A
angel12
Guest
Then why did you ask if Peeps has ever been to a mosque?
Families should worship together.
If you could, what changes if any would you make to the Ordinary Form?
- Status
Families should worship together.
B
babochka
Guest
I didn’t ask that question. That was somebody else.babochka:
Then why did you ask if Peeps has ever been to a mosque?
Families should worship together.
I just corrected the assumption that separating men and women was a Muslim thing. It has a long history in Christianity and is still practiced, to this day, in many places, particularly Middle Eastern countries.
I agree that it is not an appropriate practice for our time and place. I’m not willing to go so far as to say that families should worship together, discounting the ancient traditions of other cultures. We are a universal Church, with room for many practices that may seem foreign to us.
Last edited:
N
NickyMaz
Guest
Verus Populum, the practice of the celebrant facing the people during the mass is a serious rupture in historical, traditional Catholic worship.
For example, here is what the Methodist church says on this issue: “In our churches, the Communion table is to be placed in such a way that the presider is able to stand behind it, facing the people, and the people can visually if not physically gather around it. The table should be high enough so that the presider does not need to stoop to handle the bread and cup. Adaptations may be necessary to facilitate gracious leadership. While architectural integrity should be respected, it is important for churches to carefully adapt or renovate their worship spaces more fully to invite the people to participate in the Holy Meal. If altars are for all practical purposes immovable, then congregations should make provisions for creating a table suitable to the space so that the presiding minister may face the people and be closer to them.”
Verus Populum is a very protestant idea. It’s aim is to strip away the idea of the mass as a holy sacrifice and make it into a “meal”.
Rather than making a holy offering to God we are simply a family gathered around a “table”.
The Priest is not making an offering on behalf of the people, acting 'in persona Christi", rather he is a “presider”, leading a ceremony for the congregation.
Rather than receiving the Body and Blood of our Lord, we are eating bread and maybe wine (or grape juice).
AND it actually contributes to clericalism because it puts at the center of the mass the personality of the celebrant. Ad Orientem keeps the focus on worshiping God.
I believe strong that how we worship should reflect what we believe and likewise how we worship influences our beliefs. It should be no surprise that since versus populum has become the norm we have seen declined belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, dramatic increases in apostasy, and dramatic declines in vocations. We need to turn to God, we need to return to traditional and historic Catholic worship done ad orientem.
For example, here is what the Methodist church says on this issue: “In our churches, the Communion table is to be placed in such a way that the presider is able to stand behind it, facing the people, and the people can visually if not physically gather around it. The table should be high enough so that the presider does not need to stoop to handle the bread and cup. Adaptations may be necessary to facilitate gracious leadership. While architectural integrity should be respected, it is important for churches to carefully adapt or renovate their worship spaces more fully to invite the people to participate in the Holy Meal. If altars are for all practical purposes immovable, then congregations should make provisions for creating a table suitable to the space so that the presiding minister may face the people and be closer to them.”
Verus Populum is a very protestant idea. It’s aim is to strip away the idea of the mass as a holy sacrifice and make it into a “meal”.
Rather than making a holy offering to God we are simply a family gathered around a “table”.
The Priest is not making an offering on behalf of the people, acting 'in persona Christi", rather he is a “presider”, leading a ceremony for the congregation.
Rather than receiving the Body and Blood of our Lord, we are eating bread and maybe wine (or grape juice).
AND it actually contributes to clericalism because it puts at the center of the mass the personality of the celebrant. Ad Orientem keeps the focus on worshiping God.
I believe strong that how we worship should reflect what we believe and likewise how we worship influences our beliefs. It should be no surprise that since versus populum has become the norm we have seen declined belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, dramatic increases in apostasy, and dramatic declines in vocations. We need to turn to God, we need to return to traditional and historic Catholic worship done ad orientem.
Last edited:
A
angel12
Guest
My apologies.
E
exnihilo
Guest
In defense of your parish most tunes I have encountered at Mass are ill suited for poor singers. First they don’t have parts so everyone has to sing the melody. Second the melody often has a large range and big movements. Your parish could probably chant just fine, which is why we used to have chant.
It also, ironically, contributes to clericalism. The priest becomes more the center of attention.
E
exnihilo
Guest
I would require the Roman Canon to be said on all Sundays and Solemnities. Where I live it is almost never said.
Last edited:
N
NickyMaz
Guest
I know! I suspect a lot of Catholics would freak out if they heard it since 99% of the time we hear EPII.
D
dochawk
Guest
It was St. John Chysotum who made the separation at the Hagia Sophia–and it had to do with inappropriate behavior during liturgy (as in, making out during the homily!)
It’s not versus populum (not “verus”) that is the rupture, but the lack of ad orientum–there have been churches in Rome since the further fifth century where the priest was versus populum, as it was the only way to stay ad orientum given the unavoidable placement of theater.
hawk
O
OraLabora
Guest
No, not really, because some circumstances called for it even before the Council. While not common back then, it did exist and there were rubrics for it.
There were also other instances, for example when the altar was placed between the choir and the nave. The Mass was either versus populum for the clerics/religious in the choir, or for those in the nave. Either way was licit.
Ad orientem, while not common in the OF, has not disappeared either, I’ve attended few in churches where the configuration of the altar allowed no other option.
Last edited:
R
resolute
Guest
I would take out the sign of peace between the laity.
Last edited:
H
Hereiam
Guest
Rather than change the Mass I would pray for understanding and catechesis of those who do not accept it as a suitable form of worship and administration of the Blessed Sacrament.
R
Roguish
Guest
Precisely. I was at an Oriental Orthodox mass this morning. (That’s a form of Orthodox Christianity, for those who don’t know.) Men and women were seated apart, of course.
Earlier I brought up the example of a mosque because I live next to one, so I know that the practical problems (“Where do the children go?”) that @Peeps brought up just don’t exist. Also, the notion that separated seating is incongruent with the meaning of marriage is nonsense. Neither the Orthodox Christians nor the Muslims are misunderstood about the meaning of marriage.
@angel12, no, I don’t intend to model the Mass on Islamic services. But that doesn’t mean that everything they do is wrong. They get a lot of stuff right. Separated seating is one thing. Insisting modesty in dress from all those attending services is another. On the latter point, most religions get this right. Ever seen a Hindu woman going to the temple in a tank top? Never. Same in Islam. Same in Orthodox Christianity. Same with the mormons. Same with many Protestant denominations. Seems it’s mostly the RCC and some “hip” protestant churches that fail to uphold a dresscode.
Last edited:
M
Maxwell03
Guest
Altar rails and kneelers be brought back and a more quit music would be great. And the sprinkling of the holy water and prayer to saint Michael.
Edit: AND AS USUAL! MORE INCENSE!! I love being the thurifwr
Edit: AND AS USUAL! MORE INCENSE!! I love being the thurifwr
Last edited:
A
Augustinian
Guest
How many Satanists do you think there are? I don’t think there are that many at all.
A
angel12
Guest
Families should worship together. There’s no reason to separate them.
A
Augustinian
Guest
When I was a kid in elementary school, the church shuffled us downstairs into a chapel for mass, while the adults were upstairs in the main church on Sunday morning.
G
goout
Guest
What are you afraid of? Christ came to banish fear for those who have faith in him. You should not live in fear of things you cannot control. We should have a healthy awe and reverence for the Eucharist.
P
Peeps
Guest
So you think that the pipe organs should be removed?
P
Peeps
Guest
I personally think that separating the men and women would result in texting back and forth between couples.
Also, I didn’t mean to imply that the children would be removed from the nave if parents were seated on opposite sides of the room.
I only meant that the children would probably sit with just one parent (the one most equipped to deal with their needs; e.g., with Mom if child is nursing).
This might mean dividing up the children between the parents, which probably wouldn’t be a bad idea; it happens all the time anyway as one parent takes a child who is acting like a child (duh!) out of the nave during Mass while the other parent remains in the pew with the rest of the children,.
The other thing that might happen is that the parent who feels totally uncomfortable taking charge of the children (and yes, that happens in many families!) would end up sitting alone while the other parent takes sole charge of the children. I suppose in some families, this would not cause a build-up of resentment. But I think in many families, this WOULD cause a build-up of resentment–“You get to sit quietly and worship the Lord while I have to wrestle with three squiriming toddlers! Make your own Sunday dinner, we’re going to McDonalds–without YOU!” etc.
My husband and I were Evangelical Protestants for the first 47 years of our lives, and we very seldom had to take our small children into the worship service with us–and when we did, our older daughter wreaked havoc–the pastor namedher “Energizer Bunny!” I think what my husband and I would do is just attend Mass at different times, and never bring the children until they were mature enough to sit somewhat quietly for the hour-long Mass.
But this is all just chatter. Separating men and women will never happen in Catholic churches in the U.S. Media and public criticism and disdain would be widespread and create too much negative publicity for the Church, which is already looked at as a dangerous place for children by our dirt-grubbing media.
Also, I didn’t mean to imply that the children would be removed from the nave if parents were seated on opposite sides of the room.
I only meant that the children would probably sit with just one parent (the one most equipped to deal with their needs; e.g., with Mom if child is nursing).
This might mean dividing up the children between the parents, which probably wouldn’t be a bad idea; it happens all the time anyway as one parent takes a child who is acting like a child (duh!) out of the nave during Mass while the other parent remains in the pew with the rest of the children,.
The other thing that might happen is that the parent who feels totally uncomfortable taking charge of the children (and yes, that happens in many families!) would end up sitting alone while the other parent takes sole charge of the children. I suppose in some families, this would not cause a build-up of resentment. But I think in many families, this WOULD cause a build-up of resentment–“You get to sit quietly and worship the Lord while I have to wrestle with three squiriming toddlers! Make your own Sunday dinner, we’re going to McDonalds–without YOU!” etc.
My husband and I were Evangelical Protestants for the first 47 years of our lives, and we very seldom had to take our small children into the worship service with us–and when we did, our older daughter wreaked havoc–the pastor namedher “Energizer Bunny!” I think what my husband and I would do is just attend Mass at different times, and never bring the children until they were mature enough to sit somewhat quietly for the hour-long Mass.
But this is all just chatter. Separating men and women will never happen in Catholic churches in the U.S. Media and public criticism and disdain would be widespread and create too much negative publicity for the Church, which is already looked at as a dangerous place for children by our dirt-grubbing media.
D
dochawk
Guest
I do think that St. John Chrysotum just rolled over inches grave . . . . .
Still, texting certainly beets the problems that the had that led to him separating men and women at the Hagia Sophia . . .
hawk
- Status