E
elts1956
Guest
Well, how long did it take for TLM to be accepted as Traditional? Give the NO a couple hundred years.Locally customary maybe but traditional?
- Status
D
Dauphin
Guest
I expect we’ll have a single form of the Roman Rite by then, and it won’t be the NO as we know it. It’ll be a properly reformed Traditional Latin Mass, in continuity with Tradition.
G
grandfather
Guest
The vision that comes to mind when I think of rumors that may be analogous to this circumstance is that of an army that is in the field. The troops are marched or trucked to this place and that, dug into trenches, rained on and cold, and they never know the real plan of the generals, or even where they are going. They are in the back of a truck going somewhere. They wonder all the time what is going on, what is coming next, if peace is close at hand. Rumors are created on speculation and as they get passed around they get bigger and more fantastic and speculation becomes truth. “I heard we are going to be shipped to the front for a big battle, to the city where there are lots of girls and beer, that the enemy is going to attack us tomorrow, that the war is over”. “It is really true, because my buddy brings the mail sack to the general’s office and he heard the general’s cook tell the driver…”No, this is a rumour thread - it’s perfectly appropriate.
This is good news, if true.
No matter how many times people allow themselves to get caught up with rumors and then be disappointed they are always ready to jump on the next one that comes along and take it for a ride. In this case it is what the pope will do next about this situation or that, that we wonder and speculate about.
We have this itch to know what is coming in the future. “Sufficient is the evil of the day”. This is all a distraction from our own lives. Living the spiritual life is a quest for personal holiness. I need to do my job, grow in grace, gain victory over my sins, say my prayers, be a good husband and father, etc. Part of my job is praying for the pope and our leaders, but I need to trust that they will do their jobs by God’s grace.
Schism is a great evil. We should long for and pray for unity. Listening to rumors and spreading them is counter productive. It accomplishes nothing good, but there is something intriguing about the whole process that sucks us in and we like getting caught up in the latest buzz.
E
ethelzguy
Guest
Every “tradition” was once something “new” and likely offensive to someone…Locally customary maybe but traditional?
P
ProVobis
Guest
Which NO are you talking about? The clown NO, the puppet NO, the Spanish NO? Fr. Phlager’s Mass? You really expect any of these to exist as they are now for a couple hundred years? If constant innovation is the key to “maintaining” the status quo of the local NO, then that itself should tell you that any version of it couldn’t possibly be traditional.
And while we’re at it, just how traditional is the English language?
Then perhaps your definition of “tradition” disagrees with mine. Remember, I don’t consider myself traditional at all.
C
consumedconvert
Guest
Oh dear, someone nuked with the clown Mass.
That’s not the normative NO. I for one have never seen one myself (Except for net videos), and I really doubt you have either. THis is the reddest of red herrings.
The English Language goes back to approximately 600 AD.
G
grandfather
Guest
I have seen photos of the clowns, but never been to one myself. Now, Santa Claus Masses are another matter. They were very popular for some time. Normative or not, I attended a charismatic Mass, and the Irish priest ascended the altar in beaded buckskins and a gigantic feathered head dress. The Santas, bozo the clowns and Indian chiefs have gone pretty much out of style and given way to costumed dancers. There are quite a few of those nuking the local parish and in the diocese. It goes very well with the electric guitars and drums.
S
SJP
Guest
It’s true, I don’t imagine that that many people have experienced a clown Mass.
However, how many people hear Gregorian Chant at Mass? How many people hear Latin? How many people have to watch as the army of EMHC’s distribute communion? and the list goes on…
Point being, you don’t have to attend a clown Mass to witness liturgical abuse. There is plenty of it going on in many many places.
However, how many people hear Gregorian Chant at Mass? How many people hear Latin? How many people have to watch as the army of EMHC’s distribute communion? and the list goes on…
Point being, you don’t have to attend a clown Mass to witness liturgical abuse. There is plenty of it going on in many many places.
T
TNT
Guest
Dream on.
Nothing will happen.
The issue is not the Mass ONLY. The core issue is the perceived Heresies of the Vat II documents.
If it wasn’t for those documents, the SSPX would have been the FSSP decades ago.
So forget it.
Even if Fellay jumped ship, the SSPX is NOT Fellay.
Nothing will happen.
The issue is not the Mass ONLY. The core issue is the perceived Heresies of the Vat II documents.
If it wasn’t for those documents, the SSPX would have been the FSSP decades ago.
So forget it.
Even if Fellay jumped ship, the SSPX is NOT Fellay.
E
elts1956
Guest
V
VivatJesus
Guest
HA!! What planet do you live on, “Convert”? You’ve obviously never taken a college English course. One cannot even read Canterbury Tales without needing a translation, much less something like Beowulf, both of which are in “English” and were written long after A.D. 600.
Latin is a “dead” language and isn’t subject to changes in meaning like English is, which is why it is ideal for celebrating the Holy Mass.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
But the translation we must follow suffers from the same deficit as it would if it were spoken aloud, so the logic here fails completely. The Mass does not have to be in Latin for God to understand it and if we’re following what MUST naturally be a corrupted translation, that means we’re getting it wrong even in a EF.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Locally customary maybe but traditional?
Traditional. Just like the Vulgate - which was very bothersome when it was new. So was monasticism. So were the friars. So was Thomism. So was the use of Aristotle: at least the Revised Missal was never banned - unlike the use of some of Aristotle’s writings.
Most traditional things were controversial to begin with - even St. Paul was. Tradition is merely something controversial that has been domesticated with the passing of time. Give evolution a couple of centuries, & in 2200 it will be the “traditional teaching of the Church”
- just as religious liberty has become. In the right circumstances - that is, if people do not know otherwise - innovation becomes Tradition very quickly.Such things recommend themselves in time, if only because people are an inert lot; so the new things cease to threaten the certainties of those who held to older traditions: & people eventually die. For their grandchildren, the thing that upset people so much as “untraditional” is Tradition; they do not reject what that older generation did, because they do not know it, unless they discover it; the generation that may have trouble is the second generation. The grandchildren are “Traditional” in a way their grandparents were not - for they were simply Catholic; adolescent rebellion is likely to be one contributor; for teenagers know everything
People don’t like being unsettled - they like the status quo; it’s familiar to them. So when some tiresome person comes along & says that the Church never taught the doctrine of Limbo, facts to the contrary are not allowed to get in the way; because the Limbo-free position is the familiar one. So the evidence that blows this comfortable (because familiar) belief to atoms, is ignored. Truth is what people want it to be & need it to be - if they wanted, or needed, the truth to be that St. Peter participated in “clown masses”, that is what it would be; & God help anyone idiotic enough to question such a “fact”: he would be torn to pieces
- just as happens now with things that people don’t want, or can’t allow to be, touched. People are tigers when their certainties are threatened.
P
PrayforMallory
Guest
I haven’t reached the same conclusions as you have.Traditional. Just like the Vulgate - which was very bothersome when it was new. So was monasticism. So were the friars. So was Thomism. So was the use of Aristotle: at least the Revised Missal was never banned - unlike the use of some of Aristotle’s writings.
Most traditional things were controversial to begin with - even St. Paul was. Tradition is merely something controversial that has been domesticated with the passing of time. Give evolution a couple of centuries, & in 2200 it will be the “traditional teaching of the Church”
Such things recommend themselves in time, if only because people are an inert lot; so the new things cease to threaten the certainties of those who held to older traditions: & people eventually die. For their grandchildren, the thing that upset people so much as “untraditional” is Tradition; they do not reject what that older generation did, because they do not know it, unless they discover it; the generation that may have trouble is the second generation. The grandchildren are “Traditional” in a way their grandparents were not - for they were simply Catholic; adolescent rebellion is likely to be one contributor; for teenagers know everything
People don’t like being unsettled - they like the status quo; it’s familiar to them. So when some tiresome person comes along & says that the Church never taught the doctrine of Limbo, facts to the contrary are not allowed to get in the way; because the Limbo-free position is the familiar one. So the evidence that blows this comfortable (because familiar) belief to atoms, is ignored. Truth is what people want it to be & need it to be - if they wanted, or needed, the truth to be that St. Peter participated in “clown masses”, that is what it would be; & God help anyone idiotic enough to question such a “fact”: he would be torn to pieces
All of the developments you mentioned have been the results of organic development and continuity.
C
consumedconvert
Guest
I live on Earth, thank you. Never taken college English? I was an English major, and took quite a few grad classes in English. The most fascinating course I ever took was graduate level History of the English Language, taught by a very demanding professor. I never use a translation when I read Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, or other works. I do when I read Beowulf. But both Chaucer’s works, and Beowulf, and what I am typing now are English.
The precurser of English was brought over by three main groups, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes–all from modern day Germany. Soon their dialects became the basis of a rather simple language known as Anglo-Saxon, or simply Old English. Some seventy to ninety perscent of our vocabulary (depending on the speaker) still consists of Old English words. It is the same language we speak today–only a much more primitive dialect of it.
If your point is that English changes, I agree. It does, quite a bit. The reason why I cannot read Beowulf without serious study or a translation is that it is pre-Norman English and is a much more highly inflected language than contemporary English. The reason why I can read Chaucer, with concentration, is that it is early Post-Norman English, a.k.a. Middle English. *Most *of our language has not changed since then, though there are differences, I grant you.
Latin doesn’t change any more, I grant you (except very minor changes–consider that the Vatican has an official lexicographer, or dictionary-writer, who keeps the Latin language more or less up-to-date). But when Latin was a living language, it changed over time. Living languages do that. It was a living language–and the universal language–until the Classicists of the Rennaisance tried to fossilize into “correct form” (meaning Ciceronian form) and killed it instead.
Come to think of it you’ve gotten me off-thread. I don’t know what the point of your post was. If you’d like to start another thread so that we may discuss the development of the English language, in all of its glory, please let me know.
C
consumedconvert
Guest
BTW, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes started invading England spurradically in A.D. 450. They were invited by Hengest and Horsa, two Germanic chieftans who had been invited as mercinaries to help fight off the Picts and Scots, now that Rome had withdrawn. After seeing how weak the Celtic inhabitants of England (who had hired them) had become, they decided it would be easy pickins.
The beginnings of the English Language was actually probably closer to just after those tribes came to Britainnia, though the Oxford English Dictionary traces the earliest native English words to around A.D. 300.
The beginnings of the English Language was actually probably closer to just after those tribes came to Britainnia, though the Oxford English Dictionary traces the earliest native English words to around A.D. 300.
E
elts1956
Guest
ProVobis, what do you mean by constant inovation? The NO Mass I attend has not changed in forty years.
R
rien
Guest
Any guess what the SPPX is asking?
I’d assume some sort of universal apostolate. A say in naming the bishops for that apostolate. As in the SPPX submits 3 or so names and the Pope confirms one of them.
If the TAC were ever to reunite, which seems increasingly doubtful with the latest developments, I think they would too demand a sort of veto power over the naming of bishops for the TAC. Rome has apparently accepted this with China and its far closer to the early church model. Which is good IMO.
I’d assume some sort of universal apostolate. A say in naming the bishops for that apostolate. As in the SPPX submits 3 or so names and the Pope confirms one of them.
If the TAC were ever to reunite, which seems increasingly doubtful with the latest developments, I think they would too demand a sort of veto power over the naming of bishops for the TAC. Rome has apparently accepted this with China and its far closer to the early church model. Which is good IMO.
B
BrendanD
Guest
I believe Rome is offering a personal apostolic administration.
- Status