We Grew up with It

[mkingdomlvr]

The thing that makes me CRAZY with these before Mass rehearsals is that there are other places these guitarists can prepare!!!

The Church I attend has a large parish hall attached to it AND a school! Why can’t the choir/band/folk singers warm up there and allow us to pray without the soundtrack?

 

[GodIsGracious]

The thing that makes me CRAZY with these before Mass rehearsals is that there are other places these guitarists can prepare!!!

The Church I attend has a large parish hall attached to it AND a school! Why can’t the choir/band/folk singers warm up there and allow us to pray without the soundtrack?

Because it’s all about them.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I am very glad to hear that I am not the only one who thinks that rehearsal should be confined to the parish hall. Twenty years as a cathedral chorister and we never practiced in the cathedral - always in the parish hall. One of the major problems I have with my local geographic parish is that they rehearse before Mass and those of us who want to pray or examine our consciences are faced with having to listen to botched chords, off-key notes, etc. Don’t these folks practice during the week?

We had choir rehearsal for two hours on Wednesday evening and an hour before Mass on Sunday - in the parish hall…

We used to have a placard at the cathedral back in the 80s. It was placed before the Blessed Sacrament in the side chapel (no little room but why is Our Lord reserved in a side chapel - anthother topic). It was a quotatation from the Book of Habbakuk:

20 But the LORD is in his holy temple; silence before him, all the earth!

I grew up with that. Socialize in the parish hall AFTER Mass over coffee and doughnuts. Not before. It’s not about us; it is about Him.

 

[Joannm]

Because it’s all about them.

No, it is probably more about the pastor. Why does he not step in and tell them to rehearse somewhere else. When I started to work at my parish I was annoyed that the choir warmed up in the church before mass. I went to the pastor and we got someone to donate a used piano and now the choir warms up in our chapel (the Blessed Sacrament is not there, only during exposition on Thursdays), which is in a different part of the church building and only slighly can be heard if they leave the door open. So perhaps someone needs to speak to the pastor. Perhaps they don’t have another place to rehearse.

 

[white_sheep]

I was born in 1980, I don’t remember the way the EF was done back then, I don’t even really know much about it. I do know how it is done now and I attend occasionally. My parish has a Latin NO that is very nice and an English OF that is very nice. What I’ve found is that around 99% of the time if you are at a parish which does not offer a Latin service the only mass available is a hippie mass. I am frankly very opposed to and alienated by hippie music and it seems that all the rest of the men in there are as well. They don’t sing, naturally, because they usually mock other men who listen to such music, but I suppose they can suffer through it. I don’t care if it is in Latin or English really, I don’t even care if we have more EF masses(though I would prefer that).

All I want is a compromise. Can we make it so that every parish offers at least one reverent mass every Sunday and all the rest can be hippie masses? Can’t we just get one? Why do people who don’t appreciate the mass being made a mockery have to travel so far every Sunday to get to a mass they can stomach? It is absolutely ridiculous. Now that I am moving I plan on joining the parish council and getting involved every other way I can to try to change things since a normal parish is now almost an hour away. Will I have any luck? Have any of you tried this?

 

[roveau]

I have no problem with the Latin Mass because I grew up with it. After a while you get to understand what some of the words are, then whole sentences. You don’t have to learn Latin because you always have the English next to the Latin in your Missal… and you get to know what’s going on in the Latin Mass eventually.

I like the Latin and the old style English in the prayers because it removes the words from the everyday useage that you hear in the streets or on television - that gives the words greater spiritual value (in my experience anyway).

I went to a Tridentine Mass again yesterday. Our parish has one once a month. Just wonderful. The visiting priest speaks Latin so well and with the correct accent that I had a little bit of trouble following him. I was so used to our Australian priests and altar boys, when I was young, saying the Latin with an Australian accent. I’ll also have to confess that I got lost a bit during the silent parts.

I am so grateful for our Latin Mass but I am also grateful for the OF because we go there for the Eucharist and to worship God with the community.

I’ll have to say that the Catholic Church even when I was young (I’m 59) had terrible music anyway (wishy washy) compared to the rousing hymns of the Protestants that I don’t mind the terrible music that we have nowadays. I can’t get myself to sing it but I’m going to have to try (and offer it up).

Rove

 

[otjm]

I was born in 1980, I don’t remember the way the EF was done back then, I don’t even really know much about it. What I’ve found is that around 99% of the time if you are at a parish which does not offer a Latin service the only mass available is a hippie mass.

It would appear you have travled extremely little, if you think that 99% has to do with anything - except hyperbole. Further, if you were born in the 80’s, you have no clue what a hippie even is.

I am frankly very opposed to and alienated by hippie music and it seems that all the rest of the men in there are as well.

Men are notorious for not singing; again your youth is showing. And as for hippie music - open OCP and look at the bottom of each piece of music, and start counting how many of them are taken from the Psalms; then start counting how many are taken from the OT; then start counting how many are taken from the Gospels. You may or may not like the tunes they are written to, but please, before you start blowing snot on Sacred Scripture, do a little research. Once you find that a large number of the songs we sing out of OCP are Scripture or Scripture based, maybe, just maybe, your attitude will change. Then, again, maybe it won’t.

Now that I am moving I plan on joining the parish council and getting involved every other way I can to try to change things since a normal parish is now almost an hour away. Will I have any luck? Have any of you tried this?

If your attitude when you get to the new parish is similar to some of your comments herein, it most likely will be your luck to be either ignored or dismissed.

Note: I have traveled a bit more widely than you have, and lived a couple of more years or so. Some of what you do not like I would agree with, I suspect, and some of it I would be a bit more tolerant of than you appear to be. Over the years things have calmed down a great deal; Masses are in general more reverent; the priests who had so much to do with the changes are retiring and/or dying, and are being replaced with the John Paul 2 priests. The pendulum swings both directions, and some time ago it started to swing back from the excesses of the 70’s. However, it takes time; it will swing back in some areas much more quickly than others.

But you are most welcome to go to your next parish and talk to people about the “hippie” Masses, and to lecture the priest on reverence. You will reap what you sow. But most likely it will not be what you want to reap.

 

[trish2009]

I am being chastized left, right, and sideways. I am no triumphalist, Bishop Basil, I have never seen the Pauline Mass celebrated in Latin except on EWTN.

It saddens me to have to drive 25 miles one way as I have done for the last 28 years because my local parishes were more like Protestant churches.

I have no desire to take away the OF from anyone. I am more concerned about the fundamental injustice which was done to all of us who were alive and in the pews on the First Sunday of Advent 1969. A mighty conspiracy theory…Oh, yeah, I want to restore the TLM.

Think again. Think again and then again, again. Forty years ago, I was an altar boy. Forty years ago I sang in my high school choir for the class of 1968. Forty years ago my classmates made me have to sing “Sons of God”, Simon and Garfunkle, and “And They’ll Know We are Christians”. An entire choir dissolved for…what?

Did I get a choice back then? Did I get a vote? Go back and read what Vatican II said and then see what has been done in the “spirit of Vatican II”.

I grew up with a Missa Cantata. When I was not serving on the altar, I was in the pews with my mother and siblings. We chanted Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, etc. Everything we do today in English, I grew up with Latin.

I’ve got 40 years of history to look back over. Forty years. I’m not dead and I have memories of what came before and experience of what is now. I guess I’m just supposed to roll over and play dead.

Please don’t roll over and play dead. There is hope on the horizon.

I am 73 years old and grew up on the 40’s and 50’s. Went to a Catholic grammar school. Sung the Latin hymns and the English hymns too. We attended Latin Masses with a small Missal in our hands. It had both the Latin on one side and English on the other side of the page. So we knew what the priest was doing and saying as long as we followed along in our Missals. I don’t understand the people who say the attended the Latin mass and never knew what was going on!

I too was appalled by the new changes. Not because I couldn’t live without the Latin but because they didn’t just convert the Latin into English. They totally changed it. I still cringe when I hear the modern so-called hymns (I call them songs) and the loudness of them, the bands or guitar players right up there on the altar make me sick. What was wrong with keeping the Choir Loft and the organ? That wasn’t in Vatican II.

I still will not receive Communion from a lay person, I don’t care what title they give them. Their hands have not been consecrated and they have no business handling the Sacred Host. But there’s good news on the horizon. Pope Benedict is going to try to restore Communion on the tongue while kneeling. I just read the report on an internet site called Newsblaze.com. If you can’t find it I have a copy on my desktop which I can post here.

And now they’re bringing back the correct wording in the Mass, such as “Lord I am not worthy that Thou should come under my roof, but say the word and my soul will be healed” and some of the other “correct” words in the Mass. So all is not lost if we can just live long enough to see the changes go into effect.

Hand in there.

Pat

 

[otjm]

I still will not receive Communion from a lay person, I don’t care what title they give them. Their hands have not been consecrated and they have no business handling the Sacred Host. But there’s good news on the horizon. Pope Benedict is going to try to restore Communion on the tongue while kneeling. I just read the report on an internet site called Newsblaze.com. If you can’t find it I have a copy on my desktop which I can post here.

The “report” on the internet is not a report, it is an editorial. It is not accurate from a historical perspective; it grasps at details to which it attempts to give significance which they don’t have, and consists of conjecture and ignores theological principles. You should be careful of what you read on the internet as it is the prime source of most urban mythology now.

There is an old rule of law: false in part, suspect in all. That editorial falls within that rule.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I had hoped with this thread to be able to explain that there are those of us who were alive in 1967 and who were happy with the TLM, chant, and sacred polyphony. Because of our experiences over the last 40+ years, the last thing…the very last thing I would ever want to do is to force those of you who are content in your parishes, content with OCP/GIA, etc. to revert back to the TLM.

I am often astounded by the posts coming from those of you who are content in your parishes. Many of you have absolutely no experience of the TLM. Others, like my friend, NCJohn, are of an age with me and take an oppossing viewpoint. We agree to disagree.

Why does the idea that some of us want to go back to that which we lost in 1967 frighten some of you?. Or would anger be a better word? I’m like Trish, I won’t receive the Eucharist from an EMHC. I’d also like to kneel too. What is so frightening about my personal choice or so angering?

I have sung in my cathedral choir for twenty years. I have told my story about how we were forbidden to sing in Latin for some ten of those years. For me, the depth and breadth of our liturgical musical heritage makes me wonder why there is such and insistence upon OCP/GIA even acknowledging that they use Sacred Scripture. Should the banal and insipid negate the glories of our heritage? Or negate all of the English composers (Catholic and Protestant) who have written in English? What is so frightening about that? Or so angering?

I was not a hippie. I enlisted in the Navy. Never had long hair. Never did any of the things my generation did. I was not alone. Why is it so hard to understand that there were a whole bunch of us alive in 1967 who understood and liked the TLM, chant, and sacred motets? God bless our Holy Father. After 40 + years he recognized that we existed. Deo gratias ite Deo gratias, most of his bishops have loosened the bonds and at least some of you are able to celebrate a Missa Cantata.

Sadly, I cannot. Not even once a month. We have the choir. We have the choir loft and the organ. I would not take away the guitars and the drums and the OF Mass that pleases you. What is so frightening or so angering about wishing to have a Missa Cantata once a month at my cathedral parish? I simply do not understand.

 

[trish2009]

The “report” on the internet is not a report, it is an editorial. It is not accurate from a historical perspective; it grasps at details to which it attempts to give significance which they don’t have, and consists of conjecture and ignores theological principles. You should be careful of what you read on the internet as it is the prime source of most urban mythology now.

There is an old rule of law: false in part, suspect in all. That editorial falls within that rule.

The article on Newsblast.com was an editorial, however, I list below some of the quotes of Msgr. Marini, Vatican liturgist; Cardinal Llovera, Prefect for Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship; Cardinal Caffarra, Archbishop of Bologna; the Council of Trent and St. Thomas Aquinas that were used in this news article. Are we supposed to not believe what these people have said including St. Thomas Aquinas?

Why would the Pope insist the people kneel and receive on the tongue at his Masses if he believed receiving in the hand was proper?

According to Vatican liturgist, Monsignor Guido Marini, “the Pope is trying to set the stage for the whole church as to the proper norm for receiving Communion for which reason communicants at his papal Masses are now asked to kneel and receive on the tongue”.

Cardinal Llovera, the new prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments speaking to Life Site News on July 22, 2009: “It is the mission of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments to work to promote Pope Benedict’s emphasis on the traditional practices of liturgy, such as reception of Communion on the tongue while kneeling.”

Also worth considering is the recent decree from Cardinal Caffarra, the Archbishop of Bologna Italy, forbidding the practice of Communion in the hand: “Considering the frequency in which cases of irreverent behavior in the act of receiving the Eucharist have been reported, we dispose that starting from today in the Metropolitan Church of St. Peter, in the Basilica of St. Petronius and in the Shrine of the Holy Virgin of St. Luke in Bologna the faithful are to receive the consecrated Bread only from the hands of the Minister directly on the tongue." (from his decree on the reception of the Eucharist, issued April 27, 2009)

“To priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist.” (Council of Trent) This teaching is beautifully expressed by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica: “Because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.”

 

[brotherhrolf]

Those of us who remember our Latin remember that “Domine, non sum dignus” means Lord, I am not worthy. Receiving the Holy Eucharist kneeling was the norm until the mid 70s when the altar rails were removed. We grew up with it.

 

[otjm]

The article on Newsblast.com was an editorial, however, I list below some of the quotes of Msgr. Marini, Vatican liturgist; Cardinal Llovera, Prefect for Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship; Cardinal Caffarra, Archbishop of Bologna; the Council of Trent and St. Thomas Aquinas that were used in this news article. Are we supposed to not believe what these people have said including St. Thomas Aquinas?

Statements taken out of context are a dangerous way to set up an argument, particularly when it can be shown that the stament in its context does not prove the point of the one citing it. The Archbishop of Bologna is a prime example; rather than showing a general move against CITH, it shows a specific move to a specific problem that was widespread at the two churches. In other words, it simply does not prove the point.

I don’t know how many parishes that Archdiocese had; but let’s use Chicgao as an example: if it were baned in two parishes, that would be 2/357ths of the Archdioces of Chicago. Make sense? At St thomas Aquinas speaking on an issue that is disciplinary is not a source I would use given the centuries that have passed.

Why would the Pope insist the people kneel and receive on the tongue at his Masses if he believed receiving in the hand was proper?

He is Pope of the entire Roman rite and is far more likely to use the norm than the indult. The better question would be, why would he use the indult, since it is not the norm. Answer: the better practice of the pontif would be to use the norm.

According to Vatican liturgist, Monsignor Guido Marini, “the Pope is trying to set the stage for the whole church as to the proper norm for receiving Communion for which reason communicants at his papal Masses are now asked to kneel and receive on the tongue”.

There is a whole genre of papal watching, trying to outguess what the Pope has not yet said. They are about as accurate as economists are in predicting next year’s economy, which means that they are not very accurate at all. People attach to those statements whioch support their own issues and agendas, and ignore those which don’t; and when something does not come to pass, no mention is made later of the statement not comeing true. The Pope doesn’t have to set the stage; the proper norm is COTT; CITH is by indult; thus the stage was set centuries ago…

Cardinal Llovera, the new prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments speaking to Life Site News on July 22, 2009: “It is the mission of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments to work to promote Pope Benedict’s emphasis on the traditional practices of liturgy, such as reception of Communion on the tongue while kneeling.”

Another statement that does not say a whole lot; emphasis on the traditonal liturgy is just that - emphasis. Thsi says nothing about the indult being removed; it fits in well with Redemptionis Sacramentum allowing the EF; and which in his letter the Pope himself said would probably not be widespread.

Also worth considering is the recent decree from Cardinal Caffarra, the Archbishop of Bologna Italy, forbidding the practice of Communion in the hand: “Considering the frequency in which cases of irreverent behavior in the act of receiving the Eucharist have been reported,

As noted above - specific issue.

“To priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist.” (Council of Trent) This teaching is beautifully expressed by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica: “Because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.”

CITH has nothing to do with doctrine - the Consecration - but only as to discipline. St Thomas himself was not commenting specifically on previous church history and tradition but stating a position as to the discipline at the time. We did not have tabernacles until well into the history of the Church - somewhere in the 8th to 9th centuries; and postioned in the church until the 10th. People would take the Eucharist to their homes before that. All that history is politely forgotten or ignored.

I am not suggesting that CITH is right or wrong as a discipline. People who are very against it will attach to anything which supports their position that it should be done away with. It may be done away with, as it is not the norm but an indult; then again, it may be that it won’t be done away with. Only time will tell. People have predicted the widespread use of the EF, and it overcoming and effectively doing away with the OF. That may happen; but most likely, given the rate of spread now, not in my lifetime or yours. In a couple of Archdioceses which seem to be open to it, the rate is about 3.5% (Chicago) to maybe 4.5% St Louis, and the information I have is not necessarily correct on that one). That is parishes that have it, not the percentage of Masses said on a weekend in the EF. Out of the total percentage of Masses said on a weekend, those both would be below 1%, and significantly so. That is hardly a massive move.

The editorial is poorly written, not historically or theologically correct, uses emotive language, and quotes statements that are subject to other interpretations without abusing them. The writer clearly has an agenda. It is far less certain that Rome does. Rome may; and time will tell. But I am not putting money on it now.

 

[otjm]

Those of us who remember our Latin remember that “Domine, non sum dignus” means Lord, I am not worthy. Receiving the Holy Eucharist kneeling was the norm until the mid 70s when the altar rails were removed. We grew up with it.

And it is still the norm of the Roman rite; but I would agree that it is not nomative of the parishes in the US.

And the Latin phrase applies to both forms of reception; it is an act of humility to place one’s palm facing up, and have Our Lord placed in it. Perhaps, because people in our parish approach it that way, that may be one of the reasons that we have had 24 Hour Perpetual Adoration for 15 years.

 

[brotherhrolf]

And it is still the norm of the Roman rite; but I would agree that it is not nomative of the parishes in the US.

And the Latin phrase applies to both forms of reception; it is an act of humility to place one’s palm facing up, and have Our Lord placed in it. Perhaps, because people in our parish approach it that way, that may be one of the reasons that we have had 24 Hour Perpetual Adoration for 15 years.

You are exactly correct that it is not normative of the parishes in the US. I have crossed swords with a young person here on the forums in my diocese. I can go to an OF at the indult parish and kneel at communion. I have done so and it was as natural to me as the sun rising in the East.

I am old enough to remember when the Communion Rails were taken out in the mid-70s. The question is why? May I be so bold as to say “because we could”? At about the same time, I was given the opportunity to attend the Eastern Orthodox Great Vigil on Holy Saturday. This would have been in 1977. I cried because I realized just how much we lost in ten short years.

Dear otjm. I am not asking you to abandon your parish or kneel to recievie the Holy Eucharist. Why is this such a problem for you? I grew up with believing that the Holy Eucharist was the literal Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We were taught to receive Holy Communion such that, if the Eucharist stuck to the crown of our mouth, we were to gently dislodge it with our tongues (never with our fingers). I see young children at my cathedral parish consuming the Holy Eucharist as if it were a potato chip instead of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

I’m sorry. No. No. I do not agree with you and I understand that I don’t have a snowball’s chance in Hades of convincing you.

I grew up with it. I am not about to turn my back on that which I grew up with. I don’t expect you to change your feelings but I fully expect that mine might be honored. I don’t expect you to return to the usages of the past…No, I am not asking that. But I do ask you to respect the fact that there are those of us who adhere to what we grew up with. What is so frightening about that? Our Lord is present in the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Altar - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. He is not some potato chip to be wolfed down with a palmed Eucharist gulped down.

May Our Lord have mercy on our souls.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

You are exactly correct that it is not normative of the parishes in the US. I have crossed swords with a young person here on the forums in my diocese. I can go to an OF at the indult parish and kneel at communion. I have done so and it was as natural to me as the sun rising in the East.

I am old enough to remember when the Communion Rails were taken out in the mid-70s. The question is why? May I be so bold as to say “because we could”? At about the same time, I was given the opportunity to attend the Eastern Orthodox Great Vigil on Holy Saturday. This would have been in 1977. I cried because I realized just how much we lost in ten short years.

Dear otjm. I am not asking you to abandon your parish or kneel to recievie the Holy Eucharist. Why is this such a problem for you? I grew up with believing that the Holy Eucharist was the literal Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We were taught to receive Holy Communion such that, if the Eucharist stuck to the crown of our mouth, we were to gently dislodge it with our tongues (never with our fingers). I see young children at my cathedral parish consuming the Holy Eucharist as if it were a potato chip instead of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

I’m sorry. No. No. I do not agree with you and I understand that I don’t have a snowball’s chance in Hades of convincing you.

I grew up with it. I am not about to turn my back on that which I grew up with. **I don’t expect you to change your feelings but I fully expect that mine might be honored. ** I don’t expect you to return to the usages of the past…No, I am not asking that. But I do ask you to respect the fact that there are those of us who adhere to what we grew up with. What is so frightening about that? Our Lord is present in the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Altar - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. He is not some potato chip to be wolfed down with a palmed Eucharist gulped down.

May Our Lord have mercy on our souls.

 

[otjm]

You are exactly correct that it is not normative of the parishes in the US. I have crossed swords with a young person here on the forums in my diocese. I can go to an OF at the indult parish and kneel at communion. I have done so and it was as natural to me as the sun rising in the East.

Dear otjm. I am not asking you to abandon your parish or kneel to recievie the Holy Eucharist. Why is this such a problem for you?

It is not a problem for me, and if I seem that way, it is not my intent. What I have issues with are those who play the “holier than thou” card repeatedly - you don’t, and I most certainly don’t include you in that group.

I grew up with believing that the Holy Eucharist was the literal Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We were taught to receive Holy Communion such that, if the Eucharist stuck to the crown of our mouth, we were to gently dislodge it with our tongues (never with our fingers). I see young children at my cathedral parish consuming the Holy Eucharist as if it were a potato chip instead of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

So have i, on all points. 8 years of Holy Name nuns; 2 years of diocesan high school, 2 years of Jesuit high school (and out befoe they went goofy), two years of diocesan seminary, and 2 years of “Notre Dame West” (and it was not goofy - a couple of profs were but we all know who they were).

I’m sorry. No. No. I do not agree with you and I understand that I don’t have a snowball’s chance in Hades of convincing you.

Of what? We agree far more than you think.

I grew up with it. I am not about to turn my back on that which I grew up with. I don’t expect you to change your feelings but I fully expect that mine might be honored. I don’t expect you to return to the usages of the past…No, I am not asking that. But I do ask you to respect the fact that there are those of us who adhere to what we grew up with. What is so frightening about that? Our Lord is present in the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Altar - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. He is not some potato chip to be wolfed down with a palmed Eucharist gulped down.

I don’t attend 24 hour Perpetual Adoration because I think that is a potato chip. You want respect? That sword slices both ways, buddy. That last comment is absolutely unnecessary and beneath your dignity. Please retract it.

It was Layman who suggested that we have everyone kneel at an altar rail so our 70+ year old priest could “WHIP IT OUT THERE”. If that is what the EF produces (opinions in people, not the EF itself) then God help us. If that is what is meant by reverence for the Eucharist and its distribution according to the EF, than thankyouverymuch I will vote for CITH. That is so appalling I cannot even get words around it.

May Our Lord have mercy on our souls.

Amen.

I think I am about 5 years older than you; and instead of the navy - 4 years - I took the Army - 3 years and the joy of the Delta, Can Tho and Ca Mau, Viet Nam. I got the t-shirt, ok?

I go to the Trappist Abbey about once a month. OF and certainly with reverence. Our 70+ Jesuit pastor “does the red and says the black”. We have EMHC’s, thanks be to God, because he could not sustain the level of energy he has and continue to guide the parish as he has, and I don’t give a flip what Layman thinks of that. If Layman’s concept of Christian charity, common sense and worship is what gets exhibited by those promoting the EF, I will keep the OF thankyouverymuch.

Strangely, I thought of you this weekend as I was preparing my 92 year old mother to move to a reirement facility. We were looking through a picture album which I didn’t recall; the shot that called you to mind was one of my mother and her younger sister, apparently in their 20’s to maybe early 30’s, walking in downtown Portland. Gloves, hats that would have made the Easter parade, Sunday very best suits and high heels. To go shopping. I am a west coaster, so I cannot say no one does that any more, but I honestly don’t know any woman who wears gloves to go shopping; and if they are in a suit, it was because of something else - work most likely. And I thought of you - why? Because, by and large, those days are gone - at least out here. Of course, before we wax too idylic, the Ku Klux Klan had been burning crosses out here against the Catholics not too long before. In the early 60’s you could still find Masses with Palistrina, or a Gregorian chant now and then (one of the reasons Gregorian Chant was noted in the documents bwas because it had been dying a slow death before that).

I understand your desire for the High Mass; and I don’t belittle that at all. I served Low Masses, High Masses, and was everything from a candle bearer to the MC (and that several times) at solemn High Masses. I remember the beauty of them.

I have also seen the solemness, reverence and beauty of the Chrism Mass now, and other Masses celebrated by our Archbishop (who happens to have a wonderful tenor voice, and is very fluent in Spanish). I attended an OF in another parish a few weeks ago and the priest was from Uganda, I believe; eyes sharp as a new razor, and very reverent. In the OF.

I am sorry that you miss it. I would support you being able to find it.

People, if they are too lazy and unmotivated to drive 20 to 30 minutes each way to go to one (EF), are just not that interested. I had a parish years ago that was just that far a drive and I went every Sunday, and never once complained. Why would I complain? It was my choice to do so. I went, not because of the EF/OF issue, but because I had close friends in that parish, and because I was part of that community in spite of living in the burbs.

The whining astounds me: I simply never gave it a thought.

I read about how much people love the EF, how they feel that being present in front of the Eucharist should leave them prostrate on the ground, and then I read of their whining that they have to travel to get to it; something just doesn’t jibe.

The Masses you speak of are beautiful. That is why, once a year I would take the new RCIA class to attend one - I was introducing them to it, not bad mouthing it.

 

[otjm]

I am old enough to remember when the Communion Rails were taken out in the mid-70s. The question is why? May I be so bold as to say “because we could”? At about the same time, I was given the opportunity to attend the Eastern Orthodox Great Vigil on Holy Saturday. This would have been in 1977. I cried because I realized just how much we lost in ten short years.

May Our Lord have mercy on our souls.

Again, continuing on: we have had 40 years in which, early on, catechesis went into the toilet and someone flushed. Everyone seems to want to spread the blame around with a trowel, and there is a tremendous amount of judgementalism accompanying it.

Several years ago my parish and two others went together to bring out Patrick Madrid for a seminar. It was well attended, and as I was on the committee, I was in the back of the room with the pastor of a nearby parish. At one point he turned to me and said, out of the blue, and wtih a puzzeled look on his face, “I had no idea people didn’t know these things. I am just amazed!” He was ordained just beforeor during Vatican 2.

The world we knew - the late 60’s to early 70’s - were absolute chaos nationwide, and that had nothing to do with Church but a whole lot to do with politics, massive change in social attitudes which had been fomenting in the 50’s -civil rights, sexual relations, not that far removed from World War 2 and Korea, in the middle of the morass of Viet Nam; a massive change in music (which was symptomatic of changes in society - what had been unacceptible in polite circles 10 years before was now all over public radio); the introduction of TV (one of the greatest causes or facilitators in changing social attitudes) and much of what went on in the Church was simply a microcosm of what was going on in society in general. Mores and morals were breaking down; things, images and concepts that had been anchors were being thrown out, and the same pandamonium and chaos in society entered the Church.

It was not Vatican 2 that caused the changes from an outwardly obedient priesthood and leadership of the bishops, I submit, but rather the explosion of dissent over Humanae Vitae. There was a general lack of leadership from the bishops - I recall one US Cardinal getting the rug pulled out from underneath him by Rome - as the bishops were overwhelmed with enthusiastic people taking off in all directions. Interestingly, the changes of Vatican 2 were much more easily assimilated, for example, in Poland where the chaos wa of an entirely different order.

But HV was the watershed event of wholesale dissent. Not just dissent of priests and bishops, but wholesale dissent from the pews. And that jeanie just will not go back into the bottle. People who blame Vatican 2 simply were not there.

Keep in mind that we have had two Popes, including the current one, who have repeatedly said that Vatican 2 was necessary and vital to the Church, and that it has yet to be fully implemented.

I have said it repeatedly, and will say it again; the biggest draw for the most people between the EF and the OF is not rubrics; it is not ad orientem, it is not the prayres said or the words used (e.g. “one in being” or “consubstantial”). It is the use of the vernacular. Most people simply do not want to return to an all Latin Mass, and they will vote with their feet and their pocketbook. And that is the reality of it.

Does the OF need cleaning up? Are the prayers poorly translated? Yep, and yep. And to most people in the pews, that won’t make a lot of difference.

Will we see a return to some of the music you miss? In some places and in some Masses. Most likely not a lot. It is akin to throwing a party and hardly anyone shows. And those who go to the party can’t understand why no one else is coming.

They simply are not interested enough to come. And that leaves those who want the changes in the small minority.

Is that right? I don’t think that right or wrong are questions that can be really asked, since both sides will answer them oppositely. It is a matter of what is. And I do not take the postion of trying to defend it, nor to overcome it; I simply take the position of observing what is.

As I noted, I take RCIA members to the Sung Mass. And they don’t go back. And I don’t let that get in my way; I just take the next group; if they don’t go either, that is their choice; but I don’t let it stop me from taking next year’s group.

 

[palmas85]

It is not a problem for me, and if I seem that way, it is not my intent. What I have issues with are those who play the “holier than thou” card repeatedly - you don’t, and I most certainly don’t include you in that group. So have i, on all points. 8 years of Holy Name nuns; 2 years of diocesan high school, 2 years of Jesuit high school (and out befoe they went goofy), two years of diocesan seminary, and 2 years of “Notre Dame West” (and it was not goofy - a couple of profs were but we all know who they were).

Of what? We agree far more than you think.

I don’t attend 24 hour Perpetual Adoration because I think that is a potato chip. You want respect? That sword slices both ways, buddy. That last comment is absolutely unnecessary and beneath your dignity. Please retract it.

**I think I am about 5 years older than you; and instead of the navy - 4 years - I took the Army - 3 years and the joy of the Delta, Can Tho and Ca Mau, Viet Nam. I got the t-shirt, ok?
**

A Delta soldier:thumbsup: A small world indeed… I was in the Delta also on a PBR based out of Cat Lo and later Vinh Long. We backed up the assault at Ap Bac by the 9th Infantry in 1967. I gained a lot of respect for the Army during that time.

Good men were lost, Very good men. I wish you peace my brother.

 

[otjm]

A Delta soldier:thumbsup: A small world indeed… I was in the Delta also on a PBR based out of Cat Lo and later Vinh Long. We backed up the assault at Ap Bac by the 9th Infantry in 1967. I gained a lot of respect for the Army during that time.

Good men were lost, Very good men. I wish you peace my brother.

Ah, so you too spent time in the toilet bowl of SE Asia. The Mekong created a perpetual stink that could only be releaved by flying.

I was supposed to go to the 9th but they were pulling out, so I ended up in Can Tho as a spy in the sky. I did missions for the Seals down south of us.

Seals make Special Forces look like Boy Scouts. I was 69-70 and rotated a month before my unit was shut down.

Ah well. Peace to you to, and thank you for your service.