C
Cal_Catholic
Guest
Benedict XVI replaces all members of Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff
Full article…
Full article…
- Status
G
Geremia
Guest
It might be a good step to bring us back to our rich Catholic liturgical traditions.
M
Matariel
Guest
Sounds good to me.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
I had to look up what the Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff even does.
(For those others who don’t know:
vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/documents/ns_lit_doc_20021206_profile_en.html)
The move does not suprise me. I wouldn’t read too much into it with regards to liturgical changes that are* dictated* for the rest of the Church by the Holy Father, but I think there will continue to be changes in how our sacred liturgies are modelled by the Holy Father.
For instance, he has not required that Holy Communion no longer be distributed in the hand, but in papal liturgies he has indicated that he will model the practice of distributing Holy Communion to the faithful so that they receive on the tongue, while they are kneeling. It seems his current intention to lead toward a wider use of the more traditional methods by example, rather than by papal fiat.
On that account, I don’t see this as a “shake-up”, even though it is a profound change. Does anyone else read it this way?
P
palmas85
Guest
Wait, what is that noise in the distance???
What can it mean???
:crying: :crying: :crying:
Yes the wails cries moans and gnashing of teeth of millions.
The horror, the horror of it all.
Liturgical reform at the highest level.
What can it mean???
:crying: :crying: :crying:Yes the wails cries moans and gnashing of teeth of millions.
The horror, the horror of it all.
Liturgical reform at the highest level.
B
BlestOne
Guest
Hilarious!!!Wait, what is that noise in the distance???
What can it mean???
Yes the wails cries moans and gnashing of teeth of millions.
The horror, the horror of it all.
Liturgical reform at the highest level.
I would express it with the rolling emoticon but i think you have used the limit here…
C
Cat
Guest
Oh, for heaven’s sake. Do you realize how condescending and insulting this is?Wait, what is that noise in the distance???
What can it mean???
Yes the wails cries moans and gnashing of teeth of millions.
The horror, the horror of it all.
Liturgical reform at the highest level.
This is the kind of thing that makes me dread any “traditionalism” in the Mass because I really don’t want to be around people who sport this kind of attitude.
C
Cat
Guest
I’m already awake. I woke up when I converted from Protestantism to Catholicism.
What I object to is acting as though fellow Catholics are “wrong” because they aren’t jumping for joy over some kind of “change” that might possibly be coming even though nothing official has been announced and I doubt any of you are privy to the inside politics of the Vatican enough to know the scoop.
I think it would be better to rejoice inwardly, and gently show others the way, rather than telling us all how “asleep” we are.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
It is very interesting.
However, it seems there are always those who are so extremist that they have to interpret anything that the Pope says or does only in that extremist way.
So you will find the approximately 5% or so of people who are --or long to be–sedevacantist who will insist that this means the N.O. is on the way out and good riddance as neither it, nor (occasionally) Vatican 2, nor (occasionally) the last 5 Popes should have existed anyway.
And the corresponding 5% or so of people who are–or long to be --thought of as the progressive, enlightened, and ecumenical true liberals (in the good sense)–who will immediately insist that despite what the ‘pathetic medievalists’ say, this is absolutely in no way going to stop the spirit of Vatican 2 because after all, the Pope is only throwing a ‘sop’ to the SSPX and the Latin Mass will be dead in 10 years or so.
And then the approximately 30% or so of people who prefer the EF but love and respect the OF will chime in with a reminder that both Masses are valid and isn’t it wonderful that our Popes are letting us have the richness and beauty of the EF which can only help us by giving the OF a high standard of richness and beauty to aspire to itself?
And then the approximately 30% or so of people who prefer the OF but love and respect the EF will chime in with yes, but isn’t it a shame that a few bad apples are spoiling things and probably we’d have had the EF years ago if it weren’t for so many traditionalists being so ‘disobedient’.
And then the approximately 15% of those who prefer the OF and don’t really like the EF will wonder what the traditionalists are THINKING because “intelligent people want to know what is going on in Mass and be able to understand it, and after all, it IS the OF now”, so really they can’t understand why anybody other than the over 60 crowd would even want to go to an EF.
And then the approximately 15% of those who prefer the EF and don’t really like the OF will bring up the fact that for 30 odd years (emphasis on odd) the OF had potentially and actually a lot of abuses, and that instead of being able to go to Mass in one language that stays the same you now have a hundred or more different languages and each of them has differences in translation. . .
And pretty soon, everybody is hauling out his or her soapbox and nobody is really listening to anybody but him/herself.
However, it seems there are always those who are so extremist that they have to interpret anything that the Pope says or does only in that extremist way.
So you will find the approximately 5% or so of people who are --or long to be–sedevacantist who will insist that this means the N.O. is on the way out and good riddance as neither it, nor (occasionally) Vatican 2, nor (occasionally) the last 5 Popes should have existed anyway.
And the corresponding 5% or so of people who are–or long to be --thought of as the progressive, enlightened, and ecumenical true liberals (in the good sense)–who will immediately insist that despite what the ‘pathetic medievalists’ say, this is absolutely in no way going to stop the spirit of Vatican 2 because after all, the Pope is only throwing a ‘sop’ to the SSPX and the Latin Mass will be dead in 10 years or so.
And then the approximately 30% or so of people who prefer the EF but love and respect the OF will chime in with a reminder that both Masses are valid and isn’t it wonderful that our Popes are letting us have the richness and beauty of the EF which can only help us by giving the OF a high standard of richness and beauty to aspire to itself?
And then the approximately 30% or so of people who prefer the OF but love and respect the EF will chime in with yes, but isn’t it a shame that a few bad apples are spoiling things and probably we’d have had the EF years ago if it weren’t for so many traditionalists being so ‘disobedient’.
And then the approximately 15% of those who prefer the OF and don’t really like the EF will wonder what the traditionalists are THINKING because “intelligent people want to know what is going on in Mass and be able to understand it, and after all, it IS the OF now”, so really they can’t understand why anybody other than the over 60 crowd would even want to go to an EF.
And then the approximately 15% of those who prefer the EF and don’t really like the OF will bring up the fact that for 30 odd years (emphasis on odd) the OF had potentially and actually a lot of abuses, and that instead of being able to go to Mass in one language that stays the same you now have a hundred or more different languages and each of them has differences in translation. . .
And pretty soon, everybody is hauling out his or her soapbox and nobody is really listening to anybody but him/herself.
C
Cat
Guest
Yes, there is quite a variety of Catholics.
And every one of them deserves more charitable treatment from other Catholics than Post #5.
Sarcastic remarks criticizing resistance to change imply a superior attitude, and are simply not helpful to people who may be–understandably–nervous about changes to the familiar and comfortable.
Also, the remarks imply an “inside knowledge” about the Holy Father’s plans, which I personally think most of us on CAF do not have.
C
Chatter163
Guest
How could something be “a profound change,” but not be a “shake-up”? I could see the reverse being true, but surely not the above?
S
snhs
Guest
Just like the millions of people who couldn’t understand why they didn’t hear any Latin at Mass, why the Sanctuary was reordered, High Altars were ripped out and the practices and hymns they had grown up with were being thrown out with the Communion Rail?
I think it is a given that people on this forum are giving their own interpretation on matters such as this when they are doubtful to be either the Pope’s spokesperson or one of his close confidants. There is absolutely nothing wrong with looking at personnel changes at the Vatican and theorising as to where they might lead.
And try to lighten up a bit.
The fact is the change seems to be fairly comprehensive. From what I’ve picked up most, if not all, of the new appointees have a degree of familiarity with the TLM, they’ll also probably be more aware of the traditional/Traditional practices which went along with it. It also seems apparent that part of it is still a process of changing the guard at the Vatican, appointing people who are sympathetic to and qualified to back up Pope Benedict on his changes. Whether we’re going to see major changes soon I’m not sure. It could be an indication that the Pope intends to celebrate a public TLM, he’d certainly have the personnel in place to do so now which he probably didn’t have initially. It may be more likely though that he is getting them in place to help continue with the work started by Summorum Pontificum. Or that he intends to introduce a document on the liturgy within the next few years. Maybe he’ll be looking at celebrating ad orientem at Mass or something of that nature.
I don’t know about you but in the morning I can be awake and still need a wake up call before I get up or completely come to consciousness. No matter how gently the Pope decides to introduce changes he’s still going to be criticised in some quarters for not being ‘gentle’ enough. I’m inclined to think that introducing these new appointees is a preparation to change, the only question is whether the wake up call is going to be a light tap on the shoulder, a pealing bell, or some fortissimo chords on piano
.Whatever the changes may or may not indicate though they all seem to be well qualified for the positions the Pope has given them and I hardly see how anyone can question them unless they’re overly wedded to the familiar and comfortable Spirit of VII ‘traditions’ which date all the way back to 1970 or so.
L
lvn4Him
Guest
I am so glad to see this, especially after the mass my family experienced today. The priest took it upon himself to “customize the mass per his discretion for his congregation.” We were floored!
He didn’t even read the gospel, he told the story of the gospel reading combined with the homily, and he (along with the congregation) sat through it. Then he had all the kids stand directly around the altar through the entire eucharist and had the children raise their hands for the consecration. The list goes on. My husband and I approached him after mass and he told us that the rules of the church were “norms” and that it was up to each pastor to use them as they see appropriate. So we are glad to see that someone is ready to “lay down the law.” We feel that a catholic should be able to go to any church and feel that they were at a valid mass. I agree there can be some leaway as long as the liturgical norms and rules are followed.
Krista
He didn’t even read the gospel, he told the story of the gospel reading combined with the homily, and he (along with the congregation) sat through it. Then he had all the kids stand directly around the altar through the entire eucharist and had the children raise their hands for the consecration. The list goes on. My husband and I approached him after mass and he told us that the rules of the church were “norms” and that it was up to each pastor to use them as they see appropriate. So we are glad to see that someone is ready to “lay down the law.” We feel that a catholic should be able to go to any church and feel that they were at a valid mass. I agree there can be some leaway as long as the liturgical norms and rules are followed.
Krista
A
Aramis
Guest
I hope you went to a real mass after that…
WRITE YOUR BISHOP…
… it sounds like he crossed a few too many lines to actually have said a valid mass.
J
japhy
Guest
ARG!
Why didn’t he let all of you come around the altar? How unfair of him.
Really? Because that’s not what the Church says about their rules. Maybe this priest should look again.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
First off, we do not know the circumstances surrounding the change in staff. Those who are out-going might not be interpreting this as a shake-up, but as a legitimate change in direction that legitimately requires different experitise than what they have. Nobody was dressed down or indicted here.How could something be “a profound change,” but not be a “shake-up”? I could see the reverse being true, but surely not the above?
I interpret “shake-up” to mean a change that is instituted by more or less violent means: for instance, solely by use of the power of authority rather than by the use of the power of example. That is not to say that there isn’t a time when the more violent method isn’t appropriate. When the bad must be replaced, of course you see the pre-emptive shake-up method of replacement: think of the cleansing of the Temple.
The Holy Father isn’t making decrees that the OF is on the way out. To the contrary, he is bending over backwards to say that it is not. Nevertheless, he is modelling ways of celebrating liturgy that have fallen out of use that he thinks deserve to be experienced again. I think he rightly has discerned that the most gentle way of bringing these things back is to give people a thirst for it, rather than just pre-emptively re-writing the menu of what’s available. Beauty and virtue need only to be seen to sell themselves.
Nevertheless, anyone who has been praying to see similar changes at the parish level will agree that such changes would be profound, even if the pastor and the parish liturgy committee had become thrilled to voluntarily implement them.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
We should keep in mind, though, that inviting children to stand near the altar during the Liturgy of the Eucharist is allowed in certain circumstances, within the rubrics of certain Masses for Children.
I’ve heard many debates about whether the laity may ever rightly assume the orans position. The celebrant would, of course, make certain that anyone invited to stand during the Liturgy of the Eucharist was aware of that the rubrics require a profound bow at the consecration. It is not always wrong for the laity to do what the priest does.
This is perhaps straying a little bit off-thread, though?
M
MrS
Guest
- Status