The Prohibition of the Traditional Latin Mass is an Abuse of Ecclesiastical Power

[Michie]

The prohibition of the traditional Latin Mass is an abuse of ecclesiastical power and noncompliance with its prohibition does not in fact constitute disobedience

Bishop Athanasius Schneider

1. The traditional Roman liturgy of the Mass was the liturgy of our Catholic ancestors. It was the form of the Mass with which most of the European nations (except some Eastern European countries and the Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites), all American nations, and most of the African, Asian, and Oceanian nations were evangelized.
2. “What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too” (Pope Benedict XVI).
3. “The problem with the new Missal lies in its abandonment of an ever-continuous history, before and after St. Pius V, and in the creation of a thoroughly new book (albeit compiled of old material)” (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger).
4. The new Missal’s “publication was accompanied by a kind of prohibition of all that came before it, which is unheard-of in the history of ecclesiastical law and liturgy” (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger).
5. “I can say with certainty, based on my knowledge of the conciliar debates and my repeated reading of the speeches made by the Council Fathers, that this [i.e., the reform as it is now in the new Missal] does not correspond to the intentions of the Second Vatican Council” (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger).
6. The traditional Roman liturgy of the Mass was the liturgy of all the Latin-rite Saints whom we know at least during the entire last millenium; hence its age is millennial. Although commonly called the “Tridentine” Mass, the exact same form of the Mass was already in use several centuries before the Council of Trent, and that Council asked only to canonize that venerable and doctrinally sure form of the liturgy of the Roman Church.
7. The traditional Roman liturgy of the Mass has the closest affinity with the Eastern rites in bearing witness to the universal and uninterrupted liturgical law of the Church: “In the Roman Missal of Saint Pius V, as in several Eastern liturgies, there are very beautiful prayers through which the priest expresses the most profound sense of humility and reverence before the Sacred Mysteries: they reveal the very substance of the Liturgy” (Pope John Paul II).

Continued below.

The Prohibition of the Traditional Latin Mass is an Abuse of Ecclesiastical Power - OnePeterFive

Complying would constitute a false obedience.

onepeterfive.com

 

[Terri Dactyl]

But Michie, why worship God in a language you don't understand?

 

[Michie]

But Michie, why worship God in a language you don't understand?

Is it impossible to understand? News to me.

 

[Markie Boy]

I am not drawn to it, but if someone is, I totally respect freedom to worship how one likes.

But I find it ironic - It seemed to me it was always the Trads that were really supportive of Papal power and supremacy. It would seem that power has turned on them. A bishop promoting disobedience on top of it......how would one know who to listen to?

I am asking that seriously as one that recently considered a return.

I must say my mental health improved once I decided to ignore the clergy all together.

 

[mourningdove~]

There is more to the Latin Mass besides the fact that the Mass is said in Latin.
And that is the part that I cannot explain, because what happens at the Mass is mystical ... supernatural.
The Latin Mass, in my opinion, captures the sense of beauty and mysticism, more fully ...

I'm sure it helps a great deal that I was raised on the Latin Mass.
And I am drawn to the more mystical, realizing that not everyone is.

I am very happy to see when clergy in the Church come out in support of the Latin Mass.
Unfortunately, the global elites and those in agreement with them are presently calling alot of the shots in the world today.
The Latin Mass, Traditional Catholics, won't fit in with their plans for a New World Order and a 'one world religion'.
So they are going to have to get rid of it all, or try.

I expect the Latin Mass will eventually need to go underground again, like it has in times past.
I will be very surprised if it does not.

But I do not expect that the Latin Mass, or Traditional Catholicism, will ever go away ...

 

[fide]

I am not drawn to it, but if someone is, I totally respect freedom to worship how one likes.

But I find it ironic - It seemed to me it was always the Trads that were really supportive of Papal power and supremacy. It would seem that power has turned on them. A bishop promoting disobedience on top of it......how would one know who to listen to?

I am asking that seriously as one that recently considered a return.

I must say my mental health improved once I decided to ignore the clergy all together.

Hello Markie. I understand your comment, "I totally respect freedom to worship how one likes." It sounds reasonable... until.... one really hears (and believes) a word from Jesus THE Word, in the divinely inspired and passed-down words of God in Holy Scripture. Maybe especially this:

John 4:23 "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him.
John 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."

Worship - and more accurately, adoration - matters. It has profound importance, and significance, and consequence. Thus, the Father seeks those who worship rightfully - righteously - truthfully: in spirit and truth. This issue, this matter of worship, has cosmic importance to the One God (and only God) Who created this cosmos and all in it.

I can't give a complete exegesis on this one selected passage from John's Gospel (there is infinite and supernatural wisdom condensed into the inspired words of Scripture) but I do suggest - to this whole world including myself - that we need to listen, to GOD, in His words before He must speak finally in deeds of judgment.

 

[Markie Boy]

I am not promoting any type of liberalism in saying one can worship how they want. Just that Latin should be OK, yet at the same time Latin should not be mandatory. I am 100% for listening to God, in His words - which is why I personally like to hear them in a language I understand.

One may like Latin, and that's OK. I know many raised in the Latin days, and they are thankful they are over, and like to hear things in a language they understand. That's not a bad thing, or somehow second class.

I think what the Vatican is really doing, is making war on the conservatives. Many of them collect in the Latin circles, so it's a target for them. There can be little doubt the hierarchy and papacy is making war on conservatives.

Please answer this for me - when bishop Schneider says to reject papal instruction - who do you listen to, him or the pope?

 

[fide]

But Michie, why worship God in a language you don't understand?

Hello Terri - yours is an excellent question, if it is not merely rhetorical but if you are really asking for the answer. There is an answer, but it may be hard to hear. Do you remember the story of Cain and Abel - the brothers born to Adam and Eve after the catastrophic fall into disobedience by the parents of humanity? The two brothers offered sacrifices of worship to God - that was good - but God accepted the worship of one brother, Cain, but not the worship of the other brother, Abel:

Gen 4:1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, "I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD."
Gen 4:2 And again, she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a tiller of the ground.
Gen 4:3 In the course of time Cain brought to the LORD an offering of the fruit of the ground,
Gen 4:4 and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions. And the LORD had regard for Abel and his offering,
Gen 4:5 but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. ...l.

We might say, God "understood" (in some sense) the language of Abel, but He did not "understand"(in some sense) the language of Cain. There was - and is - worship that God accepts, and there was - and is - worship that God does not, indeed cannot, accept.

The worship we offer to God must be what He accepts. His standard is the crucial one, not ours. His requirements we must seek to understand. It is not merely the verbal language that defines the true worship that we must be concerned with, but the entire act, the entire "statement", the entire liturgy of Mass is the offering that we enter and participate in, in our offering of worship to God.

Cain was very upset that God did not approve of "his worship" - he killed his brother Abel in anger, which tells us something about his - Cain's - heart in the matter! God however cared about Cain, and sought to help him seek and learn what Abel had "done right", whereas what he, Cain, had "done wrong."

Gen 4:5 ..... So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.
Gen 4:6 The LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen?
Gen 4:7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it."
Gen 4:8 Cain said to Abel his brother, "Let us go out to the field." And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and killed him.

There is a lesson for us in this Genesis account: sin within corrupts exterior actions. Even actions such as divine worship. What seems "right" to us may not be "right" with God. Even "reforms" of a liturgy of the Church are not necessarily "improvements" even if they "seem" more suitable to our "modern" situation. What seems reasonable on the surface may lead to contradictions and not improvements over a liturgy held to for centuries, endorsed by a multitude of saints and popes and holy unknowns in the Church in glory today.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

There is no prohibition of the Latin Mass.

There is a restriction in that the Mass must be approved by the local diocessan Bishop.

There is a TLM at the parish in the next town to me. It's a 2PM on Sunday, because the majority
of those attending come from outside the parish.

I've attended Mass at a Benedictine Monastery nearby. They use the Novus Ordo format,
but parts are in Latin, chanted by the nuns and monks. It's OK, but not great and without
being fluent in Latin, I was a disconnected to the hymns, and just said them in my head in my
native tongue.

 

[fide]

I am not promoting any type of liberalism in saying one can worship how they want. Just that Latin should be OK, yet at the same time Latin should not be mandatory. I am 100% for listening to God, in His words - which is why I personally like to hear them in a language I understand.

One may like Latin, and that's OK. I know many raised in the Latin days, and they are thankful they are over, and like to hear things in a language they understand. That's not a bad thing, or somehow second class.

I think what the Vatican is really doing, is making war on the conservatives. Many of them collect in the Latin circles, so it's a target for them. There can be little doubt the hierarchy and papacy is making war on conservatives.

Please answer this for me - when bishop Schneider says to reject papal instruction - who do you listen to, him or the pope?

These are very difficult, and troubling times, MB. I believe they are unique. These days are not like those of before - this is not "more of the same." Your closing question is a crucially important one for serious, earnest, faithful Catholics - and not a trivial or easy one. Not in these days of trial, with more to come, which may define us eternally.

I say we must listen to Bishop Schneider, and to the words and acts of this Pope, and to the Word and the words of God the Holy Spirit as He leads and guides "into all the truth" (Jn 16:13). And we must watch and listen very closely, remaining in prayer, to the Church as she responds in the days and times ahead. Clarity will increase, in time, for those seeking humbly before God - the faithful who "tremble at His Word".

Isa 66:1 Thus says the LORD: "Heaven is my throne and the earth is my footstool; what is the house which you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest?
Isa 66:2 All these things my hand has made, and so all these things are mine, says the LORD. But this is the man to whom I will look, he that is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word.

 

[Markie Boy]

It is literally THE question on the table. But I must say, I don't think the "both - and" approach is possible. You can not listen to both as they are opposites.

 

[fide]

It is literally THE question on the table. But I must say, I don't think the "both - and" approach is possible. You can not listen to both as they are opposites.

First, we need active in us - desperately, in this time - the 7-fold gifts of the Spirit given in potency at Baptism. These gifts frankly are not widely sought or pursued, but are gathering dust in the souls of many Catholics today, as we seek like Martha to busy ourselves about many things that are outward, exterior, surface symptoms and not at the core of the spiritual poverty at our doors. These gifts are essential to us, yet are sought by only few.

CCC 1831 The seven gifts of the Holy Spirit are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. They belong in their fullness to Christ, Son of David.[Cf. Isa 11:1-2] They complete and perfect the virtues of those who receive them. They make the faithful docile in readily obeying divine inspirations.

Let your good spirit lead me on a level path. [Psa 143:10]​

For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God . . . If children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ. [Rom 8:14, 17>]​

We need - I am trying to say - discernment. And like Solomon, we need to hear the sound of truth and be led by the Spirit to separate truth from the deceits of the double-tongued who are serving the enemy of souls, even if wearing sheepskin clothes and seeming to be what they are not. We need to listen to them all, and discern who is speaking and living the Life of Christ and who is not.

John 10:1 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber;
Jn 10:2 but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
Jn 10:3 To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
Jn 10:4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice.
Jn 10:5 A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers."
Jn 10:6 This figure Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.
Jn 10:7 So Jesus again said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.
Jn 10:8 All who came before me are thieves and robbers; but the sheep did not heed them.
Jn 10:9 I am the door; if any one enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
Jn 10:10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.
Jn 10:11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
Jn 10:12 He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.
Jn 10:13 He flees because he is a hireling and cares nothing for the sheep.
Jn 10:14 I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me...

"Both-and" is not a permanent option! But I suggest it is a necessary step at this time. No one chooses the time or times into which God has set us. These are confusing and dangerous times, and - not "but" but and - He is with us.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

We might say, God "understood" (in some sense) the language of Abel, but He did not "understand"(in some sense) the language of Cain. There was - and is - worship that God accepts, and there was - and is - worship that God does not, indeed cannot, accept.

The worship we offer to God must be what He accepts. His standard is the crucial one, not ours. His requirements we must seek to understand. It is not merely the verbal language that defines the true worship that we must be concerned with, but the entire act, the entire "statement", the entire liturgy of Mass is the offering that we enter and participate in, in our offering of worship to God.

Are you thinking God did not "understand" Cain's sacrifice because it was "fruit of the ground" rather than "firstlings"?
Surely not. Rather God saw into their hearts and motives.

Be that as it may, I think stepping away from the Traditional Latin Mass diminished Catholic identity in a way that many Catholics could not repair. There was not a solid enough understanding of what it means to be Catholic if not Latin Mass. Today it is even worse since there is so much confusion, inconsistency and division. God does not need Latin. But maybe we do.

 

[fide]

Are you thinking God did not "understand" Cain's sacrifice because it was "fruit of the ground" rather than "firstlings"?
Surely not. Rather God saw into their hearts and motives.

No, I wouldn't describe my thinking in that way, no. God saw deeper than either heart or will/motive. Jesus clarified:

Jn 4:23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him.
Jn 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

The writer to the Hebrews added this:

Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous, God bearing witness by accepting his gifts; he died, but through his faith he is still speaking.

"Spirit" is of God, not of man. "Truth" is of God, not of man. "Faith" is of God, not of man. Men give sacrifices to idols, for self-serving reasons. Those in Him give to Him what He has given - Gift. This is worthy of Him; God deserves God.

Be that as it may, I think stepping away from the Traditional Latin Mass diminished Catholic identity in a way that many Catholics could not repair. There was not a solid enough understanding of what it means to be Catholic if not Latin Mass. Today it is even worse since there is so much confusion, inconsistency and division. God does not need Latin. But maybe we do.

I mostly agree, but the answer, I believe, lies in the liturgy more than in the language.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I mostly agree, but the answer, I believe, lies in the liturgy more than in the language.

True.

Lefebvre approved of the 1965 vernacular liturgies but not the 1970. The difference? 1965 was a (clunky) direct translation of the Roman Missal. 1970 was a massive re-write. If we had only had a direct translation done by real linguists, even totally secular linguists. Imagine no SPPX schism over liturgy. I am not SPPX and predominantly go to a NO mass. I am happy it is in English. But I wish it followed better the Roman Missal in content of the prayers and in rubrics.

Another example is the Ordinariate liturgy in English. It uses sacral English, the priest faces east with the people, they use communion rails, they have a slightly different calendar, and their liturgies though long and formal work well.

 

[Markie Boy]

So Latin is not original language of the New Testament - what's older than the Latin? I have heard some of the Eastern liturgies like St. John Chrysostom and a few others are older. Would be neat to compare.

 

[fide]

True.

Lefebvre approved of the 1965 vernacular liturgies but not the 1970. The difference? 1965 was a (clunky) direct translation of the Roman Missal. 1970 was a massive re-write. If we had only had a direct translation done by real linguists, even totally secular linguists. Imagine no SPPX schism over liturgy. I am not SPPX and predominantly go to a NO mass. I am happy it is in English. But I wish it followed better the Roman Missal in content of the prayers and in rubrics.

Another example is the Ordinariate liturgy in English. It uses sacral English, the priest faces east with the people, they use communion rails, they have a slightly different calendar, and their liturgies though long and formal work well.

The Ordinariate sounds like a major iprovement over what we have in place right now.

The NO is my/our (w/wife!) only reasonable option now, and the NO's weaknesses are all accessed and magnified by the current pastor. It is truly painful. A recent visiting priest was the celebrant in the Mass during his visit, and the difference was striking. The NO would be far less difficult with well-formed, spiritually mature and authentically reverent priests.

These times are uniquely difficult and may only get worse. We'll see. But, to turn on the word "see," there are so many blind in so many high seats of earthly power, it looks like "a hard rain is gonna fall."

 

[chevyontheriver]

The Ordinariate sounds like a major iprovement over what we have in place right now.

The NO is my/our (w/wife!) only reasonable option now, and the NO's weaknesses are all accessed and magnified by the current pastor. It is truly painful. A recent visiting priest was the celebrant in the Mass during his visit, and the difference was striking. The NO would be far less difficult with well-formed, spiritually mature and authentically reverent priests.

These times are uniquely difficult and may only get worse. We'll see. But, to turn on the word "see," there are so many blind in so many high seats of earthly power, it looks like "a hard rain is gonna fall."

The TLM without a well formed spiritually mature reverent priest would be a sad thing too. The NO has weaknesses. That is a historical fact. But even that can be reverent with a decent priest. That’s why we need to pray hard for our priests and seminarians. And our bishops who are responsible for seminaries and for priests.

A hard rain is gonna fall. We ask God to make something sprout after all of that moisture.

 

[chevyontheriver]

So Latin is not original language of the New Testament - what's older than the Latin? I have heard some of the Eastern liturgies like St. John Chrysostom and a few others are older. Would be neat to compare.

Greek or Aramaic would be older liturgical languages BUT the Roman Rite itself is among the very oldest liturgies. Don't look down on it as something more recent than the Greek liturgies. After all, the Church in Rome was founded before Peter or Paul arrived there and then benefited from their ministries.


If you are looking for the definitive comparison and information on the beginnings of the Roman Rite look to Joseph Jungmann's 'Mass of the Roman Rite'. AKA 'Missarum Sollemnia".

 

[chevyontheriver]

The Ordinariate sounds like a major iprovement over what we have in place right now.

It is IMHO, but the sacral language is hard for us average Catholics to get used to after going so long with essentially desacralized NO language.