"Liturgy" or "Mass"

[OraLabora]

So, while technically correct, for the sake of normalcy and recognition, “mass” is probably a much better way of publicly getting the word out that what’s going on is in fact a mass.

Except if what is going on is in fact, not a Mass. Which happens often enough around here, especially in some of the smaller parishes in small towns, where it may actually be a “Mass” only once a month.

In such cases not only is “Liturgy” technically correct, “Mass” would be wrong more than half the times, and some folks may be hoodwinked into attending a “Mass” that in fact isn’t, when a 20 minute drive down the road might lead to an actual Mass.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Except if what is going on is in fact, not a Mass. Which happens often enough around here, especially in some of the smaller parishes in small towns, where it may actually be a “Mass” only once a month.

In such cases not only is “Liturgy” technically correct, “Mass” would be wrong more than half the times, and some folks may be hoodwinked into attending a “Mass” that in fact isn’t, when a 20 minute drive down the road might lead to an actual Mass.

You’re right, there’s always an exception to the norm. But I’m talking about a norm.

 

[pnewton]

I think that all of you should start reading two books, both of them are called the "Spirit of the Liturgy.

Interesting point. If the Holy Father uses The Liturgy, I guess it is acceptable.

 

[jmcrae]

And how likely is it that a priest just wakes up one morning and decides that a “liturgy” will take place three weeks later, notifies whoever writes the newsletter of his decision, but waits until three days before the day of the “liturgy” to decide what specific sort of liturgy it will be?

No, no, no - it’s the school principal who decides that there will be a liturgy on this day at this time. He then has to call a priest and ask him to come.

The priest usually doesn’t know more than a week ahead of time whether he will be available or not, because of sick calls, parish appointments, etc.

 

[OraLabora]

You’re right, there’s always an exception to the norm. But I’m talking about a norm.

In my diocese lack of priests to have a Mass every Sunday in every parish is the norm, unfortunately.

That said I usually only ever seen “Heures des messes” (time of Masses) on the signs outside our churches, which technically is not always correct. In some cases you only see “dimanche 9h30” with no mention of “Mass” or “Liturgy”, and I may have seen “heures des célébrations” once or twice, which also covers all possibilities.

My point though is that we shouldn’t get too hung up about it.

And now, I am going to recite Compline and hit the sack. Which is a liturgy that doesn’t require a priest!!! But is not a Mass

 

[PKinsale]

I think that all of you should start reading two books, both of them are called the “Spirit of the Liturgy”. The first by Romano Guardini refers to the EF and the second by Joseph Ratzinger refers to both the OF and the EF. Refusing to call the Mass liturgy is just out of ignorance and lack of basic understanding of what the Holy Sacrifice of the mass is about.

No one, your humble OP included, is denying that the Mass is a liturgical act.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Yes, but the Mass is not The Liturgy.

Yes it is. Mass is just a name for The Liturgy. Do you even know what the two parts of the Mass is called? The Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. In the past its called the Liturgy of the Catechumens and the Liturgy of the Faithful. Also, the other traditions of the Liturgy has those same two parts. The Divine Liturgy has it. The Holy Qurbana has it.

 

[PKinsale]

Constantine, do you have a Liturgy of the Hours or other liturgical devotions?

 

[YoungTradCath]

Yes it is. Mass is just a name for The Liturgy. Do you even know what the two parts of the Mass is called? The Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. In the past its called the Liturgy of the Catechumens and the Liturgy of the Faithful. Also, the other traditions of the Liturgy has those same two parts. The Divine Liturgy has it. The Holy Qurbana has it.

I think what he means is that it is isn’t the only liturgy.

That fact is why the use of the term might be a little confusing for people who are looking for a mass in, say, a vacation area, to fulfill their obligation, and they end up in some other type of liturgy that does not fulfill their obligation.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I think what he means is that it is isn’t the only liturgy.

That fact is why the use of the term might be a little confusing for people who are looking for a mass in, say, a vacation area, to fulfill their obligation, and they end up in some other type of liturgy that does not fulfill their obligation.

He said the Mass is not THE Liturgy. Of course it is. It is the ultimate Liturgy.

 

[YoungTradCath]

He said the Mass is not THE Liturgy. Of course it is. It is the ultimate Liturgy.

Okay, but I still think your interpretation of his post is wrong, which makes all the difference.

 

[oraproOz]

Sorry if I’m getting the wrong impression here, but you seem to be implying that there are no martyrs in the East who shed blood so we can take part in the Divine Liturgy today. And also that the Mass is different from the Divine Liturgy. In fact it is not. While the traditions surrounding it is different, it is essentially the same. We hear the word of God, then we partake of the Mystical Supper of Christ, the awesome, life giving mystery of the Eucharist.

No that was not my impression. I am aware that the Eastern Church has so has martyrs, they too shed blood for the Mass the THE MYSTICAL SUPPER OF CHRIST, is the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Church . In both we are fed on the LOGOS and the EUCHARIST.

 

[RyanBlack]

Well, unless the church down the street is another Catholic Church, it won’t be calling its services “liturgies.” The word “Liturgy” is a distinctively Catholic word. Other religions and other forms of Christianity don’t use it.

That is simply not true.

 

[jmcrae]

That is simply not true.

What other religions use this word?

 

[YoungTradCath]

What other religions use this word?

Liturgy is an extremely general term. “Jewish liturgy,” “Catholic liturgy,” and “Baptist liturgy” are all valid and acceptable terms. A liturgy is just a collection of rituals or acts done with religious worship or veneration as a reason.

 

[jmcrae]

Liturgy is an extremely general term. “Jewish liturgy,” “Catholic liturgy,” and “Baptist liturgy” are all valid and acceptable terms.

My point is that I have only ever heard Catholic theologians talk like that, though.

I never heard a Jew talk about “the Jewish liturgy,” and I certainly never heard a Baptist even admit that there is anything ritualistic about his Sunday morning service, never mind talk about the “Baptist Liturgy.”

A liturgy is just a collection of rituals or acts done with religious worship or veneration as a reason.

Yes - this is how Catholics define and use the word.

 

[TrueLight]

I never heard a Jew talk about “the Jewish liturgy,” and I certainly never heard a Baptist even admit that there is anything ritualistic about his Sunday morning service, never mind talk about the “Baptist Liturgy.”

Former Baptist concurs!

 

[RyanBlack]

What other religions use this word?

Well, the Orthodox use it all the time. Their eucharistic liturgy is called the Divine Liturgy. As for Protestants, you will not hear it used all that frequently, but it is certainly not the case the case that Protestants never use it, although one is not likely to hear it used among Baptists, Pentecostals, Congregationalists, etc. One would be more likely to encounter its use among Anglicans, Lutherans, and perhaps some Methodists. Also, if you search “liturgy” on the hompages of the ELCA, the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church USA, and the United Church of Christ, you will see right away that it is a term used by Protestants.