According to Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, Benedict would like every Catholic parish in the world to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. It's hard to say whether Hoyos, who is President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, is being accurate, or bending the truth because of this love of the Latin Mass. It is his job to reach out to the likes of the St. Pius X Society that have problems not only with the vernacular liturgy, but also with the Catholic Church's new found ecumenism after Vatican II. In any case, until the Pope himself says something, it's possible that Hoyos may be getting a little overzealous in his job and misinterpreting "available" to every parish that wants it to "should be" in every parish period.
In truth, I have no problem with the Latin Mass being celebrated where a parish wants it to be celebrated, I just wish the Vatican and Benedict would have the same respect for those Catholics who want to celebrate a more inclusive Mass that does not insult the laity and treat them like children. Maybe we could call it Mass 2K or the Holy Inclusive Liturgy.
A Faithful Catholic
44 comments:
What exactly would that Mass look like? Inquiring minds would like to know.
catholicsoldier,why do you want to attend a mass where mo one understands what is being said. O, I know it sounds mysterious, kind of like a magic show. And if you can't understand and don't participate you can say your rosary. You're not even needed--the priest can do it all. I have never met a latin mass 'fan' who has the slightest interest in his fellow man. All they want is mystery. Our church has enough wierd things already--dancing suns, adolescent girls and their fantasies, priests in two places at one time, a celibate clergy directed to never have a sexual thought--VaticanII called us to many things including following the full gospel demands. The latin mass fans--and I include clergy--only interest is a return to a church of no obligation but to go to mass , say the rosary and to hell with the rest of the world. Nothing else. Jack
Jack,
You could not be more wrong. But your self-assuredness is not a surprise.
In fact you would be surprised to learn that I actually attend the Novus Ordo in English. I actually attend it a great deal more than the Tridentine Mass. I've only been to one in the last six months. But unlike you, I see enormous benefit in it. As for your description of the attendees of the Old Mass, I think you couldn't be more wrong.
I assume you can read. From what I can gather, most Catholics can read too. The Latin Mass has this thing called a Missal, and people follow along. I know that is a radical concept.
Your description of the Traditional Latin Mass crowd may sum up some of the SSPXers, but not most. But if it makes you feel better to say the Orthodox Catholics are really evil and uncaring, go right ahead. That prejudice may just come to really surprise you.
Catholicsoldier, I'm assuming you know this, but the French were the first to start using a missal in the late 1800's. The Vatican looked upon it with great suspicion at the time, but the French thought it might be nice if they could understand what was being said. This had not been the case for quite a few centuries, unless you were rich. So the missal is really a rather late "innovation." It was a really great first step in making the Mass more inclusive.
Latin was the vernacular for a long period of time in Europe. But true, as the Middle Ages went on it was gradually replaced by the languages we now know in Europe. But keep in mind, books that were affordable were a development of the 16th century, and even then, they weren't that affordable.
Having studied the English Reformation extensively, one would be surprised by the level of understanding of the faithful about the Mass (from the lay level). I recommend reading Eamon Duffy's Stripping of the Altars for an excellent description of the vibrancy of popular religion in Catholic England before the Reformation.
Furthermore, if you read Jack's post, he's disparaging modern Catholics who attend the Latin Mass, quite viciously I might add.
As for a more inclusive Mass, what does it look like?
"As for a more inclusive Mass, what does it look like?"
Perhaps, F.C., you could suggest the closest thing to it around Milwaukee. We locals, at least, could see for ourselves. I could even bring the video mini-cam for the benefit of the out-of-towners.
Gads, C.S., I thought you liked to debate. I can't find a legimate debating point you have made yet. All that baloney about entering a church where people don't know the language makes it more holy (from your blog). When I go to mass, do I have to have a separate sheet to tell me what is said. Very silly. And you say I am vicious---glass houses and rocks. Any way maybe this will appeal to you "Italia Petula." You understand the priest at the Latin mass doesn't give a damn if you are there. You are just a spectator, so be quiet and sit down!! Jack
I have no debating points. Let's see. You immediately insult and read the hearts of people who attend the Latin Mass.
That's a debating point? That's an insult. That's un-Christian.
As for debate, um, can you read? I've been responding. I responded to F.C.'s point about the Missal. I suggest perhaps you read Eamon Duffy's Stripping of the Altars as well. Seeing how you have such a negative view of the faith of Catholics who both attend the Traditional Mass and Catholics who lived before Vatican II.
Did I miss anything?
As for me being vicious, please point that out? You in fact admit that you at least came across as vicious. It's nice to cover face and pretend one's real face, is in fact, a misinterpretation of it.
c.s. do you deny you said "quite viciously" in refering to me. Please point out where I used the word "vicious". As to your question: .Yes, you miss a lot. Back to your beads:). Jack
"Back to your Beads" -- Jack
Thanks for giving me yet more ammunition. You underline my point right there. You define condescension. You are so enlightened that you have no need for the traditional prayer and meditation of the Church. One wonders if you even have need for the Mass?
You are being quite vicious. I do not deny saying it. My saying you are vicious is not in and of itself being vicious. I asked you to point out where I was vicious. I can easily point out where you have (pretty much your entire first post).
So, go back to the Church of Jack.
Got caught on the 'vicious' thing didn't you. Now come on admit it. Jack
No Jack, I didn't. I was asking where I was vicious. You on the other-hand, were vicious. Unless you stand by your entire first post, which is such a wonderful example of you as a Christian.
Listen, c.s., you are trying to hide on the 'vicious' thing. We all make mistakes; you did so. Why don't you forget and you can move on. It wasn't that big a deal to me. But you got caught in a little matter and just can't give up. I am not 'vicious' and I don't think you are. Jack
Jack,
The thing is, you are vicious.
"Furthermore, if you read Jack's post, he's disparaging modern Catholics who attend the Latin Mass, quite viciously I might add."
Then you say: "And you say I am vicious---glass houses and rocks."
I respond: "As for me being vicious, please point that out?"
I hate to point it out, but my saying you are vicious is not necessarily me being vicious.
You are vicious, because you continue to stand by your entire first post, which did nothing but disparage Catholics who hold to the Tridentine-Rite. You have made no effort to back away from those VICIOUS comments.
c.s. You say I am vicious, then you say I (c.s.) did not say you were. Boy, you are really mixed up. I've tried to help you, but you just can't get it. Jack
Jack,
Yes, I called you vicious. My question was when was I vicious. Calling someone vicious, isn't necessarily viciousness, in your case, its FACT. Your first post on this thread so clearly underlines that fact.
But I'll go back to my beads now. You are hopeless.
My first comment was direct. I noticed you never really responded to it. To most, going around calling others vicious because you can't follow them intellectually is just...well, dumb. Jack
I never responded to it. Hmm, how does one respond to scurrilous slander?
c.s. What I say is fact. Truth cannot be slander. I'm afraid you can't answer. Jack
So, Latin Mass Catholics don't care about others. That's a fact? You are a sick man and in need of a physician. If only you would let him in.
Jack - Have all the Latin Mass attendees you've met told you that their "only interest is a return to a church of no obligation but to go to mass, say the rosary and to hell with the rest of the world"? I've been to two Latin Masses in my life and neither time did I develop telepathy, no matter how hard I prayed.
Jack,
The Sailor has a good point. That kind of shoots your "Truth" down.
Not telepathy, but I have never met a latin mass devotee that has expressed any concern for others--only in inaudible mumbling at their mass. Have never seen one at any social justice meeting or effort. I can only go by what they say and DO.
FC: your presumption that all the laity prior to c.1800 were ignorant of the content of the Mass is interesting.
I'm sure that you can prove that contention.
Catholic Soldier:
Sometimes I think that Jack's real last name is Chick.
Dad, if you look at my comment, I do not say that Catholics were "ignorant of the content of the Mass." I said they did not understand what was being said. I'm sure they got the gist of the Mass after going year after year, but that does not mean they understood what was being said, as the disciples would have or the early church when Mass was in Latin, Aramaic, Greek Coptic, etc, etc. That's why one of the first things the Reformers did was to change the liturgy into the vernacular. Even by that time, most Europeans did not understand Latin fully unless they were educated, which was a small percentage. And when you throw in the the fact that Mass was being said in Latin to natives of the Americas and Asia, where the language was completely different, they understood it even less. That all sounds pretty exclusionary to me.
Regarding an inclusive Mass, I don't know what it would look like. I think it would change from culture to culture. The Congregation of the Great Spirit in Milwaukee would be help up as a model of well-thought out inculturation of the liturgy. But it would also make sure the laity were not shunned during the Mass so that the authority of the priest can look like it's from completely on high. That's leads to unnecessary clericalism.
dad29 and catholic soldier, I have never hidden my name as you guys do. If you want more information on me look at my posts of 1-16-08 and 3-12-o8.
No, I haven't done much but at least I try to help others. But I go with T.V. Smith, friend of Whitehead, who said 'we become not what we think and say, but what we do.' Communism is a good example of not such bad thoughts but cruel actions which eventually turned them into corrupt people.
My blog has been used by My wife, Alice, my "son, Frank", and by my cousin RCA. Look and see who made the post. They are signed with one of the above.
I believe in the "reserve" which Newman defended. Frank has is own blog, but I asked him not to look at mine till later.
I believe Catholics should think and not just use quotes which could come from old Knights of Columbus pamphlets. The Church has an abundance of blind followers.
Yes I think the church is dominated too much by her hostility to sex. I have written extensively on this on my blog. I like discussion, which is hard to find on the blogs.
BTW what is the difference between a "catholic soldier" and a "Baptist soldier?" Having served 8 years in the air force during the Korean conflict I never thought to modify my description as an American Airman by sticking my religion in front of it.
You know Thomas More thought Churches'should be kept dark to increase their mystery.A great man, but off-base here. I'm afraid the Latin mass fans like a little too much mystery.
I do not expect a reply, as I seldom get one from "Traditional Catholics". I am just a catholic. I assume you are too. I am not Pope, c.s. but you are not Savanarola except in your desire. Jack
Jack,
Catholic Soldier is the handle because it colors nicely with what my blog touches upon. So by your line of thinking, Faithful Catholic is hiding his name.
Also, we've got into debates before I was using Catholic Soldier as a handle and it had my name.
Why do you claim to be Catholic?
What is 'catholic soldiering?' I don't get it. Doesn't seem real---well...in the spirit of Christ. Are you by any possibility poor "James" under an alias? Can you name something you ever did for anyone else? I'm serious. Since you quibble over torture, I wonder. Jack
Jack,
You are a sick and condescending person. You are so patronizing and insulting, it really demeans yourself and highlights your complete Anti-Christian nature. You have more in common with Jack Chick than with St. Francis.
Who made you the judge? And asking for my good acts, wow. The sense of entitlement in you is galling.
The sad thing is, you see nothing wrong with it. The truth of the matter, you are a lost soul.
As for my acts, I won't fill up F.C's blog with that. I believe it exists for discussion, not pride in our own actions.
c.s., Okay I get it, you never did anything for anyone but yourself. You have two goals in life---killing muslims and chasing down "heretics." Boy I pity any soldier under your command. No doubt you discriminate against all who do not follow your religious fantasies. I assume you send atheist on the most dangerous missions. If a women soldier has had an abortion you have to consider her a murderer and imprisioned. You need a good psychiactric examination. I wonder if the Army knows they have a sick fanatic (I call them "nuts) in their force. I've seen and been around your type. No doubt your favorite song is:
Onward catholic soldiers,
Marching as to war.
With the soul of Cheney leading on before,
Bush the royal master, leads against the foe,
Forward catholic soldiers,
Kill the infidels. Jack
I thought the military was trying to screen crazies like you. I pray for those who come in contact with you. A religious fanatic with a gun is mighty dangerous. Jack
Jack,
You couldn't be more wrong, but then, you exalt in your ignorance. You have no idea what I have done for others, and what I have done for myself.
But, I forgive you. You do not know me and you never will because you have blinded yourself with hatred of all things Catholic. God have mercy on you.
c.s., you never answer anything. Just dodge. I would hope you are in the service to defend our country, not to hunt heretics, infidels, pagans. You have the same certainty we see in many killers who God 'speaks to'. You might try an honourable discharge on the grounds of 'hearing voices.' I bet you loved it when the soldier threw the puppy over the cliff. The dog wasn't catholic,you know. Almost all of my family has served in the military. Fortuneately most of our servicemen don't combine religious fanaticism with their duties, as you do. Jack
Jack,
How does one answer such evil? How does one rationally respond to the irrational?
In truth, you are blind and deaf to any answer that doesn't fit your narrow view.
You have no idea what I do in the military. You have no idea what type of a person I am.
But if it helps you, to imagine your theological foes as you describe them, it is your right. It is also an example of your complete and utter loss of God and His Truth.
You have no honor. May God have mercy on you and I will pray for both of us.
Readers, I believe c.s. has openly lied on his blog. I ask him about it in a comment and he erased it? I wonder why?
Jack,
You are in fact the liar. I know you are paranoid and possibly suffering from dementia, but really, you are too much.
All I did was criticize Trinity, calling it a hateful community. Obama has done the same thing, severing his ties with that community.
I know you enjoy ripping your enemies. Let's see, you've called me a baby-killer, I delight in the torture of others, I will put those I disagree with into harms away, I only care for myself, I am a fanatic who delights in the killing of pagans and heretics, oh, and I am poor, poor James.
Did I miss anything? I think anyone seeing this, will clearly, that you are the one with psychiatric issues. None of the above are true, but it makes you feel good. I think that sums up, how pathetic a human being you have allowed your hate to make you.
The truth is, I pity you. I pity you that you have allowed hate to consume you. I pity you that you need to LIE to make yourself feel better. I pity you that you have lost sight of what really matters and of God. I pity you and I will pray for you.
I will pray that your heart and mind and soul is opened to the Love of God and the Truth of His Church. I will pray that your hate and emptiness be removed and you find peace. I will pray for you.
God Bless
James
James, I admire you in a way; you had the courage to admit you had not followed what you said in your "Introduction". You deserve respect. I wish you the best, although we will continue to strongly disagree on religion and politics. Jack
LOL, wow, Jack, you are delusional. I recommend seeing a Psychiatrist soon.
c.s., James or whoever you are, you're hiding again. You did erase my comment; apparently you did not want people to see where you had told a 'little one.' No big deal. Jack
Jack,
It's quite simple. Someone of your vitriol and hate is not welcome. If you can learn to act with some class (might be difficult), you may be allowed back.
c.s., James. This is getting embarassing for you. You've twisted yourself up like a pretzel. You removed my comment because it showed you had 'fibbed.'I'm too kind to tell more about this. I thought you were a man. I hope you could just say "I told a little one. I shouldn't have." You know what I am talking about. I noticed you 'linked' to an interesting "non-partisan" blog. But again, no big deal. You and I know the truth. Good luck. Jack
"SEE HOW THEY LOVE ONE ANOTHER..."
THESE COMMENT ENTRIES ATTEST TO THE DANGERS THAT PREVAIL WHEN ORTHDOXY PREVAILS OVER ORTHOPRAXY
Post a Comment