Posted on 10/14/2005 7:01:46 AM PDT by NYer
VATICAN CITY, OCT. 13, 2005 (Zenit.org).- No one at the Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist has addressed the issue of the "Tridentine rite" Mass that the Latin Church used before the Second Vatican Council.
The prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, Cardinal Francis Arinze, mentioned this at a press conference today when he evaluated the first phase of the synodal assembly.
"No synodal father has mentioned this point," said Cardinal Arinze, the co-president of the assembly. The so-called Tridentine rite was approved by Pope St. Pius V.
"If there are groups that desire the Tridentine Mass, this is already provided for," he said. "Bishops may allow it for groups."
"It is not a priority for the synod, as no one has spoken about it," the cardinal concluded. "The problem we have discussed is that many people don't go to Mass, and those that come don't understand -- they go to Communion but not to confession, as if they were immaculate."
LOL! God bless the monsignor! :-D
They were doing both. And they were going to confession before mass too. There's no better reason to go to mass than just to obey what God commands. It may even have more merit in God's eyes if it requires effort and does not give the reward of "good feelings".
The reading of other books or reciting the rosary during the Mass is pretty good evidence that a person's mind was elsewhere.
Uh, no. The "other books" were probably the missal or a prayer book for the mass with specific prayers for specific parts geared to the intellectual ability and piety of the reader to help them focus on the mystery of the Holy Sacrifice and the meditating on the mysteries of the Rosary, specifically the Sorrowful, is meditating on the Holy Sacrifice.
I don't know what an "SSPXer" is, but the history of the The Society of St. Pius X has been and is available here:
A Short History of the SSPX, if you want to know anything.
Again...
"Dead pagan males"? Did Roman women speak something other than Latin?
As for Latin being the language of pagans, Rome was pagan for approximately 1000 years while the Roman church has been using Latin for 2000 years. Thus Latin has been used by Christians for twice as long as the pagan Romans used it.
My issues with the N.O. mass are too many too count, but I'm with you on the Tridentine. I just don't like the redundancy of reading the epistle and gospel in Latin and then in English. One or the other would suit me fine, but not both!
Also "Ita missa est." I understand that. So what's the priest carrying on for? :o)
Those are terms you won't find in the Bible... I mentioned "Bible knowledge", not "Catholic knowledge" ... I am sure that an Orthodox kid could smack us both in knowledge concerning St. John of Chrysostom. I am talking about things like "Why did Moses do ..." "What was the name of Lot's wife and why was she turned into a pillar of salt?" that sort of thing.
My understanding is that the reason the priest faces away... is that he is facing in the SAME direction as the people and thus is in solidarity with them. If the priest faces the people, then the priest becomes the face of the church and takes the focus away from paying attention to Jesus.
The three languages of Christianity were Greek, Latin and Hebrew: all there at the beginning, all used in spreading the Gospel, all found on the Cross itself.
Christ had a culture. He was pretty tribal, too.
Every language is the language of dead pagan males, although I'm sure the womyn spoke it as well.
Wrong, the Maronite rite is derived from the rite of the Syriac Church of Antioch, but suffered severe Latinizations under pressure from the Jesuits.
The Tridentine Mass was basically the Mass of the papal household during the Middle Ages, applied to the rest of the Church.
Prior to the Tridentine reform, almost every diocese had its own variant of the Roman rite, or usage: the most notable being the Uses of Sarum and York in England, the Use of Cologne in Germany. The Dominican, Carmelite, Cistercian, etc.
The differences included, variants of how the confiteor was said; marking the liturgical calendar as "Sundays after Trinity" instead of "Sundays after Pentacost"; different saints mentioned in the litany of the saints; occasionally, the mention of national saints in the Roman Canon (the 10th century Missal of Robert of Jumeiges is a prime example); different wordings of the Orate Fratres, etc.
The Novus Ordo has NOTHING in common with the organic development of the Roman rite, and to say otherwise is shear ignorance. If anyone reads Abp. Bugnini's memoir, they will see the Novus Ordo was composed out of political expediency, such as the removal of prayers that would be termed politically incorrect (too much penitential character).
Another thing the Novus Ordo only pertains to the LATIN Church of the Roman Patriarchate, NOT to the Universal Church. As a Melkite, I think it is shear arrogance for the defenders of the Novus Ordo to equate dissenting from the Novus Ordo with attacking Christ.
Local councils CAN ERR, and so can the pope when he is acting as Patiarch of the West. Would it be an insult to Christ according to you Novus Ordo defenders if my patriarch, Gregory III, the Melkite CATHOLIC patriarch of Antioch, changed our liturgy and people complained?
Latinism is NOT Catholicism, nor vice-versa.
The aforementioned variants of the Roman rite have 70 percent in common with the Tridentine usage.
Then gradually Tridentinizing the Novus Ordo's rubrics and adding deleted prayers to it over 20 years or so might be a step in the right direction.
The Anglo-Catholics already proved their Book of Common Prayer could be adapted to the rubrics of the Sarum Rite, so why can't the Novus Ordo be adapted to the rubrics of the Tridentine Mass, starting by restoring Psalm 42 at the foot of the altar.
Sure, what about those of us Catholics who do NOT use the Latin rite or Latin in any way, shape or form.
I don't oppose Latin in the Latin Church, but I do have a problem with the idea that Latin=Catholic. The Latin language contributed to the schism with the Greek East because it is NOT as precise of a language as Greek to dealing with abstract theological terms. The filioque is a prime example of how the Latin language mangled theology.
Why not Church Slavonic, Syriac, Classical Armenian, Byzantine Greek or Ge'ez?
Is the below "mangled theology"? (From the "Roman" Catechism, the Catechism of the Council of Trent)
"Who Proceedeth from the Father and the Son"
With regard to the words immediately succeeding: who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Ghost proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle. This truth is proposed for our belief by the Creed of the Church, from which no Christian may depart, and is confirmed by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures and of Councils.
Christ the Lord, speaking of the Holy Ghost, says: He shall glorify me, because he shall receive of mine. We also find that the Holy Ghost is sometimes called in Scripture the Spirit of Christ, sometimes, the Spirit of the Father; that He is one time said to be sent by the Father, another time, by the Son, -- all of which clearly signifies that He proceeds alike from the Father and the Son. He, says St. Paul, who has not the Spirit of Christ belongs not to him. In his Epistle to the Galatians he also calls the Holy Ghost the Spirit of Christ: God hath sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father. In the Gospel of St. Matthew, He is called the Spirit of the Father: It is not you that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you.
Our Lord said, at His Last Supper: When the Paraclete cometh whom I will send you, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. On another occasion, that the Holy Ghost will be sent by the Father, He declares in these words: whom the Father will send in my name. Understanding these words to denote the procession of the Holy Ghost, we come to the inevitable conclusion that He proceeds from both Father and Son.
The above are the truths that should be taught with regard to the Person of the Holy Ghost.
The Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background, K. Gamber, Una Voce Press, San Juan Capistrano, CA, 1993
ISBN 0-912141-05-0
Available from: The Foundation for Catholic Reform, PO Box 255 Harrison, NY 10528
The Greek term ek pouresthai has a connotation of origin, but the Latin term procedere does not. The ab utroque procession of the Holy Spirit confuses the Father with the Son and creates a type of semi-Sabellianism.
The Son's sending of the Holy Spirit and the eternal procession of orgination are two completely different things that the Latin fathers failed to understand because they could not read Greek.
The ab utroque procession of the Holy Spirit also undermines the Father's place as the unique source of the Godhead (St. Basil the Great) The Son is not the Father and the Father is not the Son.
Also, the Augutinian idea that the Holy Spirit is the love between the father and the son depersonalizes the Holy Spirit to the level of being an impersonal force.
St. John of Damascus said the Holy Spirit is "the Spirit of the Son, not FROM the Son."
If the Holy Spirit proceeds from the father and the son as it from one principle, then the Father and the Son therefore lose their personality and distinction.
Ah, but that's where the Theotokos comes in! She has three relationships to the Most Holy Trinity: the Most Favored Daughter of the Father, the Mother of the Son, and the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. Her relationship with God was most intimate and personal. As Christians, she is the example of what is possible with God - everything.
Sure. There's only so much time in a day. My kids would put most baptist kids there are a good race, that said, the Catholic knowledge is more important than the bible knowledge. The Catholic knowledge will get them to heaven. The bible knowledge is background on that.
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.