A real counter-blast against 'doing what we feel is best' in the Liturgy

  • Thread starter Thread starter InquisitorMax
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
InquisitorMax said:
chantcafe.com/2011/04/what-we-think-we-know-that-is-wrong.html

Some very apt points there. A page to bookmark and save.
Click to expand...
Yes. Jeffrey Tucker is definitely a considerate man, and the list points have their values.

However we shall understand that the truth is always between two opposites.
  • God cares about the details, but primarily He cares about the hearts, not the outside actions
  • the vernacular, especially the mother tongue, does not result full understanding, but helps our partial,imperfect understanding
and so on.

In the time between St Pius V and St Pius X the liturgy was frozen. The Mass was considered the exclusive affait between the priest and Jesus Christ, people were mere bystanders. St Pius X started to change it, and the change was falling to other side in the last third of the 20th century, when it seemed to be, that there are no limits for the innovations at all.

Recently there is a polarization, in some churches the Masses became folk festivals even in name; in other churches the order and reverence takes back its place. The TLM can be a device to help this change, but the TLM cannot substitute for the true participation of the people, so cannot be the exclusive goal. The future is the dual dorm, mutually helping each other to find the way for the liturgy accommodating to our drastically changed world.
 
Is the TC forum a vehicle for hosting personal articles and opinions of bloggers?

It seems better to me if you had pulled a few points that interested you and shared them for discussion. I don’t agree that it is worth adding to my bookmarks.
 
  1. We must determine the popular musical taste of young people and incorporate these styles into the Mass, or young people will eventually leave the church.
    3a. Young people overwhelmingly prefer contemporary popular music in church.
    3b. Likewise, young children are only capable of grasping music written specifically for them.
Click to expand...
  1. The assembled parishioners, along with the priest, perform the primary actions of the Mass, and are also the Mass’s primary audience. This principle drives every liturgical or musical decision.
Click to expand...
  1. God is indifferent to the particulars of our worship.
Click to expand...
  1. People in the pews will never, never, never sing in Latin and they resent you teaching them how.
Click to expand...
  1. All authoritarianism in Catholic liturgy originates in Rome.
Click to expand...
  1. The Second Vatican Council fundamentally changed the church, and especially the liturgy.
Click to expand...
  1. The liturgical changes following the Second Vatican Council have led to an increase in understanding of the Mass, and therefore a general rise in Catholic practice.
    25a. To question these changes is to question the Council.
Click to expand...
These quotes seem particularly pertinent.
 
“The more Latin we use, the less we can comprehend the Mass, unless we know Latin.”

I stopped reading there. That is an ignorant statement. :rolleyes:
 
At_Trent said:
“The more Latin we use, the less we can comprehend the Mass, unless we know Latin.”

I stopped reading there. That is an ignorant statement. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
👍
Thanks, AT, you saved me the time I would have wasted reading it. An “Ave” for you!! :clapping:

P.S. By the way, your avatar is a beauty. Where did you find that? Wish I had a holy card like that…
 
At_Trent said:
“The more Latin we use, the less we can comprehend the Mass, unless we know Latin.”

I stopped reading there. That is an ignorant statement. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Try reading again; I think you missed the point of the post by 180°. 🙂
 
malphono said:
Jeffrey Tucker is normally very good, so I have to agree with Mark when he says:
Click to expand...
And I just meant literally reading it, not trying to read between the lines. To wit:
A director of music at a Catholic parish, obviously of long experience, sent me a list he has been keeping of things that people believe that are not so.
  1. It is possible to fully understand the Mass.
    1a. Having Mass entirely in the vernacular facilitates this complete comprehension.
    1b. The more Latin we use, the less we can comprehend the Mass, unless we know Latin.
. . .
 
Yep, he might want to bold that bit, otherwise some people will heartily agree with him and others disagree, but for the wrong reasons 😃
 
Lormar said:
👍
Thanks, AT, you saved me the time I would have wasted reading it. An “Ave” for you!! :clapping:

P.S. By the way, your avatar is a beauty. Where did you find that? Wish I had a holy card like that…
Click to expand...
I found it on the net one day when I googled “holy card image”

I just googled Sacred heart holy card image and it’s right there 🙂
google.com/search?q=sacred+heart+holy+card+images&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Me4&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=DfuxTYy-Bebk0QG5qKmOCQ&ved=0CCkQsAQ&biw=792&bih=435

An Ave for you as well, friend, and all here on CA !
 
malphono said:
Jeffrey Tucker is normally very good, so I have to agree with Mark when he says:
Click to expand...
Sorry, but is a silly statement. It presumes one must understand Latin to understand the Mass. I don’t speak Latin, but I know what the phrases that are repeated in every TLM mean. With a Latin/English missal, there is no reason not to understand every moment of the TLM, or OF in Latin for that matter.

Only a lack of effort would prevent it. 🤷
 
At_Trent said:
Sorry, but is a silly statement. It presumes one must understand Latin to understand the Mass. I don’t speak Latin, but I know what the phrases that are repeated in every TLM mean. With a Latin/English missal, there is no reason not to understand every moment of the TLM, or OF in Latin for that matter.

Only a lack of effort would prevent it. 🤷
Click to expand...
If one actually reads the article, (and, for good measure, it wouldn’t hurt to do a little look-up on Jeffrey Tucker – try the New Liturgical Movement, for example, where he was a major contributor for some years until time constraints got the better of him), it is not a “silly statement” in the least.
 
malphono said:
If one actually reads the article, (and, for good measure, it wouldn’t hurt to do a little look-up on Jeffrey Tucker – try the New Liturgical Movement, for example, where he was a major contributor for some years until time constraints got the better of him), it is not a “silly statement” in the least.
Click to expand...
I know who Tucker is and I have no issue with him.

The statement is ignorant. That’s why I stopped reading. I’ve seen all of the like before. It’s a good list, but without text refuting each, what’s the point ?

Do you disagree with my take on that particular statement, or do you just want me to pat Tucker on the back ? Serious question.

EDIT: looked again, I see no article…just a list of nonsense
 
At_Trent said:
I know who Tucker is and I have no issue with him.

The statement is ignorant. That’s why I stopped reading. I’ve seen all of the like before. It’s a good list, but without text refuting each, what’s the point ?

Do you disagree with my take on that particular statement, or do you just want me to pat Tucker on the back ? Serious question.

EDIT: looked again, I see no article…just a list of nonsense
Click to expand...
If there’s “no issue” with Jeffrey Tucker, I’m perplexed why there seems to be an issue with Jeffrey Tucker. :confused:

In any event, the “statement” in question is not a statement at all. It’s a reference to the comments of others made TO the gentleman. Mark tried to point that out. I tried to point that out. Beyond that, there’s nothing to say. 🤷
 
malphono said:
Jeffrey Tucker is normally very good, so I have to agree with Mark when he says:
Click to expand...
At_Trent said:
“The more Latin we use, the less we can comprehend the Mass, unless we know Latin.”

I stopped reading there. That is an ignorant statement. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
At_Trent said:
Sorry, but is a silly statement. It presumes one must understand Latin to understand the Mass. I don’t speak Latin, but I know what the phrases that are repeated in every TLM mean. With a Latin/English missal, there is no reason not to understand every moment of the TLM, or OF in Latin for that matter.

Only a lack of effort would prevent it. 🤷
Click to expand...
At_Trent said:
I know who Tucker is and I have no issue with him.

The statement is ignorant. That’s why I stopped reading. I’ve seen all of the like before. It’s a good list, but without text refuting each, what’s the point ?

Do you disagree with my take on that particular statement, or do you just want me to pat Tucker on the back ? Serious question.

EDIT: looked again, I see no article…just a list of nonsense
Click to expand...
Why don’t you specify exactly what text in my posts you disagree with or don’t understand ?
malphono said:
If there’s “no issue” with Jeffrey Tucker, I’m perplexed why there seems to be an issue with Jeffrey Tucker. :confused:

In any event, the “statement” in question is not a statement at all. It’s a reference to the comments of others made TO the gentleman. Mark tried to point that out. I tried to point that out. Beyond that, there’s nothing to say. 🤷
Click to expand...
Who, iyo, has an issue with Tucker ? I’d guess Mr Tucker would express similar views as I concerning an absurd suggestion that Latin hinders understanding of the Mass. Are you disappointed that you were wrong, and I did indeed understand that the arguments listed were not his views ?

I’m sorry, but since you aren’t refuting my views on the statement/argument in question, then your only goal was to point out I missed “the point”. Or am I wrong ? Tell me what I’m actually missing here. 😉
 
malphono said:
If there’s “no issue” with Jeffrey Tucker, I’m perplexed why there seems to be an issue with Jeffrey Tucker. :confused:

In any event, the “statement” in question is not a statement at all. It’s a reference to the comments of others made TO the gentleman. Mark tried to point that out. I tried to point that out. Beyond that, there’s nothing to say. 🤷
Click to expand...
I don’t think you read my posts. And I think Mr Tucker would agree with me on the statement, or common/erroneous argument if you prefer, against Latin in the liturgy.
 
At_Trent said:
“The more Latin we use, the less we can comprehend the Mass, unless we know Latin.”

I stopped reading there. That is an ignorant statement. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
It depends. By itself, it is.

However, if you consider that that is given in a list of things that ARE NOT SO then the meaning is the exact opposite. In other words, the author of those points is agreeing with you entirely - saying such is an ignorant thing to say!

I had to look twice myself.
 
The_Curt_Jester said:
It depends. By itself, it is.

However, if you consider that that is given in a list of things that ARE NOT SO then the meaning is the exact opposite. In other words, the author of those points is agreeing with you entirely - saying such is an ignorant thing to say!

I had to look twice myself.
Click to expand...
Why do you guys keep insisting I didn’t understand the context when in fact it’s quite clear I did ? The OP concerns a list of arguments that Mr. Tucker presented, and doesn’t agree with. He just didn’t refute them one by one. I picked one and did so.

I suppose someone could mistakenly think Mr Tucker listed his own views due to the title and opening text, but I didn’t.

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top