A Valid Concern

"Catholic and Jewish experts are concerned about relations between their faiths if Vatican plans to revive the old Latin mass include long-forgotten prayers for converting the Jews or roll back respect for their heritage."

First of all, let me say that I believe it's a valid concern. Many Jews applaud the changes in the Catholic liturgy made in the 20th century. Michael Medved recently talked about this at a lunch at the conference I attended in Grove City, commending the removal of the accusation of perfidy ("Oremus et pro perfidis Judæis") from the Good Friday Prayers.

In regards to the words themselves, I would rather have someone praying for me who believed I was a faithless wretch than have no prayers from someone who wrongly assumed I was a living saint. Although pogroms and Good Friday killings of Jews cannot and should not be denied, I'm not sure that the peasants who murdered a Jew on Good Friday afternoon would have been stopped if an earlier Pope had made the liturgical changes which Pope John XXIII did in 1960, removing the adjective "perfidious". But that is speculation on my part; words do have consequences. And either way, the adjective is unnecessary for a valid prayer, so good call, J23, on removing the phrase "perfidious Jews".

It is interesting to note the earlier changes made in regards to these prayers which took place before and leading up to the institution of the Novus Ordo. The missal which is used in the Tridentine Indult Mass is from 1962, so the removal of perfidious had already taken place. This should be pointed out to anyone who makes a dichotomy of the two liturgies. There are still quite a few Catholics alive who went to mass pre-1955, but the indult masses being celebrated now have the new wording in place.


Now I'm not an expert in these matters, but if a reader (Andy?) knows more, please chime in. I will probably consult with a priest friend of mine on this who celebrates both masses and is very balanced on the matter. The above cited article does not point out the distinction between 1962 and 1955, so I feel as if someone did not do their homework on this issue. So ignorance might be responsible for this, but I suggest there might be at least a teensy-weensy bit of bias in the mix here. Some Catholics are embarrassed by the traditionalists and the Latin Mass and face it -- the so-called "rad-trads" have made the whole Latin Mass movement more controversial than it need be. One reason is that some of those people are without a doubt anti-Semitic. But let's try to avoid a "baby/bathwater backlash" which will impoverish the rich liturgical tradition of the Roman Catholic church.