Liturgist Jargon

[D0RK4JP2]

Gday,

Here's a good lesson in apologetical distinguishment. Take a look at how the same thing (the beginning of Mass) can be represented by using different words. It's very well worded.

It is certainly something to look out for in your Parish.

FROM>>>

"THE JARGON OF LITURGISTS: BRAIN-WASHING THE FAITHFUL by Calvert Shenk"

1. "Before the Eucharistic celebration begins, the assembly gathers in the
worship space. As the assembly sings the gathering song, the presider and
other ministers enter. The presider greets the assembly and, in preparation
for liturgy of Word and Eucharist, invites them to reflect on their
sinfulness."

2. "Before Mass, the congregation enters the church. As the introit or the
processional hymn is sung, the celebrant, deacon, lector and servers enter
in procession. The celebrant, having made the sign of the cross, greets the
congregation and, in preparation for the sacred mysteries, exhorts the
faithful to call to mind their sins:"


JMJ.

[phatcatholic]

would you object to one in favor of the other?

[D0RK4JP2]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Oct 16 2004, 06:50 AM'] would you object to one in favor of the other? [/quote]
Gday,

haha, the point of posting it wasn't for me to just STATE what i like - i was hoping to hear from others 1st - but i can only say i prefer the 2nd one because it uses terms that 1) are non-ambiguous, 2) are terms traditionally used in the rites of Mass before the Novus Ordo, 3) speak specifically what the rubrics say.

So yeh , the 2nd fo'shiz! All the 'ladeedah liturgists' like the 1st one in my experience.

JMJ.

[phatcatholic]

i too like the second one better, but i don't necessarily see anything ambiguous about the first one, do u?

[phatcatholic]

i would say that the GIRM is pretty freakin ambiguous, in my opinion, which really frustrates me.............but then again, i don't have very much experience reading liturgical documents

[D0RK4JP2]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Oct 16 2004, 02:02 PM']i too like the second one better, but i don't necessarily see anything ambiguous about the first one, do u?[/quote]
Gday,

i REALLY RECKON it is ambiguous lol!

You're kind of right about the GIRM though. It's an odd facet ay.

An example why i call it ambiguous is because of one thing it says:

"...the presider and other ministers enter."

Like, this is a made up statement but it's a reflection of a sad, sad truth. It kind of links in with the extraordinary minister thread in the debate section. It's the type of language people use to get around the reality of, 'EM's may be used under the selection of the Bishop and particular descrection of the Parish Priest, when needed.' If you give words more than one meaning then, well...it can mean more than one thing and that ain't good! Like, did Christ EVER speak with a forked tongue?

You should start a thread on the GIRM so folks can chat about it.

Another bit of the 2nd one which reminded me of something i saw on the weekend:

"Before the Eucharistic celebration begins, the assembly gathers in the worship space."

I saw this little table, in a parish hall, a "sacred space" - a clay figurine of people holding hands in a circle; there was a candle in the middle, pretty silk cloth drapped over the table, rocks scattered artisticaly over the cloth next to the clay figurine, and with a book called '365 days with the Lord'. They had the same thing at the foot of the (novus ordo) alter in the Church next door. LIKE, WHAT THE !? People who do things like that use ambiguous language so what they do seems to fit it in with what is supposed to happen.

JMJ.

[cmotherofpirl]

What is the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist?




You can negotiate with a terrorist.

[Dave]

Several months ago I posted the full article that came from here on Phatmass.

[D0RK4JP2]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Oct 18 2004, 05:40 AM'] What is the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist?




You can negotiate with a terrorist. [/quote]
HAW HAW

[popestpiusx]

The first one sounds, well,... [color=red][b][edit: inadvertently disparaging remark][/b][/color] or cheesy or something like that. The second one is better.

As a side note: At the Mass I go to the start of Mass is called "The Prayers at the foot of the altar".

Edited October 18, 2004 by phatcatholic

[D0RK4JP2]

Gday,

popestpiusx, do you go to the SSPX masses?

I go to the 1962 tridentine rite. We have those prayers too.

JMJ.

[popestpiusx]

I go to the Traditional Latin Mass in Washington D.C (St. Mary's) Baltimore (St. Alphonsus) and occassionally to private Masses said by priests that I know. None of these are SSPX.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Oct 18 2004, 01:57 PM'] The first one sounds, well,... [color=red][b][edit: inadvertently disparaging remark][/b][/color] or cheesy or something like that.  The second one is better.

As a side note: At the Mass I go to the start of Mass is called "The Prayers at the foot of the altar". [/quote]
Sorry about that inadvertant disparaging remark. I was at a loss for words to accurately describe the lack of substance in the first example.

Edited October 18, 2004 by popestpiusx

[phatcatholic]

i know, that's why i added the word "inadvertently." nevertheless, it can still be a disrespectful word, which is why i edited it.

[popestpiusx]

I simply meant that the thing was "happy".

Edited October 19, 2004 by popestpiusx

[D0RK4JP2]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Oct 19 2004, 10:53 AM'] I go to the Traditional Latin Mass in Washington D.C (St. Mary's) Baltimore (St. Alphonsus) and occassionally to private Masses said by priests that I know. None of these are SSPX. [/quote]
How come you're marked as 'Phishy' then?

JMJ.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='D0RK4JP2' date='Oct 19 2004, 01:05 AM'] How come you're marked as 'Phishy' then?

JMJ. [/quote]
Now that is a good question.

[popestpiusx]

Because I am a suspicious character and cannot be trusted.

[Guest JeffCR07]

lol, just look at him, with his Tridentine Mass avatar...he's gotta be a schismatic heretic...

....


...




Hey, popestpiusx, on a more serious note, why [i]are[/i] you "phishy"? I always thought it was because you didn't believe in baptism of desire, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

- Your Brother in Christ, Jeff

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Oct 19 2004, 10:23 AM']

Hey, popestpiusx, on a more serious note, why [i]are[/i] you "phishy"? I always thought it was because you didn't believe in baptism of desire, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

- Your Brother in Christ, Jeff [/quote]
I have never denied the existence of Baptism of Desire. I may have a more limited definition of it, but , as Aluigi pointed out, that is legitimate considering it's exact nature is unclear. But I am quite certain that its existence is undeniable.