Is there a Tridentine form that is said in vernacular?

[Darnok]

I’m not just upset with Pope Whatsizname for using his God-given authority to change the Mass from Latin to whatever ‘vulgar’ tongues, I’m also pissed at whoever changed it INTO Latin from the Aramaic and/or Greek that the Apostles spoke!!! Anti-traditionalists!!!

Interesting position to take. As I understand the history of the Liturgy, (someone please correct me if I’m wrong) there has been a standardized template dating back to before 500AD, but different regions and religious orders “filled in this template” with different specifics. As part of the Holy See’s response to the Protestant Reformation (around 1000 years later), it came out with the first truly standardized Mass. Even the Novus Ordo (post-Vatican II Mass) follows this template. The whole debate is over specific words/ prayers.

To this day, any document which comes out of the Holy See (Novus Ordo and its revisions included) are first written in Latin and then translated into the several vernaculars. Some people argue for using the untranslated Latin NO.

Not specific to this thread, but I just want to express my :twocents: :
I don’t know what ultra-die-hard Catholics would say about my position. I personally am not into nit-picking the mass down to the last letter. While I’m not big on a couple of abuses with the N.O., I am for the most part happy with it (at least the way it’s celebrated at my parish). I am much happier meditating on the spirituality which the authors intended to teach rather than pulling out a Latin-English dictionary. In debates I’ve seen at the most heated, I’ve thought “this is one example supporting why the Church says the purest form of prayer has no words.”
I do hope I haven’t offended anyone, it’s just that’s my position. I personally see it as a matter of personal choice or calling (and availability) as to which mass to attend.

 

[jfallaw]

Interesting position to take. As I understand the history of the Liturgy, (someone please correct me if I’m wrong) there has been a standardized template dating back to before 500AD, but different regions and religious orders “filled in this template” with different specifics. As part of the Holy See’s response to the Protestant Reformation (around 1000 years later), it came out with the first truly standardized Mass. Even the Novus Ordo (post-Vatican II Mass) follows this template. The whole debate is over specific words/ prayers.

To this day, any document which comes out of the Holy See (Novus Ordo and its revisions included) are first written in Latin and then translated into the several vernaculars. Some people argue for using the untranslated Latin NO.

Not specific to this thread, but I just want to express my :twocents: :
I don’t know what ultra-die-hard Catholics would say about my position. I personally am not into nit-picking the mass down to the last letter. While I’m not big on a couple of abuses with the N.O., I am for the most part happy with it (at least the way it’s celebrated at my parish). I am much happier meditating on the spirituality which the authors intended to teach rather than pulling out a Latin-English dictionary. In debates I’ve seen at the most heated, I’ve thought “this is one example supporting why the Church says the purest form of prayer has no words.”
I do hope I haven’t offended anyone, it’s just that’s my position. I personally see it as a matter of personal choice or calling (and availability) as to which mass to attend.

Maybe I’ve just been away from the Church too long. I honestly don’t remember the old Mass, although I do remember the Latin and not knowing what was being said/sung. I am uncomfortable with how the music has become so horrible at my parish (they even use drums!) but I see no reason why the priest being turned around or the whozit being said before the Whatzit and not the other way around is such a huge deal to some people? Maybe there is more to it than that but still it’s not like there was an infallible Papal pronouncement saying that you have to shake hands now at the sign of peace or whatever.

 

[flyersfan1088]

How are you a participant at a Pauline Mass as opposed to the Traditional Mass? You say you say your own prayers at home. That is a very telling statement. If you don’t pray during the Mass what do you really do since the Mass itself is a prayer?. Standing, singing sitting and parroting responses could be termed participation, true. But equally so or even more so would be uniting yourself with the Priest and saying the prayers along with him, which is what most of us did and probably still do in the Traditional Mass. I have never been a spectator at one.

And I am far from unique in that regard. Sounds like you’ve been listening to some progressive propaganda my friend.

In trying to pin down where I’m coming from, you have missed the mark by a mile. I am not progressive. I do not wish to change the TLM.
I DO pray at Mass. In your previous post you made a statement that sounded as if you were saying your own prayers, in your own world. Forgive me if I was wrong. So please don’t lecture me on what I should be doing during Mass.
I have never been to a TLM. I just know that I’m getting sick and tired of the irreverence that I witness every week at the NO. If and when the TLM is offered in my area, I will go at least once. I have no idea if I will like it.
I just asked a simple question that I thought would receive a simple answer.