The "Reform of the Reform" is in motion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ockham
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dancny said:
My, My, how charitable. Apparently I am stupid and I don’t understand my own faith.

I am latin rite. Perhaps I miswrote it.

Yes I do understand all the symbolism and I find it much of the symbolism of the tridentine mass unnecessary. For your information I have read up on it to see if I was missing something from my ancient memory, I was perhaps 12 when the mass changed in my area.

I find that the reverance and glory of the mass is in what you bring to it. I also have over thirty years in the Navy and I have stood on the bridge of a ship and I can assure you of one thing. There are people in front of the Captain on that ship. Especially if your in the foc’sle or on the bow.

I am fully versed in all the symbolism. I don’t need a dead language to worship God and my unconsecrated hand is probably cleaner than my unconsecrated tounge since the mouth is the dirtiest part of the body.

Allow me to ask, when the church first started after Pentacost, did the apostles and deacons walk around putting the eucharist on the tounges of those 3000 first converts or was it shared some other way?

I disagree with you. I am neither less educated than you, less Catholic than you, less reverant than you. I simply feel differently than you. If your prefer the other way than please attend all the tridentines you wish. I feel no need of it.

Pax vobiscum
Click to expand...
There is no need to be rude and uncharitable. As for your comments regarding a dead language, it is precisely why Latin is so important the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Because it is unchanging, it is not subject to the fleeting idiosyncracies of the vernacular. Furthermore, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy never said that we could fully dispense with Latin. In fact, it strongly encouraged its use. This was reaffirmed by both the late Pope John Paul II and his successor, Pope Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis.

Incidentally, there is also no need to raise the spectre of antiquarianism with regard to your comments regarding St. Peter and the manner of distributing Holy Communion.

No one is accusing you of being less Catholic or less educated than the rest of us. However, before making comments denigrating a particular posture or a certain stance that the Holy See is advocating, it would help us to read what the authoritative documents of the Church have to say on the subject. A captain certainly does not dispute his Admiral on serious matters.
 
Someone should tell those doctors, scientists and lawyers to stop using that dead language…
 
Brendan said:
Either that, or issue instructions on how the current practices are to be interpreted.

Under Canon 16, the body that issues liturgical law also has the authority to issue authentic interpretations that carry the force of law.

It’s very similar to how the Supreme Court can tell lower courts how to interprete and enforce a law, but does not change the verbage of the law itself.
Click to expand...
We have to keep in mind the source for this information, and proceed with a great deal of caution. No changes have been made yet (I believe that was Joannm’s point).

Yes, the plenary assembly did make some recommendations (which are just that, recommendations, which might or might not lead to anything), and they also called for a deeper understand of existing norms. Whether or not we see the indult to allow Communion in the hand abrogated, it doesn’t change the fact that on-the-tongue is still the universal norm. That point has been all but forgotten in some places, and indeed, the exception has become the normative practice, and even the exclusive practice. Some young Catholics are being taught only to receive on the hand–this is a problem.

Whether we strongly support, or vehemently oppose the proposed changes described in the document, we must all remember that until such changes are approved by Rome, they are all mere speculation.

Existing norms are different. Here, we do need to heed the assembly’s words and we all need to have a deeper fidelity to the existing norms of the Church.
 
FrDavid96 said:
Yes, the plenary assembly did make some recommendations (which are just that, recommendations, which might or might not lead to anything), and they also called for a deeper understand of existing norms.
Click to expand...
Didn’t they also recommend the institution of female acolytes and lectors?
 
Phemie said:
Didn’t they also recommend the institution of female acolytes and lectors?
Click to expand...
No. That recommendation came from the Fathers of the Synod on the Word of God, an entirely separate group from the CDWDS.
 
Jakub said:
Someone should tell those doctors, scientists and lawyers to stop using that dead language…
Click to expand...
Cute! 😃

While I loved the Latin Mass of my youth, and also currently prefer it, I do not mind an English Mass if it is done reverently, prayerfully, canonically, etc. The point is, it seems as if it rarely is! There’s an occasional English Mass I go to that is done well & prayerfully most of the time, but it is the same location that also offers lay preaching :eek: , abuse of the Sacrament of Healing, rarely offers confession times, has a congregation which claps after Mass (& sometimes during), etc. The parish has pluses and minuses, obviously, so I think the point is that, while both the Latin and the English Mass can miss the mark – partly depending on the celebrant, partly depending on the congregation & individual – the vernacular Mass is more prone to other abuse because of assumptions connected with the vernacular.

I think the Latin Mass can be made meaningful to people by offering catechesis in it, providing Missals for it, etc. I also think that the option for the vernacular Mass can remain, but I would love to see some boundaries drawn around it!

Thanks for listening. 🙂
 
Benedictgirl,

It was not my intent to be rude. I found some of the responses to me rude and I tried to point it out.

There are some good cases for the use of Latin. If the whole church uses it then the you can go mass anywhere in the world and understand the mass. The language will not change so the meaning of the words will not change. There are many others.

Also, it was not my intent to denigrate any postures or any forms of the mass. Eucharist is THE moment when you encounter Our Lord at the mass. This is a really poor metaphor so please accept my acknowledgement of the fact that the metaphor is poor. But it is like giving Him a kiss and/or holding His hand. I mean that in the utmost reverance and the fact so trancends the words I use and the awe of the fact trancends even that.

I am a firm believer that the Tridentine mass should be offered, if not at every parish, then at enough so that those who prefer it can attend. I also dislike the idea fact that the two dioceses that I lived in that had it held it at 8:00 A.M. Both were some distance away from me. There is one now closer in a beautiful church that is at, I think 11. I haven’t gone but I intend to bring my adult son and daughter if for no other reason to show them the beautiful history of our church.

I never said I didn’t like the latin mass. I am not a fan and not overjoyed with it’s return. It is my humble opinion that with some good catechesis from the priest and some cooperation with our holy Father we can bring some more reverance to it.

Ours is a living church. Ours is a living God, a God who does not change and a church with teachings and dogmas that don’t change. Some practices change, We went from a meeting where the language was either Greek or Aramaic to a mass that is primarily Latin to the Novus Ordo. We grow while we stay the same.

I would like to understand one point I am trying to make as to the orientation of the priest.

It is a rather intense moment for me from the epicleses to the Amen. I love that moment, that period.

God, becomes present. God descends from heaven and becomes present on the altar for you and for me. Not in some far distant place like “the east.” Not at some future second coming, but right now, right here, right in front of us. I am constantly amazed why there is an flash of light and choirs of angels. The ONE THING I would bring back is bells. I would peel every beel in christendom at every consecration. JESUS CHRIST IS HERE!

I like to watch it. It is that simple.

Now, please don’t tell me that it isn’t about MY feelings. In a way you would be right and in a way not. EVery devout Catholic “feels” during the mass. We feel uplifted at different points, We feel peace, we feel reverant, we feel . We feel. This is where I feel the most.

That’s me. Maybe it is only me. But I would deeply regret if that were taken away. I hope you understand. I am not asking you to agree, just understand.
 
I_Believe said:
You need a letter form the Pope himself ? 😛
Click to expand...
Even if it is true, nothing new is being done about reception of communion, only a re-affirmation of what is already existing.
They have also declared themselves favorable to reaffirm that the usual way of receiving Communion according to the norms is not on the hand, but in the mouth. There is, it is true, and indult which, on request of the [local] episcopates, allows for the distribution of the host sic
Click to expand...
] also on the palm of the hand, but this must remain an extraordinary fact.

I do not see where any of this speculation on what reform is on the way or not. Who knows. I think the key is to be accepting, even to elements we do not like. There are too many people that like to complain or think they should be above what the Church says. Even if these changes take place in part, there will be some that object. We should not be among them. Our job in this is to humbly accept the the disciplinary changes of the Church. The ones we do not like, we can offer it up as a sacrifice.
 
benedictgal said:
Here is the link, Fr. David:

vatican.va/news_services/press/sinodo/documents/bollettino_22_xii-ordinaria-2008/02_inglese/b37_02.html

zenit.org/article-24448?l=english

I hope it helps. I am hoping that we will get a new Lectionary out of this. May the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus intercede for this to happen. This was one of his pet causes.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but that was for the October 2008 World Synod of Bishops. I think the question was about the one mentioned in this thread: March 2009 Plenary Assembly of the CDWDS.

Proposition 17 of the Synod does speak of opening the function of lector to women (which is already permitted in the US, so perhaps they mean worldwide), but does not use the key word “instituted” lector (unless that is in the Latin but not translated, which I personally doubt).
 
FrDavid96 said:
Thanks, but that was for the October 2008 World Synod of Bishops. I think the question was about the one mentioned in this thread: March 2009 Plenary Assembly of the CDWDS.

Proposition 17 of the Synod does speak of opening the function of lector to women (which is already permitted in the US, so perhaps they mean worldwide), but does not use the key word “instituted” lector (unless that is in the Latin but not translated, which I personally doubt).
Click to expand...
In my reply to Phemie’s question, I noted that this recommendation came from the Synod and not from the CDWDS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top