G
Godi
Guest
I quote from a Parish Priest I knew," while the NO is a valid mass, the TLM is the Cadillac of worship & the NO is a beat up old Chevy."
- Status
J
Jimsdun
Guest
But what about those âHappy-Clappyâ parishes that have no reverence or traditional music? When members arenât fulfilled they have to go elsewhere
J
Jimsdun
Guest
But what about those âHappy-Clappyâ parishes that have no reverence or traditional music? When members arenât fulfilled they have to go elsewhere
A
agr4028
Guest
Do we go to Mass to worship, or be personally fullfilled?
B
Brian777
Guest
did you read the list? the NO was not an improvement in anyway shape or form. There is theology behjind the Mass, and it was all thrown away in the NO. read the list, anybody, just read it, and youâll understandâDestroyedâ is an opinion, not a Church teaching.
For millions of Catholics, it has been âimprovedââŚagain, opinion.
B
Brian777
Guest
Is the Happy-Clappy âMassâ a form of worship, or modern entertainment? Some charismatics find great faith and spiritual upliftment in the charismatic NO Mass, but how many go simply because its more exiting and not as boring as the traditional NO or the TLM? are they truly worshiping God at all? Everybody just face it. We need one mass! ONE CHURCH, ONE GOD, ONE SAVIOR, ONE FORM OF WORSHIP! That is why Benedict has statred slowly but surely retranslating the NO so that it is a direct translation of the TLM prayers. eventually (this is just a guess, but one made from investigation) we will have a Novus Ordo Missae that is almost word for word a direct translation of the TLM. Then we can all celebrate with one Mass, one form in Latin, and the other the same in every way except the language used. Thank the Lord we wont have any more sorry division! Amen Alleluia!
S
Sure
Guest
Those folks seek out parishes that are reverent (as they should). Many times the only reverent Mass they can find is an extraordinary form. Thatâs my point. Itâs not so much the extraordinary form that they seek, itâs the reverence and Mass said correctly.
M
Marvin_Schmidt
Guest
Check out the poll results. In spite of all that is said, itâs still nearly 2:1 ( actually 1.7:1 for those into pricision ) in favor of TLM. Why is that?
Yes 228 62.98%
No 134 37.02%
Voters: 362. You have already voted on this poll
Marv:thumbsup:
Yes 228 62.98%
No 134 37.02%
Voters: 362. You have already voted on this poll
Marv:thumbsup:
A
agr4028
Guest
So, in essence, weâre going back to the 1962-69 Mass?Is the Happy-Clappy âMassâ a form of worship, or modern entertainment? Some charismatics find great faith and spiritual upliftment in the charismatic NO Mass, but how many go simply because its more exiting and not as boring as the traditional NO or the TLM? are they truly worshiping God at all? Everybody just face it. We need one mass! ONE CHURCH, ONE GOD, ONE SAVIOR, ONE FORM OF WORSHIP! That is why Benedict has statred slowly but surely retranslating the NO so that it is a direct translation of the TLM prayers. eventually (this is just a guess, but one made from investigation) we will have a Novus Ordo Missae that is almost word for word a direct translation of the TLM. Then we can all celebrate with one Mass, one form in Latin, and the other the same in every way except the language used. Thank the Lord we wont have any more sorry division! Amen Alleluia!
B
Brian777
Guest
Yes, well thats what i have gathered, perhaps the Holy Father has a different idea, but that does seem to be the direction in which he is aiming at least. I know that he definitely wants to give the NO the versus deum orientation, the priest facing the tabernacle/crucifix. As to the whole translation deal that is only conjecture. But i do hope im correct. sorry long answer to short question
P
pnewton
Guest
Having read what Pope Benedict has said so far, he seems commited to the ordinary form. I do not see any move back to the TLM any time in the future. I do think you are right that we will move back to ad orientum soon. I think that is one of his stronger opinions. I do not think the vernacular will be discarded.
B
Brian777
Guest
I never said the vernacular was going to be discarded. Ok, the NO will simply stay here, but it will slowly evolve into a vernacular version of the TLM, that way we will all be on the same page with prayers, readings, chants, etc. THE NO IS NOT GOING AWAY. ITL be like the NO having Latin and vernacular forms, only it will all be based on the 1962 missal. ok and it may take a good 20 years for the real changes to even become known let alone actually permanently implemented.
P
pnewton
Guest
It should be interesting to see. I found âSpirit of the Liturgyâ to be very revealing as to our future. It is a good book, if you havenât read it yet.
C
Claudius
Guest
While it may be true that a lot of priest are not doing the rubrics of the Mass correctly and clearly are going tooooooooo far in some things, you have to memeber that they are a minority, the same minority that were messing up the Latin Mass before the Mass of Paul VI was introduced. Wanting the ExtraOrdinary form, the Mass of John XXIII, should not come about because we are bashing the Ordinary Form. If I had a choice, I would go to the EF, but I donât because there is not even one Church that offers it yet in this country. So I help to make the OF as traditional and reverant as possible. I jump on people who come late to Mass, not too harshly but at least I mention it. I jump people who leave early, usually too harshly. I make a point of teaching the kids that Jesus is there inside the tabernacle. I encourage the priest to use incense and have as much Latin music as we can.
Over all Japanese people have really taken the opportunity with the OF to make the Mass Japanese. Most of these families have been Catholic for some 500 years. They really suffered at the hands of other Japanese. They have this feeling that Mass will be taken away from them all together as happened in the past so they cling to the Mass and show as much respect as they can. Sometimes they sing music that is clearly Japanese but sometime when they sing, if I did not know both Japanese and Latin, I just might mistake what they are singing with Gregorian Chant. And by the way, there is nothing wrong with HAPPY music at Mass. About the half the songs that make up Gregorian Chant are of a festive nature. If we would all learn how to speak Latin then we would know that.
A
Auntie_M
Guest
Dear Dear Brian, Iâm afraid you have been reading too much propaganda from the Angelus Press and the Regina Coeli Report. While youâre at it, look up Achille Cardinal Lienart (mason) who ordained Lefebvre, the founder. But that part doesnât get mentioned very much. Donât believe everything, pray for wisdom. Yes the church has her problems, but we have to have faith in Jesus that He told us the truth when He said the gates of Hell would not prevail. To believe anything less is (frankly) a serious lack of faith. Iâll keep you in my prayers.
A
agr4028
Guest
Can you reference this? You have me curious as to why the Church would want to go back to the preist with his back to us.
P
pnewton
Guest
No reference, just my opinion. I base it on Cardinalâs Ratzingerâs book Spirit of the Liturgy. In it, he outlined how the reversal of orientation started out as an exception for one Church in Rome where the architecture did not permit the celibrating priest to face away from the people. From there the practice spread. He went into the theology behind facing liturgical east and the advantages of it. I just wouldnât be surprised from reading that book that this one simple change might be made.
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
You are seeing it wrong. It is not that he has his back to us, but that he is facing God and leading in worship and sacrifice those of us in the pews. The Priest need to be facing the same directions as every one else. He is not putting ons a show he is leading the Mass.
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
The point is that is did change. Even from the 19050âs missal to the 1962 there had been changes. I can not believe I am defending the NO .Yes it did changeâŚbut it changed only through organic evolution of itself. At Trent, the bishops did not really change the Mass, they made a hybrid of all the different forms of the Mass in the Western Church. This remained almost unchanged for about 4-500 years, then came Vat 2. This change was not organic, nor was it Catholic in any way. Six Lutherans were commissioned to write the new mass under the watchful eyes of a Free Mason cardinal (Bugnini sound right to anybody?). So what does this mean? well in the words of Fr. Joseph Gelineau, SJ, âThis needs to be said without ambiguity: the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.â Here are some 60 reasons compiled by the Diocese of Campos, Brazil giving testimony to the Thruth of this quote.
I will say though that i do not necessarily agree that the NO is completely heretical or invalid, but i do understand that if a Catholic wants the fulness of Grace that Christ intended for us to recieve from the Mass, then the TLM is the way to go!
God Bless!
B
Brian777
Guest
The priest does not have his back to us!!!
He is facing God Almighty!!!1
that is what ad orientem, or, more accurately, versus deum is all about.
think about a congressman, or a lobbyist, or a petitioner, going forth to the government, he always faces thoes whom he is addressing for the benefit of his constituents.
Raymond Arroyo from EWTN, intervied cardinal Ratzinger once, and The good Cardinal said he would like to see a mass return to versus deum. theres your reference.
God Bless
- Status