What is the only feasible way out of the current crisis?

[Layman]

With a translation down the right hand side of your missal, all you have to do is to be able to read.

 

[Onegin]

With a translation down the right hand side of your missal, all you have to do is to be able to read.

Arguably, there is less cause now to remove the Latin because laypeople as a whole are significantly more literate than they were back in the day that Missals weren’t widely available.

But it’s a moot point anyway. The Mass is the same regardless of whether you can read the words in the Missal or not.

I find it silly that so many people complain about “understanding” the language at Mass but they think that going to a Spanish Mass or a Polish Mass (and I would guess most do without a Missal containing a translation) is a great cultural experience.

PROTIP: The Latin Mass is a great cultural experience. That culture is Catholicism the way it was meant to be.

 

[ProVobis]

With a translation down the right hand side of your missal, all you have to do is to be able to read.

Most who come to the EF don’t have missals but they should. It would help them follow the Mass better as most of the EF is silent.

 

[ProVobis]

I find it silly that so many people complain about “understanding” the language at Mass but they think that going to a Spanish Mass or a Polish Mass (and I would guess most do without a Missal containing a translation) is a great cultural experience.

Indeed. Many who couldn’t understand what the Mass was prior to Vatican II certainly didn’t understand it much better during the 60’s when it was being changed every week and used different versions of the Bible. If English is such a great tool for understanding the Bible, why are there so many English versions of the Bible?

 

[Lormar]

Weren’t Novus Ordo “Catholics” claiming the “Tridentine” Mass was abrogated for decades, until Pope Benedict XVI issued the Motu Proprio? I think its a bit odd and hypocritical that you wouldn’t “associate” with people simply because they want the committee-approved, “banal, man-made, on-the-spot production” commonly referred to as the Ordinary Form, abrogated.

Indeed they were! I heard it myself on Catholic Answers and, if I remember correctly, there is a book by Likoudis and Whitehead, published in the eighties as some kind of an “apologia” for the OF, that contains that very error.

 

[Lormar]

Where have you been?? I have heard dozens of Novus Ordo priests and lay leaders make disparaging comments about the traditional Mass; many of them are very vocal in their opposition. It make sense though–the Novus Ordo was intended by its architects to replace the tridentine Mass. Obviously THEY viewed the Novus Ordo as superior to, not equal to, the old Mass. I think someone recently posted here a blog entry from a Novus Ordo presbyter who is apparently the liturgy director for the archdiocese of Seattle in which he denounced and denigrated the traditional Mass.

'Tis true also, Marine Guy (you’re batting 1000:thumbsup. I know of whom you speak. He’s what they call a “Liturgical Expert.”

 

[JKirkLVNV]

'Tis true also, Marine Guy (you’re batting 1000:thumbsup. I know of whom you speak. He’s what they call a “Liturgical Expert.”

I’ve never hear the EF denigrated, maybe I’ve been lucky.

I have heard the OF denigrated. “Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.” You don’t want the EF run down, don’t run down the OF.

The Holy Father intends the two to co-exist (in peace…I’m assuming he doesn’t frequent these fora).

 

[At_Trent]

I’ve never hear the EF denigrated, maybe I’ve been lucky.

I have heard the OF denigrated. “Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.” You don’t want the EF run down, don’t run down the OF.

The Holy Father intends the two to co-exist (in peace…I’m assuming he doesn’t frequent these fora).

Do we have a mandate over on the poll thread ?

Overwhelming majority have voted yes they would attend if one were available. Interestingly, very few who voted yes have posted a reply. By contrast, seems half or more that voted no are posting negative things about the EF. “wouldn’t understand it” is a popular reason given.

I find that sad, because so many times we hear it argued that the OF isn’t a departure from the EF. So why is it hard to understand then ? Lack of effort ?

Also, many have stated their OF is reverent and that is why they voted no. I could not argue against that point.

 

[At_Trent]

alteringliturgy.com/

Thank you, I had not read that

 

[Lormar]

I’ve never hear the EF denigrated, maybe I’ve been lucky.

I have heard the OF denigrated. “Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.” You don’t want the EF run down, don’t run down the OF.

The Holy Father intends the two to co-exist (in peace…I’m assuming he doesn’t frequent these fora).

Yes, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Remember that.

 

[At_Trent]

The Mass has to be explained through teaching, through catechesis (the EF did as well).

And if it were in Latin, it would take even more teaching, because you’d have to say,“This is what the Latin means…”

With a translation down the right hand side of your missal, all you have to do is to be able to read.

Exactly. There are very few audible responses to be learned. Oremus = let us pray. How many times does one have to hear the word to know what it means ? 2 ? , 3 ?

The priest prays at 4 places. The foot of the altar, the middle of the altar, the Epistle side, and the Gospel side. The rubrics are not that complicated. If one loses his/her place in the missal, all one has to do is look at what the priest is doing.

Some just don’t seem to want to muster the effort for the glory of God.

 

[boatbearer]

Traditionalists are not waiting for the O.F. to die out, 'though they expect it could happen. They are waiting for Bishops opposed to the TLM to die out.

Depends also on what O.F. you mean:

The 1969 Missal with Latin and chant, said ad-orientem;
The 1970 - 2010 version with none of the above but with added novelties and antiquities;
The 2011(?) version with corrections.

I don’t think many bishops oppose the Extraordinary Mass. But that notion is used as an excuse for the comparatively tiny numbers of EF Masses celebrated based on weak demand.

 

[At_Trent]

Yes, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Remember that.

They sure are giving it their all over on the poll thread to find reasons to pooh pooh the EF

 

[At_Trent]

I don’t think many bishops oppose the Extraordinary Mass. But that notion is used as an excuse for the comparatively tiny numbers of EF Masses celebrated based on weak demand.

I’d say the poll over on L&S proves otherwise. You can’t refute that. It is what it is. To say there is no demand where it is not even available is asinine.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Do we have a mandate over on the poll thread ?

Overwhelming majority have voted yes they would attend if one were available. Interestingly, very few who voted yes have posted a reply. By contrast, seems half or more that voted no are posting negative things about the EF. “wouldn’t understand it” is a popular reason given.

I find that sad, because so many times we hear it argued that the OF isn’t a departure from the EF. So why is it hard to understand then ? Lack of effort ?

Also, many have stated their OF is reverent and that is why they voted no. I could not argue against that point.

I, myself, voted that I would attend, as in "once in a while, " etc., not exclusivlely. I believe others who voted yes said the same, did they not.

No, you really don’t have a mandate (and I think you know that).

Why is it hard to understand? It’s in Latin. That’s not negative, that’s simply a fact, for pity’s sake, as in “I don’t understand Latin, I do understand my own langauge.” There is no way that that is a negative slur against the EF.

 

[Layman]

I don’t think many bishops oppose the Extraordinary Mass. But that notion is used as an excuse for the comparatively tiny numbers of EF Masses celebrated based on weak demand.

I know men who have kept the TLM going in London since the 70’s. They speak otherwise.

**The Novus Ordo was imposed, the TLM effectively banned. Thus it is ‘popular’. **If the reverse were to happen tomorrow, I wonder if people would travel 100 miles for the O.F.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I’d say the poll over on L&S proves otherwise. You can’t refute that. It is what it is. To say there is no demand where it is not even available is asinine.

It’s asinine to read Summorum Pontificum as stating that it should be made available where it has not been requested:

Art. 5: “In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church. õ 2 Celebration in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII may take place on working days; while on Sundays and feast days one such celebration may also be held. õ 3 For faithful and priests who request it, the pastor should also allow celebrations in this extraordinary form for special circumstances such as marriages, funerals or occasional celebrations, e.g. pilgrimages. õ 4 Priests who use the Missal of Bl. John XXIII must be qualified to do so and not juridically impeded. õ 5 In churches that are not parish or conventual churches, it is the duty of the Rector of the church to grant the above permission.”

Art: 7: “If a group of lay faithful, as mentioned in art. 5 õ 1, has not obtained satisfaction to their requests from the pastor, they should inform the diocesan bishop. The bishop is strongly requested to satisfy their wishes. If he cannot arrange for such celebration to take place, the matter should be referred to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”.”

Art. 8. “A bishop who, desirous of satisfying such requests, but who for various reasons is unable to do so, may refer the problem to the Commission “Ecclesia Dei” to obtain counsel and assistance.”

The MP presumes requests and tells you how to go about appealing the denial of such. It nowhere requires ordinaries or priests to take the initiative. Where it isn’t requested by a stable group, there isn’t going to be a reason to initiate it. I’d say that the problem would seem to be what constitutes a stable group, either in numbers or by whatever the Church means by “stable.”

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Exactly. There are very few audible responses to be learned. Oremus = let us pray. How many times does one have to hear the word to know what it means ? 2 ? , 3 ?

The priest prays at 4 places. The foot of the altar, the middle of the altar, the Epistle side, and the Gospel side. The rubrics are not that complicated. If one loses his/her place in the missal, all one has to do is look at what the priest is doing.

Some just don’t seem to want to muster the effort for the glory of God.

What’s WRONG with it being audible? How does that detract from the glory of God, for the priest to say it audibly? How does it detract from the glory of God for the people to hear it and to make the responses?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

They sure are giving it their all over on the poll thread to find reasons to pooh pooh the EF

Oh, my word! No objective third party could read what is being said in the poll thread and come away with any sense that the EF is being denigrated or “pooh-poohed!” Esp. in light of the disdainful and demeaning things that “traditionalists” say about the OF. It simply does NOT compare!

 

[ProVobis]

**The Novus Ordo was imposed, the TLM effectively banned. Thus it is ‘popular’. **If the reverse were to happen tomorrow, I wonder if people would travel 100 miles for the O.F.

According to Fr. Kramer, the Latin Mass is both a received and approved rite. Although approved and valid, the Novus Order is not a received (i.e., handed down) rite and thus is prone to cancellation or replacement at anytime. And to do so would not violate any council decrees.

I wouldn’t be too surprised if I were to hear there are already major plans to overhaul the new Mass or the OF; the new translation(s) may only be the first step to this overhaul. Anyone remember the Missal of 65? or 67?