J
- Status
P
palmas85
Guest
Yeah, thats what I thought. So in essence, you and probably most of the others that support the Traditional but only in the vernacular actually want not only the vernacular but also the audible Canon and who knows what else… I believe that I correctly guessed that one a while back.
The thing is Kirk, how far does the Traditional Mass have to bend or modernize? before it magically becomes acceptable to you and others? Vernacular? Audible Canon? Reduction in prayers? More simplicity? More participation? Praise music? Etc Etc. Where does it end Kirk? Tell me, how far before all of you guys are satisfied?
See what I mean Kirk, once you start it keeps going. I believe that you are sincere Kirk, but I always knew you wanted more than just the vernacular. All of you guys do. At least you were honest about it finally, and I’m glad to know that.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Wait a sec, I dunno if you’ve been gone, Palmas, but I’ve posted what I thought would be good changes to the TLM. I haven’t been dishonest about anything. Check here:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2835293&postcount=114
O
otjm
Guest
Then I would have to ask you where you ar meeting these adults (East or West Coast, or somewhere in the middle of America); and what Mass have they been attending for the last 10 years? If you are meeting them in a parish which has had the Indult, then I would suggest your sample is skewed. Both Kirk and I are on the West Coast, and that may make a difference in our sample.
P
palmas85
Guest
You have always said you wanted the vernacular. Now you’ve gone ahead and said you want the audible Canon as well. I just asked how much further it needs to bend before the Traditional Mass finally becomes acceptable to you Kirk. Thats all.
As far as changes Kirk, the Traditional Mass really doesn’t need any as far as I can tell. As far as your changes you seem to want to water down the Traditional and turn it into a slightly more dignified form of the Pauline.
P
palmas85
Guest
I think the Church that you are in is what is skewing your sample. In San Diego there is a large and I do mean a large number of older people, such as I, who prefer the Traditional form of the Mass.
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
St Matthew 7:15
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
**St Matthew 7:16 **
By their fruits you shall know them.
Good Question, but many have already figured his answer and him out.
C
Corki
Guest
No, what I am saying is that there is no approved English translation of the TLM. The translation you see in your missal is not an approved translation. It is just intended as a helpful aid to the reader. Vox Clara would be ultimately responsible for getting a translation through the approval process and I can’t see them doing it without the ICEL or without the approval of each national Bishops Confererence.
The NO translation is semi-approved, for now. The reason that the ICEL has been hashing over a new one is that the old one didn’t really get much of an endorsement from Vox Clara and they were sent back to the “drawing board”. They have had several extensions but we may actually see something by Advent '08. I have also heard that the NO translation was rushed but there was a big move to get away from anything “flowery” or ornate so the lack of poetic language might have been quite intentional.
B
BritishCatholic
Guest
Well, quickly in regards to that, I will be extremely happy when the day comes when the Novus Ordo, “and also with you”, becomes “and with your spirit”. In fact, I would be more than delighted if we returned to Elizabethan English for the Novus Ordo Mass. I mean hey, the Episcopalians do it. Why not us?
And now in regards to the Tridentine Mass in the vernacular. I skimmed all the comments posted thus far in this thread, and there is a lot of good discussion. Personally, I wouldn’t mind it. However, I must admit that it would be kind of weird. I mean, I personally prefer the Mass of Pope John XXIII(that is, the Tridentine Rite) over the Novus Ordo. And I’ve been to many TLM. It’s just hard to imagine the sonorous chant of the “Dominus Vobiscum” and so on in English.
O
otjm
Guest
Well, I have said repeatedly through these fora that area makes a difference. The problem we have in communicating on some of these issues is that we presume that our area is the standard, and project what we see about us on all others near and far.
I do not disagree with your assessment of your area. But neither of us can really say that your area or mine exemplifies the standard. It will take time, I think several years at the minimum before any sort of assessment can take place that is meaningful. By the way - you’re older? As in, generally?
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
I gave you that link, Palmas. I think I that was clear (contrary to the suggestion of some that I’m attempting to deceive, “in sheep’s clothing.” But which Mass was the Council refering to when it spoke of desiring a “noble simplicity?” There was only one at the time and it was the only one that the Council Fathers had known.
In the link I provided, I gave what I thought could be changed without altering the character of the TLM. I don’t have hidden agenda. I’m not trying to make it acceptable to Protestants and I don’t want to de-emphasize the sacrificial nature, etc. And I don’t understand why you would think I would want to turn it into simply a dignified Pauline (lots of us already have that). If you lay the vernacular translations side by side, they are clearly different. It would STILL be the Tridentine, only in the vernacular and audible. That doesn’t change the nature of the that Rite and it might be an answer to all of this infighting.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
I doubt “many” have come to your conclusions, inasmuch as they are actual Catholic Christians. 2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way.
A
Ad_Deum
Guest
Was “Latin” also a vernacular? Though I like the Traditional Mass in Latin very much, and I prefer it that way; English TLM may be good as long as nothing will be changed except the language (Latin to English).
Pax
Laudater Jesus Christus
Instaurare omnia in Christo
Pax
Laudater Jesus Christus
Instaurare omnia in Christo
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
I posted this link in another forum, I’ll post it here as well.
From a letter Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to a Dr. Barth:
“I believe, however, that in the long run the Roman Church must again have a single Roman rite: the existence of two official rites in practice is for the bishops and priests quite hard to “manage.” The Roman rite of the future ought to be a single rite, celebrated in Latin or in the language of the country, but completely based on the tradition of the [old] handed-down rite; it could take in some new elements that have proven themselves, such as new feasts, some new prefaces in the Mass, a wider order of readings – more choices than before, but not too many – an “Oratio fidelium,” i.e., a fixed litany of prayers after the Oremus before the Offertory, where it earlier had its place.”
latinmassjax.org/augustnewsletter.htm
From a letter Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to a Dr. Barth:
“I believe, however, that in the long run the Roman Church must again have a single Roman rite: the existence of two official rites in practice is for the bishops and priests quite hard to “manage.” The Roman rite of the future ought to be a single rite, celebrated in Latin or in the language of the country, but completely based on the tradition of the [old] handed-down rite; it could take in some new elements that have proven themselves, such as new feasts, some new prefaces in the Mass, a wider order of readings – more choices than before, but not too many – an “Oratio fidelium,” i.e., a fixed litany of prayers after the Oremus before the Offertory, where it earlier had its place.”
latinmassjax.org/augustnewsletter.htm
B
BobP123
Guest
And then Vatican II clarified that by insisting that Latin remain in the liturgy.
B
BobP123
Guest
Does it matter what you call it? Latin has been time-proven to be more universally accepted by the Catholic Church. Or at least in the Western world.
T
ThereCanBeOnly1
Guest
I doubt “many” have come to your conclusions, inasmuch as they are actual Catholic (to JamesKirk: pity, you may never know what Catholic is) Christians.
It is ‘many’ but not ‘all’
S
stmaria
Guest
Constitution on the Liturgy of Vatican II article 36: “ The use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”**
What is this “particular law” and where did it come from? It came from the law established by the Council of Trent which openly declared that it was guided by the Holy Spirit and therefore free from error.
americancatholictruthsociety.com/docs/TRENT/trent22.htm
Doctrine Concerning The Sacrifice Of The Mass Session XXIIThat the ancient, complete and in every way perfect faith and teaching regarding the great mystery of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church may be retained, and with the removal of errors and heresies may be preserved in its purity, the holy, ecumenical and general Council of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the same legates of the Apostolic See presiding, instructed by the light of the Holy Ghost, teaches, declares and orders to be preached to the faithful the following concerning it, since it is the true and only sacrifice.
CHAPTER VIII
THE MASS MAY NOT BE CELEBRATED IN THE VERNACULAR. ITS MYSTERIES TO BE EXPLAINED TO THE PEOPLE
Though the mass contains much instruction for the faithful, it has, nevertheless, not been deemed advisable by the Fathers that it should be celebrated everywhere in the vernacular tongue.
Canon 9. If anyone says that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; or that the mass ought to be celebrated in the vernacular tongue only;[28] or that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the chalice because it is contrary to the institution of Christ,[29] let him be anathema.
B
Brendan
Guest
It is being preserved, it’s the normative language of the Mass. Every use of the vernacular is an indult.
I would agree, however, that use of the indult is too widespread in that it negatively impacts other decrees of Vatican II, such as SC #54
FYI, the text you quoted is from VII, not Trent. And it’s not 'Particular Law" which is a specific Canonical term. It is Universal Law of the Latin Rite.
And techincally, it’s not infallible, as it only applies to one particular Church, the Latin Church. Infallible truth applies to all God’s faithful, including those in the Eastern Catholic Churches.
Since Sacrosanctum Concillium applies only to the Latin Church, it is not in the same catetory as a Dogmatic Definition. In fact, you will note that it is a ‘Constitution’, that actually ranks lower than a Motu Proprio.
I for one have never advocated that the Liturgy be said only in the Vernacular, and neither has any Pontif. In fact, as I mentioned above, Latin is the normative langauge for the Mass and is regularly celebrated as such worldwide.
I agree that there are some on this board who do advocate that the vernacular be the only language for the Mass, I am not one of them. The Mass may also be said in Latin.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
To Brendan’s post, I would add that even a cursory reading of the posts in this thread would reveal that no one has suggested that the Mass ought to be celebrated in the vernacular only nor has anyone suggested condemnation of the “low tone.” To express that one thinks an audible cannon to be a positive thing is not to condemn the inaudible.
- Status