New missal not here yet, but Catholics urged to start talking about it
#11
(02-09-2010, 10:47 PM)glgas Wrote:
Quote: the translation's use of words such as "ineffable," "consubstantial," "incarnate," "inviolate," "oblation" and "ignominy" are not understandable to the average Catholic.

This is the reason why the parish bulletin should initiate talk about it, and make them familiar words to everyone. Any word becomes familiar (even the ral stupid abbreviations) if you read/hear it many times. 

exactly.  and it will be easy to teach the kids preparing for First Communion because little kids love to learn big words. 

so what if there are words in the new missal that "are not understandable to the average Catholic"?  people can learn at any age.  people naturally resist change, but not if the change is explained to them and not rushed, though i think two years is far longer than is needed


Reply
#12
(02-10-2010, 12:03 AM)Baskerville Wrote:
(02-09-2010, 11:17 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: therefore it will affect traditionalists.

How will it affect trads. Last time I was at an SSPX Mass someone brought the new Missal up to Fr. and he said something like " its still an invalid Mass in most cases making it sound pretty wont matter much to us since we use a completely different missal anyway". So my question is how will it affect trads since they do use a completely different missal. 

Any positive change in the Ordinary Form will bring it more in alignment with the Extraordinary Form. The N.O Mass could very well be "reformed" out of existence. Hopefully we'll end up with the TLM, progressing organically within the visible structure of the Church (where it should be).

This will affect traditionalists, alright. But not all. The way I see it, there are two camps of trads. First there are those in temporary exile because the Novus Ordo has banished them. They simply want a reverent Mass and the assurance that they are receiving sound doctrine. They want a Catholic environment again - in every diocese, in every parish. And when that happens, it will pull many trads away from their independent structures and right back into the visible structure of the Church (where they should be).

Then there is the second camp -- the malcontents who are suspicious of every move and every motive that comes from the Vatican. Whatever good happens will never meet their standards. The Mass will still be "lipstick on a pig." The sacraments will still be "probably invalid." They will never be happy because Vatican II was never "formally denounced" and because Russia was never "officially consecrated." They will never join the mainstream but will stay in their bunkers, insisting that their dwindling numbers are further proof of their "remnant theory." And they will find themselves in formal schism.
Aren't you glad you asked?  :tiphat:
Reply
#13
(02-10-2010, 02:59 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote:
(02-10-2010, 12:03 AM)Baskerville Wrote:
(02-09-2010, 11:17 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: therefore it will affect traditionalists.

How will it affect trads. Last time I was at an SSPX Mass someone brought the new Missal up to Fr. and he said something like " its still an invalid Mass in most cases making it sound pretty wont matter much to us since we use a completely different missal anyway". So my question is how will it affect trads since they do use a completely different missal. 

Any positive change in the Ordinary Form will bring it more in alignment with the Extraordinary Form. The N.O Mass could very well be "reformed" out of existence. Hopefully we'll end up with the TLM, progressing organically within the visible structure of the Church (where it should be).

This will affect traditionalists, alright. But not all. The way I see it, there are two camps of trads. First there are those in temporary exile because the Novus Ordo has banished them. They simply want a reverent Mass and the assurance that they are receiving sound doctrine. They want a Catholic environment again - in every diocese, in every parish. And when that happens, it will pull many trads away from their independent structures and right back into the visible structure of the Church (where they should be).

Then there is the second camp -- the malcontents who are suspicious of every move and every motive that comes from the Vatican. Whatever good happens will never meet their standards. The Mass will still be "lipstick on a pig." The sacraments will still be "probably invalid." They will never be happy because Vatican II was never "formally denounced" and because Russia was never "officially consecrated." They will never join the mainstream but will stay in their bunkers, insisting that their dwindling numbers are further proof of their "remnant theory." And they will find themselves in formal schism.
Aren't you glad you asked?  :tiphat:

AMEN, Lisa!  I love you, too.    :clap:


Reply
#14
If people can't understand words like "ineffable" or "oblation" then this means they need to look them up, it doesn't mean that worship needs to be dumbed down.

What is really going on here is a squabble over the meaning of the mass. Tradition says the Mass is the Priest, in the person of Christ, offering the sacrifice to God, thus one needs to use respectful and formal language as is fitting in such a situation.

On the other hand the liberals think the Mass is about people getting together --- communicating in unity  or community... how sweet. So in this case easy to understand language is fitting.

The battle over this translation is a dividing line, indicating two different understandings of the mass. A controversy solely created and perpetuated by the Novus Ordo.

I will let the NO church work this out and just sit back and watch the sparks fly~

One question however, why don't the conservative NO supporters of this new translation just wake up and abandon the NO project and return to the TLM?
Reply
#15
(02-10-2010, 04:09 AM)winoblue1 Wrote: One question however, why don't the conservative NO supporters of this new translation just wake up and abandon the NO project and return to the TLM?

They still think that the NO can be salvaged and that things like added readings and simplicity of the Mass are not necessarily bad under the right context, that being of course the context of Tradition.

I think that many feel that the NO when done properly can be a nice introduction to greater beauty of the Tridentine. 
Reply
#16
(02-10-2010, 04:39 AM)Unum Sint Wrote: I think that many feel that the NO when done properly can be a nice introduction to greater beauty of the Tridentine. 

I've always thought of the OF as Mass with training wheels, a rope bridge across the Tiber for our "separated brethren." I survived RCIA, it is so sad the level of spiritual development and why people are so hungry for Catholicism and don't even realize it. We are trying to evangelize a generation that was raised without any spiritual tradition. Trying to find contact points to connect to people without any common frame of reference, even if it's the need for some abstract god in their life is difficult. The level of ignorance among the modernist pagans surpasses what the Church experienced with the Goths.

I remember visiting one of the touring Vatican collections, there was a little boy looking at a breathtaking handcarved crucifix. He was asking his mother, "Who is that man? Why did they do that to him?" The mother pulled him away in deathly fear that one of us would tell him. I still pray for that little boy.

Back on topic, asking us to talk about the new missal before it's release seems about as astute as blogging about Harry Potter rumors before the book comes out. Prone to both wild speculation and disappointment. Sheesh, why don't they just send out vocabulary sheets and offer prizes for matching the new words with their proper definitions and giving us candy for right answers. It reeks of elitism.
Reply
#17
(02-10-2010, 04:39 AM)Unum Sint Wrote: I think that many feel that the NO when done properly can be a nice introduction to greater beauty of the Tridentine. 

If celebrated properly it is introduction to a much higher value: Our Lord Jesus Christ
Reply
#18
(02-10-2010, 04:09 AM)winoblue1 Wrote: On the other hand the liberals think the Mass is about people getting together --- communicating in unity  or community... how sweet. So in this case easy to understand language is fitting.

I'm not defending what the modernists have done, but there is certainly an aspect of community in the liturgy, particularly when it comes to the Mass of the Catechumens.  And in reading St. Paul's letters it is pretty clear that it has always been that way.
Reply
#19
(02-11-2010, 06:32 PM)Walty Wrote: I'm not defending what the modernists have done, but there is certainly an aspect of community in the liturgy, particularly when it comes to the Mass of the Catechumens.  And in reading St. Paul's letters it is pretty clear that it has always been that way.

Indeed. Reducing the liturgy to a strictly personal, "me and God" event is just an older kind of heresy.
Reply
#20
(02-11-2010, 06:39 PM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote:
(02-11-2010, 06:32 PM)Walty Wrote: I'm not defending what the modernists have done, but there is certainly an aspect of community in the liturgy, particularly when it comes to the Mass of the Catechumens.  And in reading St. Paul's letters it is pretty clear that it has always been that way.

Indeed. Reducing the liturgy to a strictly personal, "me and God" event is just an older kind of heresy.

Exactly, and what's even worse is reducing it to a strictly "priest and God" event.  Certainly that is a vitally important and fundamental part of the Mass that is almost completely overlooked in the modern Church, but don't fall off the horse one way just because the modernists fall off the other.  The concept of the Eucharist as a "communion" is traditional, I think.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)