W
Walking_Home
Guest
So–if by chance you end up with no Traditional Mass–are you going to become one of those “home alone” types—and cut yourself off from the graces of Holy Communion offered in the OF Mass.
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
K
King_M
Guest
Now I am utterly confused, after “Quiting” for being biased toward the Traditional Mass !!!I I got 5 demerits and just lost my temper over it and quit the list…What gives ?..Is this list only for those that don’t compare the Latin Mass with the N.O. ??? Even though I quit, I see my post was “POSTED”…I didn’t join the list to be arguementive but, apparently , that is the way it was construed by the “Moderator” I’m frustrated that I can’t express my viewes in answer to other very similar posted points of view…What way should I express my reality of seeing a VERY disrespectful N.O.?..I guess I’ll get another “demerit” for this also !!! OK…This was what I finally endured to the point of quiting the N.O…One Saturday evening , in 1993 the kids who were going to make their Confirmation, returned from a retreat…All well and good. However : they marched into church with their grubby clothes among which were girls in “Daisy Dukes”…They then proceeded to march up to the “altar” to sign a book. Low and behold, we were captive to seeing them lean over to sign the book and were forced to endure the sight of their backsides (cheeks)…I walked out and never went back…The priest said I was a “prude”…Now am I going to get a 10 demerit punishment ???..Why not just admit that the N.O. is rampant with liberals who, put up with what is not even a pious mass…Please feel free to write me personaly. I doubt if this will even make the list…
Philip42@ cox.net
Philip42@ cox.net
K
King_M
Guest
NO ! I’ll stay home and pray the Rosary and get graces that I won’t get having to endure . How old are you BRO? ? Did you grow up in the N.O. , since I suspect you did.Do you just think the novelties are “cutsy”…Do you endure Clown s and girl altar girls ? …I don’t believe I get graces from from the N.O. when I can’t even concentrate…Why don’t people wake up and see that our religion was hijacked just like our Govt…???Isn’t that cutting your nose off to spite your face?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Fraternally,
W
Walking_Home
Guest
King M:
Many people experience disrespectful OF’s – but they don’t about throwing the baby out with the bath water (won’t set foot inside a N.O. Mass)–or as JReducation put it—cutting off the nose to spite the face.
[/quote]
J
JReducation
Guest
No need to jump all over me. I have seen both the Ordinary Form and the Extrarodinary Form. I’m over 60. My religious community celebrates both forms. And, I dont’ think that nonsense is cute. Howevever, the celebration of the Holy Mass is valid and licit in both forms of the Roman Rite and all the forms of the different rites.
The nonsense does not take away from grace. Man’s nonsense cannot handcuff God’s love and his desire to save, much less hand-cuff the sacraments.
I’m sorry, but what you’re saying borders on idolatry. While we believe that the Rosary is a very powerful prayer, the Rosary can never be put on the same plane as Liturgy. The mass and the Divine Office are the official prayers of the Church and the only means for acquiring the graces that come through liturgy, because the Rosary is not liturgy and Our Lady is not Christ. You will not receive the same sanctifying grace from the Rosary as you would from the Holy Eucharist. To assume that one can is incorrect thinking and fails to conform to our Catholic faith.
While it is true that many people have done some silly things at mass, the Ordinary Form of the Mass was canonically approved by the Holy See and promulgated by the Apostolic Authority of Pope Paul VI. Therefore, we cannot say that the faith was carted off when something has been handed down to us by Apostolic Authority.
Having to endure may be a good act of penance for some people. We all have to endure things that are difficult; but as Mother Teresa said, “Love is a choice.” We may not like something, but we can choose to love and endure it for the sake of love.
Our faith can never be hijacked, no matter how dumb people get. Christ promised us this.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
K
King_M
Guest
The 2nd Vat. Council was a Pastoral council and in no way , even though Protestants were present has any “AUTHORITY”…just in pastoral matters…Study both of them and you’ll se I am correct…The innovations are more in line with Protestant beliefs…Go to an Episcolpalian service…It is non distinguishable from the N.O…Ecumenism is one thing but flopping over to mimic a Protestant service is not God’s will…Read some of the Papal “Bulls”…You’ll see where this act is the ruination of the Catholic true Catholic faith and has been declining at a fast pace…Tell us all where the reverence went.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
You know, you would win more people to your side with charity and clarity.
You will not win people to your side by insulting a man who has lost his wife tragically, has grown children, if I’m not mistaken is the founder of a new Franciscan order, and has contributing in raising awareness and knowledge here on CAF.
W
Walking_Home
Guest
No need to jump all over me. I have seen both the Ordinary Form and the Extrarodinary Form. I’m over 60. My religious community celebrates both forms. And, I dont’ think that nonsense is cute. Howevever, the celebration of the Holy Mass is valid and licit in both forms of the Roman Rite and all the forms of the different rites.
The nonsense does not take away from grace. Man’s nonsense cannot handcuff God’s love and his desire to save, much less hand-cuff the sacraments.
I’m sorry, but what you’re saying borders on idolatry. While we believe that the Rosary is a very powerful prayer, the Rosary can never be put on the same plane as Liturgy. The mass and the Divine Office are the official prayers of the Church and the only means for acquiring the graces that come through liturgy, because the Rosary is not liturgy and Our Lady is not Christ. You will not receive the same sanctifying grace from the Rosary as you would from the Holy Eucharist. To assume that one can is incorrect thinking and fails to conform to our Catholic faith.
While it is true that many people have done some silly things at mass, the Ordinary Form of the Mass was canonically approved by the Holy See and promulgated by the Apostolic Authority of Pope Paul VI. Therefore, we cannot say that the faith was carted off when something has been handed down to us by Apostolic Authority.
Having to endure may be a good act of penance for some people. We all have to endure things that are difficult; but as Mother Teresa said, “Love is a choice.” We may not like something, but we can choose to love and endure it for the sake of love.
Our faith can never be hijacked, no matter how dumb people get. Christ promised us this.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
M
Melchior_1
Guest
You mention the Episcolpalians…you do know they now have a Use within the Church which is fully valid (when they convert), yes?
The reverence is still there, you’re having trouble seeing it. You need to look past the clothing and look at the person, just as Christ did in the Gospels.
C
Chen_Zhen
Guest
What you are experiencing is not unusual, but don’t let it shake your faith or confidence.
What has to happen is that the problems will have to be sorted out over time.
The Church is universal, but right now there is a strange division that needs to be healed.
Perhaps it will help to keep in mind that the Eastern Church go by a many different rules than us because they have their own sort of disciplinary law. Our Code of Canon Law does not apply to them (ref. Can 1), it applies only to the Latin Church. Still, the Eastern Churches are in full union with us. So when you hear the traditionalists say “oh, that doesn’t apply to us”, realize that even if they don’t think it consciously, some of them may honestly believe or hope that they are more like the Eastern Churches.
In the Latin Church, there are said to not be two rites, but one rite with two different expressions. Fair enough. That is what Pope Benedict expressed in Summorum Pontificum.
I think that in this current climate, no person is qualified to see what this really means or where it is going. Even the pope can not know the future.
We have to hold on to what we have and not make any changes. It will take several decades to sort this all out, and it will be The Holy Ghost who sorts it out, not you or I or some “know it all” talking at the coffee social after Mass.
What I usually do in these situations is just smile and nod…and when they say something wrong suggest they talk to the the priest. Everyone thinks they have the answer. Like it is said “Too many chiefs, not enough Indians”…everyone wants to have it their way.
We have to pray for the unity of our Church and that we will practice the faith as it always has been.
I
InquisitorMax
Guest
I attend the TLM. When I can’t, I go to N.O. masses. The ones i know have gotten more ‘active-participation’ to the point where it’s getting silly, when you compare it to how the old rite is said.
e.g. A purely secular song sung at a First Communion Mass.
I put it down to bad priestly formation and a belief that the congregation will apostasise if they’re not let express themselves at Mass. Therefore, more sentiment, more child-oriented, more ladies in the sanctuary …
Then they wonder why men aren’t more involved.
This tendency is self-destructing. Where can it go, except towards an eventual scandal that breaks the cycle (hopefully)? Even amongst its fans, the Pope’s recent moves have clued the ‘liturgically neutral’, shall we say, that more solemnity is now fashionable.
So I think we’ll be seeing fewer ‘everybody in the sanctuary’ masses in the future. Hold tight, tell people about the old rite, and wait.
e.g. A purely secular song sung at a First Communion Mass.
I put it down to bad priestly formation and a belief that the congregation will apostasise if they’re not let express themselves at Mass. Therefore, more sentiment, more child-oriented, more ladies in the sanctuary …
Then they wonder why men aren’t more involved.
This tendency is self-destructing. Where can it go, except towards an eventual scandal that breaks the cycle (hopefully)? Even amongst its fans, the Pope’s recent moves have clued the ‘liturgically neutral’, shall we say, that more solemnity is now fashionable.
So I think we’ll be seeing fewer ‘everybody in the sanctuary’ masses in the future. Hold tight, tell people about the old rite, and wait.
W
Will_S
Guest
Easy. Abolish the new calendar. Problem solved.I just want to see all of these calendars worked out.
J
JReducation
Guest
Hey wait a minute!Easy. Abolish the new calendar. Problem solved.
Can’t do that. When do we celebrate St. Pio, St. Maximilian Kolbe, St. Giana, Bl. John XXIII, Bl. Mother Teresa, Bl. John Paul, St. Edith Stein, St. Giana Mola, Bl. Pierre Giorgio . . . ? I know I’m missing some saints and blessed that are not in the old calendar.
Also, where do we put all those wonderful and beautiful holy days that we religious celebrate that you folks in the laity don’t celebrate, because they’re not in the Roman Calendar or the Roman Missal, but they’re on our calendars and right now we don’t have our own missals . . . we’re all trying figure out that part too. The big question is how to put these feasts so that a religious house can celebrate either the OF or EF and still be in sync with the other houses of the same order. You don’t want two Dominican houses celebrating two different days on the same day, if you get my meaning.
Believe it or not, this actually happened to one of our brothers who is a priest. He was asked to celebrate the EF for a group of Franciscan nuns. It was the solemnity of St. Francis. When he arrived, they had the Roman Missal. Guess what? St. Francis is not a major feast in the Roman missal. He’s lucky to get an honorable mention. In the Franciscan missal he gets a two day celebration that mimics Good Friday and Easter Sunday The liturgy of Oct 3 commemorates his passing and the liturgy of Oc 4 his entrance into glory. The one of Oct 3 is just like the Good Friday service. It’s not a mass. I has Holy Communion, veneration of the relic, readings, preaching and some hymns. Then on Oct 4, who have all the bells and whistles.
The poor man and the good nuns had to make due with the mass as it is in the Roman Missal of 1962, while the entire Franciscan family was celebrating the mass for a solemnity with all the bells and whistles that you would see at Christmas and Easter. I mean Gloria, three readings, everything chanted, incense all over the place, kissing of relics, singing of Franciscan hymns, the sequence for the day, the gold vestments, etc.
That’s why we don’t want to calendars. It’s crazy. What we really need is one calendar for the Roman Church that is observed in either form and one for each religious order that can also be observed in either form or if the order has its own rite, then it can be observed in their rite or the Roman rite.
The problem is that the missal of 1962 still follows the calendar that was in use in 1962. I’m not saying that we change the form, just update the missal, add the appropriate pieces to the missal. It was done in 1962. It can be done again. It’s a lot of work. If I’m not mistaken, the missal of 1962 took a few years to put together. But it isn’t impossible and will not trouble the faithful at all. Most people won’t even mind having the mass for the feast of St. Pio in the EF or some other new saint or blessed.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
5
5Loaves
Guest
Christ is Ascended!
Interesting thread. I’ve seen/heard much the same as has OP and others. Are we not a broken people? Kyrie, eleison.
The hymn we sing at every Vespers, Phos Hilaron, is a very ancient hymn.
The temple is dark and when we sing O Gladsome Light we light the candles and lamps. It’s a very beautiful service.
Interesting thread. I’ve seen/heard much the same as has OP and others. Are we not a broken people? Kyrie, eleison.
We Russians have a somewhat odd practice of celebrating Orthros “daybreak” (Matins) prayers immediately after and in conjunction with Vespers as a vigil. Vespers is celebrated every Saturday in most Eastern Catholic parishes. Our parish is not able to celebrate it every Saturday and many of our parishioners go to the Russian Orthodox for the Vespers, it’s such an important part of the liturgical cycle, especially before a major feast day when it’s more likely to be a vigil.In religious houses of men, to this day, Sunday begins with Vespers on Saturday. Vespers is celebrated between 4:30 – 6:00 pm… Once you celebrated Vespers, you could not go back to the liturgy of Saturday. You have to move forward.
Br. JR, OSF
The hymn we sing at every Vespers, Phos Hilaron, is a very ancient hymn.
Here is a musical setting by a dear friend Maia of blessed memory.
The temple is dark and when we sing O Gladsome Light we light the candles and lamps. It’s a very beautiful service.
5
5Loaves
Guest
Those are helpful observations.I believe that this is a good example that people’s hearts are in the right place, but they don’t always understand the subtlies of law.
… You can have a Saturday night mass in the Extraordinary Form. You can have permanent deacons. You can eat one hour before Holy Communion.
…Current rules, outside of the ritual and common sense sill apply. I have never heard any priest or bishop who supports the EF tell people anything different. My guess is that some people assume that since this is the missal of 1962, we follow the rules that were in place in 1962.
I’m not sure how to help people separate the form from the rules. It’s the same problem with Vatican II and the Code of Canon Law. Many things were changed by the Code of Canon Law, not Vatican II. The Code came almost 20 years later, though Pope Paul VI had been working on it before he died. … It’s not the first time or the last that Canon Law is revised. It was revised in 1917 and there was no council in 1917. Do you see what I mean? People make connections that don’t exist. …
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
So, am I understanding correctly that all Catholics of the Latin Church are bound by the Canons of the Latin Church “Can. 1 The canons of this Code regard only the Latin Church”, seems evident, including Can. 919 §1, §2, §3 but some (many?) who are assisting in the EF of the Roman Rite have a pious practice of making the Eucharistic fast three hours?
I’m curious why three hours? It’s such a short fast there must be a reason for choosing that. Are you saying in 1962 the Eucharistic fast was only 3 hours? I wasn’t Catholic in 1962 but I know that during my childhood in the '50s my Catholic best friend was strictly forbidden to eat, or even drink water before morning Eucharist, from the night before. The nuns in my community covered the water faucets at the school and church so no one could use them.
S
Stylites
Guest
The Vineyard Owner employs people to work one hour in His vineyard, and gives them all the same one denari which He gives earlier employees who had to work all day long.
J
JReducation
Guest
Yes. All Latin Catholics are bound by Canon Law of 1983, not 1917. You can only follow the law of 1917 that are repeated in the Code of 1983, that are not in conflict with the Code of 1983 or that were never abrogated. In the latter case, the codes tell you. They always make some comment that makes reference to custom.
Also, it is wrong to impose rules on people that are not in the Code. To tell people that they have to fast more than the required hour is contrary to the mind of the Church. It is wrong, not because there is anything bad about fasting longer. A person can choose to do that. It is wrong, because the person doing the telling is setting himself up as an authority equal to that of the pope who is the only Law Giver in the Church.
This applies to many things. If the Church says that you can do it, it is wrong to tell people that they cannot or should not. Again, the teller is setting himself up as an authority equal to that of the Law Giver. Whether it’s the pope, the local bishop or the major religious superior, if he authorizes something that is within his competency to authorize, one must accept that ruling.
What has to be understood is that one need not do everything that is allowed. The term is very clear “allowed”. It is not being mandated. But one cannot redirect another person who is doing what is allowed. I can do this in reverse. I cannot tell a Catholic who like the EF that he should not attend it, because of ABC. There is no obligation to attend the EF, but it is allowed. Therefore, I have no right to discourage someone from doing so.
Whatever is in that code binds all Latin Catholics. If it’s a command, we do it. If it’s a prohibition, we don’t do it. If it’s a permission, we allow others to do it and we don’t discourage or interfere.
There is also another point of Tradition, with upper case T. If the pope says that a certain canon does not apply to you, then it does not apply and it’s not considered an injustice. For something to be an injustice it has to violate your human rights or your legal rights. If the pope says that a law does not apply to you and that you cannot invoke it, then your legal rights have not been violated. You have simply misunderstood the law, which happens often in civil and ecclesial law. This is upper case Tradition, because it goes back to the authority to bind and unbind.
The fast before Holy Communion has always been in a state of flux since the early days of the Church. From what I can gather, it seems to have always existed. However, the number of hours has never been consistent. There were always differences between East and West. In the West, it has been changed several times. It was no eating after midnight, then no eating three-hours before, then no eating one hour before. In between there, over the past 2,000 years, there have been different rules, most of which were changed quickly, as was the three-hour fast. I don’t think that rule lasted 10-years.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
P
pataburd
Guest
Usually, I observe the Friday abstinence as per the “old rule”. It’s purely optional on my part, but helpful, too, I think. The problem nowadays is that most people do not at all observe Fridays with some penitential act (fasting, praying, alms-giving) as Catholics are still directed to. Many Catholics I meet merely dismiss the Friday penitential observance by saying (in the context of Friday abstinence, for example): “Oh, since Vatican II we don’t need to do that kind of thing anymore.” What they mean, and what they tend to practice, is no form of penance whatsoever, which is decidedly NOT the mind of the post-conciliar Church.
And, I can understand the Church making the demands less severe as a concession to the modern day way of life. (I myself observe–appreciatively–the less severe demands when I cannot practically fulfill the more severe ones.) For me personally, though, the path to becoming forgetful or altogether negligent with penitential discipline starts with relaxing the conditions, then not following up with appropriate catechesis, which I think has been the general case, at least in the U.S.
And, I can understand the Church making the demands less severe as a concession to the modern day way of life. (I myself observe–appreciatively–the less severe demands when I cannot practically fulfill the more severe ones.) For me personally, though, the path to becoming forgetful or altogether negligent with penitential discipline starts with relaxing the conditions, then not following up with appropriate catechesis, which I think has been the general case, at least in the U.S.
J
JReducation
Guest
I feel that your observations are well made. It is important to understand why the rules about Friday were changed. At the time they came into existence they had a different purpose and a different target population. They were intended for Europeans, except the Spanish. Most of the old dioceses in Spain were exempt from the Friday abstinence as a reward for their fidelity to the Church during the 800 years of Muslim occupation.
With the spread of missionary activity, it became clear that the Friday abstinence was not appropriate for the new Churches. Most did not eat that much meat. Meat diets were more common to Europeans than to other peoples. I can tell you from my experience in South America that they eat a lot of fish, fruits, cheese and other sources of protein. They don’t eat meat everyday. I also found it interesting that meat in those countries means mammal. Chicken is not meat and dolphin is.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status