His Eminence Francis Card. Arinze spoke in St. Louis recently and said something (but little) about the timing of the "indult" to free up the older form of Mass.
The cardinal was coy about the timing of the indult, which some Vatican watchers believe could come this month. "The pope has not said anything about it," he said. "When the pope does say something, we will all hear it. "
Well… ehem… I dare say we will.
On the other hand, he made a few interesting points about the use of Latin in our churches, including that large parishes should offer Mass in Latin at least once a week, and smaller parishes, at least once a month.
Loading ...
Resuming: His Eminence doesn’t like latin.
It remains mysterious to me how Anonymus could come to this conclusion…
Its not true that the Cardinal does not like Latin.When he was Archbishop,he made the rule that if a parish had 5 or more masses on a weekend,one of them had to be in Latin.He celebrated Mass in my parish and did not seem to mind the Latin.In fact hetold me after the mass,”This is the Dior of liturgy”.Also the priests at St.John Cantius wherehe has celebrated would find this remark strange.
I am glad to read Cardinal Arinze say this about Latin. For me this is the only New Springtime of the Church that interests me – the flowering again of the Latin Church with her Latin liturgy! From it flows the flowering and growing of everything else in the Church’s life.
The Arinze comments match what I heard about the recommendation made by a commission of Cardinals c. 1986–Latin mass once a week in big parishes, etc. Even Cardinal Casaroli was in favor of it.
But once word leaked out, bishops from France and Germany came whining to Rome . . . revolt . . . blah, blah, blah . . . schism . . . blah, blah, blah . . .
Then JPII reputedly put the document in a drawer, and those pastoral geniuses from France and Germany returned to their dioceses where the Church was flourishing.
Interestingly enough, some years later the MO of the French and German bishops re-surfaced–first, by ENRON in its accounting methods, then by Donald Rumsfeld to manage post war Iraq.
RBrown, you made a claim:
“The Arinze comments match what I heard about the recommendation made by a commission of Cardinals c. 1986â€â€Latin mass once a week in big parishes, etc. Even Cardinal Casaroli was in favor of it.
But once word leaked out, bishops from France and Germany came whining to Rome . . . revolt . . . blah, blah, blah . . . schism . . . blah, blah, blah . . .”
Could you substantiate that? The only “commission” at that time I know of was concerned with the Old Rite of Mass
His Eminence doesn’t like latin.
This really does not sound accurate. Not only has Card. Arinze consistently advocated regular Latin liturgy in parishes in statements made since becoming prefect of CDW, back when he was a “simple” archbishop in Nigeria, he insisted (according to one report) on this policy in his own parishes there. (I recall his remarking that some of the African people didn’t think a priest was properly educated unless he was competent in Latin. Of course, some of us think similarly regarding our priests in the U.S.) Beyond the level of policy, some of his remarks — including some on Vatican radio last week — indicate a warm personal affection for Latin in the liturgy.
I’m sorry! I made a littlle confusion with the cardinals!
I was present when the Cardinal in an address on catechetics he delivered at my parish remrked about how many languages were in his native country and that they had further dialects.He said Latin was a souce of unity in such a situation as well as a means to tribal peace.
`By the way where is the Apostolic Exhortation that reliable news sources said a month ago was “imminent”?Pope Benedict just said the other day that the exhortation will be the basis for the international eucharistic congress in2008.I hope the longdelayed and postponed document comes out before the congress begins. Its more than a year that the synod was ended and they are drawing up the lineaments for the next!I hope that the tardiness of the document points to the dramatic nature of its contents and that the recent reamrks of Arinze and his secretary are signs of what may be in it.
In an interview on EWTN with Raymond Arroyo about a year ago or more, the Cardinal stated that he loved Latin. I don’t remember the exact words, but the statement was very direct and clear.
“I hope that the tardiness of the document points to the dramatic nature of its contents and that the recent remarks of Arinze and his secretary are signs of what may be in it.”
There couldn’t possibly be any reason for the tardiness of the document but that the contents will be earthshaking, and many are trying hard to emasculate the post synodal document. And yes, I can’t help thinking that Cardinal Arinze’s remarks, coupled with everything else we’ve been hearing, are a sign of what the document will contain.
“RBrown, you made a claim:
“The Arinze comments match what I heard about the recommendation made by a commission of Cardinals c. 1986â€â€Latin mass once a week in big parishes, etc. Even Cardinal Casaroli was in favor of it.
But once word leaked out, bishops from France and Germany came whining to Rome . . . revolt . . . blah, blah, blah . . . schism . . . blah, blah, blah . . .â€Â
Could you substantiate that? The only “commission†at that time I know of was concerned with the Old Rite of Mass”
My only answer is that is what I heard in Rome in 86-87. That, even though the commission was concerned with the 1962 Missal, the recommendation was for weekly Latin masses.
But, let’s face it, Mass in Latin generally refers to the 1962 Missal–there are comparatively few Novus Ordo Latin masses. When I was in Rome, I knew many priests whose private morning mass was said in Latin. I knew no one who did a Latin Novus Ordo.
And it is not limited to Latin vs the vernacular. Almost any priest in a parish who says mass in the vernacular ad orientem is going to get in trouble.
Really? I go to a daily Latin NO…in So. California
Really? I go to a daily Latin NO…in So. California
That’s good, but there is none to be found in the KC area.
And I don’t think I knew a priest in Rome who said a NO Latin private mass. Those who regularly did it in Latin used the 1962 Missal.