Priests' opposing views on Latin Mass

Renew America ^ | October 17, 2007 | Matt C. Abbott

[Alex Murphy]

In recent parish bulletins, Father J. Patrick Wissman, pastor of Sacred Heart Catholic Church and St. Catherine of Siena Mission in Bolivar, Mo., lashed out at Pope Benedict's motu proprio Summorum Pontificum.

Father Wissman wrote, in part:

'The Pope seems to be out of touch with the ordinary church. He seems to be acting in good will, but giving into the 'letter writers' who have been complaining for years, he will create a shadow church and cause great divisions in every diocese. Such will be that when churches are built, they would have to accommodate both rites and seminarians would have to take courses in Latin. During many centuries seminarians have fallen through the cracks and not been able to reach the goal of the priesthood because Latin was too difficult for them. This was a scandal! To return to such a course would be lunacy!



'The nature of the language we worship in is crucial. Worship language must be immediate...namely, not translated in the head — Latin would speak to the intellect at bestand that is not good enough. The language of worship must speak to the heart as well as the head.



'The gospel is meant to enlighten and challenge us! It is my opinion that the use of Latin should have been done away with hundreds of years ago. This is one of the things that Martin Luther was right about. After WWII Christians worldwide shook their heads in sober sadness and declared that Christianity had failed in Europe because it had let Hitler and his hateful and mad ways to succeed. Some very holy people said: 'No, Christianity was just never tried.' I fault the use of Latin as partly responsible for the rise and success of Hitler and his neo-pagan mythology which was obviously the religion he was supporting and that actually managed to capture the German imagination. I say the people, because of Latin never were confronted by the gospel. The Mass and the sacraments never really reached down deep into the soul. There are some notable exceptions of priests and laity and some very heroic ones as well as Protestant theologians who confronted the lies of Hitler — of course, they were gotten rid of...."

Father John Trigilio, Jr., president of the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, provided me (upon my asking) with the following response to Father Wissman's commentary.

'This pastor was born in 1938 and ordained in 1964; hence, he grew up and was trained in the seminary according to the Tridentine Mass. Yet, most of his priesthood has been in the Novus Ordo. While he has experience of the extraordinary as well as the ordinary form of the Roman Missal, his statements and judgments about the motu proprio are totally non sequitur.



'First, he classifies the request for a Latin (and not just Latin but the usus antiquior, i.e., Missal of 1962) as being 'selfish.' That is an ad hominem attack to say the least. Are Hispanics 'selfish' for asking for a Mass in Spanish? Are Italo-Americans selfish for wanting an Italian Mass? Of course not. The desire and request for a Latin Mass, be it Novus Ordo according to the 1970 Missal or the Tridentine based on the 1962 Missal, is not selfish. What is selfish is the prejudicial attitude to refuse and to ridicule those who have a spiritual need for something the Church allows, permits and now encourages.



'Secondly, he insults anyone who likes Latin as being 'disobedient' and being dissenters from the Second Vatican Council. Actually, priests and bishops who refuse to implement the papal motu proprio are the ones who are disobedient, not the faithful who have the right to request the extraordinary form of the Mass and the Sacraments. Selfish priests are the ones who refuse to provide for the spiritual needs of their flock just because their requests do not conform to his own personal preferences. The same papal authority which inaugurated the ordinary form of the Mass (Novus Ordo) also issued the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. Benedict XVI is as much pope as was Paul VI. Both enjoyed full, immediate, universal and supreme authority, hence, one cannot pick and choose which pope or which act of papal authority to comply with and which to disregard.



'It is not dissent to want and to request the Latin Mass, either. Vatican II did not mandate a totally vernacular Mass. It allowed the possibility of some parts of the Mass to be in the vernacular. Sacrosanctum Concilium (1963) #36 states '[T]he use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.' It goes on to say in #54, '[I]n Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue ... Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.'



'So, how can the request for Latin be construed as anti-Vatican II?



'Third, he resorts to the reductio ad absurdam fallacy in saying the pope is 'out of touch with the ordinary church' and that he risks creating a 'shadow church' which will divide the true church. The pope is head of the universal church and not just the church in North America. With several continents, cultures, languages and ethnic traditions within Roman Catholicism, some elements of unity need to be preserved. Latin language and Gregorian chant are not threats, nor are they antithetical to English or to contemporary church music. Whenever the pope visits a nation or presides at World Youth Day, it is amazing how many Catholics from outside the U.S. can pray and sing both in Latin and in their own mother tongue. Young and old can express both unity and diversity by sharing the same liturgical language (e.g., Hebrew in Judaism, Arabic in Islam and Greek in Eastern Orthodoxy) and by retaining some of their own vernacular.



'Fourth, Pope Benedict acutely recognizes that Catholicism is the 'great religion of the Et ... Et ' (both/and) rather than the Aut ... Aut (either/or) found in other religions. Hence, we have both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition; both faith and good works; both Eastern (Byzantine) and Western (Roman) rites. The motu proprio continues this process by affirming both the ordinary and the extraordinary forms of the Roman Rite. Father Pat, however, prefers to have it reduced to either/or. Either vernacular or Latin but not both, according to him. Pope Benedict and others believe differently.



'Lastly, I find it most offensive and bizarre to blame Nazism on Latin. While it is true that Catholics in Germany had the Latin Mass before, during, and after 1933-1945 (Hitler's Third Reich), 62 percent of the nation was Lutheran and only 32 percent was Catholic. Germany also had the third largest population of Jews in Europe. Though he himself was born and baptized a Catholic, Hitler repudiated the Catholic faith and never received any other sacraments. He practiced no religion as an adult. There is no corollary between the Latin Mass and the Nazi rise to power, and Father Pat should be ashamed to create one. That's what is misleading, not Pope Benedict, not the motu proprio and certainly not Latin or the usus antiquior.



'On the contrary, as Father [John] Zuhlsdorf has pointed out, there is a mutual gravitational pull between the ordinary and the extraordinary forms of the Roman rite. The 'old Latin Mass' and the 'new vernacular Mass' will reciprocally and beneficially affect each other since they come from one and the same Roman Rite. The dichotomous opposition is not intrinsic to either liturgical form, rather the focal point of animosity and foments of discontent originate in the paranoia of those who vehemently hate anything connected to Catholic tradition and custom. Catholicism preserves the best of the past while adopting the best of the new. It did so with Hebrew and Greek centuries ago and continues to do so with Latin and the vernacular today.



'I find Latin a unifying rather than dividing language. Attend a papal Mass in Rome where millions come year round on pilgrimage. Despite the plethora of languages and cultures, everyone joins in the Sanctus, the Pater Noster and the Agnus Dei. Whether the Mass is entirely in Latin or just the common parts; whether the ordinary form (1970/2000 Missal) or the extraordinary form (1962 Missal); the beauty of Catholic Liturgy and worship is that it transcends time and space. Ironically, more irreverence and heresy have emanated from modern 'liturgical Nazis' who seek to impose their illegitimate abuses and agendas on the rest of the faithful.''

[Pyro7480]

What particularly interested you about this article, Alex?

[Pyro7480]

Catholic ping!

[AnAmericanMother]

Awesome! Father Zuhlsdorf knocks another one right over the center field fence.

btw, Wissman just LOOKS like a hippie-dippie loon. I hope the fallout from this stupid parish letter is immediate, salutary, and decisive.

[AnAmericanMother]

Of course I meant Fr. Trigilio too!

I have his Catholicism for Dummies, and while that really IS a dumb title, it's a great book!

[JustMytwocents70]

and seminarians would have to take courses in Latin.

Oh the horror!!

[maryz]

Wissman just LOOKS like a hippie-dippie loon.

LOL! Yeah, but he's famous now -- at least in the Catholic blogosphere. They're all picking this up! :)

[AnAmericanMother]

Something just occurred to me . . .

I think the bringing up of Nazis was aimed at Pope Benedict . . . he just didn't quite have the nerve to call the Pope a Nazi.

[maryz]

and seminarians would have to take courses in Latin.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that seminarians are still supposed to be taking Latin -- not again. Granted, many seminaries dropped it post-Vatican II -- had to make room for all the sappy social science stuff (getting rid of that would be a blessing in itself!).

[maryz]

he just didn't quite have the nerve to call the Pope a Nazi.

Undoubtedly saving it for the next installment. BTW, Fr. Z has a later installment of "Fr. Pat's" piece that I hadn't seen in previous postings (wonder how long he intends to keep this up!):

Continuing with reflections on the Motu Proprio on the use of Latin.

11. I fear that one of the reasons the church has done so poorly in Europe is because the renewal of the Liturgy never took place. It did here, though! It has been one of the reasons that the American Church has thrived and even now grows greatly by new members joining from other Christian churches. When exposed to the liturgy and sacraments of the Church, they are overjoyed at the theology, the content and faith they portray and feel they have found their true home. Latin would make even the Holy Spirit stumble.

12. Latin is not a "sacred" language (as would be Hebrew or Greek (and Aramaic), the languages the bible was originally written in. But even they would be a hindrance to true worship and sacrament. Can it be that the people who want Latin really don’t want to be challenged by the gospel and be called to be thoughtful of others and be willing to sacrifice an external like Latin for the sake of the whole?

13. The choice to do a Latin Mass or sacraments according to the Pope’s document would rest with the priest, not with the people and not with the Bishop.

14. There is an insinuation in the Motu Proprio and certainly with the people who want Latin, that the changes of Vatican II were unnecessary, that the liturgy was in a good state and returning to some of the ancient practices of a better time were wrong. They would suggest there was no need for a renewal or an awakening of the faithful to the liturgy of Mass and sacraments. This attitude is unacceptable. The liturgy was in deplorable state, not only the language was unintelligible but the accretions of meaningless practices and legalistic attitudes of rubricism were a hindrance to meaningful celebration. In those days Catholic spirituality was in a bad state. Holy Communion was rarely taken by the faithful (a law had to be made to force them to take communion at least once a year) and Mass was viewed as something magical and superstitious. The true understanding of the theology of Mass and sacrament was rare.

15. The Gregorian chant although beautiful when sung correctly was almost never done with skill and beauty outside monasteries. Singing in the Catholic world of the United States was a poor at best and monotonous - with a few hymns making up the entire parish repertory, the exception being at Christmas where there were plenty of English language songs to be sung.

16. The unity of our rite or worship would be seriously jeopardized. If we are going to develop a variety of rites that a catechumen or candidate would choose from, we would confront them with confusion.

We can perhaps reflect on the wonderful gifts from God that we call Sacraments!

[Claud]

Why is everyone always ribbing on Alex? LOL

Is there some posting “conspiracy” uncovered I have not been informed about?

:-o

[DogwoodSouth]

I prefer this picture of the handsome devil Father Pat: Yes, he was a priest then.... doesn't it just smell like the 70s?

[DogwoodSouth]

I prefer this picture of the handsome devil Father Pat: Yes, he was a priest then.... doesn't it just smell like the 70s?

[DogwoodSouth]

Sorry for the double post... it might just push some of you past the gag reflex ;-)

This pic is taken from the parish’s website and is on the priest’s bio page. Lovely.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

He likes us. One of these days he’s going to up and become Catholic ;-P

[AnAmericanMother]

Oh, YYYECCCCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHH!

All he needs is some gold chains - he's got the soft focus and the unbuttoned shirt. "Hey, babeeeee!"

At least he didn't have sideburns.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

I think AmChurch has finally come together with a plan, especially considering the fact Ecclesia Dei is putting together a new document to deal with resistant bishops.

Steinbock in Fresno recently issued an announcement on the local TV channel stating that due to the priest shortage (paraphrasing here) the priests are much too busy so don’t bother asking for the Old Mass. He claims the Pope’s MP was intended for Europe where church attendance is declining, not the U.S. where churches are full. The icing on the cake? He topped it off by saying many parishes would no longer have priests but parish life coordinators so get used to it.

[maryz]

A variation of the evolving "party line," I guess. Your post reminded me of the following comment on Fr. Z's blog:

I remember Archbishop Borders, then head of the Bishops’Doctrine committee and Archbishop of Baltimore,stating to the press that Pope Paul’s order to put first confession back to its traditional place before first holy communion was meant only for the Italians. . . . . When Ex Corde Ecclesiae was issued the bishops said that it was for Europe. When the review of religious orders of women was had, they said it was meant for Europe. When the Popes condemned slavery, the American bishops wrote President VanBuren and told him that the pope was not talking about us but Europe! Cardinal O’Malley was the first to state in his meeting with the pope and afterwards to his diocese that the motu proprio was intended primarily for Europe.

Is there a pattern emerging here? ;-)

[ArrogantBustard]

Oremus

[Alex Murphy]

Oremus

Luther
Calvin
Edwards
Machen
Schaeffer