EF Mass Preferers now demand "right" of all sacraments under "old form"

[MikeInVA]

I’m curious why so many EF Mass Preferers (EFMPs) are so intent…

I’m curious why you are attacking “EFMPs”? Do you have any sources (news, blog, etc) that show one parish where parishioners are lobbying to eliminate OF Masses, let alone “many”? I find posts like this to be a source of division.

Blessings,
Mike

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

So, back to the original post, Duesenberg.
Where do you think a regular average Catholic parish is going to find a priest who is schooled in offering the EF Mass?
Do you realize there is a whole group of priests, the FSSP, with their own seminary, who for the most part provide the EF Mass in the US (and probably around the world)? Do you think they are just going to flit from parish to parish, here an 11:30 Mass, there an 8:00 Mass, with no schedule or plan?

WHERE do you think the priests are going to come from otherwise? Do you think Fr. Joe Priest- Administrator has time to perfect the EF Mass?
Here’s a really nice story about the FSSP Seminary, Our Lady of Guadelupe: Notice them learning their chant at 1:40.

Gregorian chants are a hit at this Nebraska seminary

Spending 13 weeks at the top of the classical music charts, a group of priests are reinvigorating an early musical genre. Special correspondent Dennis Kellogg of NET reports from eastern Nebraska.

www.pbs.org

 

[Fuerza]

Aside from suppression of the TLM, I had to double check to make sure that I hadn’t written this myself.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

Ha ha.
Half of that sounds like Vatican II anyway.

So much for those bright ideas - - “give 'em an inch, and they’ll take a mile”.

 

[Rau]

The committee designed it. Unlike the EF, which developed naturally over centuries.

Is there a claim in that to the effect that “natural development over centuries” is inherently superior, or above another means (such as focused attention in the present and with the knowledge of the past) of defining the Mass?

 

[edwest211]

Critical thinking requires analysis. Generally, quick answers are preferred to long and detailed. Realizing how the comments of others might influence you is important. Reality is more about perception. The internet can make an issue of something without any direct knowledge. Internet Opinion Culture can morph opinions into facts.

Learning to stop the conversation with emotion words is a tactic people either learn and don’t think about or use them to sway others, but there’s usually no way of knowing.

 

[Rau]

Agreed. Trouble creeps in though if the state of mind is that one form is good and the other “lacking”.

 

[FrDavid96]

Is there a claim in that to the effect that “natural development over centuries” is inherently superior, or above another means (such as focused attention in the present and with the knowledge of the past) of defining the Mass?

Without defending the earlier post, the answer to your question is “yes.” Organic development is indeed a superior method.

1. That sound tradition may be retained, and yet the way remain open to legitimate progress careful investigation is always to be made into each part of the liturgy which is to be revised. This investigation should be theological, historical, and pastoral. Also the general laws governing the structure and meaning of the liturgy must be studied in conjunction with the experience derived from recent liturgical reforms and from the indults conceded to various places. Finally, there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.

Vatican II CONSTITUTION ON THE SACRED LITURGY SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM

 

[Brendan_64]

Agreed. Trouble creeps in though if the state of mind is that one form is good and the other “lacking”.

That cuts both ways. You can get people in Catholic parishes who view all things post-Vatican II as being superior to those of the days before Vatican II when priests turned their backs on the people during Mass and where things were dreary and unwelcoming.

 

[whyeyeman]

You know the results of both, judge for yourself. I happen to think the EF is infinitely more beautiful.

 

[stpurl]

That cuts both ways. You can get people in Catholic parishes who view all things post-Vatican II as being superior to those of the days before Vatican II when priests turned their backs on the people during Mass and where things were dreary and unwelcoming.

Don’t forget where they didn’t understand anything that was said and just daydreamed or said mindless rosaries and the priests were all ‘pray, pay, and obey’ . . .

Because truth is never as interesting as a loud and repeatedly expressed 'tale tale"!

 

[edwest211]

Pope Benedict explained this well in his book Spirit of the Liturgy, writing as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. The priest does not turn his back on the people. He is turning toward the east along with the people to the Lord. I would describe the pre-Vatican II Mass as joyous, sacred and with a great spirit of reverence. None of it was dreary or unwelcoming. I saw my neighbors there. “I’ll see you after Church” was common among friends. Today, I wonder if people know the people next to them. In some Churches, a sense of community is missing because being Catholic is for every day of the week. And outside of Church, society in general was more Christian, behaviors were kept in check in that time period. Love of God, love of neighbor.

 

[edwest211]

It is indeed a ‘tall tale.’ We loved our priests and nuns.

 

[Rau]

You know the results of both, judge for yourself. I happen to think the EF is infinitely more beautiful.

But such a personal view on something intangible (ie. Beauty) is of course right and proper to hold. That’s of no note or concern. The concern is if one ascribes a difference in substance to the two, or suggests a material deficiency of one vs the other.

 

[Rau]

That cuts both ways. You can get people in Catholic parishes who view all things post-Vatican II as being superior to those of the days before Vatican II when priests turned their backs on the people during Mass and where things were dreary and unwelcoming.

I never felt (say) the Latin mass “lacking” in the sense I meant it - that is, lacking in substance efficacy. Rather, it is when change occurs that some are inclined to look “down the nose” at the new. I don’t mind if they don’t “like it”, or don’t find it as “beautiful”, I’m only concerned if they take that to the extreme of claiming a deficiency in substance.

Frankly, what is most beautiful, or most fulfilling etc hardly seems worth a debate.

 

[Rau]

Without defending the earlier post, the answer to your question is “yes.” Organic development is indeed a superior method.

What is organic in this context? Usually the term means “from within” and in the case of the Mass , it has been that. Change requires some conscious decision in the present - and probably a committee and someone to approve what is done. Is that not organic? The text you quoted was entirely reasonable. If changes have been made contrary to those guidelines, that is not good.

 

[OraLabora]

SP liberated the traditional Ritual and Breviary, along with (under certain conditions) the Pontifical.

It liberated the traditional Ritual and the Pius X breviary (1960 version). The latter is not traditional, as it only goes back to 1910 when it abrogated the breviary from Trent.

The traditional breviary is the Monastic breviary, which still exists in post-Conciliar form and was described in the Rule of St. Benedict in the 6th century. There are of course monasteries that still use it in both its pre- and post-Conciliar forms.

 

[KMG]

Your oft-repeated statement about the Pian changes of 1910 is QUITE misleading. You make it sound as if the Breviary of 1910 was a new book.

It wasn’t.

In fact, the old books COULD still be used…with the new Psalterium. I have a separate, 1912 printing of just that slender volume, which was designed so that books could continue to be used with the new, mandatory Psalter.

I also have a 1570 Breviary. Guess what…most of the volume is IDENTICAL to 1910 (and to 1960). On many feasts, the actual Office would be virtually IDENTICAL, EVEN down to the psalms of the major hours.

 

[Brendan_64]

I never felt (say) the Latin mass “lacking” in the sense I meant it - that is, lacking in substance efficacy. Rather, it is when change occurs that some are inclined to look “down the nose” at the new. I don’t mind if they don’t “like it”, or don’t find it as “beautiful”, I’m only concerned if they take that to the extreme of claiming a deficiency in substance.

Frankly, what is most beautiful, or most fulfilling etc hardly seems worth a debate.

And again the same criticism can be made of some who can seem to see Vatican II as the beginning of some sort of springtime with all the dusty old stuff from the past washed away and a new more vibrant form of Church emerging. The criticism cuts both ways.

 

[OraLabora]

Your oft-repeated statement about the Pian changes of 1910 is QUITE misleading. You make it sound as if the Breviary of 1910 was a new book.

It wasn’t.

It was. Completely different psalter schema that abrogated the previous.

Pre-1910 Roman:

http://www.gregorianbooks.com/gregorian/www/www.kellerbook.com/PRE-19~1.HTM

Pius X psalter:

http://www.gregorianbooks.com/gregorian/www/www.kellerbook.com/1911-1~2.HTM

The Pius X psalter is far shorter. The pre-1910 Office is much closer to the monastic in quantity and psalm ordering.

The structure of the Office was the same, so too were most feasts, so the same antiphonaries could be used for the most part. But the schema was substantially different, other than some psalms were found in their traditional places. Others, not so much, for instance Compline.

A new Roman Antiphonary was issued in 1912. I have a PDF of it.