Posted on 06/19/2005 9:33:26 PM PDT by Lady In Blue
Pope set to return to traditional liturgy:-
VATICAN CITY | June 19, 2005 5:11:27 AM IST
Pope Benedict XVI wants to restore the traditional ceremonial Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, with Latin instead of the vernacular and Gregorian chants.
Vatican expert Sandro Magister reported in his weekly newsletter Saturday that the pope is expected to replace Archbishop Pietro Marini, his predecessor Pope John Paul II's master of liturgical ceremonies.
Whoever follows Marini will have orders to restore the traditional style and choreography of papal ceremonies in St. Peter's.
Out will go the international Masses so dear to Pope John Paul II's heart, with such innovations as Latin American and African rhythms and even dancing, multi-lingual readings and children in national costumes bringing gifts to the altar.
Pope Benedict wants to return to the Sistine Chapel choirs singing Gregorian chant and the church music of such composers as Claudio Monteverdi from the 17th century. He also wants to revive the Latin Mass.
Archbishop Marini always planned the ceremonies with television in mind, Magister said, and that emphasis will remain. A decade ago the Vatican set up a system for transmitting papal ceremonies world wide via multiple satellites.
(UPI)
Yes. At least in a Latin mass English and Spanish speakers can sit in the same congregation without anyone feeling totally left out.
>> TC: RW complains about Latin being used in our Church (which is not RW's) while having problems with English which is rumored to be the conventional spoken language in Kansas. <<
Actually, I took a different understanding of "Screw the commoners and pissants! Here, Here!" I thought he was directing them.
(Sorry, RW... Couldn't joke about you behind your back.)
Would ninenot please clarify for the edification of all exactly what he means by Bugger in the reference to Archbishop Bugnini?
That does not mean that I have some obligation to make believe that your "biblical insights" as a heretic are at all relevant to Catholic theology much less the internal governance of our Church. If you are not a member of the team, please do not steal a uniform that is not yours to try to be in the lineup.
If you are free on a discussion forum to discuss what you manifestly misunderstand (else you would be a Catholic and not a Calvinist), then those of us who actually ARE CATHOLIC will feel free to tell you that your opinions are impertinent, uninformed and unwanted. Any problem?????
Do you have opinions also on what my family should have for dinner tonight without an invitation to join us? As to what color we should use to cover our house. Should my next business shirt be white, blue or otherwise? Any wisdom to impose as to what make of car I should drive? In short, who died and left you God????? Go to your nearest "scriptural" mutual congratulation society meeting and thank God you were not, ummmmm, "predestined" to be Catholic.
What is he purpose of talk as you describe it. One party possesses the fullness of Christian Truth. The other party does not but thinks he/she does. You are no more interested in compromising than is any genuine Catholic. Nor should any Catholic be interested in compromising. If you think that the biblical "insights" of anyone with a bible, reading lessons and an agenda is on some sort of playing field in some sort of legitimate contest with Christ's own Catholic Church, you are wrong on that too. There is NOTHING to argue about. You want to pick off poorly catechized stragglers. I don't want you to do that. No more, no less.
You should, then re-red your #66 which says so in the last paragraph unless you are suggesting that Tridentine Masses might be said in Latin in whichever church (if any) you attend, which, since you are said to be a Calvinist, I rather doubt.
I don't insist on dialogue with them. Unless they start attacking Holy Mother the Church, papal authority, or butting their unwanted noses into Catholic business, I prefer to igtnore them. I will certainly join them in pro-life activity or anti-homosexuality activity or any number of other secular issues. Catholics have nothing to learn from heretics or schismatics as to religion that cannot be better learned from the Teaching Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church (HQd in the Vatican).
Nope.
Thank you. At last, a little understanding around here.
I'm reading The Unknown God, by Alister McGrath, an Episcopal theologian. 120 pages long, it's taking me months to read and digest. And when I'm finished, I'm going to write it in a different form. Which, of course, would involve owning the material--a sort of personal confirmation of Christ in my life. The last spiritual book I wrote basically said that all religions are great. Sold more than 300,000 copies, left me not quite happy with that good result.
As you said,
The Mass of our ancestors said in the language used for the Masses of our ancestors is the high mark of our civilization
That's the sticking point for me. A big fan of Western civilization, I can't deny the influence of the Catholic Church on that endeavor, the greatest in human history.
Meanwhile, as I mentally quibble the fine points, another planet has been created somewhere in the universe
Just as the human eye cannot cope with the brilliance of the sun, so the human mind cannot cope with the full glory of God.
Alister McGrath
The Unknown God,
Searching for Spiritual Fulfilment
No one says he was perfect. He was, however, John Paul the Great. If you disagree, I would suggest that you will find easier and more valid targets in Benedict XV (1914-1922), John XXIII and Paul VI and that your memory may not be long enough to remember the bad old days of the 1960s. Most open criticism of JP II by those claiming Catholicism comes from SSPXers who are permanently angry over his application of justice to their heroes and to their schism. Most Catholics were more than satisfied. The schismatics were not.
If one is attacked as schismatic (i.e., an adherent of schismatic SSPX), it is sufficien to apologize if the info were wrong but reasonably founded. In the event that the target were schismatic, kindness is NOT owed to the performer of the usual dance of the schismatic pretending to be Catholic because the pope was wrong because_________(fill in the blank)__________. The pope sits in earthly judgment on us and not we on him. Examine your own conscience. Meanwhile, I will take your word for it in the absnce of further proof.
What on earth makes you imagine ninenot to be a schismatic????? I could be wrong, but I am having difficulty figuring out why you two guys are at odds. I know ninenot personally and I can say without reservation that he is nothing even vaguely resembling a schismatic (save for his allergy to 1950s popular music). A distaste for Buddy Holly does not a religious schism make. I am not personally acquainted with TaxachusettsMan but haven't seen anything from him suggesting schism, SSPX or otherwise. Am I wrong?
Suggestive yes, but not definitive. :)
Help me out here. Why are Catholics so emotionally vested in a language that not one in ten of them can speak? Maybe it's just my protestant sensibilities, but I don't get the attraction to a service in a language you don't understand. Can someone explain this to me?
The missals were printed with one side in Latin and the other in the vernacular. It made for a Universal Mass, where anyone could attend Mass, and understand it be looking at the Missal.
Jews has services in Hebrew, do you fault that?
Hebrew is the national language of Israel. It's still spoken. Latin is a dead language. I'm not knocking the idea of a church service in Latin, I simply don't understand it.
I'll try and help.
1. I'm not sure if you come from a liturgical or non-liturgical protestant background but if it is a liturgical one then you know that many part of the liturgy are the same week after week. These become so familiar that you pretty much know what is happening even if you don't understand a word. I had this very experience in a Polish mass once.
2. Church Latin is failry easy to pick up, but easier for children than adults.
3. There is a sense of that something really special is going on when using a liturgical language, something that is not common.
4. The missals have a page by page English or vernacular translation on the page next to the Latin
5. Continuity. When using the pre-1970 rite you are worshipping near exactly as your anscestors did for atleast 500, probably 1500 years
6. The sermon and Gospel are read in English because as easy as it is to pick up the fixed parts in Latin, learning enough to translate a sermon would be something few in the pews could do.
Hope that helps.
Latin is still spoken as French, Italian, and Spanish. Israeli Hebrew is different from Synagogue Hebrew as I am told. In any case the official language of Vatican City is Latin.
I cannot account for TaxMan's "logic."
I cannot account for his unalloyed admiration of the (now former) Papal MC/Liturgist, either.
I know. But the suggestions are so, ah, definitive.
And I also know that that's the point: like excommunication, it's meant to make one think, very hard, about one's position.
OTOH, I do like seeing a few 'anathemas' tossed into a conversation.
Oyez, oyez! Some days you're the spelling police, some days you're the windshield (or some sentiment to that effect.)
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.