+ Pax Dear Doctor Chapp, Just a note to cheer you on in your very, very good work in the vineyard of the Lord. Another great interview. I agree with everything you and Bishop Conley have said about what should be recovered in the Mass to enhance, transform, and lift up our lives in the Mystical Body of Christ. All the enhancements, as you point out, are already found in the Ordinariate Mass. Like you, I love it. It is indeed a beautiful vehicle for the Divine to transform us into Christ. It embodies so well the joining together of heaven and earth. . These conversations are a tremendous consolation to me. I just listened to the ones with Gavin Ashenden. Thank you once again. Sincerely In Christ Jesus, Larry Clarence Lewis London, Ontario, Canada.
Many years ago, I heard of Card. Ratzinger's book, The Spirit of the Liturgy. I had been at Mass that morning, lamenting how distracted the priest saying Mass was. I thought that many problems within the liturgy would be corrected if the priest faced East and not the people. I then started reading the book and found Cardinal Ratzinger's critique of the abandonment of Ad Orientem. I became excited and concluded it was not a mistake that I had "discovered" this. I believe that the practice of Ad Orientem, and beautiful music (Gregorian Chant and other reverent music) would resurrect a sacred Mass. Eventually, it would lead us to the intended Mass of the Council fathers. It might even calm the Rad Trads.
It’s so much more than the way the priest faces. Read Michael Davis Trilogy (Google it). You will realize the Protestant swing of the liturgy has been going on for a long time. VII made so many changes that make zero sense. There was no organic growth. It was rip and replace. If you look all over the world the church is shrinking and contracting. There is growth in the traditional circles. SSPX building multi-million dollar cathedrals and all paid for. For some reason the Vatican attacks those who simply want to workshop the way the entire church did for 1000 plus years.
I always hear that the Council Fathers wanted the Latin to remain, but right from jump, the pope was offering Mass versus populum and entirely in Italian/vernacular.
Just a remark (occasioned by the phrase "we're incarnational beings"): Last week at Sunday Mass, a dear friend (a protestant) attended Mass with my wife and I. (This was, as she admitted later, only the second time in her life that she had ever been present at a Catholic Mass.) As it turned out, we were celebrating the feast day of our parish's patron saint, St. Timothy. Therefore, there happened to be---in addition to the standing and kneeling and bowing--a fair amount of incense (of the altar, a relic, the priest, and the congregation). Her reaction afterwards: She was really, really attracted by the engagement of so many bodily senses! I have to add that our parish so participates in the liturgy--especially the singing (and the prayers that are sung)--that "the average parishioner in the pew" could feel that THEY were part of the choir! I think that she was impressed that the whole congregation "knew their parts" (e.g., the Creed, "and with your spirit", etc., etc.) by heart! Such a dialogic participation on the part of a whole congregation certainly left its mark!
I’m for the penitential prayer to be at the very beginning. Beautiful to Praise God all through the Holy Mass in a reverent and Holy state of penitence. It is right and just. 🙏❤️
Thank you for this discussion. Are these positive changes really that difficult to implement on a local level? I was at a NO Mass the other day and the priest gave a good homily on why people should have more belief in the Eucharist, but at that same Mass a lady sang 10,000 reasons, from a hymnal if i remember correctly. Am I the only one thats seeing a problem with that?
I think 90 percent of the people would be happier if they just would stop the inane, shrieky voiced single lady from singing songs nobody ever heard of!
I'm a formation deanery mentor in eleven parishes and attend the TLM, elsewhere in the Archdiocese. The rapid pace of the transition from the Latin Mass to the NO cannot be permitted to occur again. Yes, doctrine develops; it develops gradually at the behest of the Holy Ghost. This principle was absent implementing the VII changes which, as I see it, where located largely within the dimension of immanence. The third person of the Holy Trinity has been increasingly side-lined and we are reaping a bitter harvest. In hoc signo vinces +.
Having lived before and after Vatican II (I'm old enough to remember the death of Pius XII), I have to differ on why the radical changes were so easily accepted. First point is the Catholic culture at the time held priests and bishops in such high regard that if you were told the Mass was changing and that this is what we're going to do now, few questioned it, at least publicly. I do not recall a single positive or negative comment as a child from my parents or anyone I knew. The priest said we were going to change the format of the Mass, so we accepted the change. Second point is that lowering the bar gave people the impression that things such as Mass on Sunday were not as important as it used to be. Vows were not as important as they used to be. Loving your neighbor was paramount, until it wasn't, and God would understand. God,wasn't interested in how you dressed or behaved, He was just glad you were doing something. As, in education and other aspects of life, when you lower the bar, you get a decrease in what is important. The importance of refocusing the Liturgy to worship of God and not ourselves is vitally important. We are not in church to feel good or be entertained; we are there to give thanks to and worship our Creator. We do that best re-presenting via the priest Christ's passion and death. This is an awesome moment. Kumbaya is not appropriate.
Botte and Bouyer had decades of experience on the Hippolytan canon and the idea to use it had been floated for some time. He had a time crunch on having to bring it together but not a time crunch on the idea. Also his own words about his process make the idea that he had a mere time crunch unreliable since he speaks about having found a particular text to fill out important parts of the Canon and I mean unless he had a library in the cafe to draw from I very much doubt the time pressed account.
@@bsoroud I'm trying to do this in a way that is as polite to Bouyer as possible given the circumstances. Read the text. Botte the "confrere" Chapp mentioned in passing for writing EPII was an expert on the Hippolytan canon- indeed, probably the premier expert at the time. Bouyer was himself no slouch on the text. The use of the text in some form or another had been floated for quite some time. And in his own testimony Bouyer writes about him and Botte preparing texts for the composition of EPII and that he himself had found something from some source, I don't remember if he mentions it, to fill in an important gap. Moreover, it becomes obvious if you pay attention to what he's saying that what he was rushed on was not the whole prayer but on the section he was in charge of, which was basically a few sentences. The entailment on these things is as follows: 1. The idea that it was a simple rush job is misleading since if you have two experts who have been working on the text and have been thinking about the idea for quite some time then most of the work is done and you just need to go ahead and put it on paper. 2. The idea that it was an afternoon in the cafe kind of thing does not even make sense if what Bouyer says about his own composition is true. Did he find the text for the section he was in charge of at the cafe? No, obviously he found it somewhere else and then had to put together his two or three sentence contribution at the cafe the day before he had to submit it from text he had already found elsewhere. This is not an arduous or extremely time sensitive task.
@@riverrun7061 Bouyer's memoirs are rather petty and vindictive at some points, and his recounting of the finishing touches on EP2 is a great example of that. Botte's "From Silence to Participation" was I felt like a far more evenhanded, positive and reasonable account.
Good question. I think it has to do with the fact that people started being advertised as "liturgical experts" and people trusted them to make changes. Unfortunately these liturgical experts were often flaky as hell. But before the internet, very few lay people were able to read the documents of Vatican II unless they were especially willing to pay out to buy a book. So we sort of had to trust "the experts" and they got it wrong.
The Concilium that was put in charge of the reform that produced the Novus ordo did want to get rid of Latin. The reform that was issued by the Sacred Congregation for Rites in 1965 did retain the priest’s prayers, including the Canon, in Latin. But, there’s no doubt that they were getting rid of it. Paul VI, in introducing the new Mass, lamented that it would no longer be Latin, but the mother tongue that is heard, while telling us all how great it was.
I would argue that since it is essentially the priest who is offering the sacrifice, the "active participation" mantra is really based on a protestant ethos. The laity ought not to think they are essential to the action of the Mass, their level of engagement is achieved on an individual basis.
I think one of the root causes of this issue is the fact that people don't understand what the Mass is. Catholic laity's thinking have been protesantised quite a lot and the Church hierarchy haven't done much to catechise in this area. Actually, quite often the hierarchy were responsible themselves for protesantising!
Just a musing (and honestly a perspective that I have been teaching when given opportunity to do so): the Vatican II use of the term "active participation" just may be a co-opting and mis-translating of the real term "participatio actuosus" as used by Pius X in "Tra le Sollecitudini" on sacred music in 1903 - so that in more recent times they could make the concept of "participation in worship" more about human "doing" and the human centered approach that has come to be generally accepted and defended to the point that (for example) Benedict XVI's allowance of the 1962 rites in "Summorum Pontificum" was/is a threat to everything that the post-counciliar Church has conventionally promoted and valued in worship, even if blindly, to make it more "about us." I believe the better and more grounded translation of the term "participatio actuosus" is "actual participation," which is able to imply far more than simply "doing" within the worship, as it can be understood as "actually participating" in the life of God (grace) that is produced and offered to us through the sacramental worship of the Church - which therefore keeps the primacy on God's work, with our call first being one of receptivity and saying "yes" (like the Virgin Mary) and therefore partaking of what He offers to us, followed by the giving of ourselves to Him in return in an "exchange of love." Thus, the term "actual participation" is founded upon the understanding of partaking of the "covenant relationship" which the Lord Himself wills for us to share through the Gospel and the accomplishment of redemption - with our surrender of faith to Him through baptism becoming that which opens to us the fullness of that covenant love in the life of the Church and all her sacraments, and particularly in the Eternal Wedding Feast of Heaven. Thus, our "actual" partaking of the Holy Mass is the ratification and renewal of the exchange of covenant love for which God made us - as a foretaste of the perfection and completion of this exchange in heaven.
By the way (lest I not acknowledge the two of you for your time and perspective): this entire conversation was fantastic! Thank you for sharing your insights!
Did I miss any reference to the Cure d'Ars ? His parishioners were all provided the Liber Usuralis (sp?)... So I always assumed that he inspired Pius X's liturgical movement. No?
It's time to revert to the Traditional Latin mass and the Council of Trent Catechism. It would be nice to go on pilgrimages where TLM mass is offered daily.
Nonsense. If you could break away from your cult beliefs for one second, and listen to Mr. Chapp carefully, you would realize that much of the cultic sayings are hogwash. You believe you are holier than JP II and Benedict all rolled into one? Because the real Catechism of the Catholic church put out in 1992 is by far the best - except to the cultists.
The Old calendar is important, three year reading cycle is ridiculous, especially when so much of that "extra" scripture can be read in short form and "difficult" passages are omitted.
Nonsense. It is much better to hear 3 times as much scripture in the mass. How can you complain against getting MORE scripture during the mass? You have a point about "difficult" passages being excluded, however. It would be worth seeing whether certain types of people had a hand in excluding some of those difficult passages. Sometimes those are the ones people need to hear.
@@tomthx5804 it's not nonsense. Nonsense is omitting from the entire three year cycle St Paul’s exhortation to examine our worthiness to approach the Eucharist lest we condemn ourselves by partaking unworthily (1 Cor. 11:27-29). The focus of the Mass is the sacrifice, not the readings and homily which in the NO is seen as on the same level as the sacrifice. The Mass is not for "reading scripture" There is the Office and spiritual reading time to devote to the Bible which we can do any time we want. Also no other Apostolic liturgy has three year cycle, innovation for the sake of innovation. When the NO dies out nobody will lament its passing, despite the "more scripture" it supposedly has.
@@tomthx5804 He's got a good point. With matters of worship we don't operate from a principle of "more is better". There are small verses that I've had to meditate on for a week or more.
@tomthx5804 but the lectionary is about so much more than reading as much scripture as possible. In all the Church's rites, Latin, Byzantine etc, the lectionary is part of the liturgy as the 'first theology', the principal means of passing on the faith, and the lectionaries are very ancient. As soon as a committee overturns something, there is no way of being able to appreciate what is being lost (the Chesterton's fence principle). For example, the Divine Office used to have Genesis from Septuagesima, as returning to the Fall was a pre-Lenten preparation. Of course, the reformers could have expanded out from the old lectionary by having the old as 'Year A', but instead they decided to simply abolish it, so we are left with a 'first theology' determined by a very particular committee in a very particular time, and not a 'first theology' with its roots in the early church. Indeed, even Cranmer kept the Eucharistic lectionary intact in his order for Holy Communion (unfortunately not currently used in the Ordinariate). There are other aspects of the reform which could have been entirely in keeping with this, such as the introduction of a weekday lectionary, but to scrap the while lectionary and simply start again is a real problem for a Church claiming to represent an Apostolic tradition and points to the Latin Church's problem of having become, especially since Trent, overly-legalistic and centralised.
Wouldn’t you say that all that bowing, kneeling and genuflecting is laity also participating in the liturgy? Isn’t there a theological significance to the triple, or triune repetitions?
Is the Ordinariate liturgy done differently in America? Here in England it is barely distinguishable from the New Mass in most places. It would be nice to see a full restoration of the Sarum Rite.
Really loved 1. The bishop is a TLM celebrant, 2.. that TLM requires total "in the now" focus for the entirety of the Mass such that there's little room for celebrant innovations, 3. Euch Prayer2 is "barely" sufficient. I attend TLM about twice a year; it probably does take a PHD in rocket science to grasp it all -- but its mystery and magesty compels. Vatican power mongers have logically targeted TLM, so much so that its telling me to get started on that PHD.
Great video! Would add altar girls to the list. Destructive to vocations, did not appease the woman-priest pushers, and it was called an "evil practice" by Benedict XIV in Allatae Sunt.
New evangelization. I just think of Protestant churches where the old folk go to one service and listen to Michael Talbott on the big screen, then the Gen X service starts and they play Amy Grant, then after filling the adults out the side door, they play Katie Nichol for the Gen Z audience. And nobody is ever transformed and the generational disunity of our broader society is reinforced.
It also ensures traditions just die from gen to gen and there isn’t any sort of continuity with generations long gone. Each generation reinventing itself from scratch to appeal to modern trends
Also, not just a trained choir but also a children's choir that performs at a mass each week. I chant the Our Father still based on the one we did in our 9am children's choir. Children learn music by singing.
@@Deathbytroll absolutely right about traditions. I work with a homeschool co-op helping teach music to young people, mostly 8 to 14 years old. Doing my little part to make sure they know the old hymns and chant (Pange Lingua, Adoro Te Devote etc). Adults set too low of a bar for kids, they are capable of learning Latin no problem. (And we should learn Latin/gregorian chant, at least if we want to be obedient to Vatican 2 and Sacrosanctum Concilium). One thing I have observed though, is there is a generational rupture. What 10-year-old can sing a melody from mass that his grandparents sang? The Protestants have amazing grace and it is well with my soul. Wonderful for them. But the Catholic patrimony has been chopped off at the knees largely, at least from my observation in my little neck of the woods. We need generational continuity, and I don't mean on eagle's wings and here I am Lord. We need to move on. We can do better. Our children deserve better
14:55 ....What did the early Church's Mass look like?.... forgive me, Mr C, if you go in a different direction. I haven't finished the video. That question does seem to be heading in an 'antiquarian' direction. those required signs of reverence towards the Sacrament grew gradually as the Church's appreciation of the Sacrament deepened. By the same token the VII liturgists must have known that stripping away gestures of reverence will eventually 'sink in' to the generations of Catholic school children taught/pressured to receive Jesus like they are waiting for their change at the 7-11. In my diocese, Corpus Christi, it seems that children who go to little public schools (far from our big city) are the only ones that still receive on the tongue. They apparently didn't get the memo.😊 YET🙁 It's kind of like modern gnosticism....how people act with their bodies doesn't affect what they believe in their souls.....the same goes for Fiducia Supplicans.... The children are watching . They get the Tucho's drift🙁 31:48.... "the rapidity of how Americans threw off the Latin Mass proves the inadequacy of the Latin Mass... people were thrilled...." So thrilled that a majority stopped going to church altogether!!! Mr. C , God gives us crutches for a reason. We have many.... like Rosary beads....eg... I think if the Church were to crusade against Rosary beads (maybe as non-apostolic) , many lay people's prayer lives would fall flat? There you go! See how inadequate those Rosary crutches are? when our betters kick our crutches away, we fall flat! Proof positive! No more crutches! No more cripples get to heaven!
@@gaudiumetspes22dr.larrycha26 , Sorry, Professor!!! I'll get there...(had to go somewhere this morning) I love this episode....Your right, I haven't finished.
@@gaudiumetspes22dr.larrycha26 Hi Dr. Chapp, have you heard of or read ‘Why Catholics Can’t Sing’ by Thomas Day? I’ve heard anecdotally that it blames Irish monasticism and quiet contemplative low Masses influencing parish worship over time.
This was great. May God send us saints to renew our liturgical worship! Thank you bishop, thank you Larry
Amen
+
Pax
Dear Doctor Chapp,
Just a note to cheer you on in your very, very good work in the vineyard of the Lord. Another great interview. I agree with everything you and Bishop Conley have said about what should be recovered in the Mass to enhance, transform, and lift up our lives in the Mystical Body of Christ. All the enhancements, as you point out, are already found in the Ordinariate Mass. Like you, I love it. It is indeed a beautiful vehicle for the Divine to transform us into Christ. It embodies so well the joining together of heaven and earth.
.
These conversations are a tremendous consolation to me. I just listened to the ones with Gavin Ashenden. Thank you once again.
Sincerely In Christ Jesus,
Larry Clarence Lewis
London, Ontario, Canada.
I'm very glad I found your channel and your content!!!
Very enlightening conversation. Thank you. 🙏❤️
Many years ago, I heard of Card. Ratzinger's book, The Spirit of the Liturgy. I had been at Mass that morning, lamenting how distracted the priest saying Mass was. I thought that many problems within the liturgy would be corrected if the priest faced East and not the people. I then started reading the book and found Cardinal Ratzinger's critique of the abandonment of Ad Orientem. I became excited and concluded it was not a mistake that I had "discovered" this. I believe that the practice of Ad Orientem, and beautiful music (Gregorian Chant and other reverent music) would resurrect a sacred Mass. Eventually, it would lead us to the intended Mass of the Council fathers. It might even calm the Rad Trads.
It’s so much more than the way the priest faces. Read Michael Davis Trilogy (Google it). You will realize the Protestant swing of the liturgy has been going on for a long time. VII made so many changes that make zero sense. There was no organic growth. It was rip and replace.
If you look all over the world the church is shrinking and contracting. There is growth in the traditional circles. SSPX building multi-million dollar cathedrals and all paid for. For some reason the Vatican attacks those who simply want to workshop the way the entire church did for 1000 plus years.
It is so refreshing to hear the bishop speak about the liturgy this way. What a treasure!
I always hear that the Council Fathers wanted the Latin to remain, but right from jump, the pope was offering Mass versus populum and entirely in Italian/vernacular.
Just a remark (occasioned by the phrase "we're incarnational beings"): Last week at Sunday Mass, a dear friend (a protestant) attended Mass with my wife and I. (This was, as she admitted later, only the second time in her life that she had ever been present at a Catholic Mass.) As it turned out, we were celebrating the feast day of our parish's patron saint, St. Timothy. Therefore, there happened to be---in addition to the standing and kneeling and bowing--a fair amount of incense (of the altar, a relic, the priest, and the congregation).
Her reaction afterwards: She was really, really attracted by the engagement of so many bodily senses!
I have to add that our parish so participates in the liturgy--especially the singing (and the prayers that are sung)--that "the average parishioner in the pew" could feel that THEY were part of the choir!
I think that she was impressed that the whole congregation "knew their parts" (e.g., the Creed, "and with your spirit", etc., etc.) by heart! Such a dialogic participation on the part of a whole congregation certainly left its mark!
I’m for the penitential prayer to be at the very beginning. Beautiful to Praise God all through the Holy Mass in a reverent and Holy state of penitence. It is right and just. 🙏❤️
1:00:49 👍👍👍!!!
btw, speakin' o' Lincoln, 2010 I travelled from Peabody, MA to Mesopotamia with some of Bishop Bruskawitz's boys. Good people!!
❤❤❤Praying for our church ⛪ 🙏 ❤
Thank you for this discussion. Are these positive changes really that difficult to implement on a local level?
I was at a NO Mass the other day and the priest gave a good homily on why people should have more belief in the Eucharist, but at that same Mass a lady sang 10,000 reasons, from a hymnal if i remember correctly. Am I the only one thats seeing a problem with that?
I think 90 percent of the people would be happier if they just would stop the inane, shrieky voiced single lady from singing songs nobody ever heard of!
I'm a formation deanery mentor in eleven parishes and attend the TLM, elsewhere in the Archdiocese. The rapid pace of the transition from the Latin Mass to the NO cannot be permitted to occur again. Yes, doctrine develops; it develops gradually at the behest of the Holy Ghost. This principle was absent implementing the VII changes which, as I see it, where located largely within the dimension of immanence. The third person of the Holy Trinity has been increasingly side-lined and we are reaping a bitter harvest. In hoc signo vinces +.
Having lived before and after Vatican II (I'm old enough to remember the death of Pius XII), I have to differ on why the radical changes were so easily accepted.
First point is the Catholic culture at the time held priests and bishops in such high regard that if you were told the Mass was changing and that this is what we're going to do now, few questioned it, at least publicly. I do not recall a single positive or negative comment as a child from my parents or anyone I knew. The priest said we were going to change the format of the Mass, so we accepted the change.
Second point is that lowering the bar gave people the impression that things such as Mass on Sunday were not as important as it used to be. Vows were not as important as they used to be. Loving your neighbor was paramount, until it wasn't, and God would understand. God,wasn't interested in how you dressed or behaved, He was just glad you were doing something. As, in education and other aspects of life, when you lower the bar, you get a decrease in what is important.
The importance of refocusing the Liturgy to worship of God and not ourselves is vitally important. We are not in church to feel good or be entertained; we are there to give thanks to and worship our Creator. We do that best re-presenting via the priest Christ's passion and death. This is an awesome moment. Kumbaya is not appropriate.
Botte and Bouyer had decades of experience on the Hippolytan canon and the idea to use it had been floated for some time. He had a time crunch on having to bring it together but not a time crunch on the idea. Also his own words about his process make the idea that he had a mere time crunch unreliable since he speaks about having found a particular text to fill out important parts of the Canon and I mean unless he had a library in the cafe to draw from I very much doubt the time pressed account.
contrarian run
@@bsoroud I'm trying to do this in a way that is as polite to Bouyer as possible given the circumstances. Read the text. Botte the "confrere" Chapp mentioned in passing for writing EPII was an expert on the Hippolytan canon- indeed, probably the premier expert at the time. Bouyer was himself no slouch on the text. The use of the text in some form or another had been floated for quite some time. And in his own testimony Bouyer writes about him and Botte preparing texts for the composition of EPII and that he himself had found something from some source, I don't remember if he mentions it, to fill in an important gap. Moreover, it becomes obvious if you pay attention to what he's saying that what he was rushed on was not the whole prayer but on the section he was in charge of, which was basically a few sentences. The entailment on these things is as follows:
1. The idea that it was a simple rush job is misleading since if you have two experts who have been working on the text and have been thinking about the idea for quite some time then most of the work is done and you just need to go ahead and put it on paper.
2. The idea that it was an afternoon in the cafe kind of thing does not even make sense if what Bouyer says about his own composition is true. Did he find the text for the section he was in charge of at the cafe? No, obviously he found it somewhere else and then had to put together his two or three sentence contribution at the cafe the day before he had to submit it from text he had already found elsewhere. This is not an arduous or extremely time sensitive task.
@@riverrun7061 Bouyer's memoirs are rather petty and vindictive at some points, and his recounting of the finishing touches on EP2 is a great example of that. Botte's "From Silence to Participation" was I felt like a far more evenhanded, positive and reasonable account.
If it is true that the council fathers did not want to abandon latin how did exactly that occur from the get go?
Good question. I think it has to do with the fact that people started being advertised as "liturgical experts" and people trusted them to make changes. Unfortunately these liturgical experts were often flaky as hell. But before the internet, very few lay people were able to read the documents of Vatican II unless they were especially willing to pay out to buy a book. So we sort of had to trust "the experts" and they got it wrong.
The Concilium that was put in charge of the reform that produced the Novus ordo did want to get rid of Latin. The reform that was issued by the Sacred Congregation for Rites in 1965 did retain the priest’s prayers, including the Canon, in Latin. But, there’s no doubt that they were getting rid of it. Paul VI, in introducing the new Mass, lamented that it would no longer be Latin, but the mother tongue that is heard, while telling us all how great it was.
I would argue that since it is essentially the priest who is offering the sacrifice, the "active participation" mantra is really based on a protestant ethos. The laity ought not to think they are essential to the action of the Mass, their level of engagement is achieved on an individual basis.
Well said
I think one of the root causes of this issue is the fact that people don't understand what the Mass is. Catholic laity's thinking have been protesantised quite a lot and the Church hierarchy haven't done much to catechise in this area. Actually, quite often the hierarchy were responsible themselves for protesantising!
Just a musing (and honestly a perspective that I have been teaching when given opportunity to do so): the Vatican II use of the term "active participation" just may be a co-opting and mis-translating of the real term "participatio actuosus" as used by Pius X in "Tra le Sollecitudini" on sacred music in 1903 - so that in more recent times they could make the concept of "participation in worship" more about human "doing" and the human centered approach that has come to be generally accepted and defended to the point that (for example) Benedict XVI's allowance of the 1962 rites in "Summorum Pontificum" was/is a threat to everything that the post-counciliar Church has conventionally promoted and valued in worship, even if blindly, to make it more "about us."
I believe the better and more grounded translation of the term "participatio actuosus" is "actual participation," which is able to imply far more than simply "doing" within the worship, as it can be understood as "actually participating" in the life of God (grace) that is produced and offered to us through the sacramental worship of the Church - which therefore keeps the primacy on God's work, with our call first being one of receptivity and saying "yes" (like the Virgin Mary) and therefore partaking of what He offers to us, followed by the giving of ourselves to Him in return in an "exchange of love." Thus, the term "actual participation" is founded upon the understanding of partaking of the "covenant relationship" which the Lord Himself wills for us to share through the Gospel and the accomplishment of redemption - with our surrender of faith to Him through baptism becoming that which opens to us the fullness of that covenant love in the life of the Church and all her sacraments, and particularly in the Eternal Wedding Feast of Heaven. Thus, our "actual" partaking of the Holy Mass is the ratification and renewal of the exchange of covenant love for which God made us - as a foretaste of the perfection and completion of this exchange in heaven.
By the way (lest I not acknowledge the two of you for your time and perspective): this entire conversation was fantastic! Thank you for sharing your insights!
Did I miss any reference to the Cure d'Ars ? His parishioners were all provided the Liber Usuralis (sp?)... So I always assumed that he inspired Pius X's liturgical movement. No?
Sunday mass attendance 1970 50%. Now ?
It's time to revert to the Traditional Latin mass and the Council of Trent Catechism. It would be nice to go on pilgrimages where TLM mass is offered daily.
Nonsense. If you could break away from your cult beliefs for one second, and listen to Mr. Chapp carefully, you would realize that much of the cultic sayings are hogwash. You believe you are holier than JP II and Benedict all rolled into one? Because the real Catechism of the Catholic church put out in 1992 is by far the best - except to the cultists.
The Old calendar is important, three year reading cycle is ridiculous, especially when so much of that "extra" scripture can be read in short form and "difficult" passages are omitted.
Nonsense. It is much better to hear 3 times as much scripture in the mass. How can you complain against getting MORE scripture during the mass? You have a point about "difficult" passages being excluded, however. It would be worth seeing whether certain types of people had a hand in excluding some of those difficult passages. Sometimes those are the ones people need to hear.
@@tomthx5804 it's not nonsense. Nonsense is omitting from the entire three year cycle St Paul’s exhortation to examine our worthiness to approach the Eucharist lest we condemn ourselves by partaking unworthily (1 Cor. 11:27-29). The focus of the Mass is the sacrifice, not the readings and homily which in the NO is seen as on the same level as the sacrifice. The Mass is not for "reading scripture" There is the Office and spiritual reading time to devote to the Bible which we can do any time we want. Also no other Apostolic liturgy has three year cycle, innovation for the sake of innovation. When the NO dies out nobody will lament its passing, despite the "more scripture" it supposedly has.
@@tomthx5804 He's got a good point. With matters of worship we don't operate from a principle of "more is better". There are small verses that I've had to meditate on for a week or more.
@tomthx5804 but the lectionary is about so much more than reading as much scripture as possible. In all the Church's rites, Latin, Byzantine etc, the lectionary is part of the liturgy as the 'first theology', the principal means of passing on the faith, and the lectionaries are very ancient. As soon as a committee overturns something, there is no way of being able to appreciate what is being lost (the Chesterton's fence principle). For example, the Divine Office used to have Genesis from Septuagesima, as returning to the Fall was a pre-Lenten preparation. Of course, the reformers could have expanded out from the old lectionary by having the old as 'Year A', but instead they decided to simply abolish it, so we are left with a 'first theology' determined by a very particular committee in a very particular time, and not a 'first theology' with its roots in the early church. Indeed, even Cranmer kept the Eucharistic lectionary intact in his order for Holy Communion (unfortunately not currently used in the Ordinariate). There are other aspects of the reform which could have been entirely in keeping with this, such as the introduction of a weekday lectionary, but to scrap the while lectionary and simply start again is a real problem for a Church claiming to represent an Apostolic tradition and points to the Latin Church's problem of having become, especially since Trent, overly-legalistic and centralised.
@@iwattguitar Well put. Are you in the Ordinariate? I myself am.
Wouldn’t you say that all that bowing, kneeling and genuflecting is laity also participating in the liturgy? Isn’t there a theological significance to the triple, or triune repetitions?
Is the Ordinariate liturgy done differently in America? Here in England it is barely distinguishable from the New Mass in most places. It would be nice to see a full restoration of the Sarum Rite.
14:47. Mel Gibson? Nope.
Really loved 1. The bishop is a TLM celebrant, 2.. that TLM requires total "in the now" focus for the entirety of the Mass such that there's little room for celebrant innovations, 3. Euch Prayer2 is "barely" sufficient. I attend TLM about twice a year; it probably does take a PHD in rocket science to grasp it all -- but its mystery and magesty compels. Vatican power mongers have logically targeted TLM, so much so that its telling me to get started on that PHD.
Great video! Would add altar girls to the list. Destructive to vocations, did not appease the woman-priest pushers, and it was called an "evil practice" by Benedict XIV in Allatae Sunt.
New evangelization. I just think of Protestant churches where the old folk go to one service and listen to Michael Talbott on the big screen, then the Gen X service starts and they play Amy Grant, then after filling the adults out the side door, they play Katie Nichol for the Gen Z audience. And nobody is ever transformed and the generational disunity of our broader society is reinforced.
It also ensures traditions just die from gen to gen and there isn’t any sort of continuity with generations long gone. Each generation reinventing itself from scratch to appeal to modern trends
Also, not just a trained choir but also a children's choir that performs at a mass each week. I chant the Our Father still based on the one we did in our 9am children's choir. Children learn music by singing.
@@Deathbytroll absolutely right about traditions. I work with a homeschool co-op helping teach music to young people, mostly 8 to 14 years old. Doing my little part to make sure they know the old hymns and chant (Pange Lingua, Adoro Te Devote etc). Adults set too low of a bar for kids, they are capable of learning Latin no problem.
(And we should learn Latin/gregorian chant, at least if we want to be obedient to Vatican 2 and Sacrosanctum Concilium).
One thing I have observed though, is there is a generational rupture. What 10-year-old can sing a melody from mass that his grandparents sang? The Protestants have amazing grace and it is well with my soul. Wonderful for them. But the Catholic patrimony has been chopped off at the knees largely, at least from my observation in my little neck of the woods. We need generational continuity, and I don't mean on eagle's wings and here I am Lord. We need to move on. We can do better. Our children deserve better
14:55
....What did the early Church's Mass look like?....
forgive me, Mr C, if you go in a different direction. I haven't finished the video. That question does seem to be heading in an 'antiquarian' direction.
those required signs of reverence towards the Sacrament grew gradually as the Church's appreciation of the Sacrament deepened.
By the same token the VII liturgists must have known that stripping away gestures of reverence will eventually 'sink in' to the generations of Catholic school children taught/pressured to receive Jesus like they are waiting for their change at the 7-11. In my diocese, Corpus Christi, it seems that children who go to little public schools (far from our big city) are the only ones that still receive on the tongue. They apparently didn't get the memo.😊 YET🙁
It's kind of like modern gnosticism....how people act with their bodies doesn't affect what they believe in their souls.....the same goes for Fiducia Supplicans....
The children are watching . They get the Tucho's drift🙁
31:48....
"the rapidity of how Americans threw off the Latin Mass proves the inadequacy of the Latin Mass... people were thrilled...."
So thrilled that a majority stopped going to church altogether!!!
Mr. C , God gives us crutches for a reason. We have many.... like Rosary beads....eg... I think if the Church were to crusade against Rosary beads (maybe as non-apostolic) , many lay people's prayer lives would fall flat?
There you go! See how inadequate those Rosary crutches are? when our betters kick our crutches away, we fall flat! Proof positive! No more crutches! No more cripples get to heaven!
You need to watch it all. We bring that very topic up.
@@gaudiumetspes22dr.larrycha26 , Sorry, Professor!!! I'll get there...(had to go somewhere this morning)
I love this episode....Your right, I haven't finished.
@@gaudiumetspes22dr.larrycha26
Hi Dr. Chapp, have you heard of or read ‘Why Catholics Can’t Sing’ by Thomas Day? I’ve heard anecdotally that it blames Irish monasticism and quiet contemplative low Masses influencing parish worship over time.
The liturgy doesn't have to be reformed it has to be restaured before the changes of 1954!