Posted on 03/12/2007 5:52:37 AM PDT by NYer
You might be interested to know that Baroniuspress.com is bringback the three volume Latin-English Breviary published by Liturgical Press in the early 1960's. This time the correct psalter, the Vulgate and NOT the Pius XII psalter, will be used.
It won't be cheap, but if it is produced by Baronius Press it should be a beautiful book.
a week ago i was staying at the seminary of the fraternity of saint peter in southern germany. I know that both the new and old liturgies have the same Body of Christ and graces etc, but there is definately something marvelous about the latin mass and having the latin breviary sung in gregorian chant by about 50 seminarians. Its a mystical experience hearing the mass spoken in latin and it helps to elevate our minds up towards God.
I think this is a very good move of the pope. He is not replacing the vernacular mass but preventing the hurdles that prevent the latin mass from being celebrated.
**It would be interesting to know which cardinals oppose this.**
Seven cardinals -- Shall we have some wild guessing fun?
1. Roger Cardinal Mahony
it has nothing to do with their reasons, nor whether they will be regularized.
rather than try to reform the church from within they separated from it.
that is the way of the schismatic (and frankly the protestant;i dont like this church ill make my own).
Christ founded one church. he never inteded for Christians to be separated from one another.
1Cr 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
(A little Catholic humor there.)
Turns out this is the same recycled story which has been doing the rounds since last year. Plus an extra few inaccuracies thrown in for good measure.
I thought they started the "any day now" talk about a week after BXVI was installed :-).
How many times can the "insider" "experts" "close to the Pope" be wrong before the interested public tells them all PHHHHTTTTT?
"it has nothing to do with their reasons, nor whether they will be regularized."
On the contrary, it has everything to do with reasons. There is a difference between pushing a little old lady out of the path of a speeding bus, and pushing her into the path of a speeding bus. You seem to be insisting that we ignore that, and treat all little-old-lady pushers as the same.
"rather than try to reform the church from within they separated from it. "
No, not really. The same people who "stunned" the Holy Father by banning the traditional missal were trying to destroy the SSPX by deceit, because it was the only thing standing in the way of their complete destruction of the Tridentine. Lefebvre refused to let that happen, and was "announced" Latae Sentae excommunicated.
The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bad bishops, and history will show that those who forced Lefebvre's hand were in the wrong.
They didn't separate themselves, they were maneuvered out by modernists. In fact, they have refused to be separated.
there is nothing doctrinal about latin language. nothing at all.
anyone who splits with the body of Christ over langauge is at best a phyletist.
the SSPX has rejected the patriarch of the Roman church. instead suggesting that they themselves are able to determine who the REAL patriarch is.
schismatism at its worst.
"there is nothing doctrinal about latin language. nothing at all.
That completely ignores so many important points that I hardly know where to begin.
"anyone who splits with the body of Christ over langauge is at best a phyletist."
They didn't split. They were pushed out. Further, the attempt to kill the Tridentine is far, far more than a matter of language.
"the SSPX has rejected the patriarch of the Roman church."
In no way.
"instead suggesting that they themselves are able to determine who the REAL patriarch is."
In no way.
This reminds me of arguing with a liberal over Bush's "lies."
God bless you, yours and all that you do.
Back at'cha! (Colloquialism, you know ...)
The chances of SSPX reuniting in toto is a number not unadjacent to zero. Any regularization, should it occur, will split SSPX down the middle. Williamson has zero interest in submitting to Rome. Instead, there will be occasional breakaways by those who want back in. FSSP... the recent Institute of the Good Shepherd in France......maybe more in the future.
Not that this really matters. They won't be regularized any time soon. And the chances decrease with every passing day. As Fellay said the other day, this is far bigger than just the rite of Mass.
The malcontent mentality is now too strongly established and will always find something which is unsatisfactory.
It will leave the schismatics and excommunicati in a position of putative rebellion against the Church as they were moments before the original LeFebvrite consecrations of rebels as bishops and it will leave those who have continued in faithful obedience to the Holy See in, ummmm, obedience to the Holy See.
Of course, it is a big IF, oft gushily and enthusiastically reported by sycophants of the schism (like those who dishonestly claim that the papal excommunications of the SSPX ringleaders and papal declaration of SSPX as in schism were somehow rooted in Mass rubrics and publish an endless series of articles claiming that B-XVI will be siding with the schism any day now). Of course, they may be confusing B-XVI with "Pope Michael" of North Dakota or Kansas or wherever, a former SSPXer who, having apostasized from Catholicism to SSPX further apostasized from SSPX to Pope Michaelism or whatever.
Do you regard Pope John Paul II, who excommunicated SSPX leaders and declared their cult a schism one of "the Church's modernist attackers????" Catholics want to know. You are far more sensible on matters political like Ann Coulter.
Dare we hope that obstructionist bishops' "conferences" be abolished for resistance? I hope so but doubt that we will see that just yet. OTOH, B-XVI is pope but probably not the last pope and he is unlikely to be replaced by a liberal. The war he starts will be continued, in spite of and not because of SSPX.
Baronius Press was planning to REPRINT the Liturgical Press edition.
I'm the one who emailed them and urgently begged them NOT to do so.
The Liturgical Press edition, as you may know, had the Pius XII Psalter, the Confraternity translation of the Psalms in English, and Connelly's horrible prose version of the hymns.
I even mailed them my four volume Stanbrook Abbey Roman Breviary in English and the complete edition of John Mason Neale's metered and rhymed version of the old Latin hymns.
They've sent that stuff all back now, so we shall see what we shall see.
If you've got it all in one book, you've either got the 1964 Benziger in English with the John XXIII-abbreviated third nocturn, or a big old "totum" in Latin. Prior to the John XXIII simplification into Tomus Prior and and Tomus Alter (which is what the SSPX and the FSSP have reprinted), the standard Breviarium Romanum was in four volumes by season: Hiemalis (Winter), Verna (Spring), Aestiva (Summer) and Autumnalis (Autumn).
2. Sean Cardinal O'Malley
3. Dermott Murphy-Cormac (did I get that right)
4. Anyone recall the name of the dutch Cardinal?
5. Got to be the Irish guy
6. The Bishop in charge of the ICEL.
7. The last must be a Frenchman
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.