Errors still being taught

henry

At today's Corpus Christi Mass, a 60 something Hispanic Priest told the congregation at the Spanish language Mass that Vatican II "opened the windows" to let fresh air into the Church. He said the Bishops said to use the vernacular, that "the pipe organ you have in the back of this church" is not the only instrument that can be used, but others too, and that Mariachi can now play for Masses and their songs are beautiful. He said VII told the Priest to face the people, and shake hands before Communion to amend for transgressions against our neighbor. He said people didn't go to Mass before VII because the only ones who responded were the altar boys, the choir sang, and there was nothing for them to do. This congregation is very blue collar, and will take his words as Gospel truth. And the battle to get the truth out continues.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Henry,

Are you sure this priest didn't have purple bold on?

(Aha! I did it. Apparently my purple bold does work!)

MatthewRoth

The Roman Rite Pax has never been about leaving quarrels at the altar...

M. Jackson Osborn

Such falsities are not the only ones the Hispanics get wrong (nor are they the only ones). Quite a few (as in myriads) of them actually worship our Lord's mother as a full fledged goddess. They are even quoted in public media saying so around Guadalupe feasts and such. Even more dumbfounding is that no bishop ever seems to disabuse them of these heretical and blasphemous notions. (And to think that we have some persons who suspect that H.F. Francis is the one who is a threat to the Faith!) Is it any wonder, the impressions many Protestants get about us???.

About the priest referenced above: his conclusions are quite general amongst clergy, bishops, and laity. The idea is that anything that we have an itch to do is/was, therefore, established by VII; and anything we don't like was, therefore, thrown out by VII. Such arguments would win a poor showing in philosophy class, would they not!?

The most amazing thing of all (stupefying, actually) is that thousands of such 'priests' get ordained every year and their bishops egg them on.

(I just read on the internet news that after an eleven year effort to save their parish church in Boston the faithful have finally surrendered and vacated the church so that their episcopos can have it wrecked. It just goes to show, doesn't it, that if a bishop really wants something bad enough he will eventually get it. Too bad that too few of them really want the liturgy and music which VII stipulated was to be 'preserved' and 'fostered' bad enough to be good Catholic bishops and see that the council's wishes in this regard are fulfilled. - But, let us hasten to give high praise for those few who are real Vatican II men.)

chonak

Here's that church in the Boston suburbs. Have a look at it, Jackson: in ordinary circumstances, you'd probably affirm that rubble would be more attractive.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/05/29/scituate-church-final-service-st-frances-x-cabrini-11-year-vigil/
The final service there was conducted by a married former Catholic priest, and a few days ago a spokesman said the group intends to form an independent (i.e., schismatic) congregation.

Some of the church-occupation cases were led more by neighbors opposed to development of the properties than by practicing Catholics wanting to save their parish church for religious or sentimental reasons.

M. Jackson Osborn

Well, Chonak, that's pretty lacking in sympathy attraction, isn't it. Unfortunately, there are just enough genuine horror stories to make us overly ready to jump on even those that may, on closer inspection, not merit our approbrium. Thanks for the details.

chonak

To get back to Henry's opening post: that priest is certainly in contention, if there's a prize for the greatest number of myths and falsehoods in one sermon.

CharlesW

My own experience with some Hispanic Catholics is that their religion is a mixture of Catholicism and their native paganism. The Catholicism never really took full hold. Of course, we are not supposed to point such things out or be insensitive and lacking in charity toward the obvious.

Steve Collins

I do not believe that this is all their fault as a culture or as a community. I believe the American Church itself looks down on them. The Church seems to think (feel) that they cannot be asked to learn English (much less the Latin that their language is based on!) and provides them parallel services, both liturgical and secular, that keep them right where they were when they immigrated.

MatthewRoth

Yeah, it’s been bad since the American church absorbed the California church after the Mexican War.

doneill

Was this priest a parochial vicar or a visiting priest? If the former, the pastor ought to have a talk with him, and persuade him to issue a retraction. If the latter, this priest should never be invited again. It sounds as if this priest never bothered to actually read the documents; it is irresponsible to spread falsehoods like this, because it is destructive to the Church. And besides, what on earth does that stuff have to do with Corpus Christi?

Liam

Chonak

I love the detail that the St Frances Cabrini "community" will now meet in . . . the local Masonic lodge. Now, American Masonry is a much-diluted thing from its confreres across the pond, but still, I can't help but think that is a final finger gesture at least on the part of someone.

eft94530

Create rebuttal half-sheet tracts and fold them in half and stay after a weekday morning mass to populate the hymnals. Everybody deserves a spare bookmark.

Adam Wood

I honestly cannot imagine how any of those things --- even if they were TRUE --- are appropriate material for a Corpus Christi homily.

melofluent

Getting back to the digression re. syncretism- If the rector of St. Louis Cathedral in NOLA has no problem disavowing Marie Laveux and Voodoo, is there any correspondence with clerics denouncing Santa Muerte and the superstitions attached to Ash Wednesday? I remain unaware of any such clarified instruction.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Adam,

I don't mean this to be a stretch or a comedy skit or snarky. All of the nonsense from that priest could come from a fundamental misunderstanding (deliberate and culpable or not) of Corpus Christi. As a much younger man I asked a priest if the focus of the feast was Sacramental or Ecclesiological. I was relieved to find that the focus was Sacramental, but with hymns such as Sing a New Church Into Being, and the stuff that masquerades as a translation of Thomas Aquinas' Adoro Te, it seems entirely plausible to me that this priest, in good faith, believed all of that stuff pertained to the new rites which eclipse the old ones (et antiquum documentum novo cedat ritui). What this says about the priest's formation.... well.... I'm sure Lutheran Satire has something to say about that.

Richard Mix

As a description of the Second Vatican Council documents the homily was clearly lacking in nuance, but shall we look at the alleged 'errors' one by one?

the Bishops said to use the vernacular,
..not necessarily to the exclusion of Latin, but permission to say Mass in vernacular was indeed a window that got opened, yes?

that "the pipe organ you have in the back of this church" is not the only instrument that can be used, but others too, and that Mariachi can now play for Masses and their songs are beautiful.
The first part was of course true before as well, and in some eyes Mariachi masses are not less beautiful than the old polka masses.

VII [I keep reading "7"] told the Priest to face the people, and shake hands before Communion to amend for transgressions against our neighbor.
I don't actually know about versus populum outside of St Peter's before 1970: not very widespread, wouldn't one say? I wonder about this rational of the kiss of peace: current local tradition is to suddenly drop hands after the Pater noster and stand in an awkward pose with hands in pockets or on hips during the prayer for peace and unity.

He said people didn't go to Mass before VII because the only ones who responded were the altar boys, the choir sang, and there was nothing for them to do.
Can we assert that this was no one's experience?

eft94530

people didn't go to Mass before VII

Uh what about Rule Three?

And to be snarky, anyone have pre v2 and post v2 data ...
For sales figures for personal handmissals,
For Kennedy Directory summaries,
For local October Count numbers?

ClergetKubisz

Can we assert that this was no one's experience?

Yes, but it appears that the priest was asserting that it was everyone's experience.

VII [I keep reading "7"] told the Priest to face the people, and shake hands before Communion to amend for transgressions against our neighbor.

The history of versus populum outside of St. Peter's in the 1970s is irrelevant: this statement is simply false, as the documents from V2 concerning the liturgy did not specifically state anywhere that this was to occur. There have also been those that have asserted that the Roman Missal was written with ad orientem in mind. I would challenge that priest to show me where in V2 or any of the council's documents where Holy Mother Church said this explicitly.

that "the pipe organ you have in the back of this church" is not the only instrument that can be used, but others too, and that Mariachi can now play for Masses and their songs are beautiful.

This does not take into account that Holy Mother Church herself has specifically said that the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem. It seems that the priest is claiming that while the pipe organ is not an unworthy instrument, we should be making less use of it (in direct opposition to SC Chapter VI) and exploring more "cultural" options. I would also point out that this is a clear example of secularism.

the Bishops said to use the vernacular,

This may have very well been true, and while the door was opened for increased use of the vernacular, the documents of V2 do not specifically require the use of it. However, they do insist on the continued use of Latin in the liturgy. This priest seems to be claiming that the vernacular is required, when in fact it is not. However, it may be true that at some point, a bishop did tell him to begin using the vernacular, meaning it is a requirement for him, as the bishop is effectively his superior and the priest must obey.

MatthewRoth

Also, the pope doesn’t face the people for its own sake, as Ratzinger explained.

Steve Collins

But the Bishops in the US DID tell us to use ONLY the vernacular. I was in the pew the Sunday after VII closed, and the Pastor flat out told us this would be our last Latin Mass, and that they would have something in pews for us next Sunday. Parts of the UK kept the choirs, and even kept Latin, at least for the choirs' singing of the Ordinary. Meanwhile US choirs were disbanded and told to go downstairs and sit in the pews like everyone else, to help them all sing more.

The actual documents of VII did not come out till 10+ years later. There was no going back by that time. I am convinced that this was part of the Bishops' plan in the US - sweeping changes, kept in lace for at least a generation, so that even if reversals came from Rome, the bad practices would be grandfathered in as "local custom".

ClergetKubisz

Like I said, the bishops may have said it, but that doesn't make them right; they are still prone to error, just like any other man.

But the Bishops in the US DID tell us to use ONLY the vernacular.

This is in violation of the Council of Trent, Session 22, Canon VIII: "If anyone saith that the Mass ought to be said everywhere in the vulgar tongue...let him be anathema."

That law would still have been in effect (and technically still is) at the time of V2, and the bishops would have known it.

MatthewRoth

Cardinal McIntyre refused to allow the vernacular. Cardinal Cushing didn’t quite know what to do, given his archdiocese had at least four vernaculars: English, Italian, French, and Portuguese, and those are just what I remember off the top of my head. He rhetorically asked what would the vernacular be for his archdiocese were Latin to no longer be mandatory.

Richard Mix

it appears that the priest was asserting that...

Amongst ourselves we can complain all we want about people not actually reading the documents, but before awarding that

prize for the greatest number of myths and falsehoods in one sermon

it might be a good idea to ask whether there is an authorized transcript of the homily.

ClergetKubisz

Yes, knowing the entirety of what was said and in what context would help greatly.

M. Jackson Osborn

...bishops...are...prone to error...

Some not only are prone, but prefer a variety of deliberate errors, particularly in musical and liturgical matters. To that add the many, many, priests who are also deliberately prone, whose bishops do nothing to correct them. We may safely suggest, if not propose, that the decades of liturgical chaos which followed the council, and which continues and will continue into the future, was and is the result of deliberate error on the part of quite a few bishops and quite, quite a few more of their clergy, not to mention having been the actual agenda of most seminaries. As I said above somewhere, the council, for too many, meant 'whatever we don't like was, therefore, abolished by the council', and 'whatever we want was, therefore, endorsed and imposed by the council', plus 'if there is anything in the actual documents of the council that contradicts what I say was abolished or endorsed... you can't be serious!, I'm not interested in hearing it'. It is hardly a secret that seminaries, priests, prelates, even quite a few religious wanted to abolish Latin, music, and liturgy that had any reference to or derivation from our historic patrimony. They smelled the air and went to work, heedless of and/or couldn't care less what the council actually said. They are still active and are mad as can be that some of us are trying to stanch their revolutionary Jacobin holiday, their liturgical reign of (t)error.

Caleferink

We have a retired monsignor who regularly assists us at my parish and was, apparently, a secretary to a bishop who attended Vatican II. He has said the very same thing the OP said, along with things like "moving away from the Latin language..." and such. It's a little awkward when he talks about "changing the liturgical language" to the vernacular in his homily and then I have Mozart's "Ave verum corpus" planned later on in the same liturgy.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Caleferink,

This Monsignor is the one creating awkwardness, not you. Confessing myself to not be a fan of Mozart or of his Ave Verum Corpus, I still can't find the cause of awkwardness to be you. He doesn't clear his homily with you. He doesn't tell you what music to plan around his homily. He doesn't choose to represent the teaching faithfully.

Caleferink

Chris,

Thanks. I never said I felt I was the one creating the awkwardness, just that it has been a little ironic. I was using the Mozart "Ave verum" as just an example of one everyone knows and we've done relatively recently.

TeresaH

Hey, that sounded a lot like our homily Sunday. Our priest, as so many times before, bashed rubrics, and said all kinds of things like "benedictions were banned," etc. Richard, our priest could be in the running for most false statements in one homily. It's a regular practice here.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories