C
clem456
Guest
What the Church actually says is
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
Art 30:
- Status
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
F
frobert
Guest
Thank you, your post is very helpful.
E
EphelDuath
Guest
“Pride of place” is a mistranslation (or a poor translation, depending on how you view it). The original Latin is:
“Ecclesia cantum gregorianum agnoscit ut liturgiae romanae proprium: qui ideo in actionibus liturgicis, ceteris paribus, principem locum obtineat.”
Meaning “principle place”. Gregorian chant is THE music of the Roman rite. The past few generations of Catholics have been deprived of their spiritual patrimony that the Church has handed on to them. I thank God that it’s making a revival.
Pope Bl. John Paul II was uniform with the Council’s wishes:
“Liturgical music must meet the specific prerequisites of the Liturgy: full adherence to the text it presents, synchronization with the time and moment in the Liturgy for which it is intended, appropriately reflecting the gestures proposed by the rite. The various moments in the Liturgy require a musical expression of their own. From time to time this must fittingly bring out the nature proper to a specific rite, now proclaiming God’s marvels, now expressing praise, supplication or even sorrow for the experience of human suffering which, however, faith opens to the prospect of Christian hope.”
(Source: Chirograph for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio “Tra le Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music, November 22, 2003, sec. 5)
Replacing the Propers of the Mass with random hymns is permitted, but not the ideal. It’s NOT what the Holy Fathers of the past century have asked for. It is NOT what the Council asked for.
“Ecclesia cantum gregorianum agnoscit ut liturgiae romanae proprium: qui ideo in actionibus liturgicis, ceteris paribus, principem locum obtineat.”
Meaning “principle place”. Gregorian chant is THE music of the Roman rite. The past few generations of Catholics have been deprived of their spiritual patrimony that the Church has handed on to them. I thank God that it’s making a revival.
Pope Bl. John Paul II was uniform with the Council’s wishes:
“Liturgical music must meet the specific prerequisites of the Liturgy: full adherence to the text it presents, synchronization with the time and moment in the Liturgy for which it is intended, appropriately reflecting the gestures proposed by the rite. The various moments in the Liturgy require a musical expression of their own. From time to time this must fittingly bring out the nature proper to a specific rite, now proclaiming God’s marvels, now expressing praise, supplication or even sorrow for the experience of human suffering which, however, faith opens to the prospect of Christian hope.”
(Source: Chirograph for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio “Tra le Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music, November 22, 2003, sec. 5)
Replacing the Propers of the Mass with random hymns is permitted, but not the ideal. It’s NOT what the Holy Fathers of the past century have asked for. It is NOT what the Council asked for.
C
CruceSignati
Guest
Thank you all for your replies.
Do you think that the main source these misconceptions could be poor catechesis, or is it something else?
Do you think that the main source these misconceptions could be poor catechesis, or is it something else?
J
JReducation
Guest
I think that we must keep in mind that very often the loudest spokesperson of any movement or group is its worse representative, which then leads to misconceptions that lead to prejudice.
E
EphelDuath
Guest
Poor catechesis is the root cause of almost every problem in the Catholic Church these days. I would also attribute it to our “progressive”-minded culture that always equates new with better. Catholics should be taught to love their heritage.
M
mikecash
Guest
My first impression of Catholicism was CAF. So, I assumed everyone was thrilled with Summorum Pontificum 
. I quickly found out that wasn’t the case!
This summer I was living near the EF in my diocese. I went about six or seven times and really enjoyed it. I mentioned this to my fiancée’s grandfather, a devout Catholic. Six months later, I’m not 100% sure that he doesn’t think I’m a sedevacantist. At RCIA, Father, who I think very highly of and is very devout, made an off the cuff comment that a “certain French Archbishop” couldn’t accept Vatican II, stirred up dissension in the Latin Rite, and forced the Holy Father to give the “dissenters” the old Mass back that they wanted in every diocese. Frequently, I’ve heard older Catholics talk about the “bad old days” when they were so board with those Latin Masses.
Honestly, I don’t blame those who endured the transition to the Novus Ordo for having hard feelings. Having experienced both forms, what a transition it must have been especially combined with everything else Catholics were facing in the world. I’m sure it was a complete culture shock to the American Church.
I think the generation that made the transition to the Novus Ordo feels that those who like the EF and other more traditional practices are the same people that made the post-Vatican II period hard on the Church. Literally, I think Father (who made the “dissenter” comment) would expect he’d see a bunch of old people at the diocese EF on Sunday! Of course, 80% of the congregation at the EF wasn’t even alive during the transition or were babies. I think those that are against traditional Catholicism feel like right when things finally seem settled about the liturgy, the EF came back and stirred things up again.
. I quickly found out that wasn’t the case!This summer I was living near the EF in my diocese. I went about six or seven times and really enjoyed it. I mentioned this to my fiancée’s grandfather, a devout Catholic. Six months later, I’m not 100% sure that he doesn’t think I’m a sedevacantist
. At RCIA, Father, who I think very highly of and is very devout, made an off the cuff comment that a “certain French Archbishop” couldn’t accept Vatican II, stirred up dissension in the Latin Rite, and forced the Holy Father to give the “dissenters” the old Mass back that they wanted in every diocese. Frequently, I’ve heard older Catholics talk about the “bad old days” when they were so board with those Latin Masses.Honestly, I don’t blame those who endured the transition to the Novus Ordo for having hard feelings. Having experienced both forms, what a transition it must have been especially combined with everything else Catholics were facing in the world. I’m sure it was a complete culture shock to the American Church.
I think the generation that made the transition to the Novus Ordo feels that those who like the EF and other more traditional practices are the same people that made the post-Vatican II period hard on the Church. Literally, I think Father (who made the “dissenter” comment) would expect he’d see a bunch of old people at the diocese EF on Sunday! Of course, 80% of the congregation at the EF wasn’t even alive during the transition or were babies. I think those that are against traditional Catholicism feel like right when things finally seem settled about the liturgy, the EF came back and stirred things up again.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Probably not for too much longer IMO. A lot of computer programs now have some very strange-looking code which American programmers can’t handle.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Good catch. Those sneaky translators.
T
tradcathconvert
Guest
Very good point, Brother JR. Thank you for making it here.
J
JReducation
Guest
That would hold if poor catechesis were a universal problem. But it’s not. There are dioceses, conferences of bishops and religious communities that have excellent catechesis. But these pockets are also suffering.
But observe your own use of language here. You keep referring to the NO instead of the OF. While you refer to the TLM as the EF. To our brothers in my community, which is a very traditional community, this would make them very uncomfortable in your presence. Because in our tradition of 800 years, we think with the pope. Pope Benedict did not say EF and NO. He said EF and OF. In our community, a brother who dares refer to the liturgy in any way that is not as the Holy Father speaks, is severely punished as per the Rule of St. Francis of 1221. There is what I call living tradition. We keep the tradition alive. If the Pope says EF, we say EF. If Francis says no Gregorian chant, we say no Gregorian chant. Actually, it was Clare who said no Gregorian Chant. But she’s our mother, so we don’t argue or question her.
I’ll point up to Clare again. We have an 800 year tradition. So laymen who attend mass at our churches or chapels have to accommodate to that tradition, regardless of what the Council said. The Council was not out to undo what was in place. That’s what has to be understood.
In fact, in our case, the Council introduced a novelty, Gregorian Chant. In 1978, the Holy See gave us permission to use Gregorian chant for the first time in 800 years. One has to be careful how one reads these documents to remember that there are going to be exceptions. If there are exceptions, it means that the mind of the Church on this point is not etched in stone. It is a preference, not a law.
In Church tradition, when there is an exception it exists because it’s an indult or because the point is a preference and not a law. In this case, there has never been an indult granted to certain pockets of the Church to refrain from Gregorian chant. The only other explanation is that the point is not a law, but a preference. Church law only has two kinds of exceptions, indults or traditions. In this case, the absence of Gregorian Chant is part of Catholic tradition.
I’m not trying to make life difficult. I’m trying to supply the correct language so that when we do speak to others, they don’t walk away with misconceptions about traditionalists.
T
TimothyH
Guest
I would caution that this is exactly the kind of thing that confirms some of the conceptions mainstream Catholics have about traditionalists - that traditionalists hold mainstream Catholics in contempt, look down their noses at anyone who does not attend the Tridentine Mass or think they are somehow better or holier.
However it is intended to be taken, it is received as condescending. It certainly doesn’t make anyone want to go visit your Parish.
-Tim-
H
hoop0826
Guest
I found that liturgically, we (EF) and (OF) form parishoners tend to be interested in different things - or rather EF Catholics many of whom I met seem to be of similar mindset, interested in the saints, modesty of dress, etc. Most OF parishoners I’ve met seem to be more interested in hospitality, showing love and warmth and caring to each other. Seems that both are good?
P
ProVobis
Guest
Tim, if I were you, I’d look at or think some numbers. I don’t consider myself a traditionalist, but how many traditionalists look down on or despise “mainstream Catholics” as opposed to “mainstream Catholics” who look down or even despise the traditionalists? I’ll bet the ratio is no more than 1%, so why so much insecurity? Is it the traditionalists’ fault that the vast majority of Catholics don’t even go to Church?
T
TimothyH
Guest
This is really a misconception in the opposite direction, about mainstream Catholics not having interest in the saints.I found that liturgically, we (EF) and (OF) form parishoners tend to be interested in different things - or rather EF Catholics many of whom I met seem to be of similar mindset, interested in the saints, modesty of dress, etc. Most OF parishoners I’ve met seem to be more interested in hospitality, showing love and warmth and caring to each other. Seems that both are good?
Personally, I pray to my patron St. Augustine every day and ask for the intercession of the great men who started the religious orders - Benedict, Francis, Dominic, Ignatius, as well as St. Josemaria Escriva for whom I have a particular devotion. I am also an altar server at a twice monthly novena to St. Jude Thaddeus where we venerate a relic.
The post at forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=11351072&highlight=cloud+of+witnesses#post11351072 shows the devotion to the saints at my parish. We celebrated the feast of St. Ambrose today in the liturgy.
I know many, good, solid mainstream Catholics with tremendous devotion to the saints. Maybe it is not the same in other places but it is one of the things that distinguish Catholics from non-Catholics here in Georgia.
-Tim-
T
TimothyH
Guest
Well, if you were me you would probably go see a psychiatrist or something.
My intent was not to get into an argument about the relative numbers of traditionalists and mainstream Catholics who have contempt for each other. That discussion misses my point and I’m sorry if I didn’t make it clear.
The only point I am trying to make is that sometimes people can confirm misconceptions others have about them if they are not sensitive to the language they use.
However it was intended to sound, it comes across as condescending. Sarcasm often does even when there is a basis in truth. Maybe no negative intent was meant and I’m not saying that the poster was being sarcastic but we have to be careful because statements are not always received as the person who said it meant.
Sometimes we are our own worst enemies and in haste we confirm the misconceptions others have for us rather than refute them. That’s all I am saying.
-Tim-
R
RedCaves
Guest
The first part of my post was just a bit of humor from me.Well, if you were me you would probably go see a psychiatrist or something.
My intent was not to get into an argument about the relative numbers of traditionalists and mainstream Catholics who have contempt for each other. That discussion misses my point and I’m sorry if I didn’t make it clear.
The only point I am trying to make is that sometimes people can confirm misconceptions others have about them if they are not sensitive to the language they use.
However it was intended to sound, it comes across as condescending. Sarcasm often does even when there is a basis in truth. Maybe no negative intent was meant and I’m not saying that the poster was being sarcastic but we have to be careful because statements are not always received as the person who said it meant.
Sometimes we are our own worst enemies and in haste we confirm the misconceptions others have for us rather than refute them. That’s all I am saying.
-Tim-
I am inclined to believe that there are also misconceptions about those who are not traditionalists but are still Catholic. My favorite one that I hear is that how all of you are “papolators” but I know better than to believe that, in most cases at least.
The rest of my post listed some common talk that is directed at Traditionalists.
Based on some people that I have talked with, for many decades, Traditionalists, both diocesan and “Lefebvrites” were treated as second class citizens. They were considered “nutcases”, “dinosaurs”, and “stuck in the past”.
Still being new to Tradition, I have often developed a sense of sympathy to these people and their communities. It appeals to my sympathy for the outcast which happens to be part of my personality.
Granted, there are some idiosyncrasies in the Traditionalist world that I would never pick up on, but for many people in these communities, the pain from the past still lingers and the realization that “liturgical, doctrinal, and cultural justice” was almost never given out by Rome during the late 20th Century.
G
GangGreen
Guest
I do think that there’s an issue with Catholics who don’t like the EF and “traditionalism” who look down on those who do. It’s kind of evident in my view. However, the venom is always pointed a the “traditionalists” who point negativity toward the ordinary form and the way it is practiced.
I also think that “traditional” Catholic is something that can’t quite be described easily.
You have people who only attend the EF and refuse to accept the OF.
You have people who prefer the EF, but will attend the OF when they can’t attend the EF for whatever reason or it’s just unavailable to them.
You have people who maybe attend both forms equally.
Some who attend the OF more, but like the EF more.
Who attend the OF more, but will attend EF occasionally.
Those who attend only the OF and refuse to attend the EF.
There are so many varieties and yet we like to call “traditional” only one group. Yet anyone from any of those groups I listed above can be “traditional.”
I think that you can take anyone from any of those groups above (except the first) and say that a traditional Catholic prefers whatever Mass they attend to be one that’s done reverently. Whatever that means to them. That can mean Gregorian Chant, Ad Orientem, Communion on the tongue, etc. or maybe even none of these. Maybe it just means a Mass that doesn’t abuse the rubrics and introduce modern elements into the Mass.
However, being “traditional” doesn’t only mean how we prefer the Mass. It can just mean the types of devotions we take part in or other various things.
I also think that “traditional” Catholic is something that can’t quite be described easily.
You have people who only attend the EF and refuse to accept the OF.
You have people who prefer the EF, but will attend the OF when they can’t attend the EF for whatever reason or it’s just unavailable to them.
You have people who maybe attend both forms equally.
Some who attend the OF more, but like the EF more.
Who attend the OF more, but will attend EF occasionally.
Those who attend only the OF and refuse to attend the EF.
There are so many varieties and yet we like to call “traditional” only one group. Yet anyone from any of those groups I listed above can be “traditional.”
I think that you can take anyone from any of those groups above (except the first) and say that a traditional Catholic prefers whatever Mass they attend to be one that’s done reverently. Whatever that means to them. That can mean Gregorian Chant, Ad Orientem, Communion on the tongue, etc. or maybe even none of these. Maybe it just means a Mass that doesn’t abuse the rubrics and introduce modern elements into the Mass.
However, being “traditional” doesn’t only mean how we prefer the Mass. It can just mean the types of devotions we take part in or other various things.
R
RedCaves
Guest
Your last sentence: It can also mean that to be a traditionalist, you seek doctrinal purity and consistent, dogmatic interpretations.
P
ProVobis
Guest
In this particular case, you may have a point. However, know that the vast majority of Catholics have never heard of the terms Extraordinary Form or Ordinary Form and many parishes still list their Masses as Novus Ordo or Traditional Latin Mass (or just plain Latin Mass). Spanish Mass or English Mass or other vernacular Mass are usually listed as such in the bulletins in multi-lingual parishes.
- Status