Cardinal Sarah praises ad orientem worship, suggests appendix to Roman Missal [CWN]

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

Thanks for the explanation. There isn’t much time, however, to fix one’s gaze on Jesus at Mass (OF) except in a verbal manner by either listening or responding. Which is fine, but if one wants to have non-verbal contemplation, then the OF Mass isn’t really conducive to this. That’s how it was designed - to be pretty much completely verbal in nature. That’s the point I’m trying to make, and which the article that I linked to makes.

Are you sure?

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?” (John 14:8-9)

If you listened to the Liturgy of the Word, you have seen a glimpse of Jesus’ life, and from that you have seen a glimpse of the Father. Isn’t that what contemplation is?

As for the Liturgy of the Eucharist, you are experiencing the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the One Sacrifice of the Lamb of God. You are going back in time. That is the ageless teaching of the Catholic Church.

And as for the whole Mass, read the Book of Revelation. Here are a few guidelines: agapebiblestudy.com/charts/liturgy%20of%20the%20mass%20in%20the%20book%20of%20revelation.htm

To participate in Holy Mass is to participate in the mystery of the whole economy of salvation. You are not only in the presence of angels and the saints in heaven, but also in the presence of every Holy Mass done throughout the ages.

If those are not cause of contemplation AND participation in Holy Mass, I don’t know what is!

 

[Denise1957]

+JMJ+

Are you sure?

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?” (John 14:8-9)

If you listened to the Liturgy of the Word, you have seen a glimpse of Jesus’ life, and from that you have seen a glimpse of the Father. Isn’t that what contemplation is?

As for the Liturgy of the Eucharist, you are experiencing the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the One Sacrifice of the Lamb of God. You are going back in time. That is the ageless teaching of the Catholic Church.

And as for the whole Mass, read the Book of Revelation. Here are a few guidelines: agapebiblestudy.com/charts/liturgy%20of%20the%20mass%20in%20the%20book%20of%20revelation.htm

To participate in Holy Mass is to participate in the mystery of the whole economy of salvation. You are not only in the presence of angels and the saints in heaven, but also in the presence of every Holy Mass done throughout the ages.

If those are not cause of contemplation AND participation in Holy Mass, I don’t know what is!

We do indeed experience the crucifixion of Jesus during Mass, as represented in a completely verbal manner, except when we make the physical effort to go up and receive communion, and go back to our seats. Where during Mass do we have time to think about and contemplate our Lord in His Passion and Crucifixion, other than when the priest describes it verbally before consecrating the host?

 

[Sirach2]

One who is a “contemplative” will find it easy to gaze upon Our Lord in the car on the way to mass, after mass, and throughout his day, even intermittent with sleep at night. During mass, it is rude to avoid partaking in the liturgy in order to have private gazing upon God. It could also be called, in St. John’s words, an attachment to consolation.
The thrust of the Council is to partake actively with responses, listening to the Word, singing, etc. It is our supreme act of worship, not our private prayer time.

Yes, most do give Our Lord those special moments when He is within us at communion. I like to use the time when the priest is cleaning the chalices for more extended prayer to Our Lord. But as I said, a true contemplative will have many, many moments throughout the day for intimate contemplative prayer. It is NOT confined to Mass.

It is also easily misunderstood by many that there is a “gift” of contemplation bestowed by God, called “infused” contemplation, and the lesser form called active contemplation, where the person himself is “gazing” upon God. without the special gift of infusion. It develops gradually when a person is faithful to prayer, moving from initial stages of vocal prayer, meditation, prayer of simplicity, and finally the wordless focus and communion with God.

St. Teresa used a good analogy of peeling the orange. We “work” using the above processes until such time (often many years) that all the rind is removed. When you can no longer peel, you gaze. The soul finds itself immediately in God’s presence without the preliminary acts. Simple?

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

We do indeed experience the crucifixion of Jesus during Mass, as represented in a completely verbal manner, except when we make the physical effort to go up and receive communion, and go back to our seats. Where during Mass do we have time to think about and contemplate our Lord in His Passion and Crucifixion, other than when the priest describes it verbally before consecrating the host?

I am, to be honest, baffled. We lose contemplation “when we make the physical effort to go up and receive communion, and go back to our seats”? Do you not even feel the anticipation of getting closer and closer to the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ? The joy of having that great treasure in you as you walk back to your seat?

 

[Denise1957]

One who is a “contemplative” will find it easy to gaze upon Our Lord in the car on the way to mass, after mass, and throughout his day, even intermittent with sleep at night. During mass, it is rude to avoid partaking in the liturgy in order to have private gazing upon God. It could also be called, in St. John’s words, an attachment to consolation.
The thrust of the Council is to partake actively with responses, listening to the Word, singing, etc. It is our supreme act of worship, not our private prayer time.

Thank you for making my point for me. We are expected to participate at the OF in pretty much a completely verbal manner. That’s how it was designed.

 

[Denise1957]

+JMJ+

I am, to be honest, baffled. We lose contemplation “when we make the physical effort to go up and receive communion, and go back to our seats”? Do you not even feel the anticipation of getting closer and closer to the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ? The joy of having that great treasure in you as you walk back to your seat?

I didn’t explain myself very well. Sorry about that. What I meant is that one of the few times that we don’t have to engage in verbal worship at Mass is when we receive communion. Not that verbal worship is bad thing. But quiet times at Mass is good, too, IMO.

 

[Sirach2]

Thank you for making my point for me. We are expected to participate at the OF in pretty much a completely verbal manner. That’s how it was designed.

But you find it problematic, whereas the Church does not agree with you. This may be why people find the TLM so gratifying, since their worship can become “God and Me.”
You may need to read Sacrosanctum Concilium to get a clearer picture.

1. Liturgical services are not private functions, but are celebrations of the Church, which is the “sacrament of unity,” namely, the holy people united and ordered under their bishops
   Therefore liturgical services pertain to the whole body of the Church.
2. It is to be stressed that whenever rites, according to their specific nature, make provision for communal celebration involving the presence and active participation of the faithful,** this way of celebrating them is to be preferred, so far as possible, to a celebration that is individual and quasi-private.**

Keep in mind that this instruction was voted upon and sanctioned by over 2,000 bishops who were in agreement. To accuse the Church of being faulty because they are not following one’s private wishes, is to spread error and disunity. Perhaps this is why there are two forms, OF and EF, for those who prefer the more private silent worship. To each their own, both are valid.

 

[Denise1957]

But you find it problematic, whereas the Church does not agree with you. This may be why people find the TLM so gratifying, since their worship can become “God and Me.”
You may need to read Sacrosanctum Concilium to get a clearer picture.

Keep in mind that this instruction was voted upon and sanctioned by over 2,000 bishops who were in agreement. To accuse the Church of being faulty because they are not following one’s private wishes, is to spread error and disunity.

And how does this relate to my point about the OF being about verbal participation? Don’t you agree that this is true?

You seem to want to make this about me and what you assume my preferences to be. Let’s just stick to the subject, okay?

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

I didn’t explain myself very well. Sorry about that. What I meant is that one of the few times that we don’t have to engage in verbal worship at Mass is when we receive communion. Not that verbal worship is bad thing. But quiet times at Mass is good, too, IMO.

Ah, I see. Hmm, probably the reason I have no problem with this is that I got used to the Rosary. When I pray the Rosary, I let its familiar rhythm quiet down my thoughts and focus them on the mysteries. In the same way, the familiar rhythm of the OF Holy Mass quiets down my thoughts and lets me gaze at the Crucifix in front as I participate in the Mass.

I actually was surprised when the Catechism said this about the role of Holy Images in the Liturgy:

1162 “The beauty of the images moves me to contemplation, as a meadow delights the eyes and subtly infuses the soul with the glory of God.” Similarly, the contemplation of sacred icons, united with meditation on the Word of God and the singing of liturgical hymns, enters into the harmony of the signs of celebration so that the mystery celebrated is imprinted in the heart’s memory and is then expressed in the new life of the faithful.

 

[Sirach2]

And how does this relate to my point about the OF being about verbal participation? Don’t you agree that this is true?

You seem to want to make this about me and my preferences. Let’s just stick to the subject, okay?

I was addressing your lament that there are not sufficient silent times, in agreement with Cardinal Sarah. THAT is your subject, is it not?
I’m sorry for taking your bait. My bad. It won’t happen again.

 

[Denise1957]

I was addressing your lament that there are not sufficient silent times, in agreement with Cardinal Sarah. THAT is your subject, is it not?

No, it is not my subject. You are pulling one thing from my post in order to try to cause a disturbance. It isn’t right for you to accuse me of baiting people. I may just report you for it.

(post has been duly reported)

 

[Brendan_64]

This is rare

Well you must live in a very orthodox diocese then.
The Creed left out, lay-people giving long ‘reflections’ after the Gospel, Penitential Acts used that don’t come from the Missal, instructions that the congregation hold hands during the Our Father, instructions that the congregation hold their hands in the Orans position during the Our Father, prayers altered, various bits left out, various bits added in to the Mass for ‘special ocassions’, chasubles not worn, children standing around the altar during the Consecration at Holy Communion Masses, the congregation sitting on the sanctuary with the priest throughout the Mass… These are common-place, they are not rare.

Well this is your opinion, but the decision in the use of EMHC’s and ministers of the cup is left up to the pastors of the parish, under the direction of the Bishop.

GIRM 162: “The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him”

Redemptionis Sacramentum 88: “Only when there is a necessity may extraordinary ministers assist the Priest celebrant in accordance with the norm of law.”

It is clear that Church norms and rules state that EMHCs should only be used if there is a very large number of communicants. However the reality is that EMHCs are used as a matter of routine, not simply in extraordinary circumstances. In fact it is extremely rare to find a Mass (no matter how small the congregation is) where EMHCs are not used.

The Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy calls for active participation of the people in the Mass and this means physically active, in singing of hymns, responses to the parts of the Mass, doing readings, EMHC’s and ministers of the cup where needed.

Active participation does not mean ‘doing lots of stuff’, it does not mean being physically active. Active participation involves interior participation in Christ’s love through our spiritual involvement in the witness of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Active participation through our minds and hearts. Were Our Lady and John not actively participating as they knelt at the foot of the Cross on Calvary as Our Lord was crucified and died? Yes words, actions and gestures in the Liturgy are also important as they are a language that reflect what the mind of the Church and unify our internal participation with external gestures. To be participate fully and actively is to follow the liturgy in word and gesture (without addition of alteration) in the pews.

But this has nothing to do with being ‘active’ by being an EMHC, reader etc.

Active participation has nothing to do with being more active ‘physically’. It simply means to participate fully in the Mass (both internally and through making the set responses and actions). One can be just as active while participating in an EF form low Mass as in an OF form Mass.

We have become too obsessed about the need for the laity to be all busy ‘doing’ stuff. I think it has gotten to the point where the whole point of the Mass seems to be often missed. Mass is not about doing things, it is about being there to kneel at the foot of the Cross and witness.

 

[dans0622]

… We are expected to participate at the OF in pretty much a completely verbal manner. That’s how it was designed.

Yes, there certainly was a stress placed upon the congregation responding and not just the altar boy(s) as well as have far fewer “silent” prayers for the priest.

Getting back to what I said yesterday, there is one occasion where “silence” is mentioned in Sacrosanctum concilium, in n. 30. There are “proper times” for silence, it says, without any further specification. A subsequent document, Inter oecumenici, did not mention silence. Another, Tres abhinc annos, mentioned it but says it is optional, at a certain time. So, indeed there was little emphasis placed on silence. More recent documents (in addition to all the GIRMs) have tried to reinstate a greater respect for the benefits of silence during Mass.

Dan

 

[Denise1957]

Yes, there certainly was a stress placed upon the congregation responding and not just the altar boy(s) as well as have far fewer “silent” prayers for the priest.

Getting back to what I said yesterday, there is one occasion where “silence” is mentioned in Sacrosanctum concilium, in n. 30. There are “proper times” for silence, it says, without any further specification. A subsequent document, Inter oecumenici, did not mention silence. Another, Tres abhinc annos, mentioned of it but says it is optional, at a certain time. So, indeed there was little emphasis placed on silence. More recent documents (in addition to all the GIRMs) have tried to reinstate a greater respect for the benefits of silence during Mass.

Dan

Thank you for the further info regarding the documents.

 

[Sirach2]

No, it is not my subject. ]
You are pulling one thing from my post in order to try to cause a disturbance. It isn’t right for you to accuse me of baiting people. I may just report you for it.

(post has been duly reported)

Take a look at your own words, please. “Silence” is your subject, as I stated and prove herein.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13067483&postcount=75
That being said, I can sympathize with the Cardinal’s views about incorporating Latin and silence into the OF.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13069626&postcount=85
However, one of the traditional elements which the OF does not seem able to accommodate is silence and contemplative prayer during Mass, which the old form did accommodate very well.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13066850&postcount=59
The good **Cardinal **said…"Joyful fear requires silence in the presence of the divine majesty. It is often forgotten that sacred silence is one of the means set forth by the Council to encourage participation."
The problem is of course that the Ordinary form of the Mass was not designed to have or encourage silence. It was designed to have nearly continual verbal participation
　
**　**

 

[Denise1957]

Sirach2:
Take a look at your own words, please.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13067483&postcount=75
That being said, I can sympathize with the Cardinal’s views about incorporating Latin and silence into the OF.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13069626&postcount=85
However, one of the traditional elements which the OF does not seem able to accommodate is silence and contemplative prayer during Mass, which the old form did accommodate very well.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13066850&postcount=59
The good Cardinal said…“Joyful fear requires silence in the presence of the divine majesty. It is often forgotten that sacred silence is one of the means set forth by the Council to encourage participation.”
The problem is of course that the Ordinary form of the Mass was not designed to have or encourage silence. It was designed to have nearly continual verbal participation
　
**　
**

So you believe that I posted the above things in order to bait people? Really?

 

[dans0622]

I think it is well worth considering the nature and purposes of the “ordinary form”, and how well the nature and purposes are conducive to a greater emphasis on sacred silence, more Latin, and celebration “ad orientem.” Was it designed to have as much silence as the older form? As much Latin? Ad orientem?

Personally, I think this form of the Mass can work well with a lot of silence, a lot of Latin, and ad orientem. It seems Cardinal Sarah thinks so. But, that doesn’t mean it is wrong to wonder how much is too much or whether or not a basic purpose of the new liturgy is to have the vernacular, lots of dialogue, and the priest facing the people so they can see what’s going on and “participate” visually.

Dan