Very Good Apologetic Webpage

[mark4IHM]

Anna,

Thanks for your post. I hope you can get a Mass that's closer. It is a problem. And please, just call me Mark.

[nippy316]

Thanks for the link...it's still an interesting site.

nippy316

[mark4IHM]

If we know Jesus, we believe His every word. Jesus does not lie and cannot ever be wrong. Therefore, the Catholic Church with the Successor of Peter will always be guided by God.

Couldn't agree with you more. The Holy Ghost is the Soul of the Church. The papacy is an institution we all venerate. There have been many, many, holy, saintly popes that are an inspiration to us all.

But God did not promise to guide Peter in his every action, thought, word, and deed. I reckon that the betrayal of Christ by our first Holy Father is in Sacred Scripture for a reason. Some of our popes have not lived up to their office. One pope was solemnly declared a heretic by his successor. This needn't weaken our faith in the papacy. It should, however, give us a realistic (ie, Catholic) view of the strengths, weaknesses, and the bare, bleeding humanity that each Pope bears within him.

[Jake Huether]

"It just kills me... they argue that the Mass should be in Latin as it was for hundreds of years, but they ignore the fact that the Latin Mass was a change itself!?"

Excellent point Iron! So true. I mean, they try to be so whitty about it, but they're no different! I think it's just a case of "old habbits die hard". It isn't about being traditional or not, it's about not being comfortable or not being in tune to what's going on. You know, many of the traditionalists (that think VII was bad) are simply used to the ol' way of doin' things. If their Mass changes, then they won't be able to help out, or they wont be able to follow. If they just sat down and thought about it for a while... The first Mass wasn't in Latin, it wasn't in a Cathedral, or even a seperate congragational area, I doubt there was an alter, or even pews and kneelers. In fact, at the very first Masses I doubt there was insence! And in all likelyhood, the priest, a Desciple of Christ, would have actually faced the congregation. Jesus faced his Apostles on the night He was to be arrested! "Take and eat, this is my Body..." He was reclined at a table with His 12.

It frustrates me that good Catholics would nail VII on really petty things. I'd be willing to place money on the fact that Church numbers, etc. declined not because of VII, rather because of the things going on outside of the Catholic Church. Like Roe v. Wade and the sexual revolution to name just two. VII was a great thing, and it's true fruits, I believe, have yet to be seen. Unfortunately for JPII it was the weeds of idiocy outside the Church that have infiltrated and constricted the flowers of VII.

Just my 2 pennies.

[cmotherofpirl]

"It just kills me... they argue that the Mass should be in Latin as it was for hundreds of years, but they ignore the fact that the Latin Mass was a change itself!?"

Excellent point Iron!  So true.  I mean, they try to be so whitty about it, but they're no different!  I think it's just a case of "old habbits die hard".  It isn't about being traditional or not, it's about not being comfortable or not being in tune to what's going on.  You know, many of the traditionalists (that think VII was bad) are simply used to the ol' way of doin' things.  If their Mass changes, then they won't be able to help out, or they wont be able to follow.  If they just sat down and thought about it for a while...  The first Mass wasn't in Latin, it wasn't in a Cathedral, or even a seperate congragational area, I doubt there was an alter, or even pews and kneelers.  In fact, at the very first Masses I doubt there was insence!  And in all likelyhood, the priest, a Desciple of Christ, would have actually faced the congregation.  Jesus faced his Apostles on the night He was to be arrested!  "Take and eat, this is my Body..."  He was reclined at a table with His 12. 

It frustrates me that good Catholics would nail VII on really petty things.  I'd be willing to place money on the fact that Church numbers, etc. declined not because of VII, rather because of the things going on outside of the Catholic Church.  Like Roe v. Wade and the sexual revolution to name just two.  VII was a great thing, and it's true fruits, I believe, have yet to be seen.  Unfortunately for JPII it was the weeds of idiocy outside the Church that have infiltrated and constricted the flowers of VII.

Just my 2 pennies.

Jake your 2 pennies are worth a dollar, because you are exactly right. The Church turmoil did not start in the 1960's, it merely came to a head. Dissent had reared its ugly head years before. Society changed. The Church is still the Rock.

It takes around 100 years for a Council to work out all the bugs. Because of unprecendented technology the turmoil following a typical Council has been magnified and compressed into a smaller time span. This combined with the return to pagan and barbaric societial standards has created a real headache for the Church. We will survive. While the Church in Europe and North America is on the decline, the Church on other continents is thriving.

God provides!

[mark4IHM]

"It just kills me... they argue that the Mass should be in Latin as it was for hundreds of years..."

In the document Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, the Second Vatican Council declared:

"The use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."

So it appears "they" (traditionalists?) were not the only ones arguing the Mass should be in Latin. Which raises an interesting question: are those going to vernacular Masses disobeying Vatican II?

[mark4IHM]

I'd be willing to place money on the fact that Church numbers, etc. declined not because of VII, rather because of the things going on outside of the Catholic Church. Like Roe v. Wade and the sexual revolution to name just two. VII was a great thing, and it's true fruits, I believe, have yet to be seen.

Dear Jake,

I agree with you that the true fruits of the Council have yet to be seen (though we may differ on the conclusions we draw from this). I also agree that the Church has been adversely affected by the general godlessness and immorality around her, a condition that is all the more awful because it is occurring in a de-Christianized world.

But I don't think that's the whole story, for the decline of religious life within the Church is too dramatic for the Church not to bear some of the responsibility. I say this in all charity, speaking objectively. And the statistical decline of religious life within the Church is simply horrendous. For instance, the number of priests has declined from 58,000 in 1965 to 45,000 today. Fifteen percent of American parishes are priestless, compared with 1 percent in 1965. Annual ordinations of priests have fallen from 1,575 in 1965 to 450 in 2002. Seminary enrollment has dropped 90 percent since 1965. Two thirds of the seminaries that were open in 1965 are now closed. In several European countries the percentage of Catholics attending Mass is in the single digits.

Popes Paul VI and John Paul II (and Cardinal Ratzinger) have attributed the decline to a "crisis in the faith" within the Church itself, and it is difficult to disagree. Prior to the Council the Church in America was growing. After the Council it abruptly began shrinking; this began before Roe v. Wade.

My purpose in citing some of these statistics(there are many more) is constructive. It seems the only way to begin to arrest the decline is to find out exactly what is causing it. The popes themselves seem to be looking within the Church for solutions, and in this I heartily support them.

[Donna]

Jake, I was used to the New Rite of Mass (so to speak) before I became Catholic. This is because as a Lutheran, I had attended the "traditional" Lutheran worship service (there are often children's, contemporary and traditional services each Sunday).

There are few differences between the Lutheran worship service and the New Mass.

But, it was at a series of Latin Masses (while Lutheran) that I was given to understand and fall in love with the Real Presence (among other graces). It's odd: At roughly 30 years old, "coming home" to something I'd never known.

I encourge you to maybe look at a Missal with the old rite in it; therein you will see, basically, the same Mass that formed many saints.

* * * * * *

Lex orandi lex credendi: the law of prayer is the law of belief. Our faith is formed and sustained in no small way through the liturgy itself. Every Catholic rightly concerned about abuses in the New Mass I doubt are based on old habits dying hard, or a rigid legalism.

Pope Pius XII said something to the effect that it would not be right to return to the Apostolic Mass. We forget that this Latin Mass's delopment had occured in an organic way, over centuries. Especially the Canon was safeguarded for doctrinal reasons.

For anyone interested "The Reform of the Roman Rite" by Msgr. Klaus Gamber is informative.

P.S. To view the Lutheran liturgy:

a) "elca" Google search (click on first entry).

B) At ELCA home page under "search", type in "liturgy".

c) Click on Page 2, #17, ("FAQ: Biblical Roots of the Liturgy").

[Katholikos]

Nevermind I just found out the site is TRaditional and opposes the Vatican II church.

Is this the web site of the person who recently signed on as katoliko at phatmass?

With such similar names (both mean Catholic), I've been concerned that someone might get us confused, so I've started signing my posts --

JMJ Jay (Likos)

Katholikos

[Anna]

Good idea, Likos!

When I first saw the name "katolico" I thought, "uh, oh! This is gonna get confusing!"

Katolico, maybe dUSt would let you re-register with a different sn, for us simple folk?

Pax Christi. <><