Yeah, that’s one change that really puzzled me. The other ones I noticed, I understand. But changing “one in being with” to “consubstantial with” I don’t understand. It’s just such a huge swing in diction that it sticks out like a sore thumb.
There’s Catholic parishes that tolerate women and gays out there. I got married in the Church. I won’t name the parish, but I told the priest that I wasn’t exactly a believer and did the whole “culturally Catholic” thing and said something about respecting the religion and not taking Communion. He said something to the effect of Jesus can handle it, and said, go ahead, take Communion. I’ve attended mass over a hundred times over the last 20 years, but have never taken Communion except for that time.
That is, really, a tiny group. I see four parishes there in Chicago. The Archdiocese has something like 300+ parishes.
ETA: Sorry, I was only counting Chicago proper. So like 11 masses out of 336 parishes in the Archdiocese, or just over 3% that have Latin masses, and one of them is discontinued, and three of them, if I’m reading right, are just once a month.
rident stolidi verba Latina – Ovid
Latin does not have any intimate form of address. Any intimate/distant aspect would be purely a function of the Spanish.
Reading columns by Ann Landers and/or Dear Abby was also a common way of getting the phrase into your lexicon.
Word. I miss blasphemy being a real thing, too.
Oh, wait, it’s the other thing. I don’t miss blasphemy being a real thing.
Huh? Have you tried Swedish meatballs? Or sauerbraten? You must have gotten to the lutefisk table first, and it ruined everything for you.
Check out Æbleskiver. You’ll be back.
Uhh, I think the word you’re looking for is reactionary.
And when did the English version of the Nicene Creed begin with “WE believe?”
Same here.
Maybe closer to ten times (over the course of thirty-five years), but I still don’t join the procession to the altar rail. In fact, at my mother’s funeral nine years ago, my brother actually shocked me when he accepted Communion, and later, responded to my inquiry that he no longer identified as a Catholic.
Dunno what that says about me.
This is an interesting question to me, because it came up within the last month here on the Dope (in re: the Apostles’ Creed), and it’s always been “We believe” for the Nicene as far as I remember (and “I believe” for the Apostles’), since my church-going years in ths 80s onward. But Wikipedia seemed to suggest that a lot of Catholic parishes say “I believe.” Not here, as far as I remember.
I learned it as “I believe”. Chicago, 1960s.
It was "We believe from 1973 to 2011 according to the Wiki article. I know that it was “We believe” for as long as I can remember, but I’m also not sure how well I remember that sort of detail from before the age of 10.
Then that sounds about right. My biggest Catholic-church go-every-week years were from 1980 to about 1993.
Swedish meatballs are plain meatballs in canned gravy. Sauerbraten is good. Lutefisk is not–have you ever been in the house when Grandma made it? German/Irish Dad nearly threw his MIL out of the house for that crime. Æbleskiver? Fried wads of dough are in my wheelhouse but I think Danes are Missouri Synod so I haven’t had them.
Well, the U.S. plus Canada. And given that it appears to run about four to eight parishes per diocese and there are often over a thousand parishes in a diocese and that most of those parishes provide only a single Latin mass per week, (with quite a few offering one only on special occasions while a much tinier number offer it daily), I would say that “small” adequately identifies the group.
I would not claim that the demand is marginal, but it hardly rises to the level of large.
And in terms of “resurgence,” when some of its advocates indicate a serious misunderstanding, using such terms as “protestantization,” I really see no indication of a resurgence.
There will always be folks who prefer the beauty of the sung version, (I really love Gregorian Chant and Organum), and some who simply want to indicate displeasure with Vatican II, and a miniscule number who actually understand enough Latin to desire to worship in that language, but there is no great surge of people who wish to take the whole church back to 1960. (I have no problem with the mass in Latin as long as it follows the Novus Ordo of 1972 and does not fall back into the errors to which the Tridentine mass tends to encourage some.)
Sorry, that was the word I was looking for all right. However some people who go for the Latin Mass seem to be more into the aesthetics of it than any other reason. They are the same people who wish for more Gregorian chant, incense, soaring churches made of stone, and a lot of kneeling. There is something to that. If it wasn’t so connected to rigidity and punitiveness I myself might be on board.
As it is, I seem to be becoming an Episcopalian. Most of the ritual, little of the misogyny and homophobia.
Not quite.
Consubstantiation was word assigned (not by Luther) to the Platonic Luther’s description of the Eucharist in opposition to the Aristotelian Transubstantiation. The words contrast the philosophical identification of the bread and wine that has been consecrated with Transubstantiation indicating that the the (Aristotelian) substances of bread and wine become (note the trans-) the Body and Blood while Consubstatiation holds that the they remain bread and wine in which the Body and Blood are joined with (con-) bread and wine.
In the newer formulation of the Creed, Consubstantial has no relation to the Eucharist, but indicates that the Father and Son are of one divine substance.
It was certainly jarring to hear, but it is not heresy.
Not sure how I typed that. The figures usually run in the low hundreds, not thousands.