Skip to comments.Pope Set To Return To Traditional Liturgy
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.
check this out!
I hope he fires "Pope Donnie" and reforms the Catholic (so-called) Diocese of Erie.
Prayerfully joyful news!
Vivat Benedictus XVI.
Such as ...?
The fact that much of the Church throughout the Western world is doing its own thing, often in direct defiance of Vatican doctrines.
The fact that so many Catholics regard abortion as OK, and their local churches support them in that view.
I know JPII was always going to be a hard act to follow, but I'm a little disappointed in Benedict so far.
After only a couple of months? The liturgy is one thing and the most important thing because it deals with how we worship GOD! If we can get that right, a lot of other things will fall into place. BTW, it's up to Catholics to read up on their faith and inform their conciences. The Church can't do everything for them.
re-think....Got to rethink!
The restoration of the liturgy is necessary to reigning in the so-called "Spirit of Vatican II." I predict that Mass attendance will improve dramatically now that B16 is going to stop the insanity. The liturgy of Novus Ordo Masses are just too open to abuse. Altar girls, Eucharistic ministers, lay readers, Mass facing the people, no Communion rail, guitars instead of an organ, Communion under both kinds, liturgical dancers, and the responsorial psalm where we have to repeat the same sentence in a monotone like zombies have played a part in driving people away from Mass. If we go back to praying like Catholics, we will eventually go back to believing and behaving like Catholics, too.
I don't feel any less a Catholic because I go to the "new" Mass. I'm sure the Lord thinks no less of me because I speak to Him in Enlish rather than Latin.
It's not the way Mass is said, it's the message (or lack of it) coming from the pulpit that is impacting.
We need a strong, loud, clear Church now.
"I can't help but think there are higher priorities to deal with."
For want of a nail, the shoe was lost...
What this doesn't say is which Mass will be said in Latin.
I don't see the return of traditional Mass at the Vatican as the panacea for the problems the worldwide Church is currently facing.
I only wish it was.
"I'm sure the Lord thinks no less of me because I speak to Him in Enlish rather than Latin."
That ain't the point, mate.
"It's not the way Mass is said, it's the message (or lack of it) coming from the pulpit that is impacting."
And Latin says, "Since we're starting with Divine Revelation, "change" isn't on the agenda."
(Change being a codeword for "compromise with evil.")
Besides, there's been so much rewriting not only of liturgy and prayers, but even of scripture itself, inflicted in the name of "translation" that it's way past time to bring back Latin in a big way.
If the modernist heretics want to rewrite the Vulgate, they won't be able to hide it as a "translation."
...I'm a little disappointed in Benedict so far.
Not me. I absolutely adore this magnificent, humble man. Long live Pope Benedict XVI.
One language of worship. I'm thrilled.
I'm sure heretics can have their way with Latin just as well as English.
Speaking either, I'd be much happier if I heard our priests giving leadership. Three Sundays ago was "Respect Life" Sunday. Our priest managed to avoid mentioning both abortion and euthanasia in his 10 minute oration. Some effort in English or Latin!
I'm not bagging him. He's our Holy Father - a wonderful, good holy man.
Just a bit of a let down after JPII.
I can't imagine why you'd feel let down by this Pope. I didn't think my heart was ready for another Pope, but Benedict has mine and he had it from the beginning. I was praying for his election.
I suppose I'm used to a Pope who gets out there and lays it on the line.
From all reports, Benedict was going to follow in John Paul's footsteps in the regard. Maybe he's preparing...
"I'm sure heretics can have their way with Latin just as well as English."
Doing things in English gives them a *lot* more leeway to pretend they're not up to anything.
We had an incident not too long ago up here in Yankeeland where a bishop misrepresented the contents of a letter from the Vatican.
I don't know if you've studied Latin or not. I've only dabbled a very little bit, myself. But it's enough to see how watered down, wimpified, and downright eviscerated a lot of things are in English as compared to Latin. And I don't think that's an accident. I think the ICEL did it on purpose.
There's nothing wrong with having good, accurate English translations of the Latin, but we need to get back to Latin as the language of the Church.
You have to start with the root. As many pope, including the two most recent ones, the Mass is the foundation. As Leo XIII pointed out, the active virtues do not replace the passive virtues, which are just as necessary for the good of the Church.
The language is not the major difference.
"Just a bit of a let down after JPII."
I feel the opposite.
I accept the point you make, but, just maybe, the problem was a dodgy Bishop not the language. If every Bishop who should be fired was, there wouldn't be too many left.
You weren't a fan of JPII?
I loved JPII and couldn't stand the thought of losing him, but I have to be completely honest, B-16 has totally captured my heart.
"just maybe, the problem was a dodgy Bishop not the language."
Sure, a dodgy bishop is a problem, but the opportunity to "translate" gives a dodgy clergyman a lot of cover to rewrite. It's not an either/or situation.
Get rid of dodgy clergymen, sure, but also take away that opportunity to rewrite.
I was talking to a Protestant the other day about the "But only say the word, and I shall be healed" problem.
At this point, congregations will be made particularly aware of the extent of change as they recite the words, Lord, I am not worthy that thou should come under my roof but only say the word, and my soul shall be healed.
The present version, which is a gross mistranslation, empties the response of its scriptural echoes, reading: Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed. The new text refers us to Luke 7:6-7, from which the words come under my roof (sub tectum meum) derive. This is the Gospel account of Our Lords curing of the centurions dying slave. The centurion says: I am not worthy to have you come under my roof (Catholic RSV edition).
(He's calling this "new" text, but it looks like the old text to me. I think it's only "new" in that it's a correct translation of a passage that was mistranslated--on purpose, in my view.)
Even as a Protestant, my acquaintance immediately saw that there was an important difference between the two versions, and yet, how many generations have been catechised and confirmed knowing only the deficient version?
Keeping things in Latin is a safeguard.
"You weren't a fan of JPII?"
I was troubled by some of the things he did and didn't do, while constantly reminding myself of the likelihood that I was wrong.
I wish I could have given my wholehearted support to things like giving Mahoney a red hat and not cleaning out the seminaries, but I just wasn't up to it.
Web India? "Vatican expert Sandro Magister"?
This source appears to have all the authority of Dick Durbin's phantom FBI agent at Gitmo.
Magister is recognized as highly reliable and an expert.
I'll be watching for a news report of events that have actually happened. Speculation and predictions have a value of precisely nada.
Instead of me posting scores of quotes recogning Mr. Magister's expertise, why don't you post one source criticizing him as unreliable or untrustworthy.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is at the very center of the Church. How it is celebrated is crucial to every other aspect.
I think all popes get out there and 'lay it on the line' but they each have their own personal way of doing it.
It seems to me, the more I read B16's books, that he believes lex orandi: lex credendi, i.e., the law of prayer is the law of belief. From a beautiful and reverent prayer (the Mass) flows our beautiful and reverent belief. The first guides the latter... but this also works in opposite. B16 will it seems, set the standard for the Mass - raising the bar around the world.
I love JPII but some of the Masses he said were not as inspiring as for instance, his funeral Mass.
While I agree with your sentiments, receiving the Eucharist under both species does NOT qualify as an "abuse".
It is not. However, it IS the necessary first step in the journey of a thousand miles. Christ said to put the Kingdom of Heaven first and all else will be added unto you.
It's not an either/or situation. It's not a case of sorting out the liturgy or dealing with dissent. Both need to be addressed. This is his starting point. It doesn't mean he won't get to grips with the problems which concern you.....and all of us.
The form of worship in St. Peter's is something which can be altered in the blink of an eye. The other stuff, such as Church discipline is something which will need to be an ongoing effort.
The problem being this: at one time the guiding star for translations was precision, now it's all about "relevance".
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.