Comments for Liturgy: Back to the Future at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 13 out of 13 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Sun, 19 May 2013 07:49:32 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3590 Our Lord Jesus was nailed to a cross, died and rose again on the 3rd day for our salvation. I love that Truth. Are we really bickering over what genre of hymn we should sing in praise of this Truth? Does it lessen this Truth if 5% or 95% of the mass is said in Latin or English or Spanish? We are one family on this road trip; let\'s stop bickering over the radio station and focus on the journey. - Dave Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:00:11 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3585 "My Catholicism", Mr. Phelan? Sounds like the same, possessive, "made in my image" way of thinking being assigned to others, just on the other end of the spectrum. Too often \"your Catholicism\" and \"my Catholicism\" are but are own poor images of the one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church. We might all do well to pray more fervently that we might know and love the Church as she truly is. - Deacon Sean Smith Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:05:48 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3584 In our thoroughly orthodox parish, for the Wed. night mass, we'll sing significant parts in Latin and then do an old 19th century evangelical hymn - IF IT FITS with the readings or the homily. The striking thing is how our pastor ties the music to the liturgy - and from growing up as a distinct minority among Protestants, he calls upon a deep repertoire of great old Protestant hymns (and Catholic - have you sung anything by, say, Fr. Faber recently?). It works - we don't have "incidental music". - Tom Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:05:23 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3582 Well said. - Terence Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:23:58 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3581 Deacon Smith, you have put your finger right on it. If the terminology was kept as it existed fifty years ago, there would have been no reason for the Novus Ordo Mass. Its purpose was to establish a new religion! "There was never any experience of these prayers in English"? Wrong! I pray the English in my 1962 missal as the priest prays in Latin, word for word, just as I did 45, 50 and 65 years ago. See my piece below. There are no permanent deacons or altar girls in my Catholicism. - William H. Phelan Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:14:06 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3580 After Vat II the Mass added the Protestant ending to the Our Father; our sacred Catholic Music was replaced by Protestant hymns, Shaker tunes and sometimes I feel like I am at a Baptist service. I have not seen our Protestant brethren reach out to us - only us to them and in ways that disrespect our religion. Lets be Roman Catholic again. If this is a start I welcome it. Now do something about the music. - Liz Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:13:11 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3579 Summorum Pontificum sums up the mind of Joseph Ratzinger, who has consistently favored different liturgical rites (Roman, Dominican, etc) that all express the one true faith. Now, with "two forms of the one Roman rite" we have legitimate pluralism within the Roman rite, so we should have both forms in our parishes and seminaries. It seems to be the practice of many of those in charge only to allow the form they prefer (the new Mass). The Church wisely allows both. We should follow her lead. - David Bonagura Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:12:31 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3578 At a workshop on the new translation a few weeks ago, I heard people commenting that we are "going back" to the way things used to be, "pre Vatican II". That seems to be most inaccurate, since no one "back then" would have ever heard these prayers in English, only Latin. There was never any experience of these prayers in English. So, there really is no "going back" at all. If these had been the translations when first using the vernacular, no one would have said a bad word about them. - Deacon Sean Smith Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:47:34 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3577 One may speak of the Novus Ordo itself as the issue, but the fact is that Mass is often celebrated in ways that deviate substanially from the mandated rubrics. That liturgical chaos has led to doctrinal and moral chaos. Those who embrace that chaos shrink from any mention of the Extraordinary Rite like Draculas shrinking before a crucifix because they embrace that chaos, which they call feedom and modernity. They fear mention of Hell more that Hell itself. - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:46:56 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3576 This post offers points to ponder. What it proposes, if I understand it correctly, is that the Church through Her teaching office has proposed two liturgical ways of expressing the one Faith. Problems arise only when and if one of these ways seems more concerned with faith in the goodness of human beings rather than with God, the source of any and all human goodness. - Ars Artium Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:46:21 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3575 The Catholic Church is not unfamiliar with vernacular liturgy. The first liturgy was probably Aramaic, followed by Greek. Latinization occurred much later. In the effort of creating uniformity the Church of the Roman Empire wanted Latin. The Irish were the last to conform and if it weren't for Charlemagne Latin would not be the Church's language. The Eastern Church never used Latin except by force. The forthcoming liturgical changes are not a repudiation of the Novus Ordo but a sanctification. - Willie Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:45:59 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3574 David, diversity or conformity, which is it? I found much ambivalence in your piece, perhaps a reflection of the mixed messages sent by Vatican II and the Pope himself. I'm 67 so I can relate to the old Latin mass better than the modern rites that have substituted the vernacular for the mysterious, and the mundane (Beatles music) from the lofty (Gregorian hymns). Which is why I stay out of the church, but remain in the Church. Better, as Jesus said, to go into your room and pray by yourself. - Joseph Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:45:31 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/liturgy-back-to-the-future.html#comment-3573 While the article is well done, I found its point unclear. In the pre-Vatican Church there existed Original Sin , mortal sin and Heaven or Hell. These do not exist in any degree in the Vatican II Church. They are never preached. I believe what dictates is education and intelligence, a sort of high church/low church results to which the different groups are drawn. The Novus Ordo, it is now being admitted, was designed to attract Protestants.back to the Church. I hope they enjoy it. - William H. Phelan Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:40:26 +0100