Is The Extraordinary Form Inherently Charasmatic?

[Gregorius]

http://blog.adw.org/2010/05/is-the-old-latin-mass-charismatic/

Edit: Computer won't allow me to add link, so I pasted here. Whoa, it took care of it for me! Edited June 2, 2010 by Gregorius

[Bennn]

I guess it depends on what you would define as Charismatic. The EF has rigid structures that have to be followed, while Charismatic Masses (correct me if I'm wrong, never been to one) are more 'loose', which seems to be a characteristic of Charismatic Masses.

I'm all for rigid structures, by the way. It's a stronger 'defense' against liturgical abuse.

Then again, the ancient chants were inspired by the Holy Spirit in people across the centuries, and they have a certain 'charism'. In my opinion the sacredness of those chants can't be found in any other form of music, and they carry the soul into contemplation of the Divine.

+Pax Domini,
Ben

Edited June 2, 2010 by Bennn

[Resurrexi]

The traditional Roman Liturgy is definitely not "charismatic," at least not in the conventional sense of the word.

[Cherie]

I can understand Father's point, but "charismatic" has a very different connotation nowadays -- one to which I would say the EF Mass is the [i]opposite [/i]in some sense!

[fides quarens intellectum]

Neat blog post. Thanks for linking it!

[Winchester]

Every charismatic thing I've seen is chaos. The more "charismatic" something becomes, the more it seems personal actions of participants become important. The focus changes from The Eucharist to shenanigans.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Winchester

[laetitia crucis]

Thanks for that link, Gregorius!

I heart Msgr. Charles Pope! He's quite possibly one of my favorite priests [i]ever[/i].

[mortify]

There are different perspectives underlying each form of worship. In one the image is the Sacrifice of the Cross, everything is sacred, even the very words the Priest speaks have to spoken in a solemn tone. The Liturgy in this case is superior to the Priest, he is merely an agent.