Is it the Liturgy, or the people?

[PaulinVA]

I recently stumbled onto the Traditional Catholicism forum, and have read the threads with interest.

I have to admit that there is an appalling lack of reverence in my parish. Well, we don’t have a church, we have a “worship center,” and the Tabernacle is in a chapel in the back of the church. That has something to do with it.

So, my question is this - is the Novus Ordo necessarily less reverent than the Tridentine, or is it the people that go to each of these are more or less reverent?

Right now, the Tridentine mass is sort of a niche, you know? I won’t dispute the people to attend are more reverent, but they are a minority in the Church. The NO mass attendees don’t seem to be as reverent, but I’m not sure why.

If one were to replace the NO with the Tridentine, I’m not so sure you would see a huge rise in reverence, because it’s still the same people.

 

[bkovacs]

So what if you took the Tridentine and put it into vernacular, then called it the Ordinary. With the Tridentine in Latin the Extra-Ordinary. Answer, less confusion, more reverence, and better continuity.

 

[malphono]

Whether the congregants themselves are less reverent is a question to which I won’t venture a comment. But from I’ve seen and heard, the way the Mass is presented can be a factor.

It seems to me that perhaps one big reason for what is (at least the appearance of) less reverence in the OF, is the OF itself. By that I mean the OF has, (among other things), (a) far too many “options” and room for what I’ll call “improvisation” and (b) has a decidedly “horizontal” approach. The EF, on the other hand, has (again among other things), (a) strict rubrics which sort of preclude “improvisation” and (b) has a decidedly “vertical” focus. The latter is probably best seen in terms of ad orientem, where the focus is unmistakable.

It’s interesting to consider that the rubrics of the OF (what few there are) actually presume ad orientem celebration. And it’s also interesting to consider that those OF Masses done according to the “reform of the reform” (i.e., “by the book” including ad orientem, at least partly in Latin, sung Propers, etc) seem to be able to instill a greater sense of reverence than does the “garden variety” OF. Perhaps not to the degree of the EF, but still a sight better than what most people seem to experience. On the down side is the rarity of the “reform of the reform” in the OF.

 

[PatrickJT914]

It is the heart of people. Jesus has said in the Gospels many things. Including stop judging by externals, stop judging by man’s standards.

“The outside of your cup is clean, but within, you are full of extortion, excess” Matthew 23: 25

“Clean the inside first, that your outside may be clean also.” Matthew 23:25-28

“Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which appear beautiful outwardly, but are full of dead mans bones, and all uncleanness within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” Matthew 23:25-28

Any this is a start. Got to go.

 

[maurin]

I recently stumbled onto the Traditional Catholicism forum, and have read the threads with interest.

I have to admit that there is an appalling lack of reverence in my parish. Well, we don’t have a church, we have a “worship center,” and the Tabernacle is in a chapel in the back of the church. That has something to do with it.

So, my question is this - is the Novus Ordo necessarily less reverent than the Tridentine, or is it the people that go to each of these are more or less reverent?

Right now, the Tridentine mass is sort of a niche, you know? I won’t dispute the people to attend are more reverent, but they are a minority in the Church. The NO mass attendees don’t seem to be as reverent, but I’m not sure why.

If one were to replace the NO with the Tridentine, I’m not so sure you would see a huge rise in reverence, because it’s still the same people.

lex orandi, lex credendi.

 

[PaulinVA]

Whether the congregants themselves are less reverent is a question to which I won’t venture a comment.

But that is the question!

If this Sunday every Mass said in the states was a Trinedtine Mass, would there be a sudden rise in perceived reverence?

 

[Dauphin]

But that is the question!

If this Sunday every Mass said in the states was a Trinedtine Mass, would there be a sudden rise in perceived reverence?

Yes. The reverence, mystery, and doctrinal depth of the liturgy itself would be cause for greater reverence from the congregation. If the Mass is treated casually by those celebrating it (which is made easier by the loose rubrics of the Pauline Mass), and lacks a sense of encounter with the mystery of God, then others will treat it casually as well.

 

[PaulinVA]

Yes. The reverence, mystery, and doctrinal depth of the liturgy itself would be cause for greater reverence from the congregation. If the Mass is treated casually by those celebrating it (which is made easier by the loose rubrics of the Pauline Mass), and lacks a sense of encounter with the mystery of God, then others will treat it casually as well.

I find your response interesting. Most of the “pew potatoes” that come to Mass every Sunday have no idea that there are “loose rubrics” and wouldn’t care if they knew.

So, since most of today’s Catholics don’t know latin, how would the “reverence, mystery, and doctrinal depth of the liturgy itself” be known? Why would it not be perceived as disconnected from modern life?

I think that about half the people would get up and leave, and the other half wouldn’t know what to do.

I don’t 'think the people suddenly become more reverent because someone is speaking latin.

 

[Dauphin]

I find your response interesting. Most of the “pew potatoes” that come to Mass every Sunday have no idea that there are “loose rubrics” and wouldn’t care if they knew.

Whether they know or not, the effects are there. One Mass can vary wildly from another. The priest has few restrictions on his behavior, and the liturgy frequently degenerates into his “show”.

So, since most of today’s Catholics don’t know latin, how would the “reverence, mystery, and doctrinal depth of the liturgy itself” be known? Why would it not be perceived as disconnected from modern life?

I certainly hope it would be perceived as disconnected from modern life! Modern life is rotten to the core.

The Church’s tradition is timeless and speaks to all the ages. When we go to Mass, we step out of time and into eternity. Christians aren’t meant to live for one particular age, but to receive and preserve the faith and practice of those who came before us.

I think that about half the people would get up and leave, and the other half wouldn’t know what to do.

I don’t 'think the people suddenly become more reverent because someone is speaking latin.

If they see something being taken seriously, they’ll take it seriously themselves. Latin isn’t the only thing which creates mystery at the Mass. The content of the prayers, the hallowed and symbolic actions of the priest, the atmosphere of reverence and deliberation, and the key moments of silence all serve to facilitate an encounter with the mystery.

The Traditional Latin Mass is particularly effective at fostering active participation. Even if one is unfamiliar with the prayers or doesn’t have a missal at hand, simple prayer and union with the sacrifice being offered is an easy matter.

 

[PaulinVA]

Dauphin,

Thanks for the replies, but I just don’t see it.

The same priests and the same parishioners who are seen as the irreverent rabble will suddenly become reverent because of the liturgical form just doesn’t make sense.

 

[Anne1964]

It’s been my experience that the OF mass varies widely from parish parish. When I first returned to the Church I joined a local parish and was initially happy with it. Over time I began to feel like something was missing. I began visiting other parishes and found the one I am in now and the difference is amazing.

In the first parish we never had incense at Mass, the altar servers (boys and girls) dressed sloppily, and most of the parishioners never genuflected, and confession was only offered 1/2 hour per week. During Mass the priest always seemed to be in a hurry. It felt rushed.

In my current parish, we have incense at virtually every mass, the altar boys (no girls) dress nicely in cassock and surplice, every parishioner genuflects every time they pass the tabernacle (which is behind the altar), and confession is offered on Weds evenings and Sat. afternoons. On Saturdays our priest will stay until everyone who wants to has gone to confession. Latin is a part of most masses, particularly during Advent and Lent. The parishioners in general are a much more conservative group. Our priest moves slowly and deliberately during Mass and all of his actions are reverent.

The difference between the two parishes is like night and day.

I don’t think the Novus Ordo is necessarily less reverent, but I do think the degree of reverence is more heavily influenced by the priest during a Novus Ordo Mass than it is in the TLM.

 

[maurin]

Dauphin,

Thanks for the replies, but I just don’t see it.

The same priests and the same parishioners who are seen as the irreverent rabble will suddenly become reverent because of the liturgical form just doesn’t make sense.

lex orandi, lex credendi

and of course, some of it depends on the dedication and on the seriousness of the Priest and the people.

But when the Sanctuary resembles an auditorium, and the “ministers” behave as if they are in an auditorium, how does one expect the people to behave in an auditorium?

 

[PaulinVA]

lex orandi, lex credendi

and of course, some of it depends on the dedication and on the seriousness of the Priest and the people.

But when the Sanctuary resembles an auditorium, and the “ministers” behave as if they are in an auditorium, how does one expect the people to behave in an auditorium?

So it’s not the Latin Mass, but the building?

I’m very confused.

 

[RUINATION_IPA]

I have to admit that there is an appalling lack of reverence in my parish. Well, we don’t have a church, we have a “worship center,” and the Tabernacle is in a chapel in the back of the church. That has something to do with it.

You’re already noticing *lex orandi lex credendi *at work here…

So, my question is this - is the Novus Ordo necessarily less reverent than the Tridentine

Yes! (as stated by others) by the simple fact of it being a failed experiment. The NO was intended to minimize Catholic teachings and principles in order for it to gain acceptance by non-Catholics and in order to become “more relevant” to “modern man” both of which were failed attempts and the Church & liturgy as a result have become irrelevant to most. When you compare the new with the old side by side you can see the inherent beauty and reverence (which is mandated by way of strict rubrics) in the TLM which is lacking in the NO.

or is it the people that go to each of these are more or less reverent?

The people can only do what the Priest allows them to do so the people aren’t entirely to blame.

Right now, the Tridentine mass is sort of a niche, you know? I won’t dispute the people to attend are more reverent, but they are a minority in the Church. The NO mass attendees don’t seem to be as reverent, but I’m not sure why.

A lot of people have already stated why but here’s a few more. The NO consists of your everyday Joe who thinks little of the spiritual order or the salvation of his own soul. This is due to the overwhelming influence of modern society’s snares (ie. materialism, hedonism etc…) in which the Pastor’s primary job is to help him detach himself from the things of the world and ponder the eternal. Most pastors have failed in their endeavor as they have ,themselves, adopted the spirit of the world and are in no position to help others detach others from it. Add to this that you have Church architecture that does not reflect eternal beauty or eternal truths, then couple this with a watered down liturgy and poor old Joe doesn’t have a chance. Joe doesn’t even know the meaning of the word “reverence,”

If one were to replace the NO with the Tridentine, I’m not so sure you would see a huge rise in reverence, because it’s still the same people.

Here’s where you err. The TLM by it’s very nature demands reverence. It demands reverence of the Priest by use of strict rubrics which do not allow for the Priest to take on the role of an entertainer. It demands reverence in the parishoners by their “active” interior participation, silence, and contemplation. When one is not engaged in shaking hands, hugging, kissing etc… one has time to contemplate. The old liturgy itself speaks of the truths of the faith even if the Priest fails to do so. The mystery of the TLM, along with all the exteriors such as architecture, stainglass windows, statutes, latin etc… ELEVATE us out of the mundane & secular and into the eternal. Over time people will either change or they’ll leave but either way the TLM demands reverence to God by it’s nature.

 

[maurin]

So it’s not the Latin Mass, but the building?

I’m very confused.

hardly

do you know what ‘lex orandi, lex credendi’ means?

 

[maurin]

So it’s not the Latin Mass, but the building?

I’m very confused.

if you didn’t understand the ‘auditorium’ analogy, let me know.

 

[Shin]

lex orandi, lex credendi.

This.

A house of worship is necessarily a house that looks like and is a house of worship.

A people that do not believe that a beautiful and reverential church gives honor to God is a people that do not believe in the presence of God.

People who dwell on sacred ground and in sacred houses will become more sacred, people who dwell in the profane will become more profane.

Churches and people’s lives, their houses have become more profane and less sacred.

It is the difference between sacred and profane.

Look at the video clips here teaching the mass: fsspdvd.com/

The difference between depth of the spiritual, between sacred – and a mass that is designed for the world. Perhaps in time the N.O. will be changed to become more like the Gregorian mass – acquiring depth of meaning in every gesture. But this is not what it is now, now it seems a rough piece of work, constantly changed with erasing and rearranging, for reasons that have little to do with tradition from which we gain the Faith, and for the most part to do with preferences that only have to do with the current times, personalities, and the world.

I think that we can only say that the formation of the new liturgy was done disconnected and disjointedly, a disruption of tradition rather than flowing from it. Swift, sweeping, and gigantic change – this is not what should happen within the Faith and the liturgy.

When it does happen, it disrupts the souls of the participants. And that it has. The people do not have the habits of understanding of the deep meanings of each of the portions of the mass anymore. Books are being written, but the loss of uniformity and precision of gesture and meaning… so that the priest who gives the mass is always acting only in basic ways that lack the depth of meaning of before…

Necessarily makes the faithful less attentive and reverent, because they follow the liturgy of the shepherd.

As a person acts, so too some of this is reflected in the heart even often if it is made of stone.

 

[maurin]

Dear Shin,

times 1,000!

 

[Hesychios]

But that is the question!

If this Sunday every Mass said in the states was a Tridentine Mass, would there be a sudden rise in perceived reverence?

No. The parishes that offer the Tridentine Mass/Extraordinary Form are magnet parishes. The membership is self-selected. The run of the mill Catholics attend the local parish by default, regardless of their own level of conviction or spirituality.

So with the same people, we get the same attitudes, at least initially. Some would resent the liturgical changes probably. Many do not remember the Latin Mass at all, and already some of these people have children who are college aged and these have no recollection either, unless they have gone looking for it.

It’s human nature to resist change.

Who knows? Perhaps we’d see a new group break out: the Society of Pope Paul VI. And they will have illicit Pauline Masses! With guitars and drums …no kneelers, communion in hand…group confessions…

 

[malphono]

No. The parishes that offer the Tridentine Mass/Extraordinary Form are magnet parishes. The membership is self-selected. The run of the mill Catholics attend the local parish by default, regardless of their own level of conviction or spirituality.

So with the same people, we get the same attitudes, at least initially. Some would resent the liturgical changes probably. Many do not remember the Latin Mass at all, and already some of these people have children who are college aged and these have no recollection either, unless they have gone looking for it.

This all sounds familiar … there was a [thread=301562]thread[/thread] a while back about fear of the EF. And fear there is. For the sake of economy, I won’t repeat what I said [post=4667720]then[/post] but I still hold to it.

It’s human nature to resist change.

True, particularly when the change is both unnecessary and counter-productive.

Who knows? Perhaps we’d see a new group break out: the Society of Pope Paul VI. And they will have illicit Pauline Masses! With guitars and drums …no kneelers, communion in hand…group confessions…

New group??? Methinks that’s a rather apt description of the OF the way it’s usually done (in the US at least) …