, a lot of them that I’ve met also have problems with other parts of Catholicism as well. Devotion to Mary, Devotion to the Saints, practices such as Rosaries, Benedictions, the use of scapulars Holy Water etc etc. In fact they have told me almost to a man that such things were distinctly un emphasized during their RCIA groups and basically lumped together as old time practices that are no longer thought of as relevant…
I wasn’t attempting to single you out, I was kinda playing Devils Advocate as it were. Sorry if it sounded if I was aiming at you, I wasn’t.
AND some of the advocates for Latin’s wholesale return weren’t around either, esp. in these forums. You have teenagers who post here that I think are into it for the same reason that they like listening to Harry Potters spells in the movies (based loosely on Latin): it just sounds cool!
Thank God we don’t take that attitude toward the schismatic SSPX bishops (who’s lasting lesson may well be that to get what you want, go into schism). We worship the God who leaves the 99 safe in the fold and goes in search of the one single sheep who is lost. Those who profess to be discerning a call to the priesthood of the Good Shepherd would do well to remember that.