Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing My Service on I.C.E.L.
Communicantes (Newsletter of the Society of St. Pius X in Canada) ^ | October 2002 | Rev. Fr. Stephen Somerville

Posted on 11/29/2002 5:00:21 PM PST by Loyalist

An Open Letter to the Church Renouncing my Service on I.C.E.L.
Father Stephen Somerville, STL.

Dear Fellow Catholics in the Roman Rite,

1 – I am a priest who for over ten years collaborated in a work that became a notable harm to the Catholic Faith. I wish now to apologize before God and the Church and to renounce decisively my personal sharing in that damaging project. I am speaking of the official work of translating the new post-Vatican II Latin liturgy into the English language, when I was a member of the Advisory Board of the International Commission on English Liturgy (I.C.E.L.).

2 – I am a priest of the Archdiocese of Toronto, Canada, ordained in 1956. Fascinated by the Liturgy from early youth, I was singled out in 1964 to represent Canada on the newly constituted I.C.E.L. as a member of the Advisory Board. At 33 its youngest member, and awkwardly aware of my shortcomings in liturgiology and related disciplines, I soon felt perplexity before the bold mistranslations confidently proposed and pressed by the everstrengthening radical/progressive element in our group. I felt but could not articulate the wrongness of so many of our committee’s renderings.

3 – Let me illustrate briefly with a few examples. To the frequent greeting by the priest, The Lord be with you, the people traditionally answered, and with your (Thy) spirit: in Latin, Et cum spiritu tuo. But I.C.E.L. rewrote the answer: And also with you. This, besides having an overall trite sound, has added a redundant word, also. Worse, it has suppressed the word spirit which reminds us that we human beings have a spiritual soul. Furthermore, it has stopped the echo of four (inspired) uses of with your spirit in St. Paul’s letters.

4 – In the I confess of the penitential rite, I.C.E.L. eliminated the threefold through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault, and substituted one feeble through my own fault. This is another nail in the coffin of the sense of sin.

5 – Before Communion, we pray Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst (you should) enter under my roof. I.C.E.L. changed this to ... not worthy to receive you. We loose the roof metaphor, clear echo of the Gospel (Matth. 8:8), and a vivid, concrete image for a child.

6 – I.C.E.L.’s changes amounted to true devastation especially in the oration prayers of the Mass. The Collect or Opening Prayer for Ordinary Sunday 21 will exemplify the damage. The Latin prayer, strictly translated, runs thus: O God, who make the minds of the faithful to be of one will, grant to your peoples (grace) to love that which you command and to desire that which you promise, so that, amidst worldly variety, our hearts may there be fixed where true joys are found.

7 – Here is the I.C.E.L. version, in use since 1973: Father, help us to seek the values that will bring us lasting joy in this changing world. In our desire for what you promise, make us one in mind and heart.

8 – Now a few comments: To call God Father is not customary in the Liturgy, except Our Father in the Lord’s prayer. Help us to seek implies that we could do this alone (Pelagian heresy) but would like some aid from God. Jesus teaches, without Me you can do nothing. The Latin prays grant (to us), not just help us. I.C.E.L.’s values suggests that secular buzzword, “values” that are currently popular, or politically correct, or changing from person to person, place to place. Lasting joy in this changing world, is impossible. In our desire presumes we already have the desire, but the Latin humbly prays for this. What you promise omits “what you (God) command”, thus weakening our sense of duty. Make us one in mind (and heart) is a new sentence, and appears as the main petition, yet not in coherence with what went before. The Latin rather teaches that uniting our minds is a constant work of God, to be achieved by our pondering his commandments and promises. Clearly, I.C.E.L. has written a new prayer. Does all this criticism matter? Profoundly! The Liturgy is our law of praying (lex orandi), and it forms our law of believing (lex credendi). If I.C.E.L. has changed our liturgy, it will change our faith. We see signs of this change and loss of faith all around us.

9 – The foregoing instances of weakening the Latin Catholic Liturgy prayers must suffice. There are certainly THOUSANDS OF MISTRANSLATIONS in the accumulated work of I.C.E.L. As the work progressed I became a more and more articulate critic. My term of office on the Advisory Board ended voluntarily about 1973, and I was named Member Emeritus and Consultant. As of this writing I renounce any lingering reality of this status.

10 – The I.C.E.L. labours were far from being all negative. I remember with appreciation the rich brotherly sharing, the growing fund of church knowledge, the Catholic presence in Rome and London and elswhere, the assisting at a day-session of Vatican II Council, the encounters with distinguished Christian personalities, and more besides. I gratefully acknowledge two fellow members of I.C.E.L. who saw then, so much more clearly than I, the right translating way to follow: the late Professor Herbert Finberg, and Fr. James Quinn S.J. of Edinburgh. Not for these positive features and persons do I renounce my I.C.E.L. past, but for the corrosion of Catholic Faith and of reverence to which I.C.E.L.’s work has contributed. And for this corrosion, however slight my personal part in it, I humbly and sincerely apologize to God and to Holy Church.

11 – Having just mentioned in passing the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), I now come to identify my other reason for renouncing my translating work on I.C.E.L. It is an even more serious and delicate matter. In the past year (from mid 2001), I have come to know with respect and admiration many traditional Catholics. These, being persons who have decided to return to pre-Vatican II Catholic Mass and Liturgy, and being distinct from “conservative” Catholics (those trying to retouch and improve the Novus Ordo Mass and Sacraments of post-Vatican II), these Traditionals, I say, have taught me a grave lesson. They brought to me a large number of published books and essays. These demonstrated cumulatively, in both scholarly and popular fashion, that the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas. These writings show further that the new liturgy produced by the Vatican “Concilium” group, under the late Archbishop A. Bugnini, was similarly infected. Especially the New Mass is problematic. It waters down the doctrine that the Eucharist is a true Sacrifice, not just a memorial. It weakens the truth of the Real Presence of Christ’s victim Body and Blood by demoting the Tabernacle to a corner, by reduced signs of reverence around the Consecration, by giving Communion in the hand, often of women, by cheapering the sacred vessels, by having used six Protestant experts (who disbelieve the Real Presence) in the preparation of the new rite, by encouraging the use of sacro-pop music with guitars, instead of Gregorian chant, and by still further novelties.

12 – Such a litany of defects suggests that many modern Masses are sacrilegious, and some could well be invalid. They certainly are less Catholic, and less apt to sustain Catholic Faith.

13 – Who are the authors of these published critiques of the Conciliar Church? Of the many names, let a few be noted as articulate, sober evaluators of the Council: Atila Sinka Guimaeres (In the Murky Waters of Vatican II), Romano Amerio (Iota Unum: A Study of the Changes in the Catholic Church in the 20th Century), Michael Davies (various books and booklets, TAN Books), and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, one the Council Fathers, who worked on the preparatory schemas for discussions, and has written many readable essays on Council and Mass (cf Angelus Press).

14 – Among traditional Catholics, the late Archbishop Lefebvre stands out because he founded the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), a strong society of priests (including six seminaries to date) for the celebration of the traditional Catholic liturgy. Many Catholics who are aware of this may share the opinion that he was excommunicated and that his followers are in schism. There are however solid authorities (including Cardinal Ratzinger, the top theologian in the Vatican) who hold that this is not so. SSPX declares itself fully Roman Catholic, recognizing Pope John Paul II while respectfully maintaining certain serious reservations.

15 – I thank the kindly reader for persevering with me thus far. Let it be clear that it is FOR THE FAITH that I am renouncing my association with I.C.E.L. and the changes in the Liturgy. It is FOR THE FAITH that one must recover Catholic liturgical tradition. It is not a matter of mere nostalgia or recoiling before bad taste.

16 – Dear non-traditional Catholic Reader, do not lightly put aside this letter. It is addressed to you, who must know that only the true Faith can save you, that eternal salvation depends on holy and grace-filled sacraments as preserved under Christ by His faithful Church. Pursue these grave questions with prayer and by serious reading, especially in the publications of the Society of St Pius X.

17 – Peace be with you. May Jesus and Mary grant to us all a Blessed Return and a Faithful Perseverance in our true Catholic home.

Rev Father Stephen F. Somerville, STL.


TOPICS: Catholic; Worship
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; icel; liturgicalreform; mass; novusordo; prayers; tridentine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 901-943 next last
Fr. Somerville used to be considered one of the Canadian Church's liberal liturgical heroes (though Somerville, to his credit, never saw himself that way).

His condemnations of the New Mass cannot be so easily dismissed by the KJPL gang; he was one of its contributors.

1 posted on 11/29/2002 5:00:21 PM PST by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aristophanes; Dajjal; Desdemona; Domestic Church; dsc; FBDinNJ; Francisco; ...
PING!

Please freepmail me if you would like to be added to or removed from my Traditionalist list.
2 posted on 11/29/2002 5:05:43 PM PST by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Wow! This is like Trotsky coming out as a Tsarist.

Do the Traditionalists have a Witness Protection Program?
3 posted on 11/29/2002 5:18:40 PM PST by Goetz_von_Berlichingen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Is Fr.Somerville, as of October 2002, aligning himself with the SSPX or is he just aligning himself with the traditionalist movement?
4 posted on 11/29/2002 5:33:23 PM PST by Domestic Church
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Great post. Father Somerville will now be persecuted for daring to speak up for the faith.
5 posted on 11/29/2002 5:43:05 PM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Good article. You would have been further heartened to hear Archbishop Dolan who appeared tonight on "The World Over" on EWTN and spoke about this very subject. He sees the confusion over translation(s) coming to an end and a return to the true Latin translation. There is a new leadership of conservatives rising out of the USCCB, thank God.

I find this confusing: "SSPX declares itself fully Roman Catholic, recognizing Pope John Paul II while respectfully maintaining certain serious reservations."

Shouldn't it be that Pope John Paul recognizes the SSPX while maintaining certain serious reservations? It seems to me that the writer has his statement backwards and I'd guess that men like Fr. Richard McBrien recognizes himself as "fully Roman Catholic," so I'm not sure what that means. I'm also wondering what the SSPX means when they say "recognizes Pope John Paul 11" - what do they recognize him as?

6 posted on 11/29/2002 6:38:01 PM PST by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diago; narses; Loyalist; BlackElk; american colleen; saradippity; Polycarp; Dajjal; ...
I.C.E.L.’s changes amounted to true devastation

This is a powerful testimony. As Fr. Somerville himself points out, this information has long been available to anyone who takes the time to investigate a topic so essential to the salvation of your immortal soul.

Clearly, I.C.E.L. has written a new prayer.

Even if you are convinced of the validity of the Novus Ordo, when you attend Mass in the vernacular, you are participating in a travesty of even this new service. THE PRAYERS ARE NOT THE SAME.

I have come to know with respect and admiration many traditional Catholics. These, being persons who have decided to return to pre-Vatican II Catholic Mass and Liturgy, and being distinct from “conservative” Catholics (those trying to retouch and improve the Novus Ordo Mass and Sacraments of post-Vatican II), these Traditionals, I say, have taught me a grave lesson. These demonstrated cumulatively, in both scholarly and popular fashion, that the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas.

"Conservative" Catholics (aka "neo-Catholics") are part of the problem, not part of the solution. They are not defending the 2000-year tradition of the Church. Instead they are institutionalizing abuses and corruptions.

Such a litany of defects suggests that many modern Masses are sacrilegious, and some could well be invalid. They certainly are less Catholic, and less apt to sustain Catholic Faith.

For the good of your soul, ATTEND THE LATIN MASS. You are gambling with all eternity otherwise.

It is FOR THE FAITH that I am renouncing my association with I.C.E.L. and the changes in the Liturgy. It is FOR THE FAITH that one must recover Catholic liturgical tradition.

Let's please dispense with all the hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic." It is clear that Fr. Somerville is devoted to the Catholic Faith. Let's address the substance of his arguments. Your destiny for all eternity is riding on it. As Fr. Somerville said:

You, who must know that only the true Faith can save you, that eternal salvation depends on holy and grace-filled sacraments as preserved under Christ by His faithful Church.

7 posted on 11/29/2002 6:39:42 PM PST by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
These demonstrated cumulatively, in both scholarly and popular fashion, that the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas.

This is where I go bonkers. Does this mean that they (SSPX & Fr. Somerville) believe that Vatican II was abandoned by the Holy Spirit and therefore is null and void? Where exactly does this thinking leave us?

8 posted on 11/29/2002 7:07:12 PM PST by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
I'm glad to see changes coming at ICEL but I'm afraid we are years away from a better English translation making it down to local parishes. I don't know the process but I imagine that even after a new translation is approved it will take quite some time for new lectionaries to be printed, distributed and used.
9 posted on 11/29/2002 7:16:26 PM PST by cebadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
Two points. First, the problems aren't only with the translation of the Novus Ordo. It's with the Latin original as well. The vernacular version is only slightly worse, building on an already Protestant foundation. In any case, the new Mass in Latin is nowhere to be found in the real world--except maybe on EWTN.

Second, the point Fr. Somerville was making was not to suggest SSPX deigns to recongize the Pope. It is to silence those who believe SSPXers are in "schism" because they do not recognize the Pope. This was never the case. It's refreshing to hear someone outside the movement admitting this.
10 posted on 11/29/2002 7:22:55 PM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
Look, you are not correct on this matter of the Holy Spirit. The Church has always taught that divine protection against error only occurs at a council when a solemn dogma is being declared. Vatican II declared no new dogmas, therefore there can be no assurance of divine protection for any of its statements. Many on this site--yourself included--have this loony idea that everything issued by the Council is binding on the faithful, as though God Himself had spoken. This is patent nonsense. Pastoral decrees can be full of mistaken ideas and even liberal foolishness--as Vatican II undoubtedly was.
11 posted on 11/29/2002 7:37:32 PM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: GatorGirl; tiki; maryz; *Catholic_list; afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; Askel5; ...
Ping
13 posted on 11/29/2002 8:09:20 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
"In any case, the new Mass in Latin is nowhere to be found in the real world--except maybe on EWTN."

Our parish celebrates a New Mass in Latin on every First Saturday, in honor of Our Lady. We use the booklets that come from Ignatius Press, which are free for the asking. The booklet is called simply, "The Mass of Vatican II" and it is in the public domain, so reproductions are permitted.

14 posted on 11/29/2002 8:22:23 PM PST by redhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio; Maximilian; american colleen
I don't think you are going to find us silenced by Fr. Somerville's magisterium either. And a member of ICEL, no less. Either you guys knuckle under to papal authority or you remain in schism. It's just that simple. As American Colleen posts, Fr. McBrien probably imagines himself Catholic but that does not make it so.

Your recognition of the pope [We'd know that guy anywhere! We recognize him! He's that Polish guy who claims to be pope, right?] is on a par with my making a promise to an errant child to remember the child in my will and then having the only remembrance be a paragraph to the effect: to my rebellious and unrepentant child whom I promised to remember in my will, Hi kid! Don't expect Fr. Somerville's "admission" to become an epidemic.

The "movement" huh?

The new Mass in Latin has been said often at St. Mary's Church in New Haven, CT, founding location of the Knights of Columbus, at Opus Dei houses and a lot more places as well. Where do you get the notion that it is never said?

SSPX is such a tiresome schism!

15 posted on 11/29/2002 8:49:32 PM PST by BlackElk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
While you're defending the indefensible--popes and cardinals bowing down to Allah--all the while attacking solid Catholics who prefer the fullness of the Catholic faith to becoming Protestants, take a little time out to read the article. Your ignorance needs schooling badly.
16 posted on 11/29/2002 9:15:40 PM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: redhead
Our parish celebrates a New Mass in Latin on every First Saturday, in honor of Our Lady. We use the booklets that come from Ignatius Press, which are free for the asking. The booklet is called simply, "The Mass of Vatican II" and it is in the public domain, so reproductions are permitted.

We have the NO in Latin on Sunday evening. My Priest used to do the Tridentine Mass during that same time slot, but the Archbishop pulled the indult.

I don't share the heated emotions that some on this forum do regarding the SSPX vs NO Catholics. Even at it's most reverent, IMHO, the NO basically stinks. The language is common, and there is nothing about it that I find elevates the Mass to that "glimpse of the supernatural" that I would like to experience during the Mass. Add to that mix, the many "pastoral innovations", aka, dancing girls with bowls of incense, less than noble vessels, bad music, etc, and I have to wonder if it's ever going to get better. I now attend the Rite I of the Anglican Use, so I no longer feel angry, sad, hopeless, etc, following Mass.

I know many people long for the NO as celebrated at EWTN or at Mother Angelica's new monastery in Hanceville. In fact we discussed it at Thanksgiving dinner yesterday, and we've all attended both of those Masses many times. The basic thought was that even the most reverent Priests, beautiful surroundings, traditional hymns, and lack of innovation can't overcome the defective language in the NO.

That said, I am curious what the replacing of Cardinal Estevez with Cardinal Arinze is going to do along the lines of "fixing" the defects in the NO.

17 posted on 11/29/2002 9:33:58 PM PST by sockmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Pursue these grave questions with prayer and by serious reading, especially in the publications of the Society of St Pius X.

So, we should get the "truth" from a group of schismatics?

What a waste of time reading this tripe was!

18 posted on 11/29/2002 9:42:34 PM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
...attacking solid Catholics who prefer the fullness of the Catholic faith...

You got me lost! What is it exactly, in your opinion, the fullness of the Catholic faith? It seems something much better than the Pope or even Jesus would have imagined.

BTW, I found a nice little anti-Pope for you on www.truecatholic.org. Enjoy!

Papal Photo Gallery
His Holiness Pope Pius XIII 
July 4, 1999

Papal Photo Gallery
The White Smoke
Burning of the Ballots at the Conclave of 1998.   Actual photo of the White Smoke signaling the election of Pope Pius XIII to the Chair of St. Peter.

Papal Photo Gallery
Pope Pius XIII - Papal Oath

Papal Photo Gallery
Pope Pius XIII in good spirits after his Episcopal Consecration
(with Cardinal Bateman)
July 4, 1999

19 posted on 11/29/2002 10:34:59 PM PST by heyheyhey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: heyheyhey
Looking at picture two it seems the Conclave was held at Ted Kaczynski's cabin.


20 posted on 11/29/2002 10:48:30 PM PST by drstevej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
In any case, the new Mass in Latin is nowhere to be found in the real world--except maybe on EWTN.

Actually it's quite common.

21 posted on 11/30/2002 12:30:42 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
13 – Who are the authors of these published critiques of the Conciliar Church? Of the many names, let a few be noted as articulate, sober evaluators of the Council: Atila Sinka Guimaeres (In the Murky Waters of Vatican II),

<> Who signed the infamous "We resist you to the face" schism sheet and specialises in attacking the Pope in the execreable "The Remnant."<>

Romano Amerio (Iota Unum: A Study of the Changes in the Catholic Church in the 20th Century),<> Read it. Big deal. Personal opinions of a peritus whose agenda wasn't put into action<>

<> Michael Davies (various books and booklets, TAN Books),

<> English school teach whose books are suffused with errors<>

and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre,

<>excommunicated<>

one the Council Fathers, who worked on the preparatory schemas for discussions, and has written many readable essays on Council and Mass (cf Angelus Press).

14 – Among traditional Catholics, the late Archbishop Lefebvre stands out because he founded the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), a strong society of priests (including six seminaries to date) for the celebration of the traditional Catholic liturgy. Many Catholics who are aware of this may share the opinion that he was excommunicated

<> The Pope who excommunicated him is presumably one of those Catholics<>

and that his followers are in schism. There are however solid authorities (including Cardinal Ratzinger, the top theologian in the Vatican) who hold that this is not so. declares itself fully Roman Catholic, recognizing Pope John Paul II while respectfully maintaining certain serious reservations.

<> Is this Thanksgiving or April Fool's Day?<>

22 posted on 11/30/2002 3:34:22 AM PST by Catholicguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
Let's please dispense with all the hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic."Let's not. They are useful to identify schismatics and heretics. We have a duty to warn others of spiritual danger and the internet is fertile ground for spawning private judgement Magisteriums that folks, like yourself, stupidly consider worthwhile reading.

Let it be noted the so-called traditionalists NEVER Post a defense of an Ecuemnical Council or the Pope. They ALWAYS attack legitimate Divinely-constituted authority. Some Tradition (if you are a So. Baptist)<>

23 posted on 11/30/2002 3:40:26 AM PST by Catholicguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
This is REALLY significant. Somerville is a "name," and one to be reckoned with. My vague recollection is that he was also quite involved in music.

Was this letter a reprint, or was it sent specifically to the SSPX?
24 posted on 11/30/2002 6:08:40 AM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
I too long for the uplifting words of the Tridentine Mass but, the Novus Ordo, however flawed the prayers may be, is still valid because the words of the Consecration, "This is My Body, This is My Blood", were not changed.

The significance of Father Somerville's opinion is that it may help those to act in favor of better language who are in positions where they could do something.

One of the last times there was a discussion on this topic I stated that Protestants were involved in the formulation of the Novus Ordo and I was told I was full of hooey. Well, whoever you are how told me that here it is. Now put THAT in your crack pipe and smoke it.

25 posted on 11/30/2002 6:20:09 AM PST by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Among traditional Catholics, the late Archbishop Lefebvre stands out because he founded the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), a strong society of priests (including six seminaries to date) for the celebration of the traditional Catholic liturgy. Many Catholics who are aware of this may share the opinion that he was excommunicated and that his followers are in schism.

Maybe he was excommunicated for insubordination? That's a firing offense in any profession. From all accounts that's what it sounds like. He might have been right, but say/do the wrong thing to the worng person, thus creating a conflict of egos and whammo you're gone.
26 posted on 11/30/2002 6:27:11 AM PST by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
I attack disrespectful, disobedient, taste-obsessive schismatics, and have yet to attack a solid Catholic. Solid Catholics do not despise papal authority. The protest against papal authority is of the essence of Protestantism. You continually support your hatred of papal authority by creating strawmen. Many of us do not disagree with the idea that Latin ought to continue to be the language of the Church but it is NOT an essential.

Many of us do not disagree with the idea that the Tridentine Mass is usually said more reverently than the Novus Ordo (without a need for it to take an exaggerated hour and a half for a normal High Mass just to show our fellow man how VERY reverent we truly are), but recognize that there are also reverent Novus Ordo Masses.

Many of us prefer that the priest OUGHT to face ad orientem rather than ad populum, that the Sacrament of Penance OUGHT to be conducted in traditional confessionals (although again that is NOT an essential) and ought NEVER to be administered en masse other than in strict emergencies, that there are Novus Ordo priests, bishops and laity every bit as insolent, disrespectful and disobedient as the schismatic SSPX and, perhaps, even more so.

None of the above or any of the repetitive ravings of offended calcified trads amounts to a justification for the disrespect, disobedience, disdain and absolutely diabolical hallmark of your "movement", the ingrained habit of the sin which is the rebelliousness shared by SSPX with the worst of the reformation.

When your little temporary sect illicitly ordains priests and illicitly consecrates bishops, it ordains and consecrates IN and FOR disobedience, rebellion, insolence and dissent from the only legitimate religious authority available among men: the Vatican and the papacy in particular. You and that sect of yours then compound this by poisoning the souls of your young people against the papacy itself (against the Vicariate of Christ on earth).

I certainly hope that you get around to repenting before going the way of all flesh. If you want to adhere to this schism to your dying day, tugging pitifully at the sleeves of obedient Catholics bleating your petty arguments against the Church itself, have a party but it may well be both negative and eternal. God did not designate you to judge the pope any more than he designated Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Woods, Ferrara, Droleskey, Marcel Lefevbre or a legion of their respective followers to do so.

Neither SSPX nor Tom Woods nor Chris Ferrara nor Tom Drolesky nor the Remnant nor any other self-appointed religious authority will prevail against the Church any more than the other gates of hell. It's a guarantee on the Highest Authority.

For Catholics, Catholicism ought to be a norm, a sign of contradiction to the world, to be sure, but normal life for Catholics nonetheless and the safest of spiritual harbors welcoming a world weary of the consequences of the world's sorry standards.

We Catholics ought to be able to wear and live our Catholicism with a sense of joy in the conviction that Our Savior lives and, through the Paraclete, continues to govern the Church's life through His vicar on earth and we will. That vision does not seem satisfy you and others like you who worship themselves, their tastes, their opinions and, above all, (don't burn your fingers on their foreheads) your unjustified presumption of theological and prudential adequacy. It is unfortunate that your apparent need to draw attention to yourselves is more important to you than humility before and obedience to the best pope you will ever see and his successors whoever they may be.

27 posted on 11/30/2002 6:33:11 AM PST by BlackElk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Sommerville says some interesting things. And if he's renouncing his role...it's worth at least listenting. And to a very large extent with languange and music, he's absolutely correct.

...the Second Vatican Council was early commandeered and manipulated and infected by modernist, liberalist, and protestantizing persons and ideas.

This line says a lot. They did the same thing in the universities. And for some dumb reason, people are afraid to confront them. I have no idea why. It's amazing the number of incompetants who rise to power. In many fields, incuding mine.

Request please: a good, solid definition of "modernism". I haven't gotten one yet. Does it have something to do with thinking for oneself, enlightenment and socialism? What?

I had a talk with my grandmother about this yesterday, and she doesn't particularly like the language of the NO. She said going back to Latin would not bother her, but then she grew up with it. My mother, OTOH, will NEVER accept going back, and she's a daily Mass goer.

I had a whole line of comments for this since I read this last night and with all the distractions while I've been typing, I forgot half of them. I'll be back later.
28 posted on 11/30/2002 6:40:53 AM PST by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loyalist
Shouldn't Fr. Somerville have written his letter of resignation in Latin, since it is a far superior language in every way from English? In fact shouldn't Latin-rite advocates speak in Latin most of the time because of its superiority, resorting to vernacular only when dealing with their inferiors in the secular world?

He is rather mindlessly resorting to the cheap convenience of vernacular. After all, if you expect the laity to have to learn and understand a dead language in order to participate fully in liturgical life, the least the clergy can do is to use it in their daily business.

29 posted on 11/30/2002 6:43:38 AM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
Should we also have avoided all those hackneyed accusations of "schismatic" and "heretic" against Luther. After all, he was a virulent hater of the papacy, didn't that make him a good Catholic in SSPX's book?

I'm looking for a good opportunity to dispense with all of those hackeyed accusations that McGovern was at the least a communist sympathizer, that Willie Sutton robbed banks, that Johnny Appleseed was a boon to the creation of apple orchards, that the sun rises in the East and that disrespect and insolence are to be discouraged among actual Catholics. Valid opportunities in all cases are few and far between.

I also note the repulsively presumptuous abuse of the prefix "neo" yet again. We have in politics isolationist Simon Legrees who imagine themselves the real conservatives and attack the real thing as "neo-conservatives" and now we have schismatics imagining themselves Catholic who abuse that overused prefix by dismissing actual Catholics in communion with the Holy See as something called "neo-Catholics." It is in such cocoons of abused vocabulary, in each case, that politically or spiritually carcinogenic fantasies must be protected lest they be blown away by cold cruel reality and/or common sense as the case may be.

30 posted on 11/30/2002 6:50:17 AM PST by BlackElk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
It certainly lacks a certain aura of Vatican splendor but they can dream, can't they? They close their eyes and imagine the Michelangelo ceiling above what looks like a rather roomy outhouse. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither was St. Mary's, Kansas.
31 posted on 11/30/2002 6:53:17 AM PST by BlackElk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: heyheyhey
Your pictures are amusing but they have nothing to do with SSPX which follows JnPII when he is not leading his Church astray or making false declarations that can't be backed up by Tradition. Catholicism is above all a faith, not a pope and not fancy Roman palaces. Popes make mistakes--when they depart from Tradition and attempt to introduce novelties as this Pope and Paul VI have done. As the First Vatican Council put it, "The Holy Spirit was not promised to the Successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine." Popes are divinely protected from error only when they remain within the bounds of Catholic Tradition and not when they stray as this Pope does intermittently. So reread the article and learn something.
32 posted on 11/30/2002 7:11:09 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona; sinkspur; ultima ratio; Zviadist; Loyalist; Maximilian; Polycarp; sitetest; ...
Pope Pius X, in his encyclical Pascendi Domenici Gregis (known by the English title of Against the Errors of the Modernists) (August, 1907) and its accompanying syllabus of errors Lamentabili Sane (July, 1907) referenced Modernism as the synthesis of all heresies. What he called modernism is an equivalent of what today's Protestants call Secular Humanism but they have naturally failed to see the relationship of Secular Humanism to numerous other heresies.

Another way to look at it is that there was an explosion of bad ideas at the turn of the last century and for about 40 years before. Darwin, Dewey, G. B. Shaw, Freud, Jung, H. G. Wells, and a host of others who bent their intellects to the task of erasing any connection between man and God. They buttressed the movement for "progress" and "reform" by getting that pesky old God and His restrictive rules out of the way of creating new Soviet (whoops, creating a new humanity.

Within the Roman Catholic Church, these demonic characters were aided, abetted and joined by the likes of George Tyrell, SJ, and Teilhard de Chardin, SJ, who tried, as gates of hell to overcome the Church from within. Tyrell was excommunicated and refused burial in sacred ground. Teilhard, also known for an evolutionist hoax (Peking Man) died silenced but was apparently a buddy of Angelo Roncalli (personally not theologically) who was elected as John XXIII. After the election of John XXIII, the floodgates were opened to prudential errors in Church governance and the carnival of misbehavior which proceeded from opening the windows of the Church and letting the world's pollution in.

As a result, there has been entirely too much encouragement of people like Sinkspur who serve as deacons while never seeing a Catholic principle or dogma that ought not be subjected to the misbegotten excuse for "wisdom" that might arise from democracy in the pews and anarchy in place of hierarchy on the one hand and his opposite numbers of SSPX, such as ultima ratio and zviadist and, apparently, Maximilian and a few others who seem to imagine hellfire and damnation for anyone who considers JPII who gave us their Tridentine Mass back as a dangerous subversive not in communion with their schism.

Our job as faithful Catholics is to keep the Church alive with the help of and according to the guarantees of our Savior. In that way, neither the enthusiasts of the misbegotten heretical left nor the the adherents of the misbegotten schismatic SSPX will be allowed to feast on the carcass of the Church. Of course, neither will be allowed to do so because the Church will prevail, as guaranteed.

Back to the original source: Pascendi Domenici Gregis and Lamentabili Sane are published in English by the Daughters of St. Paul in one pamphlet for a modest price well below $5.

33 posted on 11/30/2002 7:19:33 AM PST by BlackElk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; BlackElk; sinkspur
I said the new Mass in Latin is nowhere to be found in the real world. I never said it was not to be found--somewhere, some time, in some exotic location. Mass late at night, Mass on first Saturdays, Mass at Opus Dei chapels are not the real world and are not common. Most ordinary parishes use the vernacular.

BTW, some bishops think they can fool the faithful by substituting the Novus Ordo in Latin for the old Latin Mass. More tricks and chicanery from the same people who brought us clown Masses and pedophilia scandals.
34 posted on 11/30/2002 7:22:41 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
"Where exactly does this thinking leave us?"

It appears to be another step into the unofficial schism territory. Perhaps this will help in restoring the Latin Mass to the mainstream of the Latin Rite. I would love to see it expanded from the token category.
35 posted on 11/30/2002 7:23:17 AM PST by Domestic Church
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
You misread (why are we surprised) the meaning of the sentence you quoted from Vatican I. The meaning is equivalent to: "....... that by His revelation they might (sell bubble gum)" That is to say that the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of St. Peter to protect against error. This is not an invitation for you to pick or choose what YOU THINK is error but an invitation for you to submit to papal authority and the dogmas of the Church not for you to be a cafeteria type adhering to whatever pleases your rarified tastes and self-importance.
36 posted on 11/30/2002 7:27:46 AM PST by BlackElk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
This is REALLY significant. Somerville is a "name," and one to be reckoned with. My vague recollection is that he was also quite involved in music.

He composed many of the Mass settings and some of the hymns in Catholic Book of Worship, the CCCB's official hymnal.

With this letter to the SSPX, he will probably become an unperson in the Canadian Church.

37 posted on 11/30/2002 7:56:43 AM PST by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Catholicguy; BlackElk; heyheyhey; sinkspur
The SSPX is not in schism. Nor are its followers. Nor was Archbishop Lefebvre. Your saying so over and over doesn't make it so.

Cardinal Castillo Lara, President of the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law: "The act of consecrating a bishop [without the Pope's permission] is not in itself a schismatic act."

Count Neri Capponi, Doctor of Canon Law, renouned for his arguments before Rome's highest juridical body, the Apostolic Signatura: "The fact is that Msgr. Lefebvre simply said: 'I am creating bishops in order that my priestly order can continue. They do not take the place of other bishops. I am not creating a parallel church.' Therefore this act is not, per se, schismatic."

Fr. Patrick Valdini, Dean of the Faculty of Canon Law at the University of Paris: "It is not the consecration of a bishop that creates the schism. What makes the schism is to give the bishop an apostolic mission"--something the Archbishop never did.

Fr. Gerald E. Murray, Licentiate in Canon Law, Gregorian University: "I come to the conclusion that he's [Lefebvre's] not guilty of a schismatic act punishable by canon law. He's guilty of an act of disobedience to the Pope, but he did it in such a way that he would prevail himself of a provision of the law that would prevent him from being automatically excommunicated."

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in responding to the decree issued by Bishop Ferrario of Honolulu excommunicating Catholics for attending Mass at an SSPX chapel: "From the examination of the case, conducted on the basis of the Law of the Church, it did not result that the facts referred to in the above-mentioned Decree, are formal schismatic acts in the strict sense, as they do not constitute the offense of schism; and therefore the Congregation holds that the Decree of May 1, 1991, lacks foundation and hence validity."

Professor Geringer, Canon Lawyer at the University of Munich: "With the episcopal consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre was by no means creating a schism."

Cardinal Edward Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity: "I would point out at once that the Directory on Ecumenism is not concerned with the Society of Saint Pius X. The situation of the members of this Society is AN INTERNAL MATTER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. The Society is not another Church or Ecclesial Community in the meaning used in the Directory. Of course the Mass and the Sacraments administered by the priests of the Society are valid."

38 posted on 11/30/2002 7:59:00 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
So the Pope fires a traditionalist for sticking with Tradition, but keeps the prelates who have covered up corruption for decades, who are outright apostates, even awarding them the red hat? What does that say about this Pope?
39 posted on 11/30/2002 8:03:22 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
Modernism: "... the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously." From The Oath Against Modernism Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.
40 posted on 11/30/2002 8:35:31 AM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: narses
See http://www.truecatholic.org/pope/prevpope-pius10.htm
41 posted on 11/30/2002 8:36:29 AM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
I was searching around for a copy of the Vatican's 1997 Instruction on Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful in the Sacred Ministry of the Priest, when I found this interview with Fabian Bruskewitz and Paul Likoudis on the subject of Bishop Bruskewitz issuing a formal warning to Catholics who belong to groups which are opposed to the Catholic Church, telling them that they are in danger of excommunication.

Q. Isn't it true that the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre did not apply to his followers or individual members? Is your decree, by including Catholics who belong to the St. Pius X Society, going beyond what the Vatican decree does?

A. The sanction of interdict and excommunication that is in the legislation of the Diocese of Lincoln applies to membership on the part of people who are in or of the Diocese of Lincoln in the Society of St. Pius X and/or the St. Michael the Archangel Chapel. Both have been fraudulently advertising themselves in Lincoln as "in full union with Rome," causing confusion, ambiguity, and uncertainty on the part of many of the faithful in Lincoln, and giving rise to many serious questions which the legislation was intended to answer.

Bishop Bruskewitz is someone I listen to. My parish priest calls him "medievil" and "out of touch" and so I know the liberals can't stand Bruskewitz which is a huge point in his favor, IMO.

42 posted on 11/30/2002 8:40:53 AM PST by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Straw man argument.

Special occasions call for special language and dress. This is true of many, if not most, religions. The English in the Book of Common Prayer is not the same English used on the streets of London. Jews still use Hebrew at their services, but most use the vernacular at home and at business. And, if I'm not mistaken, even non-Arabian Mohammedans use Arabic in their prayers.

This should be a non-issue, were it not for the brutal and totalitarian methods by which the Modernists in the Church stamped out traditional practices.
43 posted on 11/30/2002 8:45:56 AM PST by Goetz_von_Berlichingen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
Let me take your points one by one.

1. Solid Catholics do not despise papal authority. Right. Neither do I. Neither do traditionalists in general. Neither does the Society of Saint Pius X. It is not the Pope's authority that is despised. It is his unlawful use of it. No Pope may use his authority to command what would harm the Church.

2. Your claim that many Tridentine Masses are said irreverently and many Novus Ordo Masses are said reverently is true, but beside the point. The priest is not the star. The focus in the Mass should be on God, not on the priest and not on ourselves. In the old Mass the priest faces east, away from the people, and no less a liturgist than Cardinal Ratzinger himself has called this an essential point. As a result of facing away from the assembly, priestly actions cannot be ego-driven as they are in the new Mass. But even more than this, no amount of acting ability or reverence in the world can begin to compensate for the Protestant doctrinal underpinnings of the Novus Ordo Mass which wear away the Catholic faith in ways that Father Somerville has suggested.

3. Your bizarre claim that it is "rebellious" to defend the faith against violations by even this Pontiff and his hierarchy is incomprehensible. What are Catholics supposeed to do--throw away their faith to please superiors? They have tried silence and humility and it has resulted in an even speedier erasure of Catholic culture, Catholic teachings, Catholic devotions, Catholic liturgy. When are the faithful allowed to say: "Enough is enough. We don't want to kiss the Koran or worship in synagogues or mosques. We don't want bishops who are apostates awarded with red hats. We don't want lurid gay-friendly sex education introduced in parochial schools. We don't want the doctrine of the Real Presence insulted daily by clergy and bishops. We don't want to embrace this new liberal concoction that calls itself the faith but does not resemble anything Catholic"? --When it is too late and we have already been converted to a new one-world religion? How is it possible to resist such an abomination without speaking out against those who abuse authority by allowing this to happen, in violation of all past popes and councils? Yet your argument is precisely that. When faced with a choice between the traditional faith and the Pope, you choose the Pope. That is a wrong choice.

4. Your notion that the Holy Spirit "continues to govern the Church's life through His vicar on earth" flies in the face of the evidence. There are unprecedented signs of corruption and apostasy everywhere, not only here but around the globe. The Church in the West gives every indication of being effete and ineffectual in combating the serious evils within its own ranks. These are not signs of God's blessings.
44 posted on 11/30/2002 8:46:44 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
I do not misread the Vatican I statement. This is why Cardinal Newman made the point that it sets limits on the papacy. This is why Cardinal Ratzinger makes the same point, that the pope is not an absolute monarch. The pope is not a god to be worshiped--as you do. That is idolatry, not Catholicism. When the Pope misuses his authority and commands what is wrong, he must be disobeyed, not worshiped. The faith comes first.
45 posted on 11/30/2002 8:55:43 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
Bishop Bruskewitz is wrong.
46 posted on 11/30/2002 8:59:30 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
This is where I go bonkers. Does this mean that they (SSPX & Fr. Somerville) believe that Vatican II was abandoned by the Holy Spirit and therefore is null and void? Where exactly does this thinking leave us?

Where does that leave us??? It leaves us exactly where we have been for 2,000 years, before the radicals (some of whom we now see are repentant) decided to pull the rug out from under the Faith.

You mean to tell me you honestly cannot imagine life outside Vatican II? You are so alienated from your 2,000 year faith that without Vatican II you would not feel Roman Catholic? That in itself speaks VOLUMES about the REAL destruction of Vatican II -- the way it has pulled people from the 2,000 year old faith and into a new religion. Amazing!

47 posted on 11/30/2002 10:34:37 AM PST by Zviadist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
You still don't understand that Luther has inspired modernism, not traditionalism. Traditionalists don't rebel against Tradition, which is exactly what Luther did. It was Luther who turned the altars around to face the people, then threw out the Offertory and declared the Mass was a Memorial Meal rather than a reenactment of Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross--exactly what Neo-Catholics do today. Luther is the man your boys like to quote and emulate. They reject the Church's past following the fifth century--exactly as he did.
48 posted on 11/30/2002 11:53:50 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
Bishop Bruskewitz is wrong.

Of course. I expected you to say no less.

You have turned the ancient faith into a quarrel.

49 posted on 11/30/2002 1:10:41 PM PST by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Zviadist
You mean to tell me you honestly cannot imagine life outside Vatican II?

I'm 43. Of course I cannot imagine life outside of Vatican II.

Can you imagine life in Auschwitz?

50 posted on 11/30/2002 1:13:09 PM PST by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 901-943 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson