A
archangel04
Guest
There are Church Fathers that would disagree with you especially St. Ignatious of Antioch.
- Status
M
MarkThompson
Guest
I think it’s been hashed over pretty well, so I’ll make this my last remark on this particular topic, but the original comment I was responding to said that the traditionalization of the Ordinary Form “can never be because of the priest facing the people [literraly ON STAGE].” The premise seems to be that an OF Mass must be said versus populum, and that if the priest is facing you the Mass cannot be reverent. Both of these contentions are false. The OF can be said ad orientem, just as the TLM, depending on circumstances, can be said versus populum (when that would also be ad orientem in the literal sense). And having the priest face the people does not, somehow, automatically make things irreverent. If the assertion is that it’s just theologically “wrong” somehow, it’s out of keeping with what actually happened at the literal Calvary. If the assertion is that, depending on the foibles of the priest, some people might be distracted, that’s not terribly meaningful. Other people might not, and people might be distracted if construction were going on down the block, or if the sacred art and statues in the sanctuary were particularly intriguing.
In other words, the claim “This can never be because of the priest facing the people [literraly ON STAGE]” is pretty much its own straw man.
M
MarkThompson
Guest
I agree!True these are some good questions. Notice that in none of my posts have I ever been a proponent of Latin only, although Latin in my opinion should be used epsecially during the Consecration, again my opinion and preference. One thing I’ve notice at the TLM is that during the silent moments, one can get easily be distracted or if tired, very sleepy. The OF allows one to participate in many scared prayers and I have no problem with that, in fact I enjoy that, but it lacks silence and some cases reverence. As humans we tend to be visual creatures, and showing ad orientum (at least during consecrations), incense, bells, and silence shows that the Consecreation and Eucharist are the center high point of the Mass.
The other important thing to keep in mind is that different things work for different people. Believe it or not, there are people on these boards who have said flat out, “I don’t like music at Mass; I find it distracting, especially if there are any words.” Well, that’s fine – go to a Low Mass, or whatever other Mass your parish has that doesn’t have music, which is often the early-morning Mass. Obviously, the Church as an institution does like music at Mass, and there are many Vatican documents discussing its importance. But to each his own, and we’d probably be worse off if the Church mandated that all five Propers and a full Ordinary be sung at every Mass, to say nothing of a recessional hymn, Communion meditation hymn, etc. Likewise, there are people who say, “The best thing about the silent Canon is that it allows you to really concentrate on it; whenever it’s spoken I lose focus.” Okay, no problem – for him. Other people say they get distracted and uncomfortable during protracted periods of silence, and find it easier to focus their thoughts and pray if a suitable sacred song is being sung.
So that’s the problem with just saying, tout court, that the Mass needs more sacred silence, or more sacred music, or whatever. All that really means is that I want more of it, and it’s something that helps me pray and worship. Some people get distracted when something is spoken, others get distracted when it isn’t.
That’s not to apply too great a level or relativism to it, of course. I’m willing to say point blank that the organ is more reverent than the kazoo, and one belong in Mass while the other doesn’t. But to say that a problem with the OF is that it “lacks silence” makes sense only if you happen to want more silence. Naturally, many people who prefer the TLM do like more silence, but remember that even within that group there are folks who would get irritated to have a choir singing De Lassus or Monteverdi polyphonic Propers during the Eucharistic Prayer, and others who think that’s the height of religious refinement.
A
archangel04
Guest
I know atleast the OF mass I attend sometimes lacks silence, silence should be used atleast at some point in the mass, atleast 30 seconds to a minute. For example during communion procession sometimes the line is so long that the music finishes before it’s over, so why start another song? Just allow the silence to take it’s place. I have no problems with music/singing, remember St. Augustine said that singing is like praying twice!
C
CDNowak
Guest
However, I think we can say tout court that the Church needs more Sacred … whatever:thumbsup:
O
OraLabora
Guest
Where I attend Mass the communion antiphon is chanted in Latin and as many psalm verses are chanted so as to allow the faithful to receive communion. After everyone has received, there is a period of a couple of minutes of silence.
There are also periods of silence after each reading and the homily. Usually you could hear a pin drop until some moron’s cell phone goes off…
M
MarkThompson
Guest
It needs lots more sacred whatever, and an extra dose of reverent je ne sais quoi!
K
Kerygmatic
Guest
St. Ignatios of Antioch speaks of an appelate office but does not continance anything like a papal supremacy or magisterium. Besides, St. Peter was Patriarch of Antioch before assuming the Roman cathedra. How can that see logically be inferior? It wasn’t in the pre-schism Church, nor during St. Ignatios’ time.
A
archangel04
Guest
You are lucky
A
archangel04
Guest
Well seeing that I am no expert witht he schism, I am sure that many would agree with me that it’s the Ortgodox Church we are waiting on for them to return to the True Church.
K
Kerygmatic
Guest
Well, for one, we affirm the Lerentian definition of the Catholic Church. Do you? The Seventh Ecumenical Council expressly anathemizes all innovations. How can that be reconciled with your heretical notion of “doctrinal development,” The Orthodox Church has no innovations, teaches no errors, and your popes affirm that. So the case is made by Rome that the Orthodox are the True Church. The Chair of Peter says we are Catholic. So why would you disparage papal teaching?
M
MarkThompson
Guest
No offense, but this thread is not about the East-West schism. Could you do us a favor and start a new, different thread if you’d like to discuss something other than “‘traditionalizing’ the ordinary form”?
A
archangel04
Guest
Look I am not into discussing about the schism, since I have no actual education on it, but I follow the Church of Christ, simple as that. Don’t change the topic on what we are disussing. If you want to disuss this topic post it up in the approprate forum and I will follow it.
You havn’t been on this forum a long time and already you come on to the traditional forums and start attacking the TLM on other post.
K
Kerygmatic
Guest
Orientale Lumen teaches we Orthodox are not only NOT in schism, but the Catholic Church.
While I wasn’t attacking the Latin mass, but providing an earlier pre-schism form of it, which is more authentic, more conducive to liturgical piety, and only suggesting it be part of the discussion in the Liturgical Reform going on now. That would reinforce Roman liturgical piety and restore a parity of the Latin mass, which Novus Ordo is also, with the liturgical Tradition of the undivided Church. That might just promote unity.
While I wasn’t attacking the Latin mass, but providing an earlier pre-schism form of it, which is more authentic, more conducive to liturgical piety, and only suggesting it be part of the discussion in the Liturgical Reform going on now. That would reinforce Roman liturgical piety and restore a parity of the Latin mass, which Novus Ordo is also, with the liturgical Tradition of the undivided Church. That might just promote unity.
L
Layman
Guest
Sorry, we’ve had this before. Y’can’t proselytize for Eastern rites on the Traditonal Roman Catholic sub-forum, AFAIK.
K
Kerygmatic
Guest
Orthodoxy is not a “rite” but the True Church. I wasn’t proselytizing it, but speaking of liturgical considerations which could speed along GENUINE, not ecumenist, dialogue. While Orientale Lumen ENCOURAGES LATIN RITE CATHOLICS TO FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH THE EASTERN RITES AND SHARE IN THEIR SPIRITUALITY, STATING THAT THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IS INTRINSICALLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. It is still in effect. Where is this proselytism you are going on about?! Thank you for telling all that Eastern Riters are not allowed to speak up in their union with Rome and that you forbid them any sort of equality of witness. It is pretty clear how you regard Eastern riters and their union with you. Don’t think the Orthodox Church, the One True Church, will ever accept such repression!
O
OraLabora
Guest
Definitely! And it’s an OF Mass too. I can barely stand going to parishes now, unless it’s when our Gregorian schola chants; at least we know the music will be from the Propers.You are lucky
C
CradleCath
Guest
Thank you so much for actually comparing the prayers of the EF. to those of the O.F., I’ve tried to do that a few times…to no avail. The posters on the thread just kept discussing Latin, Ad Orientem, etc.
Few seem to realize that the theology of the two Masses is different. The Novus Ordo Mass celebrates the Last Supper…much like Cranmer’s Mass did. The TLM. focuses on Calvary.
Absolutely & those who infer that it’s just “smells & bells” do a great disservice… not only to those of us who prefer the TLM., but to the Latin Mass in general.
I
infanteedu
Guest
I’m a former religious man who is still trying to enthuse people with Our Lord Jesus, particularly in His Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Mass.
I’m 68 years old and I know first hand the Latin Mass before Vatican II. I only want to comment on one single item and it’s the following. Before Vatican II people (I included), since we didn’t understand what the priest was saying (for what it counts it could be Chinese) we spent that sacred time reading a devotional book and/or praying the Rosary. Pope John XXIII and the bishops at that time wanted us to PARTICIPATE in the Mass, not to be passive in it. It is very sad and depressing, at a time when people are more and more moved away from our Church seeing people in authority trying to GO BACK to a past because of sentimental feelings. I don’t think that our Lord gives a hoot to the language we worship with and I’m sure that He is not amused to see how some individuals want to make people more and more reticent to even attend our liturgies. This Latin thing might play a role, perhaps, in some big cathedrals or a particular group of people but to the run of the mill normal parishioner, this doesn’t make any sense.
We, as Catholics, are LOSING the battle, friends, just look at the Mass attendance and the life our parishes have (Or don’t have). Our churches in the U.S. are closing right and left; our churches in Europe are closing (and being transformed into mosques) even at a faster clip. And we are worrying about re-introducing Latin…………… How hurtful this is.
Praying for you, for our Holy Father, for those in authority and for our Church in general,
Sincerily,
Ed Infante
I’m 68 years old and I know first hand the Latin Mass before Vatican II. I only want to comment on one single item and it’s the following. Before Vatican II people (I included), since we didn’t understand what the priest was saying (for what it counts it could be Chinese) we spent that sacred time reading a devotional book and/or praying the Rosary. Pope John XXIII and the bishops at that time wanted us to PARTICIPATE in the Mass, not to be passive in it. It is very sad and depressing, at a time when people are more and more moved away from our Church seeing people in authority trying to GO BACK to a past because of sentimental feelings. I don’t think that our Lord gives a hoot to the language we worship with and I’m sure that He is not amused to see how some individuals want to make people more and more reticent to even attend our liturgies. This Latin thing might play a role, perhaps, in some big cathedrals or a particular group of people but to the run of the mill normal parishioner, this doesn’t make any sense.
We, as Catholics, are LOSING the battle, friends, just look at the Mass attendance and the life our parishes have (Or don’t have). Our churches in the U.S. are closing right and left; our churches in Europe are closing (and being transformed into mosques) even at a faster clip. And we are worrying about re-introducing Latin…………… How hurtful this is.
Praying for you, for our Holy Father, for those in authority and for our Church in general,
Sincerily,
Ed Infante
O
Ockham
Guest
The Church isn’t trying to ‘GO BACK’ for ‘sentimental feelings’. You just pointed out that Mass attendance was much higher pre-V2 so your argument is circular. Now that I attend the EF and use a missal I’ve never participated so much in my life. Many people at the OF are just going through the motions. As you pointed out, most stay home.
- Status