The “true Mass”? The term has even been thrown around a lot on this board. I know, pretty sick, isn’t it? Well, you can check the usages for yourself at this link if you’d like. Some pretty scary posts in there, I’ll warn you.
Ooh, a treasure trove.
), during the Introit, and when the Pope arrives at the Stational Church - none of those Gaulish alterations where incense is used more often. We Romans are simple when compared to other Christian liturgies! And we should never practice Elevation during the Words of the Institution nor say any prayers during the Offertory save for the Secret - I mean, how dare men alter the Mass by inserting those? 
And chants should be sung IN FULL - why settle for an abbreviated version: let’s sing the whole Psalm, as we once did before those damned heretics started to decide that it’s okay to sing only a few verses!
[/SARCASM]What really gets my goat is that the modernists dropped Greek – the language of the sacred New Testament, fercryinoutloud – in favor of the vernacular. Martin Luther would have stood up and applauded. Cranmer could hardly have done a better job himself.[SARCASM]Ya know, if the Roman Liturgy was not supposed to be touched by any man, then I think we are still supposed to use incense ONLY when the deacon goes up to the ambo (real ambos, not those Baroque pulpits or lecterns you see today
Finally, there are some historians who propose that Gregorian Chant as we know it today was actually an amalgam of what is known as Old Roman Chant and Gallican chant. I believe that whoever is responsible for this ‘sacrilege’ - what guts he has to mix the holy chant of the Roman church, handed down from our Lord, with something else! - must be burning down there right now.
Never mind the Greek, why did those writers decide to translate the sacred words of our Lord, spoken in Aramaic, into that vernacular tongue?What really gets my goat is that the modernists dropped Greek – the language of the sacred New Testament, fercryinoutloud – in favor of the vernacular. Martin Luther would have stood up and applauded. Cranmer could hardly have done a better job himself.
I’m not talking about diminishing Jesus and His Sacrifice, that would be nonsense. What I’m talking about is when the Eucharistic Liturgy is celebrated in such a way that it doesn’t give Jesus in the Eucharist the reverence and respect He deserves, and disobeys the rubrics and teachings set down by the Church He established.
Good question. Much of Scripture at the time was written in Hebrew. Most people in the Roman Empire spoke Greek and Latin, in spite of the Romans having conquered the Greeks. Inscription above the cross was in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin. Take your pick, I suppose.Never mind the Greek, why did those writers decide to translate the sacred words of our Lord, spoken in Aramaic, into that vernacular tongue?
Correct. He’s the Son of God, for pete’s sake. He deserves the best that we have!
That’s something we need to study in depth as well: the reason why there are priests who have the urge to dress up like clowns. Will somebody conduct a research?
That’s the reason why I wrote further down there:
(N.B. You shouldn’t take that post seriously.
)All the languages change and usually form into other languages, even Greek and Aramaic. Today it is estimated that there are around 7000 languages in the world. We can only judge by writers of those early periods in which vernaculars they wrote in, not necessarily what they spoke. (A lot of people were multilingual just as we have today and you had many more illiterates too.) Also by examining the ruins of Pompeii which suggested some Latin in the early Masses,btw. Latin could have been more of a common language than the other vernaculars of that day. But a lot of those vernaculars were forms of Latin too. We don’t even know for certain Christ performed the Last Supper in Aramaic, it could have been easily been in Hebrew, since that was Christ’s worship language.
I don’t think so. At least, I’ve never seen an instance where that’s what someone had in mind when using the phrase.
Thanks for the link. The Italian has it as well: “una Liturgia vera” as well as the Polish "Wierni mają prawo do prawdziwej "
I agree with the sentiments that the late John Paul II presented in the letter, but as Mark said, I personally doubt that everyone who uses the title must be referring to Inaestimabile Donum. I take it as likely that a few folks out there who use the term probably never accept JPII as legitimate anyway.
the purification of the Vessles. very interesting. i have not seeing this happening for quite some time. there is no such a thing anymore at least in this part of the world.