Laudate_Dominum Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1305336909' post='2241136'] I have a problem when we start discussing which mass is better, and which Catholics are more reverent. How do you decide who is more reverent? Some think the person on the floor talking in tongues is more reverent. Some think it is the person in the veil, kneeling for communion. I am reverent. What I wear, how I act, or which mass I go to does not change how reverent I am. I find it offensive for anyone to imply otherwise.[/quote] Yeah, for me these days the whole OF/EF thing is primarily a matter of technical comparative liturgy. Not really interested in judging people and their interior lives. lol. Well, I can judge myself but it is pretty sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominicansoul Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1305335851' post='2241125'] We should look maybe at the average way it is celebrated though. What is the average, most common way that the OF is celebrated, and what is the most common way the EF is celebrated? Which parishioner, on average, is more reverent? I don't say this to speak ill of those who prefer the Novus Ordo for whatever reason. I bring this up because I think it is evidence that the EF has something very valuable to offer the wider Church, and that the older Mass could potentially benefit all Catholics in a variety of ways. [/quote] we can't measure the value of a Mass by how reverent its congregation is... ...i think it is also dangerous to even begin to think you can measure the reverence of another person... ...a lot of people don't realize that the Mass on Its own is the most valuable form of worship to the Almighty God, regardless of its participants...we can have a Mass attended by the worst sinners, and the Mass doesn't change in value...Mass is Mass....[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1305337428' post='2241147'] Yeah, for me these days the whole OF/EF thing is primarily a matter of technical comparative liturgy. Not really interested in judging people and their interior lives. lol. Well, I can judge myself but it is pretty sad. [/quote] this is why you are awe.some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1305336909' post='2241136'] I have a problem when we start discussing which mass is better, and which Catholics are more reverent. How do you decide who is more reverent? Some think the person on the floor talking in tongues is more reverent. Some think it is the person in the veil, kneeling for communion. I am reverent. What I wear, how I act, or which mass I go to does not change how reverent I am. I find it offensive for anyone to imply otherwise. [/quote] [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1305337428' post='2241147'] Yeah, for me these days the whole OF/EF thing is primarily a matter of technical comparative liturgy. Not really interested in judging people and their interior lives. lol. Well, I can judge myself but it is pretty sad. [/quote] i you both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 14, 2011 Author Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1305337948' post='2241157'] we can't measure the value of a Mass by how reverent its congregation is... ...i think it is also dangerous to even begin to think you can measure the reverence of another person... ...a lot of people don't realize that the Mass on Its own is the most valuable form of worship to the Almighty God, regardless of its participants...we can have a Mass attended by the worst sinners, and the Mass doesn't change in value...Mass is Mass.... [/quote] Do you agree that the law of prayer is the law of belief ([i]lex orandi lex credendi[/i])? The Vatican does. What does it mean to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 resisting temptation to troll . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthfinder Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 Back to the Instruction, according to Fr. Z, the Instruction states (in Latin) that "ordinaries are strenuously asked" to have their clerics trained to be able to offer the EF, whereas the English translation merely says "asked." Actually, I looked at the translation of the Instruction in a couple different languages, and they all seem to have this weaker translation. To me its like saying that the Bishop only has to maybe, possibly do something about this if he really, actually, might possibly, in the future perhaps, want to do something of some sort about this. It's too bad that the translation went this way. I know in a local seminary they teach Hebrew and Greek, I don't think Latin is taught (I haven't actually looked at their ciriculum in a while, so I could be wrong, or it might have changed). Although those are both very important languages, they are not the language of the Church. However, this seminary does use some Latin songs and chants and the priests coming out are of a pretty traditional nature, so for them they just need to be nudged into offering an EF mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1305336281' post='2241129'] [i]Why[/i] is there, on average, more reverence at a T.L.M.? [/quote] Uh, maybe because most "average" Catholics attend the Novus Ordo, and only those who have a more unique interest in the liturgy make it a point to seek out the Traditional Latin Mass? Just a thought. If the situation was reversed, and the Traditional Latin Mass was the "norm" that the "average" Catholic attended, and the Novus Ordo had to be seeked out by people with a special interest in it, I'm quite positive that you'd see a greater reverence in the Novus Ordo and many abuses in the Traditional Latin Mass. I don't think a lot of people think of this when they think about what they think about, but it seems rather common sensical to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kafka Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 well said dUSt, well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1305336909' post='2241136'] I have a problem when we start discussing which mass is better, and which Catholics are more reverent. How do you decide who is more reverent? Some think the person on the floor talking in tongues is more reverent. Some think it is the person in the veil, kneeling for communion. I am reverent. What I wear, how I act, or which mass I go to does not change how reverent I am. I find it offensive for anyone to imply otherwise. [/quote] What she said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1305353154' post='2241263']it seems rather common sensical to me. [/quote] I agree. I'm not convinced that the causation is implied by the correlation in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 14, 2011 Author Share Posted May 14, 2011 (edited) Or maybe, just maybe, some people are provided by God with a particularly gifted understanding of the Liturgy, and they see the great treasure of our Church that is the T.L.M.. Maybe they are drawn to that Mass because it offers for them something they don't see in the Novus Ordo. Maybe the [i]usus antiquior[/i] is a "precious treasure" to which they are drawn, not because of shallow archaeologist or aestheticism, but because of its richness. Maybe some people agree with Pope Benedict in thinking that the Novus Ordo is "a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product" (his words, not mine). Maybe some of these people "find the dignity of the sacred preserved there" in opposition to "many priests who deliberately raised 'desacralization' to the level of a program" (also Pope Benedict [then Ratzinger]). Maybe some people are very concerned that Vatican II is treated as a 'superdogma'- maybe they distrust the paradigm in which, "The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero. " (ibid.) Maybe some people feel that some aspects of the new Mass are flawed and not ideal. It is perfectly legitimate to think so. Maybe they find that "all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place" (Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani). Maybe some people are disturbed that, "The new form of Mass was substantially rejected by the Episcopal Synod, was never submitted to the collegial judgement of the Episcopal Conferences and was never asked for by the people." (ibid.) Maybe some see that, "The position of both priest and people is falsified and the Celebrant appears as nothing more than a Protestant minister, while the true nature of the Church is intolerably misrepresented." (ibid.) Maybe some are disappointed and grudging of the fact that "the New Order will alienate the East" while simultaneously "pleasing various dissenting groups" and that it "has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants." (ibid.) I say nothing that hasn't been said by better men than you and me. Is it so unthinkable? (Edited for poor phrasing in line one.) Edited May 14, 2011 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 Maybe on top of maybe = a house of cards. Maybe monkeys'll fly out of my .... oh, never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Th0t Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1305170366' post='2240364'] I have a question, and I'm not trying to be a pain by asking. I simply do not know, and not being a traddie, I hadn't thought about it before now. I know that the OF in English is being revised to a more faithful translation. I completely support that effort, and it is currently being phased in by our pastors. I'm wondering if the same translation issues occurred in other languages. I mean is there this kind of fight going on in Spanish speaking countries, or German? If so, are they, or have they, received a revised translation? If not, why have we had this trouble in English? [/quote] Actually they are. I don't know much about it, but our parochial vicar had mentioned that they are working on revising some things for the Spanish Mass in the United States that will differ from the Mass in Mexico and all Southern America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 14, 2011 Author Share Posted May 14, 2011 [quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1305355128' post='2241272'] Maybe on top of maybe = a house of cards. Maybe monkeys'll fly out of my .... oh, never mind. [/quote] You can mock if you want, but if you do (you don't even have to tell anyone), think about these things. Ask yourself if it's possible that there actually are serious problems in today's Liturgy, and ask yourself if it's possible that a Mass assembled by a committee might be less ideal than one that developed organically over many centuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximilianus Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 I just hope this means that maybe, just maybe, the faithful in my deanery won't have to make going to an EF the equivalent of going on a pilgrimage to a distant holy site. Peeps like me aren't asking for much, just at minimum the opportunity to make it to an usus antiquior without travelling across the state or to a different diocese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts