If you could, what changes if any would you make to the Ordinary Form?

  • Thread starter Thread starter giuseppe96
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do some of you truly believe that not allowing people to receive Holy Communion in their hand, and also getting rid of EMHCs, would result in more young men answering the call to the priesthood?

Perhaps I’m really dense, but I think that if this were true, Holy Mother Church would immediately, by tomorrow morning, or maybe even within the next hour, implement these very simple changes in order to have more priests.

When I consider all the places in the world that have one priest who comes to their village intermittently, or places in the U.S. where priests have more than one parish under their watch–I just can’t believe that Holy Mother Church would refuse to make the simple changes that would result in more young men hearing the call and answering the call to the priesthood. I just can’t believe that. It’s cruel! Can Holy Mother Church be so cold-hearted that She allows the shortage of priests to continue when She could increase the numbers by making two simple changes in the Mass?

Can you prove your theory about a connection between Holy Communion received in the hand and the use of EMHC? Has there been a controlled study in which all the other changes in society since Vatican II are factored in (e.g., proliferation of televisions in every home, invention of and home use of computers, more homes in which both parents work outside the home, extended families not living close to each other, loosening of/complete elimination of morality standards in the entertainment industry, elimination of prayer from public schools, wars that never end, etc. etc.), that the only cause of less priests is the practice of receiving Holy Communion in the hand and the use of EMHCs in many parishes? These other factors were proven by the study to not influence the number of young men who answer the call to become priests?
 
Peeps said:
Perhaps I’m really dense, but I think that if this were true, Holy Mother Church would immediately, by tomorrow morning, or maybe even within the next hour, implement these very simple changes in order to have more priests.
Click to expand...
The Church really doesn’t know what would happen in 2018 if they eliminated communion in the hand and the EMHC ministry.

The theory is that since there were more vocations to the priesthood before these two ideas were implemented- reversing it would increase the number of vocations.

I personally don’t see the connection.
 
I would make it a vernacular version of EO, however, I would add a bit. I would change the prayer to Saint Michael into a prayer to Peter to guide the church he helped found (JC founded church but peter was the rock). I would also make it so that the priest dips the host in the cup, so you can receive both body and blood.
 
Augustinian said:
40.png
Galatians6-17:
Ending communion in the hand.
Click to expand...
A lot of people have really only received communion in the hand, this kind of procedure would confusing or even disturbing to many, many Catholics.

I don’t think that confusing the people like this is necessarily a great idea.
Click to expand...
Folks received only on the tongue for the first half of the last century and they seem to have adapted to communion in the hand just fine.
 
It amazes me that there are so many people who think they know better than the Church.

We have the EF for those who want it so why do those who do feel the need to tell the rest of is how “difficient” we are for liking and participating in the OF in the ways the Church heself has allowed?
 
CilladeRoma said:
why do those who do feel the need to tell the rest of is how “difficient” we are for liking and participating in the OF in the ways the Church heself has allowed?
Click to expand...
The number of Latin masses has really expanded over the past 20 -30 years, yet the percentage of people attending Latin Mass is still quite tiny, far less than 1% of the mainstream Catholics out there. The thought was previously that if the Latin mass were made available, the people would flock to it in Pre-V2 type numbers when church attendance was a lot greater than the current day.

That has not happened however, so the Latin promoters are a little bit beside themselves.
 
Augustinian said:
The number of Latin masses has really expanded over the past 20 -30 years, yet the percentage of people attending Latin Mass is still quite tiny, far less than 1% of the mainstream Catholics out there.
Click to expand...
What’s meant here by “mainstream Catholics”?
 
Last edited:
Augustinian said:
40.png
gracepoole:
What’s meant here by “mainstream Catholics”?
Click to expand...
Those who attend masses and liturgical events strictly in the vernacular. The vast majority of Catholic, the “mainstream” if you will.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of Catholics don’t attend Mass at all, though. According to some studies done as recently as 2016, there are areas where only 12% of self-identified Catholics attend Mass weekly.
 
Last edited:
One man’s opinion.
Apparently, the rest of the Bishop’s of the world don’t share his views.
 
gracepoole said:
The vast majority of Catholics don’t attend Mass at all, though. According to some studies done as recently as 2016, there are areas where only 12% of self-identified Catholics attend Mass weekly.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. But in 2018, the vast majority of American dioceses at least, have Latin Mass available. And its really done very little for Mass attendance.
 
I have no wish to flame anyone for their honest opinion, so I will simply say that I like the Mass the way it is, though I would probably like it if some of the things changed as well. In particular,
  1. I like that music is chose locally, allowing what is best for each parish.
  2. I like that things like posture after communion, hand position, and how one receives communion is not regimented like a military drill, to use Cardinal Sarah’s analogy.
  3. I like the prayers of the faithful being adaptable to the needs of the parish.
I noticed among people that I know, few people have much of a problem with the way the Mass is. That seems to be mostly an on-line issue.
 
pnewton said:
I noticed among people that I know, few people have much of a problem with the way the Mass is. That seems to be mostly an on-line issue.
Click to expand...
The internet has a way of amplifying things. Tiny groups have suddenly achieved the kind of coverage that they would have never dreamed of before the mid-90’s.
 
We’ve had a Latin Mass parish in our city for decades. ICK, so it’s good with Rome.

Attendance is smallish and has been for all those years. There is a core of families and individuals who have been attending the parish since the beginning, but this core doesn’t seem to grow (other than in number of children in their families!).

I don’t know anyone in my giant parish (OF Masses) who is interested.

I know people in my parish who have “conservative” opinions about the OF (e.g., they would like to have all organ music, or they would like silence in the nave, or they are women who cover their heads usually with a veil, etc.).

But these people are not interested in the Latin Mass parish.

I’ll admit to being a skeptic about the growth of the TLM. I work in a scientific field (hospital lab) and we rely on evidence, not theories. From the evidence in my city, the TLM is not growing.

Oh, well. Small is OK.
 
Same in my city. We have had an EF Mass for 25 years.
The Community now has it’s own parish and celebrate an ad orientum OF with Gregorian chant and organ
and the EF.
Average attendance is about 150 on Sunday for the OF and about 125 for the EF
The Masses at the other 4 parishes within a 5 mile radius of that one , which all celebrate the OF in various ways have an average attendance of about 400.
 
Interesting.

I have a theory that the Latin Mass thrives in big cities where tourists, both Catholic and non -Catholic, come to seek out the Latin Mass because they want to experience their own history.

As for small cities and small towns, I kind of think that most of these Latin Mass parishes attract a small but very devoted number of Catholics, but don’t tend to grow. Yes, I know that there are exceptions where the TLM is growing. But they have room to grow.

Here’s a suggestion, and perhaps the CAF family would comment on this idea. I think that many of the Latin Mass parishes have no idea how to “grow” their parishes. Yes, they pray and they SHOULD pray, for more members. But the Bible makes it clear that we are to do the work of an evangelist, which means WORK as well as pray.

But how do TLM parishes do this evangelistic work? They can’t “steal sheep,” which is what many of the growing Protestant churches do–attract people away from their own churches. Certainly if the OF parishioners are interested in the Latin Mass, and attend, and then fall in love with it–yes, they should switch parishes. But as we are seeing, most OF parishioners are not interested in the Latin Mass on a regular basis…

And they can’t hold evangelistic crusades or revivals meetings or host concerts by currently-popular Christian musicians–that’s not the “stuff” of the TLM people!

And that’s where my idea comes in. I would like to suggest that the Latin Mass parishes develop an outreach campaign that encourages Catholics (in fact, Christians of any type, including Protestants) to attend the Latin Mass at least once a year to stay in touch with their historical roots and to experience Mass the way their grandparents and great-grandparents experienced it.

The parish could even hold several “Experience Living History” Sundays a few times a year. At these times, not only would the Latin Mass be celebrated as usual, but there would be a short talk before the Mass (in a fellowship hall, not in the nave!) by the priest, who would not only explain what the congregation will see and hear (or not hear!), but also pass out a paper explaining the Missal and how to use it, and any other information that would help a newbie to know what’s going on. Also, suggestions could be given like those we hear on CAF–e.g., don’t fight the silence, but use it as a time to experience the Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus in a new (old) way) Finally, this Meet and Greet Time would be a way for the TLM parishioners to introduce themselves to the visitors and demonstrate that they are not “weird”!

I think this “Once A Year for History’s Sake” would be appealing for many Catholics, including converts from Protestantism. It would bring a nice little offering of monies into the TLM parish coffers (always helpful), and it would probably result in at least a few new devotees to the TLM per year, and these people would be the new parishioners in a TLM parish. It’s slow growth, but it’s better than no growth.
 
Why would non-Catholics be interested in Trent-style Latin Mass? We had the Reformation to clear up the late medieval corruptiom, after which Western christianity progressed in two different mainstreams.
TLM is downroute from that split and includes VI, just saying.
 
I would not omit anything from the OF except for eliminating a few of the “option” parts like the penitential act…

I would restore the Prayers at the foot of the altar.

I would restore the Tridentine version of the Confiteor, and mandate that as the only penitential act to be used in Mass.

I would restore the Kyrie to a threefold repetition instead of two. I would also mandate the Kyrie in either Greek or the vernacular is to always be said as part of Mass.

I would restore the ancient Introits, Collects, and post-Communion prayers. Bring back the older Tridentine versions and translate those into English.

I would restore the Offertory and the prayers over the offerings/Secrets.

I would restore certain readings which were cut out/omitted from the OF cycle of readings.

I would restore having all Masses celebrated Ad Orientem.

I would restore some of the triple signs of the Cross and some of the prayers with the incense and censer.

I would mandate the Eucharistic Prayer I (the Roman Canon) is to have pride of place over the other Anaphoras. I would mandate that on Solemnities and Sundays EP I, III or IV is to be used and EP II is NOT to be used. I would change EPII and restore some of the original wording of it, and make it so EP II is only allowed on weekday ferials and even then only if there is good reason to use a shortened Anaphora.

I would restore the invocation of Mary and the Saints during the “deliver us o Lord from all evils…” after the Our Father.

I would mandate that the proper music for Mass is either chant or sacred polyphony, and the only time other music is to be used is when a serious cultural barrier demands it, or when the parish is simply unable to do chant or polyphony, or when there is a near unanimous demand from the parishoners for other types of music - and those are to be approved by the Bishop.

I would mandate that hymns which were written by the arch-heretic Martin Luther and other hymns written by enemies of the Church are NEVER to be used in Liturgy.

I would encourage Pastors to pray by chanting certain parts of the Ordinary - say, the Gloria, the Credo, the Roman Canon, and/or the Pater Noster and Agnus Dei in Latin.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top