Author Topic: Dialogue Mass Vernacular Readings (Read 1613 times)

Retablo · « **on:** February 10, 2012, 12:07:34 PM »

There is a discussion amongst more liturgically orthodox Catholics today concerning the use of the Latin Language in the Novus Ordo Missae, prompted largely by Pope Benedict's example. A number of liturgists now favor a return to a Latin canon and the ad orientem posture of the celebrant.

Within the Traditional Catholic community, is there any sort of an opposite discussion over the inclusion of vernacular languages in the liturgy, I wonder? I ask because I once attended Mass at an SSPX priory at which the Epistle and the Gospel were read from the altar in French, not Latin. I wondered if that was reflective of a trend.

Does an opening up of the Mass to vernacular language factor in contemporary liturgical discussions within the Traditional Catholic community in general, or do opinions and practices simply vary from culture to culture within the Traditionalist community? Also, what of the status of the so-called "dialogue" form of the Mass? I understand that some Traditionalists approve of it while others view it as the thin end of the wedge.

I know that the Tridentine Masses offered by parishes within my own diocese are strictly in Latin, with no allowances for the vernacular at all, or even for "dialogue" responses by the congregation. Is that simply because diocesan Latin Mass communities haven't "kept up with the Joneses", so to speak? Is it because, not really being a part of the Traditional Catholic community they do not have their fingers on the pulse of trends within Traditional Catholic liturgy? Are they trapped, perhaps, in a non-evolving liturgical anachronism reflective of a particular era because they view the Tridentine Mass as an "extraordinary expression" of the Roman Rite, whereas the Traditionalist community is not, insofar as they recognize the pre-Conciliar form of Mass as the ordinary expression of the Roman Rite and therefore as a living thing capable of organic evolution?

Thorn · « **Reply #1 on:** February 10, 2012, 12:31:51 PM »

Retablo, why are you asking all these incessant questions about tradition? You seem to be knowledgeable yet ask so many convoluted questions that it would take reams to answer. How do you know that the priest said the Gospel from the altar in French? You can barely hear him speak.
My advice to you, dear soul, would be to read more and ask less. Perhaps others here can advise some good books to read. I haven't the time nor patience to deal with it right now as there's sooo many books out there I wouldn't know where to begin. God Bless.

Retablo · « **Reply #2 on:** February 10, 2012, 12:47:48 PM »

Quote from: Thorn

Retablo, why are you asking all these incessant questions about tradition? You seem to be knowledgeable yet ask so many convoluted questions that it would take reams to answer. How do you know that the priest said the Gospel from the altar in French? You can barely hear him speak.
My advice to you, dear soul, would be to read more and ask less. Perhaps others here can advise some good books to read. I haven't the time nor patience to deal with it right now as there's sooo many books out there I wouldn't know where to begin. God Bless.

Well, it seems to me discussion boards might not be very interesting if members couldn't ask questions and couldn't discuss things...y'know? I'm hoping to read the perspectives of liturgically-attuned and engaged Traditionalists on a question that seems valid enough to me. I can't imagine there's a book that would do the trick, really.

I know the priest read the Epistle and Gospel in French because he did so audibly(I don't suppose one would read them in the vernacular quietly...why would one bother?). It was at...Shawinigan (sp?) in Quebec. Can't remember the priest's name, to be honest.

Thorn · « **Reply #3 on:** February 10, 2012, 03:09:32 PM »

Was that you, Retablo, who gave me a thumbs down? If it was, how do you expect to get a discussion going if you thumbs down someone who takes you to task or otherwise engages you? If it wasn't you, well then at least someone read what I wrote & that's a good thing - I guess.

btw - in your intro you said that you went to Fr. Gruner's many years ago & that it was ------ interesting & once was enough. Care to elaborate? Did you meet Fr. Gruner, get to talk to him? What was umm, interesting? I'd be interested.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #4 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:23:20 PM »

Retablo, while there is certainly nothing wrong with you asking questions, it is true that in order to answer all of your questions about Tradition, you will need to do some extensive reading. Instead of diving into your questions on this thread, it's probably a better idea to get you to understand why the Traditional Latin Mass is the true Mass of the Church and why the Novus Ordo is not. Here is a list of numerous articles from Catholic Apologetics on the subject. Sufficient reading will answer your questions about Traditional Catholicism... just be sure you don't read all the articles at once. :)

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/index.htm

Retablo · « **Reply #5 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:36:20 PM »

SpiritusSanctus:

Thanks for the helpful link. I have studied the matter in depth, though, over many years. I don't want anyone to be under the impression that I am untrained in the various nuances of thought with respect to "tradition" as it speaks to the Liturgy of the Roman Rite. I don't come to this community as someone who is in the dark about various positions regarding the Mass and its proper expression.

Of course, I fully understand that Traditional Catholics view the Mass in the pre-Conciliar form as the best expression of the Roman Rite, and that form promulgated by Pope Paul VI as either a less perfect form, an illegitimate form, or even an invalid form, depending upon which Traditional Catholic one speaks to.

I have said that I often attend Mass in the Extraordinary Form. Most of the Catholics I know who attend that Mass describe themselves as "Traditional Catholics". Many would assert that the Tridentine form of the Mass is, in fact, the only acceptable form (with respect to the Roman Rite, at any rate) and would never attend the Novus Ordo Missae. Still others regard the Novus Ordo as legitimate, but somehow deficient. And, of course, there are those present who, like myself, accept both forms, provided they are celebrated properly.

In the context of the diocesan sponsored Masses, there is only one form that is accepted: all Latin, no dialogue. Yet I know from experience that this is not necessarily the case with respect to the Society of St. Pius X, at least. In their settings I have encountered both the dialogue form of the Mass, and also, as I mentioned, a form in which the readings were in the vernacular instead of in Latin. I wonder if the all Latin style with no dialogue is used in the diocesan setting only because no other form is known, whereas in Traditional Catholic settings other forms are known and tolerated because traditionalists are more attuned to an authentic organic interpretation of the Tridentine form of the Roman Rite, because it is their "ordinary form", so to speak.

So my aim is to pose a topic for discussion with respect to how we encounter the pre-Conciliar liturgy, which may vary depending upon locale or situation. It seemed a harmless enough topic; I apologize if it should have gotten anyone upset. I do not understand why it would make anyone upset, to be honest, but I mean no harm by it.

Thorn: as far as Father Gruner's Fatima Crusade, I must admit I found it somewhat esoteric. It almost seemed that, for them, the messages of Fatima constituted articles of Faith; that they put undue emphasis on this private revelation, elevating it to something more, and it seemed central to their belief and mission in a way that seemed, to me, to be unbalanced. I beg your pardon if saying so should sound harsh, but that was my sincere impression.

Sigismund · « **Reply #6 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:13:45 PM »

I have seen both at FSSP Masses.

Thorn · « **Reply #7 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:28:08 PM »

Retablo, you seemed to have misunderstood entirely my reply to you. Your 'topic for discussion' didn't upset me - it's just so vast a subject as promoted by you as to be almost impossible to answer here. It would simply be easier for you (and us) to get some good books and read about it. Besides, you 'asked questions', which really wouldn't lead to discussions but just personal insights as there's no consensus, just a thousand opinions & therefore no real basis for a solid discussion. Do you understand my point now?

I appreciate your sincere impressions on Fr. Gruner. Actually, they're my impressions as well! For some reason I was on his list to receive the Fatima Crusader even tho I've never given him any money. I was distressed that he capitalized 'she' when referring to the Blessed Virgin Mary & even wrote to tell him to consult any English textbook or dictionary that would say that we only capitalize pronouns when referring to a Diety. Someone did write back & it's so long ago I can't remember how they explained it but they still capitalize she. It does give the impression that they regard her as a goddess. So very sad.

Curiously, you didn't answer my question about the thumbs down, but don't bother now.

Retablo · « **Reply #8 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:51:53 PM »

Quote from: Thorn

Retablo, you seemed to have misunderstood entirely my reply to you. Your 'topic for discussion' didn't upset me - it's just so vast a subject as promoted by you as to be almost impossible to answer here. It would simply be easier for you (and us) to get some good books and read about it. Besides, you 'asked questions', which really wouldn't lead to discussions but just personal insights as there's no consensus, just a thousand opinions & therefore no real basis for a solid discussion. Do you understand my point now?

I appreciate your sincere impressions on Fr. Gruner. Actually, they're my impressions as well! For some reason I was on his list to receive the Fatima Crusader even tho I've never given him any money. I was distressed that he capitalized 'she' when referring to the Blessed Virgin Mary & even wrote to tell him to consult any English textbook or dictionary that would say that we only capitalize pronouns when referring to a Diety. Someone did write back & it's so long ago I can't remember how they explained it but they still capitalize she. It does give the impression that they regard her as a goddess. So very sad.

Curiously, you didn't answer my question about the thumbs down, but don't bother now.

Thorn:

Forgive me. I did give you a thumbs down because I misinterpreted you as assailing me for asking what I felt was a legitimate question. It was petty, and I will give you a thumbs up to make up for it. Pardon me the more so for giving to your response a negative interpretation. Human frailty. That and the inability to discern "tone of voice" in a typed format.

Yes, the captilized "She"! I noticed that as well! Even in the scriptures "he" and "his" are not capitalized when referring to God. Why for the Madonna? But that really symbolizes how they came across to me: as "capitalizing", so to speak, the Fatima events, in an unusual way. Also, there were women associated with them who I addressed as "Sister" naturally assuming by their habit that they were nuns. But no, they were lay women, even married women, and they dressed in the manner of nuns, which I found peculiar.

I should say, in justice, however, that when I visited they were all very friendly and welcoming, and Father Gruner especially so. He seemed very intrigued about what the traditional Catholic outlay was like where I am. But, as I say, everything returned to Fatima, for him, like a fixation.

With respect to different ways in which the Mass may be presented in different settings, I suppose I am simply looking to read the impressions of this community in a way that is conversational rather than dissertational, in any event. For example, "yes, at my parish we have the dialogue Mass but I don't like it because..." or "at my chapel we have readings in the vernacular and I value this approach because..." Really, though, what I want to find out is if anyone has a sense of whether the Tridentine Mass is..."more alive"...so to speak, amongst the Traditional Catholic community than it is allowed to be in a diocesan setting. I thought it would make for an interesting conversation.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #9 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:53:22 PM »

Quote from: Retablo

And, of course, there are those present who, like myself, accept both forms, provided they are celebrated properly.

Well, I can understand why someone (at first, anyway) would accept the Novus Ordo Missae if it was celebrated reverently. Of course, I think Archbishop LeFebvre put it nicely when he said:

"The Novus Ordo Missae, even when celebrated with piety and respect for the liturgical rules, is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism... if bears within it a poison harmful to the Faith".

In other words, a Mass that was promulgated by Freemasons to please the Protestants is highly questionable in terms of validity and is insufficient no matter how reverent it is celebrated. To prove this point, the creator of the NO, Cardinal Bugnini (who was proven to be a Freemason), had this to say:

"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy, everything which is to be considered the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated bretheren... that is, for the Protestants".

I'll let you read the articles on your own behalf for more information. I hope that helps. God Bless you on your search for Tradition, Retablo.

Quote

In their settings I have encountered both the dialogue form of the Mass, and also, as I mentioned, a form in which the readings were in the vernacular instead of in Latin.

Interesting, where was this SSPX chapel located?

Retablo · « **Reply #10 on:** February 10, 2012, 09:23:57 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Retablo
And, of course, there are those present who, like myself, accept both forms, provided they are celebrated properly.

Well, I can understand why someone (at first, anyway) would accept the Novus Ordo Missae if it was celebrated reverently. Of course, I think Archbishop LeFebvre put it nicely when he said:

"The Novus Ordo Missae, even when celebrated with piety and respect for the liturgical rules, is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism... if bears within it a poison harmful to the Faith".

In other words, a Mass that was promulgated by Freemasons to please the Protestants is highly questionable in terms of validity and is insufficient no matter how reverent it is celebrated. To prove this point, the creator of the NO, Cardinal Bugnini (who was proven to be a Freemason), had this to say:

"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy, everything which is to be considered the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated bretheren... that is, for the Protestants".

I'll let you read the articles on your own behalf for more information. I hope that helps. God Bless you on your search for Tradition, Retablo.

Quote
In their settings I have encountered both the dialogue form of the Mass, and also, as I mentioned, a form in which the readings were in the vernacular instead of in Latin.

Interesting, where was this SSPX chapel located?

SpiritusSanctus:

I am not comfortable with the...actors...involved in the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae, and I am not comfortable with their motivations, either. I realize that Msgr. Bugnini was a suspicious character and that because of him and others, what might have been a splendid renewal of the liturgy instead became a less than satisfactory reform that left very much to be desired. Such men will have plenty to answer for one day. I do not believe their actions represented anything like Pope John's vision of a "Springtime".

Nevertheless the Holy Father Pope Paul VI did promulgate it, and I think he probably did so, not wholly pleased, himself, with the result, but worried about what further damage might result if he did not stop the "reforming" process wher it was and make typical what was there. Endless further reforms were being contemplated and endless Eucharistic Prayers. I think Pope Paul was bewildered and said, "Basta! It stops here! It's gone far enough and this is as far as it goes." As a result, something less good than what we had before becomes the result of it all, nevertheless something alot better than what many desired, I think.

At the end of the day, the Novus Ordo Missae, if it is celebrated in a way that respects the language and the traditional ars celebrandi of the Roman Rite, turns out, for me at any rate, not to be an unacceptable presentation of the Roman Liturgy, and certainly not an invalid one. But how often does one encounter that? Almost never! The Pope does it and that's about it. And that is a huge improvement over the way the last pope celebrated the Mass! When it is presented in a foolish way...as it is more often than not...then the post-Conciliar Mass becomes a very sad thing, indeed.

The chapel of the SSPX where the Latin/French Mass was celebrated was a priory, in fact, in a place called Shawinigan (I'm not sure I'm spelling that right) in French-speaking Canada. The chapel in the priory was interesting insofar as there were gold damask curtains on the windows. It was the first time I had ever seen window treatments in a church before. It looked like the parlour or dining hall of a French chateau, except fitted with pews and an altar instead of domestic furnishings.

Thorn · « **Reply #11 on:** February 10, 2012, 10:20:17 PM »

Thanks, Retablo, for replying regarding Fr. Gruner. That was MOST interesting about the laywomen dressing as nuns. I never knew that & it just might explain a certain independent chapel whose priest is on very friendly terms with Fr. Gruner, allowing a woman there to wear a habit too. Except this woman IS called 'Sister'!!!! & goes about pretending to be one!! The church is in great distress.

Retablo · « **Reply #12 on:** February 10, 2012, 11:24:28 PM »

Quote from: Thorn

The church is in great distress.

Amen to that, brother. Amen to that.