Posted on 05/02/2005 7:25:14 AM PDT by worldclass
Noting that in his Good Friday homily soon-to-be pope Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger condemned the "filth there is in the church," Wheeler believes the pontiff "will not tolerate [homosexuality's] presence in his church."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
So why is Latin "sacred"?? It wasn't the first language of the church (as Arabic is for Muslims). The first pope (Peter) probably didn't even speak it. Probably the only one of the early church fathers who did was Paul. The sole reason IS tradition. There is nothing "magic" (or even special) about Latin.
well, then, why dont you tell us which churches or dioceses you have in mind.
"Well, how do you explain all the homosexuals that enterd the church and supposedly filled seminaries inthe 60's and 70's?
What amazes me is that the story is an admitted fake. The history channel even did a documentary showing how the story was based on a previous legend which was a fake. YET some people refuse to accept it as fake.
A completely ridiculous assertion--the Roman Church has at least as much "administration" as any other bureaucracy. Where is the infallible dicta teaching that Latin is the "official language of the church".
"Only 10 percent or less of all documents in the Vatican archives have been translated from the Latin original."
So?? All that says is that Latin was used in the Church administration for a long time. A happenstance of history--nothing more, nothing less.
"Latin is a sacred language."
Really??? Why so. God certainly didn't hand it down from on high---nor did Jesus or Peter. If God has ANY "sacred language", it is probably Hebrew.
"Latin breeds unity."
Potentially valid point. But the fathers of the church obviously thought that was insufficient reason when they threw it out as the language for masses.
"The Church was growing exponentially when the sacraments were given in Latin."
Irrelevant.
"There were more than twice the number of conversions in the early 1960s."
Irrelevant.
"Don't know what your hang-up is, but what is the official language of your "non-Catholic" church you attend? How are the conversions going worldwide in your denomination?"
My "hang-up" is that there is nothing "magic" about Latin. As a language, it is no more special than English, Spanish, or Greek.
As to my church (Episcopalian), we use English here in the US. In other countries, we use the native langauge. And, BTW--Episcopalians and Anglicans consider themselves to be Catholic--just not Roman.
As you note, I have been trying a more peaceful road. A post or a few ago, I found it opportune to react more vigorously to Judica Me. I have never liked being preached at. As I have often posted, the tone of my individual posts tends to reflect the tone of the posts to which I am responding.
Our differences are likely far more on tactics than on substance. As to substance, the Novus Ordo Mass, however low rent the rubrics by comparison with the unquestionable magnificence of the Tridentine Mass, is nonetheless a valid Mass subject to usual requirements. SOME Novus Ordo priests may well be saying invalid Novus Ordo Masses. I have heard of one priest with a live-in (female) lover who simply skips the Priest's Communion. I guess he wants to cut down on his own mortal sins by depriving his congregation of valid Masses, including Masses of obligation.
By and large, those who oppose SSPX most vigorously here share with SSPX defenders most goals as to liturgy, spirituality, theology, etc. The means are nonetheless important. I and others have posted on numerous occasions the concern that undermining papal authority would undermine in advance the authority of some future pope who might satisfy you on all scores. That papal authority is a treasure of the Church conferred upon the Church by Jesus Christ Himself.
It has certainly been the case that some popes have been far more satisfying to traditional laity than other popes. I think of the lesser papacies as punishments imposed by God upon a sinful laity. Those lesser popes (Benedict XV 1914-1922 comes immediately to mind and I confess a verrrrry substantial lack of enthusiasm for John XXIII and Paul VI who, between them and in concert with Annibale Bugnini's liturgical atrocities, nearly drove me to Russian Orthodoxy) were nonetheless popes. A wise reaction to a disappointing papacy is not to be driven wild by it (as I was in youth) but to be the best Catholic one knows how to be, to seek and accept the graces which God offers us through the Church and the sacraments, to deepen our knowledge and wisdom, to behave scrupulously in reaction to the disappointments and to unite together in determination to carry out our own obligations as the laity as soldiers of Christ gifted with the graces of the sacrament of Confirmation.
I agree with your first five paragraphs. I confess that I have been all too enthusiastic for public horse-whipping of those who have resisted JP II. I apologize.
As to your last paragraph, we are each guilty and we accept our status as fallen human beings with the tendency to sin, do we not? I nevertheless believe that many on BOTH sides have demonstrated a capability in combat that should draw the respect of those traditionalists with whom they have not been allied. If the forces can be pooled under B-16 and all can share an enthusiasm for his leadership (he will have to earn it but each of us will have to react honestly), then our mutual fire may be directed where it ought to be directed at the secularist common enemies who would persecute thee AND me and those like each of us. There were such instances in the days of the catacombs when those who had personal disagreements were martyred together.
Let us hope for the sake of our respective children that our secularist enemies will not be able to replay the history of the catacombs against us all. If that should come to pass, may we all prove worthy of the gift of our Catholic Faith.
Thanks!
I dont buy it. No one could tell JPII the evidence so he wouldn't indulge his prejudice against this evidence?
And this was a big problem in the late 60's and 70's. Why wasn't something done by US bishops and cardinals THEN? There has got to be a better explanation than this personal peculiarity on one pope. Find the cause so you can be sure to root this stuff out.
There is not fear of dialogue. Some resist becoming a near occasion of evangelization by others for theological or ecclesiastical positions which they regard as unsound.
Don't be so defensive. My post 224 was sincere. Any deceased Catholic needs prayers - even the Pope. You can call him John Paul the Great all you want but it won't make his stay in Purgatory any shorter.
...and some people are just plain sissies (not you of course!)
As has been mentioned before, altar "girls" are authorized by the document of Pius XII which also allowed female members of choirs. So you and your daughter share more than breakfast cereals...
But there are those who cannot and WILL not understand canonical/liturgical regulations...
Diocese of Boston for one.
>>And we have a couple similar where I live, however, if it is Novus Ordo, it cannot be "highly orthodox."
The reasons being are three:
+Communion in the hand, the cause of dropping Christ on the ground and being trampeled underfoot. This is sacrilege.
+ Communion under both species, with the fact the precious blood is spilled at times, thus causing sacrilege.
+Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion (used ordinarily) and altar girls.<<
I'm sorry but I must respectfully disagree with you.
Our "Deep Catholic" parish has extremely orthodox Novus Ordo Holy Masses.
Communion is given on the tongue with the host dipped in the Precious Blood. Kneeling. Our pastor believes that a priest should not be sleeping (we have four) while EMCs are handing out the Eucharist. Normally, we receive from a priest or a deacon. Only during the holidays are EMCs used.
We have 200 (yes, 200! Our parish was mentioned on EWTN for this) Altar BOYS. We have Choir Girls and Altar Boys. Problem solved.
We are extremely orthodox with Greek and Latin in each Holy Mass. My daughter, who will be receiving First Holy Communion in May, was in the May Crowning Procession on Sunday, wearing a little blue cape just like I did as a child. The Confirmation class crowned Our Lady.
At the end of the month, we have Corpus Christi.
One can have a post Vatican II parish and still be orthodox. It takes a Holy Pastor who knows what is right and is willing to stand up for what he believes. (God Bless Father Ben)
Our parish has gone from 85 families in 1990 to over 750. We have outgrown our church!
It's clear that you have a real hangup with Latin and our discussion is near an end.
The Church 'baptized' Latin due to its universal utility in the wake of the Roman Empire's spread. The Church has 'baptized' a number of other goodies, many from pagan or purely secular sources.
Please share your antinomian angst with Rembert Weakland, OSB. He needs a few new friends, and can teach you a great deal about subtle ways to be contumacious, not to mention disingenuous.
Bye!
Who says? You? What a joke. The reason that people in Latin America, the Philippines, and many other places venerate the name of Jesus Christ is because the Faith was brought to them by Catholic missionaries, many of whom paid the ultimate price for the Gospel.
>>There is no "administration" in the Catholic Church. Latin is the official language of the entire Church. <<
Someone on Catholic Answers told me that the ATMs at the Vatican have a Latin language button.
Don't hold me to that fact but I would love to see it.
Do the priests in your parish use the ICEL version of the Consecration, "for all" instead of "for many"? If so, all the orthodoxy you refer to maybe moot, if the Mass contradicts sacred scripture by misquoting Christ.
Just thinking out loud here, but it seems the poster in question didn't ask others to not reply
Just you
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.