Pope Benedict XVI is greeted by children on his arrival for his annual holidays in Lorenzago di Cadore, northern Italy yesterday
Posted on 07/10/2007 9:08:50 AM PDT by Pyro7480
Pope Benedict XVI is greeted by children on his arrival for his annual holidays in Lorenzago di Cadore, northern Italy yesterday
I STUMBLED upon a Latin Mass last winter. It was grim, joyless, interminable and disquieting. There was no music. Nobody shook hands or brought gifts to the altar. It was as exuberant a celebration of creation as an expired fly left to rot on a window sill.
The only fanfare that threatened was the persistent, pedantic locking and unlocking of the little gate in the altar railing. A priest passed through this gateway at one stage, came to the side chapel where I knelt and entered a confession box, prompting the formation of a long-faced queue of sinners.
All the while, the officiating priest droned on, with his chasubled back to the congregation. He was, of course, flexing the dead Latin tongue, but it could as easily have been Aramaic or the lingua franca of Mars, such was his incomprehensible mumbling. Clearly, he was having a private conversation with his Maker.
It was when I quit trying to eavesdrop that I noticed the disapproving glances. Worshippers in the centre aisles - youngish, older and oldish men and women, most holding missals with frayed marker ribbons - were squinting disdainfully in my direction. I did a quick inventory. Was I standing in a forbidden place? Did I lack devoutedness? Did I have serpents for arms, was a slimy green monster surging through my buttoned coat?
Then I discerned what was different between them and me: the women over there had their heads covered, mostly with flowing Grace Kelly mantillas, whereas my female head, to the eternal damnation of my soul, was unconcealed. I left before Mass was over.
In the porch, I read a notice listing the regular Latin Mass times and I resolved not to return. As I walked away, I remembered hearing that there used to be two public houses side-by-side in a village near my home town. One was called 'The Ramble Inn'. The other was 'The Stagger Out'. Their juxtaposition was an eloquent synopsis of my morning. I did not feel I had been involved in a religious ceremony. I felt excluded, belittled, resented - an interloper in my own Church, a survivor - for how long more? - of the internal schism that eats away at the insides of the Roman Catholic Church.
Condemns
How predictable it has become that, whenever the Vatican makes some announcement eroding more of its grudging democracy, the media condemns it as an insult to Islam or Judaism. So it was again last weekend when Pope Benedict lifted the post-Vatican II restrictions on the 500-year-old Latin Mass. What about reconciliation with the Jewish community? demanded the global commentariat, with more than a little justification.
But what about Catholics, for Godsake? What about the indomitable faithful sickened by the grievously sinful institutional cover-up of paedophile priests? What about the AIDS-virus carriers who could have been safeguarded by condoms? What about monogamous, loving gays? What about women?
Most 'liberal Catholics' will again bite their tongues rather than criticise this latest genuflection to the fundamentalist clique because, when you are pro-choice you cannot be a bit anti-choice too.
If some people favour a church rite more appropriate to the 16th century, their preference should be accommodated. As the post-Vatican II hippies put it: different strokes for different folks and amen to that.
But this Tridentinist concession is not a simple toss-up between guitars, tambourines and Kumbaya versus the Council of Trent. The pope's own profoundly political psyche puts paid to such simplism.
This is a man who waged a diplomatic offensive to get God into the EU constitution, who condemned record numbers of theologians when he ran the old Inquisition office in Rome, and who denounced feminism for undermining the structures of society.
This is the man who welcomed the illegal joint invader of Iraq, Tony Blair, to the Vatican as a fraternal visitor while threatening politicians in Mexico and Spain with automatic excommunication for legalising abortion and gay marriage.
Reprimands
This is a moral crusader bringing the liberals of the US and Europe to heel by dispensing reprimands and interdicts, as if he is the landlord of Catholicism.
As long as he reigns, women will not be priests. His holy grail of 'family values' is a pre-'60s kitchenscape of woman chained to the sink by her rosary beads. Being treated as second-class citizens is normal life for Catholic women. Being made to cover your arms by the Swiss Guard and having your president denigrated for wearing a flower in her lapel is par for the course. Still, it beats being burned at the stake.
THE past, however, has crept menacingly closer with this Latin Mass announcement. It is a statement about the priorities of the ruling theo-cons in Rome, at a time when a scarcity of clergy is a pressing concern in Europe.
Last Sunday, when the Tridentine news was percolating through, it was announced in a church not a mile from the one where the Latin version is routinely celebrated that evening Masses were being cancelled due to a shortage of priests.
In politics, as Pope Benedict well knows, emphasis is the message. And the destination on the message board reads: The Middle Ages.
In the South, Catholicism is a 'new thing' and most dioceses and parishes are VERY conservative. We have a few moonbatty parishes (and everybody knows who they are) but they are small, with dwindling congregations. The booming parishes are the conservative/orthodox ones like St. Brigid in Alpharetta and our parish, Holy Spirit.
I think Mahoney is an awful influence in Cali, I guess the Vatican has just decided to wait him out until retirement rather than challenge his cabal in the U.S. church.
Whatever ails the Catholic church, saying Mass in a foreign language isn’t the cure. You can just as easliy raise funds to build a mosque in Latin as you can in German. A healthy dose of Southern Baptist fire and brimstone, now that would get things moving...even if it was in English.
I know what you mean about the uh... enthusiasts, shall we say. I went to TLM one Sunday and this little woman, not especially old, maybe about fifty, long dress, lace mantilla, glasses, comes trudging down the aisle toting a large satchel. She sits in the front pew and starts setting up shop. She’s got icons, crucifixes, statues of Mary, statues of saints, CANDLES (I was told later she’s not allowed to light them), rosaries, missals. She sets up her own little private chapel there in the front row and settles in.
It was kind of everything I’d been warned about in the Catholic Church, but on the other hand I didn’t really mind. I think the private devotions are kind of sweet. I don’t have to participate in them.
Nothing inherently wrong with dancing, folk music, Jesus music, kids liturgies, group blessings (minus the nazi salute please). Just not in the Holy Mass. And preferably not in the nave at any time, though that might be too much to ask.
Expect to see more of this, bump!
Well, of course you can’t expect a well-bred dog to rummage the trash for tissues with GERMS on them ...
Vlad likes to chew baby wipes (unused ...) too. At least they’re cleaning his teeth.
Why would anyone bring a dead person’s tongue to church?
Yes it does.
Yes indeed it was written by a poster child for the Renfield Society.
I think many of the posters here would enjoy the books of
William, L Biersach. He writes mysteries whose protaganist is a traditional Catholic priest in the Diocese of Los Angeles.
How do you say “Kumbayah” in Erse?
No shaking of hands? No bringing of gifts? No handling of snakes? No condoms in the Church?
In Scots Gaelic it’s “Thig an seo.” More or less.
Yeah, I like that. Sounds good to me.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
I’ll have to keep an eye out — though I searched on the internet, and even his soft covers seem pretty expensive! This might take some thought! Can you tell me a little about what they’re like? I don’t like to splurge on a expensive book by an author I don’t already know.
I think she would have to become a Christian first.
The words “lingua franca” are Latin for “language of the Franks.” I was pointing out that in the same sentence that she called Latin “dead,” she used the phrase, “lingua franca,” apparently not realizing that this phrase, commonly used today, was “dead latin.” In other words, she made a fool of herself.
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS
OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?
Response: Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”[5], that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.[6] “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him”[7].
In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church[8], in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.
It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word “subsists” can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the “one” Church); and this “one” Church subsists in the Catholic Church.[10]
Third Question: Why was the expression “subsists in” adopted instead of the simple word “is”?
Response: The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are “numerous elements of sanctification and of truth” which are found outside her structure, but which “as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity”[11].
“It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church”[12].
Fourth Question: Why does the Second Vatican Council use the term “Church” in reference to the oriental Churches separated from full communion with the Catholic Church?
Response: The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the term. “Because these Churches, although separated, have true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds”[13], they merit the title of “particular or local Churches”[14], and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches[15].
“It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches that the Church of God is built up and grows in stature”[16]. However, since communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles, these venerable Christian communities lack something in their condition as particular churches[17].
On the other hand, because of the division between Christians, the fullness of universality, which is proper to the Church governed by the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him, is not fully realised in history[18].
Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?
Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense[20].
Yes I knew how she was using it. I was only kidding.
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.