Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
The Mass and how it is celebrated -Rites & rites. ; The differing, traditions Rites and Uses."
Topic Started: Sunday, 5. November 2006, 16:43 (2,338 Views)
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Nelly there are at least three reasons for Mass being offered in Polish for the Polish immigrants:

1 At our Masses, even if those Poles who do not understand English, follow the Mass from missals in their own language, they cannot understand the sermon, bidding prayers or notices.

2 A Polish speaking priest is available to hear confessions in the immigrants' own language.

3 Although Britain has a long heritage of accepting immigrants from other lands most of the Polish immigrants come here to earn some money, save up and then return to Poland in a few years time. My guess is that a lot of them will fall in love with English girls, marry, and stay here. Time will tell.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

Nelly,
We don’t get uptight about the Rite. If you were to attend one of the other churches then the Rite they use is the proper one. What most people object to are the liberties some Priests take within the Latin Rite. Each Rite has it’s own rules, ours is the Roman Missal. In it each word, which must be said, and each action, which must be done by Priests, Deacons, and servers is written in the book. The church tells us we may not deviate from this, yet many Priests seem to have a need to make the Mass his own. That is where we have problems with the Liturgy.

The Eastern churches come from different cultures and their Divine Liturgy (our Mass) developed differently. I don’t think they find ours inferior, just different and since the introduction of the new Mass, lacking in the beauty and mystery of what we had before.

Each of the Eastern churches, with the exception of the Maronites, has an Orthodox counter part. The Ukrainian may be an Orthodox congregation. Normally here in the US if there are not enough people of a certain Rite to support a separate Parish, they assimilate into a Latin Rite Parish.

Polish immigrants founded my Parish in 1935, and we have two Masses in Polish each weekend. The other 5 are in English. Many come here to work, with the intention of going back to Poland. Few actually return there. I have been told that even with the money, the things they become used to here are not readily available back in Poland.
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Deacon Robert,

I, for one, find the history of the Eastern rites quite fascinating.

One thing I don't quite understand, however, is this:

These rites remained largely unaffected by the changes made by V2 and were guaranteed that their traditions remained intact. Why wasn't this the case for the Latin rite?
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
nelly k

Deacon Robert,
Can I say I am intrested in the question Patrick has put, can you show me or link me with the poper Rite, the thing is I see Mass as Mass and still dont really know what an abuse is, you think I would by now :rolleyes:
Rose I take your point about the Polish. nelly
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

Patrick, I think I touched a nerve when I asked for an answer to your question.

Quote:
 
Vatican II was an event of the entire Catholic Church, and its impact has been felt significantly by ALL of us.

You seem to be confusing "rites" (as in liturgical rites) with what we NOW prefer to call Churches of the Catholic Church.  In other words, we would now more appropriately refer to Latin Catholics as Latin Catholics, or Catholics in the Latin Church.  Similarly we no longer refer to Maronite Catholics as members of the Maronite RITE, but the Maronite Church.  This reflects not only a kind of "political correctness" but it actually reflects the LAW of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

Now, were the liturgical rites of these Eastern Churches significantly affected by Vatican II?  I will leave detailed responses to that from our Eastern Catholic brothers, but there were certainly some changes.  In many ways, the focus was on the Latin Church on LITURGICAL ISSUES, because the Latin Church was in need of the greatest reform.  However, it is critically important to appreciate that the Council was about ALL Catholics, whatever church they were in.  So, the theologies/ecclesiologies developed in Lumen Gentium, for example, apply to ALL of us; the pastoral implications of Gaudium et Spes, for example, apply to ALL of us.  The documents on ecumenism and interfaith relationships apply to ALL of us.


I think you were specifically asking why many things appeared to have changed in our celebration of Mass, our church buildings, and availability of various devotions, when the Eastern Churches have not.

This may be true or not. I am waiting to see if an Eastern Deacon will respond.
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

An Eastern Deacon responded, and simply put very little was changed in their celebration of Liturgy. Both Eastern and Western churches were meant to go back to their roots. Apparently we had farther to go. In their case the command was to "go East" which I take to mean remove those things that Latinization forced on them. His explaination is much better and more detailed than mine. I stupidly lost his e-mail. If I can recover it I will post some of it.
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Deacon Robert
Nov 9 2006, 08:06 PM
Patrick, I think I touched a nerve when I asked for an answer to your question.

Quote:
 
Vatican II was an event of the entire Catholic Church, and its impact has been felt significantly by ALL of us.

You seem to be confusing "rites" (as in liturgical rites) with what we NOW prefer to call Churches of the Catholic Church.  In other words, we would now more appropriately refer to Latin Catholics as Latin Catholics, or Catholics in the Latin Church.  Similarly we no longer refer to Maronite Catholics as members of the Maronite RITE, but the Maronite Church.  This reflects not only a kind of "political correctness" but it actually reflects the LAW of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

Now, were the liturgical rites of these Eastern Churches significantly affected by Vatican II?  I will leave detailed responses to that from our Eastern Catholic brothers, but there were certainly some changes.  In many ways, the focus was on the Latin Church on LITURGICAL ISSUES, because the Latin Church was in need of the greatest reform.  However, it is critically important to appreciate that the Council was about ALL Catholics, whatever church they were in.  So, the theologies/ecclesiologies developed in Lumen Gentium, for example, apply to ALL of us; the pastoral implications of Gaudium et Spes, for example, apply to ALL of us.  The documents on ecumenism and interfaith relationships apply to ALL of us.

Deacon Robert,

It certainly looks like it!

Anyway, I found this on EWTN that explains Catholic Rites and Churches

Quote:
 
I think you were specifically asking why many things appeared to have changed in our celebration of Mass, our church buildings, and availability of various devotions, when the Eastern Churches have not.


Yes, I was. Along the lines of 'Why did the Tridentine Rite get shelved in favour of a New Mass and other things that were done away with, but the Eastern Churches and their liturgies and their traditions etc remained as they were before the Council?

Quote:
 
This may be true or not. I am waiting to see if an Eastern Deacon will respond.


I note from your second post in relation to this, you kind of mislaid the email... Hopefully, you'll be able to retrieve it. If not, don't worry.

Deacon Robert, I appreciate the time and effort you are taking here with us on this thread, thank you.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

I was able to retrieve the e-mail from the server archives. I am posting the relavent part, the rest is personal correspondence.

Quote:
 
To answer your question as simply as possible, I'd have to say there've
been no changes in the Divine Liturgy of the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic
Church.  Now, Eastern traditions, which were abandoned for various reasons
by many of the Eastern Catholic Churches decades ago, have since been
largely reclaimed after Vatican II basically told the Eastern Catholic
Churches to "go East." This might make a difference in the overall worship
from the 1960s to now, depending on the parish.

Since Vatican II, the Byzantine Churches and our sister Churches of the
other Eastern Rites have been working to restore the purity and
authenticity of our liturgical practices. Over the centuries, through a
variety of circumstances, many of these had been heavily latinized -
particularly in the Diaspora. The extent to which this renewal/restoration
has been accomplished still varies considerably from Church to Church -
from jurisdiction to jurisdiction within a given Church - and sometimes
even from parish to parish within a given jurisdiction.


The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Gerard

Deacon Robert
Nov 9 2006, 08:46 PM
An Eastern Deacon responded, and simply put very little was changed in their celebration of Liturgy. Both Eastern and Western churches were meant to go back to their roots. Apparently we had farther to go. In their case the command was to "go East" which I take to mean remove those things that Latinization forced on them. His explaination is much better and more detailed than mine. I stupidly lost his e-mail. If I can recover it I will post some of it.

Decn Robert,

I liked this. And I agree with that statement I have emboldened. And thts partly why I said above that I liked the sound of these other rites (or churches of the catholic church)

Patrick,

I have sggested before that you (and many traditionalists) want to back to a Tridentine "golden age" whereas I (and many charismatics) want to go back even further to an early church "golden age". We have more in common than is obvious at first sight.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Gerard
Nov 10 2006, 02:43 PM
Patrick,

I have sggested before that you (and many traditionalists) want to back to a Tridentine "golden age" whereas I (and many charismatics) want to go back even further to an early church "golden age". We have more in common than is obvious at first sight.

My dear friend,

I had to read your post to me twice.

Let me try and explain something:

The Tridentine Mass organically developed from the first Mass. The New Mass, which was a split from that organic development will not, in any way, shape or form, provide a means of getting back to that 'Early Church golden age' that you so desire.

Let's create a hypothetical situation. It's 2010. Following the sessions of the Third Vatican Council, it is decided to scrap the New Mass and to scrap the Old, and start again, with the Mass as it was at the very beginning as instituted by Our Lord.

Now, as the years pass, you and I will be dead. The Mass will probably be similar to the one you and I assisted at in 2010. Centuries later, our descendants will be assisting at Tridentine Masses. The New Mass wouldn't even figure. Why? Because the Tridentine is a natural and organic development from that 'golden age'.

So, really, what you are after, will evolve naturally into the Tridentine Mass anyway.

THey're my thoughts, anyhow.

Am I making any sense?

Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Gerard

Patrick,

I do not accept your underlying premise that the two Masses are so different. The big difference is the language. After that, the other things are small.

I would say more but I fear there would be no point.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Gerard
Nov 10 2006, 03:56 PM
I do not accept your underlying premise that the two Masses are so different. The big difference is the language. After that, the other things are small.

Gerard,

I am lost for words. So, instead, I will borrow some from the then Cardinal Ratzinger:

“After the Council… in place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product”.

Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Gerard

Patrick,

Pope Paul VI thopught it was OK.

Likewise Pope John Paul, The Great.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Gerard
Nov 10 2006, 04:37 PM
Patrick,

Pope Paul VI thopught it was OK.

Likewise Pope John Paul, The Great.

Gerry

Gerry,

They weren't the only ones who thought it was 'ok'. Here's a picture of six more people, alongside Pope Paul VI, who thought that the New Mass was 'ok':
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deacon Robert
Member Avatar

I have a copy of this on my computer, but this is the first I have found with the rubrics.

http://sor.cua.edu/Liturgy/Anaphora/Chrysostom.html
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Locked Topic