Posted on 04/22/2006 5:05:54 PM PDT by tridentine
The old Latin Mass will return to the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston for the first time since 1970 when Monsignor Edward Sadie leads a special service at 2 p.m. Sunday at Sacred Heart Co-Cathedral. The church choir will sing in Latin as well.
Sadie thought it was a good idea when the Catholic Church dropped the Tridentine Mass — Catholics know it as the Latin Mass — in 1970. It had been many centuries since Latin was the language of the people, and that was never the case in America.
Now Sadie thinks it’s a good idea to bring the Tridentine Mass back to his church, where two priests celebrate Mass six times a weekend, but generally not at 2 p.m. Sunday.
“I’m anxious to bring back to church any who feel they were abandoned or neglected,” he said. “I want to meet the needs of people who feel strongly about it.”
He is getting calls from people around the state who want to attend Sunday’s Latin Mass. Some are older Catholics nostalgic for the Mass as it was before 1970, Sadie said. “Some are younger Catholics who think we lost a lot,” he said.
Sadie said he has received the encouragement and approval of Pope Benedict XVI and diocesan Bishop Michael J. Bransfield. After Pope Paul VI revised the Mass in 1970 and decided priests should celebrate it in each country’s prevailing language, a priest couldn’t celebrate the old Mass without first getting permission from the local bishop.
Bishop Bernard W. Schmitt had not given that permission in the 16 years he led the diocese ending in 2005, Sadie said. “I don’t know if Bishop Schmitt was asked,” he said. “It depends who does the asking, too.”
Latin was the language of the people when St. Jerome, who lived from around 347 to 420, went back to the Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the Old Testament and the Greek texts of the New Testament and made the authoritative translation of the Bible now known as the Vulgate.
St. Jerome wasn’t the first to translate the Bible into Latin, but earlier attempts had created a jumble of inaccuracies. “As new scrolls are discovered, the authenticity of St. Jerome’s text has been reinforced,” Sadie said.
After Gutenberg invented the printing press in about 1450 and the forces of nationalism began to gather, national leaders rejected the authority of Rome, Sadie said. Meanwhile, regional dialects were coalescing into national languages, Sadie said. “The Church became defensive and held strongly to the Latin.”
As the years have passed since 1970, the Latin issue has become less emotional and less divisive, Sadie said. “There was a group who broke away from the church at that time over the issue. There are efforts now to heal that schism.”
Acting within bounds that Pope John Paul II set out in 1984, Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston brought the Tridentine Mass back to that city’s Holy Trinity German Church, where it is celebrated at noon every Sunday. In Troy, N.Y., St. Paul the Apostle Church [sic--St. Peter's] offers the Tridentine Mass every Sunday.
Sadie isn’t sure how often he will celebrate the Latin Mass here. “It could be once a week if enough people want to come,” he said. “I’m getting calls from around the state. I’ll take a survey to find out where people are coming from. I expect people from an hour or two away.”
To contact staff writer Bob Schwarz, use e-mail or call 348-1249.
I will be there, in the choir loft. I can't tell you how happy I am!
I fail to see what all the hoopla is about the "Latin mass". If you want authenticity, say the mass in Aramaic or Greek--both of which pre-dated the use of Latin.
Latin is the official language of the church and has been for over a thousand years. The pre vatican II mass is alot more reverent than the N.O. Mass issued in 1970. And becuase Latin is a dead language, it makes it more suitable since its words cannot change.
So what. We're talking about the mass for the peoples of the world--not the bureacrats of the church.
"The pre vatican II mass is alot more reverent than the N.O. Mass issued in 1970."
Why?? Because it is said in a dead language??
And becuase Latin is a dead language, it makes it more suitable since its words cannot change."
What the heck does THAT matter, if none of the listeners can understand it?? It has to be translated anyway--why not just use the translation directly.
THE OBLIGATIONS AND RIGHTS OF ALL THE CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL (Cann. 208 - 223)
Can. 208 From their rebirth in Christ, there exists among all the Christian faithful a true equality regarding dignity and action by which they all cooperate in the building up of the Body of Christ according to each one’s own condition and function.
Can. 209 §1. The Christian faithful, even in their own manner of acting, are always obliged to maintain communion with the Church.
§2. With great diligence they are to fulfill the duties which they owe to the universal Church and the particular church to which they belong according to the prescripts of the law.
Can. 210 All the Christian faithful must direct their efforts to lead a holy life and to promote the growth of the Church and its continual sanctification, according to their own condition.
Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.
Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.
§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.
Can. 213 The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments.
Can. 214 The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church.
Can. 215 The Christian faithful are at liberty freely to found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world and to hold meetings for the common pursuit of these purposes.
Can. 216 Since they participate in the mission of the Church, all the Christian faithful have the right to promote or sustain apostolic action even by their own undertakings, according to their own state and condition. Nevertheless, no undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority.
Can. 217 Since they are called by baptism to lead a life in keeping with the teaching of the gospel, the Christian faithful have the right to a Christian education by which they are to be instructed properly to strive for the maturity of the human person and at the same time to know and live the mystery of salvation.
Can. 218 Those engaged in the sacred disciplines have a just freedom of inquiry and of expressing their opinion prudently on those matters in which they possess expertise, while observing the submission due to the magisterium of the Church.
Can. 219 All the Christian faithful have the right to be free from any kind of coercion in choosing a state of life.
Can. 220 No one is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy.
Can. 221 §1. The Christian faithful can legitimately vindicate and defend the rights which they possess in the Church in the competent ecclesiastical forum according to the norm of law.
§2. If they are summoned to a trial by a competent authority, the Christian faithful also have the right to be judged according to the prescripts of the law applied with equity.
§3. The Christian faithful have the right not to be punished with canonical penalties except according to the norm of law.
Can. 222 §1. The Christian faithful are obliged to assist with the needs of the Church so that the Church has what is necessary for divine worship, for the works of the apostolate and of charity, and for the decent support of ministers.
§2. They are also obliged to promote social justice and, mindful of the precept of the Lord, to assist the poor from their own resources.
Can. 223 §1. In exercising their rights, the Christian faithful, both as individuals and gathered together in associations, must take into account the common good of the Church, the rights of others, and their own duties toward others.
§2. In view of the common good, ecclesiastical authority can direct the exercise of rights which are proper to the Christian faithful.
*Brother, there are not a few Christian Catholics who desire to assist at the Pluperfect Sacrifice of the New Covenant according to the old Latin Rite. It is certainly permissible, nay, even laudatory that that be so.
In fulfilling their desires, they are cooperating in building-up the Body of Christ while maintaining the Bonds of Unity in Worship, Doctrine, and Authority. Why criticize their legitimate aspirations? Why not congratulate and bless them for their good works?
Any Liturgy approved by Holy Mother Church is authentic. And, beginning with the Last Supper, every Liturgy/Mass/Eucharist is still the same. We Christains have always had one Mass. The Mass is the Mass is the Mass.
Every Mass in the Catholic Church is about the Redeemed gathering at the altar with Jesus to offer to God the Pluperfect Sacrifice of the New Covenant and then participating in the Heavenly Banquet. The Mass, in its essence, is the action of Jesus offering Himself to God as a Sacrifice of propitiation on our behalf.
Quibbling about the language in which the Mass is offered, or about the Liturgical setting in which the Mass is offered (which are, "accidents") tends to obscure the truth of the Substance of every Catholic Mass approved of by the Catholic Church - the action of Jesus as both Priest and Victim, offering Himself to God on our behalf; and we Christians joined with Him at the altar in the renewal of the Sacrifice of the New Covenant and then consuming the Heavenly Banquet; Jesus, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, Substantialy present in the Eucharist.
And so, brother, if Christians are in love with the old Latin Liturgy, and it is permitted them to participate in worshiping our God as He taught us to worship Him in the Mass, then why criticize their legitimate aspirations?
Holy Mother Church also includes the Maronites and their Divine Liturgy is available for you to assist at if you desire to approach, as close as possible, the Liturgy in Aramaic. And there are the Melkite Catholics for those desiring Greek.
Our Mother is a loving, generous Mother and we ought imitate her, brother.
Have a Blessed Sunday
I'm not "criticizing" it--I'm trying to understand why they are so fixated on it.
Background---I was brought up as a relatively "high-church" Episcopalian in south Louisiana in an area that was overwhelmingly Catholic. I often attended "traditional Latin Masses" with my Catholic friends when I would have "stay over" visits with them on weekends, and also when I was "courting" my very devout "cradle Catholic" spouse (which was about the time the Church was changing from the Latin mass to the Englich mass). From this background, I KNOW that the "reverence" level of a mass in English CAN match (and sometimes surpass, for native English speakers) that of any Latin mass. Add to that that I am a recent convert to Catholicisim (this Easter).
Now, I'll be the first to say that the current English-language Mass is NOT as reverent as those old Episcopal "Holy Eucharist" services, but that's because whoever did the translation from Latin to English had no "poetry in his soul". As a single example---read the Catholic version of the 23rd Psalm in English, and then read the same Psalm in the King James bible. Which of those two is the more reverent??
The "Latin Mass traditionalists" seem to think that simply changing the language of the Mass service will somehow correct all the negatives that have crept into the Catholic Church due to the excesses of liberals post-Vatican II. Here's a clue---it's NOT GONNA HAPPEN. The only thing that will cause that situation to change is to find out what the Church's teachings REALLY ARE, and stick to those (and yes, Virginia, as part of my deciding to join the Catholic Church, I "did" read all 800+ pages of the Catechism--on my own hook, as it was NOT taught in my RCIA class--which is indicative of the REAL reason for those "post Vatican II" problems).
But, my own particular take on the subject is that every Catholic church I know of (except for very small mission churches), has more than one Mass on weekends. So, do one of those masses in Latin, and the other in English, and let the chips fall where they may.
The truth be told, Latin being the language of the liturgy is only a side issue. The real issue is the reverence and fidelity to church teachings. Most people attend the Latin Mass mainly because they are sick of hetrodoxy from the pulpit, they are sick of no reverence what so over during the mass, they are sick of altar girls, they are sick of Lay Eucharistic Ministers, they are sick of the banal music, they are sick that they looked down upon for recieveing opur lord on their knees and so on. This is the reason why people go to the Latin Mass.
If the old mass was simpily translated into English, kept the same rubrics, and may some occasional Latin here and there, there would far fewer calls for the traditional Latin mass.
The entire reason this "dead" language was chosen was to (a) honor the Church's past -- we are and were headquarted in Rome (a place where Latin was spoken) and (b) to provide a common language for worship. This would enable someone like me to attend Mass in Germany and have the exact same experience.
The Novus Ordo Mass does not allow for the "portability" of faith when travelling...and it's much less reverent and moving.
You don't read very well, do you??
And how, exactly, is allowing the Latin mass to be widely said again going to fix any of those supposed problems??
Are you even a practicing Catholic?
What is with your hatred of Catholic tradition?
You don't read real well either, do you. If I "hated Catholic tradition" I wouldn't have converted to Catholicism. However, I "do" make the distinction between Catholic Tradition as defined by the Magisterium of the Church, and the blind, unreasoning, false plain human tradition that is constantly whining about the Latin mass. Like it or not, the New Order of the Mass is valid, having been established by by an official church Council and Peter's succcessor. I'm not real fond of "guitar masses", either, but if that's all that's available, that's what I'll attend, and be thankful for it.
Each Liturgy has, oddly, benefited the other. And the old Liturgy is/will causing/cause the new to be reformed so as to be all it ought be
As to being "fixiated" on a particular Liturgy, I think that the most natural thing in the world. I too was raised when the Latin Mass (low) was normative in America and all throughout the West. So, "fixated" might be a bit perjorative. Try "in love with."
The brothers and sisters I know and respect exhibit longanimity in their desires to assist at the Liturgy of their youth. Deprived of their love, they yet maintained the Bonds of Untiy in Worship, Doctrine, and Authority and so news they, finally, have access to their love is news of great joy
As they grew into maturity, they expected, with great reason, it would be the sole Liurgy/Mass/Eucharist they would assist at for their entire lives. Many are the reasons that was not the case but try to understand your brothers and sisters who fell in love with the Latin normative Mass long before your conversion. The old Mass/Liturgy/Eucharist is their home in a world gone mad.
And I say this as one who still loves the old Mass but, for many reasons, assists at the Pauline Rite
Amen, brother.I too will attend any Mass/Liturgy/Eucharist approved by the Church, even a "guitar" mass approved by the church is far superior to any latin liturgy celebrated by those not in unon with their Bishop and Pope
Read it. None of those reasons has anything whatsoever to do with Catholic doctrine, and the Magisterium of the Church has decided that those reasons were inadequate to retain "universal Latin".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.