Plans to ‘abolish’ Latin Mass would be ‘diabolical’ - Cardinal Sarah

This seems to me to be a fixation an a post-Christ aspect of tradition.

I love Latin and am studying it continually. But the language of the New Testament is actually Greek.
Latin became the language of the Church and its liturgy. The "Church of Christ" certainly does not depend on it.

A lot of doctrines are based on the latin reading, I wonder what's next?

RileyG said:

Well, yes, but it’s the official language of the Church, nonetheless.

Click to expand...

And well it should be. It is helpful to have a universal language that at least the experts can agree on its meaning before translated into vernacular languages. But Cardinal Sarah takes its importance too far.

Akita Suggagaki said:

And well it should be. It is helpful to have a universal language that at least the experts can agree on its meaning before translated into vernacular languages. But Cardinal Sarah takes its importance too far.

Click to expand...

I doubt cardinal Sarah would be concerned about any mass specifically in Latin if only the liturgical changes after Vatican II were in keeping with Vatican II. I mean who would be objecting if the TLM were directly and competently translated into English? Not the traditionalists. Instead we have a 'novus ordo' that differs not in mere language but conceptually. I'll grant it's valid but in many ways it's a C+ pass, not even a solid B.

So we don't have an approved direct English translation of the 1962 missal that can be used. The 1965 translation is no longer approved for use by anybody anywhere and no newer direct translation would be approved even though that would be so useful.

Martinicus said:

Any attempt to “abolish” the traditional Mass would be a “diabolical project” that “seeks to break with the Church of Christ,”
said Cardinal Robert Sarah this week.

“In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but not rupture,” noted Sarah at an event Monday.

Source: Lifesite News

Click to expand...

I'll be honest, I find myself becoming more and more grateful for Abp Lefebvre and the SSPX in this post-Traditionis Custodes Church if for no other reason than I know the TLM won't be going anywhere with them.

Gnarwhal said:

I'll be honest, I find myself becoming more and more grateful for Abp Lefebvre and the SSPX in this post-Traditionis Custodes Church if for no other reason than I know the TLM won't be going anywhere with them.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the SSPX is not in schism at the moment. They were, but not currently.

chevyontheriver said:

Instead we have a 'novus ordo' that differs not in mere language but conceptually.

Click to expand...

By this do you mean less vertical and more horizontal? Less all facing God the same way out there and more facing God in our midst?
Or what do you mean?

chevyontheriver said:

Keep in mind that the SSPX is not in schism at the moment. They were, but not currently.

Click to expand...

Indeed. I actually have a chapel here in my town, unfortunately I'm at work when they have Sunday Mass. They only do 1st and 3rd Sundays of the month at 3pm. If my work schedule ever changes I'd really like to check it out.

RileyG said:

I think they’re in irregular communion? My diocese does not recognize them, nonetheless.

Click to expand...

Their canonical status is considered irregular but I've heard some good arguments lately for why that's not really a thing.

RileyG said:

I think they’re in irregular communion? My diocese does not recognize them, nonetheless.

Click to expand...

It's an irregular something, but not a schism right now. It was a schism. It may again some day be a schism. But right now it's not.

Akita Suggagaki said:

By this do you mean less vertical and more horizontal? Less all facing God the same way out there and more facing God in our midst?
Or what do you mean?

Click to expand...

Maybe. More Protestant too, as if that was well received by Protestants. I do think there was a rupture with the past. Because if there wasn't an intended rupture the goal of shutting down the TLM would never have become a thing.

I look at what Vatican II, the documents, envisioned for the liturgy and I don't see it IRL. I'd be so happy for a quality direct translation of the 1962 missal. What we got is not that.

chevyontheriver said:

I do think there was a rupture with the past.

Click to expand...

But is that so bad? It is a rupture only with a Eurocentric Christianity.

I am proud of myself. I got into the habit of doing Latin exercises with a cup of cereal before going to bed.

But I ask myself, Why focus on Latin when I could focus on Spanish, a language I could actually use with living people.?

But I keep going with it.

When we embark on celebrating the Holy Sacrafice of the Mass it is very important to use a sacred language rather than a profane language. Latin was made sacred by being one of the languages used on the very Cross that Our Lord suffered and died on. (By definition, any language that is not "sacred" is profane. Today we have a different understanding of "profane".)

When I came home to the Catholic Church (after 38 years as an Anglican) I did so at a parish that celebrated the Traditional Latin Mass only, led by the F.S.S.P. I had spent the previous 15 years attending the parish down the road with my wife and young children, which celebrated the Novus Ordo Mass exclusively.

The BIG difference is not so much the language, but rather, the TRADITION.
The "Traditional Latin Mass" actually began in the Upper Room on Holy Thursday. The Apostles kept celebrating that Mass (although they did not have a name for it at the beginning) for a long time. The successors of the Apostles remained true to Our Lord's command to "do this in memory of Me as oft as thou shalt eat/drink it" (a paraphrase obviously).
Over the centuries this Holy Sacrifice of the Mass became codified. All I know, without doing more research, is that it took a long time and must have involved many steps.

The early Christians even had to celebrate Mass in the Roman Catacombs. (See In The Catacombs | From Jesus To Christ - The First Christians | FRONTLINE | PBS for more info.)

Slowly the form of the Mass, that Our Lord commanded we keep, developed "organically".
Pope St. Pius V standardized the Mass by promulgating the 1570 edition of the Roman Missal. Pius V made this Missal mandatory throughout the Latin Church, except where a Mass liturgy dating from before 1370 AD was in use. This form of the Mass remained essentially unchanged for 400 years.

Then there was an abrupt change with the "manufactured Mass" (Pope Benedict XVI words) when Pope Paul VI introduce a "new order of Mass" (the Novus Ordo).

There lies the problem. God had guided His Church for centuries as to how to celebrate and slowly develop the Mass. Now we have a man-centred Mass rather than a Christo-centric Mass.

My main point in the above ramblings is that as valuable as the use of Latin is, what the vast majority of Catholics have ever known for the last 60 years would be unrecognizable to their grandparents, great grandparents, etc. It is NOT an organic development of the Mass Jesus established.

Those of us attached to the Traditional Latin Mass love it for its beauty, the sound teachings we hear (passed down via Apostolic Succession), the sacred music (Gregorian Chant). IT IS OUR HERITAGE!

To survive The Church must return to Her roots that started in the Upper Room where Jesus ordained the first bishops.

Dominus vobiscum, Reg