Mich würde mal interessieren, wie eben o. g. Traditionalisten damit argumentativ umgehen...Oder sollte gar schon unter 1922 die "Zerstörung" eingesetzt haben? ("The use of the "Dialogue Mass," first conceded in 1922, was extended and encouraged, so that the congregation would recite much of the Mass along with the priest: the Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, etc., as well as all the responses. It should be noted here that the traditional form of congregational participation is Gregorian Chant. Popular recitation of Mass prayers was never done until the "Dialogue Mass" was introduced."; a. a. O.)
Vielleicht hat ja sogar schon der ach so gerne ins Feld geführte Hl. Papst Pius X. den Anfang vom Ende gesetzt? Hat er doch das später so oft gebrauchte Wort von der "tätigen Teilnahme" eingeführt...("One hundred years ago, on the feast of Saint Cecilia, Pope Saint Pius X issued directives on sacred music that gave encouragement and direction to the reform of the Liturgy, in addressing the nature of sacred music appropriate for use at Mass. In this directive, known by its Italian title, Tra le sollecitudini ("among the concerns"), the pope uses for the first time the expression actuosa participatio (active or actual participation) of the people in the celebration of Mass") (Quelle: http://www.adoremus.org/1203PiusX.html)?!
Bitte um Eure Meinungen...
). Werktagsmessen waren früher praktisch nur von Senioren und Hausfrauen besucht.
