tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post2127704004215582650..comments2023-06-01T09:22:18.917+01:00Comments on Liturgiae Causa: The problem of Rome...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-55433620199109170942011-08-14T23:13:41.268+01:002011-08-14T23:13:41.268+01:00Albertus, my apologies - I misunderstood you to be...Albertus, my apologies - I misunderstood you to be making something like the "usual traditionalist argument" (i.e. that all was beautiful before the Council). I should have read you more carefully!Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05705761696437705220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-15991166743680307342011-08-14T15:40:54.510+01:002011-08-14T15:40:54.510+01:00CHristopher:
you write: ''I mean in parti...CHristopher: <br />you write: ''I mean in particular the almost complete loss of the solemnly celebrated Office and the "mass or nothing" outlook and the reductionism in the celebration of the Christian year which is nowadays not only in terms of minimalisation of seasons, but also even great feasts which are just tossed to whatever day they like.'' <br />But on the above points i fully agree here with both you, and Patricius, and Wickham Legg. I only meant to defend the integrity of the pre-conciliar Roman Mass and the pre-Pius-X Roman Divine Office in its objective texts, chants, ceremonies and rubrics. They were (and still are) ancient, holy and authentic. By saying that the Church needed only to restore their proper practice, I was perhaps minimalising, using the word ONLY, but for me the proper practice of the Roman Rite includes the regular celebration of the Divine Office inparishes (a custom which i still witnessed in my youth, though it had become rare), as well as the solemn and complete celebration of the high feast days, not only on their proper days, but with the prescribed processions, etc. What i am trying to say is that everything was there in theory before the 2nd Vatican Council, it just had to be repristined and celebrated. Nothing needed to be invented to replace the traditional Liturgy which had fallen into misuse and unuse through no fault of its own. Enlgish is not my native toungue. I'll try to write more clearly in the future!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-80171844896063485292011-08-13T23:12:36.353+01:002011-08-13T23:12:36.353+01:00Great quote, Patricius - I particularly like "...Great quote, Patricius - I particularly like "Back to Pugin". If I were of a certain persuasion I might even put it on a mug or a pin badge or a t-shirt on cafe press...<br /><br />Tom - couldn't agree more!<br /><br />Albertus: if Wickham-Legg (who is most well known to me as the complier of the Sarum Missal) is right that "the liturgy of modern [even, "modern" from our as well as his point of view] Rome is the liturgy of the Franciscan Friars" (and, sadly, I think he is) then surely there was a more wholesale problem prior to the Council than just bad practice and neglect? He actually seems to identify some of those problems which have really come to light following the liturgical reform: I mean in particular the almost complete loss of the solemnly celebrated Office and the "mass or nothing" outlook and the reductionism in the celebration of the Christian year which is nowadays not only in terms of minimalisation of seasons, but also even great feasts which are just tossed to whatever day they like.<br /><br />sortacatholic: I looked up δέομαι just to try to work out why you were spending your time thinking about it (oh dear). Anyway, I must confess that after finding 22 occurrences (mostly in Luke/Acts) I am none the wiser about it, except for its relationship to δέησις and all that implies... ;o)<br /><br />ChristopherChristopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05705761696437705220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-42111368845748958342011-08-13T20:17:18.790+01:002011-08-13T20:17:18.790+01:00Sadly no, I don't use Facebook, Google+ or the...Sadly no, I don't use Facebook, Google+ or the like. I've been online for almost 20 years, so I'm a bit battle-worn from spam. Besides, my life is the <i>boringest</i> life ever. Normal people don't spend their time thinking about the incidences of δέομαι in the New Testament. It's no surprise that I'm in my early 30's, without a finished dissertation, and living in a flat that would make East Berlin concrete housing blocks seem like the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Nothing to see here. Move on to the next exhibit.<br /><br />I'd give an anonymous address here, but that might bring unwanted traffic to Patricius' blog. If Patricius wants to risk it, fine. <br /><br />sortacatholicAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-82106415016240474392011-08-13T19:33:28.927+01:002011-08-13T19:33:28.927+01:00Dr. J W-L knew a thing or two and was a prophet wh...Dr. J W-L knew a thing or two and was a prophet who was, sadly, largely unheeded.<br /><br />His prediction of what would happen to the Canon after the "thing of yesterday" new Pian Breviary was spot on.Rubricariushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05050302650867319277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-13054862142484896122011-08-13T14:50:08.157+01:002011-08-13T14:50:08.157+01:00Sortacatholic,
may i ask whether you are at Faceb...Sortacatholic, <br />may i ask whether you are at Facebook?<br />AlbertusAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-44497738831486210532011-08-13T14:49:27.516+01:002011-08-13T14:49:27.516+01:00Very interesting quote, but let's not forget t...Very interesting quote, but let's not forget the end : ''The end of this paper will have been attained if I should succeed in persuading some ecclesiologists that all that is Roman is not ancient, and all that is English is not Puritan.''<br />These final words of the quote seem to say that much of what was currently Roman was indeed ancient (but certainly NOT ALL of it), whilst some of current English (does he mean ''anglican''?) practice had nothing to do with Puritanism, but was of earlier, mediaevel origin. He makes a sensible call for study and discernment based upon sound principles as opposed to mindless scrapping and blind aping of others. Would that the Vatican II liturgists had read your John Wickham Legg. There were - naturally - things wrong with the pre-conciliar practice of the Roman-rite. But all that need be done was to set the practice aright. The texts, chants and ceremonies did not need to be abolished, as if they were somehow at fault, and not those who neglected them, or practiced them wrongly. The early liturgical movement was on the right track, but, alas, was hijacked by those seeking to scrap all they deemed to be 'repetitioius'', ''unpastoral'' and ''mediaevel'', paste together things from diverse ancient and modern sources, invent much ex nihilo, and copy the worst of what others had to offer, in the name of a false oecumenism. The result was the Novus Ordo. I have mixed feelings about the popular devotions in march, may, june, october and november. They should not silence or overwhelm the liturgical year, which must have priority. But they can, when doen the proper way, enhance the liturgical year. But the subject would take too much space to consider. Besides, it has recently been discussed at the New Liturgical Movement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-86789060158202801742011-08-13T07:13:08.839+01:002011-08-13T07:13:08.839+01:00Patricius, you'd like the local Anglo-Catholic...Patricius, you'd like the local Anglo-Catholics here in Montreal. It's Dearmer cubed. The A-Cers sing hymns and propers constantly. Only once have I seen a fiddleback. The architecture is 16th century, not Baroque. The clergy wear the big surplices that Tom C notes. It's plenty more Catholic than some Novus Ordo joint belting out "Shine Jesus Shine" or some other horrid hymn. <br /><br />I've often wondered why some of the A-C parishioners haven't passed out on the floor with cyanosis after the xteenth verse of an <i>English Hymnal</i> favorite, however. Singing is so useless. It interferes with bead telling and prayerbook reading. Chanting is fine because it is the only authentic form of Christian accompaniment. Organs are loud and scary beastly things best saved for skating rinks and the like. ::cringe::<br /><br />Maybe it's a good thing that I'm categorically denied the priesthood because I am poofteriffic and not afraid to say it. I am not a normal one, however, given that I love pietist Masses and lack aesthetic sense to the point of colorblindness.<br /><br />sortacatholicAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8192580971664762668.post-82684281135237822072011-08-12T21:12:55.155+01:002011-08-12T21:12:55.155+01:00Yuck, that lace is horrible. But even without lace...Yuck, that lace is horrible. But even without lace I don't really like the Roman cut. The full ("English") surplice, that is true beauty. Elegant drapery, wide sleeves. I daresay it is the most beautiful vestment. You just can't go wrong with it.<br /><br />I like Dearmer's introductory picture of a Low Church celebration in the book "Illustrations of the Liturgy". Much better than the forced and unnatural division in "Low Mass" and "High Mass".<br /><br />The quote is very interesting. Sadly, the situation in Rome has worsened since it was written.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06820001463809982324noreply@blogger.com