Old form of Mass attracts new generation

[maryjk]

Probably some people attached to the OF Mass deliberately come here to look for alternative opinion? I don’t know.

Come “here?”

The Traditional Catholic Forum isn’t exclusively for those that attend or want to attend the EF.

 

[Gidge]

Come “here?”

The Traditional Catholic Forum isn’t exclusively for those that attend or want to attend the EF.

Understood, but why troll those who clearly are attached to the EF ?

 

[maryjk]

Understood, but why troll those who clearly are attached to the EF ?

Cat has been here since 2004 and has over 10,000 posts. She isn’t trolling anyone.

Just like you, she is stating her opinion.

It happens to be one I agree with.

I personally find chant grating, and polyphony frantic and jarring.

I enjoy strong, beautiful melodies because for me, they are calming and restorative to my soul. The random notes in chant are disturbing to my soul; I find myself trying desperately to fit them together into a pattern, and they don’t fit, and this distracts me from worship.

The foreign language is also distracting to me. I can’t help but seek out the translation because without it, the words are gibberish. This “brain-work” of having to translate foreign phrases is an immense distraction to me. It’s not just Latin, it’s any language other than my own. Some people enjoy foreign languages and feel enlarged in their soul when they hear them. I feel confused and lost.

 

[ProVobis]

Cat has been here since 2004 and has over 10,000 posts. She isn’t trolling anyone.

Just like you, she is stating her opinion.

It happens to be one I agree with.

I’m a little confused here. I’m hearing that you seem to think the vernacular is such a good idea but only if it’s in English? You have no use for a Polish, Spanish, etc. Mass; is this what you’re agreeing with?

 

[maryjk]

I’m a little confused here. I’m hearing that you seem to think the vernacular is such a good idea but only if it’s in English? You have no use for a Polish, Spanish, etc. Mass; is this what you’re agreeing with?

No, and I’m not sure how you would get that idea from what I posted.

 

[ProVobis]

No, and I’m not sure how you would get that idea from what I posted.

This is among the things you referenced and it appeared that you were in agreement with all of it. That’s where I got the “idea.”

This “brain-work” of having to translate foreign phrases is an immense distraction to me. It’s not just Latin, it’s any language other than my own.

 

[maryjk]

This is among the things you referenced and it appeared that you were in agreement with all of it. That’s where I got the “idea.”

Which is why I attend a Mass in the vernacular.

Much like Cat, I don’t travel outside of the US. (Although I used to travel quite extensively.) So, Mass in the vernacular is in English.

And since I don’t speak another language, attending Mass in another language would be “brain work” for me. I would feel the need to translate what I was hearing. And for me, it wouldn’t be Mass in the vernacular. So, no, I don’t attend Mass in Polish or Spanish or Latin.

But that doesn’t mean that all Masses should be in English. No, like me, people attend Mass in their vernacular. Their language of the people.

 

[rben20]

Good to see the rich tradition of the EF is loved and supported by many.

 

[ProVobis]

And since I don’t speak another language, attending Mass in another language would be “brain work” for me.

So how is that “consubstantial” phrase working for you?

Seems to me there is some “brain work” involved, even in the English Mass, which, I have to admit, was a difficult one for me. But then I was taught in the Latin Mass by mostly Polish priests.

 

[maryjk]

So how is that “consubstantial” phrase working for you?

Seems to me there is some “brain work” involved, even in the English Mass, which, I have to admit, was a difficult one for me. But then I was taught in the Latin Mass by mostly Polish priests.

One word is vastly different than a totally different language.

And one word in English, that you might have to look up or work to understand, is still the vernacular.

And the work to understand that word is vastly different than a Mass in a different language.

 

[ProVobis]

And the work to understand that word is vastly different than a Mass in a different language.

Not quite sure what your point is. Do you understand “consubstantial” better than “consubstantialem”?

On second thought, never mind. :banghead:

 

[maryjk]

On second thought, never mind. :banghead:

Pretty much feeling the same way.

:banghead:

It shouldn’t be so hard to understand that I prefer Mass in the vernacular. In the language of the people. And in my case, that language is English.

 

[larsont7]

Pretty much feeling the same way.

:banghead:

It shouldn’t be so hard to understand that I prefer Mass in the vernacular. In the language of the people. And in my case, that language is English.

Ok, we get it. You and Cat prefer the OF, which you are both entitled to. I started this thread by posting an article from Miami’s Archdiocese about the EF and its use there. How are your posts relevant to this article? And if they are not, why post them? Just curious.

 

[maryjk]

Ok, we get it. You and Cat prefer the OF, which you are both entitled to. I started this thread by posting an article from Miami’s Archdiocese about the EF and its use there. How are your posts relevant to this article? And if they are not, why post them? Just curious.

I posted in defense of and agreement with Cat, who isn’t a troll. (Neither am I)

ProVobis couldn’t let that lie. No, I had to defend my position.

First he accused me of thinking that all Masses everywhere should be in English.

Then, because there was a word that threw him, I should just admit that hearing the Mass in Latin was the same.

Wonder why I kept posting? Because ProVobis wouldn’t stop asking me questions.

 

[R_C]

One word is vastly different than a totally different language.

The point is that in our XXIst Century we are used to the idea of clearly defined languages, we are used to the Holy See providing vernacular versions of Holy Scripture and of other liturgical rites, etc.

We do not often recall, however, that languages were not always so clearly defined. Even today, it is a not-too-well-known fact that there are from 6800 to 6900 distinct languages in the world, and that 94% of all languages are regularly spoken by just 6% of the population. It would in fact be impossible to translate Holy Scripture or, by that matter, the Roman Missal, into many (if not most) of these languages.

In the Early Church Greek was also employed, yet Latin became in the Middle Ages a universal language - not just in the Church, but also in science, literature, law, and administration.

Today the Church still produces its official liturgical texts in Latin because this provides a single clear point of reference for translations into all other languages. The same holds for the official texts of canon law, and for all other doctrinal and pastoral communications and directives of the Holy See (and the Holy Father), such as encyclical letters, motu propriae, and declarations ex cathedra.

“For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure until the end of time… of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.” (Pope Pius XI, Officiorum Omnium, 1922)

“The use of the Latin language prevailing in a great part of the Church affords at once an imposing sign of unity and an effective safeguard against the corruption of true doctrine.” (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei)

“The Latin language is assuredly worthy of being defended with great care instead of being scorned; for the Latin Church it is the most abundant source of Christian civilization and the richest treasury of piety… we must not hold in low esteem these traditions of your fathers which were your glory for centuries.” (Pope Paul VI, Sacrificium Laudis, 1966)

“If there are some present who do not understand what is being said or sung, they know at least that all is said and sung to the glory of God, and that is sufficient for them to join in it devoutly.” (St. Augustine)

 

[Cat]

Ok, we get it. You and Cat prefer the OF, which you are both entitled to. I started this thread by posting an article from Miami’s Archdiocese about the EF and its use there. How are your posts relevant to this article? And if they are not, why post them? Just curious.

How does a discussion work? Discussion involves give and take, point and counterpoint, and yes, disagreements. Surely you did not expect to put up your OP, and then have everyone chime in and say, “Yes, wonderful! I agree.”

That’s Facebook. This is still a discussion forum, and until it becomes a Facebook page, I will discuss. I love lively discussion, and that’s why I come here. I’ll leave when it becomes “one-sentence” social media.

MY post was not in response to your OP, but in response to a poster named anonymous1995, who posted as fact several points about the EF Mass that are personal opinions. E.g., “Latin polyphonic music creates ‘a sense of silence’ within our hearts. We may hardly memorize the melodies of Palestrina’s compositions and chants, but they calm our souls down. Magic!”

These statements are purely opinion, not facts. I felt that it was important for people reading the thread to remember that. Latin polyphonic music does NOT create a “sense of silence” within all hearts (certainly not mine!). That’s an opinion, a personal experience that is simply not true for everyone.

If everyone approaches the issue of the EF and the OF assuming that anonymous1995’s opinions are fact, then of course many Catholics will condemn the OF form because there is generally no Latin polyphony in the OF Mass and therefore, if anonymous1995’s opinions are fact, there is no interior silence in the OF Mass.

But anonymous1995’s opinions are NOT fact, and therefore not valid reasons to condemn the OF.

I must point out that anonymous1995 did NOT condemn the OF Mass, BTW. In fact, anonymous1995 made it clear that he/she was not deriding the OF, but that the EF was a better choice for him/her.

Yes, for those who share this opinion, indeed, the OF Mass is a great choice.

And I did NOT condemn the EF or your OP in my post. I spelled out my objection to anonymous1995’s statement of opinion as fact, and I described my personal opinion, and made it clear that it was an opinion, not fact.

IMO, if people involved with an online discussion forum don’t want discussion, but simply want everyone to agree with and affirm their OPs, they should state that in the OP.

Sorry if I sound crabby. I have a very difficult time with the Facebook approach to socializing, and the entire concept of “friending” and “unfriending” and holding discussions to one short sentence followed by another short sentence. My dear German grandmother and other relatives are turning over in their graves! Some of my fondest memories are those lively discussion at Grandma’s house where everyone talked at once and talked fast and supported their opinions with facts and examples, and yet, we still all managed to listen to each other and learn a lot.

 

[ProVobis]

MY post was not in response to your OP, but in response to a poster named anonymous1995, who posted as fact several points about the EF Mass that are personal opinions. E.g., “Latin polyphonic music creates ‘a sense of silence’ within our hearts. We may hardly memorize the melodies of Palestrina’s compositions and chants, but they calm our souls down. Magic!”

These statements are purely opinion, not facts. I felt that it was important for people reading the thread to remember that. Latin polyphonic music does NOT create a “sense of silence” within all hearts (certainly not mine!). That’s an opinion, a personal experience that is simply not true for everyone.

I suppose Vatican II’s call for Latin, Gregorian chant, organ, etc. was just an opinion as well?

We have schools that teach that stuff. If your preference is not to take these classes and discuss with your German family, okay, but it doesn’t change the dynamics of the Church.

 

[ProVobis]

MY post was not in response to your OP, but in response to a poster named anonymous1995, who posted as fact several points about the EF Mass that are personal opinions. E.g., “Latin polyphonic music creates ‘a sense of silence’ within our hearts. We may hardly memorize the melodies of Palestrina’s compositions and chants, but they calm our souls down. Magic!”

These statements are purely opinion, not facts. I felt that it was important for people reading the thread to remember that. Latin polyphonic music does NOT create a “sense of silence” within all hearts (certainly not mine!). That’s an opinion, a personal experience that is simply not true for everyone.

I suppose Vatican II’s call for Latin, Gregorian chant, organ, etc. was just an opinion as well?

We have schools that teach that stuff. If your preference is not to take these classes and discuss with your German family, okay, but it doesn’t change the dynamics of the Church.

English or not, the Church will continue.

 

[QuestingKnight]

What we need are standards, rigorously enforced. The current trend is towards ultimate democratisation: whatever the locals want is what you’ll see at Mass.

Considering the break with tradition - much more lay participation and sentimentalisation at this religious rite - and extrapolation at the current rate of change, a Roman Catholic Mass in South America or Holland will be pretty lively in another 40 years.

Now, if this suited the creating of a suitably solemn atmosphere for the worship and propitiation of God, it would be Ok. But the noise, movement, vernacular and hymns are all veering away from the solemn, towards mere entertainment. And the killer is, it’s not even professional entertainment. It’s bland. Super bland People who couldn’t make it on the professional stage have 1 hour in 1 week to rehearse a performance for the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. You would not pay money to hear the hymns or the sermon at an average modern Catholic Mass if they were performed in a secular context. The EMHCs dress in civilian clothes; only great performers can get away with that on the professional stage.

The old rite lays out the hymns, rubrics, dress so that 1 priest and server can perform it without having to exert themselves and still look and sound impressive.

The Church has thought of it all. Are your local musicians terrible? Have a Low Mass. Can they manage 2 nice hymns at the Offertory and Communion. OK, the option is there.

Then the laity can attend in peace, the priest can do the job and exit stage left, in peace, and the community can fulfil its duty to propitiate, adore, thank and petition the Lord God, with peace of mind, having performed the act of worship as the Church wills it, rather than how the strongest personalities in the parish will it.

 

[anonymous1995]

MY post was not in response to your OP, but in response to a poster named anonymous1995, who posted as fact several points about the EF Mass that are personal opinions. E.g., “Latin polyphonic music creates ‘a sense of silence’ within our hearts. We may hardly memorize the melodies of Palestrina’s compositions and chants, but they calm our souls down. Magic!”

These statements are purely opinion, not facts. I felt that it was important for people reading the thread to remember that. Latin polyphonic music does NOT create a “sense of silence” within all hearts (certainly not mine!). That’s an opinion, a personal experience that is simply not true for everyone.

If everyone approaches the issue of the EF and the OF assuming that anonymous1995’s opinions are fact, then of course many Catholics will condemn the OF form because there is generally no Latin polyphony in the OF Mass and therefore, if anonymous1995’s opinions are fact, there is no interior silence in the OF Mass.

But anonymous1995’s opinions are NOT fact, and therefore not valid reasons to condemn the OF.

I must point out that anonymous1995 did NOT condemn the OF Mass, BTW. In fact, anonymous1995 made it clear that he/she was not deriding the OF, but that the EF was a better choice for him/her.

Sorry for not making it clear. I have to reiterate that my post only gives MY ANSWER (MY!!!) as to why the OF Mass SEEMS TO SHOW LESS grandeur than the EF Mass RELATIVELY. Again, that’s my personal opinion.

As for breaking from the Church traditions, I think this is a matter of how things are executed. To me, one factor is because people have mediocre education on the gist of liturgy, and also the imprudence in execution of liturgy, and as a result fail to demonstrate continuity with the past in reforms. That’s also why, while not demeaning the significance of liturgical localization, I always emphasize that a certain proportion of Chants, Latin polyphonic music and other traditions be incorporated in our OF Masses, so that our OF Masses get the essence of the traditions while reaching out to our modern world in more contemporary ways, such as the use of vernacular languages and some changes in the Mass structure as compared to the past. I am very optimistic towards this, for the vehement debates on forums like this successfully enhance the awareness of the people to seriously treat our Mass liturgy. And I also feel that our Popes are also working on this. So let’s pray that God lead our Church to have a liturgy which extracts the most out of traditions and novelties.