- Status
R
rpp
Guest
Hmm… That does not quite ring true to me. I need to do some more checking. I do know that he did “solidify” it against structural changes and modifications. I am not sure when it became the “standard” Mass for the Latin Rite Church.
Yes, you may be correct, but it was a liturgy from which Pope Gregory derived the Latin Tridentine Mass.
You were correct to use the lowercase rite in your response. The rites for different orders are different today, sometimes significantly, because they are based on the Novus Ordo Mass which permits certain changes.
My source of information on this is an old Franciscan nun who is my Spiritual director. According to her, it was not until the introduction of the Novus Ordo Mass with its myriad of options that some Orders and Societies developed their own rites (lowercase). However, it is true that many celebrated the Tridentine Mass with what could be called different styles. Style is a part of a rite, not a Rite.
The fundamental structure of Mass was the same. This cannot be said when comparing the Tridentine to the Novus Ordo, Byzentine, Coptic or Maronite Rites.
R
rpp
Guest
I am sorry, I did not intend to imply that non-Latin Rite saints are somehow less saintly. Since I was limiting my discussion to the Latin Rite Mass, I did not think I needed to mention the other 20-something other Rites that are in communion with Rome.
As for the rest of your comment, all I can say to that is that it is wonderful how the Holy Spirit guides and preserves the Church. That the Tridentine Mass has been preserved since Apostolic times is certainly tesatimony to His power and grace. Proof of our Lord’s statement when he said that “The gates of Hell will not prevail against it.”
H
havemercy
Guest
I’ve yet to attend the Tridentine. I want to so bad. I hope at least Ben XVI makes it so that they’re more commonplace. I have no beef with the N.O., but you can really take advantage of it.
R
rpp
Guest
Thank you!
First let me say that I very much love the Novus Ordo Mass. Also love the Tridentine Mass. I pray LOTH Morning Prayer and attend daily Mass with Franciscan nuns at a retreat house/infirmary/retirement house. One of these sisters is my spiritual director. I experienced a sudden conversion from atheism in 2003 and after 17 months of RCIA, I was confirmed at Easter 2005. In that time I have read over 250 books on everything from spirituality to church history to the crises of the modern church. Not to mention the Bible, the Catechism and all the Vatican II documents in their entirety and several of documents available from the Council of Trent. I have read countless encyclicals, articles, opinion pieces. I have attended Mass throughout the USA in my travels. I also happen to be a published author. I have always had a passion for history and have studied it all my adult life (along with physics and astronomy), though it is not my profession. When I became Christian, I turned my eye to learning everything I could as fast as I could.
As a result, I tend to be “book smart” but inexperienced.
I said all that so that you can understand a bit where I am coming from; a book-smart professional skeptic with a scientific/engineering bent.
The Mass that was promulgated in 1968 was developed pretty much from scratch. Not everyone who participated in its development was Catholic; there were at least 6 protestant theologians who contributed to it.
The reason for its development from scratch was that Pope Pius V at the council Trent declared that anyone who made [structural] changes to the Tridentine Rite was “anathema”, a pretty harsh declaration. Yet Vatican II encouraged that the Mass be made in the vernacular and that the faithful participate “more fully and consciously”. So to some faithful and orthodox, (my opinion here) translating the Tridentine Mass was either insufficient or not permitted.
Along with these well meaning and Spirit-lead bishops and liturgists, liberal/dissenting/modernist theologians (e.g. the theologian and former Augustinian priest Gregory Baum from Canada) had another agenda. They felt they had an opportunity to create a Mass that would not offend Protestants (as if that should be a consideration), have lots of options so individual priests and bishops could change to reflect “local needs” and not “frozen” so the Church or even individual priests and/or Bishops could “modernize” it. The Novus Ordo was born.
The numerous options lead to great misunderstanding among the faithful laity, who could smell liturgical abuse in the Tridentine Mass half a continent away. With all the options, it was confusing to know what was permitted and what was not.
This confusion was not limited to the faithful laity either. Many a faithful priest unintentionally committed abuses as well. With the influence of “feel-good” liberal theology of the 1960’s and 1970’s, this abuse was often corrected properly. Of course there was also intentional abuse, which was also not corrected. Furthermore, many bishops in the USA incorrectly suppressed the TLM, even after Pope Paul VI said it had not been suppressed. That suppression continues to this day in many dioceses.
These abuses were tolerated because the faithful did not understand the very complex rubrics that govern the Novus Ordo options. This is still true today. Combine that with numerous indults granted to say, US bishops, which permit certain other departures from what is permitted in the GIRM and confusion among the laity was, and still is, the rule.
The Tridentine Mass, with its very few options, yet wide “stylistic” variations, is more simple for the laity to understand and thus more difficult for abuse to creep in.
Below are two good articles from good and faithful Catholic commentators with some surprising opinions about the TLM
catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/church/novus-beauty.htm
Here are some other links about the development of the Novis Ordo Mass. They are from sources that represent two different perspectives, Modernist and Traditionalist.
answers.com/topic/mass-of-paul-vi
latin-mass-society.org/2004/fabrication.htm
G
giuseppeTO
Guest
R
rlg94086
Guest
This I witnessed firsthand with the change of posture after the Sanctus. The GIRM said kneeling is proper, but it can be overruled by the Bishop. The Bishop in Oregon (where I was at the time) left it up to the priests. Perhaps the priests should have just left it up to the layperson?
R
rpp
Guest
Hey! We agree! Wow!
Well, almost. I am not sure about the “junior partner” thingie. I will say that I think as time moves forward, the more orthodox priests will want to say the TLM more frequently. The faithful, nervously and in small numbers at first, will gradually come to accept it more readily, particularly the young.
Eventually, you may find that Sunday Mass may be divided by Mass type; 8:00 in Latin, 10:00 in Vernacular, etc. One problem I foresee is those parishes where the Tabernacle is not in the sanctuary or where moving the altar to abut the tabernacle is not practical. Remember the priest says the TLM facing the Tabernacle, the same direction the parishioners face.
I agree with you that the contention that the TLM will “solve the problems” is, well, optimistic. One cannot ignore the influence of dissenting, disobedient and downright immoral priests (and bishops?). While these have always been with the church, their influence has blossomed in recent decades.
An area where our experiences differ is TLM attendance. I have attended TLM in several different parishes around this country. Without exception, those who arrived less than 10 minutes early got to stand in the back (and presumably most of them knelt on the floor when the time came.)
One final personal thought. The one thing I do not like about the TLM is the amount of time spent kneeling. Of course this is purely personal and entirely due to the fact I have a very bad left knee. (I had my forth surgery on it this past Friday.) I have a similar but opposite problem the Novus Ordo, not enough kneeling!
S
Strider
Guest
This whole disagreemeent between the two rites may be moot, or almost so. I wouldn’t have written that a month ago, but since then I’ve been to two NO all Latin Masses.
The priest celerated both ad orientem, or facing the Tabernacle with his back to the people.
The Latin translation of the NO is much more true to the TLM, including the three mea culpas in the confetior and the response et cum spiritu tuo instead of a Latinzed, “sand also with you.”
I grew up with the TLM and have full appeciation of it, but this Latin NO, said properly, is just as good. :yup:
I have also develeloped an apreciation of the properly celebrated NO with a little Latin, as in the EWTN daly NO. But my main point is that the Latin NO is ALMOST a TLM. Beautiful!
The priest celerated both ad orientem, or facing the Tabernacle with his back to the people.
The Latin translation of the NO is much more true to the TLM, including the three mea culpas in the confetior and the response et cum spiritu tuo instead of a Latinzed, “sand also with you.”
I grew up with the TLM and have full appeciation of it, but this Latin NO, said properly, is just as good. :yup:
I have also develeloped an apreciation of the properly celebrated NO with a little Latin, as in the EWTN daly NO. But my main point is that the Latin NO is ALMOST a TLM. Beautiful!
N
Nicholas_Larkin
Guest
I can’t wait till the Holy Father gives a Universal Indult, if he does. It would be awesome!
J
Joe_Monahan
Guest
RPP,
Ordinarily I don’t get into this forum, but a poster called the discussion between you and David to my attention and asked if I would clarify a couple of points.
Your source is misinformed. Religious Order Rites existed long before the introduction of the NO Mass and there is no such term in liturgics as “style”. I recommend you read the early twentieth-century edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia’s topic on Rites for detail as to these. The portions specific to the Religious Order Rites begin at roughly the half-way mark of the scroll bar.
There are 6 Rites, other than the Latin, not 20-something. There are 22 Catholic Churches, other than the Latin Church, in communion with Rome. To understand the difference between Rite and Church, I recommend reading posts 1 though 3 of the thread **SOPHIA: Eastern & Oriental Catholic Churches sui iuris
**
Joe
R
rpp
Guest
Thank you for the clarification and correction. I will chase down these references.
Z
zorrox
Guest
Sometimes the bishops and even some cardinals make me mad as heck. What has changed in the faith of the Church for 2000 years? Nothing.
Our belief on the Holy sacrifice of the Mass is the same now as it was before Vatican II and as it was in the time of the apostles.
So what could ever make a pastor of the Church panic in regards to another way of celebrating the Mysteries.
They surely should have greater fears for both their own and other people’s souls.
Our belief on the Holy sacrifice of the Mass is the same now as it was before Vatican II and as it was in the time of the apostles.
So what could ever make a pastor of the Church panic in regards to another way of celebrating the Mysteries.
They surely should have greater fears for both their own and other people’s souls.
R
rpp
Guest
Mea culpa. I have made some significant factual errors as well as some imprecise statements in the last couple of my posts regarding Rites of the Church.
Due to the various responses I received, and other people that I have spoken with, this is a area of the Church which is not well understood by most. I think this is probably because people know about their church, parish and rite. They may know something about others, but most people have a more limited exposure to these other rites and churches. Myself included.
Another difficulty is the use of terms. Some words, like “rite” and “church” have several meanings all correct, yet often seemingly contradictory. Consider these phrases, “Catholic Church”, Rite of the Mass”, “Latin Rite Church”, “Rite of Election”, “Byzantine Rite Church” and “Byzantine Rite”. These all refer to completely different things and only two are equivalent.
Because of this, I think my confusion is understandable, though that does not make what I wrote any more correct.
Since this is a somewhat bigger issue and is a bit off-topic, I will start another thread to post my corrections. First I need to assemble a bit more information.
One word. Several people have forwarded to me information about non-Latin Rite rites and churches. I have always limited my remarks on this thread to the Latin Rite Church, also called the Western Church and the issues regarding the Tridentine Mass. Obviously not everything that applies to that topic can be applied to Other Churches and Non-Western Church rites.
As for the authoritative tone of my previous posts, I am sorry about that as well. There were a couple sources for that. The first was that I was quite confident that what I posted was correct. When I used non-standard terms (like “style”) to avoid confusion I should have made it more clear that I was doing that. Another source was pride, perhaps to the point of sin. Finally, I do have a bad habit when I speak or write of not be as clear as should be when I am speculating, relating incomplete information or basing conclusions on incomplete or questionable sources. In all these areas I will continue to better myself. I look to all of you to help me. I will always be receptive to polite, constructive and well-meaning guidance.
More on the specifics later.
Due to the various responses I received, and other people that I have spoken with, this is a area of the Church which is not well understood by most. I think this is probably because people know about their church, parish and rite. They may know something about others, but most people have a more limited exposure to these other rites and churches. Myself included.
Another difficulty is the use of terms. Some words, like “rite” and “church” have several meanings all correct, yet often seemingly contradictory. Consider these phrases, “Catholic Church”, Rite of the Mass”, “Latin Rite Church”, “Rite of Election”, “Byzantine Rite Church” and “Byzantine Rite”. These all refer to completely different things and only two are equivalent.
Because of this, I think my confusion is understandable, though that does not make what I wrote any more correct.
Since this is a somewhat bigger issue and is a bit off-topic, I will start another thread to post my corrections. First I need to assemble a bit more information.
One word. Several people have forwarded to me information about non-Latin Rite rites and churches. I have always limited my remarks on this thread to the Latin Rite Church, also called the Western Church and the issues regarding the Tridentine Mass. Obviously not everything that applies to that topic can be applied to Other Churches and Non-Western Church rites.
As for the authoritative tone of my previous posts, I am sorry about that as well. There were a couple sources for that. The first was that I was quite confident that what I posted was correct. When I used non-standard terms (like “style”) to avoid confusion I should have made it more clear that I was doing that. Another source was pride, perhaps to the point of sin. Finally, I do have a bad habit when I speak or write of not be as clear as should be when I am speculating, relating incomplete information or basing conclusions on incomplete or questionable sources. In all these areas I will continue to better myself. I look to all of you to help me. I will always be receptive to polite, constructive and well-meaning guidance.
More on the specifics later.
A
amoxoxoma
Guest
Outward appearance is all that counts?
I left the church at the age of 16 when mass was still in latin. I came back to the church at 32 because it was a liturgy for the people of God, not the historians.
P
prv
Guest
What is this “2865 test”? I don’t remember having to pass any kind of “test” in order to be admitted to First Communion, nor any when I was confirmed by the power of the Holy Spirit a year later. I didn’t pass (or fail) any test when I started serving at the blessed altar of our Lord my freshman year in college.
The only test adults (including children able to reason) really need is:
Do you believe and profess all that the Catholic Church professes to be revealed by Christ Jesus our Lord?
and
Will you live as a faithful Catholic in keeeping with the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ as revealed by the Holy Catholic Church?
This is for all, traditional or modernist, Catholics.
R
rpp
Guest
The 2865 Test is a sort of slang. But here is how it goes.
You need four things. A copy of the Cathechism, and three highter pens, green, yellow and red.
You start at the beginning of the Catechism and read the first article / paragraph. It is numbered one. After reading you mark it with a color. Green means you agree, Yellow means you are uncertain and Red means you disagree. Keep track of how many times you use each color. Move to the each article / paragraph and mark it with a color.
After you finish reviewing all 2,865 articles in the Catechism (hence the name), score yourself based on how often you used each color. Here is the scoring:
If you marked all 2865 paragraphs Green, that is you did not take the caps off the Yellow or Red markers, you are in full communion with the Church.
If you used any other color, it is time to review your faith; you risk being personally out of communion with the Church. (Others have described the the effect of using Yellow and especiually Red in more harsh terms. I wil not here.)
It is a more detailed, but fundamentally the same thing as the porofession we all made at Confirmation. It is good, I think, for all of us to review ourselves on this from time to time.
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
Considering that what the new cathechism proclaims about, say, masturbation, is a load of relativistic rubbish, I must be schismatic.
I thank the Lord everyday I have anonymous internet buddies to point out my own schism-ness.
I thank the Lord everyday I have anonymous internet buddies to point out my own schism-ness.
R
rpp
Guest
A bit off topic, but here goes…Considering that what the new cathechism proclaims about, say, masturbation, is a load of relativistic rubbish, I must be schismatic.
I thank the Lord everyday I have anonymous internet buddies to point out my own schism-ness.
And the Catechims says
I am your internet buddy and I am here to help! :bounce:
- Status