A
AJV
Guest
“By their fruits you shall know them.” From the point of view of its fruits, the NO Mass is not a rite conducive to the flourishing of the Church’s mission, when you look at the decrease in vocations, mass attendance, belief in the Real Presence ect.
Although the NO Missae itself does not promulgate the liturgical abuses or innovations that have emerged (communion in the hand, altar girls, dancing matrons, rock bands, standing during the consecration) it does provide greater opportunity and leeway for these actions to take place. There are some fundamental flaws in the new Mass that are present regardless of how reverent it is celebrated.
The New Liturgy stripped the Offertory prayers of a sacrificial, propitiatory emphasis. In its place is the Presentation of the Gifts borrowed word-for-word from the Jewish grace-before-meals cited by the Talmud. “Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the bread of life.”
This suppresses mention of the Sacrificial character of the Mass and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist as Victim to be offered to the Father in propitiation for our sins. The emphasis is on a memorial meal and on thanksgiving. The term “It will become for us the bread of life.” is deliberately ambiguous. “Bread of life” can mean anything–as can the subsequent phrase regarding the wine: “it will become for us our spiritual drink”. This can mean anything. Not a whisper about Christ’s sacrifice or our redemption from sin by means of his sacrifice.
Throughout the new Mass a parallel is set up between the “Liturgy of the Word” and the “Eucharistic Liturgy” both of which are on the “table of the Lord” where Christ gives Himself as spiritual food. In fact the liturgical text deliberately blurs the distinction between Christ’s Presence on the altar and in the Word of Scripture and in the congregation itself–all of which is distinctly Protestant. The Novus Ordo, moreover, destroyed the ancient three-part sacrificial liturgical structure of oblation (Offertory), immolation (Consecration) and consumption (Communion) and substituted a memorial meal instead. It did so while deliberately eliminating emphasis on the truths of the Catholic Faith regarding sin, the need for redemption, and the propitiatory nature of Christ’s sacrifice.
It’s true others completed by other means what Paul VI began. But there can be no doubt the intention was to emulate Luther’s Lord’s Supper liturgy. The present Mass in fact in virtually indistinguishable from a Lutheran or Methodist service.
Agree.
Could any one of you’ll please demonstrate using any Lutheran books before 1970? I’m highly interested since I don’t see much similarity in either the newest LSB or the ELW which have both made great strides in the Lutheran liturgy.Fast Ed,
I agee with you. Over the years I’ve been to both Luthern and Methodist services and the Luthern, in particlular, is a ringer for the NO. It was spooky.
You are right when you say the NO is basically flawed.
I could see it last night at Mass and it was done reverently. The choir was great but the liturgy was “weak”
Actually there is more than a whisper of Sacrifice at the Offertory. You can find in the prayer In spiritu humilitatis, the *Oratio Super oblata *and the *Orate Fratres *. Unlike those omitted there is no anticipation in these.
If you really want ot go ancient wise- oblation and immolation according to the Roman liturgy belongs in the Eucharistic Prayer and has from the earliest of dates and is so even in the TLM. The way oblation has made its way of anticipation into the Offertory is because of the liturgies from where it was taken. As you know, the Roman liturgy was spread throughout Gaul and Spain and gradually displaced those liturgies.
In those liturgies, unlike in Rome: the oblation, commemoration of the saints, and Memento’s were made at the Offertory rather than in the Eucharistic Prayer. As the Roman replaced the Galician, a certain amount of repetition took place when the Canon displaced the fixed and variable prayers of the Galician Eucharistic Prayer: and so various local councils and synods forbade the recitation of names at the Offertory “as some are accustomed to do” and insisted that they be only recited (and recited silently) within the Canon and that the Pax be given before communion. The remaining Offertory prayers took on a devotional character, and in the way of much else, worked their way into the curial missal.
It was because of their anticipatory character that they were omitted and this is not new: the SCCNP did the same for some of the Eastern books in the 19th century (which have it to a greater degree)