I enjoy the Novus Ordo Mass ...

  • Thread starter Thread starter ddd86
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to say that this thread has been quite troubling to me. I love the Ordinary Form of the Liturgy, but I have attended several times, and greatly admire, the Extraordinary Form. But, some who are devotees of the EF act as if the battles going on in the Church over moral issues can be summed up in some liturgical “battle” between OF and EF.

I normally attend a faithful OF, and love it, but I am also very glad that the EF is offered in my diocese so that those who have a special attachment to it can attend it. Also, people like me can experience it on occasion even if we don’t go every week.

But, it seems to me that Pope Benedict’s hope that the celebration of both forms would strengthen both forms (which means the EF can be strengthened as well; an example would be the use of the New Lectionary) is not going to come to fruition because some of the most outspoken advocates of the EF are driven not only by love of the EF, but by disdain of the OF. I am very concerned that this is not very healthy for the Church.
 
There is no tension between my pastor and the bishop. And Father said Mass in Rome at an indult church. He was vacationing with his nephew who had just been ordained.

Our bishop was one of the first in the US to respond to the MP. In a one paragraph statement in our diocesan newspaper, he “acknowledged” the MP. As a 30 year career bureaucrat with 3 1/2 years of military service before that, “acknowledged” means that I accept what you have posted but I am not going to do a blooming thing about it. His “acknowedgement” was followed in two weeks by an editorial by our diocesan chancellor who stated that those of us who wanted the EF are a “fringe” element and are being served by our local indult parish. Father has resolutely side stepped the issue since. What conclusion am I supposed to draw?

Fr. Z is more than aware of the situation since he wrote an article about it. Hmmm…we have a choir which is already familiar with chant and sacred motets. We have a congregation which could provide acolytes with minimal re-training (myself included). The vestments from before the NO are safely stored in the sacristy. There are more than enough of us in the parish who would embrace it. So, what can it be other than the bishop has put the word out?
 
JDHallKY said:
I have to say that this thread has been quite troubling to me. I love the Ordinary Form of the Liturgy, but I have attended several times, and greatly admire, the Extraordinary Form. But, some who are devotees of the EF act as if the battles going on in the Church over moral issues can be summed up in some liturgical “battle” between OF and EF.

I normally attend a faithful OF, and love it, but I am also very glad that the EF is offered in my diocese so that those who have a special attachment to it can attend it. Also, people like me can experience it on occasion even if we don’t go every week.

But, it seems to me that Pope Benedict’s hope that the celebration of both forms would strengthen both forms (which means the EF can be strengthened as well; an example would be the use of the New Lectionary) is not going to come to fruition because some of the most outspoken advocates of the EF are driven not only by love of the EF, but by disdain of the OF. I am very concerned that this is not very healthy for the Church.
Click to expand...
JD, here I go again. You have got to understand that there is a significant number of us who grew up with the Latin Mass and who were properly and thoroughly catechized before Vatican II. We are still alive. We submitted to the Magesterium of HMC back in the 70s because it was inconceivable for us to revolt against HMC. The MP is an acknowlegement of that fact and an acknowlegement that there are a whole bunch of young people who stand with us.

Look, I am not against the NO. On All Saints Day, I saw a reverent NO on EWTN which moved my soul. It’s not about which form of the Mass, it is about the underlying principles and reverence. It is about our heritage as well.

A simple example: When was the last time you heard the hymn “Come Holy Ghost” sung at your church?
 
brotherhrolf said:
There is no tension between my pastor and the bishop. And Father said Mass in Rome at an indult church. He was vacationing with his nephew who had just been ordained.

Our bishop was one of the first in the US to respond to the MP. In a one paragraph statement in our diocesan newspaper, he “acknowledged” the MP. As a 30 year career bureaucrat with 3 1/2 years of military service before that, “acknowledged” means that I accept what you have posted but I am not going to do a blooming thing about it. His “acknowedgement” was followed in two weeks by an editorial by our diocesan chancellor who stated that those of us who wanted the EF are a “fringe” element and are being served by our local indult parish. Father has resolutely side stepped the issue since. What conclusion am I supposed to draw?

Fr. Z is more than aware of the situation since he wrote an article about it. Hmmm…we have a choir which is already familiar with chant and sacred motets. We have a congregation which could provide acolytes with minimal re-training (myself included). The vestments from before the NO are safely stored in the sacristy. There are more than enough of us in the parish who would embrace it. So, what can it be other than the bishop has put the word out?
Click to expand...
Well, the bishop cannot put the word out forbidding the EF. Your pastor may fear reassignment or other repraisals. Still, it is his prerogative and it is on his conscience. The real question is what is he willing to do or to lose to provide the EF? It is a sad state of affairs, but it IS up to your pastor to provide or not provide the EF. While he may suffer pressures, he cannot be forbidden. So, is he comfortable where he is? Is he just too tired to take it on? Does he have something to really fear?

Those are not questions to be answered here, of course. But your complaint is with you pastor and should be taken to him.
 
bpbasilphx said:
James, be precise here:

Do these practices actually hurt their FAITH (leading them to reject the Resurrection and Hypostatic Union and other dogmas)–or does it merely offend their sense of proprieties and they simply don’t like them?
Click to expand...
Yes, liturgical abuses do sometimes hurt the faith of people. And by hurt I mean weaken. I don’t mean that people routinely reject the resurrection because “Fr. Look How Creative I Can Be” decides to rewrite the prayers of the Mass or wear a clown nose.

But, the way we pray can affect what we believe. A few things come to mind immediately:

For abuses “contribute to the obscuring of the Catholic faith and doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament”.
Redemptionis Sacramentum 6

For the Sacred Liturgy is quite intimately connected with principles of doctrine, so that the use of unapproved texts and rites necessarily leads either to the attenuation or to the disappearance of that necessary link between the lex orandi and the lex credendi.
Redemptionis Sacramentum 10

This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.
Pope Benedict’s Explanatory Letter to Bishops on Summorum Pontificum

I know that abuses have at times weakened my faith and the faith of others I have known. I can’t tell you how many times I have walked out of Mass depressed over what I have witnessed. And that just sets the stage for the rest of the week. There are alot of things in this world that can bring you down. And the Mass should never be one of them.

James
 
XtusVictor said:
If you pastor celebrated the EF this summer without his bishop’s approval, he was in error as the new law did not take effect until Sept. 14.
Click to expand...
It may not be so black and white:

**As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted.
**Pope Benedict XVI

James
 
XtusVictor said:
Those are not questions to be answered here, of course. But your complaint is with you pastor and should be taken to him.
Click to expand...
Indeed, and I have. But after 30 years in state government, I know when a question is being dodged and when it is not. I have no doubt in my mind that had the bishop embraced the MP instead of merely acknowledging it, it would have been a different story entirely.

Oh, it’s OK for the cathedral choir to sing in Latin. It is OK for the cathedral choir to open Midnight Mass with chanting Hodie Christus Natus Est. It’s OK for the choir to have learned various Renaissance Mass settings for concert performances but it is not OK to put those Mass settings in their proper context.

All I ask is “once and awhile” so that my children and (please God) grandchildren know from whence they came.
 
brotherhrolf said:
JD, here I go again. You have got to understand that there is a significant number of us who grew up with the Latin Mass and who were properly and thoroughly catechized before Vatican II. We are still alive. We submitted to the Magesterium of HMC back in the 70s because it was inconceivable for us to revolt against HMC. The MP is an acknowlegement of that fact and an acknowlegement that there are a whole bunch of young people who stand with us.

Look, I am not against the NO. On All Saints Day, I saw a reverent NO on EWTN which moved my soul. It’s not about which form of the Mass, it is about the underlying principles and reverence. It is about our heritage as well.

A simple example: When was the last time you heard the hymn “Come Holy Ghost” sung at your church?
Click to expand...
I do understand what you’re saying. I believe I was trying to say the exact same thing. I love the fact that the EF is being made more readily available, and I understand that there are both older and younger Catholics who are drawn to it. Wonderful.

The only thing I’m objecting to is the sense I’m getting from some people that those who don’t feel a particular attachment to the EF and prefer the OF are, by definition, less faithful Catholics who cannot possibly have as deep of an experience of the faith as those devoted to the EF. The OF is viewed as inferior, not as a matter of taste, but objectively. Therefore, the MP’s suggestion that both forms can be mutually beneficial is disregarded.

As for your point about hymns, etc., I agree with you on that. The OF should be celebrated much more reverently, and with more attention to our rich tradition, than it is in many places today. But, as Fr. Corapi has said, either form can be said reverently or irreverently. He says that priests used to brag about how fast they could say the Mass in Latin. “I can say it in 15 minutes!” It’s not about which form is used, it’s about reverence.
 
agapewolf said:
I played it on Pentacost. A N.O. Mass… AND at a lifeteen Mass we well.
Click to expand...
Were the kids able to sing it? Had they heard it before? Could they sing Veni Creator Spiritus or Veni Sancte Spiritus like I could when I was a child on Pentecost Sunday? You can “noodle” all you want but I doubt very seriously that those kids could sing all the verses of Come Holy Ghost much less Veni Creator Spiritus or Veni Sancte Spiritus - forty years ago when I was a teen, I could.
 
brotherhrolf said:
Indeed, and I have. But after 30 years in state government, I know when a question is being dodged and when it is not. I have no doubt in my mind that had the bishop embraced the MP instead of merely acknowledging it, it would have been a different story entirely.

Oh, it’s OK for the cathedral choir to sing in Latin. It is OK for the cathedral choir to open Midnight Mass with chanting Hodie Christus Natus Est. It’s OK for the choir to have learned various Renaissance Mass settings for concert performances but it is not OK to put those Mass settings in their proper context.

All I ask is “once and awhile” so that my children and (please God) grandchildren know from whence they came.
Click to expand...
Well, Brotherhrolf,

I must say I do feel for you and hope that your bishop is “not young.”

Joey

BTW, could you provide a link to the Fr. Z article on your parish situation? I have sought and am yet to find.
 
JDHallKY said:
The only thing I’m objecting to is the sense I’m getting from some people that those who don’t feel a particular attachment to the EF and prefer the OF are, by definition, less faithful Catholics who cannot possibly have as deep of an experience of the faith as those devoted to the EF. The OF is viewed as inferior, not as a matter of taste, but objectively. Therefore, the MP’s suggestion that both forms can be mutually beneficial is disregarded.
Click to expand...
Pride is an easy thing for anyone to fall into. Many traditional Catholics are so upset by the constant irreverence and watered-down version of Catholicism that is being forced down our throats. Many people are just so passionate on this subject that they often come across as arrogant. I have struggled with pride during debates. It’s possibly the easiest sin to commit. That doesn’t excuse posters who are arrogant, but it doesn’t make what they say wrong.

However, so many people on this forum are so ready to cry out the classic lines: “you think you’re better than I am!” and “stop judging me! I’m not less Catholic than you!” I believe that the TLM is better and that the NO is a watered-down version of the liturgy. I will say so to anyone who asks me my opinion. That does not make me arrogant. People unfortunately don’t like to have others disagree with them. One must search for the truth in others’ statements rather than constantly searching for faults in the person making the statement.

That being said, EVERYONE has a moral obligation to be charitable during these debates. No one is going to be influenced by your posts when you are constantly sarcastic, degrading, arrogant, etc. They will simply stereotype you as one of those “traditional Catholics” or vice-versa. We must search for faults in our own posts and search for truth in others’…not the other way around. Even if we traditional Catholics are right, what good is it doing us if we can’t follow (to the best of our ability) Our Lord and His Mother’s example of supernatural charity?
 
JDHallKY said:
I do understand what you’re saying. I believe I was trying to say the exact same thing. I love the fact that the EF is being made more readily available, and I understand that there are both older and younger Catholics who are drawn to it. Wonderful.

The only thing I’m objecting to is the sense I’m getting from some people that those who don’t feel a particular attachment to the EF and prefer the OF are, by definition, less faithful Catholics who cannot possibly have as deep of an experience of the faith as those devoted to the EF. The OF is viewed as inferior, not as a matter of taste, but objectively. Therefore, the MP’s suggestion that both forms can be mutually beneficial is disregarded.

As for your point about hymns, etc., I agree with you on that. The OF should be celebrated much more reverently, and with more attention to our rich tradition, than it is in many places today. But, as Fr. Corapi has said, either form can be said reverently or irreverently. He says that priests used to brag about how fast they could say the Mass in Latin. “I can say it in 15 minutes!” It’s not about which form is used, it’s about reverence.
Click to expand...
Yes, indeed. Ah, those famous 15 minute Masses. Never experienced one. The 4:30 Vigil Mass (NO) at @$^% in New Orleans on Saturday afternoon I attended in college was finished in 25 minutes. But I served far too many 6 am Masses with just Father and me in the rectory in 1965 and 66 (when the church was being built) and then in 67 when the sisters came (convent was built before church) and Mass was said in the convent chapel. Perhaps I was fortunate. Indeed, I was fortunate.

Ad Deum qui laetificat juventutem meam. Dear God, how I would love to serve You as I did when I was a child.
 
brotherhrolf said:
Were the kids able to sing it? Had they heard it before? Could they sing Veni Creator Spiritus or Veni Sancte Spiritus like I could when I was a child on Pentecost Sunday? You can “noodle” all you want but I doubt very seriously that those kids could sing all the verses of Come Holy Ghost much less Veni Creator Spiritus or Veni Sancte Spiritus - forty years ago when I was a teen, I could.
Click to expand...
I know it, learned it when I was 14 at Church, and still can sing it.
And when I say learned it at Church, I learned it as a member of the congregation, not the Choir.
 
quoting myself
We, as Catholics who are faithful to the Magistarium and everything that it teaches, need to work harder to bring the Church back than those who changed it in the first place. RS calls us to make sure that our Priests are conducting Mass the way that it was intended. We, as faithful Catholics, need to begin movements to bring people back to the Church we know and love!
Click to expand...
It is my opinion that this new church year should be a movement among faithful OF attending Catholics to help being the Church home. I think that anyone who reads this should begin kneeling to receive. Perhaps send a letter to the Music Ministry requesting chant? But we need to start a movement within the OF masses to bring people home to the Truth and Majesty of reverance. It will only take a few of us, but those few of us need to get it together so that we can make a difference.
Click to expand...
 
IrishBrigade said:
. *He says he doesn’t speak Latin well and doesn’t have time to study it. *

…sorry, but Latin is a phonetic language using our own alphabet, and in fact is less difficult to speak in than Spanish, because nobody today can tell whether it’s being mispronounced or not…as far as not having time to study it, well, sorry again, because it might take all of a couple of weeks to become familiar with the limited and repetitious amount of Latin required to fulfill the TLM…conspiracy may not be afoot hfere, but complacency and lack of initiative certainly is…
Click to expand...
I was raised post V-II, but I also applaud the holy father pulling back the veil on the TLM. I’ve been twice. I have nothing but respect for this rite, understanding that it was the traditional mass for generations of Catholics whove come before me. I appreciate the sense of…timelessness I guess is the best word, that you get with the TLM.

I have to say though, that I personally prefer the NO. Just the thought of doing away with it and replacing it with the latin mass like some have suggested (seriously? tongue in cheek?) on this board gives me that same nervous “oh, no” feeling that some people have described in reaction to the NO. I love it so much, even though I do not love the modernist spin that has tainted some parishes. Don’t dig guitar music, improvised changes to the liturgy, self-help homilies, etc. (Before coming to this forum I called myself a “traditional catholic” because I thought that’s what I was! 🙂 )

Anyway, I digress. The main reason why I’ve only gone TLM twice and prefer NO…? The latin. In my mind, the beauty and dignity and universality of latin doesn’t trump simply understanding what’s being said during the mass, knowing where you are in the liturgy, and -yep, I’m gonna say it- participating in the mass. I understand that’s not the point of the mass; I just don’t see how it’s a bad thing. How does priest and laity speaking the same language necessarily lead to them “forgetting” or “confusing” their roles…?

Sorry for rambling…So I guess my question is, what is it about the latin that y’all think is inherently superior to the vernicular?
 
PatienceAndLove said:
quoting myself
Click to expand...
I couldn’t have said it better. Good Lord - I don’t want to return to the EF, but I do want to return to the reverence of the EF - to that which I knew which sadly is missing today in most parishes. At 56 I don’t want to hear people older than me talking about which hemorrhoid medicine is best before Mass. (Shut your mouths! You know better! You were raised better!), I don’t want to hear “Prepare Ye the Way of the Lord” from the 1970s Broadway musical Godspell as an appropriate Advent introit.

I don’t want to introduce myself to my neighbor as part of the entrance rite. I don’t want to hold hands at the Our Father nor do I want to do the “wave” at it’s end. I don’t want to shake hands and do the whole protestant thing at the sign of peace. In 1970 we turned to our neighbor and said “Peace be with you”. That’s it. Father didn’t leave the altar and come sailing down the main aisle.
It’s not NO vs EF. It’s adherence to the rubrics.

In short, I want to go back to being a Catholic. I am tired of driving 25 miles one way on Sunday. Forty years ago I could attend any Catholic church and the Mass was the Mass. I can’t say the same thing today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top