N.O. experience

  • Thread starter Thread starter FabiusMaximus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
purplesunshine said:
One who has the cajonies to post that THEY magically know how mass should be done when they’ve been to all of what? two??? should spend more time studying before they go off on “this is how catholocism should work” rant. Including learning that saying “NO” is an offensive tactic of people who try to discredit the validity of the ORDINARY mass.
Click to expand...
You forget that it was Agatha Christie and other Protestants (even Anglican bishops) who petitioned Pope Paul VI to restore the Latin Mass in the first place. And the Pope granted their wishes. I wonder how many Latin Masses they really attended. What did they know that Catholics didn’t?
 
The instant I saw the thread title, I just knew what it was going to be … I wonder how long til the thread gets locked or pulled?
 
I don’t get it. Novus Ordo Missae means New Order of the Mass. But some prefer it be called the Ordinary Form. Yes, I know, The pope does too. I’m fine with it.

“did you go to the TLM or the ordinary Mass ?”
“did you go to a TLM or the Novus Ordo Mass ?”

“ordinary” seems a much easier choice if one meant to degrade the OF/NO
“ordinary” implies “nothing special”

jmo
 
I think many parishes list it on their bulletins as:

English Mass

Spanish Mass

Latin Mass

Msze Święte

etc.

Or they just list the Mass times. (To an Anglophone, the world was created in English.:rolleyes:)
 
purplesunshine said:
Get it straight. It’s the OF NOT NO.

And there are many reverant EF masses. Even without smells and bells.
Click to expand...
Relax! Novus Ordo is what it war originally called. If you wan’t to educate someone why not be charitable about it? By the way what does OF mean? I am askin since not everyone knows what OF means, and really there is nothing official on any document with “OF”.

Yes. you are correct there are many reverant EF masses without smells and bells, thank you for pointing that out, but I think the OP was asking about the OF.

BTW OF= Ordinary Form (of the mass)
EF= Extraordinary Form (of the mass).
 
YoungTradCath said:
People need to stop being so critical of what the OP says.

.
Click to expand...
Just read the thread that I satrted couple weeks back titled “tired of the same old same old”. Are you surprised there are reactions like this? The OP is not even Catholic and look how quickly he is attacked. We all make mistakes so I don’t see why other posters have to attck the OP, not to mentions I didn’t really see any mistakes on his op.
 
Cat said:
It seems to me that someone who has “lapsed” in their practice of church attendance should do more research before making any statements about how a Mass should be done.

Also, all of us, but especially someone who is lapsed, should consider paying less attention to the reverence (or perceived irreverence) of others and more attention to the state of their own heart. Frankly, I find it amazing that a human being, especially someone who is not practicing Catholicism and hasn’t attended the church in question, can judge the hearts of others. I don’t believe it.

Also, to those who have “lapsed”–while you were gone doing your own thing, your “family” that stuck around grew and changed. If you had been there, you would have been able to experience all those changes, too, and live through them and in some cases, suffer through them. But you were gone by your own choice. So why do you think you can waltz back in and bemoan the fact that the “family” doesn’t do things the way they did back in the past when you used to be part of the family? You can be nostalgic, yes. That’s OK and understandable. But to be “broken-hearted” because the Church moved on while you were gone by your own choice–that’s not OK.

BTW, your “papa” (the pope) has approved of all the changes in your “family” that you are “broken-hearted” about–it’s OK to not use incense in a Mass. Contemporary music played on a piano is OK, too. It’s OK for women to read and lead the singing. It’s OK, with the approval of a bishop, for Communion to be received in the hand.
Click to expand...
Does not seem very charitable to me. I would have worded some things different for a brother/sister who has taken baby steps to comming back to the Church.
 
purplesunshine said:
**One who has the cajonies **to post that THEY magically know how mass should be done when they’ve been to all of what? two??? should spend more time studying before they go off on “this is how catholocism should work” rant. Including learning that saying “NO” is an offensive tactic of people who try to discredit the validity of the ORDINARY mass.

That’s what I believe and I’m not sorry for it.
Click to expand...
Nice wording of offensivle using intimate body part of a man on a Catholic site. What happen to charity?
 
Gracious, what a “testy” post! Why can’t we ease up a bit folks. Its getting so I might just try another forum.
 
FabiusMaximus said:
I wasn’t too impressed. Maybe it was me.

Yes I’m well aware. It’s not the lack of incense that killed the experience for me, but I just love seeing it and smelling it. It just overall didn’t seem to do it for me. It seemed somehow “less.”
Click to expand...
OP, you should probably read the rules of the forum.
Pitting one form of the Mass against another is a big “no-no”.
The OF is not “less” than the EF.
 
It’s a rite to honour and propitiate a god. It’s become fashionable to remove clerical, hierarchial, Latin, iconic, linguistic and symbolic elements from it. And then to say: “This is what the council wanted” and “It makes no difference that such changes were made”.

Then, surprise, people start not to take it so seriously any more. Because the setting is more casual and the actors, too.

And thus the cry goes up: “We need more catechesis!”, to restore the reverence. Ironic, when symbolic elements that would easily teach people that This Is Special have been removed or changed.
 
I certainly agree that we need to be respectful of the OP and his/her questions.

However, I am somewhat surprised to see so many who are advocating that we pay attention to and give serious consideration to the opinions of Protestants.

Usually when there are music threads, the idea that certain music is less intimidating to Protestants is utterly discounted, and the general consensus from conversative Catholics is that the Mass should never seek to please Protestants and that their opinions don’t really matter.

In fact, the fact that there were Protestants present at Vatican II is looked upon with great suspicion by some Catholics, who believe that these Protestants perverted the Mass and caused it to become “more Protestant.”

I tend to agree with the conservative Catholics–although we ourselves should certainly be friendly to Protestants, we should not attempt to adjust the Mass to become more Protestant-friendly.

And I stick by what I said. It is bad enough when Catholics criticize a liturgically-correct Mass because it not conducted according to their personal tastes (music, incense, Latin, veils, etc.).

But a non-Catholic really needs to pay their dues first (attendance, study, RCIA classes or some other apologetics classes about Catholicism, film series, history lessons, discussions with older and wiser Catholics, etc.) before criticizing the liturgy.
 
FabiusMaximus said:
I didn’t say that the parishoners were less reverent, I said it didn’t seem very reverent.
.
Click to expand...
When you said that there did not seem to be much reverence at the consecration, I understood you to mean that the people witnessing it had no reverence, or had less than what you observe at a TLM (since that is what you are comparing the experience against). If that was not what you intended to convey, then I misunderstood what you wrote.
I haven’t attended a TLM in many years (not necessarily by choice), so I would not know the atmosphere of reverence or irreverence there. I’m just trying to find out what were your criteria for judging the reverence (to whatever degree) of the people at either Mass (parishioners or otherwise).
 
Most Catholics prefer the NO. Its simpler and gets them out of Church quicker. Theres no extensive use of any ‘extras’ because people view it as unnecessary.

That is why I avoid NO masses. I only go to NOs that have more involved liturgy. Otherwise I feel the same way.

That the Mass is just a burden and no reason to go the extra mile in worship.

Sickening, but not my place to pass judgement. Its peoples personal preference.

EDIT: Not to say all Catholics who do NO are less participant. But you can very very defiantly tell the difference.

And its not really their fault. You create a half assed atmosphere, and people respond to their surroundings. Not the laitys fault in the least in this regard.
 
And another post, I suggest we… deter from discussing this in length. As it inevitably leads to pitting the masses against eachother which is against forum rules.
 
Paxvobis said:
Just keep in mind that there’s nothing wrong with the NO either. It’s the same Sacrifice of the Mass.
Click to expand...
While it is the same Sacrifice of the Mass, it would be inaccurate to say that there is nothing wrong with the way the NO is practiced in the great majority of parishes.
 
Yes, and we all have our opinions, and we are entitled to them.

However, at present, those opinions in regards to one mass or another or being pitted against eachother… are not allowed. So lets cease from this point so noone gets a talking to.

Let us pray for unity and conformity in beautiful liturgy. :highprayer:
 
What I would say to the OP is this: There are probably really good reasons the CC looked to introduce a vernacular Mass. It came at a very unfortunate moment in time historically with regard to what was going on in the world of liturgical scholarship, and even the state of language (at least in English). There seems to be real recognition that the OF has problems in theory and in execution, but all Catholic theologians agree it is a valid Mass. In practice, some are done better than others, and it is what most laity is now used to, which is really important in liturgy - so any changes to fix the problems will come slowly. I suspect they will come though, and there may even be a plan for this.

For individuals stuck attending it who find it less than up-lifting, I’d remember that worship is being offered to God, no matter whether it is moving our own hearts. Try to find other ways to fill the gaps you find personally, like praying the offices, or listening to recorded music.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top