Sunday, July 31, 2016

YOU WOULD THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE OBVIOUS: LATIN IS THE GREAT UNIFIER OF THE LATIN RITE AND A LATIN RITE BOMBSHELL

The closing Mass of World Youth Week with Pope Francis shows once again and in the most obvious way how the Latin language unifies Catholics throughout the world when used for the Mass. When I watched a portion of the live Mass which is in video below, it was during the Eucharistic Prayer. It was the Roman Canon prayed by His Holiness in Latin--I felt at home and understood what was being prayed.

The pope doesn't speak Polish and if he could and had His Holiness been praying the canon in Polish, I would have been clueless about what was being said and even what part of the canon was being prayed.

Isn't it time to unify Catholics throughout the Latin Rite with our mother tongue? Didn't Pope Benedict have the solution in all of his papal Masses no matter where, no matter how large or small?


And on another Latin irony front, how ironic that it is Pope Francis who is the one making the way for the SSXP to be fully reintegrated into the Church with a personal prelature.

When the Ordinary Form of the Mass is celebrated with the appropriate amount of Latin, there is definitely a resemblance of it with the Extraordinary Form. One know that the newer form evolved from the ancient form especially when the Roman Canon is prayed in the Ordinary Form.

Thanks be to God for Pope Benedict who freed the Ancient Form of the Mass from the shackles of the dungeon of the Museum of Church Liturgical History and made it available to the masses throughout the world and even in little ole Macon, GA and other places.

In doing so, it showed that the SSPX aren't really a throw-back to another time but a community within the Universal Church every much a part of her preserving the liturgical heritage, spirituality and devotional and moral life of the Church. How good is that?

BOMBSHELL!

 
Vatican Confirms: SSPX Will Get Personal Prelature

Vatican Confirms: SSPX Will Get Personal Prelature

The head of Ecclesia Dei has confirmed what was reported by Sunesis Press months ago, viz., the regularization of the SSPX and the creation of a Personal Prelature.
CW: Why is a reunion with the SSPX to the Catholic Church so important?
Guido Pozzo:
The Church suffers from any lack of unity. The Society of St. Pius X consists of 600 priests, 200 seminarians, and other members and is represented in 70 countries. Given such a significant reality you can not just turn a blind eye to the situation.
C & W: Recently there was an acceleration of relationships, why?
Pozzo:I would not speak of an acceleration, but by a patient process of rapprochement.  The Vatican is not demanding, insisting on ultimatums, instead we jointly planned some steps to reach full reconciliation. Since the stages were agreed upon, the way is easier to tread. We are still interested in clarifying some doctrinal and canonical questions. It is very important to promote a climate of mutual knowledge and understanding. In this respect, much progress has been made.
C & W: What has changed in the attitude of the Vatican since the beginning of the pontificate?
Pozzo: Several new perspectives were integrated. 2009 to 2012 was primarily a theological debate in the foreground.  There were doctrinal difficulties which hindered the canonical recognition of the Fraternity. We know, however, that life is more than doctrine. For through the theological discussion in the past three years we have come to know the desire and understand the reality of the Fraternity.
C & W: How is this managed?
Pozzo:  If you like, instead of discussions in a lecture hall, now we have a cozy fraternal atmosphere, even though the purpose is the same. On behalf of the Vatican, a cardinal and four bishops attended the seminaries and priories of the Fraternity, and saw for themselves the truth. Nothing like this has happened previously, and of course it helped us to understand one another.
C & W: The Brotherhood has long had extremist members in its ranks, such as Bishop Richard Williamson, who denied the Holocaust.  Did this harm the negotiations?
Pozzo: Monsignor Richard Williamson and other extremists and anti-Roman elements were excluded from the fraternity or separated from her. This of course has aided the discussions.
C & W: What instructions has Pope Francis given to you for the negotiations?
Pozzo: Since August 2013 the Pope has entrusted me as Secretary of the Commission Ecclesia Dei, and he directed me to dialogue with patience, decisiveness and without any rush. He laid particular emphasis on the cultivation of personal relationships in order to create a climate of trust.
C & W: Bergoglio knew the Fraternity from Argentina.How crucial is this personal contact for the Pope?
Pozzo: This is certainly an important element. When he was still Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis had contacts with the Fraternity. He saw how much effort they put in evangelization and in charitable work. The Fraternity does not, as is often claimed, only value the traditional liturgy, but also has substantive work.
C & W: Francis always stressed the pastoral aspect. Is this also the key to an understanding with the SSPX?
Pozzo: Pastoral and dogmatic theology are inseparable. The style and concrete willingness of Pope Francis to help the unity between the people not only to think but also to learn. Of course, some gestures are important. He has allowed the Priests of the SSPX to hear confessions of  the faithful, he has received the Superior General of the Fraternity, Monsignor Bernard Fellay in private audience. The rapprochement and resumption of talks was all made possible by the excommunication by Benedict XVI.
C & W: Why is a Personal Prelature appropriate for the SSPX?
Pozzo: That seems to be the appropriate canonical form. Monsignor Fellay has accepted the proposal, even if in the coming months details remain to be clarified. Only Opus Dei currently enjoys this canonical structure, which is a big vote of confidence for the SSPX. It is clear that the solution of the canonical form requires the solution of the doctrinal questions.

48 comments:

Billy the Kid said...

"Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?" St. Paul. Apparently the Pope believes we should from his remarks to Polish youth.

Jan said...

That is great news about the SSPX. We need all the help we can get to fight liberalism in the Church and they will strengthen the arm of the orthodox element in the Church. Deo gratias indeed. Let's hope they come into full communion before the end of the Year of Mercy.

TJM said...

THe folks at the National Anti-Catholic Reporter and Pray Tell (Sniff) must be on suicide watch.It is beyond peradventure that like St. John XXIII said, "Latin is the language that joins the Church of today." (Veterum Sapientia).

Anonymous said...

I can't wait for the SSPX to get official recognition. Of course this is being done because then Francis can send an observer to them, can we say Franciscans of the Immaculate. But the big difference is the SSPX will NOT tolerate nonsense. Any "observer" who tries to bring down the hammer of modernism will find themselves on their outside of the door with the locks changed. And Bishop Fellay will be quite public in denouncing the heresy coming out of Rome. He is not and will not be politically correct.

Anonymous said...

If this is true then we must give the S.S.P.X. ALL the support we can and push and push for the return of the TLM to all of our altars. Bishop Felley needs our help now and we must give it to him. Now we all know that Francis won't be pope forever and that the next pope must continue with the integration of the S.S.P.X. lets pray it is Cardinal Sarah, Ranjith or Burke.

Anonymous said...

Any news on the crazy comments to the press on the way back. I'm not sure if Francis left Poland yet. But I am betting that the controversial and scandalous remarks he will make to the press this time will be: denouncing Trump, not be name, but by some snide reference. He will denounce the Polish bishops as hurling doctrine like stones at people. Knowing that no bishop or priest will denounce him he will clearly state that Holy Communion is for anyone who wants it without reservation. Just a guess. But you can betthe remarks this time will be off the charts. Poland is still a very Catholic country and that has got to set Francis' teeth on edge. I mean really priests were wearing cassocks and buns looked like nuns. You know he HATES all that. He is going to be in a bad mood. Just watch.

John Nolan said...

As V2 and its ambiguous documents recede into history and the Council itself is seen in historical terms as a product of it times, then the reconciliation of the SSPX becomes easier. JPII and BXVI were too close to the Council to speak about it objectively. Wojtyla supported Dignitatis Humanae because he saw it as pertaining to religious freedom under Communist governments. The author of that document, John Courtney Murray, was not thinking along those lines at all.

John Nolan said...

I've just watched the closing WYD Mass. It wasn't the Roman Canon, it was EP III, but no matter. What we saw here was a Novus Ordo Mass in Latin. The Mass setting wasn't particularly distinguished but the youthful choir sang it lustily and in Latin. It should be remembered that Polish, unlike English, has no Latin cognates so there is no excuse for us to be unfamiliar with the Latin ordinary. We also had Credo III, the plainsong Pater Noster and Adoro te devote at the Communion (where nearly everyone received on the tongue).

And no females in the sanctuary. What makes me sad is that for most English-speaking Catholics under the age of 60 this Mass might as well have been in Tamil or Chinese as far as their understanding of it goes.

gob said...

Eugene, do you have an attorney?

anon1 said...

The sooner the better. I hope that the baddies who scuttled the previous attempt will be contained this time.

George said...

The SSPX has been in an ecclesial and canonical limbo - neither officially in schismatic status, nor in full communion. The Societies churches were established within the jurisdiction of dioceses without the approval being granted by the local bishop to do so. Granting the SSPX their own prelature was the best way to bring them back under the authority of the Holy Father. Bringing local ordinaries into the picture would have complicated things and perhaps even prevented this normalization of relations from coming about, or at least being realized at this time .

There is irony in all this in that the conception of the personal prelature structure came out of Vatican II(Presbyterorum ordinis) and was enacted by Pope Paul VI in Ecclesiae Sanctae.

Marc said...

I go to an SSPX parish. Just last week, the sermon was about why we cannot and will never "accept" Vatican II. These statements from Rome about a personal prelature contain nothing new. This is what they've been saying for years.

Anonymous 2 said...

As he has made clear, Pope Francis wants to tear down walls and build bridges. One hopes that this particular demonstration, which pleases followers of this Blog, will help to make them more open to accepting the legitimacy of some of the other bridges Pope Francis has been trying to build. Or, to use another image, now that the tent is expanding in this direction, that they will be more accepting of the tent expanding in some other directions too.

Anonymous 2 said...

Marc:

Can you please remind us? What were the reasons given? Why do they apply if Vatican II is “just pastoral”?

Anonymous 2 said...

Marc:

Can you please remind us? What were the reasons given? Why do they apply if Vatican II is “just pastoral”?

Anonymous said...

Another great airplane interview.

Francis, the Vicar of Christ equated the human sacrifice by radical Muslim extremest of a Catholic priest who is offering Mass, done in the name of Islam, with civil crimes committed by people who happen to be Catholic.

Of course this isn't a problem is it Father. Go ahead and spin this one.

Anonymous said...

"The pope doesn't speak Polish and if he could and had His Holiness been praying the canon in Polish, I would have been clueless about what was being said and even what part of the canon was being prayed."

I have attended Mass in Vietnamese, Polish, French, German, and Italian. I speak none of these languages. However, even when the Mass was in Vietnamese, I was very aware of "what was being said" and of "what part of the canon was being prayed."

Surely, the problem is not with the language here, but with your ability to perceive and understand...

Marc said...

A2, in a nutshell, the main reason is that the documents contain errors.

Anonymous said...

Gob @1:17 Its not Eugene It is now Billy Gene. You know like the Michael Jackson song.
He is still the one who is a former minister who threatens people on this blog. He also carries guns into the church and freely admits it. He thinks just by changing his name nobody will know who he is. LOL

rcg said...

Anon 8:13: that was pointlessly rude. One of the reasons touted for usin the vernacular is so that it can be followed by the congregation. Since NO Masses are not usually as rigourous in the actions then the language becomes more important to follow the Mass. Yet at world youth day the sea od Babel in attendance would have been aided by the use of a common language, and it was provided by Latin.

Gob and Anon 12:12: I wonder, if Billy the Kid is Gene, it was a change in his nom de cyber in satyrical response to the situation? I can't tell, I am too slow witted and self-absorbed.

Anonymous said...

But Latin isn't a "common language." Latin has not been the "common language" for hundreds of years. And when it was a "common language" it was the language of the educated and the elite.

The Masses I attended in languages I do not speak were all NO Masses. I had no trouble whatsoever being aware of what was being said and what part of the Canon was being prayed.

Anonymous 2 said...

Marc:

Yes, but what are the alleged errors the priest mentioned in his homily?



Jesse James said...

Hey! I know Billy...be nice.

Anonymous said...

rcg You are not slow witted. You are one of the smartest posters. I agree with almost everything you say.

Anonymous said...

From Fr. Z.....and this certainly applies to you Father. "Ultrapapalism is the other side of the coin of Sedevacantism ."

Pat Garrett said...

I knew him too.

Jesse James said...

Pat, that was pretty lousy of you to hide in that dark room and plug Billy by surprise. You should have gone outside and fought it out like a man.

Pat Garrett said...

You may be right. Billy was such a Christian gentleman. A Catholic, I think...loved Latin Masses.

Marc said...

A2, he didn't mention them specifically in this homily.

rcg said...

Anon, I, too, have attended Mass in several languages and you are correct that it can be followed when the postures and movements are followed scrupulously. If the parishes using the NO was as faithful to the GIRM as the VO (EF) parishes then it would be easier.

As far as Latin not being a common language: surely you jest. I had this exact conversation over 30 years ago with a friend of mine who is Jewish and had the complaint about both Latin and (classical religious) Hebrew. The same can be said about Classical Greek. The advantage those languages hold for people like me with science and naturalist education and training is that those panguages are fixed in amber. I can have the same discussion with John Nolan today as a hundres years on either side of the calendar and it is equally true and accurate. I can leave it on the table to be picked up by a Russian colleage tomorrow morning and he can use it to reproduce accurately what I found. He can even correct my work. I did not pursue the philosophical works except as literature and the most basic levels. Returning to the Latin Mass has drawn me into what my grandfather wanted me to see so many years ago. That the thoughts can be captured accurately and permanenlty for future use. And, seriously, it really is not all that hard to gain a working knowledge of Latin. And for a few bucks or quid you can get a really nice hand missal or a FREE app with the words side by side in your language of choice. Now I still need the guidance of people like Nolan, or my priest, to tell me the conjugations and such when needed to catch the nuance of an artful phrase and open the passage, flower-like to study in its beauty and meaning.

Anonymous 2 said...

Marc:

That is a pity. I had hoped to be enlightened given that “the sermon was about why we cannot and will never ‘accept’ Vatican II.”

What explanation_was_given, then, why the SSPX cannot and will never “accept” Vatican II?

Anonymous 2 said...

P.S. Was it simply “Vatican II contains errors” and nothing more? That doesn’t seem enough to fill an entire sermon (unless it is a very short one).


Catholic Mission said...

Too many people are agreeing with me.They understand Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made a doctrinal and objective mistake. He contradicted common sense and the Principle of Non Contradiction


Too many people are agreeing with me.They agree that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre made a doctrinal mistake.It was an objective mistake.He contradicted common sense and the Principle of Non Contradiction.

He was correct,Vatican Council II (Cushingite) is a rupture with Tradition but this is only when physically known baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) is chosen for the interpretation.He accepted this premise( hypothetical BOD was objectively known in the present time) . This was an innovation in Catholic salvation theology.It was a prominent error in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.

There is no denial from traditionalists and pro SSPX bloggers.None of them are saying that Archbishop Lefebvre did not use the irrational premise to arrive at a non traditional conclusion.

Meanwhile a prominent lay supporter of the SSPX who does not want to be quoted has said that the soul is invisible for man and that we cannot see or know cases of BOD and I.I. So BOD and I.I would not be exceptions to EENS.However this would mean that the Archbishop made a mistake. So even on something so obvious, as not being able to see a person's soul, he does not want to be quoted.

In the previous blog post I mentioned that there are traditionalist and conservative Catholics who agree with what I have been writing.

Tancred(The Eponymous Flower) and Prof.Phillip Blosser, professor of Philosophy at the Sacred Heart Seminary Detroit and owner of the blog Musings of a Pertinacious Papist - agree with me.Even Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson, Fr.S.Visintin osb, Dean of the Theology at the Pontifical University of St.Anselm, Rome and John Martignoni, the apologist at EWTN agree with me. I am not saying anything new or personal.It is obvious that there are no physically known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance.

There are many Catholic priests here who agree with me.They say there are no known cases of BOD and I.I in 2016.Since there are no explicit cases of BOD and I.I in our physical reality, BOD and I.I were never exceptions to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.(EENS).

It means not only did Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops make a mistake but so did Pope Benedict XVI in his interview with Avvenire.The pope said that extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was to the 16th century missionaries. He said there was a development of doctrine with Vatican Council II. He meant hypothetical cases mentioned in Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc) were not hypothetical for him. They were explicit.So they became exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was known over the centuries i.e the strict interpretation with no exceptions.

GOOD NEWS FOR THE SSPX AND SEDEVACANTISTS

There is good news for the SSPX and the sedevacantists.The old ecclesiology, which they support,while excluding Vatican Council II (Cushingite), is not contradicted by Vatican Council II(Feeneyite).

They can tell Ecclesia Dei that they affirm the old ecclesiology ( on an ecumenism of return, and non Christians having to formally convert into the Catholic Church).They would also affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) i.e there are no known exceptions in Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.This is EENS as it was known to Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston and the 16th century missionaries...
Lionel Andrades

CONTINUED
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/08/too-many-people-are-agreeing-with.html

Jesse James said...

Yes Pat Garrett, After all, who are we to judge?

Anonymous said...

"Catholic Mission" what the hell are you talking about. I get, I really get that you are right and everybody else is wrong. But can you clearly explain what you are trying to say in maybe less than 3,000,000 words.

Anonymous said...

Now Billy Gene (in honor of Michael Jackson) is Jesse Jackson I mean Jesse James.
He sure likes to adopt the Jackson name I don't blame him I love Michael Jackson and Jesse Jackson.

Marc said...

A2, I don't have a photographic memory for sermons. I'm sorry about that. As I recall, part of what he was explaining, using the recent example of Cardinal Sarah's remarks about ad orientem, was how the New Church prelates oftentimes recognize the rightness of what needs to be done, set out all the reasons it should be done, and still don't do it. He also used the example of Paul VI writing about the use of Latin: he wrote all the great reasons to retain Latin and then did away with it regardless of all those reasons.

The overall reason why we cannot "accept" Vatican II has to do with rejecting errors. So, as we know, a lot of the documents are perfectly fine, but you have minor overt errors in the documents, as well as "time bombs" that have been going off for the last 5 decades.

So the connection had to do with the lack of logic on the part of the New Church prelates who recognize something is amiss, but do not recognize the ultimate source of the error. In the case of ad orientem, you have errors patent in Sacrosanctum Concilium that contribute to the error -- Cardinal Sarah, for one, recognizes the need to return to ad orientem, can state all the reasons it should be done, but then it does not happen.

Lest we fall into the same logical defect, we must reject the documents as containing patent and latent errors.

That's pretty much what I remember. It was not a short sermon (maybe 20 minutes), but I have a 9-month old and it was about 90 degrees in the Church (no air conditioning), so I'm not exactly able to pay absolute attention to the sermons these days!

If you want to be enlightened, you could reach out to an SSPX priest and ask him to answer your questions. I'm sure he'd be willing to do so. Or you could read the writings of Archbishop Lefebvre, especially Open Letter to Confused Catholics. Also, the SSPX website has a lot of information on it.

Jesse James said...

Anonymous @ 8:25, You have been hanging out in the Rot Gut Saloon too long. Nothing you said makes any sense...all I can gather from it is that you really like negro perverts and race baiters. hey, whatever turns you on...

Anonymous said...

"Patent and latent" errors . . . according to whom?

And this person who has this extraordinary perspicacity, has he or she the charism given to bishops to teach in the name of the Church, in the name of Christ?

And who is to say that this individual, with no such charism, has, himself or herself, not erred?

To take on oneself the authority to determine what the Scriptures mean and what the doctrines mean is nothing short of Lutheranism at its best and Jimmy Joe Bean the non-denominational "minister" at the latest start-up, break-away church down the block in the long unused Blockbuster store at its worst...

Marc said...

Cool story, Anonymous at 12:25. You feel better now?

Anonymous said...

"Cool story, Anonymous at 12:25. You feel better now?" isn't much of a reply, now is it?

Anonymous 2 said...

Marc:

Thank you. That gives me a much better idea. I sometimes have the same experience with sermons, however good they may be (I suspect most of us do=)).


Anonymous 2 said...

P.S. Congratulations, dad!!

Marc said...

I wasn't talking to you, Anonymous at 12:25. I was answering questions from Anonymous 2. I have no desire to have a discussion about Vatican II. Anonymous 2 asked a question about a sermon I mentioned, so I was providing details about that sermon for him.
_____

Anonymous 2, thank you! As for sermons, I have a pretty bad memory for them. I'm a little surprised I was able to conjure up as much about that one as I did. I usually just have a vague recollection of them. Last Sunday was about gossip. I remember a recent sermon from a deacon that was quite good, but I don't remember what it was about! I remember that I stood in line for Confession during the entirety of Mass and there are no fans near the Confession line, so it was like 100 degrees. I was literally a sinner sweating in Church. :-)

Critical Reader said...

Anonymous at 12:25:

I don't intend to get into a debate on VII either; this is just a one-off. When the Vatican adopts a pastoral tone in its documents and goes on and on in them for tens of thousands of words instead of adopting succinct "anathema sit" statements; calls, in some of those same documents, for more lay participation; and publishes and disseminates those documents more widely than ever before in Church history; it's rather disingenuous of it to slap people down when they actually read those documents, critique the documents, and note that at the very least the documents potentially contradict what the Church had earlier taught.

It's likewise disingenuous to speak to the people in this mode and then later turn around and claim that the language can only be properly understood by experts or by those with the proper charism.

The Powers That Be have invited this sort of searching critique. If they don't like it when people provide such a critique, then they should never have written the documents thus, and published them thus, and encouraged us to read them. Your own criticism of Marc smacks of the same sort of pre-VII clericalism that the VII Church seems to decry. So which is it to be? The hierarchy should either practice what it preaches or preach what it practices--I don't care which. But as for giving us the documents and chide us for being concerned about what's in them, the--ahem--heck with that.

Anonymous 2 said...

Marc:

I think I would pass out!

And if you will permit a little more humor, I wonder if the priest was tempted to say to some penitents as additional incentive to reformation: “You think_this_is hot?

Marc said...

A2, ha! I haven't received that gentle chiding in the confessional just yet!

I feel most concerned about our priests offering Mass fully vested. There is a small fan in the sanctuary, but nothing like the huge fans we have in the nave. I imagine it is quite hot for them! Fortunately, during the summer months, the Sunday high Mass is suspended and only low Masses are offered. We have some great priests who offer Mass at our parish.

Critical Reader said...

We could always put a grate in the floor under the altar and blow cold air up it, Marilyn Monroe style . . .