Pope Benedict and the Reform of the Reform

[benedictgal]

Not to worry, I’m neither confusing it, nor am I particularly desiring it.
My personal “ideal”, as it were, would be a situation where reverent, vernacular OF’s are the norm, with a sufficiently broad use of the EF to allow anyone who wishes, to attend without having to drive a great distance.
Actually I guess I would like to see just one EF offered at each parish on a regular basis.
Will it ever Happen? Maybe not. Certainly not in my lifetime.

Of course don’t confuse my desires with the strident demands of some others here. I believe you’ve read enough of my posts to know that I am not a “Take us back to Latin” guy.

Peace
James

Neither was the Pope suggesting a wholesale cessation of the vernacular. The problem lies with the excessive creativity and bad translations that we currently have. That is why Pope John Paul II promulgated the publications of both Liturgicam Authenticam and Redemptionis Sacramentum. Pope Benedict is trying to get an authentic and accurate interpretation of what the documents of the Second Vatican Council actually said, as opposed to those who are merely following the alleged spirit of the Vatican II.

 

[ethelzguy]

My personal “ideal”, as it were, would be a situation where reverent, vernacular OF’s are the norm, with a sufficiently broad use of the EF to allow anyone who wishes, to attend without having to drive a great distance.

Of course don’t confuse my desires with the strident demands of some others here. I believe you’ve read enough of my posts to know that I am not a “Take us back to Latin” guy.

Peace
James

Our parish has been easing Latin prayers back into all Masses for about a year now. At first I was rather ambivalent about it, like we were going back in time, but oh well, no big deal.

Watching “The Rifleman” or “Andy Griffith” in black-and-white is still quite enjoyable too.

The wife thinks the prayers in Latin “are pretty”.

It didn’t rock my boat one way or another. My resistance to Latin came solely as a result of participating at CAF. The attitudes of superiority by most of those who crave a return to Latin cast an ugly pall over the use of Latin in my mind. Unfortunately, now when I hear Latin at Mass I become rather annoyed.

 

[brigid12]

I rather enjoy hearing/saying prayers at Mass in another language. That’s me - I like other languages. I also prefer a Mass which is more than the “kiddie-speak” that a poster in another forum mentioned as what is all too often the usual OF. That is not always true, however in reading the translations of the EF it was apparent that the words/prayers had been simplified down to what is common language in the newspapers - a fifth grade level.

I am very much a fan of our present Holy Father and would like to see implemented his suggestions, however his suggestions are unlikely to be implemented (in the forseeable future) in hardly any of the diocese on the West Coast, at least. There is definitely episcopal disregard for them right now from what I’ve read and heard. The Holy Spirit will probably ensure that they are implemented at some point in the future , however I doubt that I’ll see them (from earth, that is).

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I’m a fan of the singer, Josh Groben. I enjoy listening to the songs he sings in Italian, even though I don’t understand the words. They sound beautiful. However, I enjoy even more, the songs he sings in English, because I can understand them, fully.

The same is true between Mass in Latin and English. A Mass in Latin is beautiful, but a Mass in English, I understand more fully.

Unless you’re fluent in Latin, the same will be true for you, if you’re honest about it.

Reverence, has to do with the people attending the Mass, not the language.

The most reverent Masses I attend are at St. Joseph’s Abbey, in Spencer, Ma. They are in English.

I don’t expect that Mass at my home parish will ever reach that level, because, most of the people of the parish, are not on that spiritual level.

Jim

 

[DeaconVocation]

I read Fr. Zuhlsdorf’s blog “What does the prayer really say”, and he comments a lot on Summorum Pontificum and related issues. I have to admit it has not been clear to me the “big plan” - extraordinary Mass which a minority wishes becomes the liturgy of choice, an ordinary liturgy which has suffered from a lot of liberties taken. Where is all of this going?

Then one day Fr. Zuhlsdorf commented on a George Weigel article about all this - and both seemed very convinced that the grand plan is to create awareness of the need for reverence in the celebration of the liturgy through increased awareness of the extraordinary form. Use this awareness to reform the ordinary liturgy to make it more reverent and more representative of our particpation in a heavenly event.

The end of Weigel’s article says it well:

And the net result, over time? Almost certainly not “Latin days are here again” in every Catholic parish but rather a more reverent, more prayerful celebration of mass according to a reformed missal of 1970—and according to what the Second Vatican Council actually prescribed.

Read it yourself, Weigel’s article with Father’s comments, and see if that’s what you get out of it:
wdtprs.com/blog/2008/06/george-weigel-on-the-return-of-the-tlm/

 

[JRKH]

I read Fr. Zuhlsdorf’s blog “What does the prayer really say”, and he comments a lot on Summorum Pontificum and related issues. I have to admit it has not been clear to me the “big plan” - extraordinary Mass which a minority wishes becomes the liturgy of choice, an ordinary liturgy which has suffered from a lot of liberties taken. Where is all of this going?

Then one day Fr. Zuhlsdorf commented on a George Weigel article about all this - and both seemed very convinced that the grand plan is to create awareness of the need for reverence in the celebration of the liturgy through increased awareness of the extraordinary form. Use this awareness to reform the ordinary liturgy to make it more reverent and more representative of our particpation in a heavenly event.

The end of Weigel’s article says it well:

And the net result, over time? Almost certainly not “Latin days are here again” in every Catholic parish but rather a more reverent, more prayerful celebration of mass according to a reformed missal of 1970—and according to what the Second Vatican Council actually prescribed.

Amen to this.

James

 

[ethelzguy]

Amen to this.

James

An excellent article. It spells out very well, that while Latin is encouraged, that the idea that the Church is doing a full-bore 180 degree turn is greatly exaggerated.

We are not headed back to the 1940’s and 50’s. We are moving forward.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

It didn’t rock my boat one way or another. My resistance to Latin came solely as a result of participating at CAF. The attitudes of superiority by most of those who crave a return to Latin cast an ugly pall over the use of Latin in my mind. Unfortunately, now when I hear Latin at Mass I become rather annoyed.

How very true. And this also might possibly have been the reason many Bishops resisted the TLM when an indult was required.

Lux

 

[japhy]

The holy Father is not Changing things back to reflect the “old way”, but rather is encouraging the use of both forms to reflect the “full way”.

That is an incredibly succinct way of putting it, JRKH. Bravo!

 

[japhy]

It is surprising how many people do not know that, including myself up until about a year or so.

I agree here… when I finally read the Vatican II document on the liturgy last year, I was blown away.

 

[benedictgal]

That is an incredibly succinct way of putting it, JRKH. Bravo!

That is quite true. In fact, that is, essentially, what Msgr. Guido Marini said when he was explaining the Benedictine Reform of the Reform:

«As for terms like “preconciliar” and “postconciliar” that are used by some, it seems to me that these belong to an outdated language, and if they are used with the intention of indicating a discontinuity in the Church’s journey, I maintain that they are mistaken and typical of highly reductive ideological views. There are “old things and new things” that belong to the treasury of the Church of all time, and must be considered as such. The wise man is able to find both of these in his treasury, without appealing to other criteria apart from those of the Gospel and the Church. Not all that is new is true, nor is all that is old. The truth spans old and new, and it is for this that we must strive, without prejudice. The Church lives according to the law of continuity in virtue of which it recognizes development rooted in tradition. What is most important is that everything work together so that the liturgical celebration truly is the celebration of the sacred mystery, of the crucified and risen Lord who becomes present in his Church, reenacting the mystery of salvation and calling us, in the logic of an authentic and active participation, to share to the full in his own life, which is a life given in love to the Father and to his brothers, a life of holiness.»

No truer words could convey this, unless, of course, the explanation came from the Pope, himself. Ah, but it has. All we have to do is read his pre-Papal books and writings on the matter.

 

[ethelzguy]

No truer words could convey this, unless, of course, the explanation came from the Pope, himself. Ah, but it has. All we have to do is read his pre-Papal books and writings on the matter.

This statement is misleading. “His pre-Papal books and writings” do not carry the authority of the Pope, as he was not Pope at the time of said writings.

Becoming Pope does not make all previous writings and books “Papal in Nature”. The views expressed as a Bishop or Cardinal are done so from the viewpoint of a Bishop or Cardinal. The view from the Chair of Peter is undoubtedly somewhat different.

 

[AMDGtoo]

Seeing as how I was never exposed to the latin portions of mass, how will us youngins’ get the proper responses memorized? I have other friends who have never had exposure to the latin mass responses…

Just had to answer this. Before the Novus Ordo, little missals (having all the responses of the Mass in both Latin and English) were carried to Mass and used (much like how Evangelicals carry their Bibles to Sunday Services.) And as if that was not enough, in the mid-60s a small 3X5 card having the 15 responses used at Mass (printed in Latin and spelled out phoentically and with what the priest would say) was available and could be tucked into the small missal. Knowing the proper responses was not difficult then and should not be difficult now. IMO things shouldn’t be made to seem more of a problem than they are.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Just had to answer this. Before the Novus Ordo, little missals (having all the responses of the Mass in both Latin and English) were carried to Mass and used (much like how Evangelicals carry their Bibles to Sunday Services.) And as if that was not enough, in the mid-60s a small 3X5 card having the 15 responses used at Mass (printed in Latin and spelled out phoentically and with what the priest would say) was available and could be tucked into the small missal. Knowing the proper responses was not difficult then and should not be difficult now. IMO things shouldn’t be made to seem more of a problem than they are.

But all we were doing is mimicking the words. We had little if any understanding of what we were actually saying.

Fact is, because of the vernacular today, those who now attend a Mass in Latin, actually have a better understanding of what is being said.

However, this wasn’t the case for Catholics of pre-Vatican II. Oh sure, there were those few who took Latin in high-school and such, but people like my parents and grandparents, who never attended high-school, understood little if anything in Latin.

Jim

 

[JRKH]

But all we were doing is mimicking the words. We had little if any understanding of what we were actually saying.

Fact is, because of the vernacular today, those who now attend a Mass in Latin, actually have a better understanding of what is being said.

However, this wasn’t the case for Catholics of pre-Vatican II. Oh sure, there were those few who took Latin in high-school and such, but people like my parents and grandparents, who never attended high-school, understood little if anything in Latin.

Jim

This may be true about the older generations, I don’t know. I do know that my Grandparents and Parents Knew how to act in Church. They Knew and treated every part of the Church and Liturgy with Love and Respect.
You were quiet in Church so you didn’t disturb others who were praying (including before and after mass). You Genuflected whenever you crossed in front of the Altar. If you were scheduled to serve mass, you didn’t wear gym shoes that stand out like boats under your cassock. You dressed appropriately for a visit to your Lord and Savior on Sunday. Not like your late for a picnic.

I apologize for getting off on a rant like that.
I guess my point is that, If reintroducing Latin, and the EF helps to reinvigorate a true reverence for God, His House, and His Liturgies then I’m all for it.

Peace
James

 

[AMDGtoo]

But all we were doing is mimicking the words. We had little if any understanding of what we were actually saying.

I think there is something most don’t even mention, most of the time the majority of the congregation never even heard the Latin (except for those 15 responses.) The people were busy with the English translation while the priest directed the Latin prayers to God.

We actually think in pictures and in concepts. And when any of us learn another language, words (whether English, Latin, Spanish, Swahili, etc.) are then put to them. Through repetition the concept and the words become one in the mind. And as far as that “mimicking words”, well, my parish does it all the time when teaching a new concept or song–except the words are in Swahili or something like that. No one takes offense about that. Why is Latin different? Why is it that it is only then that I hear “I don’t do Latin” (and you can’t make me even if it is only 15 lines and some that are repeated at that)?

 

[Joannm]

This may be true about the older generations, I don’t know. I do know that my Grandparents and Parents Knew how to act in Church. They Knew and treated every part of the Church and Liturgy with Love and Respect.
You were quiet in Church so you didn’t disturb others who were praying (including before and after mass). You Genuflected whenever you crossed in front of the Altar. If you were scheduled to serve mass, you didn’t wear gym shoes that stand out like boats under your cassock. You dressed appropriately for a visit to your Lord and Savior on Sunday. Not like your late for a picnic.

I apologize for getting off on a rant like that.
I guess my point is that, If reintroducing Latin, and the EF helps to reinvigorate a true reverence for God, His House, and His Liturgies then I’m all for it.

Peace
James

How is having the Mass in Latin going to stop people from talking before and after Mass? How is it going to stop people from wearing gym shoes and tank tops? How is it going to make people genuflect and show revcerence?
People who attend the Latin Mass now are people who, by and by, do show more reverence and restraint in church than the average Sunday pew sitter. I don’t see how people are going to change what they do just because the Mass is in Latin. It is a cultural thing…it has nothing to do with language. Unless you plan on having people in the church announcing “silenceo” as they do in Italy…or having cover ups available at the doors of the church, you aren’t really going to change those things that annoy you.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

JRKH

This may be true about the older generations, I don’t know. I do know that my Grandparents and Parents Knew how to act in Church.

This was the culture of the times. People knew how to act in town meetings, school, etc. We called adults, Mr and Mrs, never by their first names. Even the behavior in a movie theater was more civil than today.

Sure, they were quiet in Church, but many were daydreaming, prayed the rosary or fell asleep. There were the others like my uncle, who spent time in a seminary, who followed his missal, and knew a little more than the average Catholic sitting next to him.

They Knew and treated every part of the Church and Liturgy with Love and Respect.
You were quiet in Church so you didn’t disturb others who were praying (including before and after mass). You Genuflected whenever you crossed in front of the Altar. If you were scheduled to serve mass, you didn’t wear gym shoes that stand out like boats under your cassock. You dressed appropriately for a visit to your Lord and Savior on Sunday. Not like your late for a picnic.

A big part of this was the way the nuns taught us. When I went to Catholic School,(pre-Vatican II), each class sat in assigned pews according to grade. The nun you had as your teacher, sat behind your class. Getting a hand across the back of the head for misbehavior, was administered quickly, and without question, and you’d have detention after school. You didn’t dare tell your parents the sister, hit you, for they would punish you for causing her problems.

Many Catholics were leaving the Catholic Church, because of the lack of connection to the Mass, and other reasons I won’t get into here.

Have no doubt about it, there was a problem, which is why Pope John XXII called the Vatican II council together. The Church needed to bring the people into the Mass and have us part of it, rather than observers.

I apologize for getting off on a rant like that.
I guess my point is that, If reintroducing Latin, and the EF helps to reinvigorate a true reverence for God, His House, and His Liturgies then I’m all for it.

I can assure you, re-introducing Latin, or the EF, will not bring reverence to the Mass. Only the hearts of the people who attend Mass can do that, and it matters little what language is used.

Are you really telling me that you’ve never attended a reverent NO Mass?

Jim

 

[brotherhrolf]

This was the culture of the times. People knew how to act in town meetings, school, etc. We called adults, Mr and Mrs, never by their first names. Even the behavior in a movie theater was more civil than today.

You are so correct in this. Except here down South we did call adults by their first names (e.g. Mr. Jim).

Sure, they were quiet in Church, but many were daydreaming, prayed the rosary or fell asleep. There were the others like my uncle, who spent time in a seminary, who followed his missal, and knew a little more than the average Catholic sitting next to him.

This is urban folkllore to me or opinion. Yes, the little old Italian ladies in my parish said the rosary. But, my mother made sure I knew how to follow the missal BEFORE I became an altar boy.

A big part of this was the way the nuns taught us. When I went to Catholic School,(pre-Vatican II), each class sat in assigned pews according to grade. The nun you had as your teacher, sat behind your class. Getting a hand across the back of the head for misbehavior, was administered quickly, and without question, and you’d have detention after school. You didn’t dare tell your parents the sister, hit you, for they would punish you for causing her problems.

You mean they didn’t used the dreaded clicker?

Many Catholics were leaving the Catholic Church, because of the lack of connection to the Mass, and other reasons I won’t get into here.

So how did I grow up in the same era and have the sense of reverence that I have at Mass?

I

can assure you, re-introducing Latin, or the EF, will not bring reverence to the Mass. Only the hearts of the people who attend Mass can do that, and it matters little what language is used.

You are partially right and partially wrong. Right because the EF will not bring reverence to the Mass - it is indeed the hearts of the people. But as someone who grew up before Vatican II isn’t there much we can remember? Simple things like keeping our mouths shut once we entered church? Ah, reverent silence!

Are you really telling me that you’ve never attended a reverent NO Mass?

For the last 25 years. But I have to drive 25 miles one way. Do I really want to hear two ushers discussing Preparation H before Mass? That’s what I have at my geographic parish.

There’s still a bunch of us around who grew up before Vatican II and who have been astounded by the changes in the last 40 years. I was perfectly content with HMC before Vatican II. I have been through all the changes.

I really get tired of hearing the same old, same old from you guys who liked what happen after Vatican II - along with the same tired, worn-out expressions (e.g. nobody knew what was being said, everyone said the rosary, people fell asleep). A little honesty people! There are too many of us who did know what was being said and who did participate in the Mass.

 

[JRKH]

Jim,
You really have to not take may rant’s so seriously. Especially when I apologize for getting off base. As to the points you raise…

JRKH
This was the culture of the times. People knew how to act in town meetings, school, etc. We called adults, Mr and Mrs, never by their first names. Even the behavior in a movie theater was more civil than today.

“The Culture” you speak of is one of the things that the Church sees as being a most dangerous thing. Especially to our young people. Cultural Changes that allow disrespectful behavour is something we should be working to change.

Sure, they were quiet in Church, but many were daydreaming, prayed the rosary or fell asleep. There were the others like my uncle, who spent time in a seminary, who followed his missal, and knew a little more than the average Catholic sitting next to him.

Intersting comment. Personally I never concern myself with what others are doing. As for my formative years and attending Church with my family, no one slept I can assure you. We prayed, and made the apprpriate responses. When I was old enough I learned ALL the Latin necessary for serving mass. (unfortunately they changed it before I got the chance:shrug: )As for praying the Rosary, that is a personal devotion and thus between the individual and God.

A big part of this was the way the nuns taught us. When I went to Catholic School,(pre-Vatican II), each class sat in assigned pews according to grade. The nun you had as your teacher, sat behind your class. Getting a hand across the back of the head for misbehavior, was administered quickly, and without question, and you’d have detention after school. You didn’t dare tell your parents the sister, hit you, for they would punish you for causing her problems.

Ah - I remember it well. Our family was just as you describe. Frankly we could use more of it.

Many Catholics were leaving the Catholic Church, because of the lack of connection to the Mass, and other reasons I won’t get into here.

Perhaps. I was too young at the time to know.

Have no doubt about it, there was a problem, which is why Pope John XXII called the Vatican II council together. The Church needed to bring the people into the Mass and have us part of it, rather than observers.

My suspicion is that if the changes had been more incremental and consistant we wouldn’t be having these discussions. Mistakes were made - and are still being made. All in All I have faith in The Church to sort things out.

I can assure you, re-introducing Latin, or the EF, will not bring reverence to the Mass. Only the hearts of the people who attend Mass can do that, and it matters little what language is used.

Maybe not… I can hope
I just can’t help but be saddened - yes saddened - that a person can’t kneel after Church and pray quietly because of the cafeteria level of noise going on. I have even had children running in and out of pews around me while I’m trying to pray and thank God for His Gift of the Eucharist.
Surely people can see another praying. Surely people can understand that the Church is not a playground to be run around in.

I am a Catholic, born, fell away, reverted, and I will die a Catholic. I deal with the issues as best I can for the Love of our Dear Lord.
I will continue to dress well (shirt and tie on Sundays), Pray before and after mass genuflect etc. both because it is what I must do for Love of God and also to be an example to others.

Are you really telling me that you’ve never attended a reverent NO Mass?

Jim

Never said that and never will.
As far as my personal preferences go, I like the EF on Sunday with choir etc.
During the Week I like our OF without music and sung responses.
So you see I like both.

Peace
James