What is the reaction of Conservative Traditional Catholics to the changes in the English Liturgy?

[Warrenton]

I prefer detachable collars whenever possible. But shirts that only button halfway down the front are getting difficult to find.

I think eventually that the tridentine rite will be the norm again, but that it will take a long time. I am not in favor of any more soviet style reforms, and as I have said on numerous previous posts, having felt like an outlaw in my own church, I would not wish that feeling on any other Catholic, even one of the hootenany variety.

The truth will prevail, and as time goes on, the Novus Ordo will return to its roots. Perhaps one day a mostly vernacular mass, ad orientem, will be an alternative low mass, who knows?

 

[ProVobis]

The truth will prevail, and as time goes on, the Novus Ordo will return to its roots. Perhaps one day a mostly vernacular mass, ad orientem, will be an alternative low mass, who knows?

But many see the vernacular and facing the people going hand in hand. Would seem very unnatural to have one without the other. Just saying. My pastor tried it once at the Christmas midnight Mass and then later asked “What’s the point?” so the following year did the EF at the Christmas midnight Mass.

 

[laszlo]

But many see the vernacular and facing the people going hand in hand. Would seem very unnatural to have one without the other. Just saying. My pastor tried it once at the Christmas midnight Mass and then later asked “What’s the point?” so the following year did the EF at the Christmas midnight Mass.

The people facing altar start in 1964 as option and still option; the full vernacular started after 1970.

The problem with the people facing altar is that the tabernacle has no appropriate place as center of the attention: Jesus Christ among us permanently. To move it back to the center possible only if the priest faces the tabernacle and leading the people toward it as rule. Churches which are tourist attraction may be different, but the majority of the churches is the place of the prayer not tourist attraction.

The point for the vernacular is that by St Pius X the active participation of the people started and that is possible fully only in vernacular: people do not understand Latin. The transition has it’s problems, but it is necessary.

The fact that such forums controlled by laymen and contributed by laymen exists legally is the proof that the Church cannot and will not go back to the state where the laity is bystander only. The laity is mature enough not to make the decisions, but to participate and to have opinion.

 

[roadsend]

The people facing altar start in 1964 as option and still option; the full vernacular started after 1970.

…
The point for the vernacular is that by St Pius X the active participation of the people started and that is possible fully only in vernacular: people do not understand Latin. The transition has it’s problems, but it is necessary.

…

The full vernacular started in 1964 in the Tucson diocese, where I lived at the time.
Those laity who cared enough to acquire a missal understood the Latin quite well and were easily able to actively participate.

 

[ProVobis]

people do not understand Latin.

Old adage: Imitate now, understand later.

(Just like we did when we memorized the Our Father at 4 yrs of age.)

 

[At_Trent]

Long live the stubborn refusal to give an inch! THat’s how tradition is preserved and martyrs made.

“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around.”
G.K. Chesterton

 

[Gregory_I]

“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around.”
G.K. Chesterton

Someone needs to remind our precious liberal theologians of that today…

“Close upon this squeamishness in regard to the pronouncement of Catholic doctrine, follows an abhorrence to antagonize the convictions of others, no matter how directly opposed to revealed truth, for with Liberal Catholics the most erroneous are as sacred as the truest convictions, being equally founded upon the principle of intellectual liberty. Thus they erect into a dogma what is called the principle of toleration. The differences of belief are, after all, they complacently argue, due to differences of temperament, education, etc.; we will not exactly approve them, but we should at least condone them.”

“Therefore is it that the Catholicity of a great number of people in our times is a Liberal Catholicity, or, rather, a false Catholicity. It is really not Catholicity, but mere naturalism, a pure rationalism; it is in a word paganism disguised in Catholic forms and using Catholic language.”

-“Liberalism is a Sin.” by Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany, 1886.

 

[laszlo]

“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around.”
G.K. Chesterton

The Holy Tradition is much more than that: it is the words and decisions of Jesus Christ preserved through the Church.

And also because Jesus Christ stands with that, and he also stands with the present hierarchy, the two cannot be played against each other.

 

[Timothy17]

“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around.”

G.K. Chesterton

God bless the Truth, which is for my heart what the resftul sitting of a wearied worker, who eats a little meat, and drinks a little water, is to his body !

Pax Christi,
Tim

 

[TBolt1000T]

The reasons for the “errors” in translation in the 1970’s is because we did not have Pope Benedict XVI in charge, who is now doing his job as pontiff in protecting the Mass. In his 1977 memoir, Milestones, Joseph Ratzinger wrote: “I am convinced that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing today is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy.” It is quite obvious that he has made it a priority in his papacy to correct the problems with the Mass, and that seems to be returning it to its Latin roots.

It seems that the errors in the Liturgy came from those who were trying to be politically correct and not offensive to those who didn’t believe. As a result, far too many people now have no idea what is going on in the Mass. They may understand all the words, but they have no concept of the presence of Christ in the liturgy.

God Bless Pope Benedict XVI.

AMEN!

This is just my oppinion, but I think that in a fiew decades, after all is said and done, we may be calling him St. Benedict XVI. I’m very greatful that we’re blessed to have him as our Pope in these times.

 

[Iotaunum]

And together with that the union with the Anglicans started. May be the mistranslation kept them back, until those faithful to the tradition started to form groups, which are uniting.

I don’t understand the point you are making. Just because the Anglicans made a better translation in some parts, particularly the form of consecration - this is not to say that a more accurate translation of the Novus Ordo from Latin into the vernacular gives us anymore grounds for the union you mention with the Anglicans. Union with Anglicans will only begin to be realised when they recognise that the Mass is a true sacrafice and accept the Catholic (True) doctrine on the Mass, Church and Sacraments etc. Sure Anglicans may like to have an almost identical liturgy for purposes of “unity” as seen by Episcopalianism, but they would still reject the truth and instead hold a pluralistic view of “the Church” -as they see it - allowing for disagreement on fundamental and essential matters of faith. In reality we should speak of their conversion.

God is writing straight on crooked lines.

Interestingly the Hungarian bishops who otherwise in some level oppose the Traditional Latin Mass, already introduced the new Hungarian translation (the previous one was translated from the ICEL English version)

That just proves that the most accurate translation, even the Latin, is still acceptable to those who find the Latin Mass unnacceptable. Indeed, I thought it would pose no problem for the majority of Irish priests, but it seems they are way too liberal even to accept an acurate translation of the New Mass. I have been talking to quite a few priests and the opposition is indeed strong on their part. It is not too much to say that, unfortunately, the Irish Clergy (the majority) are as liberal as the most hardened liberals anywhere else. So much for Irish Orthodoxy. After reading the writings and history of Irish Clergy (particularly Bishops and Cardinals) for the past few years, I can say with certainty that they would be horrified if they were to come back today.

 

[ProVobis]

Union with Anglicans will only begin to be realised when they recognise that the Mass is a true sacrafice and accept the Catholic (True) doctrine on the Mass, Church and Sacraments etc. Sure Anglicans may like to have an almost identical liturgy for purposes of “unity” as seen by Episcopalianism, but they would still reject the truth and instead hold a pluralistic view of “the Church” -as they see it - allowing for disagreement on fundamental and essential matters of faith. In reality we should speak of their conversion.

I agree.

On the Sacrifice of the Mass, Doctrine, Canons, and Decrees:

thecounciloftrent.com/ch22.htm

 

[laszlo]

I don’t understand the point you are making. Just because the Anglicans made a better translation in some parts, particularly the form of consecration - this is not to say that a more accurate translation of the Novus Ordo from Latin into the vernacular gives us anymore grounds for the union you mention with the Anglicans.

The new translation removes an obstacle for the union. As far as I understand the Anglican union is movement against the liberalization (women priest, openly homosexual priests) and the people’s Church what the ICEL translation represent is symbol for this liberalization.

 

[Chatter163]

For my part, I cannot understand posters who ask “why, whatever do you mean by ‘conservative traditional Catholic’, my dear fellow?”! It’s really the most condescending question that can be asked on this forum. Whoever asks that question with the amusing “” smiley is just being pompous. You all know perfectly well what marks a conservative traditional Catholic.

It’s not an issue that can be avoided: conservatives are the people who shudder when they hear “Gather Us In”, and who are generally nervous of democratic urges. Traditionalists try their hardest to wear suits as often as they can, and the most formal attire possible. Conservatives are at their wits’ end in attempting to be virtuous according to classical models of virtue, not according to modern pluralistic, relativist models of virtue. There are gigantic, world-separating divides between the Conservative Traditional mindset, the Moderate Tolerant mindset, and the Liberal Novel mindset. Do not pretend you have no idea what these differences and distinctions are, because they are fairly obvious. The stern manner of a traditional man is so obviously in contradiction to the smiling tolerance of a progressive man that it seems ludicrous to even ask. It is true that some men (saints) transcend these categories, but the regular people of the world generally fall into them.

Conservative Traditionalists are the men, like myself, who tend to be pigheaded in their dogmatic beliefs. We lend ourselves to zealotry, fanaticism, and hatred in our convictions. It is true that we are great sinners, but I’d rather lend myself to zealotry and fanaticism than the lukewarm risus sardonicus of a be-cardigan’d progressive (strange to say, I do like cardigans myself ). Anyone who claims to be ignorant of this difference is either a celibate monk who entered cloister at age 12, or is being abstruse.

Get over yourself. I asked the question

What exactly is a “Conservative Traditional Catholic”?

to ascertain the perspective of the OP (does he/she attend the EF or not) and to clarify a somewhat redundant question, which seemed a bit odd and anything but precise.

 

[Pondero]

Does anyone know when we will get this new translation in Canada, we are usually behind the USA in these matters.?

 

[Hadrianus]

For the first time the vast majority of English speaking Catholics will have an accurate text of the Mass of Paul VI and for that we must be grateful.

Language also effects thought and a more precise vocabulary will have a positive effect upon belief, as will the restoration of notions of sacrifice, and theological terms such as ‘consubstantial.’ Contrary to the assertions of the heterodox the average Catholic is not subnormal and can both learn and appreciate Catholic theological terminology.

 

[ProVobis]

For the first time the vast majority of English speaking Catholics will have an accurate text of the Mass of Paul VI and for that we must be grateful.

“Closer to” or “more in line with” the Latin doesn’t mean it’s accurate. You could say it’s MORE accurate (like π is 3.1416 instead of 3.14) but it’s still only an approximation. There will still be some controversy and I doubt if the ICEL will be finally put to rest. I do agree with you on consubstantial, however. Now to replace all the English phrases with the Latin ones.

 

[stormy99]

I think I qualify for the title of ‘conservative traditional catholic’, despite being a catechumen. My politics are easily in line with those of Bossuet and de Maistre, and I detest all philosophical inquiry after Aquinas. I think women really ought to stay at home and bear children, and my taste in concert music hardly extends to years after 1910. You might call me a caricature of traditionalism, but there it is.

**Did they have concerts in 1910? Stay home and bear children…and that’s it…? WOW! You are truly conservative…are you also married?

stormy**

 

[stormy99]

What exactly is a “Conservative Traditional Catholic”?

**Unfortunately the explanation to me is rather scary…we have women giving the Eucharist…suppose that shouldn’t be allowed either…

stormy**

 

[WetCatechumen]

I consider myself a traditionalist to some degree, but I still like attending both forms of the Mass at the parish I attend. I’m not sure exactly why the 1973 English translation of the OF was corrupted so badly. I have always thought that the people who were translating it may have been in a big hurry to get it done, and that may have had a lot to do with it.

Here are a couple of good examples of this corruption, with English translations of the original Latin text in parentheses provided by yours truely. . In the Gloria, how on earth do you start out with “et in terra pax hominibus bone voluntatis,” (and on earth, peace to men of good will), and end up with “and peace to his people on earth?” “Bone voluntatis” (of good will) was completely omitted from the English translation, while still retained in the Latin. And in the Credo, how do you start out with “et ex Patre natus ante omnia secula” (and from the Father, born before all ages), and end up with “eternally begotten of the Father?” ** A software translator could probably do better than that…
**
I’m really looking forward to the implementation of the new translation. What I’ve read of it so far seems to be much more true to the original Latin source.

Hahaha, we had a thread on this earlier. Google’s beta Latin-English translator kicks the tar out of ICEL.