Cardinal Mahony: "There is no liturgical abuses in L.A"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Iohannes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
I hope everyone here realizes that this is not the norm for the Mass of Paul VI. For every diddly heap abuse like this, there are 100 others celebrated with love and reverence…and a sense of TASTE!!!
Click to expand...
I agree that the Mass of Paul VI can be celebrated with love and reverence. There are a couple of parishes in the area here where this is the case.

But it has not been my experience that this is the norm. I have seen alot of abuses at alot of parishes in this diocese, and throughout Ohio, and in several other states. But far more common than this seems to be the Masses where there are no abuses but where things just seem very tacky. A lack of abuses does not necessarily mean any sense of reverence.

But I am glad that your experience seems different.

James
 
40.png
MaryAgnes:
So … if the Cardinal followed the “rules” of RS, I wonder how many chalices he would need??? Where would he put them all??? Seems to me there would be more danger of spillage if he had followed the “rule” rather than the “spirit.”

Remember: The Pharisees followed the rules.
Click to expand...
The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) covers cases of this nature. If there is an inordinate number of communicants, then Communion is to be given with only the Hosts, and not the Precious Blood.
GIRM:
The Diocesan Bishop may establish norms for Communion under both kinds for his own diocese, which are also to be observed in churches of religious and at celebrations with small groups. The Diocesan Bishop is also given the faculty to permit Communion under both kinds whenever it may seem appropriate to the priest to whom, as its own shepherd, a community has been entrusted, provided that the faithful have been well instructed and there is no danger of profanation of the Sacrament or of the rite’s becoming difficult because of the large number of participants or some other reason.
Click to expand...
Your logic amazes me. Follow the rules = baaaaaaad. Break the rules = good.

:confused: :confused: :confused:
 
40.png
Iohannes:
The Archdiocese of Los Angeles is not the Diocese of Lincoln of Bishop Bruzkewicz where there is indults everywhere and every parish is practically orthodox. I hope some people are bit more understanding.
Click to expand...
Amen. 👍
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
He is annointing the altar, consecrating it. Totally legitimate, but liturgical dancers again! :banghead:

I hope everyone here realizes that this is not the norm for the Mass of Paul VI. For every diddly heap abuse like this, there are 100 others celebrated with love and reverence…and a sense of TASTE!!!
Never mind that the Holy See has forbidden it, he’s ignoring the national conference of bishops OF WHICH HE’S A MEMBER!!!
Click to expand...
What goes on in those pics, is “normal” for parishes in LA

Actually, there are a few places that celebrate the Novus Ordo the normal way. What I mean is Celebrating the Novus Ordo Jux Typica or using all the norms and none of the options for example using ad orientem, latin is the normal way of celebrating the Novus Ordo while using versus ad populum and ICEL is an option.

Or to make it simple, celebrating the Novus Ordo the normal way would make it look like a Tridentine Mass.
 
40.png
Iohannes:
What goes on in those pics, is “normal” for parishes in LA

Actually, there are a few places that celebrate the Novus Ordo the normal way. What I mean is Celebrating the Novus Ordo Jux Typica or using all the norms and none of the options for example using ad orientem, latin is the normal way of celebrating the Novus Ordo while using versus ad populum and ICEL is an option.

Or to make it simple, celebrating the Novus Ordo the normal way would make it look like a Tridentine Mass.
Click to expand...
You are misrepresenting the way the Mass of Paul VI is celebrated in the US (I can’t speak for the Archdiocese). You know full well that we have permission to use the vernacular and that it the most widely employed method in this entire country.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
You are misrepresenting the way the Mass of Paul VI is celebrated in the US (I can’t speak for the Archdiocese). You know full well that we have permission to use the vernacular and that it the most widely employed method in this entire country.
Click to expand...
I know that most of this country celebrates vernacular and versus ad populum, but that is not the norm of the Novus Ordo.
 
40.png
Iohannes:
I know that most of this country celebrates vernacular and versus ad populum, but that is not the norm of the Novus Ordo.
Click to expand...
But how we do it is done with permission. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but according to Cardinal Arinze, the Mass in the vernacular isn’t going away. He said so EWTN. I consider that very good news indeed. Now, do we need a better translation. Sure. I think it would be grand to have the old TLM in the vernacular, for instance.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
But how we do it is done with permission. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but according to Cardinal Arinze, the Mass in the vernacular isn’t going away. He said so EWTN. I consider that very good news indeed. Now, do we need a better translation. Sure. I think it would be grand to have the old TLM in the vernacular, for instance.
Click to expand...
CCC states at no priest needs permission to do the Latin Novus Ordo. The Novus Ordo Missal(priest missal) also implies that Ad Orientem is the norm.

The major issue of liturgical reform is not about the vernacular, BTW.
 
40.png
Iohannes:
CCC states at no priest needs permission to do the Latin Novus Ordo. The Novus Ordo Missal(priest missal) also implies that Ad Orientem is the norm.

The major issue of liturgical reform is not about the vernacular, BTW.
Click to expand...
But we’ve permission to do it in the vernacular and this is the norm in English speaking countries, as is ad populam.

As for your last sentence, that’s not the impression I get from tons of people on these threads.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
But how we do it is done with permission. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but according to Cardinal Arinze, the Mass in the vernacular isn’t going away. He said so EWTN. I consider that very good news indeed. Now, do we need a better translation. Sure. I think it would be grand to have the old TLM in the vernacular, for instance.
Click to expand...
About one year the Traditional Latin Mass was in the vernacular experimentally. That was the 1964 Missal. The next year the 1965 Missal came out which was very similar to the 1964 Missal except the took out the Last Gospel and part of Psalm 42 and added new options like versus ad populum and vernacular. Now tell me why they had to go beyond the 1965 Missal?

coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/
Why did they have to go beyond the 1965 Missal and let the faithful hear ICEL English?
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
But we’ve permission to do it in the vernacular and this is the norm in English speaking countries, as is ad populam.

As for your last sentence, that’s not the impression I get from tons of people on these threads.
Click to expand...
I am talking liturgy speak not cultural speak. On a cultural level, english is the norm for the Novus Ordo. But using liturgical language, it is an option not a norm. Latin is the norm in liturgical/theological language if you get what I mean. Plus it is implied in the Missal that Ad Orientem is the norm.

Do you know why Ad Orientem is the norm?
 
40.png
Iohannes:
About one year the Traditional Latin Mass was in the vernacular experimentally. That was the 1964 Missal. The next year the 1965 Missal came out which was very similar to the 1964 Missal except the took out the Last Gospel and part of Psalm 42 and added new options like versus ad populum and vernacular. Now tell me why they had to go beyond the 1965 Missal?

coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/
Why did they have to go beyond the 1965 Missal?
Click to expand...
I’m not one of the Council Fathers (neither do I play one on TV). You’d have to ask them. One thing I’m fairly sure of: it wasn’t Bugninni, the Protestants, or Free Masons, rad trad conspiracy theories notwithstanding.

Perhaps they wanted greater simplicity. Perhaps it was truly a hearkening back to more primitive, apostolic practice. I used to worship in the Episcopal Church, where the “mass” was celebrated by the “priest” ad orientum. It isn’t the most earthshaking change to have it done ad populum. AND I truly don’t think in the grand scheme of things that it matters that much. I think the vernacular matters, as I think that it is important for devotional reasons that the people be able to understand what it being said in this most supreme act of worship. Does God need it to be in Latin in order to understand it? You and I both know that isn’t the case.

That’s one basis for why I don’t see the point in some of the stuff done in a TLM: why have the readings in both Latin and the vernacular? I should think that it wouldn’t matter from God’s perspective and that it would from the perspective of those who needed to hear what It said.
 
40.png
Iohannes:
I am talking liturgy speak not cultural speak. On a cultural level, english is the norm for the Novus Ordo. But using liturgical language, it is an option not a norm. Latin is the norm in liturgical/theological language if you get what I mean. Plus it is implied in the Missal that Ad Orientem is the norm.

Do you know why Ad Orientem is the norm?
Click to expand...
Yes, I get what you mean, but for all intents and purposes, in ENGLISH speaking countries, under their bishops, with the permission of the Holy See, it isn’t culture speak, it’s a valid exercise of worship. Latin is the language of the Church, well and good. I like Latin, I hope to understand more and more of it as I age. I still don’t want to see us go back to a “liturgical” language.

Our Lord is to appear in the East at His Second Coming. Shall we reconfigure all the church’s that have been built in the last 30 years to achieve ad orientum? My priest actually faces ad orientum (true east) when he offers the Mass. Problem is, it’s also ad populam. We cannot remove the altar, it’s solid marble and had to be put in before the roof was put on the church.
 
40.png
Iohannes:
About one year the Traditional Latin Mass was in the vernacular experimentally. That was the 1964 Missal. The next year the 1965 Missal came out which was very similar to the 1964 Missal except the took out the Last Gospel and part of Psalm 42 and added new options like versus ad populum and vernacular. Now tell me why they had to go beyond the 1965 Missal?

coreyzelinski.8m.com/1965_Mass/
Why did they have to go beyond the 1965 Missal and let the faithful hear ICEL English?
Click to expand...
I went to that link. Beautiful! I would be entirely pleased to attend this liturgy…provided it was celebrated as a dialog Mass, with no silent Canon.
 
In the link above, I noticed the following: * “**May Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to life everlasting.” . * Should it still be said this way? Our priest uses ‘us’ instead of ‘you’. Is this correct in the NO?
 
40.png
Elzee:
In the link above, I noticed the following: * “**May Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to life everlasting.” . * Should it still be said this way? Our priest uses ‘us’ instead of ‘you’. Is this correct in the NO?
Click to expand...
yes

Novus Ordo:
Misereatur nostri omnipotens Deus et, dimissis peccatis nostris, perducat nos ad vitam aeternam.

TLM/1965 Missal:
Misereátur **tui ** omnípotens Deus, et dimíssis peccátis tuis, perdúcat te ad vitam ætérnam.

nostri- pronoun genitive for we/us

tui- pronoun genitive for you/thou
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
I went to that link. Beautiful! I would be entirely pleased to attend this liturgy…provided it was celebrated as a dialog Mass, with no silent Canon.
Click to expand...
Why did they have to go further and give us ICEL Translations?
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
I went to that link. Beautiful! I would be entirely pleased to attend this liturgy…provided it was celebrated as a dialog Mass, with no silent Canon.
Click to expand...
As a more contemplative-minded person, I much prefer the silent Canon since it allows me to more easily raise my heart and mind to God. However, I appreciate the opinion of people who have a need to hear every word the priest speaks. I’m blessed that in my diocese, I’ve discovered several different Masses, both new and old, that are all said with reverence and dignity.

I think it’s wonderful that our Church allows us the opportunity to experience both the ancient and modern. :clapping:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top