OF mass

[promethius]

The best answer would be for the Holy Father to erect a new sui juris particular Church in the orient.

Unfortunately, that would present a major problem: I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but a lot of the priests we’re seeing in America and Europe these days hail from Africa and Korea… without those nations as “feeder populations” for priestly vocations in the Latin rite, we’ll rapidly be out of an effective priesthood.

 

[promethius]

For the few progressives who welcomed every change (facing the people, more vernacular, standing for communion, etc.) there were an equal number if not more people who stopped going to church every Sunday.

Yes, it is sad that for every person who supported change in the liturgy, good or bad, there was at least one catholic in such a sorry state of faith that they would enter mortal sin rather than be obedient.

It seemed to matter nothing that they lost interest and never came back, even when the Latin Mass was restored.

And why should the church pander to the lowest common denominator: the unfaithful, disobedient, mortally sinful who abandon the mass? I don’t care to placate them: they chose their own fate.

 

[Te_Deum]

Unfortunately, that would present a major problem: I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but a lot of the priests we’re seeing in America and Europe these days hail from Africa and Korea… without those nations as “feeder populations” for priestly vocations in the Latin rite, we’ll rapidly be out of an effective priesthood.

Africa would remain Latin. And the priest-supply problem could be easily remedied by excluding far-East priests who minister in the Latin world from the new establishment of an Oriental Church.

Though it could cause problems, it would really all have to be thought out.

Africa stays Latin though.

 

[ProVobis]

And why should the church pander to the lowest common denominator: the unfaithful, disobedient, mortally sinful who abandon the mass? I don’t care to placate them: they chose their own fate.

I wouldn’t pass judgement on them in such a fashion. There is the principle of stare decisis which has almost always held true for stability in any organization, religion, government, etc. A web search on this principle would give more good hits than I can list here.

 

[promethius]

I wouldn’t pass judgement on them in such a fashion. There is the principle of stare decisis which has almost always held true for stability in any organization, religion, government, etc. A web search on this principle would give more good hits than I can list here.

I’m familiar with the principle, and the fact that it’s called a “grandfather clause” in general parlance for legal use in the courtroom.

However, I fail to see how this secular legal term has anything to do with grave matter and the abandonment of the mass… we can only hope that they were poorly catechized enough that they did not know their disobedience was sin.

 

[TimothyH]

"Cat:

I’m not sure this would be acceptable to those who love the Latin Mass, though. I fear what could happen if people get their love for the Latin Mass out of proportion to their love for their Lord Jesus

Are they mutually exclusive?

The point I like to make is that the Mass is not what makes one holy. That’s what the pharisees and the strict followers of the mosaic law thought, that holiness was determined, in part, by how you worshipped.

For Jews of the Old Testament, worship was sacrifice, and it only happened at the temple in Jerusalem. That is why the law commanded that men go up to the temple three times each year, to offer worship to God. It was the most important thing a Jew could ever do in his life, offer worship to God at the temple.

But Jesus radically redifines what is important to God in the sermon on the mount.

Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)

Jesus redefined holiness from how you worshipped, or even if you worshipped, to how you treated other people, going so far as to tell us that we should not worship if we have treated anyone badly - that we should go seek forgiveness from that person first, and only then should we offer worship to God.

King David understood this.

For you do not desire sacrifice or I would give it;
a burnt offering you would not accept.
My sacrifice, O God, is a contrite spirit;
a contrite, humbled heart, O God, you will not scorn.
Then you will desire the sacrifices of the just,
burnt offering and whole offerings;
then they will offer up young bulls on your altar
(Psalm 51:18-19,21)

David understood what was important to God. That worship without a clean heart and a life of virtue - which begins with humility - was of no value to God.

Yes, God deserves the greatest worship we can offer. He deserves the most grand, most reverent, highest Mass we can afford to offer. And even that will not begin to approach what he really deserves. That is why God gave us the Mass itself, so that we could offer God the Son to God the Father. Offering God to himself is the only way we can begin to worship God the way he really deserves. But worship is our absolute minimum requirement.

Some seem to forget that the word “Mass” mans “Sending forth”. Mass is just the beginning. If that is all we do, wring our hands over the Mass, we are nothing more than unprofitable servants. If we think that the Mass is what makes us holy, then we are wicked and unfaithful servants. Worship is just our minimum requirement.

But how we treat people every day, the other 167 hours of the week, is what makes us holy. Jesus sees how much we love him not because of what Mass we go to, or how many Masses we go to, but in how we treat each other and how we treat the lowest in our society. That’s how Jesus knows if we love him or not, and not by our attendance at Mass.

I don’t think I’m too far off target from what Cat was trying to say.

No, love of Mass, any Mass, is not mutually exlusive of love of Jesus. Far from it. But it is not the same thing. Love of Mass, any Mass, does not equal love of Jesus. Mass is just the start.

-Tim-

 

[TrueLight]

The point I like to make is that the Mass is not what makes one holy. That’s what the pharisees and the strict followers of the mosaic law thought, that holiness was determined, in part, by how you worshipped.

For Jews of the Old Testament, worship was sacrifice, and it only happened at the temple in Jerusalem. That is why the law commanded that men go up to the temple three times each year, to offer worship to God. It was the most important thing a Jew could ever do in his life, offer worship to God at the temple.

But Jesus radically redifines what is important to God in the sermon on the mount.

Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)

Jesus redefined holiness from how you worshipped, or even if you worshipped, to how you treated other people, going so far as to tell us that we should not worship if we have treated anyone badly - that we should go seek forgiveness from that person first, and only then should we offer worship to God.

King David understood this.

For you do not desire sacrifice or I would give it;
a burnt offering you would not accept.
My sacrifice, O God, is a contrite spirit;
a contrite, humbled heart, O God, you will not scorn.
Then you will desire the sacrifices of the just,
burnt offering and whole offerings;
then they will offer up young bulls on your altar
(Psalm 51:18-19,21)

David understood what was important to God. That worship without a clean heart and a life of virtue - which begins with humility - was of no value to God.

Yes, God deserves the greatest worship we can offer. He deserves the most grand, most reverent, highest Mass we can afford to offer. And even that will not begin to approach what he really deserves. That is why God gave us the Mass itself, so that we could offer God the Son to God the Father. Offering God to himself is the only way we can begin to worship God the way he really deserves. But worship is our absolute minimum requirement.

Some seem to forget that the word “Mass” mans “Sending forth”. Mass is just the beginning. If that is all we do, wring our hands over the Mass, we are nothing more than unprofitable servants. If we think that the Mass is what makes us holy, then we are wicked and unfaithful servants. Worship is just our minimum requirement.

But how we treat people every day, the other 167 hours of the week, is what makes us holy. Jesus sees how much we love him not because of what Mass we go to, or how many Masses we go to, but in how we treat each other and how we treat the lowest in our society. That’s how Jesus knows if we love him or not, and not by our attendance at Mass.

I don’t think I’m too far off target from what Cat was trying to say.

No, love of Mass, any Mass, is not mutually exlusive of love of Jesus. Far from it. But it is not the same thing. Love of Mass, any Mass, does not equal love of Jesus. Mass is just the start.

-Tim-

Thank you Timothy. This is a beautiful post.

I accept that as what YOU’RE saying.

 

[Cat]

The point I like to make is that the Mass is not what makes one holy. That’s what the pharisees and the strict followers of the mosaic law thought, that holiness was determined, in part, by how you worshipped.

For Jews of the Old Testament, worship was sacrifice, and it only happened at the temple in Jerusalem. That is why the law commanded that men go up to the temple three times each year, to offer worship to God. It was the most important thing a Jew could ever do in his life, offer worship to God at the temple.

But Jesus radically redifines what is important to God in the sermon on the mount.

Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)

Jesus redefined holiness from how you worshipped, or even if you worshipped, to how you treated other people, going so far as to tell us that we should not worship if we have treated anyone badly - that we should go seek forgiveness from that person first, and only then should we offer worship to God.

King David understood this.

For you do not desire sacrifice or I would give it;
a burnt offering you would not accept.
My sacrifice, O God, is a contrite spirit;
a contrite, humbled heart, O God, you will not scorn.
Then you will desire the sacrifices of the just,
burnt offering and whole offerings;
then they will offer up young bulls on your altar
(Psalm 51:18-19,21)

David understood what was important to God. That worship without a clean heart and a life of virtue - which begins with humility - was of no value to God.

Yes, God deserves the greatest worship we can offer. He deserves the most grand, most reverent, highest Mass we can afford to offer. And even that will not begin to approach what he really deserves. That is why God gave us the Mass itself, so that we could offer God the Son to God the Father. Offering God to himself is the only way we can begin to worship God the way he really deserves. But worship is our absolute minimum requirement.

Some seem to forget that the word “Mass” mans “Sending forth”. Mass is just the beginning. If that is all we do, wring our hands over the Mass, we are nothing more than unprofitable servants. If we think that the Mass is what makes us holy, then we are wicked and unfaithful servants. Worship is just our minimum requirement.

But how we treat people every day, the other 167 hours of the week, is what makes us holy. Jesus sees how much we love him not because of what Mass we go to, or how many Masses we go to, but in how we treat each other and how we treat the lowest in our society. That’s how Jesus knows if we love him or not, and not by our attendance at Mass.

I don’t think I’m too far off target from what Cat was trying to say.

No, love of Mass, any Mass, is not mutually exlusive of love of Jesus. Far from it. But it is not the same thing. Love of Mass, any Mass, does not equal love of Jesus. Mass is just the start.

-Tim-

Thank you for an excellent post.

 

[OraLabora]

The point I like to make is that the Mass is not what makes one holy. That’s what the pharisees and the strict followers of the mosaic law thought, that holiness was determined, in part, by how you worshipped.

For Jews of the Old Testament, worship was sacrifice, and it only happened at the temple in Jerusalem. That is why the law commanded that men go up to the temple three times each year, to offer worship to God. It was the most important thing a Jew could ever do in his life, offer worship to God at the temple.

But Jesus radically redifines what is important to God in the sermon on the mount.

Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)

Jesus redefined holiness from how you worshipped, or even if you worshipped, to how you treated other people, going so far as to tell us that we should not worship if we have treated anyone badly - that we should go seek forgiveness from that person first, and only then should we offer worship to God.

King David understood this.

For you do not desire sacrifice or I would give it;
a burnt offering you would not accept.
My sacrifice, O God, is a contrite spirit;
a contrite, humbled heart, O God, you will not scorn.
Then you will desire the sacrifices of the just,
burnt offering and whole offerings;
then they will offer up young bulls on your altar
(Psalm 51:18-19,21)

David understood what was important to God. That worship without a clean heart and a life of virtue - which begins with humility - was of no value to God.

Yes, God deserves the greatest worship we can offer. He deserves the most grand, most reverent, highest Mass we can afford to offer. And even that will not begin to approach what he really deserves. That is why God gave us the Mass itself, so that we could offer God the Son to God the Father. Offering God to himself is the only way we can begin to worship God the way he really deserves. But worship is our absolute minimum requirement.

Some seem to forget that the word “Mass” mans “Sending forth”. Mass is just the beginning. If that is all we do, wring our hands over the Mass, we are nothing more than unprofitable servants. If we think that the Mass is what makes us holy, then we are wicked and unfaithful servants. Worship is just our minimum requirement.

But how we treat people every day, the other 167 hours of the week, is what makes us holy. Jesus sees how much we love him not because of what Mass we go to, or how many Masses we go to, but in how we treat each other and how we treat the lowest in our society. That’s how Jesus knows if we love him or not, and not by our attendance at Mass.

I don’t think I’m too far off target from what Cat was trying to say.

No, love of Mass, any Mass, is not mutually exlusive of love of Jesus. Far from it. But it is not the same thing. Love of Mass, any Mass, does not equal love of Jesus. Mass is just the start.

-Tim-

Excellent post. Should be a sticky on this forum and required reading before anyone starts yet another argument pitting one form of the Mass against the other.

 

[promethius]

Excellent post. Should be a sticky on this forum and required reading before anyone starts yet another argument pitting one form of the Mass against the other.

Except that said topic is banned by forum rules and so doesn’t have any prerequisite reading anyway!

 

[OraLabora]

Except that said topic is banned by forum rules and so doesn’t have any prerequisite reading anyway!

In theory at least…

 

[Usige]

The topic of holding hands during the Our Father has come up hundreds of times on CAF since I joined, and the conclusion is always that this is not an abuse. It is an irregularity. But there is no actual rubric that forbids hand-holding in the Mass. There is also no actual rubric that allows it. So it is a gray area, and parishes understandably adapt their own practice.

First, I did not mean to imply holding hands was an abuse, but a liturgical innovation (actually tied to my preceding post). As you state it’s neither specifically allowed or denied. When in doubt I tend toward the conservative side, unless someone can give a specific liturgical or pastoral reason to do something. In other words how does an innovation support and strengthen our understanding of the sacrifice of the Mass? I use the “kumbaya” phrase because many innovations eventually come down to “because we like it” or “it makes me feel good/happy.” That’s great, but how does that support the sacrifice of the Mass? There are plenty of things I like to do, but that doesn’t mean that they should be incorporated into the Mass.

I would answer the rest of your post, but I give up. It is obvious that many people take an attitude that anything not prohibited must be implicitly allowed.They are more concerned with what the can do, than what they should do. As long as they have a warm fuzzy feeling they don’t give a rip about the theological or liturgical values of their innovation. Entrenched liberals are just as obstinate as entrenched conservatives and we will never have unity while people are looking out for what’s in it for them.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m familiar with the principle, and the fact that it’s called a “grandfather clause” in general parlance for legal use in the courtroom.

However, I fail to see how this secular legal term has anything to do with grave matter and the abandonment of the mass… we can only hope that they were poorly catechized enough that they did not know their disobedience was sin.

Well, on a philosophical level, if one of the “changes” in the 60’s lead to the thinking that there was no more Hell, then what did it matter whether disobedience was a sin or not? And when more and more things were allowed (no more meat abstinence, okay to use conscience, etc.) it seems like even obedience had no more meaning. Nor discipline either, for that matter. Just saying and not passing judgement either way.