Happy 40th Birthday Novus Ordo

[Ockham]

You don’t know me, ncjohn, and yet you blithely attack me as though you can see what’s in my soul. Why is that? Is it because you hate the Tridentine Mass, and therefore everyone who happens to revere it? Then again, is it because you fear that the NO will become extinct eventually now that Benedict XVI has allowed the re-emergence of the TLM? Or is it something else? For whatever it’s worth to you, my beef is with the “Spirit of the Council,” not with you, ncjohn. But, since I’m not God, I can’t peer into your soul to see what is motivating your ad hominem rancor.

Peace

Wise words.

From what I’ve experienced here I tend to speculate as to the cause of the NO adherents’ hostility. Perhaps they are lecturers, EMHCs, female religious promoting the ordination of women, etc, fearing the loss of their stature during Holy Mass. It seems you can’t express your dissatisfaction with the current OF without being insulted, disrespected, and the victim of false witness. I don’t hold the same level of hostility towards NO adherents, liturgical liberals, lapsed Catholics, or anyone else. However, I don’t believe the NO has served the Church well and I question the motivation for most of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ initiatives. In my opinion the TLM is a more reverent form of worship and a better representation of Catholicism. If someone disagrees then that’s their preogative, however, their reaction reflects much more then an opposing view point.

 

[franklinf]

In the spirit of charity I’ll try once again to help you.

• read Newt’s reply. He collaborated 12 out of 15 of my points
• read the RS link I posted from the Vatican. If the NO/OF is practiced as reverently as you suggest then why was it written?
• read "Spirit of the Liturgy. If the NO/OF is practiced as reverently as you suggest then why was it written?
• read three or four pages of thread titles in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum. If the NO/OF is practiced as reverently as you suggest then why are so many threads started which suggest otherwise?
• Google “liturgical abuse”
• visit www.cathcon.blogspot.com and other blogs, websites, forums where the state of the Novus Ordo is discussed

Maybe you live in the most reverent NO diocese in the world, maybe I live in one of the worst. I take it you know Waterloo Ontario is not within the Southeast US so suggesting I drop into your parish for proof is rather disingenuous. The list I provided is typical of the NO Masses said in my diocese, the parishes I’ve visited in North America, and from what I’ve read and listened to typical of everywhere else in the world. That’s my position and I’m standing by it. If you continue to dispute it that’s your preogative. Ok? Can we move on now?

Perhaps this is the issue. Those select lucky few that found a “reverent NO diocese” have no need to parish hunt, while those that haven’t do. Thus, they are exposed to many more NO masses than the select few and can better speak to the prevalent abuses and overall atmosphere.

 

[vz71]

In the spirit of charity I’ll try once again to help you.

• read Newt’s reply. He collaborated 12 out of 15 of my points

OK, that’s two people that back your points.
A wise statistics teacher I studied under once taught me that two does not equal a trend.
It would be wise to consider the sheer number of Novus Ordo Mass said each day when trying to characterize any one (or two) experiences as ‘typical’

• read the RS link I posted from the Vatican. If the NO/OF is practiced as reverently as you suggest then why was it written?

As I said earlier, it is wise not to speculate the motives of any given action by the Vatican.
You may wish to believe the action has to do with the Novus Ordo, but it may not.
I would suggest liturgical abuse has more to do with the faith of the flock then of the form of the Mass.

• read "Spirit of the Liturgy. If the NO/OF is practiced as reverently as you suggest then why was it written?

See above.

• read three or four pages of thread titles in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum. If the NO/OF is practiced as reverently as you suggest then why are so many threads started which suggest otherwise?

Nature abhors a vacuum.
When we read any given thread about any topic, there is a tendency to believe there is much more to the story then what is written.
But it is well advised that we keep idle speculation to ourselves and work with only the responses on hand.
Also, there are millions of threads on this forum. Given the volume of threads, those that cover liturgical abuse are relatively few in number.

• Google “liturgical abuse”

And what? This does not back your claims to the nature of the ‘typical’ Mass.

• visit www.cathcon.blogspot.com and other blogs, websites, forums where the state of the Novus Ordo is discussed

No, I don’t believe I will.
I already know what I will find…an echo chamber of like minded people reassuring each other that their experiences are the norm and not the abberation.
Been there, discussed that, have a T shirt.

Maybe you live in the most reverent NO diocese in the world, maybe I live in one of the worst. I take it you know Waterloo Ontario is not within the Southeast US so suggesting I drop into your parish for proof is rather disingenuous.

About twice a year I entertain friends from Canada.
The offer was genuine.
Your distrust is puzzling.

The list I provided is typical of the NO Masses said in my diocese, the parishes I’ve visited in North America, and from what I’ve read and listened to typical of everywhere else in the world. That’s my position and I’m standing by it. If you continue to dispute it that’s your preogative. Ok? Can we move on now?

No we can’t. At least not until I have had my say.

You wrote your list on the ‘typical’ Novus Ordo Mass. Now we can see that it is not ‘Typical’ of the Novus Ordo, but merely typical of the Novus Ordo within your particular parish. That is a big difference.

Well, this means you don’t have to do a whole lot of research.
And it means that you have had some bad experiences.

The SouthEast US is firmly protestant territory, with a Catholic populace of less then 2% where I am located.
Your presence would be warmly welcomed and I wager you would be pleasently surprised at the apparent abscence of a great deal of your list.

Now I have had my say, we can move on.

 

[vz71]

Wise words.

From what I’ve experienced here I tend to speculate as to the cause of the NO adherents’ hostility. Perhaps they are lecturers, EMHCs, female religious promoting the ordination of women, etc, fearing the loss of their stature during Holy Mass.

You missed one.

Those that have known the Novus Ordo their entire life and eagerly attend when they can the rare TLM that they find in their area…but are then scandalized by the PRIDE of the TLM attendees.
Not the helpful kind of pride where they rightfully could take pride that their church is able to offer this form, but the boastful ‘we are better then thee’ pride that I have seen characterized in many of these threads.

I mentioned earlier, and it may bear repeating in a different form.
The Novus Ordo form lends itself to abuse, but the TLM lends itself to pride.

 

[LilyM]

Perhaps this is the issue. Those select lucky few that found a “reverent NO diocese” have no need to parish hunt, while those that haven’t do. Thus, they are exposed to many more NO masses than the select few and can better speak to the prevalent abuses and overall atmosphere.

Says who? I’m happy with my diocese, but have moved much and travel frequently, and certainly have attended and do attend many many Masses outside of my diocese (even outside my home city and state).

And you may have been to several different parishes, but if they’re all within the same diocese it’s still a skewed sample, as these things tend to cluster.

So assuming you’re not a frequent mover and traveller like I am, my experience is broader than yours - and if you are, it’s at least as valid as yours.

It’s not like I was born into my parish, I also chose it after looking at several, most of which are reverent. And I’m not exclusive by any means, one of the benefits of living in a major city. But simply find the music and preaching at some more congenial to my tastes than others.

The difference between us is that I recognise these tastes for what they are - tastes. Not rubrics, not indicia of holiness or reverence. I don’t pretend they are written in stone or that everyone needs to adhere to my standards in such things. In fact I thank God they don’t - our worship, while meant to be reasonably uniform, has always allowed for variety, hence the different Eastern Rites which thanks be have not been suppressed, hence the different varieties of Latin Mass - some with singing and responses by laity, others without - and so on.

 

[vz71]

Perhaps this is the issue. Those select lucky few that found a “reverent NO diocese” have no need to parish hunt, while those that haven’t do. Thus, they are exposed to many more NO masses than the select few and can better speak to the prevalent abuses and overall atmosphere.

Possible, but that still would not account for my experience.
I have visited and attended the Novus Ordo Mass in literally hundreds of different churches, and have found that abuse happens with regularity, but is also the exception to the rule.
The vast majority are faithful.

Given that the Bishop is responsible for a great deal within a given diocese, it would make much more sense (and it actually fits my experience) that if a given Bishop is lax enough to allow abuses, then many of the parishes in that diocese will have abuse. And the unfortunate soul that lives too far into the diocese to easily drive to another for Mass could easily feel that the majority are that way as all of the Mass experience is under the influence of a Bishop that is too lax.

 

[Ockham]

You missed one.

Those that have known the Novus Ordo their entire life and eagerly attend when they can the rare TLM that they find in their area…but are then scandalized by the PRIDE of the TLM attendees.
Not the helpful kind of pride where they rightfully could take pride that their church is able to offer this form, but the boastful ‘we are better then thee’ pride that I have seen characterized in many of these threads.

I mentioned earlier, and it may bear repeating in a different form.
The Novus Ordo form lends itself to abuse, but the TLM lends itself to pride.

Can you provide proof? Do all TLM attendees suffer from pride?

Have you seen abuse in the NO?

 

[Ockham]

Given that the Bishop is responsible for a great deal within a given diocese, it would make much more sense (and it actually fits my experience) that if a given Bishop is lax enough to allow abuses, then many of the parishes in that diocese will have abuse. And the unfortunate soul that lives too far into the diocese to easily drive to another for Mass could easily feel that the majority are that way as all of the Mass experience is under the influence of a Bishop that is too lax.

Oh…so Redemptionis Sacramentum, Spirit of the Liturgy, www.cathcon.blogspot.com, and all those other sources are directed specifically at my diocese. Who knew?

 

[ProVobis]

Why did Pope Benedict XVI write “Spirit of the Liturgy” if the OF is generally be practiced properly?

I think the then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s depiction of the Novus Ordo as “banal fabrication” goes beyond whether it’s practiced properly or not. In fact, if it had been anyone else saying what the Cardinal said about the Novus Ordo, he or she would have severely chastised by many of the members on this forum who favor the Novus Ordo. There was a reason why was there so much joy in tradville when Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope.

 

[vz71]

Can you provide proof? Do all TLM attendees suffer from pride?

Given that the context of the post had to do with my own experience, I need no proof here. However if you wish to believe that what I have written is not possible, rock on.

Have you seen abuse in the NO?

Be specific.
I have seen a great many things.

 

[ProVobis]

I may be mistaken, I am sure others will correct me if so.

But there needs to be at least one participant.
Without the priest there, no Mass can take place.

But didn’t Christ say “for where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst”?

 

[vz71]

Oh…so Redemptionis Sacramentum, Spirit of the Liturgy, www.cathcon.blogspot.com, and all those other sources are directed specifically at my diocese. Who knew?

Not at all.
Perhaps it was written for those under a Bishop willing to put up with liturgical abuse.
Is there a reason you wish to take my posts out of their proper context?

Keep in mind, were the Bishop of a given diocese unwilling to put up with abuse, it would not be there. (at least not for long) And the Vatican would have no need to address the issues.

 

[vz71]

But didn’t Christ say “for where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst”?

Yes he did.
But that also would preclude the ‘W/O attendees’ statement.

 

[Ockham]

Be specific.
I have seen a great many things.

I find it hard to believe you have seen liturgical abuses but not: Greeters, people chatting in the pews prior to Mass, the Orans Posture rarely, the Sign of Peace given only to those nearest them and in a sober manner, and excessive use of EMHCs.

Perhaps you have seen many things but not comprehended. Heard many things but not listened. I find it hard to understand how someone can make over two thousand posts on this website and believe Greeters don’t exist or that people chat in the pews.

 

[rein_me_in_Lord]

I’m convinced that most of those on the NO side of this discussion actually like what goes on at NO services:
They like the way the “presider” jokes around up on the altar (make that table) with a we’re-gonna-have-an-awesome-time-at-summer-camp-today demeanor.
They like the casual dress of those in attendance—sports apparel, t-shirts, etc.
They like all of the charismatic hand waving, the smiling, the laughing, even the chatting going on in the pews during the service.
And, most of all, they like the FACT that they are never told by the presider (or anyone else in the whole NO outfit, for that matter) that they must assiduously avoid committing mortal sin because, if they die in the state of mortal sin, they will go to hell.

I don’t blame them. That’s what the Novus Ordo Church as been at least tacitly teaching for the past 40 years. Lex orandi, lex credendi. What do people expect them to do, be reverent? To strike their breast in remorse for the times they have refused to carry their cross? Expect them to even be aware that life on earth is supposed to be the carrying of a cross—our cross—so that we can suffer with Christ so as to be with Him forever? Such notions are unknown to the vast majority of those who go to the NO (of that I am convinced) and they should be treated with charity, not mocked.
Am I wrong? Is it routine to hear from an NO pulpit preaching against homosexuality, abortion (although that does get a little lip service, thank God), sex outside of marriage, divorcing your mate and then obtaining an annulment so that you can marry that certain exciting someone who has come into your life and still “legitimately” receive sacraments, gluttony, pride, sloth, etc.—in short, preaching against MORTAL SINS? And is it also routinely heard from NO pulpits that one must make a rigorous examination of conscience and then go to confession if one is to worthily receive the Body and Blood of Our Blessed Lord, because to do otherwise is to commit mortal sin? Is it routine to hear from an NO pulpit all (or any) of these de fide teachings of Holy Mother Church? Is there a single NO parish in the U.S. where such preaching is heard on a routine basis? How about even on a semi-regular basis? How about ever? Let me know where it is—I’d like to see that.

 

[Ockham]

Is there a single NO parish in the U.S. where such preaching is heard on a routine basis? How about even on a semi-regular basis? How about ever? Let me know where it is—I’d like to see that.

Apparently in VZ71’s parish.

You just described the current Age of Aquarius/Me Generation/Baby Boomer generation. The Novus Ordo fits with the times - a modern liturgy.

We all need to continually pray for the Church. These past forty years have seen a dramatic decline in catechesis due to an “I’m ok, you’re ok” relativism. The Church hasn’t changed its teaching just the manner in which the information is exchanged. The consequences are permanent and unfortunately can be damning.

 

[rein_me_in_Lord]

Apparently in VZ71’s parish.

You just described the current Age of Aquarius/Me Generation/Baby Boomer generation. The Novus Ordo fits with the times - a modern liturgy.

We all need to continually pray for the Church. These past forty years have seen a dramatic decline in catechesis due to an “I’m ok, you’re ok” relativism. The Church hasn’t changed its teaching just the manner in which the information is exchanged. The consequences are permanent and unfortunately can be damning.

I’ve heard it said by some far more intelligent and far wiser than I that it was the Church’s apparent (to the world) embracing of modernism a la Vatican II that opened the floodgates of immorality and anti-theism which so rapidly found a vehicle for expression in the 1960’s revolution—a sort of as-the-Church-goes-so-goes-the-world scenario. I believe that the statement is true. Looking back at the events of that period shows, to at least, a striking correlation in the event of VII with the precipitous decline of the western world into paganism/barbarism.

 

[Ockham]

Hmm…perhaps. I want to research Vatican II in order to get an understanding of what exactly transpired and how we ended up in the mess we are in now. Someone posted here once that the years after a Council are chaotic and that certainly matches my understanding of the years after a revolution. As Pope Benedict XVI points out, the “spirit of V2” was a misinterpretation. Maybe we’d be in worse shape without the NO. It could be that the Church had to roll with the waves in order to keep from capsizing during the storm.

Our Western society will either correct itself or indeed we are nearing the end of this civilization as we know it. A refocus and return to God centred activity rather than mortal is essential for our survival. Judging from the decline in the Church, current economic crisis, rise of Islamo-fascism, unsubstantiating birth rate, we’re not too far from the ledge.

 

[ncjohn]

ncjohn wrote:

“To make a case that the TLM is somehow immune to abuse is to be totally disingenous and dishonest.”

Now, for you to know that my making such a case proves that I am disingenous[sic] and dishonest would imply, at first blush, at least two things:

1. That you are God.
2. That I can make a case which, in law, means that I have proved the truth
   of my case, and that, furthermore, I can do so by being a liar.

Do you see some incongruities here, ncjohn?

Since I at no point referred to you at all in my post, other than using your statements as the basis of my comments, I’m not sure what it is you are seeing. I was simply referring to the many people at this forum who try to imply that the TLM is immune to abuse by virtue of being so structured. Other than being aware of your antipathy for the OF Mass and Vatican II, I have no idea whether you are one who believes the TLM to be abuse-proof. I do stand by my statement though that it is disingenuous to state that the TLM cannot be abused since I know from painful firsthand experience how badly it can be.

I do find it interesting though that after taking me to task for something I didn’t do, you turn around and for the second time go into all kinds of speculation about me hating the TLM and anyone associated with it, both of which I have made abundantly clear are not true. You can go back through any number of my posts to see that even though I had negative experiences with it myself that I hold no negative feelings for that form itself or its adherents. My only beef is with those who feel they need to belittle the worship preferences of others in order to bolster their own “case”.

If I inadvertently offended you by your thinking I was accusing you of something, I apologize for not being clearer.

Peace,

 

[ncjohn]

In my opinion the TLM is a more reverent form of worship and a better representation of Catholicism. If someone disagrees then that’s their preogative, however, their reaction reflects much more then an opposing view point.

And if you had started with this premise, that “in my opinion…” rather than repeatedly stating it to be objective fact both in this and other threads, I don’t think anyone here would even be discussing this. You are certainly entitled to your opinion and preference. And you are entitled to express your reasons for that opionion. It is the continual lapses into ridicule and attack, which you don’t even seem to be able to recognize to be such, that cause some of us to become defensive.

I fully support your desired preference and would be perfectly happy if you could just acknowledge that we can legitimately be just as enthralled in the OF Mass as you are in the EF Mass. You may not understand why, and may not be able to have the experience yourself, but it doesn’t make it substandard or somehow wrong.

Peace,