Extraordinary Form On Ewtn July 1st

[SenorSalsa]

I would like to point out that this last week I went to Adoration twice, where the two prayers, the Tanto Ergo Sacrementum, and whatever the other one was called, were done in latin. We had a sheet that had english and latin side by side. It was not hard to sing along, even not knowing Latin, as it is a very phonetic language. And after two times, I had a fairly good understanding of what I was saying, such that when we went a third and forth time, and they were sung in English, the prayers seemed familiar, even though I had never done them in English before. And when, a few days later, I sang the tantum ergo again, in Latin, I couldnt sing it all(as I didnt have my sheet), but could do parts, and they were parts that I knew what they meant(such as the et antiquum documentum…)

PS. i realize this makes it look like I go to Adoration and Benediction a lot, but the 4 times were at a youth conference, and the last was after a daily Mass where they have perpetual adoration.

 

[FAB]

The whole Mass is in the missal, not just the parts you need to respond to, perhaps I didn’t explain that part very well. It is the language of the Church. It wasn’t just done in Latin when the EF developed, it was in Latin long before that, it was universal. You would eventually understand the whole Mass in Latin also, and immediately know what the Priest was saying also since that is in English and in Latin in the book. It really wouldn’t be difficult at all. Why not try it once and see?

Your right, Latin was the universal language and was adopted by the Church, in the same mannor that the Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s letter we all written in Greek since that was the universal language of the time. My objection to the EF goes beyond the use of Latin. It is another form of the mass, but not particularly a superior form. For those who like it, good for you since it brings you to Jesus and that particualar kind of praise lifts your soul and allows you experince Him. For me, that is what the OF form does. It allows me to experiance my savior on a much more personal level, stripping away redundant ceremony. I am gald EWTN broadcast the mass. It did give me opportunity to watch it and have a more informed opinion on it, but certainly didn’t make we want to run out and find a church that offers it on a regular basis.

Peace,
FAB

 

[GerardP]

Why should I only be restricted to the crust (knowing the responses) and not be able to enjoy hearing and understanding the entire mass (the rest of the pie)?

First, you can’t and are not meant to hear the other parts of the Mass. Particularly the consecration. That is for the priest to do and that is meant to have a shroud of secrecy and mystery over it. Also, you should be restricted because it helps to develop humility before God.

Second, Some prayers are said simultaneously as well. You are supposed to be meditating and praying about the action that is about to be performed on the altar, not trying to “keep up” with the priest or the choir.

There is nothing particulary sacred about Latin.

Yes there is. “Sacred” means to “separate” for the worship of God. Latin is the sacred language of the Church. Besides that it is precise and is very hard to obscure in ambiguity. It is also one of the three languages that was on the sign above the Cross at the Crucifixion of our Divine Lord.

It happened to be the langauge in use at the time the EF was developed. That meant it was the venacular, a language that those attending understood, imagine that!

Those attending understood the faith more than the language. Those attending the average Novus Ordo don’t understand the faith and they are losing the language more and more each day.

And there is also a curious phenomenon that is prevalent in all cultures. When a religion is taken seriously, the vernacular language that it is performed in, gradually dies and the service then becomes a sacred language. That is why the Byzantines has services in ancient Greek and not modern Greek.

The Anglicans even have their high church services in Elizabethen English. The same holds true for Eastern, Middle Eastern and Western religions.

 

[GerardP]

You won’t sell me with bi-lingual missals, I have experiance with English/Spanish . It is very distracting to try to follow the mass and jump back and forth between the two and as a result takes away from individual worship. I want to be able to listen to the Word of God, not have to read it with a language that I don’t understand being recited in the backround. Our attention should be on what is happening in the mass, not buried in a book trying to find our place.

Peace,
FAB

This is where the Protestant influence is most prevalent in the Novus Ordo. Your prime purpose is not to “Listen to the Word of God” at Mass. You are there to participate as a witness to the Sacrifice of Calvary. That is what is “happening” in the Mass. Droning on with dry replies of bad translations of watered-down prayers and gestures designed to undermine the belief of those attending is not what the Mass is supposed to be. Who needs it?

It’s amazing that peasants in the Middle Ages in all parts of the world, managed to understand the Mass but it’s just too much for our modern day world.

 

[GerardP]

My objection to the EF goes beyond the use of Latin. It is another form of the mass, but not particularly a superior form.

Sure it is. Line by line, gesture by gesture, it more clearly expresses the doctrine of the Catholic Church. The Novus Ordo by contrast is an unstable product of a committee.

The comparison between the missals is amazing. Purposeful deletions that take away essential Catholic beliefs. Reductions in gestures and repetitions that have a very symbolic meaning and now have none.

For those who like it, good for you since it brings you to Jesus and that particualar kind of praise lifts your soul and allows you experince Him.

It’s not about like or dislike. It’s about offering proper worship to God. Cain “liked” his particular sacrifice. Abel may or may not have liked his sacrifice, but he did the sacrifice that was more difficult and more pleasing to God.

For me, that is what the OF form does. It allows me to experiance my savior on a much more personal level, stripping away redundant ceremony.

You don’t experience the Savior on a personal level unless you are asked to give everything to Him. The prayers of the TLM don’t engage in a 60s’ style “Luv fest” that the Novus Ordo does. It is serious life and death and you are more likely to know your place in the scheme of things when you absorb the TLM.

How do you know what is and isn’t redundant? Why was the Kyrie (“Lord have mercy” ) changed from 9 invocations to 6? What is the relevance of 6? In the 9 in the TLM, you are honoring the Trinity thrice and simultaneously honoring the 9 choirs of Angels.

Speaking of Angels, why was St. Micheal removed from the Confiteor in the Novus Ordo? Does “one in being with the Father” mean the same thing as “consubstantial with the Father.” Why does the priest not genuflect right after the words of consecration, when Jesus (God) is physically made present on the altar? What exactly is the Mystery of Faith anyway? There are multiple “the” mystery of faiths in the Novus Ordo. Why was it taken out of the consecration, where you actually knew what it meant?

I am gald EWTN broadcast the mass. It did give me opportunity to watch it and have a more informed opinion on it, but certainly didn’t make we want to run out and find a church that offers it on a regular basis.

Only when a person realizes how shortchanged they are with the Novus Ordo do they realize the necessity of the TLM or another Apostolic Rite of equal dignity such as the Divine Liturgy of St. John or the Coptic Rite.

As someone who has watched the Novus Ordo disintegrate the faith of others and itself over more than 3 decades, this is not a “live and let live” scenario.

 

[Tommy_Joe]

Very well put GerardP.

After having grown up in the Methodist Church and converting almost forty years ago, I witnessed a gradual change in the post Vatican II Mass. It suddenly dawned on me one Sunday morning what was happening.

We were slowly turning Methodist.

With that thought in mind, I soon concluded the only part of the “Sunday service” that separated the two churches was the celebration of the Holy Eucharist,…that is until I began to read the results of various polls indicating that a very large percentage of Catholics no longer believed in the “True Presence”.
The results of those polls combined with the “I’ll stand and you can put it right here in my hand” practice of receiving Communion made me realize just how “Protestant” everything had become.

Eighteen months ago I discovered a nearby chapel that was being supported by the FSSP and attended. Granted; it took me a few months to become familiar with the Mass, but with the help a small missal printed in 1939 which included “personal” prayers that could be said while the Celebrant was saying the silent prayers I soon fell in love with the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

I only wish more Catholics would invest the little time it takes to learn the EF and do it with an open mind. They’re missing so much.

I applaud EWTN for not only broadcasting the Mass last week, but also for allowing us to watch the FSSP Ordinations last month.

 

[ethelzguy]

As someone who has watched the Novus Ordo disintegrate the faith of others and itself over more than 3 decades, this is not a “live and let live” scenario.

Or perhaps, the Holy Spirit has lead us away from observation to participation.

 

[Image_of_God]

Or perhaps, the Holy Spirit has lead us away from observation to participation.

Or perhaps active participation does not necessarily always mean physical participation. And perhaps sobriety and solemnity are virtues to the liturgy rather than obstacles to it.
If the OF was celebrated as it was originally written, there would still be great difference between the EF and the OF, but not *as *much as there are now.

Of course singing is good and should be encouraged in liturgy, I think, for singing is a prayer.

 

[ReConverted]

GerardP, you are knockin’ the ball outta the park! :clapping: :tiphat:

God bless you!

 

[LilyM]

This is where the Protestant influence is most prevalent in the Novus Ordo. Your prime purpose is not to “Listen to the Word of God” at Mass. You are there to participate as a witness to the Sacrifice of Calvary. That is what is “happening” in the Mass. Droning on with dry replies of bad translations of watered-down prayers and gestures designed to undermine the belief of those attending is not what the Mass is supposed to be. Who needs it?

It’s amazing that peasants in the Middle Ages in all parts of the world, managed to understand the Mass but it’s just too much for our modern day world.

They understood the Mass so well that, as St Bernardine of Siena pointed out, priests would say the ‘Ave Maria’ over the host instead of the words of consecration and no-one - not even the priest! - be any the wiser until they discussed it with other priests.

At least if MY NO priest says anything other than ‘this is my body … this is my blood’ over the Host I know about it, and know that it’s invalid!

 

[GerardP]

Or perhaps, the Holy Spirit has lead us away from observation to participation.

The fruits simply aren’t there. And it’s not just my opinion, In 2004 Cardinal Ratzinger described himself as “sorrowing amidst the Liturgical ruins” Everything he’d hoped for prior to the Council didn’t happen and everything he feared did happen. Now, he’s got to try and clean it up without scandalizing people, without driving too many away and re-catechize almost the whole Church. All with hidden enemies in his midst. “Pray for me that I may not flee for fear of the wolves.”

 

[GerardP]

They understood the Mass so well that, as St Bernardine of Siena pointed out, priests would say the ‘Ave Maria’ over the host instead of the words of consecration and no-one - not even the priest! - be any the wiser until they discussed it with other priests.

At least if MY NO priest says anything other than ‘this is my body … this is my blood’ over the Host I know about it, and know that it’s invalid!

Can you source the St. Bernardine quote?

Secondly, don’t be in such a rush to be so haughty. The majority of vernacular translations of the consecration in the Novus Ordo are lies. He did not say, “…which will be shed for you and for all…” No bible, no Hebrew or Aramaic scholar of repute buys into the idea promoted by Protestant Joachim Jeremiah that “all and many” are interchangeable. But the translators of the Novus Ordo did.

Thirdly, How do you know that they are using the proper matter in the Novus Ordo? Fr. Corapi on EWTN in his catechism series was talking about all of the invalid communions in the Church (Novus Ordo) because of “recipes” that the parish community had incorporated into “their” liturgy. I myself have tasted some doubtful matter in the Novus Ordo.

Finally, you are describing an error in form, not a total misperception of the point of the whole Liturgy.

 

[JuanCarlos]

Or perhaps, the Holy Spirit has lead us away from observation to participation.

To suggest that Catholics could only observe the Mass before 1965 is to say the Church had it wrong for all those centuries.

I’ve ben attending the EF for only a year and I can now follow along without a missal. I know most of the prayers by heart, all of the responses, and exactly what the priest is doing at each moment. I do not think that I am just “watching” when I attend- when the Priest elevates the Body of Christ after about 10 minutes of dead silence and the bells are ringing my soul is truly in Heaven. It does not take any effort to see that Christ is truly present on the altar.

 

[mullenpm]

I thought this Extraordinary Mass was beautiful and I have ordered a DVD from EWTN; I want to watch it through beginning to end.

I was also curious about the interviews with the Sisters; perhaps he was giving them his Blessing and prayer cards of his first Solemn Mass.

 

[sanblasboy13]

It was truly awesome. And God bless Fr. Buckley for the wonderful, courageous sermon he gave.

It was like " IN YOUR FACE SO CALLED “CATHOLICS” lol
Beautiful I loved it. The Mass was just beautiful. People are missing out on over 2,000 years of history here. THE Mass of the Saints indeed!

 

[PrayforMallory]

Yup! I’m a convert and from Anglicanism, so it was closer than many other churches but I still spent a number of months when I first came into the Church spending all of Mass looking at the missal (and I’m one that prefers to not use a missal, if possible). I’m a little apprehensive about going to a TLM for this reason (in this diocese it doesn’t seem it will be soon), but I went to a parish that had a monthly NO in Latin and although I got lost the first couple times it then became no problem. The extreme reverence and sacredness, along with it being so very different than anything in our secular lives makes it something to which I really look forward!

You don’t need a missal after a while. You memorize the prayers that don’t change. Also, for the parts that do change, you can print out an online missal and study those parts the night before, or read them in the pew before mass.

Or you can pray your own private prayers, uniting your intentions to the priest, or you can follow along with a missal.

It just takes time. Like Lily said, it was hard for me to get the hang out the NO when I converted. Same with TLM.

 

[PrayforMallory]

Very well put GerardP.

After having grown up in the Methodist Church and converting almost forty years ago, I witnessed a gradual change in the post Vatican II Mass. It suddenly dawned on me one Sunday morning what was happening.

We were slowly turning Methodist.

With that thought in mind, I soon concluded the only part of the “Sunday service” that separated the two churches was the celebration of the Holy Eucharist,…that is until I began to read the results of various polls indicating that a very large percentage of Catholics no longer believed in the “True Presence”.
The results of those polls combined with the “I’ll stand and you can put it right here in my hand” practice of receiving Communion made me realize just how “Protestant” everything had become.

Eighteen months ago I discovered a nearby chapel that was being supported by the FSSP and attended. Granted; it took me a few months to become familiar with the Mass, but with the help a small missal printed in 1939 which included “personal” prayers that could be said while the Celebrant was saying the silent prayers I soon fell in love with the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

I only wish more Catholics would invest the little time it takes to learn the EF and do it with an open mind. They’re missing so much.

I applaud EWTN for not only broadcasting the Mass last week, but also for allowing us to watch the FSSP Ordinations last month.

Congratulations. You’ve written what is probably the most important post on this whole website.

Can you imagine my consternation, when I converted from the pentecostalism, only to eventually find out that there were “Catholics” that basically did the same things?

The idea of personal prayer during the TLM is great. It’s also permissible for everyone. Why is it so hard to say your own personal prayers during the liturgy?

Is the priesthood even necessary anymore?

 

[PrayforMallory]

The fruits simply aren’t there. And it’s not just my opinion, In 2004 Cardinal Ratzinger described himself as “sorrowing amidst the Liturgical ruins” Everything he’d hoped for prior to the Council didn’t happen and everything he feared did happen. Now, he’s got to try and clean it up without scandalizing people, without driving too many away and re-catechize almost the whole Church. All with hidden enemies in his midst. “Pray for me that I may not flee for fear of the wolves.”

Amen amen.

Unfortunately for some the Magisterium ended upon the death of the late Pope John Paul II.

People think we just come to this stuff on our own. In reality, a lot of us traditionalists who are new to tradition have done so at the urging of the Holy Father’s writings.

 

[Nicholas82]

You won’t sell me with bi-lingual missals, I have experiance with English/Spanish . It is very distracting to try to follow the mass and jump back and forth between the two and as a result takes away from individual worship. I want to be able to listen to the Word of God, not have to read it with a language that I don’t understand being recited in the backround. Our attention should be on what is happening in the mass, not buried in a book trying to find our place.

Peace,
FAB

You’re insulting your own intelligence as well as everyone else’s with comments like that. My Grandmother was no linguist but made the effort to not only understand the Latin but assimilate it so that the prayers was her own words… you’re right in that if you can only translate every word that is said into your own language before understanding it you will have great difficulty understanding. That is a terrible way to learn a language. Instead, try not to translate every word eg. Patris=Father, but knowing that Patris means father, speak the language! Sit down and study the prayers- you already know the English, dissect the Latin so that you know what each word means, and begin to say it with feeling as you would in your own tongue! After a while doing that you will be able to visualize in your mind’s eye what Patris and Filii and Spuritus Sancti mean without having to say the prayer twice in your head as it were,the words will correspond to the objects, actions, and concepts naturally. That’s the only way to become fluent in any language is to learn to think in it.

Once you do that you won’t need to bury your face in a book trying to find your place, you will know what is going on and when it is going on, the prayers and responses. Don’t think that just because you see someone following along in a book that they would not be able to otherwise, some people just like to read along. I mean if you can’t be bothered to learn such a small bit of another language for your faith, what can you be bothered to do??

You could just as well learn the cues and when the prayers are said in Latin you could say them in English as you learn, nobody would crucify you for it or probably even notice it. Your prayers would be the same prayers being said by everyone.

 

[ethelzguy]

To suggest that Catholics could only observe the Mass before 1965 is to say the Church had it wrong for all those centuries.

In what way does that statement say the Church was “wrong”?

It is totally within the purview of the Church to reconsider how we celebrate the Mass.