C
CatholicOf94
Guest
Yet another great video of Cardinal Arinze’s wit and tells us how the Mass is the mass of the Church. Enjoy
youtube.com/watch?v=mqnjgg1vNgU

youtube.com/watch?v=mqnjgg1vNgU
Not when you can’t hear anything.If you go to the old Mass enough times, and you have a missal, you know what’s going on.
He’s probably referring to priests perhaps skipping a few prayers or so. But, as Mark suggested and I agree with, this could have been more that much of the Latin Mass is quiet, not so much the Latin. Not all servers were trained that well to pick up on what the priest was supposed to say, so if they had to make up for lost time to finish before the next Mass was supposed to start, this could easily be done. I have not heard that too many EF’s today are cutting corners, though. But I’d like for them to increase the volume a little bit. The spoken word has some value too.I have to wonder what pre VII abuses he’s referring to @ 3:05. He’s saying that there were abuses then, but the people didn’t know it because they didn’t know Latin. I’m not sure I buy that. Not at all. He’s talking about people who’d been going to the TLM all their lives. If you go to the old Mass enough times, and you have a missal, you know what’s going on.
The special status of the EF protects it from that at this time; priests have to do extra work in order to celebrate Mass in that form, and it doesn’t seem likely that they’ll got through all the legwork and then cut a few corners when they finally get there.He’s probably referring to priests perhaps skipping a few prayers or so. But, as Mark suggested and I agree with, this could have been more that much of the Latin Mass is quiet, not so much the Latin. Not all servers were trained that well to pick up on what the priest was supposed to say, so if they had to make up for lost time to finish before the next Mass was supposed to start, this could easily be done. I have not heard that too many EF’s today are cutting corners, though. But I’d like for them to increase the volume a little bit. The spoken word has some value too.
What about in places where literacy is low? Or, what about the period of time before people had Missals at Mass? I can believe it, it doesn’t surprise me at all.I have to wonder what pre VII abuses he’s referring to @ 3:05. He’s saying that there were abuses then, but the people didn’t know it because they didn’t know Latin. I’m not sure I buy that. Not at all. He’s talking about people who’d been going to the TLM all their lives. If you go to the old Mass enough times, and you have a missal, you know what’s going on.
Personally, I don’t see what the “literacy rate” in a given place has to do with a person’s familiarity with, or his/her ability to pray at, Holy Mass, irrespective of language.What about in places where literacy is low? Or, what about the period of time before people had Missals at Mass? I can believe it, it doesn’t surprise me at all.
You don’t need ears to hear what’s going on - you only need to open your heart to God.Not when you can’t hear anything.
Not unsurprisingly, I’ve never heard anyone report that God told them whether the priest was skipping or fudging the prayers said in a low voice.You don’t need ears to hear what’s going on - you only need to open your heart to God.
As with the Low Mass? I disagree. If you know the parts of the Mass, than essentially you know what the priest is doing. Obviously, you wouldn’t get the propers, but usually the Epistle and the Gospel read in the vernacular after they’re read in the Latin.Not when you can’t hear anything.
Many of the prayers are supposed to be said inaudibly.He’s probably referring to priests perhaps skipping a few prayers or so. But, as Mark suggested and I agree with, this could have been more that much of the Latin Mass is quiet, not so much the Latin. Not all servers were trained that well to pick up on what the priest was supposed to say, so if they had to make up for lost time to finish before the next Mass was supposed to start, this could easily be done. I have not heard that too many EF’s today are cutting corners, though. But I’d like for them to increase the volume a little bit. The spoken word has some value too.
The implication there is that sotto voce prayers are often “fudged” and/or skipped. Think whatever you want, but it seems to me that would be taking things just a wee a bit over the line.Not unsurprisingly, I’ve never heard anyone report that God told them whether the priest was skipping or fudging the prayers said in a low voice.
Actually some of them, like the Canon, are supposed to be said in a low tone but that could be a relative term as well. Lower than the other prayers which then could be said louder as well? In High Mass, however, this may not be such an issue as people would probably follow what the choir is singing rather than what is said at the altar. Always made it a challenge for us servers to respond at the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar with the choir singing the Introit.Many of the prayers are supposed to be said inaudibly.
Sure, but the only people who say the Latin Mass these days are highly traditional priests who are likely to be pretty much fanatical about the rubrics. Let’s remember that most of the same priests who were bringing in guitars and throwing out high altars in 1972 were saying the Mass in Latin in 1962.The implication there is that sotto voce prayers are often “fudged” and/or skipped. Think whatever you want, but it seems to me that would be taking things just a wee a bit over the line.
FWLIW, I pray the Latin along with the celebrant, and usually we’re at the same place at the same time (or if not the same same place, then I’m ahead of him). OK, it’s usually the same celebrant, but not always, and even when the celebrant is different, we’re not too far apart. In any case, while it may exist elsewhere, I haven’t experienced “fudging” or skipping.