Latin Vestments

[Spiller]

You know, it really seems to me that the ones wanting the Latin Mass so much really NEED those extra visuals to “feel” religious.
It is such a shame that we have gotten so far from God that we have to have something to “see” and “feel”. Faith alone has fallen by the wayside.

With my highlighting. this was one of the main points about the Latin Mass. That the priests NOT be glorified, That it is God who we go to worship and honor and with the priest “facing” the crowds that was not possible. We were NOT to be there for the priest. i think I am getting really confused…

One thing that sorta disturbed me about the EF on EWTN last night is the almost military bearing of some of the clerics. In a Mass setting, that’s a turn-off to me. They could have easily turned it down a bit…

 

[nannygirl]

One thing that sorta disturbed me about the EF on EWTN last night is the almost military bearing of some of the clerics. In a Mass setting, that’s a turn-off to me. They could have easily turned it down a bit…

Oh dear, I think you’ve fallen into the ditch of dissent. Why not just change the channel? Why are you so mean?

 

[Harpazo]

I am sorry you lack the humility to apologize for making untrue comments.

Is is not allowable for one to voice one’s opinion anymore without getting hammered for it? I will not apologize for voicing my opinion. Clearly, you are getting way off topic here. I was curious to see what Latin vestments had looked like in centuries past.

Your comments were untrue and crude:

“The contemporary vestments of the NO Rite in the Latin Church look terribly plain and in my opinion do not do justice to reflect the role of the Priest.”

Again, this was my opinion. I’m sorry my views do not conform to yours. You are allowed to hold the opinion of my comments in any way you choose.

Your were commenting on Byzantine vestments…

Now you compound your comments with another untruth? C’mon…

I’m starting to think that you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. I was not talking about Byzantine vestments at all. Where did you get that idea? It would be nice to be able to ask a question about Latin Catholic sacerdotal vestments without getting pounced on from someone who cannot respect the fact that there are differing opinions.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew

 

[nannygirl]

Is is not allowable for one to voice one’s opinion anymore without getting hammered for it? I will not apologize for voicing my opinion. Clearly, you are getting way off topic here. I was curious to see what Latin vestments had looked like in centuries past.

Again, this was my opinion. I’m sorry my views do not conform to yours. You are allowed to hold the opinion of my comments in any way you choose.

I’m starting to think that you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. I was not talking about Byzantine vestments at all. Where did you get that idea? It would be nice to be able to ask a question about Latin Catholic sacerdotal vestments without getting pounced on from someone who cannot respect the fact that there are differing opinions.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew

Some just love to complain. Please don’t pay them any mind. Your questions and comments have obviously been made in the spirit of humility.

 

[Spiller]

Umm…no, because Vatican II and its consequences are the source of the current CRISIS in the Church.

Poppycock. That’s nothing more than pure conjecture on your part…

 

[Spiller]

Oh dear, I think you’ve fallen into the ditch of dissent. Why not just change the channel? Why are you so mean?

Parts of the EF were pretty good. Others, not so good.

 

[ethelzguy]

One thing that sorta disturbed me about the EF on EWTN last night is the almost military bearing of some of the clerics. In a Mass setting, that’s a turn-off to me. They could have easily turned it down a bit…

If there was one thing I didn’t like about it, was the dour, angry faces of the celebrant and other clergy there.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

One thing that sorta disturbed me about the EF on EWTN last night is the almost military bearing of some of the clerics. In a Mass setting, that’s a turn-off to me. They could have easily turned it down a bit…

That’s one thing that always bothered me, as well, the robotic, automaton movement. I also don’t get the picking the skirt of the alb up for the priest. I think this way of offering the OF (not the OF itself) runs a tad toward the precious.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I invite you to compare the Masses of 1962, '65, and '69 in order to better acquaint you with what I meant by “simplification”.

the-pope.com/missals.html

coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/

If you are not inclined to look I will run off what was simplified in that time period:

-Elimination of the prayers before the altar (began in '65 with the elmination of “Judica me”; foreshadowed in the Holy Week of 1955’s suppression of the same)

-Elimination of the third and second confiteor ('62 and '69)

-Confiteor may be replaced by the Kyrie ('69)

-Reduction of the kyriale from 9 invocations to 6

-elimination of the last gospel ('65)

-Elimination of the prayers after Mass ('65)

-Elimination of kneeling during the Creed except in Holy Week ('69)

-Reduction of Octaves to 2-3 (can’t recall but was in the 50’s)

-Reduction of the Lavabo

-Eucharistic prayer II, most commonly used of all Eucharistic prayers, which eliminates

1. Commemoration of the living
2. Communicantes
3. Hanc Igitur
4. Reduces the prayers for the priest’s communion

-Reduction of fasting days to two

-Meat is only forbidden on Fridays of Lent

etc etc etc etc etc

Regarding the three year cycle- I am not closed minded. I will admit even with my apathy towards the NO it does win in terms of exposure to the scripture.

With some of these things, there seems to be a mindset that “more is more,” ie, more words, more gestures make it better or holier or even simply more aesthetically appealing. I realize that the council didn’t want a lot of what happens, regretablly, in the OF today, but they did want to trim away from the Mass things that had crept in and which might obscure it. As far as aesthetics go, many people prefer that the Mass be offered with a “noble austerity.”

 

[ethelzguy]

With some of these things, there seems to be a mindset that “more is more,” ie, more words, more gestures make it better or holier or even simply more aesthetically appealing. I realize that the council didn’t want a lot of what happens, regretablly, in the OF today, but they did want to trim away from the Mass things that had crept in and which might obscure it. As far as aesthetics go, many people prefer that the Mass be offered with a “noble austerity.”

It strikes me, that when the NO Mass was developed, that perhaps those doing the developing had concluded that “more is more” had become “too much”.

Every time someone challenges me to “side by side” compare the Mass forms, it becomes clear that the old Mass was copiously wordy, with much repetition.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I think you misunderstand. Those “visuals” as you seem to minimize them, are for the greater glory of God. For some reason or another, the faith and liturgy have been minimalized in the Latin Church. Everything, the architecture, prayers, vestments are for the greater glory of God. He deserves the best, who are we to hold that back from Him?

If you’re talking about the woeful polyester ponchos some priests wear, then I would agree. They’re just plain bad and I’m glad Pope Benedict has set an example with richer chasubles. Some changes have been, however, to the good. The alb made of substantial material rather than that frothy, effeminate cloth that looks like a negligee from Victoria’s Secret is a definite improvement, IMHO. If we’re doing it for God, as we should be, then the question that pops into my mind is “How much lace does the Lord require a man to wear?” The nearly fanatical insistence on the Roman chasuble (which Spiller has noted elsewhere looks like a bullet proof vest and which I always thought of as a Dairy Queen apron) by some “traditionalists” is misplaced and a proof of their poor reading of liturgical history (what we call the Gothic chasuble is actually more “traditional”). The priest changing from the cope to the chasuble is a distraction, as is the constant doffing of the beretta (albeit done at the Name of Jesus), which doesn’t even match the other vestments. If a priest wants to wear a beretta with his cassock, fine, but I’m glad they’ve generally come to be left out of liturgical use.

As for “minimalization,” our differing opinions (you as an Eastern Rite Christian, I as a Latin) probably are simply true to our nature. I’ve attended a Divine Liturgy at a sub juris church and I find I much prefer the relatively austere offering of the Holy Sacrifice as is done by my own rite. I don’t find it less worthy, but then I’m a “less is more” kind of person. I WOULD agree that it all needs to be the best we can offer and the OF has had some terrible abuses heaped on it, but I disagree that a mulitplication of gestures and a few more yards of lace are going to either fix it or be more pleasing to the Holy One.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Every time someone challenges me to “side by side” compare the Mass forms, it becomes clear that the old Mass was copiously wordy, with much repetition.

Those side by side comparisons CAN be instructive (I’ve no idea why anyone thought they were doing us a favor by replacing the “Suscipe Domine” with “Blessed are You” at the offeratory, for example, the “Suscipe” could have simply been in the vernacular), but I would agree with you generally and cite as an example the readings. Even in the context of a Mass offered entirely in Latin, it’s just silly to retain the readings in Latin and then read them again in the vernacular. God already knows what He said and we’re the ones who are supposed to understand it and be instructed by it.

 

[nannygirl]

Even in the context of a Mass offered entirely in Latin, it’s just silly to retain the readings in Latin and then read them again in the vernacular. God already knows what He said and we’re the ones who are supposed to understand it and be instructed by it.

Then may I ask why your signature in this forum is in Latin?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Then may I ask why your signature in this forum is in Latin?

Throws people off, keeps 'em guessing!

 

[redrosetea]

I think Latin vestments are more beautiful and I love the lace

There was something so dignified and sort of old Testament, looking about the way they are vested

I am glad Pope Benedict seems to favor more richness in vestments…Perhaps if the priests were better vested the people would be better dressed when they attend mass

I also miss priests in soutanes

 

[nannygirl]

Throws people off, keeps 'em guessing!

Oh, OK. I thought you wanted more clarity.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Oh, OK. I thought you wanted more clarity.

With respect, I do. Many people have historically had Latin mottos, yet used their own language for clarity (usually in explaining their Latin mottos).

 

[VivatJesus]

That’s one thing that always bothered me, as well, the robotic, automaton movement. I also don’t get the picking the skirt of the alb up for the priest. I think this way of offering the OF (not the OF itself) runs a tad toward the precious.

I have noticed–and other traditionalists I have spoken too have agreed–that this “robotic, automaton movement” you speak of seems to be prominent in ICK and FSSP Masses. The “indult”/“Motu Proprio” orders seem a lot more conscious of being “traditional Catholics”; whereas, in the SSPX, the clergy and people just see themselves as attending a Catholic Mass. This difference is understandable, since a lot of “indultarians” are only attached to the EF for subjective, sentimental reasons (they like the smells-and-bells, chant, vestments, etc.) whereas SSPXers are there for doctrinal reasons and having a traditional Mass is but a natural “side-effect” of having purity and integrity in Catholic doctrine.

 

[VivatJesus]

It strikes me, that when the NO Mass was developed, that perhaps those doing the developing had concluded that “more is more” had become “too much”.

Every time someone challenges me to “side by side” compare the Mass forms, it becomes clear that the old Mass was copiously wordy, with much repetition.

And it’s clear from a side-by-side reading that the Novus Ordo is a banal, pedestrian liturgy that underminesCatholic belief in the ordained priesthood, true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, and sacrificial character of the Mass. It’s also clear that people who are instructed in the old Mass tend to believe in the Real Presence, whereas 3/4 of people who attend the Novus liturgy do not. Do you have a problem with repetition? Do you find the Holy Rosary to be “copiously wordy, with much repetition” as well?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I have noticed–and other traditionalists I have spoken too have agreed–that this “robotic, automaton movement” you speak of seems to be prominent in ICK and FSSP Masses. The “indult”/“Motu Proprio” orders seem a lot more conscious of being “traditional Catholics”; whereas, in the SSPX, the clergy and people just see themselves as attending a Catholic Mass. This difference is understandable, since a lot of “indultarians” are only attached to the EF for subjective, sentimental reasons (they like the smells-and-bells, chant, vestments, etc.) whereas SSPXers are there for doctrinal reasons and having a traditional Mass is but a natural “side-effect” of having purity and integrity in Catholic doctrine.

No one could possess more doctrinal purity or integrity than the Church Herself. Those who find themselves outside of it may parrot what they believe to be “purity” and “integrity,” but it is, more often than not, simply a misreading of the tradition that they claim to so zealously guard. I’ve attended an SSPX Mass. If it is typical, then it bordered on, if not entered into, heresy, the priest claiming that the OF was an “abomination to God.” He said it twice.That’s not Catholic, not pure and utterly lacking in integrity, inasmuch as the Church can propose to the faithful nothing that would BE an abomination to God. They may not be heretical in general, but that’s one instance I can cite.

You might also ponder this, Vivat. The arrogance, the sheer conceit of a great many “traditionalists,” might well put a great number of people off the EF who might well have been more open to it, might have the effect of “well, if those people are representative of what the EF produces, then thank you, but no.” I, more often than not, mark it down to the arrogance of youth, which life itself will take care of in due course. If the Lord God means the EF to persist or even dominate, then it will. You and I, having no window into His Mind, would do well not to hinder by our arrogance whatever it is that He intends, but would do well to wait upon His Church, our only reference TO Him.