"Oh but it wasn't how it was done at the last supper and in the early church"

[Jason_Matthew]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

 

[patrick457]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

Well, first I would say that if we really are to imitate the Last Supper then we should all be wearing tunics and sandals and reclining on couches around a U-shaped table inside the church while we mumble in Aramaic and Hebrew. In fact, forget the church: we should be doing it in our living room.

 

[andremiguel]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

Don’t.
You will try 1000 arguments and he will find 1001 questions.
With these people, I do not answer, I ask questions. You find that something they miss the essential.

 

[clem456]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

It’s not anything to argue about. He would be right, in that no Mass is exactly like the last supper, but what does that matter really?
As far as where Jesus is standing, tell him that Jesus IS the Mass, so he would turn himself whichever way he did, and the Church now does it the way it does it. Really nothing to argue about. Nothing should be taken away from any Mass based on those issues.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

It’s not anything to argue about. He would be right, in that no Mass is exactly like the last supper, but what does that matter really?
As far as where Jesus is standing, tell him that Jesus IS the Mass, so he would turn himself whichever way he did, and the Church now does it the way it does it. Really nothing to argue about. Nothing should be taken away from any Mass based on those issues.

Yup, Celebrate the Mass the way you are comfortable. As Catholics, we have a lot more pressing issues than what way the celebrant is facing. I imagine God as looking down and seeing these arguments and saying “Really???”

 

[BertBlyleven]

This belief that the old is always better has been condemned throughout the history of the Church. I believe it is called antiquiorism. The attitude became popular in the early-mid 1900s with the advent of Biblical criticism and what is now called modernism. When someone appeals for something that is “older” (because really, what is older, a tradition that died in the year 300 or one that has survived for 1000 years), he or she only does so as far as it conforms to their own personal tastes. The last supper and the early liturgies were certainly not a “celebration of joy and peace.”

 

[T_More]

Yup, Celebrate the Mass the way you are comfortable. As Catholics, we have a lot more pressing issues than what way the celebrant is facing. I imagine God as looking down and seeing these arguments and saying “Really???”

So we should do what we’re comfortable with? That leaves the door open to all kinds of possibilities. I guess that’s why we have so many different forms of the OF Mass.

As for the more pressing issues, I would submit that many of the problems the Church faces is because of the liturigical problems that we experience. Think about it…

 

[lizaanne]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

This may be helpful:
Weapons of Mass Destruction - Part 1

Weapons of Mass Destruction - Part 2

~Liza

 

[Catherine_S]

1. The Church draws her life from the Eucharist. This truth does not simply express a daily experience of faith, but recapitulates the heart of the mystery of the Church. In a variety of ways she joyfully experiences the constant fulfilment of the promise: “Lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20), but in the Holy Eucharist, through the changing of bread and wine into the body and blood of the Lord, she rejoices in this presence with unique intensity. Ever since Pentecost, when the Church, the People of the New Covenant, began her pilgrim journey towards her heavenly homeland, the Divine Sacrament has continued to mark the passing of her days, filling them with confident hope.

*The Second Vatican Council rightly proclaimed that the Eucharistic sacrifice is “the source and summit of the Christian life”.1 “For the most holy Eucharist contains the Church’s entire spiritual wealth: Christ himself, our passover andliving bread. Through his own flesh, now made living and life-giving by the Holy Spirit, he offers life to men”.2 Consequently the gaze of the Church is constantly turned to her Lord, present in the Sacrament of the Altar, in which she discovers the full manifestation of his boundless love. *

2. During the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000 I had an opportunity to celebrate the Eucharist in the Cenacle of Jerusalem where, according to tradition, it was first celebrated by Jesus himself. The Upper Room was where this most holy Sacrament was instituted. It is there that Christ took bread, broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying: “Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you” (cf. Mk 26:26; Lk 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24). Then he took the cup of wine and said to them: “Take this, all of you and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all, so that sins may be forgiven” (cf. Mt 14:24; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25). I am grateful to the Lord Jesus for allowing me to repeat in that same place, in obedience to his command: “Do this in memory of me” (Lk 22:19), the words which he spoke two thousand years ago. *Did the Apostles who took part in the Last Supper understand the meaning of the words spoken by Christ? Perhaps not. Those words would only be fully clear at the end of the Triduum sacrum, the time from Thursday evening to Sunday morning. Those days embrace the myste- rium paschale; they also embrace the mysterium eucharisticum.
Continue…
http://archive.catholic.com/library/ecclesia_de_eucharistia.asp:bluelite:*

 

[Rich_C]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

The traditional Latin Mass has lasted almost 1,500 years, it must be doing something right. Besides, the Ordinary Form isn’t as true to the liturgy of the early Church as it’s proponents like to believe. Both forms of the Roman Rite are several steps removed from the liturgy of St. Justin Martyrs’ time.

 

[patrick457]

Yup, Celebrate the Mass the way you are comfortable. As Catholics, we have a lot more pressing issues than what way the celebrant is facing. I imagine God as looking down and seeing these arguments and saying “Really???”

Ideally this would be a good statement, but “comfortable” is a very subjective word. I mean, some folks might be ‘comfortable’ with those infamous cookies-and-milk Masses, clown Liturgies, and ad-libbed ‘communal meals’ (to name three). Now I know this may sound legalist for some, and I know rules are made to be broken (and boy folks do break a lot of them rules ), but there’s a reason why the Missal and GIRM exist in the first place.

I might as well invite you to play soccer “the way we are comfortable.” You can play it like you want; for my part, I’ll use my hands even when I’m not the goalkeeper, I grab the ball, I run to the goal holding the ball, knock the goalkeeper out first before doing a touchdown (equals ten bajillion points) American football style. With a soccer ball. (Heck, it doesn’t even have to be a soccer ball; why can’t we use a basketball or a volleyball?) If the referee calls me out I’ll stage a complaint or maybe even annoyedly throw the ball at his head for being such a stickler to the rules. Hey, I’m much more ‘comfortable’ that way.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

So we should do what we’re comfortable with? That leaves the door open to all kinds of possibilities. I guess that’s why we have so many different forms of the OF Mass.

As for the more pressing issues, I would submit that many of the problems the Church faces is because of the liturigical problems that we experience. Think about it…

If it is sanctioned through Rome, it is a perfectly valid way to celebrate the Mass. Those are the only “possibilites” we face. With the new translation of the “OF” Mass that was rolled out at Advent, there are considerably less “liturgical abuses” as you point out. Catholicism should not use a “mines better” approach. As long as the Vatican says it’s ok, you’re good to go.

 

[Dorothy]

Someone I know said to me that because the Tridentine Mass is not how it was done at the Last Supper and in the early church, it is not how mass should be celebrated. He further went on and said that Jesus did not have his back faced towards the disciples during the Last Supper and therefore, ad orientem should not be used

I tried to explain to him that the mass developed and evolved as a result of increased theological understanding and the changing of circumstances but he is still reluctant.

How do you counter his argument?

Our Lord Jesus Christ said in Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me…” Jesus gave authority to the Church. When we obey the Church in matters of faith and morals we are obeying the Lord.

Also in discipline…When the Friday abstinence from meat was lifted many tried to say “oh…the Church changes!” It was a matter of discipline,and that can change. So, no matter what others see they may not agree, so we need to be meek and obey for the sake of our unity and truth.

 

[DeepBlueSea]

Well, first I would say that if we really are to imitate the Last Supper then we should all be wearing tunics and sandals and reclining on couches around a U-shaped table inside the church while we mumble in Aramaic and Hebrew. In fact, forget the church: we should be doing it in our living room.

 

[patrick457]

The traditional Latin Mass has lasted almost 1,500 years, it must be doing something right. Besides, the Ordinary Form isn’t as true to the liturgy of the early Church as it’s proponents like to believe. Both forms of the Roman Rite are several steps removed from the liturgy of St. Justin Martyrs’ time.

It isn’t even ‘true’ to the Roman Mass of Pope St. Gregory the Great’s time. Otherwise if it was meant to be a total reconstruction, there shouldn’t be any Creed or prayers during the Offertory, there should be quite a lot of clergymen, enough to congest the sanctuary area (what, you think that just one deacon and one subdeacon and a few altar boys are enough? ), and the choir should be singing authentic Old Roman chant instead of that Gallo-Roman innovation passing itself off as ‘Gregorian’ or any of that modern noise. Oh, and no pews, and gotta be in Latin.

 

[patrick457]

If it is sanctioned through Rome, it is a perfectly valid way to celebrate the Mass. Those are the only “possibilites” we face. With the new translation of the “OF” Mass that was rolled out at Advent, there are considerably less “liturgical abuses” as you point out. Catholicism should not use a “mines better” approach. As long as the Vatican says it’s ok, you’re good to go.

Indeed. Problem is that there are people who for some inexplicable reason willingly do stuff that the Holy See has not approved.

 

[Dirt]

The argument that the Novus Ordo Missae, or Ordinary Form fits more closely to the Early Church is both absurd, and a deviant excuse for the novelties which we have witnessed in the past 40 or so years since Mons. Bugninni delivered the first form of the Current O. F. To H.H. Pope Paul VI. One may argue that the current Form was designed to implement the desires of Vatican Council II, but that argument does not hold up to scrutiny when the Documents are read along side what the Mass has become.

Latin retained as part of the Liturgy, especially in the Canon,
Gregorian Chant given Pride of place,
Versus Populem not even mentioned,
Church remodeling never addressed,
etc., etc.

Face up to the truth folks, There was/is a faction within the Church that wish to change things. Important things. Catholic Things. They will use any device/Instrument/Document/argument to attempt to sway the Faithful into supporting their new agenda. Some blame modernists, some Masonic influence, some extreme supporters of Ecumenism, et. al. Take your pick.
The reality is that the Church in western Europe and the US has declined. The Dogma and teachings of The Church are ignored by many Catholics. Pick and choose rules the day. Secularism is pervasive and the Faithful are left to their own devises by many Bishops and Priests in a “Can’t we just get along” mentality that avoids conflict like the plague.
But times are a’changin! The HHS crisis has Awakened some spirit in some of the Bishops. Some Faithful Priests are starting to return to Reverence and Homilies that actually address sin, hell, Worthy Reception, and all those annoying little things that we are supposed to believe. Some Laity are starting to ask where have all our Traditions gone? Yes indeed, times are changing.
This will be a long process, probably quite painful as well. Many may leave. Pray for them. But just as Israel was chastised by God for disobedience and idolatry, We too are worthy of this same punishment.

"“From today’s crisis, a Church will emerge tomorrow that will have lost a great deal. She will be small and, to a large extent, will have to start from the beginning. She will no longer be able to fill many of the buildings created in her period of great splendour. Because of the smaller number of her followers, she will lose many of her privileges in society.”
Then Fr. Ratzinger, circa 1969

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

Yes, things are changing. But, one thing you can be assured of is that the Church is not going to “go back” to anything that it has moved away from in the past. The Church will move forward though.

 

[Rich_C]

Yes, things are changing. But, one thing you can be assured of is that the Church is not going to “go back” to anything that it has moved away from in the past. The Church will move forward though.

I don’t know how you can assure anyone that nothing old will be revived. I think the Holy Father recognizes that there is a lot of restoration needed. I think everyone wants to move forward though.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Well, first I would say that if we really are to imitate the Last Supper then we should all be wearing tunics and sandals and reclining on couches around a U-shaped table inside the church while we mumble in Aramaic and Hebrew. In fact, forget the church: we should be doing it in our living room.

Don’t forget that we have to get rid of the Eucharistic fast, we are supposed to eat and drink prior to Communion.