Frustrated with Liturgical Abuses? That which does not kill us makes us stronger?

[legeorge]

OK, I had a thought yesterday, but I’m not sure I’m allowed to post it. (I hope I’m not breaking any posting rules) Anyway, here goes:

I was having a discussion with a fellow prayer group member about the differences between the “old” Tridentine liturgy and the “Novus Ordo”. It suddenly occurred to me that the changes resulting from Vatican II were because of all the experimentation and things that were going on leading up to the Council. With all the splits and abuses that have happened since then, could this be a case of God giving us what we ask for? Just like the Israelites who begged for a king. Israel: “We want a king”. God: "No you don’t. IS: “We want a king”. God: “Trust me, you don’t”. IS: “We want a king”. God: “OK, here you go”. They got what they wanted and it caused much suffering. Is it the same with the “new Mass”?

Here is my reasoning. We see an acute split between the devotees to the Trid Mass and those who attend the NO. Each side ridicules the other and in some cases, like the SSPX, has caused people to be excommunicated from Holy Mother Church. The experimentation that the NO was supposed to squelch has only gotten worse. Faith has been weakened, belief in the Real Presence has greatly diminished, scandal after scandal has erupted in the Church and so on.

I am beginning to think that God gave us this “new Mass” as a sort of test and a tool to strengthen his Church for these difficult times. If you think about it, it takes a great deal more faith and bedrock belief to extract the same Holiness and Reverence from a NO Mass than it does with a Trid Mass. As a result of all the scandals and lukewarmness we see in many parishes, the young Catholics today are flocking back to Orthodoxy and, yes, even the Tridentine Mass, in incredible numbers. I happen to believe that both liturgies have their good points and believe that both are valid and given to us by God through His Church. But I also think that maybe we don’t understand why God gave us Vatican II and the “Novus Ordo”. Of course, I could just be a crazy person who has spent too much time around Traditionalists. Or maybe I just don’t know anything because I was born in the 70’s and wasn’t properly catechized. What do you think?

 

[netmilsmom]

legeorge:

OK, I had a thought yesterday, but I’m not sure I’m allowed to post it. (I hope I’m not breaking any posting rules) Anyway, here goes:

I was having a discussion with a fellow prayer group member about the differences between the “old” Tridentine liturgy and the “Novus Ordo”. It suddenly occurred to me that the changes resulting from Vatican II were because of all the experimentation and things that were going on leading up to the Council. With all the splits and abuses that have happened since then, could this be a case of God giving us what we ask for? Just like the Israelites who begged for a king. Israel: “We want a king”. God: "No you don’t. IS: “We want a king”. God: “Trust me, you don’t”. IS: “We want a king”. God: “OK, here you go”. They got what they wanted and it caused much suffering. Is it the same with the “new Mass”?

Here is my reasoning. We see an acute split between the devotees to the Trid Mass and those who attend the NO. Each side ridicules the other and in some cases, like the SSPX, has caused people to be excommunicated from Holy Mother Church. The experimentation that the NO was supposed to squelch has only gotten worse. Faith has been weakened, belief in the Real Presence has greatly diminished, scandal after scandal has erupted in the Church and so on.

I am beginning to think that God gave us this “new Mass” as a sort of test and a tool to strengthen his Church for these difficult times. If you think about it, it takes a great deal more faith and bedrock belief to extract the same Holiness and Reverence from a NO Mass than it does with a Trid Mass. As a result of all the scandals and lukewarmness we see in many parishes, the young Catholics today are flocking back to Orthodoxy and, yes, even the Tridentine Mass, in incredible numbers. I happen to believe that both liturgies have their good points and believe that both are valid and given to us by God through His Church. But I also think that maybe we don’t understand why God gave us Vatican II and the “Novus Ordo”. Of course, I could just be a crazy person who has spent too much time around Traditionalists. Or maybe I just don’t know anything because I was born in the 70’s and wasn’t properly catechized. What do you think?

You might have a thought right in line with our new Pope who wants a leaner more devout church.
The frustration runs high on those who have been forced into a less than “Historically Catholic” mass. However in the big long history of the church, the time from Vatican II has been but a moment.

Only God knows what His plan is.

 

[buffalo]

This is a really interesting article. The part about JPII near the end is very enlightening.

The Mass of Vatican II

**REV. JOSEPH FESSIO **
With regard to the Mass we have now two extremes and a moderate position. One extreme position is the kind of informal Mass, all in English, facing the people, with contemporary music, which does not at all correspond with what the Council had in mind. But it is legitimate, it is permitted; it is not wrong. And we have on the other extreme those who have returned, with permission, to the Mass of 1962 and, as others have noted, it is thriving and growing. But it is not what the Council itself specifically had in mind, although it is the Mass of the ages. Then you have the moderates. This essay is based on a lecture on the liturgy given by Father Fessio in May, 1999.

The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, was one of two documents issued on the same day, December 4, 1963, the first two documents issued by the Second Vatican Council. The other document, Inter Mirifica, is on social communication. Sacrosanctum Concilium is one of the most important documents of the Council, one that has been the least understood and, I believe, has wrought the most havoc — not by having been fulfilled — but by having been ignored or misinterpreted. Now there should be no argument about the central intent of the Council concerning the liturgy. The Council actually spells out its intent, in paragraph 14 of Sacrosanctum Concilium: “Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that full, conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations, which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy.” The key words here are “full, conscious, and active participation.” The Latin for “active participation” is actuosa participatio.

I did a little research into previous uses of that expression in papal and other ecclesial documents. The first papal usage was in 1903 by Pope St. Pius X, whose motto was “Omnia Instaurare in Christo” (To restore all things in Christ). He considered himself a pope of renewal. He was elected in August of 1903 and in November, he issued one of the first documents of his pontificate, a motu proprio called Tra Le Solicitudini, that is, “Among the Concerns.” This was a document on the renewal of sacred music. In it, the Holy Father states, “In order that the faithful may more actively participate in the sacred liturgy, let them be once again made to sing Gregorian Chant as a congregation.”

That’s what the term “active participation” meant when it was first used in a papal document. But it had been used ten years earlier in another document, issued by Pius X before he was pope. He was the patriarch of Venice, and the document — as it turns out — was actually written by a Jesuit, with the wonderful name of Angelo dei Santi (“angel of the saints”). Sounds like a fictitious name.

In any case, the first use of actuosa participatio, i.e., active participation, referred explicitly and exclusively to the restoration of the congregational singing of Gregorian Chant. In 1928, Pope Pius XI reiterated the point in his Apostolic Letter, Divini Cultus. Nineteen years after that, in the Magna Carta of liturgical reform, Mediator Dei, issued by Pius XII, the same term was used with the same meaning. So until the Second Vatican Council, the term “active participation” referred exclusively to the singing of Gregorian Chant by the people.

more…

 

[Frank_Roman]

Wow.

We should send a copy of that to every Priest in America!

 

[Chalice]

I get a chuckle every time I read comments about someone trying to compare the Tridentine Mass with the normative, Pauline Mass. The Tridentine Mass is neither a panacea, nor is it without its own liturgical abuses.

For those who feel “everything was OK prior to Vatican II”, please read the following lifted from adoremus.org:

The Old Mass

"Stop! Take off the rose-colored glasses and face a reality of 20/20 hindsight. I began serving “the old Mass” in 1939. I am now 73 years old, 45 years a priest, having begun my seminary studies in 1950. As a kid knowing the perfect recitation of all the Latin Mass responses, we dealt with mumbled praying of many priests. In the old days there were parishes that were known as “whiz churches”: Sunday Mass, in and out in 20 minutes.

Young priests were told the motto: “Get them out fast”. In college I was too embarrassed to invite my dormitory roommates to Sunday Mass - the blatant lack of piety was a scandal. Rarely do I look back and remember edifying experiences as being the norm. But, yes, there were some.

In my experience today the gains outshine the losses. Yes, I know where craziness exists and horror stories are a fact. But the gains were tremendous. Yes, we are still growing/becoming what we should be. Change begets excesses – the pendulum swings from one extreme to the other, yet eventually resting in the middle… The recent writings and promulgations of our Holy Father give us hope, e.g., the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (USCCB Website), Sacrosanctum Concilium, and Ecclesia de Eucharistia.

Don’t despair. If there is craziness in your parish, pray for your bishop, write lovingly to the offending priest and copy it to the diocesan liturgical committee. Don’t you be crazy too – document accurately the observation of misdirection…"

adoremus.org/0704ReadersForum.html

 

[fix]

Chalice:

I get a chuckle every time I read comments about someone trying to compare the Tridentine Mass with the normative, Pauline Mass. The Tridentine Mass is neither a panacea, nor is it without its own liturgical abuses.

For those who feel “everything was OK prior to Vatican II”, please read the following lifted from adoremus.org:

The Old Mass

"Stop! Take off the rose-colored glasses and face a reality of 20/20 hindsight. I began serving “the old Mass” in 1939. I am now 73 years old, 45 years a priest, having begun my seminary studies in 1950. As a kid knowing the perfect recitation of all the Latin Mass responses, we dealt with mumbled praying of many priests. In the old days there were parishes that were known as “whiz churches”: Sunday Mass, in and out in 20 minutes.

Young priests were told the motto: “Get them out fast”. In college I was too embarrassed to invite my dormitory roommates to Sunday Mass - the blatant lack of piety was a scandal. Rarely do I look back and remember edifying experiences as being the norm. But, yes, there were some.

In my experience today the gains outshine the losses. Yes, I know where craziness exists and horror stories are a fact. But the gains were tremendous. Yes, we are still growing/becoming what we should be. Change begets excesses – the pendulum swings from one extreme to the other, yet eventually resting in the middle… The recent writings and promulgations of our Holy Father give us hope, e.g., the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (USCCB Website), Sacrosanctum Concilium, and Ecclesia de Eucharistia.

Don’t despair. If there is craziness in your parish, pray for your bishop, write lovingly to the offending priest and copy it to the diocesan liturgical committee. Don’t you be crazy too – document accurately the observation of misdirection.

This priest claims he has reverence for the past, yet bashes it and claims that we are much better off today.

I can find many who would disagree with him. It is one person’s opinion, not fact.

 

[Freeway4321]

Let’s not get into liturgical abuses. As if the N.O. isn’t the most abused liturgy… ever?

 

[legeorge]

Chalice:

I get a chuckle every time I read comments about someone trying to compare the Tridentine Mass with the normative, Pauline Mass. The Tridentine Mass is neither a panacea, nor is it without its own liturgical abuses.

For those who feel “everything was OK prior to Vatican II”, please read the following lifted from adoremus.org:

Actually, I think I pointed out that it was abuses and experimentation that led up to the “new order” and Vatican II was trying to stop that by making the changes. I don’t think I portrayed anything through “rose colored glasses”. I acknowledged that both are valid and both have their good points as well as their problems. I “get a chuckle” from reading posts by people who didn’t read the OP and misunderstand the intent of the thread. Or maybe I’m just offended by people laughing at me when I am seriously trying to make sense out of some of the tumult that exists within the Church.

I can relate to both sides of the story and I know that there is some deeper meaning to all of this. God is always working through His Church. The Church is alive and ever-changing, yet always the same. Two hundred years from now, the answers will be evident. I’m just trying to figure it out now so that I can fulfill my role in God’s plan and help bring about His Will “On Earth as it is in Heaven”. I don’t think that’s funny.

 

[Chalice]

fix:

This priest claims he has reverence for the past, yet bashes it and claims that we are much better off today.

I can find many who would disagree with him. It is one person’s opinion, not fact.

It’s sad that you cannot even for a moment reflect on what appears to be real life experiences of a man who has been a priest for 45 years and a pastor for over 20.

In addition, his letter was printed in the Adoremus Journal, one of the most orthodox journals within our Catholic world…

 

[Chalice]

Freeway4321:

Let’s not get into liturgical abuses. As if the N.O. isn’t the most abused liturgy… ever?

Please don’t ever suggest that the Tridentine Mass wasn’t/isn’t abused…

 

[Freeway4321]

I never have.

 

[legeorge]

buffalo, thank you so much for that informative and enlightening link. I bookmarked it to show to my husband and so that I can re-read it several times!

 

[fix]

Chalice:

It’s sad that you cannot even for a moment reflect on what appears to be real life experiences of a man who has been a priest for 45 years and a pastor for over 20.

In addition, his letter was printed in the Adoremus Journal, one of the most orthodox journals within our Catholic world…

It is sad you use a letter to the editor to prove your case. The staff who publishes a magazine does not necessarily agree with every letter they publish.

My point is we are dealing with private opinions, not hard facts.

As long as we are pasting letters to the editor, how about this one?:

The First Mass Versus the New Vernacular Mass

I used to think the Mass was a re-presentation of the Sacrifice on Calvary. But Dan Mattimore’s letter (May) extolling the new vernacular Mass and comparing it to the Last Supper convinced me otherwise. Yet he is still too soft on those who would, in his words, “encrust” our liturgies with formalities not present when our Lord first broke bread.

The First Mass (the Last Supper) was not richly decorated with opulent, felt banners. Nothing screams, in Mattimore’s words, “the ‘old wine’ of religion” like felt. Such decadence is fit only for the Temple of Baal.

Other innovations seeped in: Musical instruments should be limited to lutes and lyres. Pews must be replaced with cushions. Women should only be present to refill the wooden bowls of the men eating dinner during Mass.

Neither the Tridentine nor the new vernacular Mass is concelebrated with 12 bishops. We must make every priest a bishop, and they must be of Hebrew blood and have beards.

The most heinous “encrustation” is the reading of the synoptic Gospels, the eldest of which wasn’t written until A.D. 60, and was not read at the Last Supper or at early Masses. Only the most Latin-loving reactionary can support reciting the Gospel of St. John, which dates to A.D. 90.

We as the People of God must do our part. I am contributing by not showering before Mass — but my wife will wash and perfume my feet.
newoxfordreview.org/letters.jsp?did=0905-letters

 

[netmilsmom]

fix:

It is sad you use a letter to the editor to prove your case. The staff who publishes a magazine does not necessarily agree with every letter they publish.

My point is we are dealing with private opinions, not hard facts.

One can always find a single person of dissent.

Check out this line…
" In the old days there were parishes that were known as “whiz churches”: Sunday Mass, in and out in 20 minutes."

Today they are called “Catholic Communities” and the modernists love them. They are the norm, rather than the exception and we are not better off for them.

It wasn’t perfect then but one could always pick the High Mass and get some reverence. One is hard pressed to find that today.

 

[fix]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

One can always find a single person of dissent.

Check out this line…
" In the old days there were parishes that were known as “whiz churches”: Sunday Mass, in and out in 20 minutes."

Today they are called “Catholic Communities” and the modernists love them. They are the norm, rather than the exception and we are not better off for them.

It wasn’t perfect then but one could always pick the High Mass and get some reverence. One is hard pressed to find that today.

Yes, I always hear of these stories, negative ones, from those who want to beat us up over the drama of their upbringing. Now, what happens in 30 years? Will those who claim it is perfect now then say how terrible it was?

My point is there are plenty of issues now that require reform. That is not indispute. I cannot see why some must bash the past as if it were all bad then and very superior now.

 

[netmilsmom]

fix:

My point is there are plenty of issues now that require reform. That is not indispute. I cannot see why some must bash the past as if it were all bad then and very superior now.

And a great point it is!
I think the past is like parenting.
Some things our parents teach us to do with our kids.
And some things are lessons in what NOT to do.

Those who whine about their childhoods have not seen that they were also given a lesson in parenting.

 

[fix]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

And a great point it is!
I think the past is like parenting.
Some things our parents teach us to do with our kids.
And some things are lessons in what NOT to do.

Those who whine about their childhoods have not seen that they were also given a lesson in parenting.

It smacks of arrogance and left leaning elitism.

 

[legeorge]

I think the past is like parenting.
Some things our parents teach us to do with our kids.
And some things are lessons in what NOT to do.

This is a good analogy. What is God trying to teach us through Vatican II and the promulgation of the “new Mass”? Is he trying to teach us what to do or what not to do? Or a little of both? Is there a specific reason for this particular lesson right now, in these particular times? Is it OK to even speculate about it? Or should we just ‘go with the flow’ because ‘time will tell’?

 

[Freeway4321]

**“left leaning elitism.” **

These constant political titles for religion is straight up paganish.

 

[palmas85]

legeorge:

This is a good analogy. What is God trying to teach us through Vatican II and the promulgation of the “new Mass”? Is he trying to teach us what to do or what not to do? Or a little of both? Is there a specific reason for this particular lesson right now, in these particular times? Is it OK to even speculate about it? Or should we just ‘go with the flow’ because ‘time will tell’?

We are, all of us, tragically flawed human beings. We come into the world naked, alone and carrying the stain of original sin. highly disposed to sin and evil. Through Baptism, we are cleansed, and able to live as God intended that man should live. However, we have free will, and the ability to choose what we do and how we will do it.

Throughout history the Church has faced trials and tribulations beyond measure. Schism, heresy, false doctrines, anti popes, constant infighting pride beyond belief, denial of God, of the Holy Trinity, blasphemies etc etc etc. etc. All because of free will. Gods greatest gift to us and conversely the most deadly thing imaginable.

Through free will, we can accept without question what we want, deny without fear of censure what we don’t want and stand or fall as a result Through it all God sits back, and in an expression of what could best be called “tough love” , allows us to do it.

Liturgical abuses come about through the exercise of free will and the arrogance of man, who imagines that he can both comprehend and improve on the word of God.

The current state of the Church is a result of this mindset The state of the Church 1,000 years ago was a result of this mindset and the church in a 1,000 years will be the result of the same thing. Read Acts, Romans and Corinthians. Problems and misinterpretations in the Church started immediately after it was founded. . Each succeeding generation thinks it knows better, has a clearer and deeper understanding of faith and is therefore closer to God and what He really wants and intends. However, since we are humans, and inherently imperfect, we cannot be certain that what has been implemented has been done correctly or is even pleasing to God. And in the truest sense of the loving Father showing tough love, God allows it to happen. He has always given us that freedom of choice

I believe that the the Church will prevail, nothing can destroy it. Not even us, in our arrogance and ignorance and our belief that we know better, and that we can understand the mind and ways of God.

COR JESU SACRATISSIMUM MISERERE NOBIS