Latin Mass

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Chanman450' date='Nov 27 2004, 03:18 AM'] Did somebody say Latin Mass?
|
|
|
|
|
|
\ /


(Sorry, but I am quite proud of my sig )
BTW, who is SSPX? [/quote]
Where is your sig from?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Nov 26 2004, 05:05 PM'] I understand why, say, in St. Augustine's time, Mass was in Latin - Latin was the [i]lingua franca[/i] of the people. However, why, in the 16th Century (indeed, before) did the Roman Church keep its liturgy in Latin when it knew full well people wouldn't be able to understand it. Remember the Day of Pentecost? The apostles preached in [i]tongues known to the people[/i]. Why should not the modern Church do likewise by conducting its liturgy in a known tongue? [/quote]
The use of the Latin language in the Roman rite at the time of the Reformation was simply a custom, and one which the Church could dispense with if she wanted to, but the Fathers of Trent, for whatever reason, decided not to do that and their judgment was binding at that time. Since the Second Vatican Council the use of the vernacular in the Roman Rite, and in all the Eastern Rites in communion with Rome, has been permitted by the Magisterium and this judgment is binding except in those cases determined by particular law (e.g., the indult Mass). It should also be borne in mind that the Roman Rite liturgy celebrated according to the Missal issued by Pope Paul VI may be celebrated in the Latin language at any time without any dispensations needing to be granted.

God bless,
Todd

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Nov 27 2004, 12:41 PM'] I have found the same arogance among Novus Ordo Catholics who tend to look at Traditionalists like myself as un-enlightened dinosaurs, stuck in the dark ages of Catholicism. Would it be legitimate if I judged the N.O. based on the arrogance of those that attemd it? Of course not. All things stand or fall on their own merit. [/quote]
Hey, I said it was my hang up. I don't have a problem with Latin or the Traditional mass... I'm not judging the mass or even those who attend it. To each his own...

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Nov 27 2004, 03:46 PM'] Since the Second Vatican Council the use of the vernacular in the Roman Rite, and in all the Eastern Rites in communion with Rome, has been permitted by the Magisterium and this judgment is binding except in those cases determined by particular law (e.g., the indult Mass). [/quote]
This statement doesn't make sense in light of the following:


[quote]It should also be borne in mind that the Roman Rite liturgy celebrated according to the Missal issued by Pope Paul VI may be celebrated in the Latin language at any time without any dispensations needing to be granted.[/quote]


What I don't understand is how the decision to permit the vernacular is binding when, as you said, it is just that: permitted (not required) and to use the Latin requires no special permission? What exactly is binding?

Edited November 27, 2004 by popestpiusx

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Nov 27 2004, 02:06 PM'][quote name='Apotheoun' date='Nov 27 2004, 03:46 PM']Since the Second Vatican Council the use of the vernacular in the Roman Rite, and in all the Eastern Rites in communion with Rome, has been permitted by the Magisterium and this judgment is binding except in those cases determined by particular law (e.g., the indult Mass).[/quote]
This statement doesn't make sense in light of the following:

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Nov 27 2004, 03:46 PM']It should also be borne in mind that the Roman Rite liturgy celebrated according to the Missal issued by Pope Paul VI may be celebrated in the Latin language at any time without any dispensations needing to be granted.[/quote][/quote]
The statement makes perfect sense, because since the close of the Second Vatican Council the Magisterium has permitted the use of vernacular languages in the celebration of the Mass. The latin editio typica tertia of the Roman Missal of Paul VI is the normative text for the celebration of the Mass in the Roman Rite and all the various vernacular translations must be based upon it, and moreover, the vernacular translations must receive the [i]recognitio[/i] of the Holy See or they cannot be used at all. [cf. [u]Code of Canon Law[/u], Canon 838 §1, §2 and §3] Now when the Vatican gives its [i]recognitio[/i] to a vernacular translation of the Mass, it follows that it also gives binding force of law to the particular translations in question empowering them for use in the Church or Churches requesting that approval. In other words, by giving its [i]recognitio[/i] to the vernacular translations of the Mass, the Vatican has approved and confirmed as binding, the use of those vernacular translations for the celebration of the liturgy for the region indicated, but the approval of the various vernacular translations does not negate the right of priests to celebrate Mass using the latin editio typica tertia of the Roman Missal of Paul VI as approved and promulgated by Pope John Paul II.

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Nov 27 2004, 02:06 PM']What I don't understand is how the decision to permit the vernacular is binding when, as you said, it is just that: permitted (not required) and to use the Latin requires no special permission?  What exactly is binding?[/quote]
It is binding because the Holy See has confirmed and approved the various vernacular translations giving them binding force in law within the particular Churches concerned. The use of the latin editio typica tertia of the Roman Missal of Paul VI requires no special permission because, as I indicated above, it is the official text from which all the vernacular translations must be made. Thus, it is the normative text for the Mass of the Roman Rite, but the vernacular translations are binding, albeit not in an exclusive sense, but only in the sense that no other vernacular text may be used in the region for which they are approved.

God bless,
Todd

[Azriel]

Anybody else think Todd is just awesome?

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote]The use of the latin editio typica tertia of the Roman Missal of Paul VI requires no special permission because, as I indicated above, it is the official text from which all the vernacular translations must be made.[/quote]
I believe this only became an explicit directive from the Vatican recently. Before then (and maybe even still), I believe that some bishops felt they could demand that a priest not use Latin in the Paul VI rite. On the other side, I have heard of lay groups at liberal parishes trying to bully priests into not using Latin.

My memory is a bit fuzzy, though. Regarding the celebration of mass in Latin without a special permission: does anyone remember whether this Vatican Statement (maybe from Cardinal Arinze?) applied to the Tridentine (Indult) or the Paul VI Missal or both? I think it's just the Pauline rite.

Thanks!

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' date='Nov 27 2004, 08:00 PM'] I believe this only became an explicit directive from the Vatican recently.  Before then (and maybe even still), I believe that some bishops felt they could demand that a priest not use Latin in the Paul VI rite.  On the other side, I have heard of lay groups at liberal parishes trying to bully priests into not using Latin.

My memory is a bit fuzzy, though.  Regarding the celebration of mass in Latin without a special permission: does anyone remember whether this Vatican Statement (maybe from Cardinal Arinze?) applied to the Tridentine (Indult) or the Paul VI Missal or both?  I think it's just the Pauline rite.

Thanks! [/quote]
No, the Latin language is still the official language of the Roman Rite and so there is no special indult necessary in order for a priest to celebrate Mass according to the 1970 Pauline Missal in latin. Now whether or not it is prudent to pray the entire liturgy in latin when the majority of Roman Rite Catholics do not know the latin language is another matter altogether. The latin editio typica tertia is the normative text for the Mass in the Roman Rite and can be used at any time. The normative nature of the latin language was reaffirmed by the Congregation for Divine Worship in the instruction [u]Redemptionis Sacramentum[/u], but that particular instruction did not institute any new liturgical laws; instead, it simply reaffirmed the existing liturgical legislation of the Roman Rite.

As far as the indult Mass is concerned, because of the nature of the indult given by Pope John Paul II in the Motu Proprio [u]Ecclesia Dei[/u], it is necessary for the local Ordinary to approve of any celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal, and without the Bishop's approval, that missal cannot be used licitly.

God bless,
Todd

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Nov 27 2004, 01:19 AM'] Without a sacramental view of the Church, you will not understand it. [/quote]
Explain

[popestpiusx]

Todd, you misunderstood my question (no doubt due to my poor phrasing). But you did clarify the statement. It seemed to me that you were implying two contradictory statements: One, that the use of the vernacular is binding, unless one recieves an indult; and two, that no priest needs permission to use latin.

Thank You for the clarification.

Edited November 28, 2004 by popestpiusx

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Nov 28 2004, 12:06 AM']

As far as the indult Mass is concerned, because of the nature of the indult given by Pope John Paul II in the Motu Proprio [u]Ecclesia Dei[/u], it is necessary for the local Ordinary to approve of any celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal, and without the Bishop's approval, that missal cannot be used licitly.

[/quote]
Permission from the local ordinary is only required for public celebrations of the Mass. THere are other arrangements set up that permit a priest to say the Mass privately (which does not mean that no one may attend).

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Nov 28 2004, 12:35 AM'] Explain [/quote]
With a sacramental view of the Church you would understand (or acknowledge) that what takes place at Mass does not depend upon you understanding every word spoken, nor does the grace you recieve. The Sacrifice of the Mass takes place with or with anyone in the Church understanding a single word that is spoken.

That's the very short, very watered down version.

[Mateo el Feo]

Personally, I go to a Pauline mass, either in an English/Latin mix or English. I love my parish priests! Their masses are always edifying.

<Rant>
I am not a big fan of illicit use of the Tridentine mass. That said, I'm quite concerned when I look at the other end of the spectrum. For example, things like the New Agey liturgical dance and a whole host of novelties. Some bishops are either explicitly or tacitly approving these novelties, and continue to do so after the Vatican demands that such practices be stopped.

So, the Vatican states that the indult's availability should be "wide and generous." And the Vatican has repeatedly condemned and tried to surpress liturgical abuses.

As a contrast: in America, some bishops have made the abuses (illicit liturgical innovations) wide and generous. I have to admit that my own personal opinion is that the bishops are not being "generous" in their allowance for Indults, and may even treat those who want the indult as "red-headed step-children" (so to speak).

I guess I wouldn't have such a problem with the apparent suppression of the indult if the American bishops were as inspired to suppress other things. For example, I would love to see a USSCB that would provide a strong front against illicit changes to the Pauline mass, not to mention more bishops who were willing to discipline (remove from ministry) priests/religious/lay employees who use their position in the Church (paid by the Church) to propogate false teachings that go against the Church.

I think this stuff is relevant just to put all this stuff in perspective.
</Rant>

[qfnol31]

If I were to become a Priest, I would say the Tridentine Mass quite often. I'd say the Novus Ordo facing the correct way too. Wouldn't mind the Latin Novus Ordo either.

[Guest Aluigi]

yes, i would say a priest's private Latin mass is okay. what this means is that it cannot be scheduled or advertized. it must be the priest's private mass, not publically announced, the general public cannot be invited.

unless this contradicts the Pope's statement. I am reminded of the comment, though it could be interpreted as the latin pauline mass, from Redemptionis Sacromentem reiterating a priest is always and every permitted to say Latin Mass. the indult is required to do so at a scheduled time announced to the public. but if me and some friends asked a priest to say mass for us (as i was quite pleased to learn is not an odd thing to do at St. Vincent's where they have a ton of priests who all have to say mass everyday anyway) we could ask him to use the Tridentine order of the mass if i'm not mistaken.