If All They Wanted Was That...
Then why did they dumb-it-down?
In a post titled "Missal Envy" from about a year and a half ago... and seeing that the Traditional Latin Mass has been in the news so much as of late, I thought I'd bring this up again.
You know, I've always heard the mantra from the self-proclaimed Reformers that the wonderful reason as to why The Church so much as dumped Liturgical Latin when The Mass of Paul VI (The New Mass/Novus Ordo Mass) was instituted, was so the various peoples of the world could understand the Mass in their own native language.
OK... I understand that. I strongly disagree with their rationale, but I understand.
With that said, why didn't the Reformers just take the vernacular side of the Latin Mass missal and institute that in the various nations of the world? That seems like a common sense approach. The left-hand side of my Latin Mass missal is in English, the right-hand side is in Latin. Just publish the modern-day language side of the Latin missal by itself and call it The Mass of Paul VI or The New Mass or whatever fancy-shmancy name you want to call it.
Yeah, that would seem like a reasonable solution. But wait... turns out that offering Mass in the native tongue isn't exactly what the Reformers were after. I invite everyone to click here for a missal comparison between the English translations of the Mass of Pius V (Traditional Latin Mass) and the Mass of Paul VI (The New Mass).
Which one seems simplistic, watered-down, barren, theologically economical, individual-centered? Which one is spiritually deep, reverend, inspires the sacred, rich, God-centered?
But hey... we're so fortunate to have Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, PA (who is also the Chairman of the USCCB's Committee on the Liturgy) to edjumacate us ignorami who are too stupid to understand the difference between "for many" and "for all". Lucky us.
You know, I enjoy Vienna Sausage as much as the next Caveman. I'll knock back a can every now and then. I hear you can even pretty it up with others foods. Vienna Sausage is actually good for ya! Packed with protein and all that good stuff.
But if I had my 'druthers, I'll take the Filet Mignon, please.
Then why did they dumb-it-down?
In a post titled "Missal Envy" from about a year and a half ago... and seeing that the Traditional Latin Mass has been in the news so much as of late, I thought I'd bring this up again.
You know, I've always heard the mantra from the self-proclaimed Reformers that the wonderful reason as to why The Church so much as dumped Liturgical Latin when The Mass of Paul VI (The New Mass/Novus Ordo Mass) was instituted, was so the various peoples of the world could understand the Mass in their own native language.
OK... I understand that. I strongly disagree with their rationale, but I understand.
With that said, why didn't the Reformers just take the vernacular side of the Latin Mass missal and institute that in the various nations of the world? That seems like a common sense approach. The left-hand side of my Latin Mass missal is in English, the right-hand side is in Latin. Just publish the modern-day language side of the Latin missal by itself and call it The Mass of Paul VI or The New Mass or whatever fancy-shmancy name you want to call it.
Yeah, that would seem like a reasonable solution. But wait... turns out that offering Mass in the native tongue isn't exactly what the Reformers were after. I invite everyone to click here for a missal comparison between the English translations of the Mass of Pius V (Traditional Latin Mass) and the Mass of Paul VI (The New Mass).
Which one seems simplistic, watered-down, barren, theologically economical, individual-centered? Which one is spiritually deep, reverend, inspires the sacred, rich, God-centered?
But hey... we're so fortunate to have Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, PA (who is also the Chairman of the USCCB's Committee on the Liturgy) to edjumacate us ignorami who are too stupid to understand the difference between "for many" and "for all". Lucky us.
You know, I enjoy Vienna Sausage as much as the next Caveman. I'll knock back a can every now and then. I hear you can even pretty it up with others foods. Vienna Sausage is actually good for ya! Packed with protein and all that good stuff.
But if I had my 'druthers, I'll take the Filet Mignon, please.
posted by Kevin Whiteman at
7:09 PM
4 Comments:
Perfect example. But see, changing the words helped the Modernists with the plan to make the Mass horizontal ("see how good we all are? let's share a meal") instead of vertical ("Lord, I am not wortth...say but the word and my soul shall be healed"). I attended the Novus Ordo for years, trying to make the best of it and waiting for the "reform of the reform." I never saw how the vernacular helped people "participate" better. For me, I know a PRAY the Mass much better at the traditional Latin Mass. If the New Mass does it for others, God bless them, but I just don't see how God is being worshipped.
FAB,
Beacause of it's very nature, worship comes oh so easy at the TLM (as we both know), both for the priest and the Faithful.
However, at the Mass of Paul VI, between the emphasis on individuals and the carnival-like atmosphere at most NO parishes, deep prayer is hard to come by.
We both have seen NO parishes that can offer a reverend, respectful NO Mass... but it's rare. And the sad thing is, the priest really has to bust his hump tp make sure it IS reverend and respectful!
If it aint broken don't fix it. No one who could truly love the church would've inflicted this upon it.
Essentially the missal that came out in 1965 was just that, a direct English translation of the Traditional mass. They could of packed it up then and left it at that. The copy I have (With a Imprimatur from Terrence Cardinal Cooke) is clear, normal English, with more with out any funny business. The calendar is the "old" calendar and there wasn't what any one has given me a good reason to go beyond this. Certainly, from reading the VII council documents
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home