Attempt to resurrect pre-vatican II mass leaves Church at crossroads

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike30
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mike30 said:
Someone reccommended this article to me, I don’t really know why, but it does explain a lot of the hostility towards the Extraordinary Form especially on the part of some Bishops who steadfastly refuse to allow it to be celebrated in their Dioceses.

ncronline.org/news/spirituality/attempt-resurrect-pre-vatican-ii-mass-leaves-church-crossroads

This article is only a couple of months old.
Click to expand...
From the “Who we are” of National Catholic Register:

Our mission is to provide a perspective on the news of the day as seen through the eyes of the Magisterium.

The National Catholic Register and NCRegister.com have become America’s most complete and faithful Catholic news source.

In 1995, a group of investors, along with the Legionaries of Christ, saved the newspaper from closing and moved it to New England.

On February 1, 2011, the National Catholic Register was purchased by EWTN.

Some in the forum may not like the article, may struggle with it, or may react strongly against it.

We do not walk in the bishops’ shoes; we do not know who and what they have to deal with. If it were simply a matter of people wanting to go to the EF, I would suspect that we would see more of the EF throughout the various dioceses. However, in reading threads herein, it is not hard to see that there are a number of folks who, to put it politely, minimize Vatican 2; Paul 6th was prescient in his encyclical Humanae Vitae, and it appears that he was prescient also about how some conservatives would react to Vatican 2.

It was interesting to see the comment by Father Ratzinger; it would be more interesting to see if he ever withdrew or modified that comment later as priest, or bishop, or Cardinal.

To simply dismiss the comment as “modernist” is not only to show almost total ignorance of what Modernism constituted, but also a rather ad hominem comment about the man who would (eventually) be Pope.
 
Also this is the National “Catholic” REPORTER, which is NOT owned by EWTN, and is anti-Catholic teaching.
But the National Catholic REGISTER on the other hand is owned by EWTN and is a good Catholic source.
 
Benedikt said:
Also this is the National “Catholic” REPORTER, which is NOT owned by EWTN, and is anti-Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
Not entirely, but it does go out of its way to entertain the heterodox.
Benedikt said:
But the National Catholic REGISTER on the other hand is owned by EWTN and is a good Catholic source.
Click to expand...
Yep.

I don’t agree with the writer’s entire point of view. On the other hand, I will maintain my point, and that is, without seeing what the bishops have to endure, it is all to easy to sit in judgment of them. If a bishop were to square off with one end of the spectrum or the other, which end would be the most profitable; one that clearly has foregone any connection to the Church, or one that presumes a connection, albeit damaged?
 
I remember I read this when it was published. Nonsense really, this line particuarly makes me chuckle…

“Will we be a church that looks narrowly inward – where God is found only in piety and private devotion, or will we be a church as Vatican II defined it – a Spirit-filled people on fire with an urgent sense of mission?”

I suppose this means the Church was not “Spirit-filled” and “on fire with an urgent sense of mission” before VII?:rolleyes:
 
I didn’t read the article because it’s set to only make me lose my peace of mind. But that quote is ridiculous!
JuantheTuba said:
“Will we be a church that looks narrowly inward – where God is found only in piety and private devotion, or will we be a church as Vatican II defined it – a Spirit-filled people on fire with an urgent sense of mission?”
Click to expand...
Piety and devotion being “narrow”? My goodness. They are setting up a false dichotomy, as if piety and devotion were never inspired by the Holy Ghost and as if 2000 years of missionary activity wasn’t thanks to the beautiful devotions and inspiring pious customs.

The only way to become a “Spirit-filled people” is if we concentrate on piety, devotions, reverence and the gift of ourselves to God. Pray your rosary daily, do the First Fridays, First Saturdays, make reparation, fast, abstain, attend Benediction, join pious guilds and assocations — these things will set the world on fire. An egotistical man-inspired dance during the Offertory will not.

God Bless +
 
Mike30 said:
Someone reccommended this article to me, I don’t really know why, but it does explain a lot of the hostility towards the Extraordinary Form especially on the part of some Bishops who steadfastly refuse to allow it to be celebrated in their Dioceses.

ncronline.org/news/spirituality/attempt-resurrect-pre-vatican-ii-mass-leaves-church-crossroads

This article is only a couple of months old.
Click to expand...
This is a standard piece from the ‘national catholic reporter’ which misses out on so much; but I think this may be one reason why bishops resist the extraordinary form(EF) of the Mass.

In a way however the author is correct, it does leave us at a crossroads, the ordinary form of the Mass(OF) has in many places, been characterised by experimentation and a certain banalisation which threatened to turn it into the ‘Fr. X show’, where we see the liturgy as man made rather than God given. The reintroduction of the EF is one part of a ‘reorientation’ of the liturgy towards God begun by Pope Benedict, we will now see which path we(the Church) will follow.(I don’t assert that the church must return wholesale to the EF, rather that we must return to the idea of Mass as a God given liturgical response of the Faithful to God. The OF celebrated authentically, as a Christocentric activity of the worship of God, is my preferred form of the Roman Rite.)
The extraordinary form is incapable of activating us as the priestly people of God – the vision of Vatican II.
Click to expand...
This, in my opinion, is a theological distillation of the entire argument against the EF, which highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of what its about, possibly due to poor childhood experience or to a particular theological formation in seminaries and parishes. Because as we know, there were no saints, there was no evangelisation, there were no vocations between the council of Trent and the Second Vatican council.
 
Mike30 said:
Someone reccommended this article to me, I don’t really know why, but it does explain a lot of the hostility towards the Extraordinary Form especially on the part of some Bishops who steadfastly refuse to allow it to be celebrated in their Dioceses.

ncronline.org/news/spirituality/attempt-resurrect-pre-vatican-ii-mass-leaves-church-crossroads
Click to expand...
It was pretty ironic. This article is all about how traditionalist Catholics reject Church teaching, while the author himself appears to reject the Church teaching in Summorum Pontificum, namely that the Extraordinary Form of the Mass is good and holy and a legitimate desire of Catholics.

The article did little to explain hostility to the EF; it merely displayed hostility. If anything, the article demonstrated that such hostility is an irrational prejudice.
 
To re-emphacize, the article was not published by EWTN’s “Register” but by NC “Reporter.” That doesn’t mean the article is worthless. This paragraph brought home an important point to consider.
The liturgy that came out of the Middle Ages and Trent placed a different emphasis on the eucharistic liturgy. Focus was not on preparing all the baptized for mission but on the power of the ordained to transform bread and wine.
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense that this Council would strongly counter the Reformation heresies that labeled the Eucharist “symbolic,” among other novelties Luther et al were proclaiming, causing wide-spread defection from the faith. This Council responded to these heresies and the resulting new liturgy exemplified the true understanding of Catholic teaching.

God raised up powerful saints in this age to oppose Protestantism, and I note the article’s quote from St. Teresa of Avila, “From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!” It was misplaced, I believe, for when she made the comment, it was not about the liturgy!

We are in a new century with different problems that needed to be addressed by a new Council. The article correctly explained the reason for another reform of the liturgy:
They are there to watch the priest say “his” Mass.Rather than the risen Christ working through the whole people of God (lay and ordained), we have a powerful clergy ministering to a passive people.
Click to expand...
Those of us who lived through the days of this liturgy can readily witness to the truth of that statement. Vatican II called for a participation that actively engages mind, body, and spirit in a worship befitting Our Creator from His priestly people.

In efforts to counter the Pauline liturgy, the EF, for the most part, has made appropriate corrections to the mindless passivity of old, as I understand it – thanks be to God. Please know that I am not demeaning the EF as it is celebrated today.
 
The reason it is at a crossroads, is because there is only two ways to go from here.

Either we will worship God or we will worship the mirror.

The Pre-Vatican II mass said we must worship God. The post Vatican II mass, less so. So the reduction in reverence to God since V2 led to the increase of reverence for the mirror.

This is not a consequence of V2, but rather a consequence of accepting more of society’s norms.
 
BobCatholic said:
The Pre-Vatican II mass said we must worship God. The post Vatican II mass, less so. So the reduction in reverence to God since V2 led to the increase of reverence for the mirror.
Click to expand...
Spoken by one who has very malformed understanding of V2. 😦
 
Sirach2 said:
Spoken by one who has very malformed understanding of V2. 😦
Click to expand...
How do I have a malformed understanding of V2?

I believe that the 1960’s secular culture made mirror worship acceptable to the masses and the masses said “Sure, I’ll go and worship the mirror with you.”

V2 happened during this time and it was grossly misinterpreted. By the same people influenced by the 1960’s secular culture.
 
Sirach2 said:
Spoken by one who has very malformed understanding of V2. 😦
Click to expand...
BobCatholic is not criticising the Second Vatican Council as far as I can see, rather the confusion that came after it and which found expression in the ordinary form of the Mass. Loathe it or love it, it is far easier to celebrate self in the ordinary form than in the extraordinary form, especially when ‘active participation’ is reduced to doing more activities, running about rather than praying. The Church still teaches us that the highest form of active participation is reception of the Most Holy Eucharist in a state of grace (cf. both Sacramentum Caritatis and Redemptionis Sacramentum)

I do not believe for a second this was the intention of the council, nor is it the true function of the revised liturgy. Nevertheless the fact remains that it is easier to celebrate self, at the expense of worshiping God, in the ordinary form.
 
BobCatholic said:
How do I have a malformed understanding of V2?

I believe that the 1960’s secular culture made mirror worship acceptable to the masses and the masses said “Sure, I’ll go and worship the mirror with you.”
Click to expand...
This is grossly disrespectful to the liturgy. I’ve seen comments like this before, and it implies that the people of God do not worship HIM, but THEMSELVES. How can you make such a rash judgment?
 
Sirach2 said:
To re-emphacize, the article was not published by EWTN’s “Register” but by NC “Reporter.” That doesn’t mean the article is worthless. This paragraph brought home an important point to consider.

It makes perfect sense that this Council would strongly counter the Reformation heresies that labeled the Eucharist “symbolic,” among other novelties Luther et al were proclaiming, causing wide-spread defection from the faith. This Council responded to these heresies and the resulting new liturgy exemplified the true understanding of Catholic teaching.

God raised up powerful saints in this age to oppose Protestantism, and I note the article’s quote from St. Teresa of Avila, “From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!” It was misplaced, I believe, for when she made the comment, it was not about the liturgy!

We are in a new century with different problems that needed to be addressed by a new Council. The article correctly explained the reason for another reform of the liturgy:

Those of us who lived through the days of this liturgy can readily witness to the truth of that statement. Vatican II called for a participation that actively engages mind, body, and spirit in a worship befitting Our Creator from His priestly people.

In efforts to counter the Pauline liturgy, the EF, for the most part, has made appropriate corrections to the mindless passivity of old, as I understand it – thanks be to God. Please know that I am not demeaning the EF as it is celebrated today.
Click to expand...
There was never any mindless passivity when it came to participation in the Mass. I was born in the 40’s and attended Catholic School and daily Mass for 12 years. My Missal has Latin on one side of the page and English on the other. I have always UNDERSTOOD exactly what was happening during the Mass that we participated in. I agree that some people were asleep at the switch during Mass, however your description of the past is only your own interpretation. let’s be fair!
 
Used2beSherryG said:
There was never any mindless passivity when it came to participation in the Mass. I was born in the 40’s and attended Catholic School and daily Mass for 12 years. My Missal has Latin on one side of the page and English on the other. I have always UNDERSTOOD exactly what was happening during the Mass that we participated in. I agree that some people were asleep at the switch during Mass, however your description of the past is only your own interpretation. let’s be fair!
Click to expand...
I was born before you, attended Catholic school and daily mass also. Many who remember those days have commented on this forum that passivity was the norm, whereas you may be an exception. Similarly, the banal accusations expressed by some trads toward those who attend the OF depict the abusive exceptions as the norm. Both are wrong assumptions.
 
BobCatholic said:
The reason it is at a crossroads, is because there is only two ways to go from here.

Either we will worship God or we will worship the mirror.

The Pre-Vatican II mass said we must worship God. The post Vatican II mass, less so. So the reduction in reverence to God since V2 led to the increase of reverence for the mirror.

This is not a consequence of V2, but rather a consequence of accepting more of society’s norms.
Click to expand...
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding in regards to the bold.
How is it that the “post Vatican ll Mass” woships God less than any other. Maybe you could flesh that out for fuller understanding. I mean specifically, beyond tastes for language and music or vestments?
 
The author of the article is elitist, he supposedly knows what’s in the minds and hearts of those who appreciate the traditional Mass, and he disapproves. If he had the power to forbid them, he would. Interestingly he mentions in passing that a group of traditional nuns were moving into his diocese, which was the occasion for the Mass. I wonder why he, and NCR, chose not to comment on that development. Are there any expanding religious orders that celebrate the stifling of the traditional Mass? Are there new vocations coming in those parishes and dioceses that lament the restoration of the more traditional (vertical) language in the Novus Ordo in Advent 2011? I’d be curious if there are new convents or monastaries going up, with young novices chanting “No Pope can take away our ambiguous horizontal translations that ICEL gave us!” Perhaps there are diocesan seminaries bursting with seminarians who promise no one will ever have an other-worldly experience at their Masses, “the bland horizontal language from 1969 to 2011 was such a blessing for my vocation!”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top