Has anyone changed there mind here?

[Ghoti]

By the way, does anyone know when this comes out???

None too soon, I’d say.

 

[ProVobis]

So you’re saying they’re “faithless”, instead?

How do you tell which is which?

… just ask them

I’m afraid to.

By the way, does anyone know when this comes out???

When the faithful say so. Right, Abbott?

 

[Ghoti]

How do you tell which is which?

Tattooed on the back of the neck.

 

[ProVobis]

Tattooed on the back of the neck.

Will they have to show this when they go up for communion?

 

[elt1956]

I always thought it was a feminist’s thing to use “their” instead of “his”. (Let’s face it, Latinists would certainly not be able to get away with numbers not agreeing.) But either way, it’s certainly better than “they’re” or “there”.

I really think the feminist thing is her or she. Just gotta have a sense of humour. Peace.

 

[dyspepsic]

Secreta. Feria Secuna Hebdomadae Sanctae:
“Haec sacrificia nos, omnipotens Deus, potenti virtute mundatos, ad suum faciant pruriores venire principium. Per Dominum.”

Go ahead and translate it if its so easy.

 

[elt1956]

stmaria;3435611:

Secreta. Feria Secuna Hebdomadae Sanctae:
“Haec sacrificia nos, omnipotens Deus, potenti virtute mundatos, ad suum faciant pruriores venire principium. Per Dominum.”

Go ahead and translate it if its so easy.

Yes, I was around too. And the Latin was easy to pronounce because I heard it every day at Mass. The translation wasn’t so hard either as we used LATIN/ENGLISH missles. Peace

 

[stmaria]

Secreta. Feria Secuna Hebdomadae Sanctae:
“Haec sacrificia nos, omnipotens Deus, potenti virtute mundatos, ad suum faciant pruriores venire principium. Per Dominum.”

Go ahead and translate it if its so easy.

Stultus est sicut stultus facit

 

[elt1956]

stmaria;3435611:

Secreta. Feria Secuna Hebdomadae Sanctae:
“Haec sacrificia nos, omnipotens Deus, potenti virtute mundatos, ad suum faciant pruriores venire principium. Per Dominum.”

Go ahead and translate it if its so easy.

Yes, I have changed my mind. I had hoped this forum would help me recharge my batteries, so to speak. From what I have read about the closed minds and hearts of those who think, “my way or the high way” regarding either the Novus Ordo, or the Latin Mass, nothing in my heart has been recharged. My apologies to all who do have an open mind regarding this issue. Good for you. You are truly following Christ. You are listening with your heart, not only your minds. There is a limit to following what one perceives as following “the Law” as personally perceived and following one’s heart. I am unsubscribing from this nit picking by those with closed minds. Go at it, if it makes you feel good. :banghead: :banghead: Peace.

 

[ghost8108]

I already have an infraction against me, so I promise to be nice…Sorry…So in other words Holy Mother the Church had it wrong for 1,959 years? Thank You Vatican 2 for setting things straight.

 

[Aragorn1]

I already have an infraction against me, so I promise to be nice…Sorry…So in other words Holy Mother the Church had it wrong for 1,959 years? Thank You Vatican 2 for setting things straight.

I’m afraid I have no clue what you mean by the Church “having it wrong for 1959 years”. Vatican II didn’t “set things straight”; it didn’t “correct” any erroneous dogma or anything because there was nothing to correct. Nor did Vatican II itself teach any errors.

 

[MrS]

I’m afraid I have no clue what you mean by the Church “having it wrong for 1959 years”. Vatican II didn’t “set things straight”; it didn’t “correct” any erroneous dogma or anything because there was nothing to correct. Nor did Vatican II itself teach any errors.

Now if only more would understand that. Don’t blame VATII for the problems caused by dissident, or irresponsible, or innovative laity and clergy ***after ***VATII. They are the ones who misinterpreted “active participation”.

.

 

[Richie_Nelson]

Now if only more would understand that. Don’t blame VATII for the problems caused by dissident, or irresponsible, or innovative laity and clergy ***after ***VATII. They are the ones who misinterpreted “active participation”.

.

Can you explain what you think correct “active participation” is? The three times I went to mass, I didn’t see anything that seemed wrong.

thanks, Richie

 

[MrS]

Can you explain what you think correct “active participation” is? The three times I went to mass, I didn’t see anything that seemed wrong.

thanks, Richie

I will try. Please bear with me as I use your own bio to perhaps better explain.

• You are listed as non-denominational.
• You have gone to a Catholic Mass three times. (curious or searching?)
• You did not see anything that seemed wrong. (as a non-d, that would be expected. Afterall, many Catholics don’t see anything wrong either)

now…

Did you even know what to “look” for or how to look for it?
How much of the Catholic Mass do you understand? Do you recognize all the Scripture used in the Mass, and how it explains Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice, and how it is being re-presented to His Church today and every day?

Those thoughts, meditations, reflections, and love for God in the heart take a lot of work. That is active participation in the Mass, and what the Mass is all about. You can refer to it as a “vertical” liturgy. More of Him means less of us… the way it should be.

now…

Did you see those in the pews expressing themselves with gestures, postures, physical activity, assuming “duties” in the sanctuary etc etc. ? Very active. Very involved. And sadly, very new (last 40 years) to the liturgy.

Many are encouraged by the priest or the bishop to declare openly that “we are church” and bring an overwhelming aire of fellowship into the liturgy. Cardinal Arinze will call this a “horizontal” liturgy… more of us (and thus less of Him by default)

That is where the problem is, and the problem becomes worse because too many don’t have a clue, don’t understand, or don’t care. Those are the minds which should be changed.

To know the vertical, and then to prefer the abuses in the horizontal, is … as the good Cardinal teaches… heretical.

Just to be clear…
My own position is that I do love the NO…when it is celebrated as intended. I do not love the NO when it is celebrated with the great number of abuses-turned-norms. I recognize it as valid, but it is not my first desire by any means.

And I also love the traditional Latin Mass.

---

Have you ever watch a good movie in another language - like St Teresa of Avila in the 25 year old Spanish version?

There are English subtitles so you know what is happening, what is being said, without being fluent in Spanish. But you have to pay attention - duh.

That is the BIG plus. Paying close attention (active participation) is awesome. You miss virtually nothing, and actually gain so much more of the story of this saint. By not doing other things like conversing, dusting, reading etc, all “participation” is focused on the movie.

Same thing with the Mass. Focus on the mystery of the Eucharist is true active participation.

The Latin could be a great boost to the casual person in the pew. Don’t need to know Latin… just let it help/force you to focus on what is really happening in the sanctuary. Use the missal… Latin with vernacular subtitles.

.

 

[GerardP]

Have you ever watch a good movie in another language - like St Teresa of Avila in the 25 year old Spanish version?

There are English subtitles so you know what is happening, what is being said, without being fluent in Spanish. But you have to pay attention - duh.

What a perfect analogy! I’m going to steal that if you don’t mind.

Amazing how millions were able to watch “the Passion of the Christ” and not be totally lost because of the languages.

 

[Aragorn1]

Did you even know what to “look” for or how to look for it? How much of the Catholic Mass do you understand? Do you recognize all the Scripture used in the Mass, and how it explains Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice, and how it is being re-presented to His Church today and every day?

Those thoughts, meditations, reflections, and love for God in the heart take a lot of work. That is active participation in the Mass, and what the Mass is all about. You can refer to it as a “vertical” liturgy. More of Him means less of us… the way it should be.

now…

Did you see those in the pews expressing themselves with gestures, postures, physical activity, assuming “duties” in the sanctuary etc etc. ? Very active. Very involved. And sadly, very new (last 40 years) to the liturgy.

Many are encouraged by the priest or the bishop to declare openly that “we are church” and bring an overwhelming aire of fellowship into the liturgy. Cardinal Arinze will call this a “horizontal” liturgy… more of us (and thus less of Him by default)

That is where the problem is, and the problem becomes worse because too many don’t have a clue, don’t understand, or don’t care. Those are the minds which should be changed.

To know the vertical, and then to prefer the abuses in the horizontal, is … as the good Cardinal teaches… heretical.

Just to be clear…
My own position is that I do love the NO…when it is celebrated as intended. I do not love the NO when it is celebrated with the great number of abuses-turned-norms. I recognize it as valid, but it is not my first desire by any means.

And I also love the traditional Latin Mass.

---

Have you ever watch a good movie in another language - like St Teresa of Avila in the 25 year old Spanish version?

There are English subtitles so you know what is happening, what is being said, without being fluent in Spanish. But you have to pay attention - duh.

That is the BIG plus. Paying close attention (active participation) is awesome. You miss virtually nothing, and actually gain so much more of the story of this saint. By not doing other things like conversing, dusting, reading etc, all “participation” is focused on the movie.

Same thing with the Mass. Focus on the mystery of the Eucharist is true active participation.

The Latin could be a great boost to the casual person in the pew. Don’t need to know Latin… just let it help/force you to focus on what is really happening in the sanctuary. Use the missal… Latin with vernacular subtitles.

You have a point when you say that a lot of emphasis, perhaps in some cases too much, is placed on the congregation in many churches today. However, I don’t agree that “active participation” can be restricted to merely interiorly contemplating the Eucharistic mystery. Neither did Pope Pius XII:

1. Besides, “so that the faithful take a more active part in divine worship, let Gregorian chant be restored to popular use in the parts proper to the people. Indeed it is very necessary that the faithful attend the sacred ceremonies not as if they were outsiders or mute onlookers, but let them fully appreciate the beauty of the liturgy and take part in the sacred ceremonies, alternating their voices with the priest and the choir, according to the prescribed norms. If, please God, this is done, it will not happen that the congregation hardly ever or only in a low murmur answer the prayers in Latin or in the vernacular.”[173] A congregation that is devoutly present at the sacrifice, in which our Savior together with His children redeemed with His sacred blood sings the nuptial hymn of His immense love, cannot keep silent, for “song befits the lover”[174] and, as the ancient saying has it, “he who sings well prays twice.” Thus the Church militant, faithful as well as clergy, joins in the hymns of the Church triumphant and with the choirs of angels, and, all together, sing a wondrous and eternal hymn of praise to the most Holy Trinity in keeping with words of the preface, “with whom our voices, too, thou wouldst bid to be admitted.”[175] (all emphases mine)

Mediator Dei

Also, I’m curious to know a few specific examples of what you call “abuses-turned-norms”?

And I agree with GerardP, that’s an excellent analogy. HOWEVER… just as many people might find it easier to pay attention to a movie in his own language (subtitiles can get kind of distracting and inconvenient sometimes), so also many people may find it difficult to pay attention to the Mass when it is said in Latin and they have to read their missals. It might make it easier for people to worship God in their own language. To again quote Pius XII,

1. The use of the Latin language, customary in a considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth. In spite of this, the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people. But the Apostolic See alone is empowered to grant this permission. It is forbidden, therefore, to take any action whatever of this nature without having requested and obtained such consent, since the sacred liturgy, as We have said, is entirely subject to the discretion and approval of the Holy See. [6]

Note that the Pope does not condemn the vernacular, despite his praise for the Latin language. He says that it “may be of much advantage for the people.” What he forbids is individuals who take it upon themselves to say the Mass in the vernacular when the rubrics, at that time, prohibited it. “[T]he Apostolic See alone is empowered to grant this permission.” Since his time the Apostolic See has granted permission.

 

[stmaria]

1. The use of the Latin language, customary in a considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth. In spite of this, **the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites **

I beleive that when Pope Pius said the use of the mother tongue in " several of the rites", he was speaking of vernacular in the rites of Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, not the Mass.

 

[MrS]

Also, I’m curious to know a few specific examples of what you call “abuses-turned-norms”?

.

I guess I consider an abuse something that is added, subtracted, or changed without a directive… in other words, invented without permission… taking the liturgy or the peripherals into ones own hands.

Then the norm would be acquired over the passage of time… the abuse goes on and on until something has to be done… usually by a bishop who simply says something like:
“… well okay , you have been doing it for quite awhile now, and I don’t want to upset the laity or my activist priests by making a correction… so from now on, it can be okay if you think it is necessary…”

The list would include
-girl altar boys
-hand holding
-new or 2nd altar in the middle of the sanctuary (or worse, in the middle of the church proper)
-less or no statues, icons, etc
-priest facing the people
-lay readers (they are not lectors)
-weak music selections
-all vernacular
-anyone doing the purification
-communion in the hand
-more standing, less kneeling
-sanctuary wreckovation…

etc

 

[Uncle_Norbert]

I guess I consider an abuse something that is added, subtracted, or changed without a directive… in other words, invented without permission…

The list would include
-girl altar boys
-hand holding
-new or 2nd altar in the middle of the sanctuary (or worse, in the middle of the church proper)
-less or no statues, icons, etc
-priest facing the people
-lay readers (they are not lectors)
-weak music selections
-all vernacular
-anyone doing the purification
-communion in the hand
-more standing, less kneeling
-sanctuary wreckovation…

etc

Wow ! You actually consider all of the above to be ABUSES at one point or another?

The more I read of this thread, the more it seems that many people are just downright miserable when they attend Mass, because they are so intent on finding wrongdoing at every turn.

 

[Aragorn1]

I beleive that when Pope Pius said the use of the mother tongue in " several of the rites", he was speaking of vernacular in the rites of Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, not the Mass.

Granting that he may have been referring here to multiple sacraments, there is still no reason to exclude the Mass from the group of “several of the rites”. Nowhere does the Pope even hint that he is referring only to the other sacraments in that paragraph. The distinction you’ve drawn is purely arbitrary. Why would the vernacular “be of much advantage to the people” in Baptism, Confirmation, and Matrimony, but not the Mass??? Besides, the change from Latin to vernacular in the other sacraments has angered some traditionalists just as much as in the Mass. At the very least, after reading Mediator Dei, you must admit that in principle there is nothing wrong with the vernacular in the liturgy.

I guess I consider an abuse something that is added, subtracted, or changed without a directive… in other words, invented without permission… taking the liturgy or the peripherals into ones own hands.

Right. In fact this is the definition of a liturgical abuse: something that goes counter to the rubrics of the liturgy as the Church has defined them.

Then the norm would be acquired over the passage of time… the abuse goes on and on until something has to be done… usually by a bishop who simply says something like:
“… well okay , you have been doing it for quite awhile now, and I don’t want to upset the laity or my activist priests by making a correction… so from now on, it can be okay if you think it is necessary…”

Again, correct. The bishop cannot introduce changes in the liturgy on his own whim or due to pressure from parishoners. All liturgical developments, modifications, etc. must be approved by the Apostolic See. (Mediator Dei, 58)

As for your list, it is very complex, containing both things that are and aren’t liturgical abuses. My comments are in red:

The list would include
-girl altar boys (Whatever one may say of its propriety, it is for the time being approved by Rome.)
-hand holding (I assume you mean during the Our Father. If so, correct.)
-new or 2nd altar in the middle of the sanctuary (Not sure, haven’t heard of this one.)
-less or no statues, icons, etc (I think this was condemned along with the Iconoclast heresy.)
-priest facing the people (It’s allowed, though I think we might see a change soon, thanks to Pope Benedict’s recent Mass ad orientem. Maybe more priests will follow his example, who knows…)
-lay readers (they are not lectors) (They’re allowed, but they may not read the Gospel. Only a priest or deacon may do that.)
-weak music selections (How do you define weak? Can you imagine if the Vatican released a document prohibiting all “weak music selections”? By what objective criterion can we determine whether a given piece is weak or not?)
-all vernacular (Nope)
-anyone doing the purification (If you mean any layman, then yes I think this isn’t allowed.)
-communion in the hand (Nope)
-more standing, less kneeling
-sanctuary wreckovation… (Whatever this means… From this one and the previous one it has become clear that you are listing your personal preferences and not an objective list of “abuses-turned-norms”.)

etc