Deacon's homily against the EF (3/11/12)

[Corki]

Hmm. Ours sit together and process in by height.

Ours are by height too but girls on the left and boys on the right.

 

[sw85]

Please be careful about what you say against the Holy Spirit. The Second Vatican Council did not repeal Matthew 12:32.

The power of the Holy Spirit is awesome, and for some of us it is not just academic. The Holy Spirit is for some of us, more than just something we read about about in RICA. The Holy Spirit is God, and the presence of God in the lives of some is visceral, something we feel every moment of every day.

The Holy Spirit is God. Please don’t mock the Holy Spirit.

-Tim-

I demand that you clarify what, in my post, you regard as blasphemous or else withdraw this veiled accusation immediately.

 

[Brooklyn]

I demand that you clarify what, in my post, you regard as blasphemous or else withdraw this veiled accusation immediately.

FWIW, I didn’t see anything blasphemous in your post, either.

 

[Melchior_1]

I sure agree with that. But that still doesn’t answer my question why it is not the norm for most of those attending the OF to engage in the practices, traditional or not, that you described in your post. It is very much the norm for those attending the EF to pray the Rosary, read the breviary, etc. Why do you think that is not the case with those attending the OF?

Is it not the norm for those who attend the OF? Is it the norm for those who attend the EF? How can you tell? Again, I was using language dictated by most of the people who post here.

Can you tell me why “it’s not the norm”, or provide proof as such?

I will freely admit the reality is that the vast majority of Catholics attend the Ordinary Form, so there are a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously. I’m willing to bet five bucks that if the Forms were reversed, the same would be true and the EF would have a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously.

I mean, my family has their own Rite. Not a Form, but our own Rite. I could say that my Rite has more people practicing devotionals and customs with piety than the others, but that wouldn’t be correct, because how many Dominican Rite Masses are said? The ratios are quite small.

The reality is it’s not the Form that makes things happen, it’s the people in the pews.

 

[sw85]

FWIW, I didn’t see anything blasphemous in your post, either.

That’s good, as nothing in it was even remotely blasphemous in intention, objective meaning, or even subjective phrasing.

 

[Brooklyn]

Is it not the norm for those who attend the OF? Is it the norm for those who attend the EF? How can you tell? Again, I was using language dictated by most of the people who post here.

Can you tell me why “it’s not the norm”, or provide proof as such?

I will freely admit the reality is that the vast majority of Catholics attend the Ordinary Form, so there are a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously. I’m willing to bet five bucks that if the Forms were reversed, the same would be true and the EF would have a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously.

I mean, my family has their own Rite. Not a Form, but our own Rite. I could say that my Rite has more people practicing devotionals and customs with piety than the others, but that wouldn’t be correct, because how many Dominican Rite Masses are said? The ratios are quite small.

The reality is it’s not the Form that makes things happen, it’s the people in the pews.

I don’t know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember when there was only one form of Mass, and it was very different from the current situation. 75% of all people attended weekly Mass, there were long lines for confession each and every week, and confessions usually went from about 3:00 to 5:00 each Saturday, sometimes from 7:00 to 9:00 as well, there were confessions every day before Mass, and even confession offered on Sunday before Mass, and there were always lines. Most people knew and said the Rosary. The Breviary was not normally said by the laity because it was only offered in Latin. Lectio Divinia was not known at the time. But the church was very central in the majority of people’s lives before the OF was introduced. In fact, people would identify themselves by what “parish” they lived in.

So no, I can’t agree that “if the Forms were reversed, the same would be true and the EF would have a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously.” And we have history to prove it.

 

[Melchior_1]

I don’t know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember when there was only one form of Mass, and it was very different from the current situation. 75% of all people attended weekly Mass, there were long lines for confession each and every week, and confessions usually went from about 3:00 to 5:00 each Saturday, sometimes from 7:00 to 9:00 as well, there were confessions every day before Mass, and even confession offered on Sunday before Mass, and there were always lines. Most people knew and said the Rosary. The Breviary was not normally said by the laity because it was only offered in Latin. Lectio Divinia was not known at the time. But the church was very central in the majority of people’s lives before the OF was introduced. In fact, people would identify themselves by what “parish” they lived in.

So no, I can’t agree that “if the Forms were reversed, the same would be true and the EF would have a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously.” And we have history to prove it.

My age is irrelevant as I can look at this objectively. I don’t need to have been there to understand and study society as it was then and as it is now. In the last century we have seen;

• Two World Wars.
• Abortion on demand.
• Birth control.
• The onslaught of modernism.
• Porn and other objectifying items.
• The Great Depression.

All within the last 100 years. I don’t care what the Form is, Catholics worldwide would have been assaulted. You see attendance in Church down across the board, do we not? In the Eastern Churches, in the Orthodox Churches.

 

[Big_Feet]

I don’t know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember when there was only one form of Mass, and it was very different from the current situation. 75% of all people attended weekly Mass, there were long lines for confession each and every week, and confessions usually went from about 3:00 to 5:00 each Saturday, sometimes from 7:00 to 9:00 as well, there were confessions every day before Mass, and even confession offered on Sunday before Mass, and there were always lines. Most people knew and said the Rosary. The Breviary was not normally said by the laity because it was only offered in Latin. Lectio Divinia was not known at the time. But the church was very central in the majority of people’s lives before the OF was introduced. In fact, people would identify themselves by what “parish” they lived in.

So no, I can’t agree that “if the Forms were reversed, the same would be true and the EF would have a larger amount of people who don’t take the Faith seriously.” And we have history to prove it.

Yes, yes…we know…we have heard…everything was perfect before the new form of the mass was promulgated…everyone was pious, there were no real abuses of the liturgy going on…and wha-la! the mass changed, and everything went to crud. (or so it seems so many here imply)

Has anyone here ever taken the time to pull their head out of their personal hole and look around at the rest of the world, and how IT has changed in the last 50 years?? There are a lot of the same types of shifts occurring in the secular world as well, and please, understand that many are very much influenced by various forces outside the Church, too!

 

[Brooklyn]

My age is irrelevant as I can look at this objectively. I don’t need to have been there to understand and study society as it was then and as it is now. In the last century we have seen;

• Two World Wars.
• Abortion on demand.
• Birth control.
• The onslaught of modernism.
• Porn and other objectifying items.
• The Great Depression.

All within the last 100 years. I don’t care what the Form is, Catholics worldwide would have been assaulted. You see attendance in Church down across the board, do we not? In the Eastern Churches, in the Orthodox Churches.

I’m not sure what you mean by Catholics being assaulted. BTW, the Great Depression, both world wars and even the “onslaught of modernism” all occurred when what we call the EF was still the only form, and Catholics still remained very strong during those times.

It’s interesting that wars and the Depression are all outside forces which impact on people’s lives, and those things did not seem to harm the Church spiritually at the time. But abortion, birth control, and porn are more individual decisions, and seemed to have gained strength when the influence of the Church waned after the introduction of the OF.

You will agree that the Catholic Church had much more influence in society before the introduction of the OF. Is there a connection? Each person can make up his or her own mind about that.

 

[Big_Feet]

My age is irrelevant as I can look at this objectively. I don’t need to have been there to understand and study society as it was then and as it is now. In the last century we have seen;

• Two World Wars.
• Abortion on demand.
• Birth control.
• The onslaught of modernism.
• Porn and other objectifying items.
• The Great Depression.

All within the last 100 years. I don’t care what the Form is, Catholics worldwide would have been assaulted. You see attendance in Church down across the board, do we not? In the Eastern Churches, in the Orthodox Churches.

Even the general public’s belief in a superior being (God) has dwindled away…
The Faith of our Fathers is being attacked, and there have been MANY casualties, unfortuately. These losses are not because of the change in FORM of the way we worship.

 

[Brooklyn]

Even the general public’s belief in a superior being (God) has dwindled away…
The Faith of our Fathers is being attacked, and there have been MANY casualties, unfortuately. These losses are not because of the change in FORM of the way we worship.

It is an interesting coincidence that the secularization of society and fallen away Catholics completely coincides with the introduction of the OF.

 

[Big_Feet]

It is an interesting coincidence that the secularization of society and fallen away Catholics completely coincides with the introduction of the OF.

What I (and others) am trying to point out is that there are so many other circumstances and outside pressures, yet you point at one, and only one thing as the cause for all of this.

Very unfortunate.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

FWIW, I didn’t see anything blasphemous in your [sw85’s] post, either.

Nor did I.

 

[ProVobis]

And evidently he’s quite elderly.

He’s about 144 years old, give or take a decade.

A few years earlier and he could have told us about Trent as well.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

A few years earlier and he could have told us about Trent as well.

He’d probably say that Trent is irrelevant now.

 

[ProVobis]

It is my understanding that when the piece of Host is so small that it isn’t recognizable as bread it isn’t neccessarly the Sacred Species.

Not trying to be disrespectful or saying that you’re argument isn’t valid, but if those so small pieces were made of pollen, some of us would recognize them immediately.

 

[Brooklyn]

I just want to make it perfectly clear that I don’t mean to be attacking the OF. It is one of two legitimate forms of the Mass in the Catholic Church. But everyone would have to agree that there are definite problems in our church, exemplified by the subect of this thread - the deacon’s homily castigating the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

Melchior brought up the fact that it is not the norm for most Catholics who attend the OF to engage in many Catholic practices, such as the Rosary and frequent confession.

The world has gone off the deep end, and there are those who say that has influenced the Church. Maybe that is so. But the world won’t get better until the Church does because she is the ark of salvation, she is the one to bring the healing message of the Gospel to the world.

We shouldn’t be attacking one another but trying to support each other. That is why this deacon’s homily was so harmful. He is attacking other Catholics.

I apologize profusely if anyone has been offended by my posts. That was not my intention.

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

It is my understanding that when the piece of Host is so small that it isn’t recognizable as bread it isn’t neccessarly the Sacred Species.

Council of Trent, Session XIII (emphasis mine)

—Canon III. If any one shall deny, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the
whole Christ is contained under each species, and under every part of each species, when
separated; let him be anathema.
—Canon IV. If any one shall say, that, after the consecration is completed, the body and
blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable sacrament of the Eucharist, but
are there only during the use, whilst it is being taken, and not either before or after; and
that, in the hosts, or consecrated particles, which after communion are reserved or
remain, the true body of the Lord remaineth not; let him be anathema.

The Real Presence of Our Lord is in those particles that remain, even if a crumb or particle (notice the specific wording of the canon) does not look like a host.

• PAX

 

[sw85]

What I (and others) am trying to point out is that there are so many other circumstances and outside pressures, yet you point at one, and only one thing as the cause for all of this.

Very unfortunate.

The problem is that, just as the problems of the Church can’t necessarily be divorced from extraneous social problems, neither can those extraneous social problems be divorced entirely from those of the Church. Given that the Church was often the only force for traditionalism in Europe, the collapse in ecclesiastical discipline it faced in the aftermath of Vatican II probably allowed the left victories it might otherwise have been denied, or at least allowed it to win those victories more easily than it could’ve.

 

[Melchior_1]

Melchior brought up the fact that it is not the norm for most Catholics who attend the OF to engage in many Catholic practices, such as the Rosary and frequent confession.

I never said that at all, actually. I said :

“because some people who visit this subforum attend the Ordinary Form and partake in traditionalist practices. Lectio Divina, fasting, receiving the Eucharist on the tongue, frequent Confession, daily Mass, praying LOTH and/or the Rosary, are all what most consider traditionalist practices, yet all can be done while attending the Ordinary Form”.

I then said:

"Several people here have described them as traditional practices, which is why my language reflected that. In fact, there was a nice thread about the Dominican Rosary and how it is “the traditional Rosary”, and that fifteen decades is “the traditional way”."

I’m not quite sure why you’re saying that I said certain things when I never said them.