Latin Masses to be allowed after 25 years

Arizona Republic ^ | 3/17/2004 | Michael Clancy

[american colleen]

Catholics in general are clueless about what's going on.

Not clueless, ultima. The more I get around the more I believe most are comfortable where they are and/or just don't care. It's very sad.

[american colleen]

I agree and identify with 100% of what you just wrote.

[Pyro7480]

Thanks for responding. I think one thing ALL parties in this debate need is patience. One point the so-called "rad-trads" like to bring up is the fact that St. Athanasius was "disobedient" towards his superiors, in defense of orthodoxy. He spent the bulk of his life in exile until he was ultimately vindicated. We should all hope that the SSPX, SSPV, et al, "return to the fold." These things take time. It's only been forty years since Vatican II. It's only been less than one hundred and fifty years since Vatican I and there are still "Old Catholics" who are separated from the Holy See. We all need to pray for discipline within the Church and fight for orthodoxy like our spiritual Father St. Athanasius did.

[Fast Ed97]

I do not see the Latin as the problem facing the church or the Mass itself. What is- is a complete disregard for the liturgy Latin or not- altar girls, t-shirts and shorts for Mass- clapping during music- "feel good" homilie- and the worst is those parishoners who decide to arrive during the consecration- and then after receiving the bread/wine head straight for the door and not the pew.

[Pyro7480]

That is part of the wider problem. We need to have mercy on these people and preach to them that God isn't a burden to fulfill every Sunday. We need to thank Him and praise Him for creating us and for bestowing so many graces on us. The lesson of "The Passion" is that His Only Begotten Son DIED for us. We are not worthy of such gifts.

[presidio9]

the worst is those parishoners who decide to arrive during the consecration- and then after receiving the bread/wine head straight for the door

Are you in the habit of receiving "bread and wine" at Mass then?

[Fast Ed97]

Excuse me body and blood-

[Maximilian]

The Order of the Mass promulgated by Pope Paul VI, what others have "nicknamed" the Novus Ordo (not it's official title), can always be said in Latin.

I'd like to see some documentation on this claim. In fact, Pope Paul VI himself named the New Mass and called it the "Novus Ordo" when he introduced it. This is not a nickname, nor was it applied by others.

In fact, Latin is the normative language. Priests need permission from their Bishops to say this Mass in the venacular language (for America, English), not the other way around.

Try telling that to the priests who have been refused permission to say the New Mass in Latin. Start with the priest in Dallas just within the past few months. The chancery there made some very critical comments about him being a reactionary, the priest was transferred before his term was up, and the chancery official stated that official permission from the bishop was required to say the New Mass in Latin.

It was never the intention of Vatican II to banish Latin, quite the opposite.

If that was the case, then why did the constitution on the sacred liturgy give permission to the bishops' conferences to determine the extent of vernacular usage? As we have seen for the past 40 years, there was nothing preventing those bishops from deciding that vernacular usage would be 100%. And that has been the case, as a direct result of the implementation of Vatican II.

Additionally, despite the fact that Priests of the Latin Rite are supposed to know Latin, many do not. This excaberates the problem.

This is true, in fact quite understated. We are consecrating so-called priests who don't know a word of Latin. I was speaking with my parish priest (who was generally quite conservative) in Massachussetts when I mentioned "As it says in Casti Connubii," and he replied, "Sorry, I don't know any Latin." Not only was I shocked beyond words to discover that he doesn't know any Latin, but "Casti Connubii" is not really even Latin per se, just the title of a document. So besides not knowing any Latin, he clearly has never read any of the major encyclicals either.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

The Church he runs is not in union with the Diocese, and therefore by extension, not with Rome.

It is however, in union with the Catholic Faith. Sad those two things are no longer one and the same.

[VermiciousKnid]

Oh, those lucky, lucky people!

If only my bishop would be so kind. (Fat chance.)

Regards,

[Notwithstanding]

"...but former Bishop Thomas J. O'Brien never allowed them [because he was intolerant, as evidenced by his failure to embrace the diversity of those who prefer Mass in latin.]"

[NYer]

A generation of shoddy catechesis and poorly formed Priests, engineered by a cabal of dissidents trying to mastermind a mid-level takeover of the Church under guise of "post counciliar reform" has caused tremendous harm. The take-over has cracked and is sliding backwards as a new generation comes up to clean up the mess. The 2,000 years of Church history has seen this story played out before.

Thank you for succinctly summing up the past 40 years into an excellent expose! It should be copied, saved, and posted to all other threads on this topic ;-D

[NYer]

It is however, in union with the Catholic Faith. Sad those two things are no longer one and the same.

The same can be said for the Old Catholic Church or for Spiritus Christi - "We are rooted in Catholic tradition, committed to bringing change to the Church."

We are a Christ-centered Catholic community reaching beyond the institutional church to be inclusive of all. Jesus Christ is our pastor; therefore we open our church as a spiritual refuge. We hold the Eucharist as the center of our sacramental life. We embrace the challenge of the Scriptures. We are ordinary people joyously celebrating the opportunity to follow Jesus' radical message of unconditional love.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Both of the groups you mentioned no longer hold to longstanding Catholic doctrines. Women priests and married priests are not part of Catholic teaching.

The burden on those who despise SSPX is to factually prove how they have deviated from Catholic doctrine. It has not been done.

[AAABEST]

Women priests and married priests are not part of Catholic teaching.

Women are explicitly forbidden from speaking before the congregation in scripture, not just canon law. They are also to cover their heads during mass. It seems that all Christians - not just "new" Catholics - have taken to ignoring the written word in the New Testament, as if the word is some sort of buffet table where you pick and choose.

I honestly don't understand it.

Scripture is also very clear about unmarried MEN being better fit to serve God.

[catholic]

Finally, inculturation for traditional catholics in Phoenix.

It probably won't happen, but I'd like to see Fr Pfeiffer meet the bishop and maybe the Indult mass could be at that church. Economy of resources.

Btw, there are lots of VII priests posing as bishop and pope, and bishops posing as pope, not to mention many of them posing as Catholics. To bring children to these churches, is a whole lot worse than going to sspx. It's no more fair for you to accuse them of schism using "tradition" as a front than it is for them to accuse you of enabling and fronting for heresy and scandal after scandal for 40 years, all the while using outward orthodoxy to cover yourself.

This is great news for Phoenix, but it's the first decision of many. Having Latin mass is great, but what if the bishop kisses the holy book of a non-Christian religion? Or says that there is no need for non-believers to convert? Or allows pagans to use his cathedral for services? Or is silent as domestic partner legislation advances? What will the bishop say to pro-abortion Catholic politicians? etc etc etc. Others have said it more eloquently, but it really isn't about just the Latin mass. (I go to NO church myself)

[sinkspur]

Scripture is also very clear about unmarried MEN being better fit to serve God.

Then why did Christ pick mostly married men to be his apostles?

[ArrogantBustard]

married priests are not part of Catholic teaching.

You might want to re-phrase that. As stated, it is most certainly not true.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

You mean except for Eastern Rite Catholics and Protestant ministers who are accepted in?

[american colleen]

Then why did Christ pick mostly married men to be his apostles?

We know one apostle was married at one time because he had a mother in law - no mention of his wife, though. No mention of wives of the other apostles. But we do know that they followed him and left everything.