Pope Francis: Mass in vernacular 50th anniversary
  • ClemensRomanusClemensRomanus
    Posts: 1,023
    I hope he doesn't think his predecessor was "mistaken." I agree with his other comments, though.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Over at PTB, commentator Scott Smith reminds us:
    C. S. Lewis famously said, and very truly:
    We all want progress, but if you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.

    The Lewis maxim is much more refined thinking than HHF's quote:
    "You cannot turn back, we have to always go forward, always forward and who goes back is making a mistake,"

    This sort of well-meaning, good intentioned but casual thinking and utterance elicits "huzzahs" from the populace, but they're not getting, as Paul Harvey said, "the rest of the story." Comprehension should not be held up as a criterium, much less an ideal, for the efficacy of the Divine Liturgy. One could argue quite convincingly that the intentionality of Latin as a sacral language ought to simultaneously communicate sacred mystery for which we long, and spurs cognition towards a greater understanding of the purpose and nature of our treasured rites as well.

    Thanked by 3JulieColl CHGiffen G
  • ClemensRomanusClemensRomanus
    Posts: 1,023
    Excellently put!
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    "However, the Pope noted that there are priests and bishops who speak of a "reform of the reform." Some of them are "saints" and speak "in good faith." But this "is mistaken".

    (Pope Francis' address during his annual meeting with the clergy of Rome, Feb. 19, 2015)

    “It was courageous of the Church to come closer to the people through the liturgical reform. You can’t turn back. It is a mistake to turn back."

    (Pope Francis' homily on March 7, 2015, at Roman parish of Ognisanti in Via Appia Nuova, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the mass Paul VI celebrated here on 7 March 1965.)

    What is our Holy Father saying to us?
  • benedictgal
    Posts: 798
    As Cardinal Bergoglio, Pope Francis did not seem to care for liturgy. Look at what he has done on Holy Thursday. He certainly seems to have little regard for the Extraordinary Form.

    Even though he did tell the priests that Pope Benedict "corrected" him on some liturgical matters, I don't think that he is into a restoration of the sacred. The only consolation that I have is that we didn't get Archbishop Piero Marini as the Prefect for the CDW. Cardinal Sarah seems to be a hybrid between Cardinals Arinze and Canizares.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Benedictgal, you might find this interesting. (Of course, I do not vouch in any way for the authenticity of this report.)
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    I thought that PTB's post was hilariously juxtaposed with another post advocating the illicit use of the 1998 draft missal revisions.

    1998: what a year.
    Saving Private Ryan was in the theatres, but the soundtrack to the Titanic was the big musical moment.
    Celine Dion was very big indeed.
    Then-President Clinton was impeached that year.

    1998 was when everyone was worried about y2k.
    1998 was 3 years before 911.
    Gmail became available for public use in 2004.

    Ben Yanke was a toddler in 1998. Matthew J. Meloche was in high school, if I'm not mistaken.

    Seinfeld ended in 1998. The Office began 7 years later.

    I was in college, and am now on my third graduate program. So looking back it must have been at least a few years ago. 17? Really?

    Let's all the hipsters move forward to 1998!
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Here are my less elliptical thoughts on the subject http://www.chantcafe.com/2015/03/forward.html
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,391
    Two very different metaphors. Lewis' is about "wanting progress" but then discovering that you are on the wrong road to that progress. Pope Francis' is about "liturgical renewal," which he considers as being on the right road. Consequently, going back is a mistake in his metaphor.

    Mixing metaphors always creates a problem.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    So "forward" means what--1960?
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,696
    I started high school in '98.
    Thanked by 2Kathy Adam Wood
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,188
    But wasn't VII about "returning to the sources"? And which sources? And what time in history? And whose history?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,175
    Salvation history has a progress, but apart from that, ideas of progress are rather debatable.

    The term "progress" generally comes loaded with assumptions, usually shallow assumptions. It assumes that some change is beneficial to promoting the highest goods. If a change is hurtful to fulfilling the highest goods, then it's not progress, it's -- perhaps corruption is the right word.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    It assumes that some change is beneficial to promoting the highest goods.

    More problematically, it assumes we know both what the highest good is and what actions or changes would best serve it. Progressivism is extremely arrogant.

    Or, as a famous South American Archbishop definitely did not say in a prayer he definitely did not write:
    We are workers, not master builders.
  • Progressivism is extremely arrogant

    This is true, and unfortunately the with inverse (anti-progressivism) as well.

    Actually, pride and arrogance are the supreme arch-rivals with humility and piety.

    IMHO ;-)

    But all kidding aside, really my worst sins have their root in pride. And I think almost ALL sins of the faithful have this root.

    As I contemplate the temptations of Christ, and the tortures of Christ, I keep finding:

    "If you are truly the chosen one"
    "Hail, King of the Jews"
    et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum ad nauseum.

    ...well, maybe not nauseum...

    But this is how the adversary tempted Christ.

    But any Latin liturgy is truly beautiful if the pride of "we're doing it a little better, or more correct" isn't present.

    And any "modern" liturgy is truly beautiful if the pride of "we're doing it a little better, or more correct" isn't present.

    As long as these liturgies are in compliance and communion with the Church.

    Here, in this subject, I have a lot of life experience.

  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    I find it a curious coincidence that while our Holy Father is urging the Church ever onward and warning that going back is a mistake ["We must always go forward, those who go backward are mistaken."] two preeminent cardinals are invoking tradition as the foundation of both Catholic liturgy and theology. Of most significance is that one of those cardinals is the head of the CDF, Cardinal Gerhard Muller---not generally considered to be of a traditional mindset, at least not up until recently.

    And yet, here it is: The Summorum Pontificum Conference in Rome this June will feature these addresses by Cardinals Burke and Muller on June 13:

    Introduction by Cardinal Burke, “Tradition as the Foundation of Catholic Liturgy.”

    Introduction by His Eminence Gerhard Ludwig Card. Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei: “Tradition as the Basic Principle of Catholic Theology.”

    In addition, Cardinal Walter Brandmuller will celebrate Benediction that evening, and Cardinal Velasio De Paolis will celebrate a Solemn Pontifical High Mass on Sunday, June 14. Bishop Athanasius Schneider will also give an address on "The Treasure of the Altar: the Ineffable Majesty of Holy Communion.

    Now that's what I call an all-star lineup. : )
  • G
    Posts: 1,397
    well-meaning, good intentioned but casual thinking and utterance

    Um, yeah.
    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • Progress, apprehended most verily, is the movement from one place to another. Betterment is not implicit, only movement. It is quite possible to progress from, shall we say, a certain very high place to a certain very low place! From a better place to a worse one. To heterodoxy from orthodoxy, or vice versa. Then there is 'regress', which would mean returning to a place which one had left, which was worse (or better) than that to which one had 'progressed'. Then there is 'change', which is what we have had for the last fifty years, some of it good, some of it not at all good, but all of it a progression from where we were to where we are; a progression which has not been totally (partially, but not totally) good or bad. Which is to say that there is merit in the NO, but most of its champions are not aware of (or are utterly opposed to) what those merits really are. Likewise, the EF represents progress in that it has become a factor of our progression to where we are and where we are going. Some would, doubtless, call it 'regress'. However it remains a belatedly redeemed facet of our progress. It is a threat only to those paranoids with shallow roots. (Not that I am an apologist for it. I'm not. But I do believe in fair play... and, am deeply thankful for the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter, another step in our progression.)
    Thanked by 2JulieColl CHGiffen
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Perhaps if we stayed within the dynamic of the hermeneutic of continuity ideally there would be "progressive traditionalists" and "traditional progressives" and in the process both sides would end up in about the same general liturgical and theological ballpark.

    One thing that the Holy Father said in his sermon at Rome's Church of All Saints that struck a bell with me was his insistence that the faithful "feel not like foreigners but as brothers and sisters who are united in their love for Christ."

    Pope Pius XII also used this kind of language in his efforts to encourage active participation at the Mass. He did not want the faithful to be “outsiders or mute onlookers" (Mediator Dei), or “strangers” (De musica sacra).
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    P.S. I may be dead wrong on this, but I would tentatively suggest with all due respect that I don't believe it helps correct the misperception so many have of the Latin Mass that it is foreign, or "something odd, over there, far away" when proponents of the EF do not include vocal participation in their definition of full, conscious and active participation at the usus antiquior.

    I read an otherwise splendid and informative article on this subject at NLM recently and was disappointed that no mention was made of the fact that the people can participate by means of responses and the chanting of the ordinary and antiphons, although there was a beautiful exposition on interior participation and the increased opportunity for attentiveness and the many occasions for making bodily gestures at the EF.

    Perhaps it was assumed that vocal participation is also included, but making no mention of it was, in my opinion, an unfortunate oversight, esp. since the point of the article was that there are more opportunities for full, active and conscious participation at the EF Mass than at the OF, which is very true, esp. when you consider the many potential opportunities for the faithful to sing at an EF Missa Cantata.

    I have seen this omission many times before in articles about participatio actuosa at the EF, and it seems that in the current atmosphere where more attention is being focused on demonstrating the "negative" and alien aspects of the traditional liturgy, it might be a good idea to begin emphasizing the similarities and parallels possible between both forms of the Roman rite and the potential for mutual enrichment between the two.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Ironically, the only Masses I was able to fully participate in in Rome were in Latin.

    As would be true for most pilgrims.

    And since the Catholics of Rome rarely go to Mass...
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    It must be such fun knocking about Rome, Kathy! What church do you usually go to for Mass?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    I didn't have a usual--there are just so many options! I loved the FSSP parish. Masses at St. Peter's are always nice, particularly the one in the late afternoon. My school had a noon Mass every day. Chiesa Nuova was wonderful.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Sorry for the tangent here, but Rome sounds like so much fun: beautiful churches, great food and great coffee. What is your favorite Italian specialty?
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    I've never been to Italy, but I encourage all to try a Pizza Rustica this Easter. (I first had this when the local Ukrainian Priest made one---The Church must breathe with both lungs!)
    Thanked by 1JulieColl
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,724
    My questions is, Are they going to have an 100th Anniversary ?
    Thanked by 1JulieColl
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Are they going to have an 100th Anniversary ?

    From the reports of Mass-attendance I hear, Probably not in France...
  • ChoirpartsChoirparts
    Posts: 147
    JulieColl ...ok, so It may be a tangent, but your right, visiting Rome sounds like fun.... even if only via live webcam .

    Thanked by 1JulieColl
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Just looked up Pizza Rustica, Salieri. Wow! This is pure decadence. My boys would love it and we'll watch Choirparts webcam while we eat it and pretend we're in Italy. : )