Novus Ordo Missae - Good for the Church?

[Missa_Solemnis]

The Vatican doesn’t allow condoms.
It does allow Altar Girls. Which I feel is wrong as well.
However, all we can do is Discourage.

Just remember, those involved in the innovations are in shrinking parishes. We are breeding them out, because we do listen to the Vatican.

I really feel that 20 years from now, these we be the stories we tell our Grandchildren. About the experimentation gone wrong.
“You know when I was young there were these masses…”

Indeed. I hope so.

It wont ever be my issue though. Since my children (if I have any) will all be raised in a TLM. The NO…like Santa Claus…will be a mystery in our house.

 

[netmilsmom]

Indeed. I hope so.

It wont ever be my issue though. Since my children (if I have any) will all be raised in a TLM. The NO…like Santa Claus…will be a mystery in our house.

I love it!!!

God willing, you will be blessed with many children and at least one priest!

 

[lak611]

I truly respect your opinion but until the Vatican says “no more” these liturgies need to be offered.

They may well die off on their own, but the Vatican says they can be offered, so they should be offered. Let the market decide.

There is only one parish that has an indult TLM in Cleveland, and it is not very crowded. Obviously many people are happy with the Pauline Mass, else there would be more of a demand for the TLM.

 

[Unfinished]

Indeed. I hope so.

It wont ever be my issue though. Since my children (if I have any) will all be raised in a TLM. The NO…like Santa Claus…will be a mystery in our house.

LOL.

 

[Fergal]

Firstly it is not a new Mass. It is a revised liturgy.

Yes, yes, yes and yes again. You better believe it that it was good for the Church!

Those with no respect for the Mass have had their playtime. The experimenters will drift away when they get tired of messin’ around and run out of ideas. The ‘liberals’ will move away when they realise that they are feeding an already tired and dwindling bunch of supporters and are getting nowhere.

Those loyal and staunch will still be there and the Mass will become what it was supposed to be.

The revised liturgy in the Mass is seperating the wheat from the chaff.

Oh boy! When all that is left is wheat, what a treat is in store for those who persevered.

 

[El_Paulo]

Although I never experienced a pre-Vatican II Mass, I feel that the NO has probably had some positive effect on the Church. From those I have talked to, they welcomed hearing ‘the Mass’ in their own language. It also seems that other Christians started to view the Church with less suspicion and began to feel that it was more possible to dialogue with Catholics since they too could better understand the prayers and the liturgy. Indirectly, there was an explosion in liturgical music and art and this had a profound impact on my own faith as a young Catholic.

Looking at things from this side, I feel the English translation of the NO leaves a lot to be desired, but I believe that they are now working on a more accurate one (is this correct?).
In my ideal world I think that many of the wholesale changes that were implimented at Vatican II should be looked at again, bringing back some of the richness of the ages-old liturgy and even some of the Latin. Ironically, in a world that is becoming more culturally mixed, this is one way that Christians from all over the world can share the experince of their faith, can worship and publicly pray together.

What I am ‘against’ is a number of different liturgies (if you like) being available for use. Equally, I don’t think that some Uber-liturgy is going to save the Church, however I think that it should be as ‘standard’ as is possible. I once heard the Sunday Mass described as being a community of communities. Pandering to ONE group only alienates the other groups - this has happened in the Church of England IMO - with people fighting one another for control of the liturgy. If we let the Church worry about the liturgy (and I think they genuinely are under this Pope) then it leaves the rest of us to worry about how we live out our everyday lives in Christ where the depth and richness of the Catholic faith can ALSO be experienced.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

Firstly it is not a new Mass. It is a revised liturgy.

Yes, yes, yes and yes again. You better believe it that it was good for the Church!

Those with no respect for the Mass have had their playtime. The experimenters will drift away when they get tired of messin’ around and run out of ideas. The ‘liberals’ will move away when they realise that they are feeding an already tired and dwindling bunch of supporters and are getting nowhere.

Those loyal and staunch will still be there and the Mass will become what it was supposed to be.

The revised liturgy in the Mass is seperating the wheat from the chaff.

Oh boy! When all that is left is wheat, what a treat is in store for those who persevered.

The Catholic Church itslef refers to the Novus Ordo as a ‘new mass’ well (new order of the mass). Revised would be changing the Tridentine to fit a new mold or a new idea.

Thats not what happened with the Novus Ordo.

They didnt revise or reform the tridentine. They snipped huge parts out, turned around the altar, instituted things the Carholic Church hadnt heard of in all its history prior, and then stamped a new name for it. The rightly named “novus ordo” mass.

It may still be the ‘mass’. But its not the same thing at all.

You can take a beef tenderloin and put it through a meat grinder. It may still be ‘beef’ but I dont think youll go far selling it as a tenderloin roast.

And the New Mass isnt sifting the wheat from the chaff. Its turning wheat into chaff and welcoming it.

Ireland is the best example of this…they used to have 80%+ Mass attendance before the Novus Ordo. Then everyone left…why? Because the Church of Ireland protestant services down the street were more spiritually fulfilling that some of the Novus Ordo Masses at their Catholic parishes.

sigh

 

[Joysong]

Lak611:

There is only one parish that has an indult TLM in Cleveland, and it is not very crowded. Obviously many people are happy with the Pauline Mass, else there would be more of a demand for the TLM.

I was most surprised to read this, so I did a search here since my Pittsburgh diocese offers the mass at only one Church, too. I noticed that there are very few parishes nationwide that offer the TLM. Not only that, but according to this schedule, they are not weekly, but some are celebrated only once or twice a month, and at very odd times of the day. It truly makes one wonder about the speculation of Unfinished’s posts, which stated:

Tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of protestants/pagans and others have converted straight to the Traditional Latin Mass.

Fergal:

Firstly it is not a new Mass. It is a revised liturgy. Those with no respect for the Mass have had their playtime.

Agreed. The wheat will be separated from the chaff.
John Higgins:

If we put this in a forum less skewed toward traditionalists, I believe the affirmatives would outweigh the negatives by more than two to one.

At first glance, there are only a handful (maybe 30?) of people on this forum “venting” continuously about the terrible N.O., and it would seem to any who read these posts that everyone in the USA who is a Catholic feels the same way. However, when I consider that this forum has 41,400 members who find no problems with the mass and therefore no need to complain, I think your comment has a great deal of merit.
The statistics above are proof.

However, I do rejoice with the Church’s wisdom in continuing to allow the celebration of the TLM for those who desire it.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

I was most surprised to read this, so I did a search here since my Pittsburgh diocese offers the mass at only one Church, too. I noticed that there are very few parishes nationwide that offer the TLM. Not only that, but according to this schedule, they are not weekly, but some are celebrated only once or twice a month, and at very odd times of the day. It truly makes one wonder about the speculation of Unfinished’s posts, which stated:

Agreed. The wheat will be separated from the chaff.

At first glance with a handful (maybe 30?) of people on this forum “venting” continuously about the terrible N.O., it would seem to any who read these posts that everyone in the USA feels the same way. However, when I think that this forum has 41,400 members who find no problems with the mass and therefore no need to complain, I think your comment has a great deal of merit.
The statistics above are proof.

However, I do rejoice with the Church’s wisdom in continuing to allow the celebration of the TLM for those who desire it.

I do believe that in America… the majority of Christians dont even attend Church anyway. Perhaps if you look in places like Africa where the SSPX, |FSSP, and ICRSS are completing taking over.

As well as France…where one ‘struggling’ TLM Church has higher Mass Attendance than even the most orthodox 16-th century Cathedral.

 

[Unfinished]

Agreed. The wheat will be separated from the chaff.

At first glance, there are only a handful (maybe 30?) of people on this forum “venting” continuously about the terrible N.O., and it would seem to any who read these posts that everyone in the USA who is a Catholic feels the same way. However, when I consider that this forum has 41,400 members who find no problems with the mass and therefore no need to complain, I think your comment has a great deal of merit.
The statistics above are proof.

However, I do rejoice with the Church’s wisdom in continuing to allow the celebration of the TLM for those who desire it.

I was generally refering to the 500 years or so before Vatican II, when the TLM was the only option. Countless converted to the Catholic Church - where was all the fuss about the Mass being in Latin? No one was complaining. Now, 40 or so years after the change, everyone is crying that it would be impossible to go completely back to the Latin Mass. I think not.

And it is not a revised liturgy, it is a new Mass. Novus Ordo = New Order. Not revised order.

I agree though, only time will tell. I just got a letter from the FSSP yesterday asking for funds - they had to turn down 100 applicants to the priesthood because there is just not enough room in their seminaries. Just a few years after building a seminary in the USA they had to add a dorm to house 45 more men.

Yet my diocese suffers from a vocations crisis. The men applying to seminary for my diocese all come from the Traditional Latin Mass parish, plus one other from Columbia. Orthodoxy is in, kids. We may not live to see the fruits of traditionalism coming back around, but perhaps the next generation will.

 

[Unfinished]

I do believe that in America… the majority of Christians dont even attend Church anyway. Perhaps if you look in places like Africa where the SSPX, |FSSP, and ICRSS are completing taking over.

As well as France…where one ‘struggling’ TLM Church has higher Mass Attendance than even the most orthodox 16-th century Cathedral.

Amen. France is a prime example. The SSPX practically runs the place.

Atheism is the cool thing to do right now in the states.

 

[netmilsmom]

Orthodoxy is in, kids. We may not live to see the fruits of traditionalism coming back around, but perhaps the next generation will.

Amen, I say.

 

[Fergal]

Ireland is the best example of this…they used to have 80%+ Mass attendance before the Novus Ordo. Then everyone left…why? Because the Church of Ireland protestant services down the street were more spiritually fulfilling that some of the Novus Ordo Masses at their Catholic parishes.

sigh

Over the past years, the Catholic Church in Ireland has given the populous every reason to leave and stop going to Mass. With this in mind it is heartening to think that weekly Mass attendance is 60%+

Everyone left?? Were did ya get that statistic from?

 

[LilyM]

I was generally refering to the 500 years or so before Vatican II, when the TLM was the only option. Countless converted to the Catholic Church - where was all the fuss about the Mass being in Latin? No one was complaining. Now, 40 or so years after the change, everyone is crying that it would be impossible to go completely back to the Latin Mass. I think not.

Of course people who converted to Catholicism prior to Vatican 2 had no problems with Latin Mass - they couldn’t jolly well get anything else and no one asked them if they had a preference!!! Those who did have problems most likely wouldn’t have converted in the first place.

And I’d be willing to make a sizeable bet that plenty left the Catholic Church because of Latin as well. An important point of difference during the Reformation, for example, would have been liturgy in Latin (Catholic) v vernacular (non-Cath).

 

[El_Paulo]

You can take a beef tenderloin and put it through a meat grinder. It may still be ‘beef’ but I dont think youll go far selling it as a tenderloin roast.

Very descriptive!

I’m not sure I concur with the analogy of the wheat and the chaff as it is being used in this discussion. As I understand it, it seems that some are suggesting that the wheat are the ones who remain Mass-goers irrespective of the Order of Mass that is used, and the chaff are those who give up their Mass attendance because they somehow lack true fidelity.
There is also another intimation that once this has happened it is going to be better for those who are left. I find this disturbing! Surely a Church that has reached this happy state of affairs can only go one way afterwards!

Personally, I want to see a Church made up of wheat and chaff, and this seems to be the state of affairs that Christ suggests is likely while we remain on earth. Give me (at Mass) the broken, the jilted, the sinful, the obnoxious, the resentful, the angry, the strange, the addicted, the ‘widow’, the ‘liberal’, the ‘child’, the childlike, the childish, the deranged, the disabled, the slow to understand (and I include myself in that list)…

because as Jean Vanier says, it is those people (chaff?) who are ultimately able to minister Christ to us and in all the ways that the wheat(?) are unable to, and if we get rid of those who don’t agree with us or who challenge us then it’s not the real Church or the real Mass, whichever order is used.

 

[Joysong]

El Paulo:

As I understand it, it seems that some are suggesting that the wheat are the ones who remain Mass-goers irrespective of the Order of Mass that is used, and the chaff are those who give up their Mass attendance because they somehow lack true fidelity.

I don’t believe this is the intended meaning of wheat and chaff. Fergal was speaking about the period of “innovations” ending. The errors of the past will be corrected and a more solemn, reverent liturgy will emerge, through the Magisterium implementing changes that are now the fruit of wisdom. Pendulums swing both ways, and the innovators will be separated like dross from gold, wheat from chaff.

There are zillions of parishes across this nation. There are approx. 160 alone in my small remote diocese. To suggest that these zillions, or even a miniscule minority, have barney blessings et al, is the height of ridiculous propaganda. I would guess 95% of these are reverent and completely orthodox. Those that are NOT, will eventually be dealt with.

As I indicated previously, those who are satisfied, will rarely if ever begin a thread called, “I love my N.O. Liturgy.” No, only those who are subjected to problems come to this forum. It is not the norm.
Missa Solemnis:

Perhaps if you look in places like Africa where the SSPX, |FSSP, and ICRSS are completing taking over.

As well as France…where one ‘struggling’ TLM Church has higher Mass Attendance than even the most orthodox 16-th century Cathedral.

How does this have a bearing on the US or the rest of the world? One small country with one TLM Church is indicative of universal choice and attendance? My “one” (and only) TLM church in Pittsburgh is full of devotees, too, but they come from a 120-mile radius. This proves nothing. And where else might the SSPX impose their liturgies other than a continent that is basically illiterate, persecuted, and starving for anyone who is able to bring them a ray of hope. How sad that their hopes will be shattered when they learn their liturgists are in schism. You applaud this?

 

[El_Paulo]

I don’t believe this is the intended meaning of wheat and chaff. Fergal was speaking about the period of “innovations” ending.

I’ve read it again - Fergal seems to be talking about people here…

Those with no respect for the Mass have had their playtime. The experimenters will drift away when they get tired of messin’ around and run out of ideas. The ‘liberals’ will move away when they realise that they are feeding an already tired and dwindling bunch of supporters and are getting nowhere.

Those loyal and staunch will still be there and the Mass will become what it was supposed to be.

The revised liturgy in the Mass is seperating the wheat from the chaff.

Oh boy! When all that is left is wheat, what a treat is in store for those who persevered.

The ‘wheat and the chaff’ evokes certain imagary such as good/bad, chosen/rejected, saved/lost for example. I am just questioning the meaning of this statement. Maybe Fergal can better explain what he means as I’m not sure I agree with your interpretation of his words.

By the way, what’s a barney blessing and what are you claiming I am suggesting in regard to it?

 

[Fergal]

It was Jesus himself that first used wheat and chaff in respect of people. Of course as I now think of it, that analogy could be used respectfully here but it was not my primary motive.

What I intended was using the analogy to show the seperation of licit from illicit and valid from invalid. Just look at all the nonsense that we see today that is being brought in to try and entertain the populous. It beings a new meaning to ‘Mass Entertainment’, not entertainment for the masses but entertainment during Holy Mass.

I was recently told by a lady who receives a hefty salary from our Parish, that the Holy Mass is too easy and involves no effort and hence should not be used when there is a gathering of the faithful outside of Sunday Mass. She informed me that people expect to see innovation and hence we should replace the Holy Sacrifice for various occassions with prayer services since then, when we rid ourselves of rubrics, anything can go.

As I look back over my time attending Holy Mass, 1978, I notice that every single innovation not in line with the liturgy has failed. They keep on, however, trying to improvise. The more things they try to introduce, the more that will fail and the less there is left to introduce. This improvisatio is the Chaff I was referring to.

This my friend is what I was referring to! There again statements made on this forum will always be anything to everyone. True expression is very hard to reveal through the medium of text.

 

[Joysong]

Hello El Paulo,

I noted that Fergal stepped in to clarify his words. But when I “thumbs-upped” him, my meaning was that the chaff of innovtion will eventually fade out, leaving the wheat of a more purified liturgy. It is not always envisioned in totality what a new order will engender. Our founding fathers in drafting the Constitution, could not be foresee all of its implications, no matter how well intentioned its original formation was thought to be in perfection. It was necessary to draft several amendments, as experience pointed to the need.

As our culture ages and new technologies arise, more legislation could come into play. Similarly, the Church will always be in need of renewal. Consider the newness of cloning and stem cell research that need to be addressed with clarity of teaching.

With regard to the Barney blessing, I was speaking in generalities, for I have seen positive statements made in some negative threads, only to be refuted by an insolent reference to one isolated internet posting of a priest dressed up like Barney at a halloween mass giving a blessing to the congregation. It is implied that this is wide-spread in the Church, rather than a single incident, sad though it may be. I’m not sure what leaway the priests have with these children’s masses, and suspect it was not the customary Sunday liturgy. However, the angry person who posted it left out a lot of details, and traditionists have ran with this to condemn the N.O. mass in general. One wearies of reading this propaganda, especially when it is not the norm.

That many have abused the sacred liturgy, I have little doubt. However, it is still the Lord’s gift to us; it is still a valid celebration. It is an act of reparation to offer to God our highest praise and thanksgiving in the presence of those things that displease us until such time that He inspires corrections. Displaying the Church’s flaws and weaknesses over the Web does little good to attract converts, doesn’t it? I think we bear a responsibility before God to evangelize for the love of salvation, welcoming sinners into the fold. If we appear as a grumpy bunch of miserable Catholics, who would convert?
No, we give outsiders ammunition to run from us like the plague. For that scandal, one may bear an awesome reckoning before God some day, yet I believe “they know not what they do.”

 

[El_Paulo]

Many thanks to you both for your replies. Being new on here and not being able to fully read through back posts etc I realise I came in pretty cold to this, and other conversations, and I’m still finding my feet on the website as a whole - so thanks for your patience in taking the time to clarify your posts for the newboy!

What strikes me in disagreements over liturgy, and I see this more so in the Church of England, is that it’s human beings who end up getting hurt - many simply do not have loud enough voices or the guile to speak out for what they feel they need. I would not like to see this begin to happen in the same way in the Catholic Church and I am quite positive about what Benedict is beginning to do with regard to our liturgy.

BTW, where did you say I should go to get one of those Barney Blessings!