Forget about Vatican III 
What we need is a Trent II
I was thinking about this awhile back... but as many of us already know, the Latin Mass wasn't always the Mass of all of Western Christendom until Pope St. Pius V codified such during the Council of Trent back in the 1500's.
Prior to that, the Latin Mass was pretty much confined to central Italy. But what could have prompted St. Pius to make the Latin Mass THE Mass for all of The Western Church?
Well, for centuries upon centuries, there were various Rites within the Western Church. The Gallic Rite, the Celtic Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, the Mozabaric Rite, the Dominican Rite, the Latin Rite, etc, etc. A few still exist to this day, but are celebrated very rarely.
Anyhow, things started getting ridiculous. The Mass varied from nation to nation, province to province, and in some cases, village to village. Western Christendom was turning into a veritable Tower of Babel.
Pope St. Pius V, in his wisdom, knew that trying to be everything to everyone would be an utter disaster. With the rise of the Protestant Revolution, what Catholicism needed was something to bring the Faithful together instead of separating them. And when the Latin Mass was codified as the one Mass for the Western Church, The Church of Rome flourished.
Now lets fast forward 500 years. We have a rise in militantly anti-Catholic secularism, and how is The Church countering it? By dreaming up a Mass that's trying to be everything to everyone. A Mass that is so open to the possibility of error that it's really quite simple for abominations like the Animal Sacrifice "Mass", Hula "Mass", Polka "Mass", Cowboy "Mass" etc., etc., ad nauseum, to mutate endlessly.
Just like before the Council of Trent, we now have many a different Mass that all vary from nation to nation, state to state (province to province), and in some cases, village to village. Tower of Babel, Revisited.
Sancte Pie V, Ora Pro Nobis
What we need is a Trent II
I was thinking about this awhile back... but as many of us already know, the Latin Mass wasn't always the Mass of all of Western Christendom until Pope St. Pius V codified such during the Council of Trent back in the 1500's.
Prior to that, the Latin Mass was pretty much confined to central Italy. But what could have prompted St. Pius to make the Latin Mass THE Mass for all of The Western Church?
Well, for centuries upon centuries, there were various Rites within the Western Church. The Gallic Rite, the Celtic Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, the Mozabaric Rite, the Dominican Rite, the Latin Rite, etc, etc. A few still exist to this day, but are celebrated very rarely.
Anyhow, things started getting ridiculous. The Mass varied from nation to nation, province to province, and in some cases, village to village. Western Christendom was turning into a veritable Tower of Babel.
Pope St. Pius V, in his wisdom, knew that trying to be everything to everyone would be an utter disaster. With the rise of the Protestant Revolution, what Catholicism needed was something to bring the Faithful together instead of separating them. And when the Latin Mass was codified as the one Mass for the Western Church, The Church of Rome flourished.
Now lets fast forward 500 years. We have a rise in militantly anti-Catholic secularism, and how is The Church countering it? By dreaming up a Mass that's trying to be everything to everyone. A Mass that is so open to the possibility of error that it's really quite simple for abominations like the Animal Sacrifice "Mass", Hula "Mass", Polka "Mass", Cowboy "Mass" etc., etc., ad nauseum, to mutate endlessly.
Just like before the Council of Trent, we now have many a different Mass that all vary from nation to nation, state to state (province to province), and in some cases, village to village. Tower of Babel, Revisited.
Sancte Pie V, Ora Pro Nobis
posted by Kevin Whiteman at
1:40 PM
9 Comments:
The National Catholic Reporter (I believe, not sure) is compiling a list of issues and invitees for Vatican III. Yes, they are anticipating Vatican III within our lifetime. Don't they know that Vatican I was disrupted by the Prussian wars and Vatican II (to some lesser degree) was also intended to finish what Vatican I started (again, to a lesser degree). Nonetheless, we definately DON'T need a Vatican III. But I'm glad you brought up that Latin wasn't instituted until the 15th century.
There a few western rites left, but they are almost all gone now. The Mozabaric occured during the Muslim occupation of Spain. (that's another posting one day).
Anyways, I am noticing many similarities between your blog and Quintero at LA Catholic (visual, not content).
Good job!
Thanks Conde!
I do want to stress that the Latin Mass was brought into being back in the 500's by Pope St. Gregory the Great, and even before that, it was in it's infancy all the way back to when Sts. Peter and Paul preached in Rome.
But your right... it wasn't THE Mass for all of the Western Church until the 1500's.
And as far as these goomba's prepping for a V3, let 'em go. A liberal wet-dream is all it is.
Lastly, your right, my page DOES look alot like Peter's (now that I think about it!) :-)
As I suggested to Quintero, you should use some nice pastel colors.
Instead of dots as "bullets" you could use flowers. That would be pretty.
If you need more ideas, I can give you more.
you should use some nice pastel colors. Instead of dots as "bullets" you could use flowers. That would be pretty. If you need more ideas, I can give you more.
Oh yeah.... suuuuuure! (with tounge firmly placed in cheeck) and we can shop and talk about boys and have our hair done and talk abour boys and "do lunch" and talk about boys and have a PAP Smear and talk about boys and complain about boys and... well, you get the picture ;-)
But thanks for the offer, Scarlette!
NSD,
I am a convert of about 17 years now. So, I do not have too much experience with the Latin Mass, other than some individuals that I have met who still love to go when they can.
What I can tell you, is that like anything else in this life, the Mass can be abused.
I, on the otherhand, believe the current Roman Rite is a very beautiful expression of the love of Jesus Christ for us. To me, when celebrated reverently it does bring the believer into the deepest communion with Jesus in the Eucharist.
Johne,
I'm famous for my sarcasm... but in this case I'll be as sincere as possible.
First off, thanks for your heartfelt post. There's no doubt in my mind that you mean every word of what you posted.
One thing I would like to bring to your attention, the Tridentine Mass most certainly be abused. But only if the celebrant purposfully goes out of his way to do so.
The Novus Oedo Missea, on the other hand, by it's very nature has the doors for error and abuse kicked wide open.
There are many much more learned that I, but I invite you to check out what I posted awhile back concerning the New Mass.
Scarlette,
I read that same posting on Pedro's blog.
You're kidding right?
johne:
"I, on the otherhand, believe the current Roman Rite is a very beautiful expression of the love of Jesus Christ for us. To me, when celebrated reverently it does bring the believer into the deepest communion with Jesus in the Eucharist."
"To me"? Catholic Truth is not a matter of personal opinion. What you are saying is that altar girls, communion in the hand, guitar riff and drum solos, standing while receiving communion, women wearing men's clothing, priests facing the people and not Our Lord, and all the other novelties introduced by Vatican II are "very beautiful expression[s]..."
Based on what?
The "current Roman Rite" -- i.e. the Novus Ordo Missae (or the "N.O. Mass")-- was a deliberate corruption of the Tridentine Latin Mass (i.e. the Mass of All Ages) in order to make Catholicism less offensive and more appealing to non-Catholics, esp. Protestants.
It is the result of the Second Vatican Council, which was overseen and advised by several non-Catholic and, indeed, non-Christian observers. Why a Catholic council allowed itself to be influenced by such people is something that is beyond me, but it is important to keep that in mind when evaluating what has happened to the Church in the wake of that disaster.
The N.O. Mass can be celebrated properly, by properly ordained priests with the proper theological education and frame of mind. Good luck finding any in the mainstream church: they are as rare as hen's teeth.
The problem is not only with the N.O. Mass itself (i.e. the deliberately ambiguous language), but with the priests who celebtate it. Do they believe in Catholic Truth: the same Truth that has been taught for nearly 2,000 years? More simply, do they believe in the Transubstantiation? When they are performing the Consecration, do they really understand what they are doing? Or are they just blessing a Jesus cookie?
Since you cant know what a N.O. priest is thinking and what he intends, attending a N.O. mass is _at a minimum_ a near occasion of sin and most likely a sacrilege and therefore a mortal sin. If you want to gamble your immortal soul away because the N.O. mass makes you feel good, good luck!
For my part, if I wanted to be a Protestant, I'd go to a Protestant "church" and attend one of their various, self-contradictory, back-slapping, God-damned hootenannies.
I dont want to be Protestant. I want to be Catholic. Therefore, I will attend a Catholic mass performed by a Catholic priest who is dedicated to upholding the Traditional Faith.
Dominus tecum,
Gaufridus
The Caveman wants Trent II, since we are making wish lists I am going to hope for a Pope Urban III, heck somebody needs to make sure the terrorists stay out of the Church of the Nativity!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home