Not "participating" in Tridentine?

[Andreas_Hofer]

Anna Elizabeth:

Forgive me if you all have heard this, but just in case someone has missed it:

God created liturgists so that those of us who will never have the opportunity to undergo physical persecution may still suffer in His Name.

Anna

The Lord hath given, the Lord hath taken away: Blessed be the name of the Lord!

 

[Dorothy]

dljl:

Sounds like a question with a built in bias.

You are right!

 

[mosher]

otm:

The experience of individuals at that time is not only germane to the topic, it is the topic. Go back and read the first post; the question on the test says “(people) were” . :The question ws not about the TLM today, but prior to Vatican 2.

Granted but perhaps what I am trying to communicate here is that the stated experience is not corelational to the Liturgy itself but is a error in the individuals disposition.

otm:

Then what is it? If one is actively participating, then one is engaged in active participation. I am sure you are not saying that if one is actively participating, one is engaged in passive participation.

Active participation is a matter of disposition.
Actively participating denotes busyness - doing things.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Anna Elizabeth:

Forgive me if you all have heard this, but just in case someone has missed it:

God created liturgists so that those of us who will never have the opportunity to undergo physical persecution may still suffer in His Name.

Anna

Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a liturgist? You can negotiate with a terrorist.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The greatest horror of the Church in America?

Two words:

“Liturgical committee”

Try not to make too much hay out of the fact that I admitted that, Doc.

 

[Eileen_T]

At our Catholic School we had a priest come to class once a week to instruct us in Latin and about the Mass.

Every Friday morning the whole school attended Mass. One Friday, after Mass, our teacher - a Nun - praised one of the girls for saying the Rosary throughout the Mass. I guess those of us who took our Latin/English Missals and concentrated on following them were invisible.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

JKirkLVNV:

The greatest horror of the Church in America?

Two words:

“Liturgical committee”

Try not to make too much hay out of the fact that I admitted that, Doc.

I have to make all the hay I can. I’ve only got a week and a half before I’m off the 'net for six weeks. That’s not much time to convert you from your wayward obsessions with an audible Canon and stultifying vulgar translations.

Lord knows what mischief you’ll get into when I’m not around to keep you on the straight and narrow. :tsktsk:

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Dr. Bombay:

I have to make all the hay I can. I’ve only got a week and a half before I’m off the 'net for six weeks. That’s not much time to convert you from your wayward obsessions with an audible Canon and stultifying vulgar translations.

Lord knows what mischief you’ll get into when I’m not around to keep you on the straight and narrow. :tsktsk:

I assure you, I shall remain orthodox…cranky, but orthodox.

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

Dr. Bombay:

Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a liturgist? You can negotiate with a terrorist.

Another good one! Thanks!

Anna

 

[palmas85]

otm:

The experience of individuals at that time is not only germane to the topic, it is the topic. Go back and read the first post; the question on the test says “(people) were” . :The question ws not about the TLM today, but prior to Vatican 2. Again, read the first post. The discussion is not about what people today are doing in the TLM; it is about the TLM prior to the Pauline rite.

.

Well then in the interest of fairness and truth perhaps only those of us who were actually there in those times should be involved in the discussion. Anything anbody else says would just be hearsay and conjecture.

But how could we be sure that we were all members of that select group? I know, a pop quiz on Baltimore like we used to have in school. That would do it!!!

So who wants to start?

 

[SnorterLuster]

palmas85:

Well then in the interest of fairness and truth perhaps only those of us who were actually there in those times should be involved in the discussion. Anything anbody else says would just be hearsay and conjecture.

But how could we be sure that we were all members of that select group? I know, a pop quiz on Baltimore like we used to have in school. That would do it!!!

So who wants to start?

Well I was born in 1947 so I lived through it. I would sure hate to have to take a test on the Baltimore anymore. The nuns, and the priests for that matter, were adamant that we memorize it word-for-word. Any deviation and we missed that answer. College in the sixties may have fried some parts of my brain.

 

[mosher]

I was born in 79 I bet us n00b to the TLM could ace that quiz. Heck, just the desire of my friends who go exclusively the NO to be a good catholic would afford them the knowledge to pass that quiz. Your suggestion is too easy.

I say we have everyone send in their emotional scars via PDF that they received by saying the Rosay during mass “back in the olden days.” Also, for extra credit they can post a gif of the physical scaring they have due to being beaten by evil nuns in habits with rulers.

 

[palmas85]

mosher:

I was born in 79 I bet us n00b to the TLM could ace that quiz. Heck, just the desire of my friends who go exclusively the NO to be a good catholic would afford them the knowledge to pass that quiz. ** Your suggestion is too easy. **

I say we have everyone send in their emotional scars via PDF that they received by saying the Rosay during mass “back in the olden days.” Also, for extra credit they can post a gif of the physical scaring they have due to being beaten by evil nuns in habits with rulers.

Great, 150 please. And don’t take too long to answer, you can’t look it up you know

 

[mosher]

palmas85:

Great, 150 please. And don’t take too long to answer, you can’t look it up you know

lol

 

[warrior71]

mosher:

lol

But what is the answer?

 

[otm]

SnorterLuster:
They may have done more study, but that knowledge is too often ivory tower knowledge. The experts read each other’s writings, go to the same meetings, and end up like the politicians–believing everyone thinks like them. Then you have not been reading many of the experts, as there is nowhere the unanimity you suggest.

SnorterLuster:

As you say, there were minor changes, bu not an entire new mass. If the people were worshiping God and the Church was growing, why would you throw out the entire liturgy if favor of something untried and unproven? Wouldn’t it have been better to take it slow and easy?

There still is no entire new Mass. It still has the Epistle and Gospel readings, and added an Old Testament reading; it still has an Offeratory, a Consecration, and a Communion. Some prayers have been deleted, some have been added, some have been changeds, but on the whole it is still the same Mass; just as it is the same Mass if you go to one of the many Eastern rite churches. The order of some things may be a bit different, but the essentials are still the same.

Would it have been better slow and easy? On that we would probably be in agreement.

{QUOTE=SnorterLuster]I may have overstated, but the sacrifice has certainly been deemphasized. To use the buzz words of the day, went went from vertical to horizontal worship.You aare right, it is a buzz word. However, it is not an accurate buzz word; what changed was a deemphasis on God Transcendent and a greater emphasis on God Imminent. Both are realities kspeaking truth about God. We can argue over whether or not the Imminence of God is over emphasized, but there are those who would deny it any place at all.

 

[otm]

Is the measure of participation the amount of motion and commotion a person physically displays to observers ?
Or is it what is between the heart and God ?

If you invited a friend over to a party, and they really cared for you, but sat at your party reading a magazine and ignoring all of what was going on at the party, would you say they were participating in your party? I mean, they are physically present at the party, and they do care about you.

If it is only what is in the heart, Why would they need to attend Mass at all?

 

[otm]

Servus Pio XII:

I can give four instances of talking to people alive before the vernacular.

The first was my grandfather. He was born in 1924, and had a good portion of his life in which the Mass was said in Latin. I greeted him one day with “Introibo ad altare Dei.”
I got the reply, “Ad Deum qui laetificat juventutem meam.”

It will have been at least 40 years since he had heard that Mass, but he ‘wasn’t paying attention’, at any rate. That is why it has been impressed into his mind.

He told me he wished the Mass were still in Latin, and gave me his St. Joseph Missal (1950) as a gift.

He does not speak Latin.

---

The second is my maths teacher. He is not as aged as my grandfather, but he grew up with and had the Latin Mass for early adulthood. He witnessed the changes firsthand, as well.

He, too, wishes that the Mass were restored to Latin. I have that in good faith.

He speaks rudimentary high school Latin which he says he has forgotten most of.

---

The third is a Latin teacher at my school. Granted, she has a special love for the language, but she is also quite pious. She was one vow from becoming a nun.

She says that she loves the Latin Mass, and wishes it were back. She was jubilant when she learnt of the indult Mass we have at the Cathedral.

---

The only person I have met who does not want it back is my grandmother, but she still has quarrel with the way in which the new Mass is commonly said.

---

The people before the vernacular may not be as thrilled with it as you think.

Nay, you may have run into people who are GOOD CATHOLICS, and obey the Pope whether they like it or not. I acknowledge the validity of the vernacular Mass, and it’s equal graces bestowed. I do not, however, have to like it.

Pax Domini sit semper tecum. :tiphat:

I too, have met many people who grew up before Vatican 2; some would prefer the TLM in Latin, but most whom I know prefer the Mass in English.

Sometimes what we fail to distinguish is not the TLM or the Pauline rite itself, but how it is celebrated.

I have been to both that were celebrated with reverence and dignity, and I have been to both which weren’t. Too often, the Pauline rite has not had the dignity it should; but that is not inherent in the rite; it is an issue with the priest.

 

[oldfogey]

While I was young and foolish (not to mention risking my soul), there was a period when I did not attend Mass. The time period was 1968-70. When I came back, the Novus Ordo was in place but just implemented, and it was being celebrated as close to the rubrics as possible, before the innovations started occuring which we have all come to know so well.

I came back looking to return to my Church, but I felt a terrible loss when I saw the new liturgy, as it felt poor and simple compared to the TLM. I know a lot of others who felt the same way, and they never have come back.

I really don’t care about all the psychology and theory behind the development of the NO, but I do know that the NO does not speak to me as a Catholic as the Tridentine Mass did (and still does when I can attend an indult Mass.)

 

[JimG]

I may have actually been somewhat more attentive at the old Latin Mass, since use of the Latin-English missal forced me to concentrate to keep in sync with the priest. Nowadays, it’s much easier just to zone out. But I never thought that those saying their rosaries were not participating.

This whole thing reminds me of a story of about a female saint–can’t remember which one now. The story was told of when she was a young nun, and loved to go to Mass. Almost as soon as she was kneeling in her pew, she would be in fervent prayer, but paying no attention to the missal. Her superior would sometimes tell her that she should be following along in the missal, but she just smiled and kept communing with Jesus. Was she not participating?