Posted on 05/04/2008 4:16:11 PM PDT by NYer
The liberal rebellion in American Catholicism has dogged Benedict and his predecessors since the Second Vatican Council of 1962-65. "Vatican II," which overhauled much of Catholic teaching and ritual, had a revolutionary impact on the Church as a whole. It enabled people to hear the Mass in their own languages; embraced the principle of religious freedom; rejected anti-semitism; and permitted Catholic scholars to grapple with modernity.
But Vatican II meant even more to a generation of devout but restless young people in the U.S. rather than a course correction, Terrence Tilley, now head of the Fordham University's theology department, wrote recently, his generation perceived "an interruption of history, a divine typhoon that left only the keel and structure of the church unchanged." They discerned in the Council a call to greater church democracy, and an assertion of individual conscience that could stand up to the authority of even the Pope. So, they battled the Vatican's birth-control ban, its rejection of female priests and insistence on celibacy, and its authoritarianism.
Rome pushed back, and the ensuing struggle defined a movement, whose icons included peace activist Fr. Daniel Berrigan, feminist Sister Joan Chittister, and sociologist/author Fr. Andrew Greeley. Its perspectives were covered in The National Catholic Reporter, Commonweal and America. Martin Sheen held down Hollywood, and the movement even boasted its own cheesy singing act: the St. Louis Jesuits. The reformers' premier membership organization was Call to Action, but their influence was felt at the highest reaches of the American Church, as sympathetic American bishops passed left-leaning statements on nuclear weapons and economic justice. Remarks Tilley, "For a couple of generations, progressivism was an [important] way to be Catholic."...and long live the "Great Et Et."
Then he adds, "But I think the end of an era is here."...
Then, the movement received a monstrous reprieve. The priest sex abuse scandal implicated not only the predators, but the superiors who shielded them. John Paul remained mostly silent. A new reform group, Voice of the Faithful, arose; the old anger returned, crystallizing around the battle-cry "They just don't get it."
Benedict's visit, however, changed the dynamic. And that's a problem for progressives. Says Fr. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at Georgetown University's Woodstock Theological Center whom Benedict famously removed from his previous job as editor of America, "Reform movements need an enemy to organize against. As most bishops have gotten their acts together on sex abuse, they have looked less like the enemy and more like part of the solution. Enthusiasm for reform declined. With the Pope's forthright response, it will decline even more."
Adios ping!
bump
I think the whole abusive-priest thing was a deliberate plot by homosexual activists to undermine the Catholic Church.
Well, with the liberal media, almost every other paragraph written/spoken/televised about the Pope’s visit mentioned abusive priests and speculated what the Pope should or would do. For the layperson, it seemed that every priest was under suspicion and those who were abused were being ignored. For the media, who thrive on making everyone a victim, it was a story ready made for them.
I’m a relatively new convert to Catholicism, and I have a question for you old timers. The MSM always talks about Vatican II allowing Mass in the vernacular, but I’m assuming that the reading and of course the homily were always in the vernacular, with Latin being limited to the preparation of the Eucharist.
Can someone shed light on this for me?
Liberal Catholicism: was it ever alive?
Hey! I LIKED their music!
Actually Latin was expected by the council fathers to remain the dominant language of the Mass. It was definitely expected to remain the language of the entire canon of the Mass. AFTER the council a committee took over the job of writing the rubrics for the New Mass. That committee and circumstances essentially ushered the whole Mass into the vernacular.
What a disaster.
Homily always in the vernacular.
People had side-by-side (Latin/English) translations of the Mass.
The whole mass was in Latin except for the sermon. It was an option to repeat the gospel and/or epistle in the vernacular.
First Sunday's we sing all of the songs and prayers in Latin.
I know many older Catholics feel something was lost, but I don’t think I get it. What is to be gained by conducting Mass in a dead language, especially as the Latin is a translation itself?
What is bad about the vernacular?
What is bad about the vernacular?
_________
America is a nation of immigrants, and when the Catholic Church came here, they came from a score of different European countries. The common language, even a dead one, provided some unity
“Liberal Catholicism: Dead? “
We can only hope.
Although it would be decades before it could ever happen, English is now the universal language (lingua franca) that latin used to be, and could be the easiest way to have uniformity within the universal Church.
But there are benefits to using the dead latin language, the most obvious being that as a dead langauge, it won’t evolve and “scholars” can’t pretend that black means white - as they so often do in English.
An immediate benefit in the USA would be if the novus ordo was celebrated everywhere as VII ensisioned it - in latin.
Then parishes would not need to have spanish and english masses. Everyone would join to worship in the neutral language of the Church. It would be a real unifying experience.
It would take much catechesis, but it would be quite do-able. If there’s a will, there’s a way.
Sure, but it wouldn't seem to serve their children very well. Even for immigrants, not knowing Latin as a living language would greatly diminish the readings would it not? And as we now have Masses in several languages, any immigrant community of size could have a Mass in their particular language.
I just don't understand why you would want to do the readings in a language that almost everyone is deficient in.
One of my favorite lessons with the children in Science class, is to teach them about Binomial Nomenclature, and Carolus Linnaeus.
The kids love to discuss how language has evolved, even in the last 50 years.
The theme song of The Flintstones sure takes on a new meaning using today interpretation of certain words.
You wrote:
“I know many older Catholics feel something was lost, but I don’t think I get it.”
I am not “older” by the way. At least I don’t think so! ;)
“What is to be gained by conducting Mass in a dead language, especially as the Latin is a translation itself?”
The Latin Mass is not a translation. The prayers were written in Latin. Ever wonder why the Kyrie is still in Greek in the old Latin Mass? It was never translated into Latin.
“What is bad about the vernacular?”
Inaccurate, bland, dull and even bad theologically at times. That’s why the last two popes have been so disgusted with the language of the New Mass in English. Think of it this way. The New Mass came out in 1970. We STILL do not have a Vatican approved translation of it. It’s been 38 years!
http://www.catholic-pages.com/mass/pontificale.asp
To get to where it should be we actually have to go closer to the Latin: http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2004a/012304/012304e.php
We were just better off with the old Mass. Millions of sould lost in the meantime! What a horrible waste.
I just don’t understand why you would want to do the readings in a language that almost everyone is deficient in.
_________________________
It seemed to be a good idea at the time, the Church has subsequently changed course since then.
Of course, at that previous point in time, all of the parochial schools required study in Latin (as well as many public schools), so people were less deficient in the language than they are in the current day.
Non-Catholic bttt
Parts of it would be if the readings are done in Latin, right?
Inaccurate, bland, dull and even bad theologically at times.
Unless all pre VII Catholics were fluent in Latin, I can't think of anything duller and more pointless than sitting through a foreign language presentation without subtitles.
I assume vernacular Bibles were published pre VII, or no?
If the Priest must translate the meaning of the readings, isn't the entire point of accuracy lost?
Even the people I know who read Latin are not fluent in it. It is hard to believe that your average Catholic could get much out of readings in Latin.
Even at the height of my studies in French, I would have been losing a lot attending a Mass performed entirely in French.
Throw another shovel full of dirt on that grave!
In our Latin masses, which started up again last fall, the Gospel is first read in Latin, then in English. The homily is in English. All the other readings are in Latin. Translations are provided/ we read along.
That is now, of course. And I wasn’t around ‘then,’ being also a fairly new convert. Welcome home.
I think it is about the unity. Now there is a Spanish mass at 12, a Vietnamese one at 2, a Korean one later, etc. It divides the congregations in the very place we are to be one — church.
Where I tutor, we still have a substantial number of kids studying Latin at the Catholic high schools here in Los Angeles. Not at the public ones, tho, nor secular.
Even the people I know who read Latin are not fluent in it. It is hard to believe that your average Catholic could get much out of readings in Latin.
_______________
Of course that is a good point. But back in the day, there just was a different paradigm of Catholic worship.
Some of the congregation followed along with a hand missal, many of the others were involved in reciting the rosary or other devotions during mass.
I was a kid back then, and my parents saw that I got to mass on Sunday, and not only was the mass in Latin, the vernacular was Slovak which I didn’t understand either. It did give me good training in sitting and kneeling quietly, a skill that has served me well that I got out of the experience.
there is a Spanish mass at 12, a Vietnamese one at 2, a Korean one later, etc. It divides the congregations in the very place we are to be one — church.
______________________
Back in the day, even though it was all Latin, there were different parishes set up for the different nationalities. I don’t think Latin is a panacea for that problem.
Human-centered thinking -- the thing we are trying to move away from. The majority of the Mass is an offering to God, not an education for those who assist. Do your religious studies elsewhere primarily and attend Mass to worship God.
But it does erect a linguistic brick wall to those bishops who abuse the words of the vernacular liturgy.
Then why do the readings at all? And are you asserting that God doesn't understand English?
At the Latin Masses I’ve attended, everything is in Latin, except the readings are read in Latin and then repeated in the vernacular. Then the entire homily is in the vernacular. It’s easy to follow along most of the mass, because the Latin is on the left page, and the vernacular is on the right.
If you ever decide to go to a Latin mass, make sure to go to a High Mass first. It’s just beautiful!
The readings are one of the exceptions that doesn’t fall within “the majority of the Mass” I mentioned.
In addition to less vulnerability to local modification and vernacular nuances that change meaning, the use of Latin has strong historical precedent as I’m sure you’ll agree, and along with the priest facing the altar, tends to focus attention where it belongs. A more complete and erudite rationale can be found in many places on the net.
You wrote:
“Parts of it would be if the readings are done in Latin, right?”
No. That would mean the vulgate is a translation, not the Mass unless you’re talking about the smallest of prayers. Also, how is the New Mass NOT a translation? Do you think it was written in English? No. It was written in Latin and then butchered into bland English. I say butchered because it often can’t even be called “translation”. See this great blog to see what I mean: http://wdtprs.com/blog/
“Unless all pre VII Catholics were fluent in Latin, I can’t think of anything duller and more pointless than sitting through a foreign language presentation without subtitles.”
Uh, you’ve never been to the old Mass have you? I suggest you go since you clearly have no idea of what you’re talking about. Also, Catholics could buy missals or even learn enough Latin to know what is going on. Besides I have seen Catholics at the New Mass who are clearly bored to tears by the bland language and music. I just went to a Latin Mass today.
“I assume vernacular Bibles were published pre VII, or no?”
Yes.
“If the Priest must translate the meaning of the readings, isn’t the entire point of accuracy lost?”
He simply reads the missal and readings book. In the missal the readings are in Latin. In the readings book, the readings are in English. In my hand missal, I have both. And, since, unlike most New Mass goers, I own that missal I actually learn those readings better than they ever will just glancing at them at Mass on Sunday. The only downside is that New Mass goers cover almost the whole Bible in three years while the old Mass does not.
This will give you an idea about what a good hand missal looks like: http://www.baroniuspress.com/missal/sample_pages_daily_missal_1962.pdf
If you ever decide to go to a Latin mass, make sure to go to a High Mass first. It’s just beautiful!
__________________________
Of course that is a matter of opinion. Back in the day, many if not most Catholics avoided the high mass in favor of the quiet low mass.
Interesting, thanks. I am a fairly new Catholic, but I do enjoy the Latin masses. It’s easy enough to read along, even in the Latin.
"Woodstock" is the name of the Theological Center?
How appropriate!
Who's the Dean? Bob Dylan?
It was unifying and it was powerful and I can't help but believe that God must have been pleased.
Those impostors graduated from the seminaries and reached "critical mass" in the sixties,the enemies were quite certain that the Church would be decimated by the end of the century.
Although we experienced a lot of upheaval and confusion,it seems that we are now much more prepared to meet the secular world and bring souls to God than had we not gone through this
Pope Benedict sure has a way with words. “Catholicism,the religion of the great et,et.” Perfect!!
Sorry, but the Protestant wing of the Cahtolic Church did not get a “bump” out of the priest molestation scandal. Why? Because most people saw this for what it was - a reflection of the homosexual agenda that was ushered into the Church when we eagerly jumped into bed with the dominant culture soon after Vatican II. These revelations gave impetus to a trend in the Church to get back to basics i.e. the truth.
I majored in Medieval history in college (not a lot of money in that), so the sense of tradition and continuity that you refer to is not lost on me. Although I have not been to a Latin Mass, I can see how it would be quite powerful in that sense. And the global universality is also interesting.
Perhaps I am just lucky at my parish, but I've never felt that the Mass was boring or dull. I have, however, attended Mass at other parishes and thought that it was strange.
I certainly understand the issue of improper translations and/or impossible translations, but unless you submerge yourself in a foreign language and become fluent, you are still left with nothing but your own language to explain translations.
Thank you all for you inputs. I will spend some time reading through the resources you posted and I hope to attend a Latin Mass in the near future.
Thanks again.
Same here.
I was answering the question posed, which inquired about what went on prior to Vatican II.
BTW, does anyone know of any CDs that contain the standard Gregorian chants of the Mass, such as those sung during a Novus Ordo Latin Mass (many of which would also be sung at a X-Form Latin Mass). Also the non-sung reposnses?
It would help to have them in the car to listen to to get the words and music memorized.
Latin is not a dead language, just because it isn’t used to buy fish anymore. It is the root of all European langages west of the Rhine, including English. It is the universal language of the universal Church. For the Church it is a language of inspirational beauty just as English has been the language of dumbed-down, orate stancing, hand shaking, Mass dancing Kumbayah Catholics. Sing the Hail Mary; sing the Ave Maria.
English is a fine language for engineering and navigation. Latin is better for prayer. If classical languages are not taught anymore, is it the fault of the Church?
If we went to the Low Mass it was to get in and out quickly to meet other schedules. I got up for 5:30 mass as a teen so I could receive Communion and go home for breakfast at 6.
Who would not prefer a Latin funeral Mass for a sendoff?
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.