Gathering around the altar for consecration

[opus101]

Everyone should keep in mind that benedictine monastic communites have gathered around an altar just as the OP described for many centuries. The practice is authentically Catholic and very ancient.

I am not saying that it should be done by a secular priest outside of a monastic community, but just that we keep in mind that it does happen, and that it is legitimate, and even encouraged by the Church, and has taken place for over 1000 years.

-Tim-

The Benedictine monks that gatheres around the altar were probably all priests or at least Deacons or Acolytes. They were not lay people.

 

[centurionguard]

Suffice it to say that if we concede it to be a liturgical abuse, a reasonable translation would be that it is an insult and misuse of the very nature and order of our worship of God. This order of worship was designed by God Himself, entrusted to His Church, which is His Bride. Thus, another way of reasonably translating this is to say it is an insult to the Bride of Christ.

When Is the last time someone insulted a bride in the presence of her groom and he was not offended?

:thumbs up:

As I tried to say in another thread that was removed for whatever reason.

Is that today seems to be a Mass more about people than the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass itself. And here I’m speaking about self-styled liturgies which on the exterior may look harmless to some but nevertheless fail to follow the rubrics of the Mass.

The follow recent article in the Adoremus Bulletin speaks about just that.
adoremus.org/0911LiturgicalReform.html

I am convinced that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing today is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy, which at times has even come to be conceived of etsi Deus non daretur [Lit., as if God is not given], in that it is a matter of indifference whether or not God exists and whether or not He speaks to us and hears us. But when the community of faith, the worldwide unity of the Church and her history, and the mystery of the living Christ are no longer visible in the liturgy, where else, then, is the Church to become visible in her spiritual essence? Then the community is celebrating only itself, an activity that is utterly fruitless. And because the ecclesial community cannot have its origin from itself but emerges as a unity only from the Lord, through faith, such circumstances will inexorably result in a disintegration into sectarian parties of all kinds — partisan opposition within a Church tearing herself apart.

This is why we need a new Liturgical Movement, which will call to life the real heritage of the Second Vatican Council. [Emphasis added]

 

[triumphguy]

Suffice it to say that if we concede it to be a liturgical abuse, a reasonable translation would be that it is an insult and misuse of the very nature and order of our worship of God. This order of worship was designed by God Himself, entrusted to His Church, which is His Bride. Thus, another way of reasonably translating this is to say it is an insult to the Bride of Christ.

When’s the last time someone insulted a bride in the presence of her groom and he was not offended?

Well in the four Gospels there are a number of differences between each account of the Last Supper, and in one account the Eucharistic actions are entirely missing.

The Eucharistic Liturgy has also changed over the years, and is also different between different Catholic rites. It’s also said in different languages, and in a number of forms in our own tradition.

When I was in the seminary every single day we would gather round the altar during the Eucharistic prayer, and among my teachers are those who later became bishops, or deans of other Theological Colleges. There is something wonderful about gathering round the table as the Apostles did in the upper room. There was no abuse there I can tell you.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

Not sure why Jesus would be offended. From my read of the Gospels it was the hypocrites with their long phylacteries and tassels that “offended” him Lk 20: 45 for instance)

Liturgical “abuse” maybe. But the word “abuse” in this context doesn’t carry the same seriousness as the word abuse in many other contexts, and which truly would offend Jesus.

Yes, I am a hypocrite and a naturally prideful person, I am fixing that slowly through the Grace of God. That does not have any effect on the fact that the Church has authority by Christ to tell us what is and what isn’t acceptable. Do you really think the Congregation of Divine Worship would approve of this? If we disobey the Church, it is a sin. It offends Our Lord when we sin.

 

[triumphguy]

I’m not calling you a hypocrite - though aren’t we all - just noting what certainly seemed to offend Jesus in the Scriptures.

 

[Phemie]

It is completely illicit and a superb abuse to knowingly leave out any part of the mass. Readings must be done. The Penitential Act (one of the three) must be done. There are no exceptions, ever.

Well, yes, there are. You don’t have a Penitential Rite when there is a baptism or a wedding during Mass.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

I’m not calling you a hypocrite - though aren’t we all - just noting what certainly seemed to offend Jesus in the Scriptures.

Okay, I apologise. I thought you were referring to the majority of people here who were complaining about the abuses.

God Bless.

 

[triumphguy]

Thanks for that. I don’t like ad hominem attacks - even if someone is wrong on the internet!!!

 

[Ohana]

I am not sure what the problem is. I have been to a number of Masses where weekday masses were celebrated this way. In one parish we would be in our seats through the readings, homily and then were invited up to the altar. We did the petitions there and were.always invited to add anything we especially wanted prayers to pray for. After that we went through the offeratory, consecration and communion. After communion we offered prayers of thankgiving. We were in a semicircle in front of the altar except during the Our Father when we joined hands including our pastor. Yes we stood, but there was great reverence. during these solemn parts of the Mass. It was awesome.

 

[triumphguy]

When studying theology we were taught that in one school of thought there were two religious (not architectural) “spaces” - the “synagogue” and the “upper room.” The “synagogue” is where the assembly attends to the Word of God and the Upper Room where the Last Supper is reenacted. The various postures and gestures of the congregation and the celebrant represent this. From this point of view it makes no sense to leave people in the “synagogue” when Jesus welcomes them to the “upper room.” This is not possible with a large congregation, but it is entirely possible with a small one.

 

[Ohana]

Guess this upset me because I have another comment. I think it is a bit presumptive of people to “know” what offends Jesus/God. These daily Masses I attended (in more than one parish and I was not seeking them out - just attending Mass) did not seem at all offensive, I don’t think the degree of reverence and adoration experienced would be offensive to God. In fact, it was very personal and really helped me further develop a personal relationship with the Father,Son and Holy Spirit. I don’t dispute the deep reverence some of you seem to feel in more formal expression of liturgy, just try to understand that some of us come to that differently. And difference is not abuse.

 

[Filii_Dei]

Guess this upset me because I have another comment. I think it is a bit presumptive of people to “know” what offends Jesus/God. These daily Masses I attended (in more than one parish and I was not seeking them out - just attending Mass) did not seem at all offensive, I don’t think the degree of reverence and adoration experienced would be offensive to God. In fact, it was very personal and really helped me further develop a personal relationship with the Father,Son and Holy Spirit. I don’t dispute the deep reverence some of you seem to feel in more formal expression of liturgy, just try to understand that some of us come to that differently. And difference is not abuse.

God is certainly forgiving and compassionate, but we should not presume to take advantage of it. For sure, we don’t know for certain everything that is or is not offensive to Him, but regardless of whether he promises to rain fire and brimstone or not, we must try to keep the utmost respect for God, and the Church has set forth such instructions for us to follow so that we do not cause disrespect to God. It is for this reason that we must respect the sanctuary as God’s sacred space. As laity, the most we should ever do is stand outside the sanctuary, as our Eastern brothers do (without the aid of pews, might I add!), but never enter it.

This has its roots with the Jewish practice of respecting the Holy of Holies, where only High Priest could enter to see the Ark of the Covenant. Likewise, Jesus is the Ark of the New Covenant, housed in the tabernacle and comes down among us in the Holy Eucharist in mass, and only clergy and specific laypeople should enter this area, in recognition of this sanctified space.

I do not believe that there was any malicious intent behind the action, and I am sure that the mood of reverence was certainly present as you have said, but we mustn’t think that it would appropriately substitute the act of reverence by keeping out of the sancutary.

I am touched by how this has developed your relationship with God, but there are certainly many other ways to achieve this as well, of which intruding upon the sanctuary should not be one of it. I pray and hope that your faith may continue to grow and bear fruit.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Well, yes, there are. You don’t have a Penitential Rite when there is a baptism or a wedding during Mass.

Well, that’s because asperges is a Penitential Act.

Which I also failed to annotate…

 

[YoungTradCath]

Guess this upset me because I have another comment. I think it is a bit presumptive of people to “know” what offends Jesus/God. These daily Masses I attended (in more than one parish and I was not seeking them out - just attending Mass) did not seem at all offensive, I don’t think the degree of reverence and adoration experienced would be offensive to God. In fact, it was very personal and really helped me further develop a personal relationship with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I don’t dispute the deep reverence some of you seem to feel in more formal expression of liturgy, just try to understand that some of us come to that differently. And difference is not abuse.

It’s part of the Church’s binding power. I’ll use Br. JR’s popular toothbrush example. Br. JR is a Franciscan, and as such, he must completely obey his superiors in everything short of sin. If they tell him that he must use only a red toothbrush and he uses a green one, he is therefore sinning, because he has vowed to obey. Everyone knows using red toothbrushes doesn’t offend God. But since he made a vow of obedience to his superiors, and he wasn’t commanded to sin (using a red toothbrush isn’t, in itself, a sin), then he commits a sin by using the red toothbrush. What makes it a sin is not the act itself, but the fact that it is done out of disobedience to his superiors, which he vowed not to do.

It’s the same way with the Roman Missal. Priests are commanded to not innovate and to follow the missal “to the t,” so to speak. Not doing so could possibly qualify, at least, as two sins: disobedience to the Roman Church, therefore the Pontiff himself, and pride.

The question isn’t, “Is standing around the altar a sin because standing around the altar is a sin?” The answer to that is no. The question is, “Is standing around the altar a sin because the proper authority, ultimately the Pope, says not to?” The answer is yes.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

It seems to me what was described by the OP is a liturgical abuse. I don’t think the root of it can be blamed on VII. I don’t know if anyone in this thread has linked such abuse to VII but liturgical abuses are often blamed on VII. I was born after VII and I remember when I was about 11 learning in our parish that only certain people were allowed in the sanctuary. Mainly it was the priests and the altar servers. On Fridays when the church was cleaned a man cleaned the sanctuary because ladies were not allowed in the sanctuary. The sanctuary is the proper place for certain liturgical rites. It is the place for the proper ministers. It is not the place for the congregation. In whatever church I go in I would never ever consider entering the sanctuary. May be that’s just the way I was brought up.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

A Mass that is not full of liturgical abuses which offend Our Lord.

Did He complain to you?

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Yes! there’s no doubt there was consecration.

What kind of statement is this? You make it seem like everything the OP describes is nothing to speak about.

I would have felt the same as the OP.

The only person at the Altar of Consecration is the Priest himself.
If there is a deacon he stands a few feet in back to the side of the priest.

I did not know that in the first Mass Jesus Christ was up there and the apostles a few kilometers down !!!

At least the most printed picture in the world, Leonardo da Vinci “The Last Supper” shows everyone around a table…

 

[YoungTradCath]

Did He complain to you?

You’re missing the point.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Perhaps you should ask our Holy Father in Rome. He does not share your sentiment. He is well aware of liturgical abuses such as this that are prevalent in parishes around the world, especially in America. Abuses born from modern, protestantized perversions of the Mass and free-lance, erroneous interpretations of Vatican II’s liturgical reform. He is well aware of it, and calls for a reform of the reform, bringing the Mass back to the authentic interpretation of Vatican II.

This is just another sad and pitiful example of an overly effeminate and protestantized influence on our beautiful traditional liturgy, OF and EF alike.

Makes me nauseous.

Would you mind to me more specific and not keep yourself into generalizations?
I saw abuses and I can describe some.
But some that others call abuses I do not call them so.
Can you describe yours?
Would you mind to specify which abuses the Pope talked about and when?
As for the OF and EF, it seems to be a big deal in the USA and I followed a whole thread about it and … I got asleep …

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

The reverence and respect that is due to Him. And adherence to the manner in which Mass should be celebrated through the directives of His Vicar on earth and the Successors of the Apostles. And the right to participate fully in that manner as opposed to the way a certain priest or faction desires it.

Would you mind to specify?