Do you hate Mass?

[Binary]

I hate the monthly subscription model.

I did too, at first. But they provide so much new content that I think it’s worth it.

Now I just hate that I lost about a year of my life to a video game.

 

[Cat]

Cat, I think your post is interesting, but I also think it may have been better placed in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum, since that is where most of the arguments about abuses are. The trads who hang out here - and there aren’t that many any more, to be honest, which is a shame - LOVE the Gregorian mass and you don’t see them complaining about abuses in it. “Abuses” in the OF and OF vs. EF are really two separate issues, IMO.

As for whether you should hate the sacrifice of the mass because to like a sacrifice is “perverted”. Are you being sarcastic here? I am genuinely flummoxed at the point you are trying to make. The sacrifice of the mass is the greatest gift God has given to us. It is in no way “perverted.” It is beautiful. Those who want to see it treated reverently aren’t saying that we’re supposed to hate it; they’re simply saying that we should treat it as what it is rather than viewing it as social hour or a chance to be entertained, which really is a valid point.

I will try to explain what I mean.

No, I am not being sarcastic. I try never to be sarcastic on any online forum because it is so difficult for others to know that you are just making a “joke” because they can’t see your facial expression, hear the tone in your voice, or interpret body language. To me, sarcasm is a form of lying, and it is also rude and condescending. It makes people who don’t “get it” feel like fools.

To say that a “sacrifice” is beautiful, IMO, is perverted. A human being (or animal, in the OT), is cruelly and viciously tortured and killed. Blood gushes, breathing is labored, pain is unrelenting and intractible. The humiliation is unbearable (a crucifixion victim was crucified nude.) The death itself is horrible; the Bible speaks of “death” as an enemy, not a friend.

I think that to find the execution of a human being beautiful is sick.

There are people who enjoy watching executions. (Actress Sarah Bernhardt was a such a person, and paid her way into hangings, etc.). This is sick and perverted.

But keep in mind that there is a difference between the sacrifice itself, which is horrific and ugly, and the PURPOSE of the sacrifice, which, in the case of Jesus Christ our Lord, was to redeem fallen mankind. I understand the difference.

A purposeful sacrifice becomes beautiful; e.g., when Saint Maximillian Kolbe (Feast Day was yesterday) sacrificed himself for another Auschwitz prisoner. But to say that the sacrifice itself was beautiful–no. It is never beautiful to watch a human being tortured, suffering, and dying.

The Mass, according to some posters, is a “sacrifice,” and that’s ALL it is. Some posters have implied that it is incorrect and irreverent to ever consider the Mass a “celebration” or a “meal” or a “communion time.” It’s all about the Sacrifice of Our Lord. And frankly, I can see their point if they “hate” this, because to contemplate the Sacrifice of Our Lord is to hate what sinful mankind caused Jesus to do to redeem us. If Mass is just a Sacrifice, then perhaps we should hate it, although we can appreciate and be grateful for the Sacrifice that opened the door of heaven for us.

But I believe it is in the Exsultet that we pray, “O happy fault, oh necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer.”

So perhaps we should not hate the Mass.

But so many on these forums seem to recite a constant litany of hate when it comes to the Mass that they are subjected to. It’s as though they are victim, not Jesus.

I don’t get this.

 

[Cat]

No. The Mass is supposed to be a holy reverent event. A prayer. The reason people find the Mass hard to tolerate is because the Novus Ordo Mass has become an irreverent and often sacreligious event. That is not what it is supposed to be. The people are responding reasonably - as they should - to a horrible liturgy. They should feel this way; and if they don’t something is wrong.

But consider how many of these same people respond when they attend their first Traditional Mass. You hear it over and over again: “It was beautiful. It was so reverent and holy, I can’t wait for the next one, etc.”

That is what Mass is supposed to be. It is not supposed to be something we hold our nose and suffer through. Yet that is the result of the “liturgical renewal” since Vatican II. And the solution to the reasonable feeling of disgust is to avoid that Mass if at all possible and attend only the Traditional Mass.

Never forget the saying “lex orandi lex credendi”, which means, the way we pray is the way we believe. What this means is that an irreverent and often sacreligious Mass that produces disgust within us, will do more harm than we realize. It will almost certainly damage our faith.

Please allow me to say that not everyone loves the TLM or considers it “reverent.” To me, the TLM is a “show.” And I dislike not being able to understand the Latin. It’s not reverent at all to me. JMO.

Actually, it’s not JMO. Many of the elderly Catholics that I know literally hate the TLM. (We have one in our city.)

I’m not saying this to discourage YOU from loving it, and I do support seeing the TLM become more common in dioceses in the U.S… I’m just trying to make the point that TLM is not the cure-all that some of you think it is for “what’s wrong with Catholicism.”

Is this why people “hate” Mass? Because it’s not the TLM that they desire?

Folks, I think that’s sad. My husband is far from perfect, but I love my husband and don’t constantly wish that he were someone else. People who do that end up divorced.

 

[fix]

If then Death was the supreme moment for which Christ lived, it
was therefore the He wished to have remembered. He did
not ask that men should write down His Words into a Scripture; He
did not ask that His kindness to the poor should be recorded in
history; but He did ask that men remember His Death. And in order
that its memory might not be any haphazard narrative on the part
of men, He Himself instituted the precise way it should be
recalled.

Hence the Mass is to us the crowning act of Christian worship. A
pulpit in which the words of our Lord are repeated does not unite
us to Him; a choir in which sweet sentiments are sung brings us no
closer to His Cross than to His garments. A temple without an
altar of sacrifice is non-existent among primitive peoples, and is
meaningless among Christians. And so in the Catholic Church the
, and not the pulpit or the choir or the organ, is the
center of worship, for there is re-enacted the memorial of His
Passion. Its value does not depend on him who says it, or on him
who hears it; it depends on Him who is the One High Priest and
Victim, Jesus Christ our Lord…

But how is it made visible? Where shall we find Calvary
perpetuated? We shall find Calvary renewed, re-enacted, re-
presented, as we have seen, in the Mass…

CALVARY AND THE MASS
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

I guess Pope Paul VI, Justin Martyr, and our Early Christian ancesters had it all wrong with their sacreligious Masses that produce disgust within us.

That was a writing from Justin Martyr from the year 150 A.D. Does this type of Mass sound familiar?

What makes you say that Paul VI, Justin Martyr and the early Christian were digusted by what they wintnessed at Mass? You quote did not support your premise.

 

[Lee_M]

What makes you say that Paul VI, Justin Martyr and the early Christian were digusted by what they wintnessed at Mass? You quote did not support your premise.

I didn’t say they were disgusted. Re-read the post again please.

You originally said:

That is what Mass is supposed to be. It is not supposed to be something we hold our nose and suffer through. Yet that is the result of the “liturgical renewal” since Vatican II. And the solution to the reasonable feeling of disgust is to avoid that Mass if at all possible and attend only the Traditional Mass.

I’m arguing that the Norvus Ordo Mass was intended to be like the worship of the Early Christians. I was using a little sarcasm.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Pax…really, this is uncharitable. I must say here that I never feel that way. And I don’t think I would at any Mass because of what it is…the Mass.

OK, I understand what you are saying here. You are saying that you would never feel disgusted because of the Sacrifice taking place. But surrounding the Sacrifice is a liturgy. If this liturgy is full of abuses and sacrileges, it would be wrong not to be disgusted by the abuses and sacrileges. That is what I meant. Not that you would be disgusted at the Sacrifice taking place (which is not visible to the eyes).

That’s not to say that I wouldn’t be upset if my parish did some of the abuses that I have read about on here. But hate the “Mass”. Never.

I didn’t say hate the Mass. That was the phrase used by the OP. I was only referring to the reasonable disgust that people have when they witness abuses or other bad things that take place at some Masses. If your Church does not have such abuses, that is great.

I’m planning to start another thread dealing with the way in which abuses, or even irreverent behavior of the Priest, diminishes the amount of grace distributed to the faithful at Mass. People seem to think that the validity of the Mass is all that counts; and that the amount of grace received at any valid Mass is equal. That is not what the Church teaches. The Church actually teaches that, although the Sacrifice is infinite, and the amount of objective grace available is infinite, nevertheless, the amount of grace received by the faithful present at Mass is dependent upon the reverence of the Priest, and (I’ll need to doubt check this point), but also by the externals associated with the Mass.

 

[Dauphin]

Evelyn Waugh called attending the Novus Ordo a “bitter trial”.

I feel the same way. I attend it if there is no other choice on Sunday, since the Church demands that I attend Mass on Sunday. Contrary to what some posters think, I don’t go there “looking for trouble”. I would much rather sit at home and read the 1962 missal than sit through the local Sunday travesty, but I do it out of loyalty to the Church. I do my best to see through the banality and happy-clappy irreverence to the Holy Sacrifice and the presence of the incarnate God.

However, I’m weak; I need the Traditional Latin Mass in order to develop a sense of reverence and to truly offer the sacrifice. Otherwise, I’m just left there fuming and unable to concentrate - unable to shut out all the bad liturgy and to see the essential beauty that underlies it. That’s what makes it a “bitter trial” - not some belief in its invalidity.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

I didn’t say they were disgusted. Re-read the post again please.

I’m arguing that the Norvus Ordo Mass was intended to be like the worship of the Early Christians. I was using a little sarcasm.

I thought that is what you were getting at, but wasn’t sure. BTW, have you ever heard of the error known as antiquaritinism? It was condemned by Pius XII.

 

[ibkc]

To say that a “sacrifice” is beautiful, IMO, is perverted. A human being (or animal, in the OT), is cruelly and viciously tortured and killed. Blood gushes, breathing is labored, pain is unrelenting and intractible.

Well … actually, Cat: no. You do not understand sacrificial theology at all. In the first place, that is not how animal sacrifices, properly done, are/were performed. In ancient times, animals were raised for the specific purpose. They were well-cared for. In the ritualistic sacrifice, they were quickly slaughtered, offered up as a sacrifice, the best parts set aside for the god(s), and the rest consumed by the people. It was, beyond a doubt, a more humane way for an animal to go than our modern-day slaughterhouse model.

Now human sacrifice is another thing entirely. I’m not even going to go there, because that kind of sacrifice is a perversion, even if the victim volunteers for it.

The humiliation is unbearable (a crucifixion victim was crucified nude.) The death itself is horrible; the Bible speaks of “death” as an enemy, not a friend.

But see, crucifixion was never considered a method of sacrifice. It was a torture method. I think you are missing one of the deepest subtexts of te crucifixion. Christ’s crucifixion was not a sacrifice to those who killed him. But we Christians who know who Christ was, and what He came here to do, are doing Him a great disservice by not remembering His passion and giving it the highest honor.

Also, on death being an enemy: I don’t want to get into a verse-slinging match here, but since death is our potential gateway to the presence of God, how can that be so? It could be an enemy to an unrepentant sinner, absolutely, and I can see how the scriptures would want to get that point across.

I think that to find the execution of a human being beautiful is sick.

There are people who enjoy watching executions. (Actress Sarah Bernhardt was a such a person, and paid her way into hangings, etc.). This is sick and perverted.

I certainly agree with that. But Christ’s crucifixion was no ordinary execution, as I talked about above. It is not for us to turn our eyes away from His sufferings.

The Mass, according to some posters, is a “sacrifice,” and that’s ALL it is. Some posters have implied that it is incorrect and irreverent to ever consider the Mass a “celebration” or a “meal” or a “communion time.” It’s all about the Sacrifice of Our Lord.

I’m sorry to break this to you, but according to Catholic belief and teaching, they are correct. Of course, we do partake in the communion of His Body and Blood, and that is a reason to be joyous. But we cannot lose sight of what it took to bring that gift to us.

And frankly, I can see their point if they “hate” this, because to contemplate the Sacrifice of Our Lord is to hate what sinful mankind caused Jesus to do to redeem us.

That’s certainly one way to look at it, but it definitely isn’t the only way, and I do not think it is what the Church teaches. Yes, hate sins. No, don’t hate mankind, because we have the capability to overcome sin and to be as one with the Lord. And we have that capability because Christ came here to show us the way. The way is full of suffering, and the world is full of suffering. God knows this. God walks with us in our struggles. Every time I look at a crucifix, I am reminded of the GIFT of Christ’s sacrifice.

Please do not take offense at what I am going to say. What you have written suggests strongly that you are, at heart, still an evangelical Protestant. There are very good reasons why some kinds of Protestants worship as they do, and why that kind of worship is fundamentally incompatible with Catholic teachings. They reject the Real Presence and shun crucifixes because the thought of sacrifice fills them with revulsion and fear. I urge you to try to see the Catholic point of view, and to get past this idea that “hate” has any place in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[michelle_p]

I need the Traditional Latin Mass in order to develop a sense of reverence and to truly offer the sacrifice. Otherwise, I’m just left there fuming and unable to concentrate - unable to shut out all the bad liturgy and to see the essential beauty that underlies it. That’s what makes it a “bitter trial” - not some belief in its invalidity

So, when you go to Mass, you go with the idea of what YOU need? And if it’s not the style of Mass you like it’s a **bitter trial **?Wow.

I wonder how many of the people who can’t stand the NO Mass are as critical and picky about everything and everybody else in their lives.

Are they really angry with the church, or are they just angry and critical about everything and everybody?

And how do they view themselves in the big picture of life?

 

[Lee_M]

I thought that is what you were getting at, but wasn’t sure. BTW, have you ever heard of the error known as antiquaritinism? It was condemned by Pius XII.

I understand where you’re coming from, but when Vatican II was called, the Bishops were realizing that something was wrong. Over a 400 year period, there was being less and less participation in Mass from the congregation than it should have been. People were coming to Mass for private prayer only and the Bishops knew that something needed to be done.

I don’t think you can blame the Norvus Ordo Mass for all of the irreverence that we are seeing today. I think there is a lack of catechesis, more liberal liturgists, and a general moral decline in society. I believe the Church is trying to find a balance and correct a lot of the liturgical abuses that are occuring. Remember Vatican II was only a little over 40 years ago. That is still fairly new considering the time spans between most Councils. It will take time, but I believe the Church is on the right path again.

 

[Dauphin]

So, when you go to Mass, you go with the idea of what YOU need? And if it’s not the style of Mass you like it’s a **bitter trial **?Wow.

No, you misunderstand. I’m telling you that, in my weakness, I have difficulty in ignoring or shutting out those things which distract from the reverence of the Holy Sacrifice.

I often find myself fuming at the Novus Ordo, not because I want to, but because of an inherent weakness. I need the objective reverence and beauty of the Traditional Latin Mass to truly offer the sacrifice and to be truly reverent myself.

I wonder how many of the people who can’t stand the NO Mass are as critical and picky about everything and everybody else in their lives.

??

Are they really angry with the church, or are they just angry and critical about everything and everybody?

And how do they view themselves in the big picture of life?

I’m rather confused. How do you get from being too weak to attend the Novus Ordo to being critical of “everything and everybody”?

 

[Princess18]

No. The Mass is supposed to be a holy reverent event. A prayer. The reason people find the Mass hard to tolerate is because the Novus Ordo Mass has become an irreverent and often sacreligious event. That is not what it is supposed to be. The people are responding reasonably - as they should - to a horrible liturgy. They should feel this way; and if they don’t something is wrong.

But consider how many of these same people respond when they attend their first Traditional Mass. You hear it over and over again: “It was beautiful. It was so reverent and holy, I can’t wait for the next one, etc.”

That is what Mass is supposed to be. It is not supposed to be something we hold our nose and suffer through. Yet that is the result of the “liturgical renewal” since Vatican II. And the solution to the reasonable feeling of disgust is to avoid that Mass if at all possible and attend only the Traditional Mass.

Never forget the saying “lex orandi lex credendi”, which means, the way we pray is the way we believe. What this means is that an irreverent and often sacreligious Mass that produces disgust within us, will do more harm than we realize. It will almost certainly damage our faith.

This is where I get completely stuck and cannot understand a word you’re saying. I was born in 1976 and the Mass that I see each week is all that I’ve ever seen. Aside from my parents, aunts and uncles (who are in their late 60s and early 70s) the oldest in my family is 48 so none of us have experienced anything else. I read these forums and sit through Mass and wonder what all of you are talking about when you say how disgusted you are at the horrible liturgy and how it’s rotting and harming your faith. Does that mean that all of us who’ve never experienced anything else are just ruined forever? I cannot even remotely relate, as even my relatives who vividly remember the Latin Mass don’t complain or whine about “the good old days”. Is this your way of passing the faith on to the younger generation, by telling us that all we’ve ever known is atrociously wrong?

As far as “liturgical abuses”, I don’t get that either. Our parish priests stick to what’s written in the missals. Every time I go on vacation, the priests there do the same, as do all the priests of my friends, brothers, and cousins across the country. I don’t doubt that there are parishes out there where the priests completely make stuff up, so I assume those are the abuses you’re talking about. But if you’re talking about the current Mass format, I don’t see it.

I can appreciate that many have a fondness for the TLM and wish it was easier to find and attend. But for the most part, the current format is what you’ve got to work with. I cannot understand why it is repeatedly referred to as “the new Mass” - it’s been almost 40 years, it’s hardly new. 40 years, really, why are you still fighting it?

 

[ibkc]

I can appreciate that many have a fondness for the TLM and wish it was easier to find and attend. But for the most part, the current format is what you’ve got to work with. I cannot understand why it is repeatedly referred to as “the new Mass” - it’s been almost 50 years, it’s hardly new. 50 years, really, why are you still fighting it?

50 years in the timeline of the Church is a minuscule period of time.

 

[michelle_p]

No, you misunderstand. I’m telling you that, in my weakness, I have difficulty in ignoring or shutting out those things which distract from the reverence of the Holy Sacrifice.

I often find myself fuming at the Novus Ordo, not because I want to, but because of an inherent weakness. I need the objective reverence and beauty of the Traditional Latin Mass to truly offer the sacrifice and to be truly reverent myself.

??

I’m rather confused. How do you get from being too weak to attend the Novus Ordo to being critical of “everything and everybody”?

Guess I should have broken my comments into two posts. Sorry for the confusion. I just wonder if the people who are so super critical of the NO Mass are as super critical about everyone and everything else in their lives, including themselves.

 

[michelle_p]

50 years in the timeline of the Church is a minuscule period of time.

Is it really? 50 years out of 2000 years is what, 2-3 percent? Small maybe, but miniscule? In another 50 years, it will be 10 percent. What then?

 

[Dauphin]

This is where I get completely stuck and cannot understand a word you’re saying. I was born in 1976 and the Mass that I see each week is all that I’ve ever seen. Aside from my parents, aunts and uncles (who are in their late 60s and early 70s) the oldest in my family is 48 so none of us have experienced anything else. I read these forums and sit through Mass and wonder what all of you are talking about when you say how disgusted you are at the horrible liturgy and how it’s rotting and harming your faith. Does that mean that all of us who’ve never experienced anything else are just ruined forever? I cannot even remotely relate, as even my relatives who vividly remember the Latin Mass don’t complain or whine about “the good old days”. Is this your way of passing the faith on to the younger generation, by telling us that all we’ve ever known is atrociously wrong?

Well… I was born in 1988, and the Novus Ordo was all I had ever known. That didn’t prevent me from seeing the objective superiority, catholicity, and beauty of the Tridentine liturgy. I urge you to attend, or at least to read through the texts of the Mass and see the immense difference - almost as if it’s a Mass made for an entirely different religion.

I can appreciate that many have a fondness for the TLM and wish it was easier to find and attend. But for the most part, the current format is what you’ve got to work with. I cannot understand why it is repeatedly referred to as “the new Mass” - it’s been almost 50 years, it’s hardly new. 50 years, really, why are you still fighting it?

50 years is a very short period in the Church. It’s an extremely new and novel thing when seen in context. It’s being “fought” for a number of reasons, but principally because of objective deficiencies in the prayers which, for whatever reason, have de-emphasized the doctrine of the Mass as a Sacrifice offered to the father for the remission of sins and also de-emphasized the doctrine of the real presence by introducing vague terms at critical times like “spiritual food” during the offertory.

Compare the old and new prayers of the offertory and the difference will be immediately apparent.

 

[Princess18]

50 years in the timeline of the Church is a minuscule period of time.

So what? The change was made to ensure that the masses felt included and were able to understand and participate fully in the Mass, correct? Change ordered by the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on Earth, who is largely inerrant in his office, and inspired by God, right? Why do you feel the need to argue with it?

Furthermore, how do so many of you feel that you are spreading the goodness of your Faith by bashing the only way that most of us know to celebrate it? What message does that send? Oh, the Pope is infallible and always correct on big ticket items like abortion and birth control, but good grief they can’t for the life of them get straight on something so brainless like the proper way to celebrate Mass?

 

[Dauphin]

So what? The change was made to ensure that the masses felt included and were able to understand and participate fully in the Mass, correct? Change ordered by the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on Earth, who is largely inerrant in his office, and inspired by God, right? Why do you feel the need to argue with it?

Despite the good intentions, many people find the results to have been poor, even catastrophic for the Church’s faith.

Furthermore, how do so many of you feel that you are spreading the goodness of your Faith by bashing the only way that most of us know to celebrate it?

Because we hope that people will be enriched by attending the TLM, and that the influence of the TLM might rub off on the celebration of the OF.