J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
From the Sacrosanctum Concilium:
I took the advice of some of my friends and am reading…
Your view is in contradiction to the Church.
- Status
Your view is in contradiction to the Church.
P
palmas85
Guest
Joe Gloor:
You should read more. From the current edition of the GIRM. To infer the mass is not a sacrifice is also in contradiction to the church.
- The sacrificial nature of the Mass was solemnly proclaimed by the Council of Trent in agreement with the whole tradition of the Church.[1] Vatican Council II reaffirmed this teaching in these significant words: “At the Last Supper our Savior instituted the eucharistic sacrifice of his body and blood. He did this in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the centuries until he should come again and in this way to entrust to his beloved Bride, the Church, a memorial of his death and resurrection.”[2] The Council’s teaching is expressed constantly in the formularies of the Mass. This teaching, in the concise words of the Leonine Sacramentary, is that “the work of our redemption is carried out whenever we celebrate the memory of this sacrifice”;[3] it is aptly and accurately brought out in the eucharistic prayers.** At the anamnesis or memorial, the priest, addressing God in the name of all the people, offers in thanksgiving the holy and living sacrifice: the Church’s offering and the Victim whose death has reconciled us with God**.[4]** The priest also prays that the body and blood of Christ may be a sacrifice acceptable to the Father, bringing salvation to the whole world.[5] In this new Missal, then, the Church’s rule of prayer () corresponds to its constant rule of faith **(). **This rule of faith instructs us that the sacrifice of the cross and its sacramental renewal in the Mass, which Christ instituted at the Last Supper and commanded his apostles to do in his memory, are one and the same, differing only in the manner of offering and that consequently the Mass is at once a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, of reconciliation and expiation.
**
This rather clearly indicates that the Mass is NOT the same as a Protestant Worship Service which is what I think the poster you were replying to meant to say. It also clearly points out that the Mass is NOT just a remembrance of the Lords Supper as many today apparently believe.
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
Thanks for the advice palmas85, I’m reading as much as I can.
I never inferred that! Nor would I ever.
palmas85:
He said “the Mass isn’t a worship service” so I understand what you mean, based on his back-ground as a former Evangelical.
Nevertheless, he was saying that it was one thing and not the other, when, in fact, it is both Worship and the representation of Christ’s Sacrifice.
palmas85 said:
I never inferred that! Nor would I ever.
You understood him differently than I did, then.
He said “the Mass isn’t a worship service” so I understand what you mean, based on his back-ground as a former Evangelical.
Nevertheless, he was saying that it was one thing and not the other, when, in fact, it is both Worship and the representation of Christ’s Sacrifice.
P
palmas85
Guest
The Mass is and always was primarily a sacrifice, the unbloody re-presentation of Christs death at Calvary. Protestants always hated and reviled that aspect of it and still do. It is one of the biggest issues that hinder ecumenical dialogue.
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
It is that, and so much more!
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
Yes, we need to pray for our Protestant bretheren that God will reveal to them the fullness and truth of the Catholic Faith.
I
Ignatius
Guest
Thanks be to God.
C
Confiteor
Guest
Joe Gloor:
I have a question for you…I understand that you do not favor the “Latin Mass.” However, would you have a problem with Latin being used for the Sanctus, Pater Noster, Agnus Dei, and Latin hymns/chant on a regular basis? Some people want to go back to the TLM because of 1) liturgical abuses & 2) failure of their parish to retain some Latin in the ordinary parts of the Mass (which is part what Sacrosanctum Concilium calls for). I wonder if this might satisfy some of us who might otherwise be happy with a NO Mass primarily in English (with a proper translation of course).
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
I know the Sanctus and Agnus Dei prayers by heart so I wouldn’t have a problem with it, but I know a lot of people don’t know them anymore (if ever they did) So for me, personally, no I wouldn’t be all that upset. But for those who don’t know the Latin it would be bad.
As far as Latin hymns/chant I just don’t think people will sing it. It’s hard enough to get them to sing in English, much less in Latin. And there’s usually no translation unless it’s the next verse, in which case you end up repeating yourself.
And that’s been my primary argument against putting Latin back into the Mass. The people don’t know it and it’s reintroduction without a lot of back-ground work will just estrange them. And all this, to my mind, with no good purpose or result.
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Joe Gloor:
I came to my parish a year ago. I had never known the Latin and actually never remember hearing it. I only knew “Kyrie” in Greek because of the pop song.
My daughters were singing the responses in two weeks. I got some right away. Some like the Gloria, I still have to look but geez, they are not that hard and people are not that dumb. Like I said anyone who has gone to mass since childhood knows what all of it means. I HOPE no one is sitting in mass not paying attention. If they don’t, it’s written right there in English.
Come ON, how stupid do you think Catholics are??
Seriously, you seem to make people out to be stupid.
I came to my parish a year ago. I had never known the Latin and actually never remember hearing it. I only knew “Kyrie” in Greek because of the pop song.
My daughters were singing the responses in two weeks. I got some right away. Some like the Gloria, I still have to look but geez, they are not that hard and people are not that dumb. Like I said anyone who has gone to mass since childhood knows what all of it means. I HOPE no one is sitting in mass not paying attention. If they don’t, it’s written right there in English.
Come ON, how stupid do you think Catholics are??
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
I’m not saying they ‘couldn’t’ learn it.
But why?
I think they’re as stupid as I am, if not less.
I’m not saying they ‘couldn’t’ learn it.
But why?
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Joe Gloor:
My grandmother NEVER went past eighth grade, yet she could tell us what some words meant by breaking them down. She learned it at Church.
The question is not why but why not.
Because it gives us the root words of so many English words. It gives our children a leg up on those who don’t know it.
My grandmother NEVER went past eighth grade, yet she could tell us what some words meant by breaking them down. She learned it at Church.
The question is not why but why not.
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
If it’s simply a background in etymology, that isn’t one of the purposes of the Mass or the Church.
My question is still ‘why?’.
If it’s simply a background in etymology, that isn’t one of the purposes of the Mass or the Church.
C
Confiteor
Guest
Joe Gloor:
As far as the music, chant can be much easier for us average mortals to sing. And it is beautiful and part of the Catholic culture that binds us to the universal Church and beyond since it originated with the Hebrew cantors. The modern music I hear can be wonderful but often is not. Nor am I entirely opposed to modern instruments like the guitar (the drums do turn me off though the “teen” Mass might be a place for them). So often it has a different tempo for every verse and is virtually unsingable. Plus the lyrics often take an unCatholic turn and help to ensure that the people in the pews are confused doctrinally. Then you have the merely banal like the “We are goin’ to see the King” and “We are Marching.” I’ll take “Salve Regina”, "O Sanctissima, " or “Attende, Domine” in a heartbeat, even if I might need a little practice with the Latin pronunciation. To me, it is worth the effort.
It is the mind of the Church (even post VII as the documents and papal statements have illustrated) that we know some of those prayers (even the Credo) in Latin. The reason people don’t know them is they don’t hear them regularly enough. People at my parish seem to have trouble with the Confiteor in English because the priests don’t often use that version of the penitential rite.
As far as the music, chant can be much easier for us average mortals to sing. And it is beautiful and part of the Catholic culture that binds us to the universal Church and beyond since it originated with the Hebrew cantors. The modern music I hear can be wonderful but often is not. Nor am I entirely opposed to modern instruments like the guitar (the drums do turn me off though the “teen” Mass might be a place for them). So often it has a different tempo for every verse and is virtually unsingable. Plus the lyrics often take an unCatholic turn and help to ensure that the people in the pews are confused doctrinally. Then you have the merely banal like the “We are goin’ to see the King” and “We are Marching.” I’ll take “Salve Regina”, "O Sanctissima, " or “Attende, Domine” in a heartbeat, even if I might need a little practice with the Latin pronunciation. To me, it is worth the effort.
D
dljl
Guest
I would be open to a Tridentine mass said in english even though I love the Latin. It’s the emphasis on The Sacrifice of the Mass that I like.
P
palmas85
Guest
Joe Gloor:
At least that is the impression I get from your posts.
Many people who have returned to the Church after absences or separations still harbor bad feelings about the old days and about the reasons they left in the first place. So they see the Pauline Mass and the new ways of the Church as being a sweet smelling breeze, changes that needed to be made.
For many of us though it is a different scenario. We saw the church literally smashed, turned around, dumped on the ground and then put back together again in a fashion that I truly believe the council at Vatican II never intended. The use of Latin is a case in point.
I believe to my heart that those who favored use of the vernacular were of two groups, one who wanted ALL Latin in the Mass as well as the church excised as a memory of times gone by, something useless in the new church, in the new age and in the fresh enlightened days. Very 60’sh. Out with the old in with the new. New is better, old is bad.
The second group wanted the people to understand the readings and to have a deeper sense at the the relevence of scripture to Catholic life. And true, it did happen in the old days, particularly during weekday masses, the readings sometimes were not translated and no homily was given I don’t think this group ever envisioned that all latin would be removed from the mass and would have been aghast at the prospect.
In fact I have a Maryknoll Missal from the time period after Vatican II. It is in the vernacular up to and including the preparation of the gifts. Starting with the Eucharistic prayer and continuing through the Final Doxology , (Through Him with Him and in Him…), it changes to Latin. Then, at the Lords Prayer it returns to the Vernacular and remains there until the end of the Mass.
That is what I think the majority those who favored the use of the Vernacular in the mass were expecting. I also think that is the direction that the Holy Father is trying to direct the Church.
Joe, I think from reading your posts that I understand why you are opposed to the use of Latin in the Mass. It would be a step backward, and a loss of what the Church has gained. You said that you found the Traditional Mass lacking in your younger days, and after an absence of some time came back to the church.
At least that is the impression I get from your posts.
Many people who have returned to the Church after absences or separations still harbor bad feelings about the old days and about the reasons they left in the first place. So they see the Pauline Mass and the new ways of the Church as being a sweet smelling breeze, changes that needed to be made.
For many of us though it is a different scenario. We saw the church literally smashed, turned around, dumped on the ground and then put back together again in a fashion that I truly believe the council at Vatican II never intended. The use of Latin is a case in point.
I believe to my heart that those who favored use of the vernacular were of two groups, one who wanted ALL Latin in the Mass as well as the church excised as a memory of times gone by, something useless in the new church, in the new age and in the fresh enlightened days. Very 60’sh. Out with the old in with the new. New is better, old is bad.
The second group wanted the people to understand the readings and to have a deeper sense at the the relevence of scripture to Catholic life. And true, it did happen in the old days, particularly during weekday masses, the readings sometimes were not translated and no homily was given I don’t think this group ever envisioned that all latin would be removed from the mass and would have been aghast at the prospect.
In fact I have a Maryknoll Missal from the time period after Vatican II. It is in the vernacular up to and including the preparation of the gifts. Starting with the Eucharistic prayer and continuing through the Final Doxology , (Through Him with Him and in Him…), it changes to Latin. Then, at the Lords Prayer it returns to the Vernacular and remains there until the end of the Mass.
That is what I think the majority those who favored the use of the Vernacular in the mass were expecting. I also think that is the direction that the Holy Father is trying to direct the Church.
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Joe Gloor:
As for it not being the purpose of the Church, I have to disagree with you totally on that. The Church has long had a hand in making intelligent Catholics. Otherwise they would have never gotten into the Catholic Schools.
If you think they are not interested at all in giving an upper hand to young Catholics, you are mistaken. They are our Shepherds. Why wouldn’t they want us to be as educated as possible?
Open your mind and you may also be enlightened.
No, it’s not the purpose of the mass but many things we do give us positive experiences that have nothing to do with the original experience.
As for it not being the purpose of the Church, I have to disagree with you totally on that. The Church has long had a hand in making intelligent Catholics. Otherwise they would have never gotten into the Catholic Schools.
If you think they are not interested at all in giving an upper hand to young Catholics, you are mistaken. They are our Shepherds. Why wouldn’t they want us to be as educated as possible?
Open your mind and you may also be enlightened.
J
Joe_Gloor
Guest
palmas85 -
Thank you for your last reply - I think it sums things up very well.
I’m confident that the Church will do the right thing (needless to say) eventually. If that means a measure of Latin in the NO, so be it - I’ll certainly survive.
Hopefully, it will mean more Traditional Masses for those who want them - Latin NO mass for those who want that, too.
I think we’ve probably covered this topic pretty well and I don’t see any need in going into 4 pages on it and I expect another page break at reply #301.
I have added many of you to my daily prayers and I hope you will do the same for me.
In JMJ
Thank you for your last reply - I think it sums things up very well.
I’m confident that the Church will do the right thing (needless to say) eventually. If that means a measure of Latin in the NO, so be it - I’ll certainly survive.
Hopefully, it will mean more Traditional Masses for those who want them - Latin NO mass for those who want that, too.
I think we’ve probably covered this topic pretty well and I don’t see any need in going into 4 pages on it and I expect another page break at reply #301.
I have added many of you to my daily prayers and I hope you will do the same for me.
In JMJ
M
MrS
Guest
Joe Gloor:
well…,. it took you 67 posts on this thread to at least think that you will survive… when it happens ( and it will) I would hope you will return and say “I certainly enjoy…”
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
Ugh! Don’t ever suggest such a thing so anyone else can hear it. :tsktsk: I shudder shudder to think what ICEL would do with the Traditional Rite.
But, wait. We don’t need to wonder. Let us just glance at Eucharistic Prayer 1, uncommonly referred to as the “Roman Canon,” from the Pauline Mass. The Latin is almost a word-for-word mirror of the Canon from the Traditional Rite from the Sanctus to the Minor Elevation. We need look no further than the “Te igitur.”
*Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per Iesum Christum, Filium tuum, Dominum nostrum, supplices rogamus ac petimus, Uti accepta habeas et benedicas + hæc dona, hæc munera, hæc sancta sacrificial illibata…
*ICEL:
We come to you, Father, with praise and thanksgiving, through Jesus Christ your Son. Through him we ask you to accept and bless + these gifts we offer you in sacrifice…
1959 Marknoll Missal:
Therefore, most merciful Father, we humbly beg and entreat you through Jesus Christ your Son, our Lord, to accept and bless these + gifts, these + offerings, these + holy and spotless sacrifices…
Somehow, something was lost in the translation. No thanks. ICEL needs to stay as far away from the Traditional Rite as possible.
- Status