(Quote) John-220051 said: But the ancient rites of the Church were not put together by a committee to conform to the tastes...
(Quote) John-220051 said:
But the ancient rites of the Church were not put together by a committee to conform to the tastes of the spirit of the age, which is precisely what Abp. Bugnini said he did in directing the committee that wrote the post-Vatican II liturgies.
The Eucharistic prayers 2,3,4,etc. are synthetic. The liturgical calendar of the Novus Ordo completely threw away over 1,000 years of liturgical evolution. Ember Days and so forth were discarded. For what reason?
The Novus Ordo was completely unnecessary.
You were there when the ancient liturgies were developed?
Even the liturgies of the East attributed to ST. John C; do you believe he sat down and thought it all up by himself, wrote it up and said here do it my way? His sermons were long. Took me up to over an hour to read just one of them and my reading speed is over 600 WPM. Are the sermons in the Eastern rites as long today?
According to the Scriptures, the original liturgy was part of a communal meal. Not just the receiving of the body and blood of Christ, but a regular feast with drinking of wine along with the meal. Have you forgotten the fellow who drank too much and fell out of a window to his death described in Acts?
As a result of that, and probably similar occurrences, the celebration of the Eucharist was separated from communal meals. So that step in the development of the mass was, in fact, a response to the tastes of the age, in this case, in a negative sense.
As time went on, further development introduced more pomp and circumstances precisely to satisfy the needs of people of the age for pomp and circumstances or to make the Mass MORE MEANINGFUL to the people. Exactly a couple of the purposes of some of the changes in the NO.
You were not around to hear and be part of the complaints about the TLM that existed from the time I started school in 1939. What were those complaints? The mass is in Latin and we can't understand it. The priest does not face us and we can't really see what is going on. There are too many Holy Days. What do the sermons have to do with the readings or anything else for that matter? Its ridiculous for the Christmas season to last until February. We can't stand the chant, why don't we sing hymns we understand? and on and on.
All prayers are synthetic until they are accepted and used. Or do you believe, Christ came down and dictated each and every prayer ever used in the Mass to some Saint He used as His scribe? As far as I know He only specified one prayer. All others attributed to Him came from Private revelations that even when approved, the Church says we don't have to pay attention to them.
Get real and grow up. I don't care for the NO any more than all those complaining here. But I refuse to take the position that because I don't like it, there must be something fundamentally wrong in the theological sense. Did it accomplish the purpose for its creation. Obviously no. The developers failed to take into account any potential unintended consequences, especially in light of the turmoil both inside and outside of the Church.
Even Pope Benedict XVI who feels strongly that the reform requires reform, never went so far as to say the NO should be thrown out. He did say it needed to be brought into a state of more intrinsic reverence to it; to more clearly illustrate the ties to the past that are there.