Enter your email address to receive updates by email:

subscribe in a reader like my facebook page follow me on twitter Image Map
Podcast Message Line: 512-222-3389
Logos Catholic Bible Software

« Brain Death Documents Published | Main | On Losing My Speedo... »

April 24, 2007

Comments

Slowboy

I'm reading a book about scripture by Scott Hahn and he claims as one of the big benefits of the new mass the fact of the incorporation of the entire bible (so to speak) in the readings. I never realized that the OT was almost excuded in the Trinitine Mass. This part anyway seems a step backwards for sure.

Perhaps, as others have suggested, our future is a more elegant mix of the two Masses. This is what might have happened if the progressive element hadn't been so "hell bent" on getting the Mass turned upside down TODAY.

Christine the Soccer Mom

Have you seen Jeff Miller's Motu Proprio Random Date Generator?

It would be nice if the old Mass could be celebrated without special permission, but for two years we have had one date after another put out at The Date. Suppose it's more like what Slowboy mentioned above: something that supports a mix of the two?

But I also saw a post somewhere (gosh, was it Catholic Pillow Fight?) that mentioned that this whole thing is becoming another division. The Latin People here, the Novus Ordo people there. Of course, I suppose those divisions already exist anyway.

HeartlandCatholic.com

What's the over-under on delays from the current supposed date of the motu proprio? Is twenty-three too high? The one really encouraging thing for those wanting the motu proprio is that the media feel the need to start spreading lies about the Latin Mass being anti-semitic. Though the media don't miss a chance to insult the Church, would they bother with the anti-semitic baloney if the motu proprio weren't going to happen? This is very encouraging indeed!

Ed Peters

Some of you might remember when we suffered through interminable reports of General Franco's imminent death. Speculation about when he would die went on so long that when it finally happened, it became an instant joke. I'm getting that deja vu feeling all over again.

Rick

The Latin Mass as antisemitic??? Come on! The novus ordo revolutionaries must be desparate; they are getting "professional victims" to lobby the media for them....What's next? The Latin mass was responsible for slavery? Gimme a break!

The liberalization of the Mass would, in my opinion, do much good for the church in removing some of the hostility we traditionalists feel toward the hierarchy that has opposed the legitimate wishes of JPII and Benedict XVI in granting the Indult. And to all those who support the novus ordo 100% -- just think... you would not have to deal with whining traditionalists as much any more!

Brian

In the long run could the influence of the Tridentine Mass help restore the Novus Ordo to what it was meant to be? Maybe even make the Latin Novus Ordo Mass more popular?

A generation from now could the average parish have at least one of each on Sunday: vernacular Novus Ordo, Latin Novus Ordo, and Tridentine? Would something like that be a good thing or a bad thing?

And while we're tossing out the elegant mixing of the masses idea: Would there be any merit to a Mass that follows the Tridentine rubrics but is in the vernacular? Or would that just be stupid?

Mary Kay

Slowboy, the greater selection of Scripture in the 1970 Missal is something that's been very helpful to me.

Christine, thanks for mentioning the MP Random Date Generator. That's pretty much how I feel about it.

Rick, the earlier Missal wasn't antisemitic, but there was some anti-semitic feeling. Pogroms, for example. Anti-semitic comments here in the US.

some things, but some have connected things such as the phrase "perfidious Jews" on Good Friday

Barbara

And while we're tossing out the elegant mixing of the masses idea: Would there be any merit to a Mass that follows the Tridentine rubrics but is in the vernacular? Or would that just be stupid?

In the NY Archdiocese, that's all we had from about 1965 to 1970. So oviously, it not only is not stupid, there's actually more of a precedence for it, than there is for the N.O. in Latin.

Slowboy

"Rick, the earlier Missal wasn't antisemitic, but there was some anti-semitic feeling. Pogroms, for example. Anti-semitic comments here in the US."

Mary Kay. Typing fast. Don't understand. "Pograms, for example"

I know the real date for the motu proprio, but I'm not telling :)

Dan Hunter

There should not be any divisions between Catholics.
We all must acknowledge the truths of Christ and therefore His Mystical Body which is the Church.
The Classical Rite is a much denser and richer liturgy with greater content and the Sacrificial Nature of the Mass in much more evidence.This is what the sacrifice of the mass is all about.Sacrifice of Christ represented in an unbloody manner on the altar.
The Ordo Missae or Novus Ordo has deemphazized the outward acknowledgement of this sacrificial character.
Of course, it is still the same sacrifice of Calvary that takes place during every mass,Tridentine or Novus Ordo.But so many thousand,s have left the Church since its introduction.
What it has done for the Church is given us a greater apreciation for the Classical Mass and the undeniable sacred beauty which it manifests.
The Catholic Church has gone through a purification period lo these past 50 years and she will come out stronger and more brilliant on the other side of this loss of confidence in seminarys,religous orders and the Church in general,now that the mass that Pope St. Gregory and Pope St.Pius V made solid and codified will return to the fore of Catholic worship.
As far as a fear of anti-Semitic language in the Mass,It just is not there in the Missal of 1962.These fears are unwarranted.When we pray that the Jews eyes are opened,we are doing what the Church wants us to do, and that is to convert everyone to the true faith.We are commanded by Christ in charity to go forth and make disciples of all the nations.Just look at the great heritage we have of missionary work in the world and the shining saints this work produced.Francis Xavier in the Orient,the great Jesuits of the North,and South American missions.
And on and on.These brave men and women did not even bat an eye when they proclaimed that the Catholic Church is the true Church.They converted millions because they stood up for Christ and against the world and false religions.
We came from Judaism and it is connected to Catholicism and we are grateful to the fidelity of the Old Law Fathers to the one God,but Christ brought a New Covenant which completes and supercedes the Torah and Old Covenant.
We are called to convert the Jews,through Christ,just as we are called to an inner conversion ourselves.
God bless you.

Chevy Chase

Some of you might remember when we suffered through interminable reports of General Franco's imminent death. Speculation about when he would die went on so long that when it finally happened, it became an instant joke. I'm getting that deja vu feeling all over again.

Hmmm... So in a few months I'll be able to make news announcements saying, "And this just in... Pope Benedict's motu proprio has still been issued."

Great! This could revive my career!

Michael  Sullivan

Would there be any merit to a Mass that follows the Tridentine rubrics but is in the vernacular? Or would that just be stupid?

On the contrary, while I love Latin and think its preservation in the Church is extremely important, I rather think that this would be the perfect solution right now. No one's asking me, however.

Esau

Slowboy --

About what you said:

...he claims as one of the big benefits of the new mass the fact of the incorporation of the entire bible (so to speak) in the readings.


As I've remarked in the past, the Tridentine rite only features just 1% of the Old Testament and 16.5% of the New Testament in its lectionary.

At Mass, they only have 1 Reading and 1 Gospel.


The Novus Ordo Mass has three with the Psalms in between there. It has three cycle of readings to cover most of Scripture.

The Novus Ordo has 13.5% of the Old Testament and 71.5% of the New Testament -- a tremendous increase over that of the Tridentine.


However, I welcome the Tridentine rite as I believe it's what's needed especially during these times where liturgical abuse is rampant and respect for AUTHENTIC Catholic Tradition has been all but tossed by certain Catholics (both the Liberals and the Rad Trads) as some sort of 'refuse' from the Past meant for disposal.

That is, a genuine form of renewal might come about if elements of historical Catholic tradition were to once again be prominent in Catholic Liturgy.

Thank God for Pope Benedict XVI!

Anthony

I've always gotten the impression that certain people and groups are trying to lock Pope Benedict on a certain course or timetable and that this is the way that Vatican politics have always worked.

Is the pope allowed to change his mind and not go forward with the motu propio? Is he allowed to delay it? Are some Church figures worried that either might happen? Are they nervous that an announcement won't take the precise form that they wish? In my mind, this isn't a done deal until it is officially announced. Are people building up so much anticipation that anything less than their expectations would be a profund disappointment?

Anthony

I've always gotten the impression that certain people and groups are trying to lock Pope Benedict on a certain course or timetable and that this is the way that Vatican politics have always worked.

Is the pope allowed to change his mind and not go forward with the motu propio? Is he allowed to delay it? Are some Church figures worried that either might happen? Are they nervous that an announcement won't take the precise form that they wish? In my mind, this isn't a done deal until it is officially announced. Are people building up so much anticipation that anything less than their expectations would be a profound disappointment?

Jason

I wish the Holy See would say something about a release date or at least announce the document publicly (as they did with his first Encyclical). I feel like it's going to just drop like a bomb when it is released, with no warning. Then again, the media will probably have a fit no matter what.

Ed Peters

Ah, Chevy, great minds and memories run alike!

Esau

Anthony,

Great questions!

Unfortunately, there is heavy opposition against the Motu Proprio -- especially from clergy who seem to have such disdain for elements of the past, saying that it is but a backward step.

As heroic a figure Pope Benedict XVI is, I fear that even those in the curia might take measures to see that certain intentions of and efforts by his holiness are stifled.

Brian

Personally I'll take any Mass whether vernacular or latin, novus ordo or tridentine where the mindset is to celebrate the sacrament as fully as possible.

I hate how the prevailing attitude toward Mass is to do only the minimum of what the rubrics say is absolutely mandatory and then leave out or change as much as you can get away with. I can't understand why priests choose to celebrate Mass that way. I would think they would hate such a stripped down Mass and would want it to be as special as possible.

If the motu proprio happens, I don't think every parish would adopt a Tridentine Mass. But I hope it would have a residual effect of encouraging a greater range of lower to higher Masses. Right now the choices I have at my parish are: a flat, uninspiring vigil Mass with a gospel choir; a flat, uninspiring Mass with no choir; a flat, uninspiring Mass with a children's choir; a flat, uninspiring Mass with a hippie guitarist; or a flat, uninspiring Mass with an organist.

Esau

Brian --

LOVE your post above.

About your comment:

I hate how the prevailing attitude toward Mass is to do only the minimum of what the rubrics say is absolutely mandatory and then leave out or change as much as you can get away with. I can't understand why priests choose to celebrate Mass that way.


Unfortunately, the prevalent attitude by certain rogue priests/laity out there is that Mass is nothing but a 'service' wherein the wishes and desires of those attending must be catered to and the priest has to provide a form of 'entertainment' pleasing to the crowd versus what's actually pleasing to (not to mention, 'established' by) Christ, our Saviour.

Everybody today is on 'self' mode.

Mass has, in the same way, become 'about me' and not about Christ.

Catholicism/Christianity has all but become 'a necessary fiction' for folks in order to make them feel better about themselves. Does anybody really live according to the Gospels? Hell no! Does anybody really do what Christ had asked his followers? Hell no!

Yet, when it comes to using Christianity as some sort of self-help product to boost the egos and make folks feel better about who they are, they're all for it.

As Pope Benedict XVI had alluded to at World Youth Day, Christianity has become a 'consumer product'.


Pope Benedict XVI was right in what he said then:

"Yet, if it is pushed too far, religion becomes almost a consumer product. People choose what they like, and some are even able to make a profit from it."

"But religion constructed on a 'do-it-yourself' basis cannot ultimately help us," he said.

Jim Brown

I don't quite understand why we think that the liberalization of the use of the Tridentine mass is going to make things any better, if the 'things' we are speaking of are the rampant liturgical abuses. If I may offer up an oracle of my own: I predict that immediately after the liberalization of the Tridentine mass (should it ever come) we will begin to see some of the most horrifically abused Tridentine masses ever. In short, it'll look only slightly worse than it did immediately before Vatican II (which no one bothers to read). Shortly thereafter, some backwards priest will have the idea to MIX the two masses ad hoc, and thus create an even more severe abuse. The problem isn't the mass, mass has NEVER been a problem, the problem is total lack of obedience. That goes for all the 'traditionalists' (since when did Tradition include disobedience to the current magesterium?) and for all the people out there who strum guitars and sing "We Rise from Ashes" at the Novus Ordo.
How long until I am forced to sit through a Tridentine mass in a circular church while someone strums a guitar and sings, off key, a vernacular 'worship song' written by a Protestant that can only be tortured into theological conformity by some bizarre interpretation? I'd much rather be able to go to a Novus Ordo said respectfully, reverently, appropriately, with both Latin and Vernacular and no horrific music. If bringing back the Tridentine mass fosters that, then praise God. If not though, I have a fear that for the next few years/decades we're in for even more abuses. All I really want is to go to a liturgy that obeys Sacrosanctum Concilium, and is said with reverence. I think in that regard, as St. Paul says, "I have the Spirit."

John

Slowboy posted:

"reading a book about scripture by Scott Hahn and he claims as one of the big benefits of the new mass the fact of the incorporation of the entire bible (so to speak) in the readings. I never realized that the OT was almost excuded in the Trinitine Mass. This part anyway seems a step backwards for sure. "


Gee, Scott Hahn an ex protestant minister on your source for Catholic liturgy

Possibly try reading a book titled simply "The Mass" written by Father Adrian Fortescue, before there even was Novus Ordo (imagine that!!) with no bias and the true organic development of the One True Mass that only ADDED prayers to combat the threats to the church at that time, not delete 35 prayers and altar the rest as the New Mass has done.

And by the way, I have no idea what Scott Hahn is saying that the New Mass incorporates all of the OT and the Old mass does not as it shoots a hole directly into all of the NO supporters who cry and cry that the New Mass is indeed organic.

I guess that the reading of the secret, psalms, etc in the Tridentine mass is from some Testament Scott Hahn knows nothing about.

Tim J.

"If the motu proprio happens, I don't think every parish would adopt a Tridentine Mass"

I don't think every parish would adopt a Latin Mass, either, but some will. In order to attend a TLM now I would have to drive several hours. If, after the Motu Proprio, even just a few parishes closer by adopt a Latin Mass, that may open up my options considerably. What if people begin to "vote with their feet" in favor of parishes with the TLM?

Ordinarily, I am of the mindset that you stick with the parish closest to home, unless there is really something rotten going on. But to give my family (at last) a taste of the Latin heritage of the Church... the reverence, the sense of meaningful ritual... that might be worth a little drive.

That fact might put pressure on those parishes who DON'T care for the TLM to adopt one anyway, just to compete. Of course, one might not expect them to put their whole heart into it... it might become (in those "yeah, we have the TLM, too" places) a pale ghost of what it could be.

John

Maybe B16 should go to a synagogue and kiss a Torah much like JPII had a penchant for kissing Korans to prove that the TLM is not antisemitic and appease them. After all the V2 church in the name of ecumania has to first check with every faith including vodoo witch doctors on up to make sure that whatever we do or say does not offend them! I wonder if Jesus had thought like that would there even be a church today, or the Apostles

Such a shame

Tim J.

"I predict that immediately after the liberalization of the Tridentine mass (should it ever come) we will begin to see some of the most horrifically abused Tridentine masses ever. In short, it'll look only slightly worse than it did immediately before Vatican II (which no one bothers to read). "

Well, I pray you are wrong, but it is certainly a strong possibility... and KUDOS for pointing out the FACT that liturgical abuse was common BEFORE VatII. There are many ways to abuse the liturgy, and drums and dancers represent only one end of the spectrum.

Brian

Esau, I wholeheartedly agree with just about everything you said. Except the "certain rogue priests/laity" part. In my experience most parishes don't celebrate Mass well. It's certain brave priests/laity who celebrate it well rather than certain rogue priests who don't.

Mass has, in the same way, become 'about me' and not about Christ.

I understand why people think this way, but I don't understand why they still come to Mass. When I thought I was A-OK and knew everything and didn't need to listen to those frumpy old bishops at the Vatican, I stopped going to Mass. If I believed in God it was very faint and He tended to agree with everything I thought and did - so what did I need the Church for? To me that seems like the logical response and I don't think I would have found my faith if I didn't first fall away from the Church. On the other hand, getting together during prime Sunday morning sleeping time and holding hands and patting ourselves on the back doesn't seem like a logical reason to go to Mass to me.

Esau

But to give my family (at last) a taste of the Latin heritage of the Church... the reverence, the sense of meaningful ritual... that might be worth a little drive.


GOD BLESS YOU, TIM J.!

I had attended the Indult TLM in the past myself until the priest that celebrated it retired.

If you ever do get the chance, you'll, at the very least, get a taste of the traditional past.

Of course, you might want to get a heads-up of when to sit and when to stand first prior to attending one.

I remember the first time I had attended way back when, I was rather taken aback since these motions are quite unlike the cues in the Novus Ordo and the sit/stand/kneel motions might come off sudden and abrupt the first time around.

Also, make certain you have a Missal since they only have one cycle of readings and do only 1 Reading, 1 Gospel -- entirely different from the Novus Ordo where the Novus Ordo actually has 3 cycles of readings versus just the one and, thus, covers the bible more than the Tridentine does.

BillyHW

MP RSN.

James

A three year cycle of readings is too long. The one year cycle made more sense, because it allowed the entire life of Christ to be lived mystically in one liturgical year. The three year cycle was hastily arranged and replaced about a thousand years of tradition. I definitely think that it was a bad idea. In the Tridentine Mass, there was usually a Pauline epistle or other Scriptural reading, and then a reading from the Gospel. That makes good sense in the traditional context of the liturgy, which is focused not so much on Scriptural exegesis as the living of Christ's life liturgically.

Tim J.

I heard that B16 kissed a copy of Joel Osteen's new book!!

He sat by and did NOTHING while Charlotte Church went all Britney-floozie on us.

He also changed the drapes and carpeting in the Papal Apartments! What further need have we of witnesses?!?!

Dan Hunter

The Tridentine mass is full of The Old Testament.
Prayers at the foot of the altar,the Judica me which is Psalm 42.
The Graduals the Collects,the Secret prayers or Super Oblato.The Epistle many times is from the book of Wisdom,Daniel,Isaias.The Tract.
The very sacrificial nature hearkens back to the Temple and the priest in the Holies.
The various rites of incensation take their foundation in the Temple ceremonies.
The "Dirigatur",at the incensing of the offerings at High Mass is Psalm 140:2-4.
The Lavabo is Psalm 25:6-12.
The Sanctus.
On and on. The Tridentine Mass is laden with the beauty of the Old testament.
It is all acessable in the missal it is all catechetical in its nature .It is all uplifting and enough for our offerings of self,and The Lamb, through the Alter Christus to the High Priest Himself.
God bless you.

Esau

The one year cycle made more sense, because it allowed the entire life of Christ to be lived mystically in one liturgical year. The three year cycle was hastily arranged and replaced about a thousand years of tradition. I definitely think that it was a bad idea.


James:

I've got to say, you bring up a valid argument.

There are actually those who have indicated that the three cycles is, in fact, too long where especially in this age of prevailing short attention spans, folks hardly even pay attention to the 2 Readings and 1 Gospel at Mass anyway and can't even recall just what was read at the Novus Ordo Mass.

Though, I still find some merit (if one actually takes it seriously) to the three cycles since it does cover such a huge portion of the bible.

However, I can see the valid viewpoints of some others where it has been stated that the catechism was better reinforced with the one cycle in the Tridentine though due to it being annually repeated.

Brian

Ordinarily, I am of the mindset that you stick with the parish closest to home, unless there is really something rotten going on. But to give my family (at last) a taste of the Latin heritage of the Church... the reverence, the sense of meaningful ritual... that might be worth a little drive.

Tim, I'm of the same mindset. My parish has no pews, no stained glass, no anything. The only way you can tell it's not Protestant is the Crucifix. But I feel it's my duty to participate in and give my money to the parish I live in. So I try to always wear a sportscoat and tie and do small things to show signs of reference without purposely drawing attention to myself. Hopefully it'll rub off on people, I know I've found that it's strengthened my own faith. I don't expect that such a church would would ever offer a Tridentine Mass, but hopefully, as you said, the pressure from other parishes would make at least one of the Sunday Masses a little more reverent.

Tim J.

"GOD BLESS YOU, TIM J.!"

Well, God bless you right back, brother!

Snowman

Brian said: "Right now the choices I have at my parish are: a flat, uninspiring vigil Mass with a gospel choir; a flat, uninspiring Mass with no choir; a flat, uninspiring Mass with a children's choir; a flat, uninspiring Mass with a hippie guitarist; or a flat, uninspiring Mass with an organist."

I can understand people being upset with flagrant liturgical abuses, but setting those specific cases aside, is it not up to us to be "inspired" at Mass? Should we be expecting the Mass to inspire us, or should we simply be attending Mass to worship our Lord, and be fed spiritually? I frankly don't understand what people find so inspiring about Latin. Is it just because it's different and exotic? Like when I took Spanish lessons, people kept asking me to say something in Spanish, because it was different to them? Some talk about NO Masses being about "entertaining" the people, but the same could be said about Latin Masses. Some people, for whatever reason, find Latin entertaining. It certainly isn't more reverent. Reverence comes from within, not from what language a person is speaking. Same with homilies; the quality depends on the priest saying it. The Mass in which he says it makes no difference; priests won't suddenly crank up the quality of their homilies because some Latin is being spoken.

More reverence in Mass would be nice, but it has to come from each of us individually, not done for us by a certain form of liturgy. People can be just as bored and inattentive (perhaps even more so) in a Latin Mass as a vernacular.

Esau

Snowman:

This is why I found Tim J.'s comments very meaningful since it encompasses my sentiments for the Latin Mass.

Tim J. said:

But to give my family (at last) a taste of the Latin heritage of the Church... the reverence, the sense of meaningful ritual... that might be worth a little drive.


If you consider the long history of the Latin Mass in the history of the Catholic Church since even the days of the early church, this, therefore, bridges us with our distant past as Christians, with the heroic saints and martyrs who celebrated in this manner throughout a greater part of Church history, that should, in fact, be looked upon, remembered and revered as part of our Catholic heritage.

Tim J.

Actually, a sense of the exotic cuts pretty close to the appeal of Latin...

"Exotic; alien: being or from or characteristic of another place or part of the world; "alien customs"; "exotic plants in a greenhouse"; "exotic cuisine"

"strikingly strange or unusual; "an exotic hair style"; "protons, neutrons, electrons and all their exotic variants"; "the exotic landscape of a dead planet"

The idea is that the Truth of Church teaching and the liturgy really DOES come from a distant place, and really is (I think G.K. Chesterton would agree) "strikingly strange".

The idea of the Church being unified by a common language also touches very strongly on the real nature of "catholicity"... we are all primarily citizens of a very exotic country, indeed. We are really only temporary residents of out native countries here on Earth.

Brian

Snowman,
I never said I needed a Latin Mass. But I would like a Mass that's celebrated as if we actually believed Jesus himself was physically present. I live near Washington, DC and have been to Mass at the National Shrine a few times. It's vernacular novus ordo, but it's how Mass is supposed to be celebrated. That's the type of thing I would like to see rather than the "Ok, let's get this over with" attitude that's present at my parish (and I suspect many others). Maybe if we celebrated Mass more like we meant it, that nasty little statistic concerning the number of Catholics who believe in transubstantiation would start to turn back the other way.

Michael  Sullivan

Though, I still find some merit (if one actually takes it seriously) to the three cycles since it does cover such a huge portion of the bible.

Clearly the Fathers and Doctors of the Latin Church weren't concerned about this. Why do you assume a priori that the mass should cover a huge portion of the Bible? In fact it seems like a Protestant idea to me that a big part of "going to Church" is to get through the Bible and have someone explain every part to me.

The new breviary also contains huge portions of scripture. At the risk of making it even longer, why not make the Divine Office on a several-year track instead of the Mass? That seems to be the place for "getting your Bible in" anyway, not necessarily during the Holy Sacrifice.

Before the 60s you could pick up collections of sermons by St Gregory the Great, by St Bonaventure, by many others throughout the centuries, on any given sunday, and read a sermon on the same gospel you just heard at mass. There was real continuity, not just of worship, but also of exegesis, meditation on the liturgy, etc. Now that the cycle is disrupted and "reformed" that's no longer true. All the old theological and devotional materials pre-VII are "out of date" in a way that wasn't true before. I think that's a shame, and I'd personally be happy to go back to reading the rest of the Bible outside of Mass.

Esau

Brian --

About what you said:

Esau, I wholeheartedly agree with just about everything you said. Except the "certain rogue priests/laity" part. In my experience most parishes don't celebrate Mass well. It's certain brave priests/laity who celebrate it well rather than certain rogue priests who don't.

Actually, I was pointing out that the liturgical abuse that we see rampant these days is more often than not due to such rogue priests/laity out there.


I understand why people think this way, but I don't understand why they still come to Mass. When I thought I was A-OK and knew everything and didn't need to listen to those frumpy old bishops at the Vatican, I stopped going to Mass. If I believed in God it was very faint and He tended to agree with everything I thought and did - so what did I need the Church for? To me that seems like the logical response and I don't think I would have found my faith if I didn't first fall away from the Church.


I really get where you're coming from here!

I, myself, don't understand why such folks still continue to attend if that's indeed the case.

For that matter, I don't even understand the need to remain a Catholic -- especially those folks who actually seem to disagree with almost every dogma of the Church and actually think that the Eucharist is nothing more than bread and not actually the body & blood of Our Lord!


On the other hand, getting together during prime Sunday morning sleeping time and holding hands and patting ourselves on the back doesn't seem like a logical reason to go to Mass to me.

This is one of the things that can turn people off -- the fact that it seems the Mass has become more of a SOCIAL event rather than giving attention where attention is due: to the Holy Sacrifice of Mass and Our Lord Himself!

Esau

Though, I still find some merit (if one actually takes it seriously) to the three cycles since it does cover such a huge portion of the bible.

"Clearly the Fathers and Doctors of the Latin Church weren't concerned about this. Why do you assume a priori that the mass should cover a huge portion of the Bible? In fact it seems like a Protestant idea to me that a big part of "going to Church" is to get through the Bible and have someone explain every part to me."

Michael Sullivan:

Didn't you even take notice of the other things I said?


Like:

"I've got to say, you bring up a valid argument.

There are actually those who have indicated that the three cycles is, in fact, too long where especially in this age of prevailing short attention spans, folks hardly even pay attention to the 2 Readings and 1 Gospel at Mass anyway and can't even recall just what was read at the Novus Ordo Mass."

AND

"However, I can see the valid viewpoints of some others where it has been stated that the catechism was better reinforced with the one cycle in the Tridentine though due to it being annually repeated."

Esau

Before the 60s you could pick up collections of sermons by St Gregory the Great, by St Bonaventure, by many others throughout the centuries, on any given sunday, and read a sermon on the same gospel you just heard at mass. There was real continuity, not just of worship, but also of exegesis, meditation on the liturgy, etc. Now that the cycle is disrupted and "reformed" that's no longer true.


Michael Sullivan:

That's NOT entirely true.

I, in fact, devote myself to not only the Horae but also to the Benedictine breviary and on both accounts, they often contain sermons of the Fathers and other such Patristic writings that bear great relevance to the reading and even Gospel said at Mass that day.

Kevin Cary

Ed Peters - There was a comment at the end of John Allen's piece where a woman claimed that the SSPX is not schismatic, even though Archbishop Lefebrve is... she said to ask any respected canon lawyer and they would agree. Do you? What is their status? (if you have already written about this, perhaps you can direct me there) Thanks!

BobCatholic

I'll add my speculation:

Is there a feast date for St. Pius X?
Or on Pentecost.


2010.

:)

John

Michael posted:

"Clearly the Fathers and Doctors of the Latin Church weren't concerned about this. Why do you assume a priori that the mass should cover a huge portion of the Bible? In fact it seems like a Protestant idea to me that a big part of "going to Church" is to get through the Bible and have someone explain every part to me."

Exactly! But dont forget Scott Hahn is a former protestant minister and many here like Esau are former protestants, and the NO mass was implemented to please just such as sect bent on sola scriptura

Read Adrian Fortescue's book filled with true Latin and Greek and the true organic development of the liturgy, not the Bugnini mass that is being sold off today

The Protestant Plot to Take Over of the Catholic Church!! HAHAHAHA!!!

Exactly! But dont forget Scott Hahn is a former protestant minister and many here like Esau are former protestants, and the NO mass was implemented to please just such as sect bent on sola scriptura

YES -- Our dastardly PLOT has been uncovered!


Scott Hahn, Jimmy Akin, Tim Staples, and all us Protestant Converts are aiming to TAKE OVER THE CHURCH!!!


HAHAHAHHAHAHHHAA!!!!!

JoAnna

John -- I'm a former Protestant and I'm not "bent on sola scriptura." In fact, it seems so unbiblical now that I wonder how I ever could have believed in it.

But that reminds me, I should call Scott Hahn, head of the Protestant Plot to Take Over the Catholic Church (PPTOCC, or HAHAHAHAHAHA!!). I still haven't gotten my secret decoder ring. *sigh*

You mean the same Adrian Fortescue, author of the articles on Liturgy for the Catholic Encyclopedia, who described the canon in the Tridentine rite as being a dramatic change from what it was before?

More precisely: "the canon has not only been changed but dramatically so."


Hence:

This brings us back to the most difficult question: Why and when was the Roman Liturgy changed from what we see in Justin Martyr to that of Gregory I? The change is radical, especially as regards the most important element of the Mass, the Canon.

At Rome, the Eucharistic prayer was fundamentally changed and recast at some uncertain period between the fourth and the sixth and seventh centuries... Of the various theories suggested to account for this it seems reasonable to say: "We must then admit that between the years 400 and 500 a great transformation was made in the Roman Canon" (Euch. u. Busssakr., 86).

The part removed from the ellipse stated simply that "[d]uring the same time the prayers of the faithful before the Offertory disappeared, the kiss of peace was transferred to after the Consecration, and the Epiklesis was omitted or mutilated into our "Supplices" prayer" (Fortescue: Catholic Encyclopedia article "Liturgy of the Mass" c. 1913).

Brian

This is a little off topic, but the comments about all the Protestant converts made me think of it. Where have the staunch cradle to grave Catholics gone? It seems nearly everyone I know who's Catholic is either a convert or revert, while most cradle Catholics are either "Catholic" or no longer associate themselves with the Church.

Do You Accept Scott Hahn as Your Personal Lord & Saviour?

(Note: PPTOCC Secret Decoder Ring Required)

Rick

The point is that many partisans of the novus ordo (including converts like Scott Hahn -- who is a fine, upstanding man) have treated us traditionalists like we want something that has been left behind. This attitude -- similar to the 19th century idea of progress -- has interpreted church history in a decidedly "Whig" direction. The point is that if we had been born three hundred years (or 1000 years) ago we would have had the trid in Latin. This sutained countless Catholics and Catholic saints for years. The novus ordo types who are so hostile to the Tridentine mass are, therefore, out of line with the historical experience of the church. If they would have been born years ago, they would have -- according to their own logic and admissions -- opposed the very liturgy that fed countless saints. That is what traditionalists like myself find so distasteful about the novus ordo partisans who are also orthodox Catholics. You folks should be our biggest supporters, yet you seem to be our enemies and ally with the heterodox liberals on the fundamental issues of the mass.

Dr. Eric

I'm a cradle Catholic.

And I think that since the other Liturgies also use less of the OT, going back to the TLM's usage of a 1 year cycle like the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (the one that comes to my mind) is a good thing.

The OT is used more for Vespers and the like.

Esau

You folks should be our biggest supporters, yet you seem to be our enemies and ally with the heterodox liberals on the fundamental issues of the mass.


Rick:

Where in my posts have I OPPOSED the Motu Proprio or even the TLM???

If anything, I have promoted it!

Slowboy

I guess that the reading of the secret, psalms, etc in the Tridentine mass is from some Testament Scott Hahn knows nothing about

John,

Please save your ignorant vitrol for those who deserve it: like me. I paraphrased Scott Hahn from without a backward glance to see how close I came to his actual quote. I did not mean to imply that he has said the NO is "better" than the Tri'D. His statement was closer to this: Few Catholics seek exposure to the bible outside of the mass and the change in the readings is an improvement.

Since I have heard no statement from him about the masses I will not speculate, something you might consider yourself.

Snowman

Rick,

Again, the issue I have is that "the tridentine mass sustained Catholics for years". Our Lord in the Eucharist is what sustained Catholics for years, and he is as available to us now in the NO as he was before in the tridentine Mass. The issue for many of us who seem hostile to the tridentine Mass (and I count myself among them) is that it seems like more emphasis is placed on the rites than on the Lordby some. This is particularly evident with those like "John" who posted above, who worships the tridentine liturgy rather than worshipping God. Granted, he is an extreme example of this form of idolatry, but it's out there.

As well, there's the disdain many "trads" have for the NO. I remember a recent discussion on this same topic, a woman posted that she had to attend an SSPX mass, because there was no latin mass in the area she was visiting. So, she has put worshipping in Latin above obedience to Christ and His Church, by supporting schism.

Tim J. and Esau made a good point, that it is about re-introducing some of the Church's heritage back into the liturgy, and I can support that. I'm actually quite a history buff. But I worry that it's rewarding those who place their preference of rites over obedience to the Church. I'd love to see more reverence, but I think it needs to come from within us, not done for us through Latin liturgy. I'm as annoyed as anyone about things like grown men who come to mass in shorts and sandals, or with sunglasses propped on top of their heads, and that sort of attitude. But I don't think people will magically become more reverent with the re-introduction of Latin. People are people, and I've decided that it's best to just accept those who come to Mass without the "right" attitude, and just work on making sure I have a good attitude and am focused on Christ. It's much better for my mental health, and hopefully will keep me from becoming like "John".

The PPTOCC Conspiracy EXPOSED!

Exactly! But dont forget Scott Hahn is a former protestant minister and many here like Esau are former protestants, and the NO mass was implemented to please just such as sect bent on sola scriptura


No use in a continued 'COVER-UP'.

We've been EXPOSED.


Protestant converts are joining the Catholic Church not to go over to Catholicism, but actually to TAKE OVER the Catholic Church!

In fact, that's why the Motu Proprio is being delayed!


Our PPTOCC SECRET AGENTS have been active in Rome to make sure this doesn't happen.

In fact, our Double-Agent in these here United States was none other than ---- drum roll --- FR. FESSIO!!!

(Now you know why he got fired! He was OUR 007!)


... cue in 'James Bond' theme ...

Maureen

I wasn't aware that we "Novus Ordo supporters" were at war with the "traditionalists" at all. I realize it's difficult, but it's not productive to get paranoid. Especially when you're about to WIN BIG! Nah, you're supposed to be practicing being gracious winners in the pope stakes. :)

I also wasn't aware that we Catholics who've been going to Mass every Sunday practically since our infant baptisms had vanished. I'm sorry that we don't insist on telling everyone our story of how we never left, but it's not as if there's a great deal to tell.

"And I got mad about this thing that happened, but then I offered it up." "I thought about sleeping in, but I got up instead." "Actually, I always liked going to Mass, so I liked it at college too." Ooh, page-turners!

Also, it seems rather rude to make a point of such things. I mean, God gave me the grace of being raised Catholic, and God gave me the gift of faith. All this was an undeserved gift. If anything, I should be ashamed that I haven't cooperated any better than I have, given all the graces shed upon me.

Rick

The typical Novus ordo rejoinder, which you can find above, is that traditionalists worship the latin mass rather than God -- in other words, forms are not really important. Then, in the next breath, these novus ordo partisans long for more reverence in the novus ordo liturgy. So on the one hand, I am a bad Catholic for insisting that the traditional form of the liturgy -- the one basically (with a few minor differences) in place since the time of Pope St. Gregory the Great -- more fully expresses the truths of the Catholic faith than does the novus ordo. Then, on the other hand, the conservative partisans of the novus ordo have to establish their orthodoxy by claiming to demand more "traditional" piety and reverence from their liberal compatriots -- who more ardently support the novus ordo than any of the normal conservative cheerleaders. I call this the "Hegelian game" -- the conservatives try to posit themselves as the moderate alternative to two extremes. By posturing themselves as such, they can simply refuse to debate the relevant issues with traditionalists. It is the condescension of such a position that I most despise.

If liturgy is important -- as conservative CLAIM to believe -- if tradition is important -- as conservatives BELIEVE it is -- then the liturgical debate is THE most important debate among orthodox Catholics today! Don't marginalize me by trying to throw me into the "traditionalist ghetto." That is why the mortu proprio is so important. It will bring the traditionalist position out of the rhetorical ghetto in which it has been consigned by liberal hierarchy and the conservatives who support them on liturgical questions.

Esau

Again, Rick, where in all my posts have I OPPOSED the Motu Proprio and/or the TLM?

You said:

Don't marginalize me by trying to throw me into the "traditionalist ghetto."


Well, same thing goes for you -- Don't marginalize me by trying to throw me into the "Conservative ghetto"!

Never mind the fact that I used to ATTEND THE INDULT when it was offered at a distant parish until the priest who celebrated it RETIRED!

bill912

"Conservative" and "liberal" are political terms. They have nothing to do with the Church.

Esau

"Conservative" and "liberal" are political terms. They have nothing to do with the Church.


EXACTLY, bill912!

What these people don't realize is that CATHOLICISM is NOT comprised of such POLITICAL FACTIONS!

It is THE CHURCH Christ himself established, which we owe DUE OBEDIENCE!

Snowman

Rick, if your rant was addressing my post, you're mssing the point. I'm not saying liturgy is not important, I'm saying among some (particularly those who insist on Latin, to the point of going to schismatic Masses) have placed liturgy above obedience to the Church, and seem to have missed the whole point of Mass ("Why do you call me Lord, but don't do as I have commanded you?" - Jesus, 30 AD). I don't have a problem with reverence, but I believe it comes from each of us individually, it can't be done for us. In all honesty, if you can't worship God reverently in a NO Mass, I don't see how you can worship Him reverently in a Tridentine Mass. It seems to me that people are relying too heavily on the Mass to be reverent for them. And again, that's what I was getting at with the comment about men going to Church dressed for the beach - reverance should come from the individual, it can't be done for them by a priest speaking in Latin. People can daydream and check out women/men just as easily at a Lain Mass as at NO Mass.

And, I'm not saying this about all "trads", but I get the impression some (and I shouldn't keep pointing out John, but he comes across as particularly bitter and mean-spirited in his posts) seem to be trying to solve the problem of individual irreverence by isolating themselves from the "beach boys". If there are both NO and Latin Masses, I think many feel that the less devout will find it easier to stay with the Mass they know, and the elites will be rid of the riff-raff that populates NO Masses and makes them seem less reverent compared to Latin Masses. Needless to say, I don't think that's a good approach.

Rick

Ah! The old canard about liberal and conservative terminology.... My dear Esau and Bill, of course the concepts of liberal and conservative are appropriate in discussing positions within the Church. I assume that you are an orthodox Catholic. I assure you that I am as well. Now, disagreements among orthodox Catholics concerning Church disciplines and the ways in which Catholics adhere to traditional forms of piety and worship can be classified (and are classified) in terms of "traditionalist" and "conservative." "Liberals" are usually, though not always, heterodox Catholics who see little use for traditional disciplinary forms. The terms liberal and conservative are used to delineate positions respective to the Church's disciplinary policies, as you well know.

Esau, I do not know anything about you...therefore, I am not accusing you of anything. I am simply responding to the dozen or so conservatives I have had questioning my orthodoxy for the past 8 years that I have been attending an Indult mass.

JD

A while ago, my wife was at a seminar a well-known priest (often featured on EWTN) gave over a Friday night and Saturday. The conclusion of the program was supposed to be his celebration of the Mass, however, a back injury prohibited him from saying the Mass, and about 40 minutes prior to its start, it was announced that another priest would say the Mass. At this announcement, my wife noticed a lot of people around her making the decision to leave, saying things like "Well, if Fr. ______ won't say the Mass, we'll just go, may we can go out to dinner, etc."

This cult of personality disturbed her. Jesus would be present, and in light of that, the presence, or absence, of this priest seemed insignificant.

Equally disturbing is a cult of liturgy. Jesus will present to us in the Mass, no matter what liturgy is used or what direction the priest faces.

Alleluia, Alleluia, he is risen.

bill912

"...as you well know."

Wrong!

Your statement implies that I am a liar.

Rick

Snowman,
I understand your point. Of course, personal disposition is important and necessary.

JD,
I too dislike the cult of personality and do not support it in any way.

Sorry about my rant, Snowman, but the point is that the onus is not solely on the individual. The rite itself -- the form of the liturgy -- is an important component to creating a certain disposition in the worshipper. That is why Gregorian chant, beautiful artwork, and reverent liturgy can make the participation in a liturgy unforgetteable. Snowman, to place all the burden on the individual seems to me to be excessive. A few months ago I went to a Novus to fulfill my Sunday obligation (because I was out of town). I doubt that many pious Catholics I know (and I am not particularly pious or holy) could have worshipped reverently at the completely anti-liturgical ceremony I witnessed. Form is important. It should support traditional piety. It seems to me that the novus usually does not support traditional piety and even when said perfectly and reverently -- for example, by the priests of EWTN -- is not as traditional or reverent as the Tridentine mass.

Tim J.

St. Augustine was a convert... does that mean I should be in the market for a new patron saint, John? After all, his teachings MUST have been polluted with the errors of Manicheaism... yeah, that's it... Augustine was a Gnostic sympathizer...

Rick

Bill,
I am not calling you a liar. I am simply saying that "conservative" and "liberal" and "Traditionalist" are common terms in Catholic discussions and have well-established meanings.

Esau

Snowman DOES have a point --

Jesus did not place His AUTHORITY on a 'MASS' but, in fact, on a person: Peter, as well as his Successors.


Did not Mt 16:18 say:

18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

as well as:

19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.


I believe Snowman's citation:

'Why do you call me Lord, but don't do as I have commanded you?'

...speaks to the heart of the issue -- that Rad Trads should be obeying the Traditional Teachings of the Church, which is TO BE OBEDIENT to Christ by BEING OBEDIENT to His Vicar!

Mary Kay

"the three year cycle is too long"

Sigh.

The Church has spoken that Scripture and Eucharist are so closely interrelated to be one act of worship. That's not the exact phrase, but close enough.

Those who harp and criticize the 1970 Missal (Novus Ordo) - not the liturgical abuses, but the Missal itself - why can't you get it through your heads that you are criticizing Church teaching and that you are to accept, or at least be open enough to not dismiss out of hand, Church teaching. Why, why, do you think you know more than the Church?

bill912

I said that the terms have no place in the Church. You said that they do have a place in the Church "as you well know". If you weren't calling me a liar, what was the meaning of those words?

Alois

Rick asks:

"What's next? The Latin mass was responsible for slavery? Gimme a break!"

This is unbelievable and clairvoyant. Check out this story on CNN: Latin Mass Very Likely Cause of Slavery, Experts Say

Rick

Bill,
I assumed that you knew how the words were usually used in discourse and that you were trying to enforce another point.

I apologize if my words implied that you were a liar. I do not know you, therefore, I would have no grounds on which to accuse you of anything. Again, I apologize.

Rick

Mary Kay,
Please refer to the Church's distinction between doctrine and discipline. If we are wrong for criticizing the novus, then those who in the 1960s criticized the Tridentine mass were likewise wrong.

Mary Kay

Rick, who are you saying are "those who in the 1960s criticized the Tridentine mass?"

Thank you, but I know the difference between doctrine and discipline. It's a straw man argument here.

Leah

My husband and I have recently had to make the difficult decision to change parishes - liturgical abuses were becoming a spiritual stumbling block for him. I watched him grow more depressed and bitter, and I think both our prayer lives were suffering (pun intended).

Now after every Mass at our new parish, so often the first thing I say to my husband is "I love Jesus." Before, I always felt like crying after Mass in pain - now I cry for joy!

I know that Jesus is present at Mass here just as he was present at my former parish, but to attend Mass celebrated by a priest who loves the faith is such a great blessing!

I know from personal experience that the (ir)reverence of the liturgy can be a powerful factor in one's spiritual life. But will a universal indult really make reverent Masses more available? It seems to me that priests who would say the Tridentine Mass are already likely saying reverent Novus Ordo Masses.

Instead, the universal indult would enable priests whose bishops haven't given them permission to say the old Mass to do so. This seems to me to encourage division between the priests and their ordinary and may make it difficult for bishops to make sure that only priests are properly prepared preside at the Tridentine Mass.

I think it would be a great blessing if the Tridentine Mass were more available to the faithful who have a real spiritual need for it. But I'm not sure that a universal indult is the right way to do it. We need faithful bishops who listen to the needs of their flock, not a way to bypass the bishops.

Come on, Holy Spirit! Show us your stuff!

Rick

Mary KAy -- Refer to the liturgical movement before Vatican II and those who called for the TRidentine mass to be altered prior to 1970....There is no straw man here.

Brian

Maureen,
I'm sorry, I meant no offense. In fact, if anything I envy those whose faith hasn't wavered since baptism. Maybe (and hopefully) my experience is local to my generation (I'm in my mid 20's) and the diocese where I grew up. Although I was raised Catholic, I never knew that anyone actually was orthodox. From my family to religious education to even some priests the message was something like "God loves you, you don't really need to do [fill in controversial Church teaching here]." Is some of the fault mine? Yes. But the story is the pretty much the same for everyone I grew up with, which makes it seem to me the problem is larger than a personal one. I hope it's local to the area I grew up, but I suspect it's not.

Now that I'm playing catchup, I'm looking for role models in my parish and they're hard to find. My friends think I've rejected the truth of science in favor of some make believe God. My family thinks I'm crazy for trying to submit to the Authority of the Church. And getting guys in my KofC council to volunteer is like pulling teeth.

Faith is more than a personal thing, it's social. I long for a culture that supports it. I apologize for offending you. I'm looking for more people who have had Catholic faith their whole lives, not trying to put them down.

Mary Kay

Rick, I know something of the liturgical movement before Vatican II. Whether you do or not is uncertain, given your lack of details or sources to back up your opinion.

Some Day

Just because the Tridentine Rite is coming back does not mean the Church stays stuck.

This is not another error which is archaelogic conservativism, which do everything old, like taking Communion in the hand and celebrating on a table surrounded by the faithful.
No. You keep on perfecting things.

Holy Communion was stoped being given by hand in the 1st Century, it latter stopped being taken home. But then some wierd stuff happend.
Holy Communion was at one point a once a year thing.

The Church perfects its human side over time.

The Liturgy gets more beutiful.
So the Tridentine will just but things back in a decent position. From there you can perfect it.
The NO Mass is certainly valid and licit. It can be argued though that it is not heretical but heritisizing. Why? Because it can give a bad impression that the readings are more important than Holy Communion, the priest is a showman and that this a community offering. Not really, it is the incruent renovation of the Sacrifice of the Cross. IT IS OUR LORD OFFERING HIMSELF. Not the people. It also opens itself to more protestant influence. The TR is more safer in that sense. But certainly it cannot stay at that. It will keep on being perfected, because the merits of the blood of Our Lord are infinite.
Just like the Middle Ages were being guided by the Holy Spirit and producing a Catholic Civilization, the old stuff is good, but we must build on that. True progress is neccesary, but not progressivism.

The Holy Spirit will decide when and how things happen. Divine Providence allows for Man to bury himself, but God keeps on intervining.
Let us just pray He does so soon.
And He will. Just have confidence.

Mary Kay

Brian, if you're looking for orthodox Catholics in DC, Madonna House has a field house on or near Capitol Hill.

Mary Kay

It can be argued though that it is not heretical but heritisizing. Why? Because it can give a bad impression that the readings are more important than Holy Communion, the priest is a showman and that this a community offering

Some Day, where that happens, it's a reflection of the priest celebrating Mass. The 1970 Missal does not intrinsically or inherently do any of those things.

paul zummo

Mary Kay, you asserted that those who criticize the Novis Ordo are criticizing Church teaching. As Rick correctly pointed out, that would imply that those who criticized the 1962 missal also attacked Church teaching. That's not a straw man argument, unless you don't think anyone criticized this Mass. And if no one criticized this Mass . . . then why was it changed? Generally speaking, radical changes aren't undergone when everyone is content with something.

Also, the change in the Missal is not a change in "teaching," meaning a change in discipline.

Some Day

Neither of intrinsically nor inherently were said.
It can't be, because it would be a heretical thing.

I never said it was...that is a heresy.

I said which is the only legit argument I've ever heard is that it is heretisizing. That means it implies heresy but does not say it.
It is like trying to grab a bar a soap, you think you can grab it and destroy it but it slips.

But that does not mean you shouldn't attend it.
It is The Liturgy of the Church and that is there is to it. Until said otherwise, that is the ordinary rite.

I myself have only been to a T.R. Mass like 10 times (it was an old priest celebrating, he had dispensation).

Mary Kay

Some Day, on what basis do you say that the 1970 Missal "implies heresy?" I hope you will one day realize the ramifications of your statement that the ordinary Mass "implies heresy."

Mary Kay

that would imply that those who criticized the 1962 missal also attacked Church teaching

Paul, neither you nor Rick have answered my question. Who are you saying "criticized the 1962 Missal?"

Jack

Is that like statues of Mary imply idolatry?

Brian

I think that too often the debate over Novus Ordo and Tridentine becomes an either/or question, when maybe a more fitting Catholic answer is both/and. Those who support the Novus Ordo get wrongly grouped in with cafeteria Catholics and those who support Tridentine get wrongly grouped in with radical Traditionalists. Is it bad to have both easily available? Then maybe we can unite on the issue everyone agrees with - getting rid of liturgical abuses.

Brian

Thanks, Mary Kay, I'll look into it.

FR RP

Oh for heaven's sakes! This MP is getting like Nessie and Bigfoot...lots of sightings but no conclusive documentation. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm sure it is right behind the new Sacramentary, the new new lectionary, and the Parousia. Call be a doubter...but come on...

Some Day

Fr.,

I think it will come out, but not for the best of reasons. As I have stated before, the False Right has done more damage than outspoken leftists.
Our Lord battled the False Right more than the Left. If there is a sudden reactionary wave, it must be observed with caution. Could it be because it is an inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or the forces that be have a False Right movementation about to happen?
=====
No Jack not like that.
That implies they are dignant of veneration.

Maybe later I'll make an exposition on how the N.O. can be legitametely objected to.
But that is delicate and words need to be precise.
And although I can dominate English better than any other of the languages I know, by religious formation has not been in English.
Trust me on this though, I am no Rad Trad.
I do what is neccesary to fight the good fight.
If it means not shocking people and holding hands during the Our Father or giving the sign of peace I will. Sectarian mentalities never got anything good. Bashing the progressivists openly can only cause problems. For now. If you cut off the progressivists, you lose the majority of the faithful. If you prohibit certain imperfections, you'll have a schism. And everyone who knows something worth knowing knows that schism has been around the corner for many countries.
Our U.S. is one of them. Cardinal Arinze said in a private consultation that "we correct the American bishops, but no one listens...".
So prudence is key here in the fight against the Sons of Darkness. Esspecially the ones who are diguised as Sons of the Light.

Rick

MK,
Read Paul's post again...he explains it clearly.

Tim J.

"Oh for heaven's sakes! This MP is getting like Nessie and Bigfoot...lots of sightings but no conclusive documentation. I'll believe it when I see it."

You and plenty of others. There may be a method to this, though. Since the rumors started, people have begun to think through the implications, hash out their response, BEFORE the BIG ANNOUNCEMENT. It softens things up, a bit. Gives folks a chance to mull things over while they wait for the other shoe to drop. It's a little frustrating, but makes sense, too.

Can you picture the reaction if B16 had just dropped it out of the blue with no hint beforehand? Could you even imagine the secular media response? Hyperbole heaped on exaggeration, heaped on error, and all covered with a thick gravy of ignorance. It will be bad enough when it DOES happen (please God).

Mary Kay

Rick, no it's not clear who either you or Paul are referring to. The word "those" is an indefinite pronoun. All I'm asking is that you specify who you are referring to.

Shane

Forgive me for changing the subject ever so briefly, but can someone fill me in on what the objectionable items, such as that removed by John XXIII, were?

Esau

Some Day:

How can you imply that the Novus Ordo Missae is heretical or even inspires heresy?

If that was the case, I don't think that it would've been put in place by Pope Paul VI in the first place.

Not only that, but it would've defeated the very promise that came from Christ's own lips -- that the Gates of Hell wouldn't prevail against the Church!

Some Day

Our Lord suffered at the hands of the pontiff of the times Caiphas.

So you cannot automatically assume every leader is a good one.

Now I am not saying anything against any Pontiff.

And infallibility is not an insurance that every act of a Pontiff is correct. He could solemnly proclaim that baseball is the best sport ever. But it isn't. So liturgy is not always perfect. It is however not heretical. That is why I am careful in saying it implies but not in itself heretical. Esau you know very well that not all men of the Church are holy.

And you know what Saint Augustine said that the best men live in the monasteries...and so do the worst ones.

The worst enemies of the Church are the internal ones.

kaneohe

As a very recent convert (count weeks..) may I make suggestion? And please excuse my lack of RC word craft! I'm learning more and more everyday!!!

Scenarios and misunderstandings such as this recent concern about the language used in regard to the Jews will continue because most people in the media – and I think many in the Church don’t actually know what the texts actually say and no one is taking the time to supply the texts to the parties what really need to read them and so put the matter to rest.

I have heard of this language problem years ago and was told that in 1962 the issue was resolved. That the new Good Friday general intercessions, in particular the three prayers, for the Jewish people; for those who do not believe in Christ; and for those who do not believe in God, were no longer offensive and laid no “blood guilt”. Reading my missal (Daily Roman Missal, ed. J. Socias) I see this is true – but what confuses me, most likely confuses others, is there seems to be a general misunderstanding and lack of knowledge as to what are the approved TLM texts that will be used, if and when Pope Benedict releases his MP.

Perhaps being a recent convert I find all the various information regarding changes to the Sacred Liturgy, texts, and missals very confusing. What would help many people is a brief, clear exposition on what are the approved TLM texts that will be used, and what exactly is said in the texts.

Having someone provide the actual texts would clarify the matter, put to rest people’s fears, and supply the masses with the needed information. (Or at least a link to the texts…)

Forgive me if I am just too new at this – at times it is sensory and info overload! Believe me, I do appreciate people’s help.

Many thanks !! Grace and peace.

Michael  Sullivan

John,

I'm glad you agreed with my comments above. Esau is right to point out that there are still many instances of overlap between the new calandar and cycle of readings and the old, and the writings of the Fathers and Doctors are still useful for studying and meditating on the readings of the Mass; but he's wrong if he fails to recognize an important discontinuity.

Nevertheless, John, your comments about ex-Protestants are beside the point. I was born and raised a Protestant myself and converted to the Church when I was 18 years old. Whether one is a convert or not is no guide at all to whether one has retained Protestant ideas and sensibilites; and in fact I've known many "cradle Catholics" who had a deeply ingrained Protestant sense due to the surrounding ethos and bad teaching and upbringing. I wanted to suggest that any lingering ideas of the Mass as a big Bible study were off the mark and smacked of a Protestant view of worship; but again, whether or not anyone used to be a Protestant is irrelevant. What matters is what they think now.

kaneohe

Just realized in my above posting I mistakenly noted the Daily Roman Missal edited by Socias as the 1962 Tridentine Missal while in fact it is the NO missal...I got confused a bit having just ordered the 62 missal from Aquinas & More the other day ! So, while I am just a recent convert, and might be excused this faux pas, (please!) imagine how the media and other faiths can get lost figuring all this out!

I believe posting the actual text from the approved TLM would clarify this issue for many non-Catholics and new rubes like me!

Again, many thanks for your help.

PS Always wanting to learn more, can anyone suggest books on the history of the liturgy, etc, etc....

Grace and peace.

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31