homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Latin (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Latin
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My Latin is now too rusty to follow a service easily (it once was!!) but if I may used the entirely unscientific approach of reviewing my FB friends list, I ind two fluent Latin-speakers among my friends (one a Jew and the other Hakka Latin RC), and possibly another three who could struggle their way through (one RC, one Anglican, and one nothing at all).

While this is fine for concert and occasional-service attending, I fear that it doesn't much extend beyond it. As a frequent traveller, I am accustomed to sitting through French- and Spanish-language masses and have stood through Slavonic, Greek and Arabic liturgies, so I have no visceral objection to other-language worship and often find that even a partial knowledge of a language can be enough to get benefit from it.

But it just doesn't really work for a wider public, and wider public is what needs to be reached. As others have noted, English (sadly IMHO) has become the lingua franca of the modern world.

I found the variation in Latin usage in the RCC in different countries to be interesting. In France, it seems to have a strong political edge, and in Spain, it's (almost) nowhere to be found. In my part of Canada, I find that it has a lot to do with church musicians.

Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745

 - Posted      Profile for Ecclesiastical Flip-flop   Email Ecclesiastical Flip-flop   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In parts of remoter Italy and Spain, it is my experience that French rather than English, is the lingua franca. Consequently, if the locals find my Italian and Spanish is a bit lacking, then they may change over to speaking to me in French rather than English.

I retain a comprehensive knowledge of Latin and it stands me in good stead if and when I attend a Mass in that language. Otherwise, on my foreign travels, I can hold my own in French, German, Italian and Spanish Masses.

Whilst on the subject, traditionalists using the extraordinary form, may hear the readings in Latin and a vernacular translation will then be read out next.

--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!

Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220

 - Posted      Profile for Corvo   Email Corvo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Actually you don't need to know any language other than your own to know what is going on during a catholic mass. You can tell from the actions and the rhythm of the language being used.

You'd have to know Latin - or any other lingua franca - pretty well to understand was being said word for word.

I am an Anglican but have had little difficulty following the Roman mass in Croatian and other languages I don't know.

Some clue from a name for instance will usually tell you what the Gospel reading is.

Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In Poland I can answer confidently to' Pan z wami '(Lord be with you)' I z duchem twoim '(and with your spirit).

Other words don't bother me too much as I know what they are without knowing the words.

However I try to find a missal in another language for the scripture readings.

I'm always intrigued by the word which sounds like
'tschechmagonzy' written,well of course in lots of different ways in the different grammatical cases. 'wszechmogacy' means, I found out, 'almighty'
after hearing the word several times in different cases during a Solemn Pontifical Mass in the cathedral in Stettin (Sorry,but I can't remember the spelling of the name of the town in Polish.)

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:


Some clue from a name for instance will usually tell you what the Gospel reading is.

Plus our use of the Common Lectionary (provided it's not one of those weeks when the C of E or whoever has messed around with it) means that we can look up the readings beforehand and be reasonably familiar with their content.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
And just to make this clear, I am no liturgy freak. In fact, I'm attending a "novus ordo" mass in vernacular English nowadays, and it has been about eight years since I last regularly attended an EF mass.

And you are in Reading where Fr Armand De Mallery of the FSSP celebrates a beautiful EF Mass every Sunday! Must be your preference.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
And you are in Reading where Fr Armand De Mallery of the FSSP celebrates a beautiful EF Mass every Sunday! Must be your preference.

Obviously, but it's not really about my personal liturgical preference. I don't go to mass on my own, but with family (wife and son). So it's what works best for all of us, rather than just me. Personally, I also like the "normal" and much bigger OF crowds, because I really like being anonymous at mass. And it's also a matter of general convenience, frankly. The EF mass is "across town" and has one time slot. Wheres we can walk to the OF, and there are several mass times (and I get up late on Sundays...).

None of which would matter if I had the usual trad attitude that the EF mass is the real deal and that good liturgy will save Catholicism and the world. But I don't, particularly.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664

 - Posted      Profile for The Man with a Stick   Email The Man with a Stick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Personally, I have always found it one of the great ironies of liturgical history that the Catholic Church largely abandoned its common language at precisely the point it was becoming more and more useful, due to globalisation and mass migration.

When travelling abroad (in places where I may struggle to find an Anglican mass, I hasted to add!), I do tend to seek out Latin services. I have nothing more than a poor schoolboy grasp of latin, but am sufficiently familiar with the texts to know what is going on far better than (say) in Czech/Swedish/insert other obscure European language.

A universal language for a universal church, as I once heard it put.

Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Obviously, but it's not really about my personal liturgical preference. I don't go to mass on my own, but with family (wife and son). So it's what works best for all of us, rather than just me.

I made two visits to Fr Armand a year ago, and by coincidence I met a Spanish mam living in Surrey who attended once a month because, on the other weeks, he went to Mass with his wife and children. Family considerations are paramount, but for those to whom it matters, compromise is the order of the day.

I believe most strongly that the Church has made a mistake to sideline Latin to the extent it has. Even the Novus Ordo was meant to be celebrated in Latin, with Mass in the vernacular as an option. The advantages of Latin have already been well presented on this thread. I have a personal preference for Mass in the EF. While I understand how many not attuned to the theology might find it "remote" to have the priests and servers mumbling away in the sanctuary in a foreign language while they have nothing to do, but that is to miss the point of the contemplative element of the sacrifice and the silent canon.

Although I'm not presently in communion with the Holy Church, since my recent retirement to East Kent, I regularly attend Mass in the EF at the awesomely beautiful St Augustine's Church in Ramsgate. The indomitable Fr Tim Finegan has now made the EF his main Sunday Mass in Margate. Thank God for the Latin Mass Society.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
The indomitable Fr Tim Finegan has now made the EF his main Sunday Mass in Margate.

A number of years back we managed to get him to come over to Finland once to celebrate the old rite for us. I used to read his blog all the time.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
..., but for those to whom it matters, compromise is the order of the day.

As I have just mentioned, and said often before, liturgy just doesn't matter all that much to me.

quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Although I'm not presently in communion with the Holy Church, ... I regularly attend Mass in the EF at the awesomely beautiful St Augustine's Church in Ramsgate. (italics added)

And this shows one reason why I don't care all that much about the liturgy.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
And this shows one reason why I don't care all that much about the liturgy.

I also attend Orthodox Divine Liturgies from time to time. I used to attend Fr Finegan's Masses in the EF as far back as 2007, when I lived in Welling. He knew I wasn't Catholic but was quite happy for me to be there and talk to me. What's wrong with being there?

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I attended a mass in Latin in St John's co cathedral in Valletta Malta, when I was on holiday in January. I am fairly confident that it was the ordinary Novus Ordo mass. Although my Latin is not much good, what I could understand seemed to follow the order of service I have experienced on occasion when visiting an Anglican church that used the Roman rite.

Like PaulTH I am not Catholic, but I hope I did not do anything wrong by attending. As long as I did not receive the communion, I did not think anyone would mind.

--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai

Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Unlike PaulTH and moonlitdoor I am a Catholic
and would like to emphasize that all are most welcome to attend Mass and other liturgies celebrated publicly in a Catholic church.

Did anyone suggest that you would not be welcome ?

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I also attend Orthodox Divine Liturgies from time to time. I used to attend Fr Finegan's Masses in the EF as far back as 2007, when I lived in Welling. He knew I wasn't Catholic but was quite happy for me to be there and talk to me. What's wrong with being there?

First, I didn't comment on whether it is licit for you to go to these masses, or not. I quoted this as one reason why I am not buying into the liturgy hype of most trads. Going to the EF did not have the power to keep either you or Ad Orientem in communion with the Church. The EF mass isn't "magic": if it were reintroduced as the only mass of the Church, the Church wouldn't be cured of all its contemporary failings and the masses wouldn't start streaming back into her masses again. These are delusions of mono-causality maintained as a rallying point for a hopeless fight. It is also a convenient excuse for trads to hide behind.

Second, concerning what is wrong with you being at these various masses: what is wrong is that you attend an event as spectator which is intended as an event for participation. The Holy Mass is held for Holy Communion. Of course, if you are an inquirer the situation is a bit different: you are spectating because you are thinking about participating in future. That's fair enough (within limits to be set by those already in communion). It is also fine to participate when explicitly invited as a guest, e.g., for a wedding. It may even be fine to go once or twice just to see what is going on (a step that could lead to being an inquirer, after all). But ultimately a communal activity is proper to its community, not to strangers.

quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Did anyone suggest that you would not be welcome ?

"The Doors! The Doors! In wisdom, let us attend!"

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

Second, concerning what is wrong with you being at these various masses: what is wrong is that you attend an event as spectator which is intended as an event for participation.

But if they are baptized, they are in communion (real, but imperfect) and they can participate (not by receiving communion, but by exercising their baptismal priesthood and offering their sacrifice of praise).

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adam.:
But if they are baptized, they are in communion (real, but imperfect) and they can participate (not by receiving communion, but by exercising their baptismal priesthood and offering their sacrifice of praise).

I think that point of view is modern. The ancients would not have accorded schismatics and heretics the right to participate in the mysteries, just because they were baptised. The practical difference to the unbaptised would have been the procedure of (re)admittance. Schismatics and heretics would have had to repent of their ways first, and then after their (substantial!) penance would have been welcomed once more.

[ 21. May 2015, 14:15: Message edited by: IngoB ]

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
AIUI, for much of (comparatively modern) history, it was the norm for communicant RC laity nonetheless not to receive the sacrament every week.
(i) Am I right in this?
(ii) If I am, would you say, Ingo, that there was a difference between a communicant attending to worship but not communicate, and a non-communicant (and non-inquirer) attending to worship?
I have no dog in this fight, BTW.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Church history is not my strength, but IIRC the lack of physical (but not spiritual) communion among RCs was due to a growing popular scrupulosity about one's state of grace, which was officially critiqued early but seriously combatted only late (e.g., by Pope Piux X).

I would say that there is a significant difference between a RC who considers himself to be in a state of sin, and attends mass but does not partake in physical communion, and a heretic or schismatic, who does the same. The difference is that the RC considers himself to be in sin, whereas the heretic or schismatic - while respectful to the strictures of the RCC concerning communion - considers the RCC to be in sin (or at least to be de facto unnecessary and/or dysfunctional as a spiritual home for himself).

The RC by attending the mass but not partaking in holy communion signals: I belong here with you, and ought to share communion with you, but due to my personal failings I currently cannot stand before God with you in good conscience. The heretic or schismatic cannot signal the same by the same actions, unless he is in fact seriously considering a reconciliation with the RCC (and hence is a kind of inquirer).

(I don't know if such distinctions have been historically made, or are official somehow somewhere. This is just my own opinion.)

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The norm in the late Middle Ages was once per year (usually at Easter). The vast majority of Masses celebrated were non-communicating, except for the celebrant himself.

This, of course, was one of the issues that spurred the Reformation.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
The norm in the late Middle Ages was once per year (usually at Easter). The vast majority of Masses celebrated were non-communicating, except for the celebrant himself. This, of course, was one of the issues that spurred the Reformation.

Maybe so, but it would have been unjust of the Reformers to blame the official institutions of the Church for the practice. The only official legislation was that one had to receive at least once a year (4th Lateran), or be excommunicated, and the scholastics and popular saints were clearly favouring frequent communion. I don't really know how this habit of infrequent communion became so dominant in the middle ages.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think you were right about the perception of unworthiness. I think that's probably why the BCP Eucharist leans so heavily on assuring the people that their sins have been forgiven (see, for example, the Comfortable Words); they really wanted to encourage weekly Communion.

Of course, that didn't become very deeply rooted, either--witness the ubiquity of Solemn High Mattins until fairly recently.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
The difference is that the RC considers himself to be in sin, whereas the heretic or schismatic - while respectful to the strictures of the RCC concerning communion - considers the RCC to be in sin (or at least to be de facto unnecessary and/or dysfunctional as a spiritual home for himself).

While it's very "cafeteria" Catholic, it's perfectly possible to value the Mass as a sacrifice, pray for the dead, seek the intercessions of the BVM and the saints,all ideas missing from Protestantism, yet have a problem which prevents full participation in the life of the Church.

The "problem" could be anything from an inability to accept papal infallibility, to an irregular relationship which can't be accepted by the Church. Or it could be a rejection of certain aspects of Church teaching. That doesn't make the Mass valueless. To kneel in awe before the very presence of God is a salutary experience for any mortal creature.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Did anyone suggest that you would not be welcome ?

Nobody I've spoken to, but IngoB has given a reason why he sees it as wrong.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can certainly understand IngoB's point of view, and it was a feeling that Catholics may want to share participation in the mass with fellow Catholics rather than religious tourists that made me wonder if I might have done something wrong in going.

I have to admit that as well as wanting to participate in an act of worship, there was an element of curiosity in my motives, to see the mass in Latin in a cathedral which had seen so much dramatic history during the era of the knights of St John. Hopefully there was enough of the more worthy motive to justify my presence.

--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai

Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
While it's very "cafeteria" Catholic, it's perfectly possible to value the Mass as a sacrifice, pray for the dead, seek the intercessions of the BVM and the saints,all ideas missing from Protestantism, yet have a problem which prevents full participation in the life of the Church.

One is not "cafeteria" Catholic if one has a problem that forces one's hand. The word "cafeteria" is intended to convey a basically free choice from the "buffet" of doctrine and orthopraxis.

quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
The "problem" could be anything from an inability to accept papal infallibility, to an irregular relationship which can't be accepted by the Church. Or it could be a rejection of certain aspects of Church teaching.

I think my proposed distinction between heresy / schism on one side, and personal sin on the other, works quite well for evaluating your "problems".

quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
That doesn't make the Mass valueless. To kneel in awe before the very presence of God is a salutary experience for any mortal creature.

We know of only one kind of mortal creature that can actually kneel in awe, of course. Now, Catholicism crucially believe that God has Divinely instituted a human intermediary, the hierarchical Church, till Christ returns. We call those people in the West who think that they can ignore or sidestep this intermediary - if they then only kneel in individual awe before God - Protestants. This is however not Catholic (nor Orthodox). If you join Catholic masses regularly in the attitude that this is just fine because you believe in the real presence and kneel when the priest has consecrated the host, then that simply is an exercise of Protestantism in the midst of the very community Protestants protested against.

Not that anybody these days particularly cares about this kind of (presumably unintentional) spiritual guerrilla warfare. In particular not our shepherds, who waddle in the drunken stupor of modernity towards the sunset of the Church in the West. But just because nobody cares does not make it right.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
IngoB must realize that for various reasons a good number of sometimes very devout Christians are not in full communion with the Holy See.

Those who are in full communion with the Holy See should regret this undoubted fact,sometimes caused by the Catholics themselves, and seek to repair the breaches .

Yes,it is true that it was unusual for medieval Catholics actually to receive Communion except at Easter and at the time of impending death (Viaticum).

Yes, it is true that some of the Western Reformers wished to restore to the Christian community regular reception of Holy Communion.
It is also true that for various reasons this did not happen very widely,again due to various reasons,one of them,but not the only one,being a feeling of unworthiness.Indeed most of the new Protestant communities only celebrated the Lord's Supper on a very occasional basis,including Anglicans (Protestant or not) in this.

It's only in the course of the 19th and 20th centuries that Communion has been received regularly (What does regular mean?) by many Western Christians.

If you go to a typical Eastern Orthodox liturgy today(where there are not a lot of converts) you will find that not all that many people present will actually receive the Sacrament.

In seeking to repair the breaches in Christ's seamless garment we must absolutely be welcoming to all.Only if we make people welcome in God's house might they want to stay and enter into full communion.

IngoB has used on a number of occasions the technical terms 'schismatic'(not in full communion) and 'heretic' (diverging in teaching) but these technical terms belong to the past and are perceived by many (myself included) as unnecessarily hurtful and not normally helpful .

To me it is like calling a homosexual a 'deviant'
Whilst a homosexual does deviate in some ways from what it considered to be the norm in sexual attraction,the word 'deviant' or even worse 'pervert' are simply words from the past which are not acceptable today.

Like IngoB I am happy to participate as fully as possible in all the diverse rites used in the Catholic Church,including the Tridentine rite in Latin,or the Novus Ordo in any language,as well as the Byzantine rite to name but a few.

I consider it an honour if any non-Catholic accompanies me.

As a local Catholic community we are as welcoming as possible to those non Catholics who regularly accompany spouses or children to Mass or to others who attend regularly or occasionally.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
I can certainly understand IngoB's point of view, and it was a feeling that Catholics may want to share participation in the mass with fellow Catholics rather than religious tourists that made me wonder if I might have done something wrong in going.

I have to admit that as well as wanting to participate in an act of worship, there was an element of curiosity in my motives, to see the mass in Latin in a cathedral which had seen so much dramatic history during the era of the knights of St John. Hopefully there was enough of the more worthy motive to justify my presence.

Religious tourists would perhaps be those who go to Saint X' as they worship in the Mozarabic manner, or the canons have leopard-skin tippets, or to see and hear them use Latin, but who at least participate in the services. I am presuming by this that this is is not a reference to groups of people wandering about during services, taking videos (and selfies)-- which I have seen on some occasions in European churches. As an Anglican, I have never been made to feel unwelcome in RC churches, just Anglican ones!
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Forthview, thank you for that very generous post.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
IngoB has used on a number of occasions the technical terms 'schismatic'(not in full communion) and 'heretic' (diverging in teaching) but these technical terms belong to the past and are perceived by many (myself included) as unnecessarily hurtful and not normally helpful.

Those terms do not "belong to the past". They're just as today as they were in the past, though of course we might all disagree as to who exactly are the schismatics and/or heretics. Anyway, the point IngoB is making is a valid one.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of course I agree that as technical terms they still have a use and meaning today.

However as Christians today we wish to stress more what unites us rather than what divides us.

I'm happy to call you,Ad Orientem my schismatic friend,if you so wish.

If I may say so you are very broadminded,using a Latin term,when you sometimes disparage the ongoing changes in the Latin church.

But,however,'heretic' is a loaded word which conjures up in many people's minds auto-da-fe,burnings at the stake and other things which definitely belong to the past.

Although it may not always seem so the Catholic Church is an inclusive body and as far as possible we wish to have a positive outlook on all human beings who are children of God.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
I'm happy to call you,Ad Orientem my schismatic friend,if you so wish.

LOL! If you want to. Really, I have no problem with any Roman Catholic who might think that. At least is shows that they have some sort of a coherent ecclesiology (which is a good thing because it's a starting point). I happen to think exactly the same about the Roman Church.


quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
If I may say so you are very broadminded,using a Latin term,when you sometimes disparage the ongoing changes in the Latin church.

Indeed I do. It's quite deliberate. I remember learning about the reform, especially to the liturgy, which began long before Vatican II. Pius X was the instigator. I was shocked.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
IngoB has used on a number of occasions the technical terms 'schismatic'(not in full communion) and 'heretic' (diverging in teaching) but these technical terms belong to the past and are perceived by many (myself included) as unnecessarily hurtful and not normally helpful.

As tends to happen in discussions I'm involved in, I think we are veering from Ecclesiantics to Purgatory here. Suffice to say that these terms remain current in canon law, and that I have never heard of a more acceptable alternative. The alternative invariably seems to be to simply not mention these matters at all, and I find that unacceptable. If people decide that we shall speak of the "doctrinally challenged" and the "ecclesiastically challenged" instead of "heretics" and "schismatics", respectively, then I will happily do that. But I do not think that Christ intended the unity of politely looking the other way.

(And FWIW, just as I like to be anonymous at mass, I generally do not give a damn whether the guy next to me in the pews is a gay Anglican serial polygamist, or what have you. But if I am asked what is right, then I discuss that - and I use the terms appropriate to the task.)

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
IngoB must realize that for various reasons a good number of sometimes very devout Christians are not in full communion with the Holy See.

On any given Sunday, many people at many Masses are likely to be users of artificial contraceptives. Some of them may see themselves as Catholics in a state of sin. Many more of them will see themselves as Catholics who believe that the Church's teaching on contraception is wrong, outdated or irrelevant to their own lives. Others may conclude that they differ so much from Catholic teaching that there's no point in belonging to the Catholic Church. Which road an individual takes is dependent on their own conscience and personal sense of ethics.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This discussion is generating much more heat than light, and has furthermore deviated far from the discussion of the use of Latin in worship and liturgy.

Please return to the topic at hand and restrict yourselves to the kind of respectful discourse expected in Ecclesiantics.

Your co-operation is, as ever, appreciated.

dj_ordinaire, Eccles host

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ship Latinists can keep up with current events and the ablative at the same time, by tuning into Finnish state radio's daily Latin broadcast.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools