I was reading a commentary and the following was said,
The Missa Bossa Nova was written for the vernacular Tridentine Mass of the 1965 missal by Father Peter Sholtes. If you forget the tempo and instruments and focus on the English words, you will find that the first translation of the Latin Mass into English was very faithful to the Latin whereas what we got in 1973 was anything but faithful. Listen closely, the translation is very similar with only minor differences with the revised translation that we've had for the past glorious year.
I think the single worst thing that happened to the Catholic Mass was not its vernacularization, although the second revised English translation was an absolute disaster, now corrected thanks be to God and not to liturgists.
The single worst thing that happened to the Catholic Mass was the total abandonment of Gregorian Chant, or polyphony or other chants based upon these. But worse yet was the abandonment of no instrumentation when singing and the organ for instruments that are best left to the secular venue, such as those used in the Missa Bossa Nova. Even its name tells you that Catholic spirituality and chant are seriously compromised by the melody, beat and instrumentation used.
I responded thusly; "If you forget the tempo and instruments and focus on the English words, you will find that the first translation of the Latin Mass into English was very faithful to the Latin whereas what we got in 1973 was anything but faithful."
But we cannot forget that. It is that as much as abandonment of the Latin which caused the problems we have today. It is the absolute disregard for the sacred, in favor of the profane which caused the liturgical malaise that we must combat today.
Some will say that we cannot put the horse back in the barn, my response to that is "WHY NOT?!" According to the liberals, we are the most educated, the most modern and the most "enlightened" Catholics EVER. Why can't we figure out a way to put the horse back in the barn? I believe we can.
The Church spent a goodly number of years prior to 1570 with regional Masses, which is essentially what we have now. St. Pius V centralized that and for near ye 500 years we had liturgical stability and the Church entered into a renaissance which was a glorious period in history, from a Catholic point of view.
What we need today, is another centralization of the Mass. The Holy Father should take a lesson from St. Pius V and simply codify the Mass and THEN IMPLEMENT IT! As I have argued before, the Holy Father (for whatever reason) keeps the liturgical "forcefulness" in a hypothetical vacuum. He speaks of the glories of the reform of the reform, but does nothing about it.
The re-introduction of the TLM was not a reform of the reform, it was a restoration of a Catholic truth. And a good one, at that. But....what has come from it? (That is another post for another time) A closer translation to the Latin? That isn't due to the restoration of the TLM, that is a process which has been ongoing since 1975, with the first revision.
A true reform of the reform would be a concrete reform of the Mass, based on the TLM. Substantive changes upheld by law, not suggestion, with consequences. And those consequences should be first leveled at the bishops, then moved to the priests. The process is simple, the implementation is simple and the acceptance would be worldwide and swift. Catholics won't leave. Heck, they didn't leave when the drivel that was posted above was force fed to them, they won't leave now. And if they do, that is on the priests who don't support the Vicar of Christ and the Church.
Bottom line, we can put the horse back in the barn. We're smart enough to do it. We just have to be willing to stand up and say ENOUGH! Sadly, most priests like the freedom to do what they want, because for most priests, obedience is a hypothetical, just like the reform of the reform. So, enough of Bob Hurd, and Bernadette Farrell. Enough of Marty and David. Enough of the St. Louis Jebbies (whoever is left) and Enough of liturgical abuse being passed off as "implementation and forward application."
The Mass should not have been tampered with. Sacrosanctum Concilium wasn't needed, except by liberal churchmen in bed with the Protties. And it was forced. The Mass was reformed in the image of Luther, and Paul VI signed off on it, which makes it valid.
It's time for a second centralization and it is time for a second counter-reformation. Just like before it must be supported by law, because as we have seen over the last 50 years, suggestion will just be ignored....much like priestly obedience.