Which Mass do you hear?

[Cam42]

Then again, we could all just sing Kumbaya and Jesus Loves Me. Perhaps that would make this all better?

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 15 2006, 12:08 AM']Then again, we could all just sing Kumbaya and Jesus Loves Me.  Perhaps that would make this all better?
[right][snapback]887881[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
no. just do what you're supposed to with kids. As adults we can simply stop discussing a topic since we've figured out it's better to be right than win. He's not gonna have the tools to deal with you and you might hurt his feelings...which would be a shame. I'd say just stop posting and let the good cops have their turn.

[Resurrexi]

Ok, you wanna see my knowledge: well here it is. What I am giving you is off the top of my head. I will quote no sources, nor googlesearch the topics.

[quote] I would love to get your perspective on the filioque controversy. Should we come to a greater understanding of just how this phrase is applied and understood? [/quote]

The filioque was originally not in the NIcene Creed but was added later by an ecumenical council. The greek orthos think it is heresy, but they are committing heresy by denying the filique, which is infallable. The filique is "and the Son". For some reason, Greek Orthos think that the Holy Ghost proceeds from only the Father, but that is not true. It should be understood as the Holy Ghost proceeds from the father, not by eternal generation, but by something else.

[quote]I would like to get your take on the impending liturgical changes? Do you think that the new translations will prove to be fruitful?[/quote]

I do not think new translations would be fruitful, because the liturgy would only be messed up more. The Latin NO is much more orthodox and traditional than the current English translation. If the translatiors of the litrugy would translate it as directly as possible (e.g. like they used to translate for missals) keeping the meaning exact and almost word-for-word, then a new translation would be fruitful.

[quote]also wondering, since there doesn't seem to be a universal indult coming anytime soon, should the US bishops call for an ammendment to extend the current regulations or should they leave it up to the individual Ordinary to decide?[/quote]

I would say that a Universal Indult would come before a US Indult comes, seeing as the current Holy See is more traditional than the USSCB. But no, if the US bishops could have a get-to-gether and say that they would let teh TLM be siad in all diocese, I do not think that would be the most traditional or thologically sound thing to do.

[quote]Finally, what do you think of Romano Guardini's work on the Liturgy? I know that it is written in French and the translation is a little sketchy in places, but it is easy enough to get through.[/quote]

I'm sorry, but I do not know who he is. If he is one of those prots who composed the NO, then i do not think his work was fruitful.

[quote]Oh yeah, have you had a chance to get your head around Adian Nichols' book Looking at the Liturgy?[/quote]

I'm sorry, but most people who arent scholars do not read books like that. And if it is abotu the new liturgy, even if I were a scholar, I would not read it anyways.

[quote]I am especially curious what did you think of the idea that Pius Parsch, an Augustinian canon and his application and call for versus populum almost 50 years before Vatican Council II?[/quote]

Was he suspect for modernism? But, sir, I do not thing that most well educated people of age know about certain thigs such as Pius Parsch. You are a scholar, most people are not. You are asking me to give you scholarly answers. Most people couldnt give you scholarly answers.

and by the way, PLEASE DO NOT CALL ME ANYTHING THAT HAS "TOMMY" IN IT, THANKYOU!

[King's Rook's Pawn]

Hi, I'm not sure about the difference between all those masses, but I go to a regular "Novus Ordo" one, in which the priest faces the congragation ("versus poplam"?). I'm not sure I'd want him the other way and have to look at the back of his head. And it's in English I think the one I go to is pretty decent though--no weirdnesses going on for the most part--and the church building itself is beautiful.

[Cam42]

[quote]The filioque was originally not in the NIcene Creed but was added later by an ecumenical council. The greek orthos think it is heresy, but they are committing heresy by denying the filique, which is infallable. The filique is "and the Son". For some reason, Greek Orthos think that the Holy Ghost proceeds from only the Father, but that is not true. It should be understood as the Holy Ghost proceeds from the father, not by eternal generation, but by something else.[/quote]

Nice primer answer, but it doesn't answer the question that I asked. I was asking about how we understand the application of it, not what it is. I am very well aware of what it is. Basically, I was hoping that you'd comment on the ongoing discussions between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Bishops. It would seem that this converstation should come from both the historical and theological point of view. What theological aspects do you find intriuging about this ongoing conversation and what do you think about the strides to try and reconcile this with the Orthodox Church?

[quote]I do not think new translations would be fruitful, because the liturgy would only be messed up more. The Latin NO is much more orthodox and traditional than the current English translation. If the translatiors of the litrugy would translate it as directly as possible (e.g. like they used to translate for missals) keeping the meaning exact and almost word-for-word, then a new translation would be fruitful.[/quote]

As it stands though, your personal opinion on the merits of the translation is not what I asked. I assume that you accept the mandates of Vatican Council II. However, I agree that the Latin is more orthodox, but what say you about the impending translations as opposed to the current translations? That is what I am trying to get after here.

Also, how can a more accurate translation make things more inaccurate? That is kind of oxymoronic don't you think?

[quote]I would say that a Universal Indult would come before a US Indult comes, seeing as the current Holy See is more traditional than the USSCB. But no, if the US bishops could have a get-to-gether and say that they would let teh TLM be siad in all diocese, I do not think that would be the most traditional or thologically sound thing to do.[/quote]

You have completely missed the question. I wasn't asking about a regional indult which would be all encompassing. I was aksing about whether or not the bishops should ask for an ammendment to make it even easier for a priest to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, and easier for a bishop to designate indult parishes.

And why, from a theological point of view, wouldn't it be a sound action? I have always been of the opinion, as has the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, that the application of the universal indult should be widely applied. Since you think this to be an unsound judgment, I would be interested to know why.

[quote]I'm sorry, but I do not know who he is. If he is one of those prots who composed the NO, then i do not think his work was fruitful.[/quote]

ROFLOL!!!!!!! Romano Guardini was born on February 17, 1885, in Verona. In 1905, he had a deep crisis of faith from which he emerged with the decision to study theology at Freiburg in Breisgau. But depression again took hold, to such a degree that he considered suicide. Still, he stuck to his decision, and from then on he knew that the priesthood was his only and true vocation.

He continued his theological studies in Tubingen and during that time he had his first exposure to true liturgy at the Abbey of Beuron, whose monks were early pioneers of liturgical renewal. Liturgy from then on became a lifelong interest.

In 1910, he was ordained. The next 13 years he served as associate pastor in Heppenheim, Darmstadt, Worms and Mainz. During this period he continued his studies at Freiburg and received his doctorate in theology with a dissertation on the teaching of St. Bonaventure on salvation.

Here is part of what I was getting at....

[quote name='Romano Guardini']The Council has laid the foundations for the future – and the way this came to pass and truth became manifest will remain a classical example of the way the Holy Spirit guides the Church. But now the question arises how we are to set about our task, so that truth may become reality.

A mass of ritual and textual problems will present themselves and long experience has shown how much scope there is for a right and a wrong approach. But the central problem seems to me to be something else; the problem of the cult act or, to be more precise, the liturgical act.

As I see it, typical nineteenth-century man was no longer able to perform this act; in fact he was unaware of its existence. Religious conduct was to him an individual inward matter which in the “liturgy” took on the character of an official, public ceremonial. But the sense of the liturgical action was thereby lost. The faithful did not perform a proper liturgical act at all, it was simply a private and inward act, surrounded by ceremonial and not infrequently accompanied by a feeling that the ceremonial was really a disturbing factor. From that point of view the efforts of those who concerned themselves with the liturgy must have appeared as peculiarities of aesthetes who lacked Christian sincerity.[/quote]

[quote name='Romano Guardini']The question will arise whether our present liturgy contains parts which cannot mean much to modern man. I remember a conversation with the late Abbot Ildefons Herwegen of Maria Laach, the great champion of liturgical renewal. We had been considering various aspects and I said asign that the work for liturgy was really coming to life would be a liturgical crisis, and Abbot Herwegen thoughtfully agreed. As long as liturgical actions are merely “celebrated” objectively and texts are merely “got through”, everything will go smoothly because there is no question of an integrated religious act. But once serious prayer is joined to the action, the parts that have no living appeal become apparent.

But those whose task it is to teach and educate will have to ask themselves whether they know of its existence and what exactly it consists of and that it is neither a luxury nor an oddity, but a matter of fundamental importance. Or does it, basically, mean the same to them as to the parish priest of the late nineteenth century who said: “We must organize the procession better; we must see to it that the praying and singing is done better.” He did not realize that he should have asked himself quite a different question: how can the act of walking become a religious act, a retinue of the Lord progressing through his land, so that an “epiphany” may take place.[/quote]

This is some pretty important stuff when it comes to understanding the transition between the Mass of Pius V and Paul VI. What is your impression of what he is getting at? There is more though......

[quote name='Romano Guardini']Of particular importance for the liturgical act is the action and full participation of the congregation as a body. The act is done by every individual, not as an isolated individual, but as a member of a body which is the “we” of the prayers. Its structure is different from that of any other collection of people meeting for a common purpose. It is that of a corpus, an objective whole. In the liturgical act the celebrating individual becomes part of this body and he incorporates the circumstances in his self-expression. This is not so simple if it is to be genuine and honest. Mush that divides men must be overcome; dislikes, indifference towards the many who are “no concern of mine”, but who are really members of the same body, lethargy, etc. In he act the individual becomes conscious of the meaning of the words “congregation” and “Church.”[/quote]

There is a VERY important thought in this......and it is incredibly traditional.

[quote]I'm sorry, but most people who arent scholars do not read books like that. And if it is abotu the new liturgy, even if I were a scholar, I would not read it anyways.[/quote]

Considering that this is one of the pre-eminent works on the Liturgy in the last half of the 20th century, I would reconsider. And you said you have "a working knowledge." This is basic for anyone who is a student of the Liturgy. And to be dismissive like that is a little naive of you and not very smart , for someone who claims to have "a working knowledge."

Take the time to read it, it isn't very big, only 126 pages, but full of very important thoughts. Some of the most influential liturgists of the 20th century are cited.....Msgr. J.D. Crichton, Fr. Anthony Conlon, and of course, Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger).

Also cited are Henri de Lubac, as well as our friend Fr. Guardini.

[quote]Was he suspect for modernism? But, sir, I do not thing that most well educated people of age know about certain thigs such as Pius Parsch. You are a scholar, most people are not. You are asking me to give you scholarly answers. Most people couldnt give you scholarly answers.[/quote]

No, he was not a suspect. He was yet another influential liturgist of the 20th century. And Parsch was also a spiritual guru. He was a fanstastic writer on Christian and Catholic spirituality, in regard to the Mass. Especially important is [i]The Church's Year of Grace.[/i]

Finally, if you are going to claim knowledge, you had best be able to back it up. Yes, I am asking you to give scholarly answers, and this is the same standard I hold everyone to, when debating with me. If you are going to "jump in the deep end," you better be able to swim.

Do I expect those who debate me to keep up? You bet. Does this include you? No doubt. Do I expect those who debate me to be able to back up their assertations and assumptions? Absolutely. You told me that you have "a working understanding of many things." I was simply expecting you to stand behind your words.

If you are over your head, just say so. I am simply debating. Ask anyone has debated me, I don't cut slack, ever.

However, I think that this is a good lesson. You need to take a step back, not be so argumentative and learn from what is posted, without being a brat. The whole reason that I have been so hard is that you have been pretty obstinant. That rubs me the wrong way and you, obviously, are over your head. There is a ton of knowledge to be gained here, not only from me, but also from the others who post here.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 15 2006, 01:17 PM']If you are over your head, just say so.  I am simply debating.  Ask anyone has debated me, I don't cut slack, ever. [/quote]
Read about the....oh....last six pages of the Mary and sin thread where he and I went back and forth on what was the proper understanding of a word in reference to original sin.

[rkwright]

ooo filioque! I'd love to talk about that one...

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

StThomasMore,
What are your thoughts regarding the [i]fililoque[/i] and Eastern [u]Catholic[/u] theology/liturgy?

[cmotherofpirl]

start a[i] new[/i] thread

[Cam42]

Not a bad idea, but I am still waiting to see what StThomasMore has to say about the aspect that I brought up, as well as the rest.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 15 2006, 12:08 AM']Then again, we could all just sing Kumbaya and Jesus Loves Me.  Perhaps that would make this all better?
[right][snapback]887881[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

we're not at the typical 1970's novus ordo, or the current kiddie messes on sundays...

cam, i have to say your debate with STM is superb. not only that but you've convinced me to attend an orthodox novus ordo. well done.
is STM the youngest pm'er here?

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 15 2006, 08:24 PM']we're not at the typical 1970's novus ordo, or the current kiddie messes on sundays...

cam, i have to say your debate with STM is superb. not only that but you've convinced me to attend an orthodox novus ordo. well done.
is STM the youngest pm'er here?
[right][snapback]888760[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Gee, I don't know if he is the youngest, however, I am fostering a sense of equality. I am treating him no differently than I would anyone else. If you don't like that, c'est la vis.

I am glad that you are going to start attending the Missa Normativa.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 15 2006, 08:32 PM']I am glad that you are going to start attending the Missa Normativa.
[right][snapback]888767[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

i've never stopped. i like the mass at our local dominican monastery. but i also like the mass at the local indult and sspx... hmm. prayers, please.

have you read anything from dr parsch?

[Cam42]

[quote name='brendan1104' date='Feb 15 2006, 08:38 PM']i've never stopped. i like the mass at our local dominican monastery. but i also like the mass at the local indult and sspx... hmm. prayers, please.

have you read anything from dr parsch?
[right][snapback]888772[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I have read many things by Fr. Parsch. My personal favorite is the series that I mentioned above. It is fantastic.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Feb 15 2006, 08:40 PM']I have read many things by Fr. Parsch.  My personal favorite is the series that I mentioned above.  It is fantastic.
[right][snapback]888774[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

it's interesting that st josemaria escrive continued to offer his private mass according to the tridentine rite. apparently he believed it was superior to the novus ordo...