it depends (i) where you put the melisma,

Good advice for life.

Yes- The Moonie is still with us. When will they ever learn... and all that. It still surprises me that people would vote that way after a failed record. But so many don't remember. I was just a kid myself.
I'm fifth generation CA, and come from cowgirl (rancher) and sorority debutante stock. Talk about juggling identities.

Point taken about schismatic groups and/or groups not in full union with Rome. I feel for them, strive for patience and good will, and do not envy their situation.

Yes, the bidding prayers continued in France. Jungmann mentions their use.

"The EF is appealing to a smaller group, or fringe, and likely will not have wide effect on the majority - at least in the U.S."

Charles,

I had to laugh when I read this. We had 5 crying babies in our congregation at a high Mass this Sunday. Considering the postage-stamp size of the parish (seating, legally, 49 people), I think "smaller group" would mean "the church of the future", but this would, of course, include the core of altar boys and the growing number of university students and.......

I suppose that if the majority of vocations come from small outposts, and if these small outposts are peopled by those who are "fringe" elements --- that just means that there's much evangelizing to do!

.

Let's approach both the EF and OF liturgies sensibly. There is a trend to reintroduce chant and latin to our masses. Even if we start with BFW or the SEP or even the Anglican Use Gradual, we should be aiming to eventually use the Simplex and the GR. Some parishes may never progress beyond the SEP and hymns. I find that a lot of people who otherwise wouldn't normally attend an OF mass will feel happier with a chant lain ordinary and English propers and readings.

Now, if we could only make ad orientem more common in the OF, many of us would be much happier and feel that the mass was more theocentric for a change.

.

cgz, I have suspected for some time that the EF is more popular in areas with bad OF masses. Perhaps it is the reasonable desire to escape them that increases EF attendance. My parish offers decent, by-the-book OF masses with chant and other respectable music. EF attendance is very small and doesn't appear to be growing. The diocese has somewhere around 20 or so seminarians in training and the number is increasing. Not so bad for an area where Catholics have never been more than 4% or so of the population.

"Why copy [English chant] when the original [Graduale] shines so well?"

Comprehension. Variety. Culture.

If you can find anything like the GR in Greek Adam, a repertoire that took several centuries to develop and was sung and prayed by a whole region of people, then your point makes more sense.

Remember also that Latin had to die off as a vernacular in order for it to be more stable in the sacred liturgy. It was the language of a fallen empire. Should the same happen with English?

Dinosaurs into chickens. You are the funny man!

Dinosaurs into chickens. You are the funny man!

I can't tell if you are disputing my understanding of linguistics or biology.

I would be the first to wish the EF every success. May it live long and prosper. I just don't see any growth in it in my own area.

If you can find anything like the GR in Greek Adam, a repertoire that took several centuries to develop and was sung and prayed by a whole region of people, then your point makes more sense.

But there was no need for these centuries of innovation. Why must you Latins be constantly adding extra things to the Divine Liturgy? If it was good enough for the Apostles, it was good enough for me! Is outrage!!

Just sayin'.

I think I've noticed, if anything, that more EFs pop up where there are BETTER OFs, not worse. But that's limited to my own experiences.

Byzantine chant rocks!

.

PeterJ, sorry, but you are going to have to provide more information that simply, "That's the point."

You do realize that permitting the Roman rite to be celebrated in vernacular languages was by far the most significant of all the liturgical changes of Vatican II? So you want just that one change from V2 but no others whatsoever? How does that make any sense?

As you note, Father, this conversation, like real life ones, has wandered. This is not altogether a bad, but a rather normal and enjoyable thing. We learn a lot from it.

However, your point is very well taken, and I, basically, agree with it. Even those of us who are thankful for the council's liturgical changes (in spite of the ill-considered warts that were imposed upon them by some) cannot help thinking how things might have turned out with a better liturgical ethos and resulted in less revolutionary zeal and 'over-kill' if this or that had been done. Perhaps, some might think, if we had just translated the EF into English we would have been spared the Robespierrean reign of liturgical terror that resulted in many places, we would be far ahead of where we are now. But, the council fathers gave us not a mere translation but a considerably re-formed liturgy. It is unfortunate that some rather awful music and some rather regrettable liturgical praxes got tacked onto it. But, these things we have to outgrow in favour of a more sane and mature implementation. To my mind, reviving the EF does not contribute to this end. Rather, it in some ways thwarts such an end. It, whether in Latin or the extremely unlikely English, is a refuge for many people who cannot find their spiritual bearings in the as yet chaotic liturgical scene of US Catholicism.

As for me: I am so, so, thankful for the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter: fruit of the council, and gift of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

ronkrisman - VCII didn't call for root and branch reform of the rite. (Indeed, although endorsing a bit more use of the vernacular, it didn't actually call for a completely vernacular Mass, yes?) VCII didn't call for the OF that we actually ended up with. Or have I misunderstood?

Your assertion that "...someone who proclaims that he or she wishes to celebrate the Church's liturgy as it was before the liturgical changes called for by the Fathers of Vatican II..." is, I think, misunderstanding what is driving people to say they like the sound of vernacular EF.

Generally speaking, I'm for more liturgy, not less. Even if it's stuff I don't much want or care for. There's some kind of "stop liking things I don't like" puritanism that runs through so much liturgical activism.

I don't expect the Church will go to the trouble of translating the MR 62 into English when almost none of the faithful want it. It's a pipe dream, and it would be vanity for the bishops to devote time to such a project.

.

.

.