Well, Indyann, if you were educated by Francisicans and Benedictines for twelve years before Vatican II then you are of an age with me and should not have bought into Cat’s shibboleth that you did not know what the Latin meant. And you rank right up there with Frank, Carlo, and Gary (whom I spoke to three weeks ago at our fortieth class reunion). All three admitted that they were more interested in “stirring the pot” forty years ago with the guitars and Simon and Garfunkle at our graduation Mass than implementing changes in the Mass.
Just like I enlisted in 1971 and just like I have sung Latin in a reverent NO cathedral choir for twenty years, am I upset by a glass chalice? No. Waterford crystal has been used at diocesan liturgies for years. In the Holy Name of God, what do the scandals have to do with what happened in 1967? I am not in any way, shape, or form being blasphemous. The pedophile scandals had nothing to do with liturgy. I am justifiably angry because I served way too many Low Masses with a priest with just the two of us present in 1965 and 1966. He was a combat veteran of WWII who was a parachutist who jumped at D-Day. Father B. directly inspired me to pursue my dream of becoming a historian.
So, one priest in your parish comes down and shakes hands with the folks in the front pew. Was this done when we were kids? Come to my local geographical parish and endure the five minutes that it takes for the sign of peace. Father is up and down the main aisle and both side aisles. Not to mention the five minute “turn around and introduce yourself to your fellow parishoner” at the start of Mass.
How utterly condescending. You, like my podnahs from high school make the very grave mistake that all of us were happy with what happened. All of us were not. I am tired of being pooh-poohed when my observations are equally valid. And I will not shut up. There was a whole bunch of us who were not happy but who submitted to the magesterium.
We’ve got a bunch of young folks who are interested in the Mass of their ancestors. We have a Pope who evidently believes that there are sufficient numbers of us who, way back in 1967, wondered why our roots were ripped out and thrown away.
Cat, I’m am once again sorry. You question me. You question us. There is absolutely no danger of HMC going back to the TLM. I do read what you actually say.
The folks on this thread are Catholics who are younger than me and who are trying to discover what it was their ancestors experineced.
What, exactly, is so frightening about that. OK, Cat. So Gregorian Chant has no meter. Just because it makes no sense to you, does that mean that I don’t have memories of hearing O Salutaris Hostia and Tantum Ergo sung by all those little old Italian ladies at OLPH novena on Tuesday night when I was an altar boy?
These threads come from young Catholics who are trying to discover what it was their ancestors experienced. Indyann - you weren’t happy back in '67- more power to you. You are happy with the NO in your parish, again, more power to you.
Ladies, this IS the traditonal Catholic forum. There are any number of us who were baptized and confirmed before Vatican II and who are stilll alive. If you weren’t opposed to us who say that we did know what the Latin meant, that we really prefered the Mass we had before 1967, etc…then why post. It is a simple question.
Cat, you and Indyann are entitled to your opinons. But so am I. You don’t want Latin; you don’t want chant; you don’t want sacred motets…more power to you. You have had forty years of transendance. The Holy Father has recognized that there were those of us who were left behind. I am a traditional Catholic. I don’t seek to inflict my will upon you. I am overjoyed to see young people (like my son) embrace the liturgy of their ancestors.