JimR-OCDS Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='Socrates' date='14 December 2009 - 08:51 PM' timestamp='1260838298' post='2020726'] This contradicts your earlier claim that the TLM is just attended by "conformists" rather than "faith-filled people." Yes, we can see how dumbing everything down has worked wonders. If Catholics have really "spiritually evolved" so much over the past, this shouldn't be an issue. [/quote] Making the Mass understandable by allowing it in the language of the people, isn't dumbing it down, but instead, bringing people into fuller participation, which is exactly what Vatican II document on the Sacred Liturgy states. As Father Michael G. Ryan stated in his article "What If We Said, 'Wait'?" on the changes to the liturgy stated; [quote] The council that gave to conferences of bishops the authority to produce their own translations ([i]S.C.[/i], Nos. 36, 40), to be approved, it is true, by the Holy See but not, presumably, to be initiated, nitpicked and controlled by it. Further, the council also wisely made provision for times of experimentation and evaluation ([i]S.C.[/i], No. 40) [/quote] If we look at the humble saints such as St Bernadette, who had little understanding of the Catholic Mass because she could barely understand French, never mind Latin. Do you think she would've loved the Mass in her own vernacular? FYI, French wasn't her vernacular. Same is true for others. If allowing the Mass in the vernacular is a dumbing down, then so is translating Scripture or any other text into the vernacular, a dumbing down process. We're all just too stupid to read the text in its original language, so why dumb it down. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/saint.gif[/img] Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartjp2 Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='15 December 2009 - 10:21 AM' timestamp='1260890476' post='2020925'] Making the Mass understandable by allowing it in the language of the people, isn't dumbing it down, but instead, bringing people into fuller participation, which is exactly what Vatican II document on the Sacred Liturgy states. As Father Michael G. Ryan stated in his article "What If We Said, 'Wait'?" on the changes to the liturgy stated; If we look at the humble saints such as St Bernadette, who had little understanding of the Catholic Mass because she could barely understand French, never mind Latin. Do you think she would've loved the Mass in her own vernacular? FYI, French wasn't her vernacular. Same is true for others. If allowing the Mass in the vernacular is a dumbing down, then so is translating Scripture or any other text into the vernacular, a dumbing down process. We're all just too stupid to read the text in its original language, so why dumb it down. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/saint.gif[/img] Jim [/quote] Action failed: You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='15 December 2009 - 10:21 AM' timestamp='1260890476' post='2020925'] As Father Michael G. Ryan stated in his article "What If We Said, 'Wait'?" on the changes to the liturgy stated; [/quote] You're referring to THAT article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='15 December 2009 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1260912291' post='2021196'] You're referring to THAT article? [/quote] I am intrigued and amused by your scorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimR-OCDS Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='15 December 2009 - 05:24 PM' timestamp='1260912291' post='2021196'] You're referring to THAT article? [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/lol_pound.gif[/img] [/quote] And the point of the article I presented is flawed in what way, according to your superior knowledge? [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img] Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='15 December 2009 - 02:40 PM' timestamp='1260913203' post='2021218'] I am intrigued and amused by your scorn. [/quote] [url="http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12045"]"What If We Said, 'Wait'?"[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='15 December 2009 - 04:40 PM' timestamp='1260913240' post='2021221'] And the point of the article I presented is flawed in what way, according to your superior knowledge? [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img] Jim [/quote] It advocates keeping a translation that would have gotten an F if being graded by a high school Latin teacher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimR-OCDS Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='15 December 2009 - 05:42 PM' timestamp='1260913360' post='2021224'] It advocates keeping a translation that would have gotten an F if being graded by a high school Latin teacher. [/quote] The point of the article I presented was that as Fr Ryan points out the parts of Sacrosanctum Concilium which he referenced, is that it gave the Bishops the authority to produce the translations for their conferences, and to allow time of experimentation to see what would work best. Obviously, you merely blew it of because of who wrote it, not for its content. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='15 December 2009 - 03:50 PM' timestamp='1260913855' post='2021240'] The point of the article I presented was that as Fr Ryan points out the parts of Sacrosanctum Concilium which he referenced, is that it gave the Bishops the authority to produce the translations for their conferences, and to allow time of experimentation to see what would work best. Obviously, you merely blew it of because of who wrote it, not for its content. Jim [/quote] I got through the first three paragraphs. It's a load of garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 [quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='15 December 2009 - 04:50 PM' timestamp='1260913855' post='2021240'] The point of the article I presented was that as Fr Ryan points out the parts of Sacrosanctum Concilium which he referenced, is that it gave the Bishops the authority to produce the translations for their conferences, and to allow time of experimentation to see what would work best. Obviously, you merely blew it of because of who wrote it, not for its content. Jim [/quote] Ecclesiology fail. "In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power." (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Lumen Gentium, 22) That means he can take the authority to produce translation away from the bishops and give it to a Roman Congregation if he feels like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) I made a thread on the state of the Catholic Church which revealed the majority of Roman Catholics are "upbeat" about it. Yet this thread shows the majority of people believe the Church promulgated something it was better off never doing... how could this be? Edited December 23, 2009 by mortify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 [quote name='mortify' date='22 December 2009 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1261543009' post='2024869'] I made a thread on the state of the Catholic Church which revealed the majority of Roman Catholics are "upbeat" about it. Yet this thread shows the majority of people believe the Church promulgated something it was better off never doing... how could this be? [/quote] Summorum Pontificum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zunshynn Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='22 December 2009 - 11:39 PM' timestamp='1261543171' post='2024872'] Summorum Pontificum. [/quote] It was a positive move in that the Magisterium confirmed what traditional Catholics always knew, that the ancient form of liturgy was never abrogated, and that Catholics have a right to celebrate it. Things are far from being restored however, which should be the goal if you believe the novus ordo should have never been promulgated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 [quote name='mortify' date='23 December 2009 - 12:26 AM' timestamp='1261545991' post='2024887'] Things are far from being restored however, which should be the goal if you believe the novus ordo should have never been promulgated. [/quote] It is my opinion and hope that the Benedictine liturgical renewal will soon drip down to the average parish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now