Do you prefer the OF or EF of Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Go read John XXIII’s Veterum Sapientia. He handled this thread’s subject better than anyone.
 
So for all those centuries when the Mass was in Latin the people weren’t consciously, actively, and fruitfully participating? Balderdash. And simply because today the liturgy is in ‘the vernacular’ means that the faithful ARE 'consciously, actively, and fruitfully participating? Again, balderdash.

One can fully participate in a Latin Mass even if one is not ‘fluent’ in Latin (that is what the liturgy was designed for, and why missals are used). . .and one can equally ‘not fully participate or even be mostly aware’ of an OF Mass in which every vernacular word is theoretically perfectly understood, by an ‘attendee’ who chooses to pay little or no attention.
 
stpurl said:
So for all those centuries when the Mass was in Latin the people weren’t consciously, actively, and fruitfully participating?
Click to expand...
Did they not understand and speak Latin, in most of the Catholic Church?
 
Last edited:
They were participating. You seem to think that they weren’t, you tell me.
 
I enjoy attending my hippie OF Mass. It suits me 🤓 I have attended the EF Mass; however, there wasn’t enough organ music for me! Nothing like a stirring rendition of Let There Be Peace On Earth 🌏
 
Last edited:
I think a few here are genuinely misunderstanding the entire point of my post of questions. 🤯
 
I think you over estimate how much a commoner would have understood Latin. I doubt an Englishman in 1600 spoke or understood anymore Latin than the average American today.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
I think you over estimate how much a commoner would have understood Latin
Click to expand...
By hearing, understanding, and speaking it liturgically pre-V2…? I could be wrong, but I would presume most commoners would have understood Latin in the context of the liturgy.
 
I personally believe that God speaks all languages and doesn’t really fault us if we don’t speak Latin learn Latin, or hear the Mass in Latin. Just as He would not fault us for it not being in Aramaic.

Things evolve. It’s people who are reluctant to adapt. The prayers are the same, the Scripture is the same. The sacrifice is the same.’

These threads never amount to anything but a show of hands.
Unsubscribing. I’m on the way to daily Mass.
In English.
 
Last edited:
Wait, you think that the average person in let’s say Europe from AD 800 (Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire) to AD 1536 (Henry VIII and the dissolution of the monasteries, and the "new religion’ of protestantism) was speaking Latin, if not reading and writing?

Yes, the average person could understand many Latin words, especially in countries like France and what became Italy, and in Spain, because of the many cognates. But did they SPEAK Latin, as in while tilling the soil greeting the passersby with “Ave, Petrus. Quo vadis?” NOT SO.

You might want to do a little reading up on the history of Christianity especially with regard to Europe approximately 500 -1500 AD.
 
stpurl said:
Wait, you think that the average person in let’s say Europe from AD 800 (Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire) to AD 1536 (Henry VIII and the dissolution of the monasteries, and the "new religion’ of protestantism) was speaking Latin, if not reading and writing?
Click to expand...
Who said anything about reading and writing?
stpurl said:
Yes, the average person could understand many Latin words
Click to expand...
Exactly! How much more in the Liturgy?
 
Last edited:
“Commoners” i.e. Catholics would certainly have memorized the Pater, Ave, Credo, and the few responses of the Mass. They would have an understanding of the Mass itself through the teachings of their parish priests or any monks, itinerant friars, etc as well as their own lord or the prime landowner and his family, and any possible schooling available (which differed according to country and century).
 
I said, SPEAKING if not reading and writing, meaning to make it clear that the average person was not ‘literate’.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top