Silence in the EF

[Milesius]

That the Mass is Christ’s sacrifice is the unanimous teaching of every book I have ever read on the theology of the Latin rite written prior to the 1950’s and was taught infallibly at the Council of Trent, though I am sure there are modernist theologians around before the 1950’s who were saying somethign different I stay away from their accursed books.

 

[MarkThompson]

That the Mass is Christ’s sacrifice is the unanimous teaching of every book I have ever read on the theology of the Latin rite written prior to the 1950’s and was taught infallibly at the Council of Trent, though I am sure there are modernist theologians around before the 1950’s who were saying somethign different I stay away from their accursed books.

Wow, that’s a heavy trip, dude. So what have you read in your non-accursed books about the meaning of “vestrum sacrificium”?

 

[Momofmyangels]

Wow, that’s a heavy trip, dude. So what have you read in your non-accursed books about the meaning of “vestrum sacrificium”?

Mark–I know this is directed to another poster, but I just wanted to briefly comment on this and your other post in this thread.

I do not believe my bishop said anything contrary to “offerimus” or “vestrum sacrificium”, rather his point was that the Mass, being Christ’s sacrifice is offered up by the priest (in this case the bishop) who is representing Christ and this can only be done by the priest. We certainly can’t offer that sacrifice up ourselves, it is the sole honor of the priest. Not to say though that we can’t unite our prayers with the priest and infact the priest includes us when he says “offerimus” and “vestrum sacrificium”.

 

[MarkThompson]

Mark–I know this is directed to another poster, but I just wanted to briefly comment on this and your other post in this thread.

I do not believe my bishop said anything contrary to “offerimus” or “vestrum sacrificium”, rather his point was that the Mass, being Christ’s sacrifice is offered up by the priest (in this case the bishop) who is representing Christ and this can only be done by the priest. We certainly can’t offer that sacrifice up ourselves, it is the sole honor of the priest. Not to say though that we can’t unite our prayers with the priest and infact the priest includes us when he says “offerimus” and “vestrum sacrificium”.

Good to know. And I’m by no means a sacramental theologian, but I don’t think there’s any great theological tension in recognizing that the Church, as the gathered metaphysical-Body-of-Christ, has a sacramental role to play. In fact, the current English translation of “meum ac vestrum sacrificium” in the OF is “our sacrifice,” and in the forthcoming new translation this has been corrected to “my sacrifice and yours” to recognize that these are not, in fact, the same. So, yes, the Eucharist is Christ’s sacrifice offered in unity with Calvary through the priest; but the plain signification of the Latin text itself acknowledges that in the Mass the people too not only witness the sacrifice but make a sacrifice.

Ain’t nothing wrong with that, either.

 

[Bob_Aliano]

If I may respond to actual title of this thread, I returned to the EF because of the quiet reverence I feel there. I go to Mass to adore the Lord and I prefer to do that by sharing in the Mass as I follow in my Missal, think about what is written there and finally through contemplative prayer; of those three criteria I can only follow in the missal during an OF Mass. The incessant noise from the Choir, the generally awful singing of the congregation, the grabbing of my hand by others at the greeting and Lords Prayer, the use of EMHC, the reading of the bulletin before the dismissal and the applauding of the choir by congregation all lead to a definitely irreverent sensation for me.

 

[legendashmore]

I think sometimes people mistake active participation for in mass for doing things in mass.

How many times have you been in the Ordinary Form of the Mass and are just saying the words, but are truly in another world? Your mind is off in another place, but you are saying prayers which are supposed to make you actively participating in mass. Even though these prayers are supposed to make it easier for you to actively participate in mass, you are not.

Just because there is silence in the EF does not mean that you are not actively participating. Just because you are not saying the prayers out loud, does not mean that you are not actively participating.

Then again, just because there is silence in the EF does not mean you are actively participating either.

Active participation comes form the Heart. It comes from the person himself trying to unite himself with the prayers of the priest. It comes by paying attention to the Mass, in whatever form it is.

I love the silence in the EF. In the OF there is always noise, it is never quiet. (A lot of times, it is not good sound either.uch God speaks to us in the quiet. It is an excellent time to contemplate the mysteries of the sacrifice.

 

[pro_multis]

It sounds as if you are dismissing those who want audible prayers as those with a false idea of active participation. But even a person with a proper understanding of participation might prefer the prayers to be audible. Someone who wants to unite his prayers with the priest may very well find it easier to do if he can hear the priest.

From all time (except until the intro of the new mass) the canon of the mass has been said silently. There is no participation role for the people.

For a person to “unite his prayers” with the priest during the canon is useless. Further, your statement reveals a profound misunderstanding of the mass.

Thanks for trying out.

 

[floresco]

For a person to “unite his prayers” with the priest during the canon is useless. Further, your statement reveals a profound misunderstanding of the mass.

Perhaps this is the wrong way to express it. I’m referring to what Pope St. Pius X was talking about when he said, “you must pray with the Priest the holy words said by him in the name of Christ and which Christ says by him.” Could you explain in more detail how I am misunderstanding the Mass? I do want to understand.

 

[Lamafacaja]

I don’t frankly see the need to make the canon audible anyway, since, as somebody has already pointed out, you can tell by the priest’s gestures what he is saying and doing – you can, at any rate, tell when the consecration is about to take place, and has taken place.

The Mass is said to God, not to those is the congregation. All prayers are directed towards God, so it’s important to remember this when considering the significance of the silent prayers.

Perhaps this is the wrong way to express it. I’m referring to what Pope St. Pius X was talking about when he said, “you must pray with the Priest the holy words said by him in the name of Christ and which Christ says by him.” Could you explain in more detail how I am misunderstanding the Mass? I do want to understand.

No, I think you’ve nailed it, floresco. The priest offers the sacrifice to God, but the victim (Jesus), is offered by all who assist at the Mass. So, along with the priest we also offer the sacrifice (as well as offering ourselves), to God. The victim is a sign of that we too offer ourselves to God.