|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 8, 2011 12:45:14 GMT
"The oldest known rite"? I would have thought that some of the eastern (Greek and Syriac) rites have equal claims to antiquity. Pius V made the TLM the normative use for the Latin rite, not the church as a whole, and he provided for the continuation of local uses where these had sufficient antiquity. Many of these were swept away in the nineteenth century by liturgical reformers who thought the Roman Rite should be the norm. There were good and bad arguments for this, but I think it set a problematic precedent. There have been various types of liturgical reformer around, good and bad, for centuries - your view is that nothing changed or should have changed from Gregory the Great to 1958 is just bad history. To paraphrase Newman, to learn history is to cease to be a sedevacantist. Archbishop Lefebvre's theory that QUO PRIMUM was infallible (a) is not and never has been the predominant view among theologians (b) is an odd authority for you to claim given that Lefebvre accepted the post-1958 Popes as legitimate Popes, which you do not. May I repeat once again that "Ratzinger" as you call him (that's Pope Benedict XVI to you) is the legitimate Pope. Your view that the Canon of the Mass is the only bit that counts strikes me as highly problematic - that line leads straight to the Palmarian view that everything other than the Words of Institution can be omitted as superfluous. As for Loughcrew, there is no need to invoke Freemasons when criticising the ACP. Their own words and antics, which they kindly put up on their own website for us to dissect, should be quite enough to condemn them - playing "hunt the Mason" without any evidence just lets them off the hook.
|
|
|
Post by loughcrew on Oct 8, 2011 13:49:05 GMT
Hibernicus, I know that you don't want this site to turn into a haven for conspiracy theories so feel free to delete any post of mine which you deem to be out of order, but I have trouble rationalising the whole point of the ACP.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Oct 8, 2011 14:28:29 GMT
I'll make a point to call him Pope Benedict XVI on this site but I was thinking of Cardinal Ratzinger when I wrote that, the one who's book Introduction to Christianity, issued in 1990 in German, was banned because of heresy by Stefan Cardinal Wyszynski, Primate of Poland.
I'd also be careful about criticizing the ACP too much as we can see from the current pontiff, today's liberal may be tomorrow's pope.
|
|
|
Post by Askel McThurkill on Oct 9, 2011 20:29:12 GMT
I think if you take care to look at then Rev Professor Joseph Ratzinger's Introduction to Christianity you'll find it came out in 1968 and Cardinal Wyszynski did not have the charism of infallibility.
Study a bit of history of the Church. Compare, for example, Aeneas Piccolomini with Pope Pius II.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Oct 9, 2011 22:56:31 GMT
What exactly would constitute public heresy for you? I mean John Paul II already had his interfaith prayer meetings in Assissi where he watched the dalai Lama place a statue of Buddha on the tabernacle. If he came out in a devil mask and sacrificed a baby on the alter would that be enough or would you still wait around for a infallible declaration on the matter.
Pope Benedict his renewing the scandal of Assissi on October 27th BTW. Fr. Ratzinger was a radical theologian just like ACP are now.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Oct 10, 2011 20:00:04 GMT
What exactly would constitute public heresy for you? I mean John Paul II already had his interfaith prayer meetings in Assissi where he watched the dalai Lama place a statue of Buddha on the tabernacle. If he came out in a devil mask and sacrificed a baby on the alter would that be enough or would you still wait around for a infallible declaration on the matter. Pope Benedict his renewing the scandal of Assissi on October 27th BTW. Fr. Ratzinger was a radical theologian just like ACP are now. Radical is not synonymous with heresy. Even the Lefebvrist tract 'Peter, Lovest Thou Me' never said John Paul II was in the same chapel in which followers of the Dalai Lama are alleged to set up the Buddha.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Oct 10, 2011 20:03:05 GMT
"The oldest known rite"? I would have thought that some of the eastern (Greek and Syriac) rites have equal claims to antiquity. No, Hibernicus. The Divine Liturgies of Ss John Chrysostom and Basil have each a greater claim to antiquity than anything in the west. The Aramaic liturgy used in the Chaldaean Church is even older.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 10, 2011 20:46:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 10, 2011 20:58:20 GMT
Alasdair - sorry about my blunder. I was thinking in terms of the core of the Roman liturgy as dating back to Gregory the Great, but of course he was sixth-century, SS Basil and John Chrysostom are fourth and the Aramaic liturgy as you say is older. I was being cautious in dealing with Bernard's remark about the EF as "the oldest known liturgy" which as you say is just another example of a sede ignoring the non-Roman rites and ignoring the existence of change before 1958 so as to exaggerate the rupture. Ananda Coomaraswamy's claim that the Roman liturgy/TLM was pretty much unchanged from the days of the Apostles (which Bernard cited elsewhere on this forum) is dishonest or incompetent, probably both. I do not say this lightly .
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Oct 10, 2011 21:45:58 GMT
Alasdair - sorry about my blunder. I was thinking in terms of the core of the Roman liturgy as dating back to Gregory the Great, but of course he was sixth-century, SS Basil and John Chrysostom are fourth and the Aramaic liturgy as you say is older. I was being cautious in dealing with Bernard's remark about the EF as "the oldest known liturgy" which as you say is just another example of a sede ignoring the non-Roman rites and ignoring the existence of change before 1958 so as to exaggerate the rupture. Taken directly from Pope Pius V, Papal Bull Quo Primum Tempore www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/p5quopri.htm"Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses. " What exactly do you think Pius V was talking about when he said they had "restored the liturgy to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers"?
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 11, 2011 13:10:23 GMT
He said that they had done it according to the best techniques of the sixteenth century - this is what they were TRYING to do, it didn't mean they had actually succeeded. We know a lot more about liturgical history and the Eastern rites than was known back then, and a much wider range of texts is available. He wished to lay down a standard text of the Roman Rite (which had been made possible by the spread of printing)- this didn't mean that other Rites and uses of sufficient antiquity were to be abolished. And "the Fathers" can cover quite a late period - I have even heard St Bernard of Clairvaux described as the last of the Fathers (in contrast with the scholastics, who used a different style of argument).
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Oct 11, 2011 14:37:46 GMT
I just showed you a papal bull that states "they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers."
Your right that the holy Fathers can cover a wide range of time but how about the word "original." ~derived from the Classical Latin word origo (origin, source; birth)
And yes I'm fully aware that he allowed rites less than 200 years old to continue. He also abolished all the new rites under strict penalty.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 11, 2011 21:49:18 GMT
What he means is that they restored it to the best of their ability - that doesn't mean that their work could never be improved on in the light of subsequent evidence (any more than St Jerome is slighted by subsequent revision of the Vulgate). I am not familiar with what exactly was done - perhaps someone could fill us in on that? There is a much wider range of liturgical material available now than there was in the C16 - just as (for example) the nineteenth and twentieth-century papyrus discoveries in Egypt improved our knowledge of Classical Greek, or the C19 discovery of Ciceronian palimpsests and the recent uncovering of some of St Augustine's lost sermons have improved our knowledge of those authors compared to what was available in the C16. Surely you are not suggesting that St Pius V's statement amounts to saying that no future Pope could revise the rite if new material were discovered?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Oct 12, 2011 1:57:49 GMT
I'm just backing up my claim that the Tridentine Rite is the oldest rite in existence. I do not know exactly what methods were used by Pius V but I doubt that any of the eastern rites have not been altered.
Fr. Adrian Fortescue writes, "The ruthless destruction of the ancient rites in favor of uniformity has been the work not of Rome but of the schismatical patriarchs of Constantinople. Since the thirteenth Century Constantinople in its attempt to make itself the one center of the Orthodox Church has driven out the far more venerable and ancient liturgies of Antioch and Alexandria and has compelled all the Orthodox to use its own late derived rite."
As far as revising the rite, there were two movements in the C19 to add St. Joseph name to the Canon. The requests were denied in both cases, first by Pius VII and then by Puis IX. Although Idon't have a so'urce for this it is reported that Pius IX said in regards to adding St. Josephs name “I am only the Pope. What power have I to touch the Canon?”
In The Question of Anglican Ordinations Discussed (London, Burns & Oates, 1873), author E. E. Estcourt, then the canon of St. Chad's Cathedral, Birmingham, gives the following account: "The care taken to preserve the Canon in its original authentic form we learn from other writers. 'In ancient times,' says Muratori, 'although the liturgy of the Roman Mass was observed generally in the churches of Italy, France, Germany, Britain, and other countries, yet there was no small variety in their Missals; but this did not affect the substance of the mystery, or the chief and essential rites of the Mass. The difference ran in adding collects, sequences, and special feasts, which each Bishop might insert in his own missal. But to change the sacred words of the Canon was a crime.' By the laws of Charlemagne it was ordered that only men of full age should be employed to transcribe it; and the Councils of York and Oxford in the twelfth century decreed that the Archdeacon should examine in every church whether there were errors or defects in the Canon, either by the faults of transcribers or the books being old. Always too the Canon was written in different and larger characters than the rest, and sometimes in gold letters throughout, as an offering of reverence."
Pius X did change the mass somewhat when he started the dialogue mass (where the congregation answers the priest), some people where critical of this but it can hardly be compared to the new mass instituted by Paul VI. I suppose minor changes could be made (and have been made) to certain parts of the mass but I don't think John XXIII should have changed the canon. I also think he knew exactly what he was doing.
|
|
|
Post by shane on Oct 12, 2011 11:28:07 GMT
The addition of St Joseph to the canon had been supported by St Pius X, who IIRC signed a petition for it before his election as Pope. (I agree with you though that in retrospect it was a mistake, as was the introduction of the Dialogue Mass.)
|
|