Thursday, July 13, 2006

Clearing the Smoke of Satan?

It appears there will be several changes to the Catholic liturgy! These changes will take time to impliment. We probably won't see any for up to a couple years, but some of them seem to be well motivated and moving in the right direction.

Does anyone have a list of all the changes being proposed?

A few I've heard of:

"Credo" will be properly translated to "I believe" ("We believe," if I am conjugating correctly, would be "credomus").

"Et cum spiritu tuo" will be properly translated to "And with your spirit" (not "and also with you").

More Latin will be used.

More Gregorian chant will be used.

Several bishops argued to get "and for all" put back to "and for many" (at the consecration of the wine into the Blood of Christ), but (for now) that has been shot down.

Thoughts??

12 comments:

  1. always good to have more Gregorian chant

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agreed, especially in our "Latin" Rite.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Credimus is the correct conjugation. It is nice to see that the Holy See is finally insisting on a mostly correct translation into English. Of course, if they would bite the bullet and mandate Latin, we would not have to worry about translation issues as much. That would have the secondary good effect of spotlighting dissident bishops and priests. I am all for the Gideon's Army effect there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Would you believe it I messed up a Latin conjugation. Credere ---> Credemus.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Have you ever heard the Irish expression "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear"?

    The new world order "mass" can be made over ad infinitum but will remain only a Protestant communion service.

    A not very happy meal. A big veggieburger!

    ReplyDelete
  6. "anonymous" (why not post your name?)

    I take it you do not believe the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Novus Ordo (it sounds freemason already) was compiled by a commission of modernist Catholics and Protestants. The only goal was to make "acceptable" the Cath. liturgy for protestants. A lot is based on ideas of Luther, who hanged himself.
    The tridentine rite is... what Jesus taught the Apostles. One can see the proof in the byzantine rite of the Greek Catholics, their H. Liturgy of St John Chrysostome has hardly changed since the 4th century and it's like a "twin" brother of the tridentine H. Mass.
    The N.O.M. is valid, it's a fact, if we deny it or not. But many modernist priests have evolved to "celebrations" that are not valid anymore. This danger was almost unexistent in old liturgy.
    Vatican II changed only 1 thing to H. Mass : an invocation to St Joseph was inserted in the Canon. The Council also said Latin had to be preserved (except for the lectures). That's all the Council has "proclaimed". All the rest are abuses of our (former and nowadays) "bishop's conferences". The Vatican can't controll all translations of the world, in India there are more than 400 languagues (inofficially much more).
    Yes, you can continue to get your water in the New Order bucket, but every renovation is a new hole in it, and as said : at the end there will be nobody left anymore in our churches. Tony

    ReplyDelete
  8. "The tridentine rite is... what Jesus taught the Apostles."

    You're really going to say that-- seriously? It's kinda like the protestants who say that the King James version is the only Holy Spirit inspired Bible--"It was good enough for Jesus".

    Come on--the Tridentine Rite is a development of the Church. It is from what Christ said and did at the Last Supper, yes, but many of the prayers and readings (from Scripture mind you) were developed along with the Early Church. Besides which, it is highly unlikely that Jesus, a poor carpenter of Galilee, spoke fluent Latin. The common language which he likely spoke was Aramaic. He would have known Hebrew and Greek to read the Scriptures--which would be taught to Him as a child.

    To say that the Tridentine Mass came directly from Christ is, at the very least, highly inaccurate.
    And, it is highly impractical to teach every person in the Church Latin. I'm certainly not in love with the some of the English in the N.O. Mass, but I am certain that I would not be Catholic today if the Mass were still in Latin--no one learns it in school anymore, no one. I would never have converted if it were still in Latin. That is not what the Church is for--it is not an exclusive club. The Church is meant to be in the world and convert the world. Making it even more misunderstood and unreachable is not the solution.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi Tony...
    > The Novus Ordo (it sounds
    > freemason already)

    sw: Actually, that's just Latin for "New Order" - and the Novus Ordo Missae is the "New Order of the Mass." I'm no fan of the NOM, but hey, the Latin is just fine there! :-)

    > was compiled by a commission of
    > modernist Catholics and
    > Protestants.

    sw: Yes, that is a fact.

    > The only goal was to make
    > "acceptable" the Cath. liturgy
    > for protestants.

    sw: Well, that certainly was *A* goal of the NOM, but to say it was "THE" goal is taking the hyperbole a bit too far.

    > A lot is based on ideas of
    > Luther, who hanged himself.

    sw: Hanged himself? Are you speaking literally here? Where does that fact come from?

    More in next comment...

    Pax tecum,
    Scott<<<

    ReplyDelete
  10. (continued...)
    > The tridentine rite is... what
    > Jesus taught the Apostles.

    sw: How literal are you being here now? As cathmom5 said, Jesus likely did not speak Latin - that was the language of the Romans of the time. If you're talking about the words of Consecration - well, yes, and the renovation of the NOM has brought the words of Consecration back to a more literal rendition.

    > One can see the proof in the
    > byzantine rite of the Greek
    > Catholics, their H. Liturgy of St
    > John Chrysostom has hardly
    > changed since the 4th century and
    > it's like a "twin" brother of the
    > tridentine H. Mass.

    sw: The two rites are very similar, that is true - but they are not identical. I love both rites.

    > The N.O.M. is valid, it's a fact,
    > if we deny it or not. But many
    > modernist priests have evolved to
    > "celebrations" that are not valid
    > anymore. This danger was almost
    > unexistent in old liturgy.

    Most of those "clown Masses" have gone the way of the fads of the 1970's, but I do agree - such a "celebration" would be virtually impossible with a truly holy celebration of the Latin Mass (or Divine Liturgy).

    More later...

    Pax tecum,
    Scott<<<

    ReplyDelete
  11. (Continued...)

    > Vatican II changed only 1 thing
    > to H. Mass : an invocation to St
    > Joseph was inserted in the Canon.

    sw: Well, it did allow for certain parts (not the whole Mass) as they pertained to the people, to be said in the vernacular.

    > The Council also said Latin had
    > to be preserved (except for the
    > lectures).

    sw: Well, it did not specify "the lectures" - but a more vague, "as they apply to the people."

    > That's all the Council has
    > "proclaimed". All the rest are
    > abuses of our (former and
    > nowadays) "bishop's conferences".

    sw: And to be clear, VCII was not a dogmatic council. Nothing was dogmatically defined at VCII which was not previously defined by earlier popes or councils. It was a "pastoral" council.

    > The Vatican can't control all
    > translations of the world,

    sw: "Control?" The Vatican can "approve" or "disapprove" of anything, especially if glaring errors are brought to their attention.

    > in India there are more than 400
    > languagues (unofficially much
    > more).

    sw: But when there are huge problems with more common languages, like English and Spanish, what's the excuse?! "For many" should NEVER have been "For all" - why play with the very words of Jesus Christ?!

    > Yes, you can continue to get your
    > water in the New Order bucket,
    > but every renovation is a new
    > hole in it, and as said : at the
    > end there will be nobody left
    > anymore in our churches. Tony

    sw: Well, changes are being made, let's see how things go. Some are resisting the changes - others are embracing them.

    In JMJ,
    Scott<<<

    ReplyDelete

Keep in mind while posting:
1) Please respond ON TOPIC to the article at hand.
2) Posts more than 4 weeks old are set to automatically save new comments for moderation - so your comment may not show up immediately if you're responding to an older post.
3) The "Spam Filter" is on - and randomly messages get caught in that filter. I have no control over which messages get caught in the spam filter and those that do must wait for me to mark them as "not spam." A message caught by the spam filter may show up for a moment, making you think it posted, and then disappear. Do not assume I have deleted your comment, it's probably just the spam filter and it will show up.