dabukthumpa Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 (edited) whether or not the Tridentine Mass is objectively more superior in beauty than the Novus Ordo Mass. Edited January 9, 2004 by dabukthumpa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabukthumpa Posted January 9, 2004 Author Share Posted January 9, 2004 There you have it all - sorry if I caused any disturbances. Maybe you will like this wording more - and it will make the poll more effective. I am really interested in the results. Thanks for all the input before - and agian I am sorry if I came across the wrong way. Peace - and God Bless. Dabuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marielapin Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 I am still undecided as I have never attended a Tridentine Mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 (edited) Beauty as in music, as in gestures, as in language, what? Who's objective? Define beauty. I still don't see the point however. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Edited January 9, 2004 by cmotherofpirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 why would one be inferior than the other? Superior that the other? didn't you do one exactly like this before? Beauty? Everyone has an opinion of one, but one is not inferior than the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Its liks comparing a Leonardo to a Degas or another great master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 it's like comparing sam to frodo! love them both. Of course cmom is right. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 poor thumpa! *hands you a flower and welcomes you to phatmass* I still voted undecided. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabukthumpa Posted January 9, 2004 Author Share Posted January 9, 2004 Beauty in the form it is expressed, yes music, gestures, and language all contribute to the Beauty of the Mass. Who's objective? The objective of Beauty itself. Some things can be more beautiful than others - objectively. However - beauty is defined by how it evokes one toward the trancendent? That is God Himself who is the author of all Truth - which is beauty in itself (CCC 2500) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 i think it's asking your preference, your personal opinion of which one u like better not which one is better. i think my preference would be Tridentine, but i have absolutely nothing against the Novus Ordo (... er maybe some TRANSLATION of it, but nothing against the actual Novus Ordo) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabukthumpa Posted January 9, 2004 Author Share Posted January 9, 2004 No beauty is not in the eye of the beholder. That is not what the Catechism implies at all. Look up Beauty in the Index and read all the paragraphes it highlights - then come back and tell me if you think true beauty is relative. If it is then according to you - than the way a pagan falsly worships God can be more beautiful than the manner in which God Himself ordained us to worship Him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabukthumpa Posted January 9, 2004 Author Share Posted January 9, 2004 Also - the sam to frodo example is bad. I am sorry but God truly does make some woman objectively physically more beautifull than others. This beauty should lead us to admire the great work of our creator. Also, some people are objectively more beautiful on the inside than others - we cannot deny this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Why are you so hung up on this? All masses can be beautiful or ugly ( your terms, not mine) depending on how they are done. What is your point with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabukthumpa Posted January 9, 2004 Author Share Posted January 9, 2004 I never said ugly. That has never been a term I would use when referring to the Holy Mass - either Tridentine or Novus Ordo. So please do not imply I used that word. I am taking a poll asking if others like myself think the Tridentine is objectively MORE Beautiful than the Novus Ordo. You are free to vote and to voice your opinion. Actually I encourage it. However - whether or not "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is not a right opinion. Beuaty is objective and the Church has always seen it that way. Also - I think if people were really honest about what they think about the question I asked - it might help stop much of the negative response those people get who have aspirations for the Church's Traditional Mass. One that Pope John Paul II said Catholic Faithful have a right to aspire - and for bishops to make it available to those faithful if the need is there. (Ecclesia Dei - 1988) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 All western Rites are primitive compared to Eastern Liturgies. But primitive does not equal ugly. The Tridentine is more Primitive than the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom (sp?). The Novus Ordo is more primitive than the Tridentine. 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