Progressive Philippines Catholicism

[ProVobis]

Well, its one good reason. How else will people understand a Latin Mass without a Missal?

They managed to for over 1600+ years.

And today, not only do they have missals but the internet, mailing list groups, Catholic groups, language software, you name it. All they really need though is exposure and an open mind. They’re not going to get that if the all-vernacular is reinforced. One’s not going to prefer oranges if all he’s ever eaten are sweet apples.

 

[ProVobis]

True, but you still can’t criticize people for asking something that is legitimate.

Maybe this is a matter of good old English semantics here but I can’t understand why people would be asking for something that’s already been made “legitimate.” Maybe asking to make it more available, like ten times a day within walking distance, is that what you mean? Seems as if it’s really legitimate, the people already got what they want. Or do you mean people can legitimately ask for something, in which case it isn’t necessary to be legitimate in the first place?

 

[malphono]

Maybe this is a matter of good old English semantics here but I can’t understand why people would be asking for something that’s already been made “legitimate.” Maybe asking to make it more available, like ten times a day within walking distance, is that what you mean? Seems as if it’s really legitimate, the people already got what they want.

I’ve been wondering the same thing.

Or do you mean people can legitimately ask for something, in which case it isn’t necessary to be legitimate in the first place?

Or maybe it’s just that they (the authors of the statement in the OP) simply want to continue on their merry way and continue on their liturgical bulldozer without the interference of those nasty people in Rome and/or the local Ordinaries who support Rome?

 

[ProVobis]

Or maybe it’s just that they (the authors of the statement in the OP) simply want to continue on their merry way and **continue on their liturgical bulldozer **without the interference of those nasty people in Rome and/or the local Ordinaries who support Rome?

You mean they’re not done yet?

 

[malphono]

You mean they’re not done yet?

Judging from the statement quoted in the OP, and the supporting statement from the supporting [post=7111086]statement[/post] quoted separately, apparently not. One has to assume that the introduction of “mall Masses” was not the end of the line for the liturgical bulldozer.

 

[ProVobis]

Judging from the statement quoted in the OP, and the supporting statement from the supporting [post=7111086]statement[/post] quoted separately, apparently not. One has to assume that the introduction of “mall Masses” was not the end of the line for the liturgical bulldozer.

I don’t want to give them ideas but is a drive-thru a “legitimate” option?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Let’s see: The gospel, epistle and sermon will be said in Filipino.
Even poor people can afford a basic paperback missal, if they’re keen to read the priest’s text. Which they don’t need to be.
The lay responses are simple and, as Spanish is a derivative of Latin, even easier for Filipinos to learn.

Sorry, but you don’t know poor if you haven’t seen poor outside of the United States. Like I said, poor is $2 or less per day. And thats not per person, thats a whole family. Where else will they get the money for a missal? They don’t even eat 3 meals a day. 2 if they are lucky.

And no, Filipinos today don’t have the same appreciation of Spanish. I think we never did. Most of the populace were not educated during the colonial rule of Spain. We have Spanish words integrated into our language but by no means do we speak Spanish. Unlike South American Spanish colonies, we never adopted wide use of the language. People were kept poor and uneducated. Only those who found a way to make more money became educated. And thats a very small percentage of the population.

Ah, what the heck, let’s have the whole thing in Filipino. Perish forbid the locals should have to stretch themselves, even a bit, for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. They won’t do it. They can’t manage it. Poor, wee babies (weeps). [sarcasm]

I don’t know what you are crying about, its been in all-Filipino tha last 30-40 years.

‘The people’ know no other option. When Latin Masses are introduced in parishes in the West, you get a few outspoken critics, who, when challenged, fade away.

‘The Church allows it’ is no argument. It is like saying “It should be done, because it’s allowed” i.e. “It’s allowed … because it’s allowed”.

Why do you need a deeper reason? People want the Mass in their language, the Church allows it. The deeper reason is people want it. Why make something so simple become complicated? Just to win an argument? Its that simple, people want it. That is the reason. Why ask for something else?

I can say it hasn’t helped. The reforms were touted as heralding a new springtime. They haven’t worked. The case can be made that they have harmed the Church. Time to try something else.

Sorry but I find that argument baseless. People are making assumptions on too many things that if you analyze closely doesn’t show a relation to one another. There are many changes to society far more than the changes in the Church which has turned our society upside down today. In fact everything started during the industrial revolution. As we churn out more prodcuts, the ability to own material things has increased, thus turning people more materialistic. Just look around how many useless items we buy with so much money. Materialism and the desire for money has more to do why people aren’t going to church anymore, regardless of what the Liturgy is.

Because it would be nice to think our worship could be preserved from change by mediocre minds. That the Mass could be the same across nations. That people might once again grasp that the Mass is not directed at them but towards God.

Having lay people able to hear the priests text in their own language comes a very poor second to this.

What is wrong with people hearing the Mass in their own language? It was that way in the past. Too bad Latin died as a language. But when the Apostles established the Church they made sure to use the language of the locals. If what you are saying was true, the Apostles should have just used Aramaic, which the Greeks and Romans would have never understand and its the language that they and Jesus communicated in anyways.

 

[malphono]

I don’t want to give them ideas but is a drive-thru a “legitimate” option?

I can just picture it …

 

[ConstantineTG]

Maybe this is a matter of good old English semantics here but I can’t understand why people would be asking for something that’s already been made “legitimate.” Maybe asking to make it more available, like ten times a day within walking distance, is that what you mean? Seems as if it’s really legitimate, the people already got what they want. Or do you mean people can legitimately ask for something, in which case it isn’t necessary to be legitimate in the first place?

I think one of the follies of this thread is too much guessing has made its way into the dicussion over common sense. I mean, there isn’t even anything concrete proposed. People have been throwing in guesses what the wordings mean and everyone is just making their own conclusions.

But really, you have to realize what is said and what can be done. What else would “more Filipino” in the Liturgy mean? Plus the following text saying that while Latin is nice, they’re not interested in it. And for sure its not like they’re going to completely overhaul the Liturgy. So the short gist of it is, they want to make sure that the Liturgy stays in the vernacular. Perhaps re-translate it to make it more modern, more up to date. I have mentioned in the past one of my qualms about Mass in Filipino is that the language is dated. Its the equivalent to Shakespearan English. While Old Tagalog is beautiful and deep, its fast becoming incomprehensible to the newer generation.

Perhaps its more of a statement than a request. Or a request to keep the status quo rather than introduce changes that while valid and beautiful in its own right, its not something that will help the faith of the majority.

Not everyone wants or appreciates Latin in Mass. And while there is an option for that, we should respect those who would wish to avail of it.

I can’t see people asking for more than what the Church allows. And I don’t believe the CBCP will give in to anything that is not legitimate. Thats a sure thing.

 

[ConstantineTG]

They managed to for over 1600+ years.

And today, not only do they have missals but the internet, mailing list groups, Catholic groups, language software, you name it. All they really need though is exposure and an open mind. They’re not going to get that if the all-vernacular is reinforced. One’s not going to prefer oranges if all he’s ever eaten are sweet apples.

You just have to realize that Philippine Society is miles away from American society. To imagine how the poor live, imagine that most American pets live in far better conditions than human beings in the Philippines. To ask these people to go on the internet? To ask them to learn Latin?

 

[Layman]

Sorry, but you don’t know poor if you haven’t seen poor outside of the United States. Like I said, poor is $2 or less per day. And thats not per person, thats a whole family. Where else will they get the money for a missal? They don’t even eat 3 meals a day. 2 if they are lucky.

I bought one, a nice little one, for two quid UK, here. The price of a large bag of chips. I dare say the same ratio applies to items in the Phillipines. If Filipino’s can’t afford a small paper booklet it’s a wonder their churches don’t fall down.

And no, Filipinos today don’t have the same appreciation of Spanish. I think we never did. Most of the populace were not educated during the colonial rule of Spain. We have Spanish words integrated into our language but by no means do we speak Spanish. Unlike South American Spanish colonies, we never adopted wide use of the language. People were kept poor and uneducated. Only those who found a way to make more money became educated. And thats a very small percentage of the population.

Do you know how many responses the laity can give in the TLM? You can fit them on the palm of your hand. Now, I think, you’re just being argumentative.

I don’t know what you are crying about, its been in all-Filipino tha last 30-40 years.

And this reply maybe confirms it.

Why do you need a deeper reason? People want the Mass in their language, the Church allows it. The deeper reason is people want it. Why make something so simple become complicated? Just to win an argument? Its that simple, people want it. That is the reason. Why ask for something else?

Nothing complicated about it. You’re saying ‘people want it’. I’ve given several reasons why Latin is better for the long term good of the Church. You’re just repeating yourself.

Sorry but I find that argument baseless. People are making assumptions on too many things that if you analyze closely doesn’t show a relation to one another. There are many changes to society far more than the changes in the Church which has turned our society upside down today. In fact everything started during the industrial revolution. As we churn out more prodcuts, the ability to own material things has increased, thus turning people more materialistic. Just look around how many useless items we buy with so much money. Materialism and the desire for money has more to do why people aren’t going to church anymore, regardless of what the Liturgy is.

This is just blather. All I said was: The vernacular, along with all the other reforms, was supposed to re-invigorate our worship. They were introduced after a world war and at a time of increasing social decadence (or ‘freedom’). They haven’t done what they were advertised to do. Even more of the same: more casual, more democratic, more dumbed-down, will not do so either.

What is wrong with people hearing the Mass in their own language? It was that way in the past. Too bad Latin died as a language. But when the Apostles established the Church they made sure to use the language of the locals. If what you are saying was true, the Apostles should have just used Aramaic, which the Greeks and Romans would have never understand and its the language that they and Jesus communicated in anyways.

The Mass as we know it did not exist then. This attitide ignores 1960+ years of development in our worship. In effect, we’re now at the mercy of mediocre liturgists who think that if only they could re-create (a cheery!) Last Supper in Boise, Idaho, we’d have the perfect Mass.

In practice, they make displays that reflect the passing fads of the time, which date very quickly, which are banal and ignore the sacrificial and propitiary nature of the Mass and the beautiful accretions of the TLM.

 

[Ockham]

I think one of the follies of this thread is too much guessing has made its way into the dicussion over common sense. .

THE folly of this thread is going off topic. THE topic of this thread is a group of liturgists defying their bishops by pursuing a “Filipino liturgy” agenda. This is the Catholic Church, not the Filipino church, or some protesting denomination. Obedience to the Magesterium and God demands a proper liturgy, the universal liturgy that is focused on God and not particular cultural nuances. An Archbishop states all Masses should be like a papal Mass, yet you defy that instruction in order to promote your own interpretation of what a non-universal liturgy should be.

No one has stated the OF has to be all Latin (although that’s the way the Magisterium first produced it). That is a false tangent you introduced for reasons only you know.

As an aside, if any parish can afford two different hymn books, it can afford one hymn book and one EF missal set.

 

[ProVobis]

If Filipino’s can’t afford a small paper booklet it’s a wonder their churches don’t fall down.

 

[ProVobis]

People want the Mass in their language

And most of them don’t want to attend a Mass in another language, be it Spanish or Polish or English. It sounds like a “just for me” thing. What good is that for unity of the Church?

The Church allows Mass in translations they approve. But it doesn’t sound like everyone is happy about it. And how are translations better than the original text if people don’t seem to understand the translations either? A growing number disbelieve in the Real Presence, think the Mass is only a meal, Christ said “for all,” and think Christ is “one in being with the Father,” whatever that means. How can you keep stressing the importance of the vernacular when you have had all this misunderstanding about the Mass for the past 40 years?

 

[ProVobis]

Too bad Latin died as a language.

Then you might be disappointed to know that Google just added Latin to its translation toolbox. Google wouldn’t be doing that out of the goodness of their hearts, believe me.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I bought one, a nice little one, for two quid UK, here. The price of a large bag of chips. I dare say the same ratio applies to items in the Phillipines. If Filipino’s can’t afford a small paper booklet it’s a wonder their churches don’t fall down.

Sorry but thats really shortsighted. The Philippines is a third world country. The rich are rich, but the poor are really poor. And 60% of the population is below the poverty line. It means they don’t eat 3 square meals a day. We’re not the UK. The poor people can’t afford a bag of chips. Most of them their meals come from dumpsters behind McDonald’s where they pick up discarded burgers. Thats the reality we have. Even those who live a notch or two above that can’t afford to spend on unnecessary things. Many things you people who grew up and lived all your lives in first world nations like the US, UK and Canada take for granted the things you have without realizing the hardships many people in other parts of the world endure. We’re glad these people are Catholic. Why make the faith complicated for them?

Do you know how many responses the laity can give in the TLM? You can fit them on the palm of your hand. Now, I think, you’re just being argumentative.

Why do we need to force people into the TLM? The OF is fine as it is. No one is touching the TLM. These people attend the OF.

And this reply maybe confirms it.

Confirms what? That we have the OF in the vernacular since a few years after V2? Like its not that way everywhere else in the world.

Nothing complicated about it. You’re saying ‘people want it’. I’ve given several reasons why Latin is better for the long term good of the Church. You’re just repeating yourself.

Well what else is there to say? Like I said, its not a complicated request. People prefer the vernacular, the Church allows the vernacular, why is there a problem? Why force the TLM or even a Latin OF?

This is just blather. All I said was: The vernacular, along with all the other reforms, was supposed to re-invigorate our worship. They were introduced after a world war and at a time of increasing social decadence (or ‘freedom’). They haven’t done what they were advertised to do. Even more of the same: more casual, more democratic, more dumbed-down, will not do so either.

Yes and my contention was that materialism in the world has countered most efforts of the Church. In Europe and North America at least. The Church is booming in Africa and even other parts of Asia. I think even here in Canada as more and more immigrants come in, the Church will be revived.

The Mass as we know it did not exist then. This attitide ignores 1960+ years of development in our worship. In effect, we’re now at the mercy of mediocre liturgists who think that if only they could re-create (a cheery!) Last Supper in Boise, Idaho, we’d have the perfect Mass.

In practice, they make displays that reflect the passing fads of the time, which date very quickly, which are banal and ignore the sacrificial and propitiary nature of the Mass and the beautiful accretions of the TLM.

And like I said, that perception that the Mass is being recreated in this discussion is largely unfounded. I find no indication that there is a recreation being intended and even if it was the intention of the liturgists, the Bishops surely will have none of it. Efforts to improve on the words and include Filipino tradition where applicable would be more realistic.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Then you might be disappointed to know that Google just added Latin to its translation toolbox. Google wouldn’t be doing that out of the goodness of their hearts, believe me.

You know what I mean. Latin doesn’t have any development nor is it actively used by any culture. Isn’t that one of its virtues in its defense as the Liturgical Language of the Roman Church? That the words are unchanging?

 

[Ockham]

I find no indication that there is a recreation being intended and even if it was the intention of the liturgists, the Bishops surely will have none of it. Efforts to improve on the words and include Filipino tradition where applicable would be more realistic.

Then you have ignored the links in the OP. Perhaps it would benefit you to go back and read them.

 

[ConstantineTG]

And most of them don’t want to attend a Mass in another language, be it Spanish or Polish or English. It sounds like a “just for me” thing. What good is that for unity of the Church?

Again, the unity of the Church is not based on language. I can’t believe this argument is being recycled over and over but it has no basis nor foundation even inside the Church.

The Church allows Mass in translations they approve. But it doesn’t sound like everyone is happy about it. And how are translations better than the original text if people don’t seem to understand the translations either? A growing number disbelieve in the Real Presence, think the Mass is only a meal, Christ said “for all,” and think Christ is “one in being with the Father,” whatever that means. How can you keep stressing the importance of the vernacular when you have had all this misunderstanding about the Mass for the past 40 years?

Even if they re-translate it, its going through the same process. Approval by Bishops, then recognitio by the Holy See. The people understand “old” Tagalog, the same way English speakers will understand Shakespeare. The language just sounds dated and an update done right will do more good than bad.

What does the Real Presence have to do with the language? More people will likely lose faith in it when they don’t hear the priest say, “This is my Body.” At what point in the Mass does it affirm the Real Presence of Christ more than when the preist say those words?

 

[Layman]

Many things you people who grew up and lived all your lives in first world nations like the US, UK and Canada take for granted the things you have without realizing the hardships many people in other parts of the world endure. We’re glad these people are Catholic. Why make the faith complicated for them?

Strange, then, how even tribal people with no money at all learned the faith, with the Latin Mass. The faith isn’t being made complicated. Mass is a sacrament. It is not ‘The Faith’.

Why do we need to force people into the TLM? The OF is fine as it is. No one is touching the TLM. These people attend the OF.

• If the O.F. is fine as it is, why are liturgists fiddling with it?
• No one is forced to go to the TLM. In fact, a case can be made that the TLM is being withheld. From memory, even in First World Ireland, ‘Island Of Saints and Scholars’, only two cities run a weekly TLM. Every Sunday, millions of Catholics the world over are routinely not forced to go to a TLM. Most don’t know anything about it.

Confirms what? That we have the OF in the vernacular since a few years after V2? Like its not that way everywhere else in the world.

Try 40 years. Time to try something else.

Well what else is there to say? Like I said, its not a complicated request. People prefer the vernacular, the Church allows the vernacular, why is there a problem? Why force the TLM or even a Latin OF?

Who are the people, who prefer the vernacular? Who has polled them about this? Do they even know what they’re rejecting?

Actually, given that the N.O. was imposed, I don’t see why the laity’s opinion should count in this case, either.

Yes and my contention was that materialism in the world has countered most efforts of the Church. In Europe and North America at least. The Church is booming in Africa and even other parts of Asia. I think even here in Canada as more and more immigrants come in, the Church will be revived.

This is not the only materialistic era. It is, however, the only one that has destroyed the Roman Rite as it was known and attempted to square the circle: To have a mysterious, propitiary rite with as many populist, mundane elements as can be inserted, while doing away with sacred, set apart ones.

And like I said, that perception that the Mass is being recreated in this discussion is largely unfounded. I find no indication that there is a recreation being intended and even if it was the intention of the liturgists, the Bishops surely will have none of it. Efforts to improve on the words and include Filipino tradition where applicable would be more realistic.

[My emphasis]

And there you have it. Just what local genius is going to ‘improve on the words’? Just what banal fabrication will be inserted in the name of Filipino tradition? Which tribal or ethnic group will get their ‘traditions’ inserted into the Roman Catholic rite?

e.g. In Ireland, we had girls doing ceilidh dancing and, on another occasion, some lad in tights censing a book. Good luck with that.