Novus Ordo as man centered rite

[pnewton]

Newt, I usually find your posts well thought out, but I’m confused as to what you are going for here. CITH isn’t permissable in the TLM nor the Church for the vast majority of our history. I don’t know if the SSPX uses the term “Novus Ordo” and quite frankly I don’t care. Why would you want any of these topics banned - censorship? What do you have to hide? Why do you find such a complication with Traditional Catholics chatting in a Traditional Catholic forum?

I do not wish them banned at CAF. However, I think these issues have more to do with liturgy in general than with the Latin Mass, as they are not allowed in the Tridentine Mass. I am not the one who was complaining about non-traditionalist posting here nor was it I that called them “Modernist”.

If these subjects are going to be allowed in a Catholic forum, then of course there will be a response from all Catholics, not just those who agree with you. That is all. If a thread with such a confrontational title, and I think unjustified title such as this thread has is allowed here, it is ridiculous to complain that some Catholics respond negatively to it. Is it really so hard to understand why we post here, even if you do not think like the same? If you came across a provocative title like “Let’s finally bury the TLM” would you not want to see what sort of twist of logic would cause such an illogical statement and respond to it?

I guess I do not understand why this is so difficult. Yes, this forum says it is for discussion of traditional Catholic spirituality and such. However, the current Mass is not traditional Catholic spirituality in the sense the phrase is used here. The solution to this original rabbit trail that Cradle Catholic posted:

The question is: would you post there, or do you like to come to this forum to argue. I for one am SICK of it.

is to not have provocation and inflamatory threads that have nothing to do with Traditional Catholicism here.

 

[CWBetts]

It’s not an obsession with a language. Latin is the universal language of the Church and concrete. It isn’t suseptible to the nuances and changes of modern tongue. We may not see many current priests learn liturgical Latin, but the seminaries are filled with young candidates willing to make the necessary effort in becoming fluent.

Thats what I thought. Style over substance. Latin is the important thing

 

[Ockham]

You just showed your true colors. If you are the standard of a “Traditionalist” catholic, then I don’t want anything to do with it.

Don’t slam the door on the way out, please.

 

[Ockham]

If these subjects are going to be allowed in a Catholic forum, then of course there will be a response from all Catholics, not just those who agree with you.

I hear what you are saying Newt. However, I have found most Novus Ordo/Modernists come in here to cause trouble (“it’s in the GIRM!”). If there was a NO forum I’d just stay out of it. They are two distinct liturgies and forms of worship.

“In March of 1965, in the periodical L’Osservatore Romano, Bugnini was quoted as saying: “We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants.” In 1974 preceding his second downfall, Bugnini proudly proclaimed Vatican II to be a “major conquest of the Catholic Church”.” angelqueen.org/articles/04-02_bugnini.shtml

 

[CWBetts]

I am reminded of a joke: What is the difference between a Traditionalist and a Terrorist? You can negotiate with a terorist

 

[Ockham]

Christ taught absolutes. He said the path would be narrow. Try negotiating at the pearly gates.

 

[CWBetts]

Christ taught absolutes. He said the path would be narrow. Try negotiating at the pearly gates.

How many practices did Jesus absolutize? Try ZERO. His absolutes were about the Moral Law. His absolutes were not about the Mass. Which, for those keeping score, was NOT in Latin until several hundred years later. In the early Church Mass would have been Greek and/or Aramaic. The way I see it, the Traditionalists who want to do away with the OF don’t have a leg to stand on, theologically or historically. Aesthetically–maybe.

 

[Layman]

I have been to two EF Masses recently. What would the traditionalists think of using the English text in the 1962 Missal? Is it truly about the form of the mass or an obsession with Latin

Well, you could bake a fruit cake without raisins, but why would you bother?

 

[CWBetts]

Well, you could bake a fruit cake without raisins, but why would you bother?

These posts are making it more and more clear. In the traditionalist mind, it is aesthetics, and not theology that should determine the form of the liturgy

 

[Layman]

How many practices did Jesus absolutize? Try ZERO. His absolutes were about the Moral Law. His absolutes were not about the Mass. Which, for those keeping score, was NOT in Latin until several hundred years later. In the early Church Mass would have been Greek and/or Aramaic. The way I see it, the Traditionalists who want to do away with the OF don’t have a leg to stand on, theologically or historically. Aesthetically–maybe.

The alternative, today, for Roman Catholics, to Latin, is the vernacular: English, German or Tagalog. Not Greek or Aramaic. You can have the N.O. with the locally-favoured quota of novelties or a TLM, with Latin.

What I like about the TLM is it stretches you. The more you put into it (getting a missal or a Liber Usualis, learning a bit of Latin, learning what ‘Collect’ and ‘Gradual’ means), the more you get out of it. And you can have Ascension Thursday on a Thursday.

 

[estesbob]

The alternative, today, for Roman Catholics, to Latin, is the vernacular: English, German or Tagalog. Not Greek or Aramaic. You can have the N.O. with the locally-favoured quota of novelties or a TLM, with Latin.

What I like about the TLM is it stretches you. The more you put into it (getting a missal or a Liber Usualis, learning a bit of Latin, learning what ‘Collect’ and ‘Gradual’ means), the more you get out of it. And you can have Ascension Thursday on a Thursday.

Salvation through knowledge-now that sounds familar…

 

[Layman]

Now, did I say, or even imply, that?

 

[mardukm]

Pax, we know what is the big difference between the modern and traditional rite. And still our Mass today the Novus Ordo is the way of diversities and abuses in the liturgy. Traditionalist like me believe that this mass is no longer a God-centered rite but a man centered rite. Why priest need to face the people in order to celebrate mass in novus ordo, giving homily outside the pulpit and changing the words of consecration???

The Sacraments were given by God FOR man.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Ockham]

How many practices did Jesus absolutize? Try ZERO. His absolutes were about the Moral Law. His absolutes were not about the Mass. Which, for those keeping score, was NOT in Latin until several hundred years later. In the early Church Mass would have been Greek and/or Aramaic. The way I see it, the Traditionalists who want to do away with the OF don’t have a leg to stand on, theologically or historically. Aesthetically–maybe.

Now, now, settle down. You made a joke about traditionalists and got a come back. If you are going to dish it out grow some skin for when it comes back.

As for doing away with the NO I am not promoting that idea. Who is? I would prefer the NO move to a more appropriate time like Saturday evening though.

As far as theology and history go that’s where the TLM shines in comparision to the NO. If you look at the differences between the two the TLM is a better representation of Catholicism and was the standard liturgy for centuries. The NO is a watered down version thrust upon us during the Age of Aquarius for no good reason or result.

 

[pnewton]

Well, you could bake a fruit cake without raisins, but why would you bother?

Fruitcake? What is the whole point in fruitcake, for that matter. Fruit is good. Cake is good. Fruitcake it an unnatural abomination.

 

[pnewton]

The Sacraments were given by God FOR man.

This is a point often missed. When I here that there was no point in Vatican II, I see the very people making such statements missing this point. Instead of railing against the teaching and discipline of the Church, we must be a willing student at her feet. Yet Americans in particular always prefer to be the teacher not the student.

Without God being the center and summit of the Mass, it is an empty ceremony. However, without man, particular the Church meeting in community and as individuals with needs, the Mass is power without purpose.

 

[CWBetts]

The alternative, today, for Roman Catholics, to Latin, is the vernacular: English, German or Tagalog. Not Greek or Aramaic. You can have the N.O. with the locally-favoured quota of novelties or a TLM, with Latin.

What I like about the TLM is it stretches you. The more you put into it (getting a missal or a Liber Usualis, learning a bit of Latin, learning what ‘Collect’ and ‘Gradual’ means), the more you get out of it. And you can have Ascension Thursday on a Thursday.

You are completely missing the point. The liturgical language was changed from Greek to Latin because of the simple fact that Latin replaced Greek as the common language. St Jerome was commissioned to translate the Scriptures into Latin to make it accessible to more people, since more could read Latin than Greek. The Mass is not about “stretching yourself” (that sounds kind of man-centered if you ask me). It is about receiving the Holy Eucharist. Have I been to a TLM before? Yes. If the Mass goes back to that will I be happy? No. Will I whine incessantly about it? No. As a Catholic, it is not my place to whine about changes to the Mass that do not threaten the validity of the Sacrament.

 

[ac_claire]

Fruitcake? What is the whole point in fruitcake, for that matter. Fruit is good. Cake is good. Fruitcake it an unnatural abomination.

I agree, but there are ways around this. There’s a Welch fruitcake called bara brith that’s much more cake than fruit. (My main problem with fruitcake is it’s usually just a lot of candied fruit stuck together with very little cake.) You soak the raisins and dried fruit in tea overnight (or hot water and cinnamon/autumn-y spices) and then bake it in a nice spice bread. Any recipe for pumpkin bread would work actually…just replace the pumpkin with the soaked dried fruit.

 

[Layman]

You are completely missing the point. The liturgical language was changed from Greek to Latin because of the simple fact that Latin replaced Greek as the common language. St Jerome was commissioned to translate the Scriptures into Latin to make it accessible to more people, since more could read Latin than Greek.

This was done over 1500 years ago. People seem to have managed well with Latin up until the liturgical clock was re-set in 1969. The translation argument assumes the congregation is ignorant or lazy; they don’t know or they won’t make the effort. Even when the British forbade Catholicism in Ireland, young peasant men and women were able to get a smattering of Classical culture in ‘hedge schools’. The Mass is not complicated or lengthy and if you can stretch to paying 2.50 for a Missal, you can even get a translation nowadays. A translation with eloquent, didactic and beautiful English.

There are benefits to having a language set aside for worship which outweigh making it as easy as possible for the congregation to understand every word of a new text.

The Mass is not about “stretching yourself” (that sounds kind of man-centered if you ask me). It is about receiving the Holy Eucharist.

It’s a side benefit. As I sing in a schola and have a liber usualis, I find I learn something new all the time. In the N.O. it’s easy hymns, more responses, the common language and more noise generally.

As a Catholic, it is not my place to whine about changes to the Mass that do not threaten the validity of the Sacrament.

So, we have a revolution from previous practice, a new Mass, a greater emphasis on lay involvement, lay people reading Scripture and handing out Communion, but lay people shouldn’t debate these changes on an internet forum?

I think that cat’s out of the bag, now. You can’t have it both ways.

 

[CWBetts]

This was done over 1500 years ago. People seem to have managed well with Latin up until the liturgical clock was re-set in 1969. The translation argument assumes the congregation is ignorant or lazy; they don’t know or they won’t make the effort. Even when the British forbade Catholicism in Ireland, young peasant men and women were able to get a smattering of Classical culture in ‘hedge schools’. The Mass is not complicated or lengthy and if you can stretch to paying 2.50 for a Missal, you can even get a translation nowadays. A translation with eloquent, didactic and beautiful English.

There are benefits to having a language set aside for worship which outweigh making it as easy as possible for the congregation to understand every word of a new text.

It’s a side benefit. As I sing in a schola and have a liber usualis, I find I learn something new all the time. In the N.O. it’s easy hymns, more responses, the common language and more noise generally.

So, we have a revolution from previous practice, a new Mass, a greater emphasis on lay involvement, lay people reading Scripture and handing out Communion, but lay people shouldn’t debate these changes on an internet forum?

I think that cat’s out of the bag, now. You can’t have it both ways.

The Ordinary Form is called that for a reason. It is the standard form of the Mass. It is valid, and to claim it is invalid, or does not confer grace, is coming dangerously close to the heresy. I am not saying you must attend the Ordinary Form, but you go further than that, you strike at its ability to confer grace.