Latin and the Novus Ordo

[JKirkLVNV]

The problem today in many places is not leaving people alone. It’s the mentality that you have to have everything people do at Mass codified by rubrics, “norms”, posture edicts, etc.

The liturgical books before the Council didn’t codify that sort of thing…not, as some think, because the Church didn’t care about the assembly, but because in her wisdom the Church realized every single thing doesn’t need to be documented, rubricized, normified, or what have you. And guess what? People survived, the Church thrived, attendance and vocations were high.

Now we have some dioceses where edicts are issued about how many inches from your chest you should hold your hands to receive Communion.

Agreed, that’s overkill in terms of uniformity.

 

[papaspicy]

I’ve never seen the point of a Latin Novus Ordo. If you are going to use an entirely new and fabricated liturgy anyway, why not “go all the way” and have it be in the vernacular, with communion in the hand, extraordinary ministers galore, and altar girls.

For those who prefer new coke, they can have new coke. And those who like classic should have classic. But let’s not create a third, basically hybrid option.

There should be no moderate liturgy. Have it reactionary or progessive, but be you latin-novus-ordo and I shall vomit thee out of my mouth…

One of the reasons for having a Latin Novus Ordo is that Latin is the international language of the Church. When I go to mass at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, I am able to hear the mass in a language I understand (somewhat), and at the same time so are people from Nepal, New Zealand, Paraguay, Tanzania, etc. Likewise, when the mass is broadcast on international radio or tv, (even if this doesn’t count), the mass is available to the whole world. So there are times when a Latin version of the Novus Ordo are certainly called for and necessary. And if the Pope is willing to say the Novus Ordo in Latin, it is good enough for me.

 

[palmas85]

I don’t agree with you, but then you knew that, dear brother in Christ. In particular, I don’t see how the people making the responses detracts from the God-centeredness of the Mass. I hope there’s no whooping and hollering, but I think we SHOULD make the responses. Certainly, there are people who have over-emphasized the vertical in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and our pastor uses that term to refer to the Mass), but that’s an abuse that will hopefully die away. As for the placement of the altar, that’s not much of an issue, IMO, that cannot be settled by simply having the priest celebrate ad orientum (because I don’t think shifting the altar five or ten feet is going to matter one whit). Thankfully, I’ve never been subjected to such a sermon (though I had to sit through a lay sermon once, then the priest paraphrased the entire Mass, but that was in California and I’m starting to think there’s something in the water they serve at the seminaries out there).
But no, I disagree that the NO Mass is, of its nature, inherently “non-vertical,” or not God-centered.

Well Kirk old man, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree then. The vertical worship idea is not an abuse, but has been trumpted by numerous modern thinking theologians since the 50’s at least and is firmly a part of the new Liturgy and the new theology. In fact, it has not gone far enough in the minds of many.

As to the responses, those made in a Dialogue Mass, always a Low Mass by the way, were allowed, encouraged and followed basically three different types. None had the number of responses that we have now and in only one situation was the Lords Prayer said and that had to be in Latin. No elaborate hand gestures were permitted during the aforementioned responses either.

Altar placement alas, has not kept up with what was envisioned and desired by ,again, most of the modern thinkers. The altar was to be in the midst of the people, ideally apart from the sanctuary completely, to more effectively transmit the idea of a communal meal, and again de-emphasize the Sacrifice, which is so offensive to our separated brethren. , About the only group that has really taken that one to heart are the Neocatacumanals.

As I have said before, I am always glad when someone, anyone actually, does remember that the Mass is a sacrifice.

But overall things do appear to be getting a bit closer to orthodoxy, in some places anyway, although it does appear that I may have been correct in my assumption that the Vatican was not going to issue a general indult for the Traditional Mass. I never expected that to happen. Hoping but realistically, wasn’t holding my breath…

Hope you are doing fine Kirk and further hope that Lost Wages is treating you and yours well. You remain in my prayers always, Kirk, while I don’t always agree with you, there is no doubt as to your commitment, your sincerity, your faith and your love for Christ and the Church.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Well Kirk old man, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree then. The vertical worship idea is not an abuse, but has been trumpted by numerous modern thinking theologians since the 50’s at least and is firmly a part of the new Liturgy and the new theology. In fact, it has not gone far enough in the minds of many.

As to the responses, those made in a Dialogue Mass, always a Low Mass by the way, were allowed, encouraged and followed basically three different types. None had the number of responses that we have now and in only one situation was the Lords Prayer said and that had to be in Latin. No elaborate hand gestures were permitted during the aforementioned responses either.

Altar placement alas, has not kept up with what was envisioned and desired by ,again, most of the modern thinkers. The altar was to be in the midst of the people, ideally apart from the sanctuary completely, to more effectively transmit the idea of a communal meal, and again de-emphasize the Sacrifice, which is so offensive to our separated brethren. , About the only group that has really taken that one to heart are the Neocatacumanals.

As I have said before, I am always glad when someone, anyone actually, does remember that the Mass is a sacrifice.

But overall things do appear to be getting a bit closer to orthodoxy, in some places anyway, although it does appear that I may have been correct in my assumption that the Vatican was not going to issue a general indult for the Traditional Mass. I never expected that to happen. Hoping but realistically, wasn’t holding my breath…

Hope you are doing fine Kirk and further hope that Lost Wages is treating you and yours well. You remain in my prayers always, Kirk, while I don’t always agree with you, there is no doubt as to your commitment, your sincerity, your faith and your love for Christ and the Church.

Thanks, Palmas, right back at you (sniff, wiping away big tear, sending a Hail Mary your way).

Now, you can help me, if you will, as it seems a bit much to start a whole different thread. I’m trying to learn the prayers in Latin, and I find I’m a bit confused. On the Adoremus site, the Ave has this: “et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Jesus.”

Yet, when we sing the Ave Maria, in all of its various arrangements and compositions, we sing it:

“et benedictus fructus ventris tui,* Jesu,” *with no “s” on the end.

Which is correct? Someone should ask to start a Latin FORUM, not just a thread, where people can go and ask questions.

 

[wynd]

Thank you for that caveat of “usually.” I love the NO in the vernacular (but the music available is almost always bad) and want to keep it. I certainly don’t want anything “people centered.”

I had you in mind when I put it in there

Now, a question for Kirk and palmas85. Isn’t “vertical” referring to a God/man relationship and “horizontal” referring to a man/man relationship? You’ve referred to the former as an abuse. Who has it backwards, you two or I?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

I’m very proud of our new Holy Father, Pope Benedict, for implementing changes in the Liturgy already such as eradicating abuses like extradordinary ministers performing that tasks of priests and mistranslations within the English Mass.

Latin is THE NORM for the NO since it is the norm for the Western Church. The USCCB was given an indult to use the vernacular. I would also like to clarify that the British bishops use a different translation of the Mass – so the ‘English’ Mass is not the same as the American… and the Canadian is different too (they use the NRSV-CE and we use the NAB, for instance).

 

[wynd]

Latin is THE NORM for the NO since it is the norm for the Western Church. The USCCB was given an indult to use the vernacular. I would also like to clarify that the British bishops use a different translation of the Mass – so the ‘English’ Mass is not the same as the American… and the Canadian is different too (they use the NRSV-CE and we use the NAB, for instance).

Do they use “And also with you” too?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Kirk, the Pauline Rite is by design people centered. Everything from the constant standing and sitting, responses constantly, lay people involved in each and every action from start to finish, the sign of Peace??

The sign of peace has morphed from a kiss in ancient times to a handshake or a hug in modern times. The sign of peace is definitely an ancient element being restored to the Liturgy, not a modernist invention.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I had you in mind when I put it in there

Now, a question for Kirk and palmas85. Isn’t “vertical” referring to a God/man relationship and “horizontal” referring to a man/man relationship? You’ve referred to the former as an abuse. Who has it backwards, you two or I?

Really? I don’t think of the vertical as an abuse at all and I would bet my pension that Palmas doesn’t, either. Maybe one of us had a slip of the fingers on the keyboard. Which post is it?

 

[rwoehmke]

I get confused when we start refering to a Mass being horizontal OR vertical. I have been under the impression that the intent of the NO Mass was to bring us back to the notion that the Mass was BOTH horizontal and vertical at one time. Also to restore the iconcept that the Mass was both a sacrifice AND a communal meal. Further the Liturgy of the Word was emphasized to show the true presence of Jesus in his Word which was a concept that had been lost by the emphasis on the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Hence Altar and Ambo received equality of placement in the sanctuary. Now a days it seems I hear people plumping for the either or model and not the both and model. The communal meal business seems to be emphasized, at least in my neck of the woods, by women with their new masters of theology degrees, whereas many of us old timers seem to want to emphasize only the aspects of vertical and sacrifice. What happened to what I once thought were good objectives? I keep thinking of the comment by Jesus that “man was not made for the sabbath, but the sabbath for man” so in my opinion it is not so much that God needs our praise and worship, but that it is our need to give such to him.

 

[Walking_Home]

Really? I don’t think of the vertical as an abuse at all and I would bet my pension that Palmas doesn’t, either. Maybe one of us had a slip of the fingers on the keyboard. Which post is it?

---

It was in your response to Palmas85—in post 15.

Quote=JKirkLVNV
I don’t agree with you, but then you knew that, dear brother in Christ. In particular, I don’t see how the people making the responses detracts from the God-centeredness of the Mass. I hope there’s no whooping and hollering, but I think we SHOULD make the responses. Certainly, there are people who have over-emphasized the vertical in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and our pastor uses that term to refer to the Mass), but that’s an abuse that will hopefully die away. As for the placement of the altar, that’s not much of an issue, IMO, that cannot be settled by simply having the priest celebrate ad orientum (because I don’t think shifting the altar five or ten feet is going to matter one whit). Thankfully, I’ve never…

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

As to the responses, those made in a Dialogue Mass, always a Low Mass by the way, were allowed, encouraged and followed basically three different types. None had the number of responses that we have now and in only one situation was the Lords Prayer said and that had to be in Latin. No elaborate hand gestures were permitted during the aforementioned responses either.

Pax tecum!

I’ve been to five High Masses that were dialogue Masses. Three were Dominican Rite and two were Tridentine Rite. One of the TLMs was done by the FSSP, and the other by Bishop Basil Meeking. Both were dialogue Masses, with the people giving the responses with the servers and choir.

In Christ,
Rand

 

[JKirkLVNV]

---

It was in your response to Palmas85—in post 15.

Quote=JKirkLVNV
I don’t agree with you, but then you knew that, dear brother in Christ. In particular, I don’t see how the people making the responses detracts from the God-centeredness of the Mass. I hope there’s no whooping and hollering, but I think we SHOULD make the responses. Certainly, there are people who have over-emphasized the vertical in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and our pastor uses that term to refer to the Mass), but that’s an abuse that will hopefully die away. As for the placement of the altar, that’s not much of an issue, IMO, that cannot be settled by simply having the priest celebrate ad orientum (because I don’t think shifting the altar five or ten feet is going to matter one whit). Thankfully, I’ve never…

Good to know someone is watching out for my offenses.

Let’s call an overly “vertical” Mass a misemphasis, then.