Relative artistic merit---NO and Trad Rite

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jerry_Mitchner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jerry_Mitchner

Guest
Why was the older form of the Latin rite in effect “outlawed” for years? My strong personal (subjective) opinion is that many in positions of responsibility realized that few among the faithful would attend the NO when the traditional rite was equally available. Aren’t there some objective standards of artistic merit? The supremely important element, of course, is that any valid eucharistic liturgy is the sacrifice of Christ. The secondary element of artistic merit is nonetheless important.

All else being equal; if the supreme Lord of the universe came for a visit to your home, would you take him to see The Gong Show or to a Bach symphony concert? The NO has the artistic sensibility of the late 50’s / early 60’s [edited by Moderator].

Consider the growing interest in the traditional rite among young people. If/when the traditional rite is part of the average Catholic’s experience, I have no doubt that the NO will wither away from lack of interest and become a barely remembered footnote in texts on church history hundreds of years from now.

Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the NO celebrated reverantly according to the rubrics. The NO is all I knew for years. It’s like the “home team” you know is going to lose against a better team: you don’t have to like it, but you know what’s coming.

:dancing:
 
Jerry_Mitchner said:
All else being equal; if the supreme Lord of the universe came for a visit to your home, would you take him to see The Gong Show or to a Bach symphony concert? The NO has the artistic sensibility of the late 50’s / early 60’s (a wee bit above The Gong Show, but not by much).
Click to expand...
Are you seriously comparing ANY Mass to The Gong Show? I’ve seen The Gong Show, and the NO Mass is not a joke. I really believe it is disrespectful to make such a comparison even if you say it is “a wee bit above.”

God bless.
 
Jerry_Mitchner said:
Why was the older form of the Latin rite in effect “outlawed” for years? My strong personal (subjective) opinion is that many in positions of responsibility realized that few among the faithful would attend the NO when the traditional rite was equally available. Aren’t there some objective standards of artistic merit? The supremely important element, of course, is that any valid eucharistic liturgy is the sacrifice of Christ. The secondary element of artistic merit is nonetheless important.

All else being equal; if the supreme Lord of the universe came for a visit to your home, would you take him to see The Gong Show or to a Bach symphony concert? The NO has the artistic sensibility of the late 50’s / early 60’s [edited by Moderator].

Consider the growing interest in the traditional rite among young people. If/when the traditional rite is part of the average Catholic’s experience, I have no doubt that the NO will wither away from lack of interest and become a barely remembered footnote in texts on church history hundreds of years from now.

Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the NO celebrated reverantly according to the rubrics. The NO is all I knew for years. It’s like the “home team” you know is going to lose against a better team: you don’t have to like it, but you know what’s coming.

:dancing:
Click to expand...
I think we are being led out of the desert.
 
There is a noble simplicity in the Novus Ordo, corrctly done, that I think ensures it will always have a place in the Church.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
There is a noble simplicity in the Novus Ordo, corrctly done, that I think ensures it will always have a place in the Church.
Click to expand...
[Edited by Moderator]

I also hope I am being clear in my deep respect for any valid mass celebrated according to an approved rite or approved adaptation of any traditional rite. My concern here is that the artistic expression of any proposed changes be an improvement over, or at least equal to, what has gone before. The mass is an encounter between Christ and his people, and the manner in which we greet him should attempt to rise to the inherent dignity of such an encounter.
 
Jerry_Mitchner said:
[Edited by Moderator]

I also hope I am being clear in my deep respect for any valid mass celebrated according to an approved rite or approved adaptation of any traditional rite. My concern here is that the artistic expression of any proposed changes be an improvement over, or at least equal to, what has gone before. The mass is an encounter between Christ and his people, and the manner in which we greet him should attempt to rise to the inherent dignity of such an encounter.
Click to expand...
[Edited by Moderator] I much prefer the NO to the TLM (no silent canon, vernacular). I would prefer that we retained chant and polyphany, and that it was celebrated ad orientum, but hopefully those things will make their way back. As an encounter between Christ and His people, the NO (rightly offered) does rise to the inherent dignity demanded by such an encounter.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
[Edited by Moderator] I much prefer the NO to the TLM (no silent canon, vernacular). I would prefer that we retained chant and polyphany, and that it was celebrated ad orientum, but hopefully those things will make their way back. As an encounter between Christ and His people, the NO (rightly offered) does rise to the inherent dignity demanded by such an encounter.
Click to expand...
I agree, while my first masses were TLM I also prefer the NO. I also agree with your feelings on adding the chant. It’s supposed to be there anyway. If they add the chant (and some places do) I really don’t think the TLM has anything on it. The Latin version of the NO is very nice as well and I wish it got more attention.

Anyway, I pretty much go by the standard that where ever Our Lord is present is the place to be.
 
Another subjective, divisive thread - what a surprise!:rolleyes: What I find interesting is that those who love the Novus Ordo don’t want to see the Vetus Ordo (my new favorite phrase) go bye-bye but those who love the Vetus Ordo would love to see the Novus Ordo disappear. It’s sad that we’re rooting for the demise of the “home team”. It’s also sad to see a sports analogy when it would be far better to see a construction analogy (of course then I suppose it would turn into a demolition analogy).:banghead:
 
bear06 said:
Another subjective, divisive thread - what a surprise!:rolleyes: What I find interesting is that those who love the Novus Ordo don’t want to see the Vetus Ordo (my new favorite phrase) go bye-bye but those who love the Vetus Ordo would love to see the Novus Ordo disappear. It’s sad that we’re rooting for the demise of the “home team”. It’s also sad to see a sports analogy when it would be far better to see a construction analogy (of course then I suppose it would turn into a demolition analogy).:banghead:
Click to expand...
Ah yes. Like how the Mass was once a beautiful house, built up over the centuries from a Divine foundation. Sometimes there would be slight renovations- openng up a room, putting a window or a door where there was none before, re-arranging furniture- all for the greater glory of this house. But then it was decided that the house was too old, too full of useless junk- so why not raze it to the ground and build a completely new house, one that is more"modern"?
 
Caesar said:
Ah yes. Like how the Mass was once a beautiful house, built up over the centuries from a Divine foundation. Sometimes there would be slight renovations- openng up a room, putting a window or a door where there was none before, re-arranging furniture- all for the greater glory of this house. But then it was decided that the house was too old, too full of useless junk- so why not raze it to the ground and build a completely new house, one that is more"modern"?
Click to expand...
Thanks, Ceasar for proving my point. I don’t recall the three of us that prefer the Novus Ordo calling for the destruction of the Vetus Ordo, do you?
.
 
Jerry_Mitchner said:
…I appreciate the NO celebrated reverantly according to the rubrics. The NO is all I knew for years. It’s like the “home team” you know is going to lose against a better team: you don’t have to like it, but you know what’s coming.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your characterization of a “competition” between two approved liturgies of the Roman Catholic Church. There are over 20 rites within the Catholic Church. All of them celebrate the Holy Mass or Divine Liturgy. To see these as being in competition with one another is absurd.

We have the Traditional Latin Mass in Colorado Springs. It attracts about 100 families. They love it. If it grows, that makes me happy. However, it is solid food when the vast majority seem to first need milk. The Traditional Latin Mass community in Colorado Springs do not contribute to a significant amount of catechumen and/or converts (candidates) entering into full communion with the Catholic Church. So, the over 2300 families (and growing) at my parish seem to be responding in faith to the liturgy according to the editio typica of the Roman Missal. If they should further grow in faith and discover how beautiful the Traditional Latin Mass is, that would be great. However, I don’t see any approved liturgy as some kind of “my prayer is better than your prayer” competition. Christ is present in each of these liturgies, and so it is one bread, one body throughout.
 
bear06 said:
Thanks, Ceasar for proving my point. I don’t recall the three of us that prefer the Novus Ordo calling for the destruction of the Vetus Ordo, do you?
.
Click to expand...
The Old Ordinary of the Mass, eh? I also prefer the Old Propers, and the Old Liturgical Calendar, and such. Much better to use the terms New Rite and Traditional Rite if you ask me- keeps everything covered, not just the Ordo…

Maybe you are not explicitly calling for the destruction of the Traditional Rite, but remember that it was outlawed, except in certain cases (usualy for old, “out of touch” priests like Padre Pio and St. Josemaria…), and then it wasnt allowed in parish churches, and all that mess. Those who advocated for a new Rite also advocated for the destruction of the old. You do not see the NO being offered alongside the Traditional Rite in 1970, do you?
 
bear06 said:
What I find interesting is that those who love the Novus Ordo don’t want to see the Vetus Ordo (my new favorite phrase) go bye-bye…
Click to expand...
If such persons really exist, I would say there is a drastic shortage of them in parish and diocese liturgical committees. Just because you’re tolerant of the TLM doesn’t mean that all of your NOM bretheren are.
 
Caesar said:
The Old Ordinary of the Mass, eh? I also prefer the Old Propers, and the Old Liturgical Calendar, and such. Much better to use the terms New Rite and Traditional Rite if you ask me- keeps everything covered, not just the Ordo…

Maybe you are not explicitly calling for the destruction of the Traditional Rite, but remember that it was outlawed, except in certain cases (usualy for old, “out of touch” priests like Padre Pio and St. Josemaria…), and then it wasnt allowed in parish churches, and all that mess. Those who advocated for a new Rite also advocated for the destruction of the old. You do not see the NO being offered alongside the Traditional Rite in 1970, do you?
Click to expand...
I do see it today. So, we can live in the past (a past which you and I don’t even share if I recall were you even around in 1970? Can’t remember.) and forget that we’re supposedly getting a moto soon or we can seek vengence on the Novus Ordo or how about we just focus on the Mass of our preference and stop deriding other’s preference (of course I don’t recall me saying anything negative about the Tridentine)? I mean, what have we really learned from this thread? Is it the totally new fact that some prefer the Novus Ordo and some prefer the Vetus Ordo? Wow! That’s a shocker. This seems to be another “shot in the foot” thread.
 
parvenu74 said:
If such persons really exist, I would say there is a drastic shortage of them in parish and diocese liturgical committees. Just because you’re tolerant of the TLM doesn’t mean that all of your NOM bretheren are.
Click to expand...
[Edited by Moderator]
I’m not just “tolerant” of the TLM. I actively seek and pray for it to spread. And let us reverse this, just because some are tolerant of the Novus Ordo doesn’t mean that all of the Vetus Ordo bretheren are. So what? What’s the reason for pointing this out? I so tire of the posts that point to the extremists as the norm for the Novus Ordo. I certainly don’t’ say that the SSPX is the norm for the traditionalists. LIke I said, if you really want to see the spread of the Vetus Ordo, don’t shoot yourself in the foot with these types of threads.
 
parvenu74 said:
If such persons really exist, I would say there is a drastic shortage of them in parish and diocese liturgical committees. Just because you’re tolerant of the TLM doesn’t mean that all of your NOM brethren are.
Click to expand...
Most would have no problem with it one way or the other. At my parish which is rather enthusiastic about the NO most think its good that the TLM is still offered in our diocese because they appreciate our historical connection to the rite.

If you want to blame anyone for the trouble that the TLM has had in getting support you should look toward the extreme “Traditionalists” and the SSPX. Rome has pretty much from the get go asked for the NO to receive reverent treatment. Instead many traditionalists have tried to pretend it doesn’t exist, others have actually had the gall to go schismatic.

Then you wonder why the liberals are going nuts in the Church? If the people who are supposed to respect the Church the most look down their nose at its rites and leadership you think the loonies are going to do better?
 
Caesar said:
Ah yes. Like how the Mass was once a beautiful house, built up over the centuries from a Divine foundation. Sometimes there would be slight renovations- openng up a room, putting a window or a door where there was none before, re-arranging furniture- all for the greater glory of this house. But then it was decided that the house was too old, too full of useless junk- so why not raze it to the ground and build a completely new house, one that is more"modern"?
Click to expand...
Good analogy!
 
Caesar said:
The Old Ordinary of the Mass, eh? I also prefer the Old Propers, and the Old Liturgical Calendar, and such. Much better to use the terms New Rite and Traditional Rite if you ask me- keeps everything covered, not just the Ordo…

Maybe you are not explicitly calling for the destruction of the Traditional Rite, but remember that it was outlawed, except in certain cases (usualy for old, “out of touch” priests like Padre Pio and St. Josemaria…), and then it wasn’t allowed in parish churches, and all that mess. Those who advocated for a new Rite also advocated for the destruction of the old. You do not see the NO being offered alongside the Traditional Rite in 1970, do you?
Click to expand...
Good point, Caesar. I wonder how the people who love the Novus Ordo would feel if those roles were reversed, and the Novus Ordo was outlawed and the TLM brought back. It’s really something to think about, isn’t it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top