C
Cat
Guest
Thanks for searching for and posting this.
- Status
T
TrueLight
Guest
My Catholic Faith can also be found online. Just scroll down, click on “contents” and study to your heart’s desire. A friend of mine sent me the link.
catholicbook.com/AgredaCD/MyCatholicFaith/MyCatholicFaith.htm
D
Diana_Catherine
Guest
Thanks. I like that.
W
wasserfall
Guest
Lets be clear however, this is all completely beside the point.
The Baltimore Catechism was produced by the bishops of the United States and has imprimatur/nihil obstat and all the approval that any Catholic needs.
There is no need to go looking for some kind of “extra” approval directly from the Holy See.
As Brother JR mentioned in his post, the New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism is a fine resource for average lay Catholics to use both for their own instruction and also as teaching material for others.
In my own parish we use various books for catechetical instruction among which are the “Faith and Life” series from Ignatius Press, The “Our Holy Faith” series from Neuman Press, The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechisms (1st Communion, 1, 2). All of these are approved by the diocese for our CCD program.
J
johnthebaptist1
Guest
I wish to Thank everyone that wrote so far on the subjected Latin Mass. it feels wonderful to know that theirs a lot of People that still go too Latin Mass and want it to stay. Amen
R
Rabbity
Guest
I’ve attended both standard and Latin masses and, as an observer, I much prefer the latter.
It feels more ancient and uniquely catholic, whereas the “new” mass skates too close to being protestant. In fact the most catholic non-Latin mass I had ever attended was an Anglican service, complete with incense and lots of chanting. The priest was great, I learned more about how the people in the time of Jesus thought about certain things in her - yes her - 15-minute sermon than I did in two years of catholic school.
I hope it gains more popularity.
It feels more ancient and uniquely catholic, whereas the “new” mass skates too close to being protestant. In fact the most catholic non-Latin mass I had ever attended was an Anglican service, complete with incense and lots of chanting. The priest was great, I learned more about how the people in the time of Jesus thought about certain things in her - yes her - 15-minute sermon than I did in two years of catholic school.
I hope it gains more popularity.
C
Cat
Guest
You state that “the new mass skates too close to being protestant.”
That is probably true if you are comparing the OF Mass to the mainline Protestant worship services (Anglican or Epscopalian, Lutheran, Methodist, Reformed, Presbyterian, Congregational, United Church of Christ, and other mainline denoms with a liturgical worship service), although many of the churches in these denominations are working to make their worship services less “traditional” and more “contemporary.”
But it is not true if you are comparing the OF Mass to the evangelical Protestant churches (Baptist, C &MA, Covenant, Evangelical Free, the vast majority of non-denominational fellowships).
Evangelical Protestantism has the largest number of Protestants in the U.S. Most Protestants in the U.S. are evangelical Protestant. The mainline denominations have been decreasing in numbers for decades.
Evangelical Protestant worship services are nothing like the Catholic Mass or like the mainline worship services. There is no traditional liturgy at all in the evangelical Protestant worship service. Some of the pastors of these denominations actually consider any form of liturgy “pagan-looking”, and so they strive to make every worship service different and creative.
Also, if you compare the OF Mass to any Pentecostal Protestant denominations (e.g., Assemblies of God, which are also considered evangelical Protestant), there is no similiarity at all. Pentecostals have a very free worship time, with a great deal of singing and praising the Lord. The congregation is very involved in the Pentecostal worship service, and does a lot of “Amens” and other extemporaneous verbal responses.
Also, if you compare the OF Mass to any of the Fundamentalist denominations (many of the Baptists, etc.), you will find no comparison . The Fundamentalists strive to be as non-Catholic as possible, and any songs or hymns, or any prayers, sermons, gestures, etc. that have any remnant of Catholicism will not be heard.
Finally, if you compare the OF Mass to many of the African American churches, you will see very little similiarity.
Many of the churches in the denominations above no longer use an organ in their worship services (unless it is a Hammond for various rock pieces). In fact, many of the evangelical and Pentecostal churches use a rock band for their instrumental music now, and even the traditional piano is considered too old-fashioned.
My husband and I are converts to Catholicism from evangelical Protestantism. When we first started attending the OF Mass at the very modern Catholic church down the block from our house, we thought it was the most ancient, traditional worship that we had ever experienced. We didn’t realize at the time that there was a “Latin Mass” (because we were not raised Catholic), so we assumed that our parish was doing Mass the way Mass had been done for 2000 years. It seemed so very ancient to us, compared to all the Protestant worship services that we had attended for 47 years.
I think many evangelical Protestants have the same feeling when they first attend a Mass–that this is really ancient stuff! I don’t think many of them will feel “at home” in even the most modern OF Mass, because evangelical Protestant worship services are completely different than the OF Mass.
But yes, I agree that many of the mainline Protestants will feel that the OF Mass is familiar. But please always keep in mind that these very old denominations (many started in the 17th century) copied the Latin Mass liturgy and kept much of the Catholic Mass, so of course there will be a lot of similiarities. These church denominations are “closer” to Catholicism than the evangelical, the Pentecostal, or the fundamentalist denominations.
I hope this information is helpful.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
Interstingly the shape and structure of all the main denomination Eucharistic services now mirror most closely the very ancient masses that took place in the early centuries. So the structure of the Ordinary Form mass is actually more ancient than the EF, but sadly its execution (especially in many Catholic churches) gives the impression of something quite different
J
johnthebaptist1
Guest
Hope it goes back to more Latin
J
johnthebaptist1
Guest
Hope it goes back to more Latin. Amen
R
Rabbity
Guest
Cat, thank you for your info and forgive me for not being more clear on my own reference points.
I make no claim to historical accuracy about which one is truly more ancient than another, I’m just going by how it felt.
Besides, I just loves me some Latin.
- I’ve been to orthodox services and used that as the standard for “feeling ancient.”
- I wasn’t even thinking about fundamentalist, pentecostal, African American, or other non-liturgical church styles in my post (yes, having attended some of those, they are certainly different!) so I didn’t include them in the equation.
I make no claim to historical accuracy about which one is truly more ancient than another, I’m just going by how it felt.
True. While I’m a non-believer I’ve had most of my church experiences in liturgical churches and that’s what feels most normal to me. The lecture style, informal gathering, or holy roller style feels weird to me so I can imagine certain evangelicals feeling a bit odd at the more structured masses and services.
Besides, I just loves me some Latin.
Interesting, do you have any books or links to articles you can recommend? I’d like to read more.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
Sure. There are many but two good ones that give a cross-denominational perspective on this include:
Worship in Transition by Fenwick and Spinks
The Study of Liturgy by Jones, Waignwright and Yarnold
It’s also worth getting hold of anything by Professor Paul Bradshaw who has written some fascinating books about Eucharistic Origins and development.
D
Diana_Catherine
Guest
I am finding that a little challenging to believe. Most of the mainline denominations around here have gone “modern” or contemporary whichever is a better word. The Eucharistic services are surrounded by bands and skits, so it could be some are close to the ancient form but I certainly don’t think all of them are.
Recently a main line church built a new building near us and it included a large auditorium for the band and a small little chapel for the those that were not interested in the band. Another mainline church broadcasts it’s services on our local channel, the Eucharistic service is not anything like the ancient times, way too contemporary. Now if you were speaking of those closest to the Catholic church, such as Anglicans or orthodox churches maybe but not “all” main denominations.
Plus, the modernism creeping into those churches is one of the things that is bringing people home to the Catholic church.
R
Rich_C
Guest
I’ll have to go hunting for it again, but I read a brief article once on the Protestant ecumenical movement of the 1960s and how a lot of the mainline groups altered their liturgies to mirror the Novus Ordo (we’re talking about 1969, that’s proper term in this instance). In fact, the influence of the Church on these groups is really interesting. Around the time of WWII a number of Anglicans were adopting ad orientem in their liturgies, and promptly went back to facing the people after the Church allowed that.
We weren’t the only ones having a liturgical “renewal” in the '60s.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
Although things will certainly vary from area to area (and not knowing where “around here” is I can’t comment on a particular area) there is a wealth of information and analysis by Theologians comparing the Eucharistic Rites of the mainstream denominations (Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist) which shows that almost all have moved to rites based most firmly on ancient liturgies. There has also been Ecumenical agreement on key common texts.
A key feature of Eucharstic revision has been a more consensual outlook this begun after the brilliant Swedish Theologian Brilioth published his seminal work in 1930 Eucharistic Faith and Practice: Catholic and Evangelical.
There are many books and articles comparing the Eucharisitic theologies of these churches. In the UK, many people who have immigrated from Europe inadvertendly attend the Anglican Church for a while, without realising for a while that it is not in fact Catholic. When they are directed to the Catholic Church down the road they invariably find a more casual execution of the liturgy, and more contemporary “songs”.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
This is true. One of the other defining features of Eucharisitc revision was having a number of Eucharisitc prayers to use at Holy Communion services. But Ad Orientem is still practiced in about one third of Anglican Churches in London - not necessairly all Anglo-catholic ones either.
D
Diana_Catherine
Guest
Sorry, my bad. I should have said where I live. I live in the midwest of the United States. As I said there are some that continue to have traditional liturgies but that is few. Most mainline churches around here have gone contemporary. I am not saying that it is good. It is causing a lot of church hopping among protestants. I was there myself for quite a few years.
There are very little traditional liturgies around. Most churches have signs that read either:
Contemporary Service 11AM or they read Traditional Service 8AM and Contemporary Service 11AM.
That is why I say some but not all. I used to attend a traditional Methodist church and the hula hoops and the puppets keep me from believing it is typical of an ancient liturgy. We rarely even had communion. If we did, he would say a few prayers and then move on. Another Methodist church in our area built a huge contemporary auditorium and a very little traditional chapel. The auditorium has skits and bands and more. Much of the wording of the Eucharistic services depends on the pastors. Other Presbyterian churches have gone contemporary or mostly contemporary. One even has “humor Sunday”, where everyone presiding over the services and the choir dress silly or clownish. I am not advocating contemporary at all. I prefer the traditional. I just don’t see traditional liturgies in the main line denominations much anymore. As I said I will agree with that among some Lutherans and Anglicans but not all mainline denominations. So maybe I guess my point is, there are those that probably still follow the liturgy but not all.
IMHO, I feel the disagreements between contemporary and traditional is not just an issue in the Catholic church but others as well.
L
liturgyluver
Guest
That’s really interesting Diana, and the liturgy you describe sounds ghastly. The Methodists in the UK are still very traditional, and modern here usually means using the 1975 liturgy as opposed to the 1936. I suppose it shows that the pattern varies from place to place. Best wishes.
D
Diana_Catherine
Guest
E
ett
Guest
- Status