Mr Davies echoed the sentiments of quite a number of bishops attending the Second Vatican Council. In a recent essay in The Latin Mass magazine, Father Brian Harrison tends to play down this consensus. This is rather curious when you consider that it was the good Father who wrote the essay for a "reform of the reform" that graced the first three issues of Adoremus Bulletin, after its favorable impression on then-Cardinal Ratzinger.
Any thoughts as to why?
We must remember that 60 years after Tra le Sollicitudini and almost 20 years after Mediator Dei, many of their measures were still far from present throughout the world. In almost all places, the scholas were non-existent, the adequate catechesis of the liturgy was not adequately made by parish priests, especially for older faithful. The true "reform" that was needed then was the thorough application of the Pian decrees.
When one reads the last liturgical Document of Pius XII (Musica Sacra) and the first of John XXIII (Rubricarum Instructum), as well as the last reform of the Traditional Roman Missal (1962), one gets the impression that the Liturgical Reform was in sound basis...
Ah, but the greatest enemies of the Church, the modernists, had infiltrated the Movement since the 1920s... and he result came very soon...
Pour les francophones: I would like to suggest a very, very interesting article recently posted in the Salve Regina website, with thorough analysis of the Canon Missae as compared to the other "eucharistic prayers" made up (supposedly with good "archaeological sources") in the post-conciliar reforms. The article has some references to the French translations, but I bet all of those references are also problematic in English.
http://www.salve-regina.com/
Litu...ie_nouvelle.htm
The Salve Regina website is kept by some FSSP priests in the French-speaking world.
New Catholic,
It is nice to have such an accomplished linguist posting here! I wish that I had worked harder in that direction.
Ha! Ha! "Accomplished linguist"... Thank you for the undeserved compliment, but I believe the only accomplished linguist here is Father O'Leary, who seems to speak almost all modern and ancient European languages, plus several Asian languages.
"Any thoughts as to why?"
The answer would fill a book, and I suspect someone's already written it. Something about too many medieval accretions and not enough "participatio actuosa."
Does that help?
"Mr Davies echoed the sentiments of quite a number of bishops attending the Second Vatican Council. In a recent essay in The Latin Mass magazine, Father Brian Harrison tends to play down this consensus. This is rather curious when you consider that it was the good Father who wrote the essay for a "reform of the reform'"
The trouble with neo-cons . . . .
Neo - conservatism in the Church can mean anything from "we have to scrape every post-implementation barnacle off the ship and start over", to "well, if we could just stop them from dressing in Bozo suits and consecrating pizza, we'd be okey-dokey." Given the way in which the documents of V2, wobbly and ambiguous to begin with, became a taffy pull for every dissident peritus, virtuoso theologian too big for his britches, and protestant malcontent in the civilized world, I am a bit skeptical, not so much of the Harrisons and the Stravinskases (though the latter's tough guy attitude is downright inane, especially given his own problems running a little parish in Pennsylvania), as of the stealth-dissidents who may find their way into camp with the combination of sincere moderates and terminally flexible careerists who make up the base of the movement. Now that sympathy is building for "reform of the reform", I would hate to see yet another beer hall putsch by the same wacky crew. I have yet to be convinced that the neo-con movement has a spine. Or that all of their spokesmen are trustworthy.
By the way, anyone considering buying Davies' book should order it directly from TAN, and hang Amazon. It may cost a buck or two more, but TAN is a great outfit, and they need the help.
Wasn't Pennsylvania, sorry.
Concerning Fr Stravinskas:
Omaha police investigate fraud allegations made against priest
OMAHA, Neb. (CNS) -- Omaha police are investigating allegations of fraud made against Father Peter Stravinskas, temporary administrator of St. Anthony's Parish in south Omaha and the well-known author of several books on Catholicism. Police began investigating the priest's handling of parish funds after parishioners filed a report of possible embezzlement. The Omaha World-Herald daily newspaper initially reported that Father Stravinskas, who has been at the small parish for less than two years, was being investigated after $150,000 appeared to be missing from parish funds. An April 16 article noted that the parish, which normally spends $50,000 annually, spent more than $400,000 from August 2002, when Father Stravinskas arrived, until March 2004, when the Omaha Archdiocese froze parish funds. The priest, who has not been charged with a crime, remains St. Anthony's temporary administrator. Catholic News Service was unable to reach the parish, but Father Joe Taphorn, vice chancellor of the archdiocese, confirmed to CNS that the investigation was under way.
americancatholic.org
Has anyone ever studied the dynamic changes of mood of the Vatican II fathers with the help of Noelle-Neumann's Spiral of Silence theory? I think that could be a brilliant analysis.
For the scholars who come here some food for thought...
New Cath:
Can you elaborate a little on your spiral idea? I am in search of a comm diss. topic and would love to yank in V2 somehow. I have been thinking of looking at Dei Verbum but am a bit afraid of what I might find out!
Well, Dr. Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann's Spiral of Silence theory studies how an influent minority can shape public opinion in a certain sample (for instance, in the group of Vatican II Fathers) because the silent majority increasingly feels that it has to shape itself according to the vocal minority's expectations.
For instance, one could study the several books on the history of the Council (from Alberigo's multi-volume History of the Council to Amerio's Iota Unum and Stat Veritas to polemical books, such as The Rhine flows into the Tiber, and especially the letters and memoirs written by the Fathers themselves and their periti), as well as the evolution of the schemata of the documents and see if Noelle-Neumann's theory is pertinent to the evolution of events in the council. One single document would be enough for an academic study, especially one which was very modified, such as Lumen Gentium.
All this yearning for the past is merely barking up the wrong tree. The current liturgy in the RC Church is in no way defective in its form, and one of the most reassuring things for me is that when I attend Anglican liturgies the liturgy is celebrated in basically the same form as in our own church.
Yet there is a problem with the RC liturgy just now. What is the problem, exactly?
It has something to do with lack of biblical, homiletic, musical, ritual culture. We do not have a joy in Scripture, in preaching, in church music and in ritual.
It has something to do with the disempowerment of the laity. In smaller communities it should be possible to make every member of the congregation feel that they are actively involved, as again the Anglicans seem to succeed in doing.
Why is the Mass boring? Why do Catholic parents tell me their kids get "zilch" from the Mass?
It has something to do with the quality of the English we use. Rather than denounced the three new Eucharistic Prayers, I suggest that part of the answer is to compose many more Eucharistic Prayers. There is no special difficulty about this. The elements required in a eucharistic prayer are simple and well known. To claim that the Roman Canon has some special perfection does not make sense at all.
The notion of "creative liturgy" is much touted by well-meaning bishops but this creativity is paralyzed by the rigidity of the rubrics (a rigidity often augmented in practice by the incapacity of priests and congretations to take advantage of the permitted freedoms -- such as the dropping of the Gloria on occasion).
This liturgical disconnect is the single greatest problem of Catholicism today. If you have a joyful, functioning liturgical community all the rest follows. But you cannot have such a community if its preconditions are absent.
It was not called "Canon Missae" for 1500 years for nothing, Father... It is the Canon, it is the standard, and it is as near perfection as any liturgical text can be. It is our heritage as Romans and it is not a "banl, on-the-spot liturgy".
Could you PLEASE do me a favor? If you come to America, could you please visit a Traditional Catholic community, especially one with a school? There are some also in Europe.
If you could just go and spend a few days... You would see that none of the problems you mention exist. Children in Traditional Masses are so attentive and well-behaved, the great majority of them is enthralled by the beauty and modesty and tranquility.
We are not obsessed with the past, we are in love with the past and with the future, we know our Mass is eternal and breaks the barriers of time...
Oh, and since I know that, like most liberals, you like to talk about the poor, but would rather not see them, I could also recommend a journey to the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where you can visit a whole Particular Church devoted to the Traditional Mass and Sacraments: more than 30,000, many schools, thousands of young people and children. It's the Apostolic Administration St. John Mary Vianney. If you understand Portuguese (I bet you do), you can visit their old ( www.seminario-campos.org.br ) and their new websites ( www.adapostolica.org ).
Laudetur Iesus Christus!
Off-topic.
The canonization of Cardinal Newman, full speed ahead:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
art...1832171,00.html
Fr O'Leary,
"It has something to do with lack of biblical, homiletic, musical, ritual culture."
I concur with that statement absolutely but my proposed prescriptions would possibly be diametrically opposed to your own.
Authenticity, trancendence and truth are what I crave in the liturgy; I have resigned myself to settling for phoniness, fads and platitudes. Sometimes I am pleasantly suprised, often it's kumbaya.
Thankfully, Christ continues to turn up.
Father O'Leary noted this about today's Catholic Mass liturgy : "It has something to do with lack of biblical, homiletic, musical, ritual culture. We do not have a joy in Scripture, in preaching, in church music and in ritual."
I would add: Restricting the priesthood to celibate men eliminates the intellectual and communication skills of ~95% of the adult membership of the Church.
Then there is the comparison competition for and in our time, i.e. the NFL, NBA, NL/AL, NCAA, PGA, LGPGA, the Olympics, figure skating, Broadway, Disney World et al, Harry Potter et al,The Lord of the Rings et al, Soaps, Cosmos, NASA, PBS, HDTV, HBO et al, PC's, the Internet, I-Pods, shopping centers, big screen TV's, et cetera, et cetera.
Possible solution: Rock and Roll, Classical, Rap, ancient Latin or South American Latin Masses on EWTN with "FedExed" Communion? Why not!!! This way, those 67% of Catholics who do not presently go to Mass on Sundays would have no excuses.
And confession by e-mail on the "Pick Your Confessor" website. Or better yet a General Absolution by B16 on global TV once a month!!
Any other suggestions to bring our Church into the modern competitive world?
I keep thinking about Msgr Arthur Burton Calkins and his slithery article on “The Latin Liturgical Tradition” [http://www.latinliturgy.com/calkinstalk_lla.htm], particularly about the flawed paragraph from “Dei Verbum” that he misuses, after plangently invoking “the serenity and wisdom of Mary’s Heart”, as a platform from which to bash traditionalists. Perhaps this thread offers an opportunity to return to this issue, originally brought up by Paul Borealis elsewhere.
The paragraph in question reads:
The Tradition that comes from the apostles makes progress in the Church, with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts (cf. Lk. 2:19 and 15). It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth. Thus, as the centuries go by, the Church is always advancing towards the plenitude of divine truth until eventually the words of God are fulfilled in her.[1] [DV, Article 8, paragraph 2]
It is worth noting that a footnote is appended to the lead sentence of this paragraph. Msgr Calkins, perhaps because he does not wish to complicate his reference, does not mention the footnote or include it in his snippet. But that note is important, because it does something that the text of the DV paragraph itself does not do: it places the V2 sentiments of DV within the greater line of Church teaching. Absent that footnote, the paragraph itself is ambiguous in its meaning, and it is significant that Calkins seems to oblivious to that ambiguity.
What the paragraph appears to say, IMO, can be stated as follows: apostolic tradition grows and develops over the life of the Church. It “progresses”, or meliorates, over time, until it reaches “the plenitude of divine truth”. What’s the problem with this? Simply that it suggests that the Church does not possess the “plenitude of divine truth”, did not receive it in toto from Jesus Christ, and must grow toward it over time. And what’s the problem with an evolutionary concept of truth? Simply that it forces the conclusion that Christ either did not possess the fullness of truth, or bungled its transmission to the apostles, and that His work must be completed – made perfect – by the strivings of individuals. It forces the conclusion that what comes later is better, more complete, more enlightening, than what came earlier, and must therefore displace what came earlier. It makes a hash of the bedrock doctrine that the Catholic Church received the fullness of truth from Christ itself, and preserves – not develops or grows – it over its life.
[ctd]
[ctd]
Of course, it can be argued that this is not what the paragraph means at all. It is not apostolic tradition itself that grows, develops and progresses, but the minds and hearts of individuals. Is this not what is indicated by the references to “individuals who contemplate these things in their hearts”, and the “spiritual realities they experience”, and the “preaching of those who have received . . . the sure charism of truth”?
Well, maybe – if the paragraph is read in the context of the footnote referred to above. That footnote points to a document of the First Vatican Council, which is quoted in Denzinger, 1800 (I went over this in the earlier exchange, so I won’t repeat myself here). But Msgr Calkins does not bother with the footnote, or with the context. Perhaps he felt it was not necessary. Or perhaps he is simply tone deaf to the ambiguity in the DV paragraph itself. Whatever, the DV paragraph, taken alone, cherishes “believers who ponder these things in their hearts”, without contemplating the results of their ponderings. There are, after all, misinterpretations as well as right ones, flawed insights as well as true ones, mendacious claims as well as honest ones. For every saint there is a heretic, for every teacher a snake oil salesman. But even “the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth” – how “sure” can their charism be, how reliable their preaching, if apostolic truth is only a work-in-progress? The flaw of the DV paragraph, stated simply, is that it is open to the interpretation that we all – Kung and Teilhard no less than Pius XII and John Paul II – complete, no, we perfect, the work that Christ merely began. The infantile simplicity of this notion is exceeded only by its monumental presumptuousness.
When I first read Msgr Calkins’ article, I was somewhat caught by surprise, that its heartfelt “focus on the mystery of our redemption through the prism of Mary’s Immaculate Heart”, suddenly turned into a diatribe against traditionalists who question the phenomena of the last thirty-five years, phenomena Calkins himself identifies as the “seemingly endless liturgical experimentation and novelty, the desacralizing of the Mass, and the “dumbing down” of the congregation”. But having spent a little time examining the paragraph from “Dei Verbum”, the very paragraph which undergirds Calkins’ diatribe, I am a good deal less surprised. Calkins seems to accept uncritically the full implications of that paragraph, implications, which, I have tried to show, are problematic at the very least.
I have been reading through Mr. Davies' The Eternal Sacrifice: The Liturgy Since Vatican II, and I very much enjoy it. This book, with a number of other things, has sparked in me an intense interest in the Sacred Liturgy. This interest necessarily involved attending the "Tridentine" Mass, so I went this past Sunday at a Carmelite convent near my house, but unfortuneately I wasn't able to make it to the High Mass.
I have so many thoughts about what happened at Mass, and I cannot possibly put them all down here (at least not now). But I suppose that the most important one is that I actually "felt" (I'm using this losely) that the Latin Novus Ordo (which includes Gregorian Chant) that I've been participating in over the years is more -but I won't say "far more"- reverent and interiorly evoking than the low Tridentine Mass.
Has anyone here been to a Latin Novus Ordo (w/Gregorian Chant), as well as a (low and/or high) "Tridentine" Mass?
The Roman Canon is far from perfect -- it is a rather rambling and shapeless text compared with other canons. Above all it does not communicate effectively with the non-Roman cultures of today. Felicity, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy are very nice names but why would the people of Brazil today want to celebrate them particularly?
This glorification of a single text from the past is irrational and reactionary. It is as if someone were to say, Milton is the most perfect of poets, so I refuse to read any poetry written since.
To thread in the territory of "feelings" is quite irrelevant. No experience lifts me up more than a low Mass (Missa Recitata), which is, after all, the last stage of the great liturgical evolution in the West. The silence, the whispers, the sobriety -- all of them lead me to a degree of sensitivity that I cannot describe.
But then, this is me: whatever we "feel" does not efface the stark fact that the new mass is a completely new product in almost all its details, especially in its fabricated new "eucharistic prayers". As I have said before, why buy a very nice, computer-made reproduction of a masterpiece (which is what the new mass may be at best) when you can buy the masterpiece itself?
Typos:
Calkins seems to oblivious to that ambiguity.
should be
Calkins seems oblivious to that ambiguity.
"Christ itself" should be "Christ Himself".
Probably more, but . . . .
"This glorification of a single text from the past is irrational and reactionary" Thus speaketh the paragon of rationality.
Since the Virgin Birth of Our Lord is also in the list of events you classify as irrational, I will always remain on the side of "irrationality".
"This glorification of a single text from the past is irrational and reactionary."
Should we do away with Sacred Scripture as well?
New Catholic,
I didn't mean to come across as "treading on feelings". You'll have to forgive me, because I'm not a very good writer.
I was approaching the celebration of holy Mass from the liturgical perspective. I often hear about how the so-called Tridentine Mass is solemn, silent, profound, etc., And on the other hand, I hear how the Novus Ordo is entertaining, man-centered, Protestant, etc. I know that with respect to the Novus Ordo these characteristices are all too often true. But why don't the critics ever talk about the orthodox Novus Ordo? The one that is just as solemn, just as silent, just as profound, and not least of which is just as theocentric! The critics want to highlight the liturgical circus that everyone puts on today, but what about those of the New Order who interpret the Council with a traditional hermeneutic?
St Pio,
Does your orthodox NO feature:
- multiple alternative Eucharistic prayers?
- impromptu orans postures at any given moment on the part of the laity?
- an "Our Father" sung in the vernacular?
- greetings of peace?
- a "communication meditation" prior to which people are told to "be seated"?
"Reverence" is a relative term, but if your NO includes most of the above, I'm not impressed. If you are, then go with my good wishes.
Very interesting Una Voce America conference in November: http://www.prweb.com/releases/
20...prweb299319.htm
Bishop Fernando Rifan, the Apostolic Administrator of the above-mentioned Apostolic Administration of St. John Mary Vianney, in Campos, Brazil, will be the guest of honor. The topic: Developments (and things to expect) in the current pontificate.
For those who may be able to go to Rhode Island, it will be a wonderful event, crowned with a High Pontifica Mass.
PontificaL... I also apologize for my many typos...
- multiple alternative Eucharistic prayers?
There are four Eucharistic prayers in the Roman Missal, and father always uses Eucharistic prayer I.
- impromptu orans postures at any given moment on the part of the laity?
Please forgive my liturgical ignorance. I don't know what you mean by this.
- an "Our Father" sung in the vernacular?
We sing the Pater Noster in Latin.
- greetings of peace?
No.
- a "communication meditation" prior to which people are told to "be seated"?
What in the world is a "connunication meditation"?? As for the "be seated", everyone simply knows when to stand and when to sit . . . AND WHEN TO KNEEL.
"'Reverence' is a relative term"! I'm sorry, but your are wrong. There is only one kind of reverence when it comes to the worship of the Triune God. St. John is a perfect example of this reverence: "When I saw Him, I fell at His feet as though dead." (Apoc. 1:17) This is the attitude which holy Mass conjures up.
St. Pio, I am happy for you that you have such a respectful new mass available where you live. I would assume there are no "extra ministers" either.
One of the great problems of the new mass, though, is the fact that most "bizarre" masses, which are actually the norm (while yours is the exception), are within the "expected width" of interpretation of the rubrics of the new mass. So mostly anything is possible...
Better than I expected.
The orans posture is a prayer posture of the priest, but is often adopted by parishioners in search of the novelty and gimmickry they have come to expect from the clergy. It consists of arms extended, palms up, but there are as many variations as there are practicioners among the laity.
New Catholic,
Sadly, you are right. The Latin Novus Ordo is a rarity. My parish is the only one in the entire diocese that celebrates an orthodox Mass. Because of this our Bishop has "exiled" our priest to a little remote place in Texas. Little did the Bishop know, however, that he was simply speading the Gospel! Not only did much of the congregation follow our shepherd, but he has now added to his flock! It takes me about an hour to get to holy Mass, but I'm sure the first followers of our Lord also traveled quite a ways to see Him.
Ralph,
Now I know what you mean. I know exactly what you mean, and I hate it. No, we do not have any such thing in our parish, but it is horribly rampant in my diocese.
P.S.
I forgot to mention that we also end every Mass with the St. Michael the Archangel prayer.
St. Pio:
Ah, Fr. Weinberger. You are in good hands, indeed. At least until Bp. Grahmann moves him again.
Hello ralph roister-doister
I am putting this in my own words, as best I can and understand, but draw and rely on Joseph Ratzinger's 1968 commentary: 'Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation', 'Ch. II, The Transmission of Divine Revelation', from "Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II", Vol. III. Please note I am not a theologian or expert on the subject, forgive any mistakes.
It is my understanding that in the debates at Vatican II on the draft text and meaning of Dei Verbum Article 8, paragraph 2, there were concerns raised by two Cardinals, Ruffini and Leger. Ruffini thought he detected theological evolutionism, i.e. modernism, which had been condemned. Leger thought much the same; that it taught the progress, not of the Church's knowledge of apostolic tradition (Divine Revelation), but of the apostolic tradition itself. Leger did not want any blurring of apostolic tradition with post-apostolic Church 'tradition(s)', because to teach this would destroy any prospect of ecumenism or reunion with the Protestant churches, who have always accused the Catholic Church of adding human (Church) traditions to the binding once-for-all apostolic tradition (Word of God).
To be continued…
==
Continued from above…
Both Cardinals Ruffini and Leger had misunderstood. Upon careful examination and consideration by the Theological Commission of the objections and concerns raised by the Cardinals, some minor changes were made to the draft text, and the Theological Commission explained to the Fathers that growth of tradition is to be understood as meaning the growth/progress of *understanding in the Church* of the original apostolic tradition/reality delivered at the beginning. This clarification/explanation, I believe, is recorded and official. Moreover, Leger and Ruffini were apparently shown to be incorrect in their reading of the Latin text. When completed, the final text of Dei Verbum was voted on, and accepted/approved, by the Council Fathers, and Pope Paul VI.
To sum up: This is how Ratzinger very succinctly/briefly explains Dei Verbum Article 8, paragraph 2: "It states that tradition, which stems from the Apostles, develops under the assistance of the Holy Spirit in the Church, i.e., that there is a growing understanding of the words and realities that have been handed down to us. Again, three factors of this growth are listed: contemplation and study on the part of believers; inner understanding, which comes from spiritual experience; and the proclamation by the teaching office. The final point is made that the Church and its understanding of revelation is moving forward towards the fullness of the divine word in the Church in the 'eschaton'."
==
Good show, RR-D.
Paul,
That is an interesting account, thank you for providing it. However, IMO, what you have shown is that the cardinals were "persuaded". Perhaps they were also convinced, but nothing you say indicates that. My supervisor at work has "persuaded" me of the unparalleled wisdom of this or that company policy, which means that I shut up and go along. Not the same situation here, of course, but perhaps not all that different, either.
I wonder what role the footnote plays in all this. I wonder if it is the result of the cardinals' objections, an attempt to clarify, without also getting the noses of the DV writers out of joint. Ah, diplomacy.
Whatever the case, I still think that the paragraph, standing on its own without the footnote and its redemptive correlation to V1, is highly suspect. Surely, at the very least, it is not a model of clarity, and such muddy thinking should not have been allowed to pass, especially considering the importance of the subject. Shoddy thought leads to misinterpretation, misinterpretation leads to confusion, confusion leads to error. In such a scenario, it is only the demon who benefits.
"Shoddy thought leads to misinterpretation, misinterpretation leads to confusion, confusion leads to error."
And, unfortunately, this is the reality of so many portions of documents of the last Ecumenical Council! Which is why the satanic "spirit of Vatican II" thrives in their ambiguities... Yes, of course it is possible to interpret the Council "in light of Tradition"! But, in the end, one is left with nothing more than what the Church has always believed -- a prospect which leads into despair those people who invested their whole lives in the "Springtime" which never came.
St Pio,
If you, Dale, and New Catholic agree that you are in good hands, I have no reason to doubt it. The NO masses I am obliged to attend are vernacular rather than Latin, and sentimental rather than reverent. Not that the priests are necessarily afflicted with lust for the new: I think in most cases they are simply as "dumbed down" as the rest of us. God bless.
By the way, I did not mean to suggest in my earlier note that the orans posture is itself gimmicky -- only its adoption by all and sundry. There's enough aping the priest among the laity as it is.
Mr. Price,
Yes, I belong to the fold of Fr. Paul. How do you know him?
www.saintwilliamtheconfessor.com
Talk about 'shoddy thinking;' how about crappy translation?
The term "actuosa" does NOT MEAN "active."
It means what it looks like: "actual."
And "actual" means prayerfully conforming oneself, both in the interior and exterior fora, to Christ in sacrifice to the Father. It does NOT mean sing, dance, jump, or make popcorn.
No wonder all the Rembert Weaklands of the world can have so much, ah, fun with liturgical shenanigans.
Hello again ralph roister-doister
I trust you remember and acknowledge my previous post, regarding the 'Dei Verbum Article 8, paragraph 2' footnote reference to the First Vatican Council (Denzinger 1800, [On the true progress of knowledge, both natural and revealed], and the quote from St. Vincent of Lerin therein). I stand by my previous post, where I suggested 'Dei Verbum Article 8, paragraph 2' should properly be read in light of the footnote reference to Vatican I, - otherwise, there is no need for it to be there, and to ignore it might in fact lead to misinterpretation. But in fact it is there, thanks be to God, so we should all use it. This was my opinion, if I remember things correctly.
At the time (in context), I was more concerned with the article (link) you provided, that erroneously (in my estimation) attacked Vatican II 'Dei Verbum Article 8, paragraph 2' as being perhaps heretical, or some such thing.
Respectfully, as for Msgr Calkins’ article/lecture, did I at the time (or must I now, in your opinion) personally defend it?
Thanks!
Regardind what Ralph has said, I would still recommend to St Pio to go to the Traditional Roman Mass (the so-called "Tridentine Mass") once in a while, to get in touch with the deepest Tradition of our Faith. I do not personally know, as Dale Price seems to know, the priest who celebrates that special new mass, but it seems pretty impressive, considering that it uses the [reformed] Canon ["Prex I"] and is versus Deum.
St Pio, you should ask the priest to celebrate the Traditional Mass eventually. It is a good exercise to understand the considerable differences. If he is an older priest, he certainly has never forgotten the God "qui laetificat iuventutem" suam.
"That is an interesting account, thank you for providing it. However, IMO, what you have shown is that the cardinals were "persuaded". Perhaps they were also convinced, but nothing you say indicates that."
When I wrote "Fathers" above, I meant Council Fathers, sorry for the misunderstanding, and I hope I am at least partially accurate. But I have no idea if the two Cardinals (Leger and Ruffini) were ever convinced. Ratzinger never mentions the outcome, except to say that "After the Council the objection of Cardinal Leger (and thus indirectly also that of Ruffini) was again taken up by Protestant theologians [...]" against the Vatican II Council's and Catholic teachings on these matters. One of the theologians was Biblical scholar O. Cullmann.
==
Paul Borealis,
"I stand by my previous post, where I suggested 'Dei Verbum Article 8, paragraph 2' should properly be read in light of the footnote reference to Vatican I, - otherwise, there is no need for it to be there, and to ignore it might in fact lead to misinterpretation. But in fact it is there, thanks be to God, so we should all use it."
I agree totally. Perhaps we should tell Msgr Calkins, who, for whatever reason, doesn't use it.
And no, I'm not asking you to defend Msgr Calkins' article, though you certainly can if you care to. That vein has probably been mined sufficiently. In these notes today I was simply trying to scratch an itch that had been bothering me ever since our original exchange.
Thank you again for the reference to Ratzinger's account.
In the issue of liturgical "aggiornamento":
another work of art to be destroyed in the name of the satanic "spirit of Vatican II".
Won't this nightmare ever end??? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/.../19/
ixhome.html
Mr Roister-Doister:
I am not a neo-con. I am a neo-traditionalist, thank you very much. I'm old enough to remember when "the Old Mass" was simply "the Mass, and don't require being labeled by people who don't know what they're talking about.
If you wanna know who I am, I've got a weblog too. I'm probably more "old school" than you'll ever be.
Fr Stravinskas is not a "neo-con" either. And to whomever posted that Omaha story about him, be advised that CNS pulled that story from its files within a matter of days. (Go ahead and try to find it on their site.) Be also advised of what the press did not report; namely, that the good Father was spearheading a revival of a parish that was dying in a rough neighborhood, becoming little more than an ethnic social club. Further, two independent audits cleared him of any wrongdoing.
The physical plant was in desparate need of repair, which was done at a reasonable cost. Sadly, with the neighborhood being taken over by street-walkers and drive-by shootings, the parish now may have to fold since his departure.
(I used to tell people that the neighbors were more scared of Father than he was of them. If you know him, you know why.)
He would probably not want me drawing attention to him like this, but I don't give a rat's patootie; he is a good man whose reputation was spoiled by a bunch of weenies. He'll always be aces in my book!
The diocesan spokesman's defense of the action is especially galling:
"We are of the opinion that to facilitate the full activity of the people in the liturgy, the structure should lend to the experience of the community celebrating together."
In other words, the EMHCs keep bumping butts.
St. Pio:
The success and mistreatment of Fr. Paul attracted national attention, especially since his use of Latin in the Mass was explicitly a reason for his being removed. Rod Dreher wrote movingly about the Dallas parish and the good works done there.
Many of us were, and remain, angered by what happened. The Dallas chancery--a/k/a the Grahmann Bunker--is one of the worst in the country.
However, I am glad to hear that he continues to be a great father to his new and growing flock.
Mr Alexander,
I do not wish to engage in a pissing contest with you over who's the bigger traditionalist, or neo-traditionalist, whatever that might be.
Concerning Fr Stravinskas:
- if he's not a neo-con, what exactly is he? Apparently I'm not up on the latest factionalist terminology, but if it walks like a duck . . . .
- CNS may have withdrawn its article. I'll take your word on that. But the story is still out there, and not only on crazed traditionalist web sites:
http://www.wowt.com/home/headlin...es/
1457487.html
This article refers to an FBI auditor, who does not exonerate Fr Stravinskas -- quite the opposite. However, the story dates back to last spring, and seems to have gone off the radar since then. It is odd that that should have happened.
The background information you have provided is helpful, thank you. I would be happy to see Fr Stravinskas exonerated. I'm sorry that my bringing up the issue offended you.
"The background information you have provided is helpful, thank you. I would be happy to see Fr Stravinskas exonerated. I'm sorry that my bringing up the issue offended you."
The issue offends me, not only because I know and admire the man, but because it is obvious that both sides are not being told. That is largely the fault of a weak-kneed Church infrastructure, which cares little for the truth. It is gracious of you to offer; your apology is accepted.
Words are only of value if they have an assigned meaning. If you say someone or something "walks like a duck," it presumes a mutual understanding as to what constitutes a duck. But you don't appear to know what I mean by "neo-traditionalist," and my understanding of the term "neo-conservative" is apparently different than yours.
All the more reason why I don't like "pissing contests" such as you describe either.
Someday I'll explain such terms as "neo-trad" and "paleo-trad" on my weblog, in the context of the conversation over the state of the Roman liturgy. Until then, stay tuned, and stay in touch.
The only purpose I can think of for a term like “neo-traditionalist” would be to dissociate oneself from LeFebvreites, sedevacantists, etc, who sometimes call themselves traditionalists. OK. An alternative might be to call the schismatics schismatics, the sedevacantists sedevacantists, and reserve the perfectly honorable name of traditionalist for those to whom it properly belongs. In any case, I await your taxonomical disquisition.
The name "Lefebvrite" is most incorrect and it is distasteful and incomplete to call those faithful "schismatic". It is one thing to call their bishops "schismatic" or even their priests, but to label all their faithful "schismatic", a name absolutely rejected by the Holy See itself (which has recognised more than once that the Catholic faithful MAY go to their Masses to fulfill their Sunday obligation -- and may even donate modest contributions at Mass), is offensive and untruthful.
As for myself, I am only a Catholic -- it is a title much greater than what I deserve.
You guys are very far from the mind of the church as expressed in the Synod:
In a rebuff to the lone appeal in the Synod of Bishops in favor of the pre-Vatican II rite of Mass, the synod’s final message, set for approval tomorrow, contains no language on the subject.
Instead, the message affirms that the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) “provided the necessary basis for a progressive and adequate liturgical reform.”
The message has not yet been released to the public, but an advance copy of its final draft was obtained Oct. 20 by NCR. Its primary author is Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Quebec, Canada.
In response to concerns from some bishops that a section from the first draft of the message concerning divorced and civilly remarried Catholics was potentially ambiguous on the church’s teaching on marriage, the language has been revised in several places.
Where the first draft, circulated on Oct. 15, referred to “irregular” family situations, the final text mentions situations that “do not conform to the commandment of the Lord.” In stating that nobody wishes to exclude such Catholics from the church, the new text adds that the bishops “do not share choices they have made.” A line that the suffering of divorced and remarried Catholics “can be transformed into a precious involvement in the Christian community” has been removed, and the new text invites the divorced and remarried to listen to the Word of God for their life of faith “and their conversion.”
The lack of any reference to the old Mass appears to be a setback for Colombian Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, president of the “Ecclesia Dei Commission” set up to promote reconciliation with traditionalist Catholics, who had proposed during floor debate Oct. 15 that the final message contain a gesture of outreach to Catholics attached to the old Mass.
The NCR story on Castrillón Hoyos’ proposal can be found here: Outreach to Latin Mass Catholics proposed for final message.
Castrillón Hoyos was the only participant to bring up the old Mass, which was defined as “not a priority” for the synod by Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, in an Oct. 13 press conference.
A senior Vatican official taking part in the synod told NCR Oct. 20 that the lack of reference in the final message to the old Mass does not mean the bishops are opposed to it, merely that they didn’t think it was as important as other subjects. There was general pressure, this official said, to make the message shorter, so many suggestions for specific points were not adopted.
In general, the official said, there is a desire for reconciliation with Catholics attached to the old Mass, but at the same time strong support for the liturgical reforms introduced by Vatican II.
Bishop Dennis George Brown of Hamilton, New Zealand: "We as church need to be continually open to finding ways in which the Eucharist can become easily available to all of our faithful people. We need to be sensitive to the questions that the faithful often ask us, e.g., 'Why does it seem to be possible for former married priests of the Anglican Communion to be ordained and function as Catholic priests, while former Catholic priests who have been dispensed from the vow of celibacy are unable to function in any pastoral way?'"
Despite perceptions of priest shortages in North America and Europe, the problem is actually far worse in many areas of the developing world. The US, for example, represents 6 percent of the global Catholic population, but has 12 percent of the bishops in the Catholic church and 14 percent of the priests.
Bishops from the Global South have also continued to insist on linking the Eucharist with concern for social justice. "In a country such as Congo-Kinshasa, the Catholic faithful should be initiated more and more to bring to the altar their sufferings, which are those of all their people and which has existed for decades," said Bishop Nestor Ngoy Katahwa of Kolwezi, Congo, Oct. 6.
"The frustrations from injustice and social inequalities, the rancor of living in extreme poverty on an extremely rich soil, scandalously exploited for the well being of others, the wars imposed on them bringing with them destruction and forced displacement, the upheavals of tribal and ethnic hate … are tragedies that cover the path of the cross of the people of Congo," Katahwa said.
Full accounts of the Synod debates can be found at http://www.nationalcatholicrepor...orter.org/word/
“The synod commenced with the impressive opening Mass in St Peter’s Basilica,” Bishop Williams recalled. “It included the dancing and singing which are an intrinsic part of major liturgical celebrations in the Pacific. That some curial officials took exception to the sight of tattooed Samoan men in traditional dress dancing in the basilica was perhaps indicative of the gulf which can exist between those striving for inculturation in the liturgy and those making judgments on it from outside the culture and from within their own cultures”.
Williams also said that the synod avoided some contentious topics, even if they had broad support, such a change in the rules on mandatory celibacy for priests. “There was the inevitable dilution of heartfelt appeals and prophetic insights voiced by individual bishops in the plenary sessions, as consensus propositions were formulated in the circoli minori.
The desire to speak with a united voice ruled out putting to the vote proposals which enjoyed considerable general support, but in regard to which some did not wish to ‘rock the boat’... on the ordination to priesthood of viri probati, for example, to remedy the situation in some parts of Oceania where the Mass, as some bishops phrased it, has become for the faithful a rare privilege rather than a right.”
Critiquing suggestions in the Instrumentum Laboris for wider use of traditional modes of liturgical expression, Bishop Lungu said, “I find this part of the document to be over-optimistic about the organ, Gregorian chant and even the use of Latin at international meetings in an attempt to meet the needs of the people of all time and places. My proposal is that we should not go back to making these instruments of worship universal. … Communication and participation is vital in every liturgical celebration including the Eucharistic celebration. Our hope lies in the future and not in the past.”
Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, master general of the Jesuit order, said ecumenical conversation with the churches of the Reformation might be helped by referring to the Mass as a “sacramental sacrifice,” that is, a sacramental re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Protestants have sometimes criticized Catholic Eucharistic theology for seeming to assert that Christ’s once-and-for-all sacrifice is “repeated” on the altar.
Second, Kolvenbach suggested that seeing the moment of consecration in the Mass not as a matter of a physical instant in time, but a “sacramental time” in the eyes of God, could help overcome traditional Catholic/Orthodox debates over whether the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ during the recitation of the words of Christ from the Last Supper, or the epiclesis, meaning the calling down of the Holy Spirit over the gifts.
"You guys are very far from the mind of the church as expressed in the Synod"
Whatever... This "collegial mind" has left Holy Mother Church where she is now: abused, violated, emaciated. What else can we expect from the many who have been trying for decades to destroy the work of their ancestors?
By the way, I've never expected anything from this synod. Never. Honestly, I think the Pope never expected much either.
"The only purpose I can think of for a term like 'neo-traditionalist' would be to dissociate oneself from LeFebvreites, sedevacantists... In any case, I await your taxonomical disquisition."
You'll thank me later. Stay tuned...
New Catholic,
First of all, I want to apologize if what I wrote yesterday offended you. Yesterday was my day to offend people, so hopefully that is out of my system for awhile.
But secondly, I want to ask you, in all sincerity, what are the people who followed Archbishop Lefebvre out of the Church to be called? If not schismatics, are they not at least the followers of schismatics? Believe me, I have sympathy for them, and there are a great many things about Archbishop Lefebvre that I admire – would that others had been as attuned to the incipient dangers of V2 and its aftermath as he – but the man did leave the Church, a step neither you nor I are willing to take, for very good reasons, I think. But he, and his followers, did leave – however tentatively or with whatever reservations. So there we are.
----------------
By the way, yesterday I discovered that the Druids, God bless ‘em, are taxonimizing themselves the same way that Catholics apparently are. You’ll be intrigued to know that there are now neo-druids, paleo-druids, and -- cue the drummer – meso-druids. I have not heard of anyone referring to meso-Catholics lately – let’s get on the stick, folks!
Extra!! Extra!! Gathering of Predominantly Liberal Careerists Resist Rocking the Boat!!! Stop the Presses!!!
It would be interesting to see how many of the participating diocesan bishops actually authorize the indult. I suspect it would be a small number.
Most of them should be called Catholics, simply that, since the Holy See has recognized that their Eucharistic obligations may be fulfilled in these chapels in "irregular situation". The Holy See has warned against a "schismatic" mentality, and this is a great risk, but since we do not know the heart and intention of each faithful, it is probably best to call them just Catholics.
You are certainly right, Dale Price. Probably the American and French bishops are the only ones with "indults" in their dioceses. There are a couple of bishops from Latin America with that experience and that's it: no more then 10 of the almost 300 Fathers have this knowledge, and probably only two (the archibisshop of Atlanta and Cardinal Ruini, as Vicar of Rome) have experience with full-time Traditional parishes in the dioceses they run.
ouch... "archibissshop" No disrespect intended...to archbishop Gregory.
"The loss of the sense of the supernatural
helps to explain the decline
of the Catholic Church since Vatican Council II.
Reclaim the supernatural
http://www.catholic.net/rcc/
Peri...hildebrand.html
By Alice von Hildebrand".
==
As a totally post Vatican II catholic who have never had the chance to see the "old" Mass, I really can't see the problem with the "new" Mass when the ritual is normally followed ?
NCR interview Bp Gregory
NCR: it would seem that the synod has largely reaffirmed existing discipline on matters such as celibacy, divorced and remarried Catholics, and inter-communion. Some might say that you came all the way to Rome for three weeks to finish where you started. Is that a fair perspective?
Gregory: I suppose that would be a fair perspective if I didn’t have the experience of seeing it from the inside. From my perspective, I would say there was an awful lot of honest give and take in the synod. The results may appear not to have been the result of an honest debate, but that’s not the case. There was some hard discussion. People expressed their opinions and their pastoral experience. ..this was the best we could do right now.
..Before we say that the solution to the vocations problem is obvious, I think we need to be in dialogue with our ecumenical partners, as we have been at the synod. Other religious communities with a married clergy, and in some cases with women clergy, are also experiencing shortages. I realize that ours may be worse, because we have more people and so on. We have to ask the question of why they too are experiencing shortages. Is there something endemic in our society at the moment that makes the clerical life unattractive for a lot of people? I also have to ask about the challenge of commitment. In the synod we may be talking about the scarcity of priests, but as a bishop I’m also worried about why half of our marriages end in divorce. Isn’t there some linkage between the difficulty of convincing young men to become priests, and the fact that so many marriages fall apart? In other words, I think the forces at work here are complex, and the answers are far from obvious.
..the viri probati issue was raised first with regard to situations in the young, missionary churches. When it got into the bishops from the older churches, it became clear that there simply wasn’t the ability to say “yea” or “nay” about the viri probati.
..if what we mean is fine men, excellent husbands and fathers, men who know the basics of the faith, but that’s it, I have some concerns. My conflict is, we’re in a time when the demands on Catholic priests have probably never been higher. They require ever greater theological sophistication, pastoral competence, professional training, and so you’re talking about something more than viri probati. ..One interesting twist is that Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo’s proposal on this question was tweaked with an additional paragraph that says, “In applying this orientation, bishops ought to practice the virtue of prudence, taking into account concrete local situations.”
Interesting article here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
commen...1598177,00.html
Ran across this quote from a 1972 speech of Paul VI:
“Perhaps the Lord did not call me to this service because I have any special aptitude for it, or in order that I should GOVERN the Church and save it in its present difficulties, but in order that I should SUFFER something for the Church and make it clear that He and no other is guiding and saving it.”
Not exactly brimming with confidence, was he? Makes a Hotspur of Hamlet. All those years when theologians prattled away like dissident little elves, confident that they would receive not even a slap on the wrist, at most an oblique criticism, in some obscure Vatican document or press release, that the official teaching of the Church on [fill in the blank] had not changed! How many souls were put in jeopardy, that Kung’s feelings might be spared?
In view of Paul's massive self-doubts, and his reluctance to discipline his followers, all the more remarkable his banishment of Bugnini.
Excuse me, instead of "followers", I should perhaps have said "wayward doctors of the Church". Or possibly, "heretics".
HAPPY TENTH ANNIVERSARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Responsum ad Dubium
Concerning the Teaching Contained in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis
October 28, 1995
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.
Responsum: In the affirmative.
This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.
The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.
Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.
+ Joseph Card. Ratzinger, Prefect
NCR report on Synod
Those close to the most recent proceedings gave the impression that they were dealing with a top-flight theologian who doesn’t mind engaging in debate. In one telling incident, in fact, Benedict intervened to essentially end a march from the right and pull the synod back from establishing a false dichotomy between the Eucharist as a sacrifice and the Eucharist as a communal meal, expressed by many as the “horizontal” and “vertical” dimensions of the Eucharist. Using the weight of theological reasoning rather than blunt command to end discussion, he told the synod he saw no contradiction between the two aspects.
business loan for people with bad credit business loan for people with bad credit business loan for people with bad credit. car loan low online rate car loan low online rate car loan low online rate.
Commenting by HaloScan
