My most recent Novus Ordo experience

[michaelpoloniae]

Due to work, I was forced to attend the OF mass this evening at a different parish. I have been celebrating the EF mass for quite some time now and was reluctant to part with it even for a day. I figured it would reinforce my devotion of the EF mass, while at least allowing me to still appreciate the Novus Ordo. But I did not expect it to have this profound effect on me.

I am not sure if I should approach the priest directly or write a letter to the Bishop and not specify the particular parish I attended. But I was shocked. First of all, half the congregation was standing during most of the mass (besides the readings and Gospel). They stood during the consecreation and the communion of the priest. They took communion in the hand, which I have grown accustomed to seeing, but then consumed it like a potato chip. There were so many other glaring red flags. It resembled more of a Lutheran service than a Catholic mass.

The priest obviously won’t say anything, or even motion for the congregation to kneel during the most important parts of the mass. I assume he is just happy to have butts in the pews. And this probably holds true for many other “progressive” parishes. They seem to sacrifice the most basic liturgical rites in exchange for the number of parishioners.

But as I mentioned earlier, it definitely reinforced my faith and my reverence for the EF mass.

 

[coolduude]

Well I don’t know about the standing up complaints (I’ll leave that to another poster ) however, I know you don’t like Communion in the hand, but really the parish can’t regulate how people consume it after it is given to them. You may not like it, but they can’t do anything about it unless they stop giving it in the hand (which they are unlikely to do). You can rant about it, but writing to the Bishop probably won’t change that aspect.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[thistle]

Due to work, I was forced to attend the OF mass this evening at a different parish. I have been celebrating the EF mass for quite some time now and was reluctant to part with it even for a day. I figured it would reinforce my devotion of the EF mass, while at least allowing me to still appreciate the Novus Ordo. But I did not expect it to have this profound effect on me.

I am not sure if I should approach the priest directly or write a letter to the Bishop and not specify the particular parish I attended. But I was shocked. First of all, half the congregation was standing during most of the mass (besides the readings and Gospel). They stood during the consecreation and the communion of the priest. They took communion in the hand, which I have grown accustomed to seeing, but then consumed it like a potato chip. There were so many other glaring red flags. It resembled more of a Lutheran service than a Catholic mass.

The priest obviously won’t say anything, or even motion for the congregation to kneel during the most important parts of the mass. I assume he is just happy to have butts in the pews. And this probably holds true for many other “progressive” parishes. They seem to sacrifice the most basic liturgical rites in exchange for the number of parishioners.

But as I mentioned earlier, it definitely reinforced my faith and my reverence for the EF mass.

Sounds like you simply have a grudge against the NO and are looking for any excuse to complain about it.
You haven’t actually mentioned any specific abuse that took place.
If you had something specific, rather than a general vague rant, then you should have approached the priest after Mass and politely (not confrontational) spoken about any concern you had.

 

[archangel04]

Due to work, *I was forced to attend the OF mass *I like this one “forced” this evening at a different parish. **I have been celebrating the EF mass for quite some time now **You mean you attend the EF? Didn’t know lay people could celebrate the EF and was reluctant to part with it even for a day. I figured it would reinforce my devotion of the EF mass, while at least allowing me to still appreciate the Novus Ordo. But I did not expect it to have this profound effect on me.

I am not sure if I should approach the priest directly or write a letter to the Bishop and not specify the particular parish I attended. But I was shocked. First of all, half the congregation was standing during most of the mass (besides the readings and Gospel). They stood during the consecreation and the communion of the priest. They took communion in the hand, which I have grown accustomed to seeing, but then consumed it like a potato chip. There were so many other glaring red flags. It resembled more of a Lutheran service than a Catholic mass.

The priest obviously won’t say anything, or even motion for the congregation to kneel during the most important parts of the mass. I assume he is just happy to have butts in the pews. And this probably holds true for many other “progressive” parishes. They seem to sacrifice the most basic liturgical rites in exchange for the number of parishioners.

But as I mentioned earlier, it definitely reinforced my faith and my reverence for the EF mass.

I am sure it’s difficult to from from the EF to an OF that lacks reverncy. Pray for those in that parich. The COTH you can’t do much about as it’s the norm here in the country. You could ask the parish priest as to why does the congregation stand at most parts of the mass. But I have to agree with the other poster, it sounds like you have a grudge against the OF.

 

[PA650]

Due to work, I was forced to attend the OF mass this evening at a different parish. I have been celebrating the EF mass for quite some time now and was reluctant to part with it even for a day. I figured it would reinforce my devotion of the EF mass, while at least allowing me to still appreciate the Novus Ordo. But I did not expect it to have this profound effect on me.

I am not sure if I should approach the priest directly or write a letter to the Bishop and not specify the particular parish I attended. But I was shocked. First of all, half the congregation was standing during most of the mass (besides the readings and Gospel). They stood during the consecreation and the communion of the priest. They took communion in the hand, which I have grown accustomed to seeing, but then consumed it like a potato chip. There were so many other glaring red flags. It resembled more of a Lutheran service than a Catholic mass.

The priest obviously won’t say anything, or even motion for the congregation to kneel during the most important parts of the mass. I assume he is just happy to have butts in the pews. And this probably holds true for many other “progressive” parishes. They seem to sacrifice the most basic liturgical rites in exchange for the number of parishioners.

But as I mentioned earlier, it definitely reinforced my faith and my reverence for the EF mass.

Sounds like you simply have a grudge against the NO and are looking for any excuse to complain about it.
You haven’t actually mentioned any specific abuse that took place.
If you had something specific, rather than a general vague rant, then you should have approached the priest after Mass and politely (not confrontational) spoken about any concern you had.

The section in bold of the post by the original poster indicates a practice contrary to the GIRM. Although if the congregation was standing during the consecration, yet bowed at appropriate moments, then that would be sufficient. Nevertheless, from the conclusion of “Holy, Holy, Holy…” to the conclusion of the "Great Amen,’’ the congregation should be in a position of kneeling for all able-bodied parishioners. Additional posts can correct my post if any statement is not particularly correct.

 

[FirstCalled]

I believe they are supposed to kneel during consecration no exceptions, but I’ll leave it to someone who can find that in the GIRM quickly to quote it.
It is up to the diocesean bishop to decide whether or not you kneel after the agnus dei/communion of the priest. My “progressive” county does it that way, and I wish I lived in an area that cared more for tradition and properly done liturgies, but then again our bishop has forcibly brought women to their feet to receive standing up when they kneeled before Our Lord to receive, so you can’t be too surprised about anything here.

 

[Adeodatus]

It resembled more of a Lutheran service than a Catholic mass.

I suspect that is the point.

 

[thistle]

The section in bold of the post by the original poster indicates a practice contrary to the GIRM. Although if the congregation was standing during the consecration, yet bowed at appropriate moments, then that would be sufficient. Nevertheless, from the conclusion of “Holy, Holy, Holy…” to the conclusion of the "Great Amen,’’ the congregation should be in a position of kneeling for all able-bodied parishioners. Additional posts can correct my post if any statement is not particularly correct.

From the GIRM:

QUOTE
they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects
after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop
determines otherwise.
UNQUOTE

The GIRM clearly allows people to stand for numerous reasons. The OP simply complained about people standing. He did not give any specifics.
He also implied by his “red herring” remark that receiving in the hand is wrong which it is not. Those receiving are allowed to choose to receive on the tongue or in the hand, both valid ways to receive.

 

[Holly3278]

Well, to be quite frank, I have heard of and even witnessed much worse abuses of the Liturgy than this!

 

[PA650]

I believe they are supposed to kneel during consecration no exceptions, but I’ll leave it to someone who can find that in the GIRM quickly to quote it.
It is up to the diocesean bishop to decide whether or not you kneel after the agnus dei/communion of the priest. My “progressive” county does it that way, and I wish I lived in an area that cared more for tradition and properly done liturgies, but then again our bishop has forcibly brought women to their feet to receive standing up when they kneeled before Our Lord to receive, so you can’t be too surprised about anything here.

I am sure the Diocese of Orange will return to reverent, sacred liturgies in the coming years. Overall, the innovations and abuses conducted throughout some Dioceses in California can only continue so long.

From the GIRM:

QUOTE
they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects
after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop
determines otherwise.
UNQUOTE

The GIRM clearly allows people to stand for numerous reasons. The OP simply complained about people standing. He did not give any specifics.
He also implied by his “red herring” remark that receiving in the hand is wrong which it is not. Those receiving are allowed to choose to receive on the tongue or in the hand, both valid ways to receive.

Quite true. Nevertheless, I inferred from the statement regarding standing during the consecration as an innovation apparent in some parishes in which the pastor instructs the lay faithful to stand throughout that particular point in the liturgy. Such behavior directly contradicts the norms established in the GIRM.

 

[thistle]

I am sure the Diocese of Orange will return to reverent, sacred liturgies in the coming years. Overall, the innovations and abuses conducted throughout some Dioceses in California can only continue so long.

Quite true. Nevertheless, I inferred from the statement regarding standing during the consecration as an innovation apparent in some parishes in which the pastor instructs the lay faithful to stand throughout that particular point in the liturgy. Such behavior directly contradicts the norms established in the GIRM.

If the priest gave such instructions I agree with you.

 

[Bbigam]

Due to work, I was forced to attend the OF mass this evening at a different parish…

But as I mentioned earlier, it definitely reinforced my faith and my reverence for the EF mass.

I think it’s a bit of a problem if we feel like we are being forced to go to a different form of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It is the Holy Sacrifice, and even if we (legitimately) have a particular devotion to a form of the Mass, we are blessed and privileged to be able to assist at the Holy Sacrifice in any form or rite. Now, we shouldn’t have to deal with abuses and irreverence of course! (Lousy music can take some endurance, too.)

Our faith and our reverence should be first of all in Christ and His Sacrifice, rather than in a particular form of the Liturgy. I’m not at all saying the style and form of Liturgy don’t matter! But what it really is is so much more important than which form or style it is. I’ll take a reverent, traditional Mass over an irreverent, contemporary one any day, but I’m privileged to be able to go to any Mass on a given day. (Not to say I’ve never been upset by irreverence and liturgical ad-libbing.)

 

[paperwight66]

They took communion in the hand, but then consumed it like a potato chip. .

May I ask you to clarify this puzzling statement?

How exactly?

If you mean they visibly ate It (I don’t mean with their mouth open, but obviously chewing) then this is what we are told to do by Our Lord. ‘Take and eat’ - apparently the actual word used was nearer chew or even gnaw.

The custom of letting the Host dissolve without any mouth movement is just that, a custom. One I practise myself, as it happens, except when I’ve been given a piece of the priest’s thicker Host which doesn’t seem to dissolve so easily. But it isn’t laid down anywhere, AFAIK.

So where does the potato chip comparison come from?

 

[laszlo]

If you write to the priest or bishop of that parish, you probably will get the answer, that the standing is the sign of reverence and giving honor to Jesus Christ.

The General Instructions of the Roman Missal requires to kneel after the Sanctus until the Our Father (and standing for communion; giving and indult for the US to kneel for communion)

In the good old times Churches were full for every Sunday Mass, less then half of the participants could sit in the pews. The rest were standing all the time, and so close to each other that it was impossible to kneel even for the consecration. No one felt that this is something bad.

I myself feel better ion a Church when people mostlt kneel, but the Mass is to worship God, not our feeling, and we must leave the judgment to Jesus Christ, to whom it belongs

 

[Ockham]

So where does the potato chip comparison come from?

I’m guessing the OP is describing the all to common practice of receiving the Host in hand and walking away with it, putting it into one’s mouth mid-stride. If that’s the case then that is a very serious problem that needs to be resolved. The threat of desecration is too high and the Blessed Sacrament is exposed to danger. It’s one of the reasons Communion on the tongue became the norm many centuries ago.

 

[ProVobis]

If you mean they visibly ate It (I don’t mean with their mouth open, but obviously chewing) then this is what we are told to do by Our Lord. ‘Take and eat’ - apparently the actual word used was nearer chew or even gnaw.

This is unclear:

{26:26} Cœnantibus autem eis, accepit Iesus panem, et benedixit, ac fregit, deditque discipulis suis, et ait: Accipite, et comedite: hoc est corpus meum.
{26:26} Now while they were eating the meal, Jesus took bread, and he blessed and broke and gave it to his disciples, and he said: “Take and eat. This is my body.”

*capio,capere,cepi,captus * possible meanings: take, receive (is this what you’re thinking?)

Adding the prefix (form of ad- to, toward, against, intensely)

accipio,accipere,accepi,acceptus possible meanings: take, get, receive

From the Latin-English dictionary it appears to be the same thing. You can draw your own conclusions from the Latin, but there does seem to be a difference, if not subtle.

FWIT Other forms of capere: (meanings I’m questioning myself)

capio,capere,cepi,captus take, receive
accipio,accipere,accepi,acceptus take, get, receive
concipio,concipere,concepi,conceptus conceive
excipio,excipere,excepi,exceptus welcome
incipio,incipere,incepi,inceptus begin
praecipio,praecipere,praecepi,praeceptus command, instruct
recipio,recipere,recepi,receptus take back, receive
suscipio,suscipere,suscepi,susceptus take up, pick up, accept

 

[paperwight66]

I’m guessing the OP is describing the all to common practice of receiving the Host in hand and walking away with it, putting it into one’s mouth mid-stride. If that’s the case then that is a very serious problem that needs to be resolved. QUOTE]

Ah, now I understand - thank you, Ockham. As opposed to taking a step to the side, pausing briefly and putting the Host in one’s mouth, you mean?

Yes, indeed, it happens in our parish, too, and needs to be addressed from the pulpit, IMO.

 

[TMC]

Due to work, I was forced to attend the OF mass this evening at a different parish. I have been celebrating the EF mass for quite some time now and was reluctant to part with it even for a day. I figured it would reinforce my devotion of the EF mass, while at least allowing me to still appreciate the Novus Ordo. But I did not expect it to have this profound effect on me.

I am not sure if I should approach the priest directly or write a letter to the Bishop and not specify the particular parish I attended. But I was shocked. First of all, half the congregation was standing during most of the mass (besides the readings and Gospel). They stood during the consecreation and the communion of the priest. They took communion in the hand, which I have grown accustomed to seeing, but then consumed it like a potato chip. There were so many other glaring red flags. It resembled more of a Lutheran service than a Catholic mass.

The priest obviously won’t say anything, or even motion for the congregation to kneel during the most important parts of the mass. I assume he is just happy to have butts in the pews. And this probably holds true for many other “progressive” parishes. They seem to sacrifice the most basic liturgical rites in exchange for the number of parishioners.

But as I mentioned earlier, it definitely reinforced my faith and my reverence for the EF mass.

If you never go to this Mass, why do you care how it is celebrated? You admit you went to this Mass hoping that it would annoy you and thus “reinforce” your decision to avoid attending Mass in the Ordinary Form. Your self-fulfilling prophecy has been fulfilled, so why do you want or need to do anything?

 

[Ockham]

If you never go to this Mass, why do you care how it is celebrated? You admit you went to this Mass hoping that it would annoy you and thus “reinforce” your decision to avoid attending Mass in the Ordinary Form. Your self-fulfilling prophecy has been fulfilled, so why do you want or need to do anything?

As Catholics we have a right to a properly celebrated Mass. We also have a duty to protect the Blessed Sacrament. There are several issues in this parish the most serious being the risk of desecration. When good people allow bad things to happen it hurts us all.

 

[ProVobis]

If you mean they visibly ate It (I don’t mean with their mouth open, but obviously chewing) then this is what we are told to do by Our Lord. ‘Take and eat’ - apparently the actual word used was nearer chew or even gnaw.

I have to confess that I misread your words here. You seem to be talking about the word comedite and not accipite as I previously thought.

I do find the meaning of “eating up, consume” in my Latin-English dictionary. Even “devour” if used in context with the eyes, so you may be right on that.

However, if you look at the word “edite” which means simply “eat,” and add the prefix “com-” to “edite,” it’s hard to see an explicit “chew” or “gnaw” meaning in that. But that’s my take on the matter.