Consolidating the EF and the OF Masses

[ConstantineTG]

French and English for Canada.

My apologies

 

[ConstantineTG]

Speaking from my financial background, would the benefits exceed the costs to authenticize the Anglican Mass or EF into all the vernaculars? Wouldn’t we have the same problems with its translations as we do with the OF? Probably more, I would think. I certainly wouldn’t drive for 30 miles to attend an English Mass I could attend a couple of blocks away. That would be silly. Mass is Mass after all. If we have money to burn, could we maybe help the world’s hungry or help pregnant women instead?

Wait, you’ve lost me there. The thread of the conversation was a hypothetical scenario where there would be no OF, just the Tridentine Mass in the vernacular. Then someone brought up the Anglican High Mass which is a close relation of the Tridentine Mass in English. So I’m just continuing the conversation from the start of the thread. But if the conversation has moved on, my apologies

But if we’re still in that hypothetical scenario, then yes I believe its worth to translate the Mass into another language. I tried looking into the Anglican Church in Japan to see if they use English or Japanese. The sites are all in Japanese so I am inclined to think that they translated their Mass into Japanese. Unless someone can tell otherwise.

 

[ProVobis]

The sites are all in Japanese so I am inclined to think that they translated their Mass into Japanese.

Anyone can translate. What’s your point? Seems as if you and the others are just showing your contempt for the Church’s official language, papal encyclicals and decrees. Promoting a vernacular is one thing but trying to suppress a language which the Church holds dearly and attempts to unify us all in is really more self-serving than anything else. I know because back in the 60’s I was the same way and I didn’t realize what I was doing. Sorry if that offends you and some of the others but I don’t see it any other way.

 

[Timothy17]

I don’t think the only music should be Gregorian Chant (let’s face it, not everybody can make a two-syllable word like ‘Amen’ into a 13-syllable chant… you know you get lost at the third or fourth note, admit it. : )

Gregorian Chant is prefered for the following reason :

It relies upon, singularizes and elevates the human voice, which is God-given, whereas instruments (though permissible, as the Psalms prove) add a man-made element to the music. Arguably, since we are commanded to “pray always” with our human, God-given voices, it logically follows that God is perfectly pleased to hear all praises with our human voice, which He created.

Furthermore, in my opinion :

Latin is a very “aerial” language; English, a gutteral one, and therefore the former sounds more “heavenly,” so to speak, to English ears, though admittedly it is difficult to sing/express for English speaking peoples, though by no means impossible.

“Gregorian Chant,” therefore, is not a mere fetish of the Roman Church, but is prefered for reason, and those reasons being God-orientated rather than human-orientated; i.e., with a mind to what is pleasing to, and acceptable for, Almighty God. This also establishes, in my opinion, the dignity of the human voice as such, specially without electronic interference or manipulation, as is common now (as in phone calls and in popular music, which to varying degrees “bastardizes” the human voice).

Latin singing, furthermore, adds mystery and holiness to the Mass due to the obvious fact that what is being sung is unknown, thus mysterious, and different (holy meaning "seperate, special, set-apart).

In conclusion, by matter of logical priority, we ought to “perfect” our vocal praises to God, and then begin to add (if felt needed) instruments that specifically serve to “decorate” or compliment the God-given, human vocal praise being offered to Him.

Pax,
Tim

 

[rosary_kat]

*** ProVobis:*** Seems as if you and the others are just showing your contempt for the Church’s official language, papal encyclicals and decrees.

This is precisely what I was hoping to avoid. Let’s back up, shall we? I never said get rid of Latin, in fact, I believe I advocated its use by all Catholics. Obviously, that would take a few years to achieve, as we’d have to start with the primary grades. I was trying to visualize, with help from the forum something that could unite us all again. I don’t think any of us needs to be in our corners with our “dukes up”. I hate clown masses and “liturgical” dance (in our society) as much as you do, but I still think there’s a middle ground. In my heart of hearts, I believe that is what our Holy Father is gently steering us to. “Re-introducing” the Latin Mass, letting everyone get used to again, then little by little blending the two. If the Mass is said in Rome the way Pregustator states, why can’t it be done here in the states or for any English-speaking community?

No offense intended, I hope none has been taken.

 

[rosary_kat]

Seems as if you and the others are just showing your contempt for the Church’s official language, papal encyclicals and decrees.

This is precisely what I was hoping to avoid. Let’s back up, shall we? I never said get rid of Latin, in fact, I believe I advocated its use by all Catholics. Obviously, that would take a few years to achieve, as we’d have to start with the primary grades. I was trying to visualize, with help from the forum something that could unite us all again. I don’t think any of us needs to be in our corners with our “dukes up”. I hate clown masses and “liturgical” dance (in our society) as much as you do, but I still think there’s a middle ground. In my heart of hearts, I believe that is what our Holy Father is gently steering us to. “Re-introducing” the Latin Mass, letting everyone get used to again, then little by little blending the two. If the Mass is said in Rome the way Pregustator states, why can’t it be done here in the states or for any English-speaking community? And I believe the USCCB is following His Holiness’ lead with the new translation of the missal. I never could figure out how ‘et tu spiritu tuo’ got translated into ‘and also with you’ (side note: yes, I know about dynamic equivalence, I just think the ICEL got carried away).

No offense intended, I hope none has been taken.

 

[rosary_kat]

Tim,
Who are you quoting? That’s a very good explanation. I admit, I am a dullard when it comes to Gregorian Chant. I never learned to read music, and certainly not ‘square note’, but I can carry a tune. There are so many beautiful hymns out there like ‘Immaculate Mary’, ‘Jesus Christ Is Risen Today’, etc. I’d hate to see them tossed. There are an awful lot of people who just can’t sing, either. It’s true, I got over Kumbaya years ago, but there are songs for low mass that I think are perfectly presentable. For high mass, sure, pull out all the stops! I guess my philosophy is not to get stuck with one form and only one form. I truly believe there’s room for all.

I also fear there is some elitism involved and that should be avoided at all costs by all sides (I’m thinking of some local issues, Tim, not pointing fingers at you!).

 

[georgewithfaith]

I would like to see the EF of the Mass, the Tridentine Mass made into the OF. There is no point in consolidating the Masses. Until 1969 the Mass developed organically and had never been revamped in one fell swoop as happened under Pope Paul VI.

If we make the Tridentine Mass the OF we can then stop carrying the cross of having to make changes to or improve the Mass somehow. The two forms of Liturgy should not be consolidated. We should start with the Tridentine Mass and restore the tradition of deliberate and organic changes over time.

Here is the hard part. How do we make the Tridentine Mass the OF without causing damage to the faithful?

Pope Paul VI was able to make the Novus Ordo the OF by his decree and this caused a lot of damage in the Church. So if Benedict were to reverse Paul VI what would we do then with the Novus Ordo? Do we minimize it’s use as Paul VI was able to do with the Tridentine Mass? Do we ban the Novus Ordo completely? Do we allow priests to offer only one Novus Ordo on Sunday as long as the Tridentine Mass is offered?

The actions of Paul VI caused many problems in the Church. Many left the faith and those who felt a rupture in the liturgy ended up on the outskirts of the Church in SSPX.

I think the answer lies in what Pope Benedict has been doing. Benedict seems to be working to repair the damage and unite the Church. He allowed for liberal use of the Tridentine Mass. He is reaching out and trying to reconcile groups such as SSPX with the Church. It seems like he is laying the foundation for the future.

Perhaps one day support for the Tridentine Mass will grow to such a level that all Catholics will be in union with such a restoration of this liturgy as THE liturgy of the Roman Catholic rite. I believe there are many good young priests today who over time will bring good leadership and truth to the Church faithful. I have hope in them and I pray for them.

Pope Benedict may be a wise and shrewd man. By not making a wholesale change as Paul VI did Benedict may be along time and wisdom to work its course. Time will only tell.

 

[rosary_kat]

Perhaps one day support for the Tridentine Mass will grow to such a level that all Catholics will be in union with such a restoration of this liturgy as THE liturgy of the Roman Catholic rite. I believe there are many good young priests today who over time will bring good leadership and truth to the Church faithful. I have hope in them and I pray for them.

Pope Benedict may be a wise and shrewd man. By not making a wholesale change as Paul VI did Benedict may be along time and wisdom to work its course. Time will only tell.

Thank you for that overview! I believe you are correct and I pray for His Holiness every day. The man has a nearly thankless job. Luckily, he’s got the Holy Spirit in his corner! :heaven: