Language or Form: What's More Important?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Neil_Anthony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Neil_Anthony

Guest
If you had to choose between Novus Ordo in Latin, or Missal of 1962 in English, which would you choose?
 
Neil_Anthony said:
If you had to choose between Novus Ordo in Latin, or Missal of 1962 in English, which would you choose?
Click to expand...
The holy Tridentine in the venacular, what a gross thought. To satisfy your curiosity, if I had to choose…the Tridentine by far! FYI, according to VII, the Novus Ordo is supposed to be said in Latin anyway. Form is what matters. [Edited by Moderator]
 
latinmasslover said:
The holy Tridentine in the venacular, what a gross thought. To satisfy your curiosity, if I had to choose…the Tridentine by far! FYI, according to VII, the Novus Ordo is supposed to be said in Latin anyway. Form is what matters, and the form of the novus ordo is…

You’re opinon?
Click to expand...
I don’t even know Latin. I completely understand why people wanted the vernacular. But I don’t know why they had to change the mass so much when they did it. :confused:

So I picked Tridentine in English, but I don’t regularly go to a TLM mass anyway. If they would at least do the bible readings in English, I might go.
 
Neil_Anthony said:
I don’t even know Latin. I completely understand why people wanted the vernacular. But I don’t know why they had to change the mass so much when they did it. :confused:

So I picked Tridentine in English, but I don’t regularly go to a TLM mass anyway. If they would at least do the bible readings in English, I might go.
Click to expand...
After the Gospel (Latin) the priest (usually, as it was never obligatory) recites the readings in the venacular and then does the homily, obviously in the venacular as well. A lot of people complain that it’s in Latin, but there’s really no reason to complain as there are Missals with the translation. Besides, language of the Church or language of the people, the changes haven’t encouraged Mass attendance anyway. People who didn’t care to come when it was in Latin don’t come now that it’s in the venacluar. Oh well, it’s good to know that you picked the Tridentine anyway.
 
What a horrible choice to have to make, since the Latin language is such a venerable part of our liturgical tradition. Yet, the issues are much larger than language and the form must prevail. If I had a gun to my head, I’d choose '62 in English, no doubt.
 
latinmasslover said:
After the Gospel (Latin) the priest (usually, as it was never obligatory) recites the readings in the venacular and then does the homily, obviously in the venacular as well. A lot of people complain that it’s in Latin, but there’s really no reason to complain as there are Missals with the translation. Besides, language of the Church or language of the people, the changes haven’t encouraged Mass attendance anyway. People who didn’t care to come when it was in Latin don’t come now that it’s in the venacluar. Oh well, it’s good to know that you picked the Tridentine anyway.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I have actually come to love this. It allows me to read through the readings once or twice while the priest reads or sings it in latin, and then I can hear it again during the homily.

I always remember the readings after Mass now, which wasn’t always the case when I went to the NO.
 
Dang!!! I am the only one that would prefer the NO in Latin:D

I guess that it is probably because it is already implemented.
 
The Liturgy is much more then the language it is said in. The beauty of the Tridentine Mass comes from it’s prayers and form, but a significant part of that form is the Latin language.

Indeed, a very tough choice to make. But I am given first to the Mass itself, not a language.
 
I get to go once a month to the NO in Latin and its still the NO but in Latin, so it must be the form/reverance (and the beauty of the words, too).
 
I prefer the NO period. But this Hobson’s choice says language over form.

John
 
I hope we one day have only one usage of the Roman Rite of the Holy Mass----that is the Holy Tridentine Mass with One Full Latin Mass on one mass on Sunday, with an English/(or venacular) Tridentine Mass following it on Sunday!
 
This is a good poll as it goes to the heart of the matter of the liturgical changes. While I of course would prefer the TLM in Latin, I recognize that the changes to the liturgy, such as the discarding or altering of so many prayers, along with the creation of new Eucharistic prayers, means that those changes outweigh in importance even the language.
 
I don’t know enough about the liturgical differences between the NO and the TLM…I just know that I LOVE LATIN! From what I’ve seen/read, I love the idea of ALL of us facing the tabernacle and other liturgical differences, but mainly, I just want to hear Mass said in the special language of the Church. I’ve heard it said elsewhere that many religions have a “separate” language from the culture…Judaism has Hebrew, and Islam has Arabic, for example. I guess I just feel like the Mass is so special that it should be set apart in that way. So, even though I’m embarrassed to admit it because of the rest of the thread and the poll, I’m all about Latin :o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top