Author Topic: Need Help Translating Article - Cardinal Canizares (Read 1265 times)

padrepio · « **on:** January 18, 2013, 10:08:16 PM »

http://www.aciprensa.com/noticias/cardenal-canizares-si-lefebvre-hubiera-visto-la-misa-bien-celebrada-no-hubiese-dado-el-paso-que-dio-53466/#.UPoT9yf7K-f

Quote

Cardinal Cañizares: If Lefebvre had been well celebrated Mass "had not taken the step that gave"

29

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares
Rome, 17 Jan. 13 / 01:34 pm ( CNA ). - The Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments , Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera, revealed that the Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X ( SSPX), Bernard Fellay, he once said that if Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre had seen the Mass celebrated well, "I had not taken the step he took."

The Cardinal made this statement on 15 January in response to questions from reporters after giving a lecture on the Second Vatican Council in the Embassy of Spain to the Holy See .

The Spanish cardinal told the fact by way of anecdote: "once came to me and others, Bishop (Bernard) Fellay, who heads the Brotherhood of St. Pius X and he said, 'come from an abbey remains near Florence. If Archbishop Lefebvre had called held there, had not taken the step that gave. 'This missal is being held there the Missal of Paul VI's actually more strict. "

The Roman Missal of Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the Mass of Vatican II was born and is one of the provisions that the SSPX rejects and that is cause for schism. The Lefebvrists defend the ancient tradition of the Roman Missal of St. Pius V, also known as John XXIII missal having been revised in 1962 (during his pontificate).

Cardinal Cañizares then spoke with a smaller group of journalists, whom he said a little more what he said about the Lefebvrists and the Missal of Paul VI: "even the followers of the Brotherhood of St. Pius X, founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, when they participate in the Eucharist celebrated well, they say, 'if this is true everywhere would not need what happened' and that really has this separation. "

The Prefect further explained that "the (Council) Vatican II rather than changes, offers a vision of the liturgy in continuity with the whole tradition of the Church and theological reflection on the liturgy does. Changes are the result of this reflection theological tradition within the Church and in addition also continuing throughout the liturgical movement that began in France with the reflection of the Father Prosper Gueranger ".

To try to prove that the liturgy is not a cause of division in mid-2007, Pope Benedict XVI issued the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificuм by establishing the full release for the use of the Missal of St. Pius V.

There are many other steps taken by the Holy Father to promote reconciliation with the SSPX. On January 21, 2009 lifted the excommunication weighing on the four bishops ordained by Lefebvre in 1988, including Bernard Fellay. Although recalled that the four bishops should give "full recognition of Vatican II", and the Magisterium of the Popes Pius XII after for full communion.

Again, in 2011, the Pope gave the opportunity to end SSPX schism with the offer of a doctrinal preamble.

In 2012 the church organ in charge of dialogue with the SSPX, the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, announced that they asked for "additional time for reflection and study" on the acceptance of this preamble.

The above article is a google translation that we are working on translating, ASAP. If anyone else can start on it - it has some very important info.

Also, one of the families from "workers in Mary's garden" has a daughter ill with leukemia. Please keep her in your prayers. No other information will be made available.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #1 on:** January 19, 2013, 05:46:33 AM »

Noteworthy terms:

Quote

The Roman Missal of Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the Mass of Vatican II was born and is one of the provisions that the SSPX rejects and that is cause for schism. The Lefebvrists defend the ancient tradition of the Roman Missal of St. Pius V, also known as John XXIII missal having been revised in 1962 (during his pontificate).

The ancient tradition of the ... 1962 missal:

Fr. Hewko mentions the conditions for regularization of Campos, Brazil in
1988 included their use of the "ancient liturgy of 1962" - minute 33 of
the Dec. 29th Family Conference. He is not directly quoting something,
seems to be going off memory, but the similarity in these terms is most
interesting to me.

Also, that Cardinal Cañizares refers to the 62 missal with the words,
"also know as John XXIII missal." - Provided of course, that this
translation is accurate on this one phrase...

The Missal of Pope St. Pius V, 1571, is indeed ancient.

But referring to the 1962 Missal as being "ancient" is a stretch. It's no more
ancient than John XXIII is "ancient" or Vatican II is "ancient."

I wonder how often these words are used together, "1962 missal/liturgy"
and "ancient?" Is this being kicked around like bywords in frequent usage
so as to make it believable?

This could be leading up to the new edition of the 1962 missal, the hybrid
missal that incorporates whatever innovations it may, based in post-1962
experimentation, all conveniently under one cover with the numbers on the
cover: 1 9 6 2 ... which may be perceived as "ancient liturgy,"
even though it is objectively 2013, or perhaps later!

Are they attempting to re-define the word "ancient?"

Centroamerica · « **Reply #2 on:** January 19, 2013, 02:24:00 PM »

TRANSLATION

Cardinal Cañizares Llover, Prefect of the Congragation of Divine Worship and of the Discipline of the Sacraments, revealed that the Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, Bernard Fellay, once commented that if Archbishop Lefebvre would have seen the Mass celebrated well, "he would not have taken the steps he took."

THIS IS AN EXACT TRANSLATION. This is also the most important part because it is the only part in quotations. So the words in quotations are the only words the cardinal claims that Bishop Fellay had said. All the other terms referring to the Mass as a CELEBRATION and other modernist language I am assuming are only the words of the cardinal.

However, the truth is important and in this case I have seen the quoted portion translated purposely wrong. This is deceit. Sure it is what it is. What was said here I do not ever intend to defend, but I have seen many bad English translations of what the Cardinal says. The bad translation of the quoted words, " our division from the Catholic Church" is evil and vicious much more than what Bishop Fellay says about Archbishop Lefebvre and I will tell you why it is much more evil! They are changing something Bishop Fellay said about Archbishop Lefebvre and distorting the meaning to say that Bishop Fellay is admitting that the SSPX is outside of the Church and in formal schism. Bishop Fellay never said anything like this even if the original Spanish quote was not very intelligent at all we must know that the media is lying to us and translating wrong and distorting what Bishop Fellay actually said. That is all. Hate it if you want and accuse me if defending Bishop Fellay but the truth is the truth and I won't tolerate lies.

inspiritu20 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 19, 2013, 03:20:14 PM »

It was just posted over on IA.

Quote

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/car...not-have-split/

Rome, Italy, Jan 18, 2013 / 01:09 pm (CNA).- According to a Spanish cardinal, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X once said that if the group's leader had seen the Mass celebrated properly, he may not have broken off from the Church.

Cardinal Antonio Canizares, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, made this statement on Jan. 15 in response to questions from reporters after he delivered an address on Vatican II at the Spanish Embassy to the Holy See.

“On one occasion,” Cardinal Canizares recalled, “Bishop (Bernard) Fellay, who is the leader of the Society of St. Pius X, came to see me and said, ‘We just came from an abbey that is near Florence. If Archbishop (Marcel) Lefebvre had seen how they celebrated there, he would not have taken the step that he did.’”

“The missal used at that celebration was the Paul VI Missal in its strictest form,” the cardinal added.

The Paul VI Missal contains the ordinary form of the Mass promulgated after the Second Vatican Council and is one of the points of contention that led to the schism with the Society of St. Pius X, founded by Archbishop Lefebvre.

The Lefebvrists have insisted on continuing to celebrate the Mass according to the missal promulgated by Pope John XXIII in 1962.

Cardinal Canizares later spoke with a reduced number of reporters and further amplified his remarks about the Lefebrvists and the Paul VI Missal.

He elaborated on the idea that if the schismatic archbishop had seen the new Mass celebrated properly and reverently, he may not have rejected it.

“Even the followers of the Society of St. Pius X, founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, when they participate in a Mass that is properly celebrated, say, ‘If things were this way everywhere there would have been no need for what happened’ and for what really caused this separation,” he said.

The cardinal went on to explain that Vatican II offered more than simply changes.

“If offers a vision of the liturgy in continuity with the entire Tradition of the Church and the theological reflection it makes about the liturgy,” he said. “The changes are a consequence of this theological reflection within ecclesial Tradition.”

To show that the liturgy should not be a cause for division, Pope Benedict XVI published the Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificuм” in 2007 to establish universal use of the 1962 missal.

The Holy Father has taken several other steps towards reconciliation with the Society of St. Pius X.

On Jan. 21, 2009, he lifted the excommunications imposed on the four bishops ordained by Lefebfvre in 1988, including Bernard Fellay.

In doing so, however, he stressed that they should give “full recognition to the Second Vatican Council,” as well as to the magisteriums of the popes after Pius XII as a condition for full communion.

In addition, Pope Benedict XVI gave the society the chance to end the schism in 2011 by accepting a doctrinal preamble.

In 2012, the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei,” charged with the ongoing dialogue with the Society of St. Pius X, announced that the society had requested “addition time for reflection and study” of the proposed preamble.

inspiritu20 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 19, 2013, 03:21:14 PM »

Quote

http://www.zenit.org/article-36355?l=english

VATICAN PREPARING A MANUAL TO HELP PRIESTS CELEBRATE MASS

Prefect Warns Against Making Liturgy Into a 'Show'

H. Sergio Mora
ROME, January 16, 2013 (Zenit.org).

The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments is preparing a booklet to help priests celebrate the Mass properly and the faithful to participate better, according to the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments.

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares confirmed this Tuesday at an address at the Spanish Embassy to the Holy See on "Catholic Liturgy since Vatican II: Continuity and Evolution."

"We are preparing it; it will help to celebrate well and to participate well. I hope it will come out this year, in the summer," the cardinal told ZENIT.

During his talk the cardinal reiterated the importance Vatican II gave to the liturgy, "whose renewal must be understood in continuity with the Tradition of the Church and not as a break or discontinuity."

A break either because of innovations that do not respect continuity or because of an immobility that freezes everything at Pius XII, he said.

In particular, Cardinal Cañizares stressed the importance that Sacrosanctum Concilium gave to the sacred liturgy, through which "the work of our Redemption is exercised, above all in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist," adding that "God wants to be adored in a concrete way and it's not up to us to change it."

The cardinal said that there is talk of a renewed Church, which must not be understood as a mere reform of structures, but as a change starting with the liturgy, because it is from the liturgy that the work of our salvation is effected.

When speaking of the liturgy, continued the cardinal, one must not forget what the conciliar docuмent states: "Christ is always present in his Church, especially in the liturgical action. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, be it in the person of the minister, 'offering himself now through the ministry of the priests as he then offered himself on the cross,' be it especially under the Eucharistic species."

He stressed that the objective of the liturgy "is the adoration of God and the salvation of men," which is not a creation of ours, but source and summit of the Church."

The prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments criticized existing abuses such as showmanship, and praised moments of silence "that are action," which enable the priest and the faithful to talk with Jesus Christ and which exclude the predominance of words that often becomes showmanship on the part of the priest.

The correct attitude is the one "indicated by Saint John the Baptist, when he says he must decrease and the Messiah must increase."

The cardinal criticized the effort to make the Mass "entertaining" with certain songs -- instead of focusing on the mystery -- in an attempt to overcome "boredom" by transforming the Mass into a show.

He added that the Council did not speak of the priest celebrating Mass facing the people, that it stressed the importance of Christ on the altar, reflected in Benedict XVI's celebration of the Mass in the Sistine Chapel facing the altar.

This does not exclude the priest facing the people, in particular during the reading of the word of God. He stressed the need of the notion of mystery, and particulars such as the altar facing East and the fact that the sacrificial sense of the Eucharist must not be lost.

[...]

In regard to the case of Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, the cardinal said that Benedict XVI offered a healing measure, but that the archbishop's followers did not respond. To "think that Tradition stops with Pius XII is also a break," he noted.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #5 on:** January 19, 2013, 04:56:02 PM »

Anywhere that they refer to the traditionalist movement as a schism, namely the FSSPX, I am immediately not going to trust that they know a single word of what they are talking about and that ALL their information is false.

inspiritu20 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 19, 2013, 05:53:10 PM »

Agreed.

I wouldn't trust Rome to tell me the correct time without checking my watch.

inprincipio · « **Reply #7 on:** January 19, 2013, 11:36:11 PM »

Someone was trying to tell me that there were more than one version of the 1962 missal. Can anyone verify that there was more than one version?

inspiritu20 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 20, 2013, 03:10:14 PM »

In the United States though, the last insertion to the “1962” Missale Romanum actually occurred in 1963 – in fact, just a month before it was due on the shelves of Catholic religious supply stores everywhere. The point in question particularly affected the missal edition being printed by the famed Benziger Brothers – once proudly boasting offices in New York, Boston, Cincinnati, Chicago and San Francisco, but now virtually no more. Benziger did not receive their last printing instruction for the missal until April 8, 1963 via the imprimatur of Cardinal Francis Spellman of New York.

This episcopal approbation was for the first-time insertion of the Praefationes Particulares into Benziger’s American-produced missal. These were the so-called “Gallican Prefaces” that could be utilized if a diocese obtained permission from the Sacred Congregation of Rites. As the addition of this special section occurred after Benziger’s missals had already left the presses, this led to a printing curiosity with their edition.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/10/1962-missal-at-50-particular-curiosity.html

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #9 on:** January 20, 2013, 03:26:53 PM »

Curious, isn't it? Why not go back to before they changed anything? It's not like we would have to question anything about the older missals at all, since they were used for hundreds of years before. Why are we sticking like glue to something so modern, yea, the very YEAR that Vatican II opened? It's absurd!

inprincipio · « **Reply #10 on:** January 20, 2013, 04:27:01 PM »

I completely agree! The missal of Pope St. Pius V is not equal to the missal of John XXIII.