 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
rrammfcitktturjsp012006
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Midland, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 42 |
| First Name: | Anne | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | C of C, Wicca, Satanist, Atheist, Agnostic, Baptist, Unity, and ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 01:43 am |
|
To All,
I am a little confused as to how the New Order of Mass got so far away from the Latin Mass. I know Vatican II, many peeps took things very liberally. I was wondering if there was a website or something out there that could break down the Tridentine Mass wihtout all the hard words. I know that parts actually had names. How different is the New Order of Mass from the Tridentine, and if the New Order of Mass is so uhhh different from the Old Rite, why was it changed in the first place?
I have tried to read through Church documents but I find them confusing and filled with huge words, I guess I need Church answers simplified to where I can understand them.
May the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you always.
Anne
|
|
|
japhy
Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Princeton, New Jersey USA |
| Posts: | 179 |
| First Name: | Jeff / japhy | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | (Roman) Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 09:56 am |
|
The only document of Vatican II that spoke directly of reforming the liturgy was Sacrosanctum Concilium. I do strongly suggest you read it; its language is not that outlandish. The other documents that have made changes to the liturgy came after or outside of Vatican II. You might notice that the other documents go above and beyond what was called for by Vatican II, and a lot of the differences (non-rubrical) are more recent than the Council, such as lay Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and the indult of receiving the Host in the hand. You'd be surprised how much of the Constitution on the Liturgy was not followed to the letter, and how much was followed "to the spirit".
Why were these over-zealous changes made? For that, I would suggest reading a book like "Reform or Return?" by Fr. Thomas Kocik. I've just finished reading it, and it's quite excellent. It is a fictional dialogue between someone who advocates simply returning to the liturgy of 1962 and someone who advocates re-examining the reform mandated by Vatican II and re-applying it to the liturgy of 1962. It has numerous appendices, including the Ordinary of the 1962 Missal (in Latin and English, translated by the author), the Ordinary of the 1970 Missal (in Latin and English, translated by the author), and numerous additional essays on the topic of reforming the reform.
Also consider "The Spirit of the Liturgy" by Josef Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) which talks about the importance of ad orientem, the use of Latin, and other characteristics of the Mass that have been all but abandoned since Vatican II.
While I attend a parish which celebrates only the Ordinary Form (Missal of Paul VI), I am feeling more and more drawn to the Extraordinary Form (Missal of Bl. John XXIII) even though I've only been to one such Mass. As such, I am interested in the idea of a "reform of the reform", which would seek to reform the Missal of 1962 in a far more coherent and continuous way. In the meantime, I'd really love it if Latin made a return to much of the Ordinary of Mass (in the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Memorial Acclaimation, Pater Noster, Agnus Dei, and perhaps in the Credo as well, and some of the introductory and closing rites). Plus, Gregorian Chant (or even polyphony) would be nice to hear again. These may sound superficial, but I think that a lot of parishes suffer from a lack of the sense of the sacred (due in part to the Missal itself, but also to the varying ways it is "celebrated"), and such changes might make them remember where they are, why they're there, and who they're there for!
Websites / Blogs of interest:
Adoremus Society for the Renewal of Sacred Liturgy: http://www.adoremus.org/
What Does the Prayer Really Say: http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/
The New Liturgical Movement: http://www.thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/
Last edited on Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 10:13 am by japhy
____________________
[Mary said,] "Do whatever he tells you." - John 2:5
|
|
|
rrammfcitktturjsp012006
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Midland, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 42 |
| First Name: | Anne | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | C of C, Wicca, Satanist, Atheist, Agnostic, Baptist, Unity, and ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 10:17 am |
|
Hi. K I will read those documents thanks.
I remember attending a Latin Mass one time and how reverent they all seemed to be. It was at Vatican at St. Peter's Basillica at that time I was very much opposed to God in my life. I remember saying that if God really existed then I could easily find Him in the Catholic Church. I remember hearing the Latin hymms, the Gregorian Chant, and other things. I also remember steeped as I was into Wicca or Satanism at the age of 18, I did have a wavering doubt as to oh boy, what if God does exist and what if the Catholic Church is the True Church. It would be only in 2003 that I would finally complete the journey home.
I am thankful that our parish has a Mass where we sing all the Mass parts in Latin. I wish that more Latin could be used. We do sing them in gregorian chant and they are beautiful. I am beginning to feel that the liberites taken in changing the Mass was a mistake. I think there is a way to reform the Tridentine Mass, but not get it to where Mass is now. It is so hard for me to actually find depth in Mass compared to the first Mass I ever heard in Italy. I guess when said in Latin it just encourages a spirit of reverence, which I find so lacking in the vernacular. I just wondered if I was the only Catholic out there who wishes things were not the way they are, and am applauding Benedicts 16th's decision to let the Tridentine Mass come back. Kudos to the Holy Father.
May the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
Anne
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4981 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 01:29 pm |
|
rrammfcitktturjsp012006 wrote: I guess when said in Latin it just encourages a spirit of reverence, which I find so lacking in the vernacular.
Reverence is not a matter of language. I remember the original Latin mass, and it was often quite irreverant. Mostly the people in the congregation couldn't tell the difference.
After every major council there has been a 50 year period of turmoil. It was so bad after Nicea in 325 that they had to call another council in 381 at Constantinople! It takes 50 years for the Church to absorb the results of a major council and reach equilibrium. After Trent, there was no major council until Vatican II. Those wishing to liberalize the Church felt they had been given free rein, and so they went overboard. It's like a balloon that is blown up almost to the point of breaking, and then let go. It flies everywhere.
Historically, the last ten years of the first half-century after a major council is a time of settling down and setting course into the future. Pope Benedict was elected 40 years after the end of Vatican II. We are now two years into that last decade, and he has begun to reclaim the "soul" of the Church. Meanwhile, reverence has never left. Watch the Holy Father celebrate mass in the vernacular when he visits a country, and you will see a reverent mass. Attend mass at a monastery, or attend the Divine Liturgy at an Eastern Catholic Church. Find a priest who loves the liturgy, and you will see a reverent mass.
The Mass of Pope Paul VI is beautiful. Read and study the words and the proscribed actions. Unfortunately, it is often not celebrated in a reverent fashion. The greatest plays ever written can be poorly performed. The greatest music the world has ever known can be played badly. And the liturgy can be butchered, but it is still always beautiful and holy because Jesus is always present in the Eucharist. And how can that possibly be bad?
Meanwhile, give Pope Benedict a few more years. I believe he was selected by the Holy Spirit to give us back a spirit of reverence. Latin will become more common, future churches will be built to allow the priest to worship with the people, organs and choir lofts will return, etc. It won't happen quickly (dioceses can't afford to replace churches that are otherwise structurally sound), but we'll see more traditional elements added when renovations take place, as long as the people in the parish demand it and are willing to pay for it.
A lot of the problem is us. Why didn't we raise a ruckus when all the communion rails and high altars were ripped out? In my parish we did, and we still have our communion rail and our high altar. We also put the organ back in the choir loft. We are the only parish in my diocese with a communion rail!
As we discussed in another thread recently, the Church does not move quickly. A lot of the problems with the Mass of Pope Paul VI is not with the mass itself but with the translation. A new translation has been in the works for a decade or more, and it is nearing completion. There is a fair chance we will see the final result before the end of this decade. The Holy Father has also called for studies of other possible changes, such as allowing the incorporation of some of the traditional elements of the Mass of Bl. John XXIII and the relocation of the Sign of Peace to earlier in the liturgy, as well as an increase in Latin, Gregorian chant, and traditional music.
Change begins in seminaries. Priests have to be trained. There are very few priests today who even know how to say the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. But the change is underway. We just have to be patient and accepting.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
seakings4ever
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | St Johns, Florida USA |
| Posts: | 3 |
| First Name: | Mike | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | dyed-in-the-wool-taught-by-Irish-nuns-proudly-Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11th, 2007 03:02 pm |
|
This is a very good discussion so far. While I love the old rite, I must confess I have some mixed feelings about its re-implementation on a large scale. While the part of me that yearns for a return to reverence and sacredness would want more of the old rite, I am not sure doing so would appeal to large numbers of people. In fact, I would contend we need to fix some things which were broken in the Novus Ordo in the first place and address some practices and attitudes which have crept into practice by both clergy and laity.
The old Mass was indeed beautiful. As an altar boy in the old Tridentine rite I knew the calls and responses of the priest and server by heart and knew what they meant. I can still remember parts of them. I really loved the old Mass and even as a boy reacted with some negative reaction when the first change was effected to take away the high altar and replace it with a "modern" formica job, with the priest facing the people. Then the Latin was phased out. The 70s and 80s followed with some reallly bad liturgical music - usually amateurs plunking tunelessly on guitars and tamborine shaking. The hand-clapping would drive me to fits of distraction. This was more about entertainment and less about giving glory to God. That sort of drivel still persists. Witness the so-called "folk Masses" that proliferated for the Saturday vigil crowd. The musicians in these groups are largely about performing and entertaining themselves rather than leading the people in music appropriate to the ligurgy or the readings as Mass.
Then we have all the charismatic show-boating antics which have crept in over the past 20 years - priests doing their own thing in the Eucharistic Prayer, people holding their arms aloft in mimicking the gestures of the celebrant, the all but compusory hand-holding at the Lord's Prayer and similar distractions.
In the meantime we have lost our sense for the sacred and for reverence for the Holy Eucharist. Once there was only silence and a conscious awareness of the Real Presence in the church. Now we have rampant chit chat and people working the room - even if the tabernacle is still in the sanctuary. People no longer genuflect. All manner of casual dress is tolerated - grown men in shorts, young women and not-so-young pushing the envelope in tubetops and "spaghetti straps", flip flops, etc. To make it worse, at least in my parish, we have at least a dozen "Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist " in inappropriate attire (heavy set women in stretch pants, men in the ubiquitous guayaberra shirts, flip flops, etc) parade up the steps to stand behind the celebrant for Communion. Then all the passing around of cups and bowls for posting at "Communion Stations" around the church. Who says Communion should not take longer than 10 minutes?
I can almost predict what the responses to my curmudgeonly comments. (a) Well at least they're coming to Mass. (b)This is how we worship. (c) Don't pay attention to other people; just worry about yourself. (d) Maybe you should find another parish? And so on... These are just a few of the things we need to work on. In the Church's effort to reform and update the Liturgy, I believe for the most part we have only succeeded in dumbing it down. We are losing large numbers of Catholics because of poor catechesis for an entire generation of Catholics, for which also we have given a poor understanding of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The dumbing down of the liturgy has only contributed to that.
Implementation of the old rite will not solve these problems. In fact, I think it will only add to them. Traditionalists will flock to places where the old rite is offered - whether they understand it or not (and most will not). Further we run the risk of factions - traditionalists vs modernists, etc. People say they are yearning for the old rite, but are they really? Let's work on the problems we have first before opening another can of worms.
|
|
|
kimdyuma
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 710 |
| First Name: | Kim | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | cradle Anglican, Episcopal /Catholic-04/07/07 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11th, 2007 03:07 pm |
|
| I aggree that we need to work on bringing reverence back to the everyday Mass
____________________
Adopt from your local Humane Society- Please spay or neuter your pets
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1212 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11th, 2007 04:58 pm |
|
| I believe there are many here who agree with you, including me. But IMO, the parishioners who are happy with the way things are, probably aren't on this or any forum. Happily, I landed in a parish that does things very reverently and follows strict traditional liturgy. But when I visit other parishes, I see what everyone here complains about. But like Rick says, it will take a good bit of time to correct the situation, because we will have to have the cooperation of priests and bishops.
|
|
|
brian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Chicago South Burbs, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 720 |
| First Name: | brian | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | methodist, evangelical, anglican, catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11th, 2007 09:37 pm |
|
CajunRick wrote:
Reverence is not a matter of language. I remember the original Latin mass, and it was often quite irreverant. Mostly the people in the congregation couldn't tell the difference.
I feel like we had this discussion before, and I do not want to go down the exact path we took (actually it was someone else not me you were discussing this) but while I agree that reverence has more to do with the way a mass is celebrated by all of us (priest and congregation), and that you certainly could have a more reverent mass in either Latin or English or with the older rite or the newer one, depending on time and place and the heart of people; I would argue that language has at least 'something' to do with it. That it is possible that certain phrasings, music, postures, language, amounts of incense, do at least from an objective standpoint do more to encourage reverence than others. This is probably why the church is so careful about what and why it does what it does liturgically. So while it is up to us to repsond and make whatever the church perscribes as reverent as possible, I happen to think that certain choices may do more to evoke a spirit of reverence than others.
One may argue if we can know what threse things are, or if it differs from individual to individual and culture to culture. But I happen to think more Latin and chanting, while not forcing anybody in any place to be more reverent, may be effective in inspiring reverence, and suggesting to the casual attender that what is going on is something sacred. I think some of the way things are done these days seem to encourage irreverence.
I am not saying that these are the churches fault or that we have made any wrong decsisions, so much as part of the times we are living in and maybe abuses or a lack of respect for the holiness of the liturgy already in place.
I do think it is possibe that we could keep the mass exactly as it is, and if followed with reverence and respect and tasteful music we may not need to have discussions like this so often.
So, I think the answer is mixed. We need to work on ourselves and pray that the Holy Spirit inspires our conversion as a church and respect for the Eucharist and a a proper sense of awe toward the Holiness of God, but I also think that there could be some changes made or things already suggested being more heavily implemented that could be of use as well.
One more note about whether reverence is from people or language. One thing I like about being Catholic as opposed to less liturgically evangelical, is that I know that no matter where I go and no matter how many people pray or what they do good or bad, I know that the mass is still the mass. The angels and saints are still there. The Eucharist is still confected. This is so sweet because I used to have to rely too much on emotion or experience to think church was good. Now sometimes I do not mind a lack of enthusiasm, because it encourages me to find truth and beaty from the reality of what is mystically going on. It is sometimes an advantage. Do not get me wrong, I prefer masses where people sing and genuflect and where the atmosphere of love is just contagious. But I am just saying that liturgy makes sure that someone wanting to go to mass and meet with Christ in an intimate way, always has the possibility of success so long as they fully participate. To this end, I would also argue that we should want the liturgy itself to be as beautiful as it can be, so that even if 9 of 10 people are still missing the point, the text itself will give the person paying attention the most rewarding conversation with God possible.
Brian
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4981 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11th, 2007 10:43 pm |
|
brian wrote: CajunRick wrote:
Reverence is not a matter of language.
I would argue that language has at least 'something' to do with it. That it is possible that certain phrasings, music, postures, language, amounts of incense, do at least from an objective standpoint do more to encourage reverence than others.
I am using the word "language" to distinguish Latin from English, nothing else. Prayer in English can be as reverential as any other language, as can Spanish, French, German, etc. I am not referring to the accuracy of the translation or the choice of words being used, but strictly the language. I contend that it is quite possible to celebrate a reverential mass in English, and it is quite possible to celebrate an irreverent mass in Latin.
One more note about whether reverence is from people or language. One thing I like about being Catholic as opposed to less liturgically evangelical, is that I know that no matter where I go and no matter how many people pray or what they do good or bad, I know that the mass is still the mass.
Very true, even if you are in Haiti and the mass is conducted in Creole, or you are in Africa and it is in Swahili. Language does not cause reverence; nor does it prevent it.
I prefer masses where people sing and genuflect and where the atmosphere of love is just contagious.
And so do I, but I've had that feeling attending English liturgies much more often than attending Latin liturgies.
To this end, I would also argue that we should want the liturgy itself to be as beautiful as it can be, so that even if 9 of 10 people are still missing the point, the text itself will give the person paying attention the most rewarding conversation with God possible.
And I completely agree. But that is not prevented by the language in which the liturgy is conducted.
Some people may prefer the liturgy in Latin and find it more reverential, and others may prefer English. Some may prefer Gregorian chant and others Polish folk music. But these are personal preferences. I am not discounting them. They may well affect how a person participates in the liturgy. But the effect is personal and has no effect on the liturgy itself. The liturgy, regardless of language, music, or other external trappings, will be as reverential as the clergy and congregation choose to make it.
To this point, it is quite possible that Latin liturgies have been more reverent because the priests celebrating and the congregation attending are passionate about it. They are willing to go out of their way to celebrate and attend, and to put more effort into it. I am afraid many people believe that if Latin should return as the dominant form of the liturgy, all of the changes they dislike of the last 45 years will miraculously disappear and the mass will once again be some idealized form of liturgy they see today in small, isolated chapels. People will dress properly, they will genuflect to the Blessed Sacrament and be miraculously silent and respectful. That's not how people work. Reverence comes from inside, not outside. All the Latin in the world can't make a person reverent if they aren't. It will take some serious catechesis to return a reverent attitude to the congregation, not a change of language.
Last edited on Sun Nov 11th, 2007 10:50 pm by CajunRick
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
kimdyuma
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 710 |
| First Name: | Kim | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | cradle Anglican, Episcopal /Catholic-04/07/07 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11th, 2007 10:53 pm |
|
liturgy. But the effect is personal and has no effect on the liturgy itself. The liturgy, regardless of language, music, or other external trappings, will be as reverential as the clergy and congregation choose to make it.
I agree with both your points Rick & Brian- but the lack of reverence in so many churches is less to do with language etc. and more to do with our society at large- manners are pretty well hit or miss. We often have children come to visit over meals- they honestly have no idea of using cloth napkins, the proper use of utensils and even general dinner conversation. I sound like a self righteous prig here but as stupid as it sounds those are details in an overall attitude. How many men don't know enough to take their hats off at the table? How many children are encouraged to call adults by first names rather than Mr./Mrs etc. How many boys are taught to give up a seat in the bus, open a door etc?
____________________
Adopt from your local Humane Society- Please spay or neuter your pets
|
|
|
rrammfcitktturjsp012006
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Midland, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 42 |
| First Name: | Anne | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | C of C, Wicca, Satanist, Atheist, Agnostic, Baptist, Unity, and ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12th, 2007 12:44 am |
|
To All,
Wow what a thought provoking thread this has been. I needed to clarify, I guess with my Latin=reverence my comment did not come across as what I meant it to be.
What I meant to say is that, I wish the translations had been better done. I think we lost some of the orginal elements of what the Latin says when things got translated.
Am I in favor for going back to all Latin, no I think the readings or the Homily need to be in the verancular as well as the prayer part of Mass. I also believe that and love that the priest faces the congregation and we get to see things and that the New Order of Mass does invite particpiation of the people. I am so sry for posting my comment so wrongly.
Yes reverance does need to come back but how that is going to come about is each of us bring to Mass reverence and sacredness with the understanding of what is going to go on in each Mass we attend.
Thanks for posting guys. I have enjoyed reading this thread.
In Him,
Anne
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4981 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12th, 2007 12:59 am |
|
rrammfcitktturjsp012006 wrote: What I meant to say is that, I wish the translations had been better done.
I completely agree with you there, and so does the Church. That's why new translations have been in process for a long time, and are due to be completed by the end of next year (2008). The mass will be in English, but the language will be more reverential.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
seakings4ever
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | St Johns, Florida USA |
| Posts: | 3 |
| First Name: | Mike | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | dyed-in-the-wool-taught-by-Irish-nuns-proudly-Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12th, 2007 09:53 am |
|
I concur with all the above. Getting back to my earlier comment, we need to fix what's broken in the Novus Ordo first. That includes addressing how we approach the Mass and the Eucharist in terms of attitude, gestures and clothing (one of the psalms says "Worhip Him in holy attire").
I truly love the Tridentine rite, but I don't think it will bring people back to reverence. The people must fix that themselves. Part of that solution is in catechesis - and I don't mean just for the kids in grade school and Confirmation preparation. We also have to reach a whole generation of adults who did not have the benefit of good religious instruction. And we expect them to pass on the Faith to their children? I teach Confirmation class and I find it appalling how little these kids know - stuff one would expect their parents to impart to them. Even the basic concept of attendance at Mass. A statistic I read recently inferred about 80 percent of Catholics do not attend Mass on a regular basis (i.e., every Sunday and HDO). In my own circle of contacts there are those who believe it's no big deal to miss Mass. Growing up, we practically had to be on our deathbeds to miss Mass (OK, some hyperbole). Many people do not understand that first and foremost the Mass is a sacrifice. Then there is our belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. There are many Catholics who either don't believe or know enough about the Eucharist to believe. These are among the things we need to work on.
No matter all our best intentions in re-implementing the Tridentine rite, I do not think it will have the desired effect for most Catholics. It will draw the die hard traditionalists and the little old ladies in mantillas, but it will not effect a change in attitude toward reverence by everyone else. That's the stuff we need to work on. Getting involved in adult faith formation, RCIA, teaching kids in Religious Education (formerly known as CCD) and simply being good parents to our children, instructing them in our faith, will help get us there. Don't forget, WE are the Church. Don't expect Father or the deacons of if we're lucky, the nuns to do it all.
|
|
|
Current time is 07:27 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
