Poll: adding Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and Leonine Prayers to OF

[Joysong]

RJames,

How’s things in Kentucky?

 

[otjm]

I believe the qustion was asked when priests were threatened when they refused to say the new Mass. People cited Quo Primum (wrongly, I think, but they asked the question by asserting that the TLM could not have been abrogated).

The seminary in Econe was set up precisely to train priests to say the TLM and to avoid the modernist seminaries.

How can you say nobody questioned the apparent abrogation of the TLM?

People ask whom - one another? None of them had an audience with the Pope. You don’t seem to understand how isolated he is from the extreme vast majority of people. Priests were threatened - did they have an audience with the Pope? No, they didn’t. You seem to not understand there are approximately 1 billion Catholics in the world. There are something in the range of 269 active bishops in the US alone (and last I checked, there were at least a couple more world-wide). The pope doesn’t have time now to see all his bishops once every 5 years - it has been extended to about once every 6 years. And it is not like he sees them one at a time. How was he supposed to know all you want to impute to hime?

How can I say no one asked the question? Because I have been following this for a long, long time, and no one in Rome was asking the question publicly, as it would have been reported; that kind of thing makes the news. It was simply taken as a given that it was abrogated. Were there pockets of people asking the question? Yes, a few, with a few people. and none of them was getting a hearing.

You are simply making the same mistake that most people make - it is called in the vernacular “Monday Morning quarterbacking”. It is always crystal clear to everyone after the question is properly stated and the answer given, that that had to be the answer all along. However, amazingly, it is not crystal clear before the question is properly formulated by those who cna answer it.

Have you never made a decision, found out it was a mistake later, and found out because you later knew something that you did not know when you made the decision? If you haven’t, I would like to meet you, as you are obviously one of if not the most brilliant people on the face of the earth. Everyone makes presumptions, especially on issues that are not clear on their face. You are looking back and saying "Well it was obvious!’ Well, RJames, the fact is it wasn’t obvious.

 

[I_Believe]

Hm. At the end of Mass we hear “go, the Mass is ended.”

There is absolutely nothing wrong with private prayer in any way, shape or form. But to imply that people being in a social gathering is somehow bordering on sacriligeous is to say that the ancient formula is meaningless. Gathering in a social gathering is not per se un-Christian; in fact, it can be one of the most Christian things to do. It is a place where we have an opportunity to actually be part of a Catholic community. It amazes me to find parishes in which people act as if they were total strangers, bent on leaving those “others” as quickly as possible.

“…to love and serve the Lord.”.

Yes, the Mass has ended, but does one’s awareness that he/she has placed themselves before the Real Presence and received the Blessed Sacrament, end at that point ? Evidently, for many it sure does.

There is no time limit on how long one should spend in thanksgiving and praise after the Mass, I agree. But the narthex of the church is a place for reverence and prayer, not idle chatter, no matter how warm and brotherly it may be. Take it outside, or to the parish hall.

 

[RJames]

People ask whom - one another? None of them had an audience with the Pope. You don’t seem to understand how isolated he is from the extreme vast majority of people. Priests were threatened - did they have an audience with the Pope? No, they didn’t. You seem to not understand there are approximately 1 billion Catholics in the world. There are something in the range of 269 active bishops in the US alone (and last I checked, there were at least a couple more world-wide). The pope doesn’t have time now to see all his bishops once every 5 years - it has been extended to about once every 6 years. And it is not like he sees them one at a time. How was he supposed to know all you want to impute to hime?

How can I say no one asked the question? Because I have been following this for a long, long time, and no one in Rome was asking the question publicly, as it would have been reported; that kind of thing makes the news. It was simply taken as a given that it was abrogated. Were there pockets of people asking the question? Yes, a few, with a few people. and none of them was getting a hearing.

You are simply making the same mistake that most people make - it is called in the vernacular “Monday Morning quarterbacking”. It is always crystal clear to everyone after the question is properly stated and the answer given, that that had to be the answer all along. However, amazingly, it is not crystal clear before the question is properly formulated by those who cna answer it.

Have you never made a decision, found out it was a mistake later, and found out because you later knew something that you did not know when you made the decision? If you haven’t, I would like to meet you, as you are obviously one of if not the most brilliant people on the face of the earth. Everyone makes presumptions, especially on issues that are not clear on their face. You are looking back and saying "Well it was obvious!’ Well, RJames, the fact is it wasn’t obvious.

The nature and extent of the Infallibility of the Pope are also contained in the definition. This Infallibility is the result of a Divine assistance. It differs both from Revelation and Inspiration. It does not involve the manifestation of any new doctrine, or the impulse to write down what God reveals. It supposes, on the contrary, an investigation of revealed truths, and only prevents the Pope from omitting this investigation and from erring in making it. The Divine assistance is not granted to the Pope for his personal benefit, but for the benefit of the Church.

The primary worship of the Catholic Church, the sole ark of salvation, is certanly a matter of faith and morals.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

On the question of the social upheavals of the 60’s and the TLM vs. the Pauline Rite, I find this anecdote somewhat telling:

ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=92494

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The primary worship of the Catholic Church, the sole ark of salvation, is certanly a matter of faith and morals.

But the form, outside of it’s essentials, is what the Holy Sacrifice is clothed with. It is not the Holy Sacrifice Itself. Otherwise, there would not have been a diversity in the ancient Rites between the East and the West. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the Gallican Rite was prevalent in the Holy See itself until a certain point in history.

The old Holy Father did not err in a matter of faith and morals in issuing the indult. In her disciplines, Holy Mother Church only enjoys a negative infallibility, that is to say that whatever discipline She imposes can at the least be said to not lead the faithful into impiety.

 

[Rabbititus]

I wouldn’t want the prayers at the foot of the altar just added on to the OF. They would need to replace the Penitential Rite, lest it become really redundant to have the servers say the Confetior for the congregation only to have them say it again once the mass had started.

IMO, I think if there are to be changes to the OF to bring it more in line with tradition, it should be little tweaks and reforms made to the ordinary of mass as it currently stands. If it were up to unworthy old me, I would make Penitential Rite A the only one, and change the Confetior back to its pre-Vatican II form with the saints names. Then I would add back the old offertory prayers (which normally aren’t audible to the congregation, so I doubt this would be a jarring change), make the proper introit, gradual, offertory, and communion chants mandatory (Hymns could still be sung in addition to them) and do away with the Memorial Acclimation completely. The latter two would probably be the most unwelcome and jarring changes, but I don’t think they are big enough to drive any reasonable people away from church. I doubt most people would object to the old Confetior being restored to the mass, as most people like the saints.

I am neither here nor there in regards to the last Gospel and Leonine Prayers, but think maybe they could be made an option for masses without music.

 

[SenorSalsa]

I wouldn’t want the prayers at the foot of the altar just added on to the OF. They would need to replace the Penitential Rite, lest it become really redundant to have the servers say the Confetior for the congregation only to have them say it again once the mass had started.

you would not need to replace the Penitential Rite, just remove the confetior as an option from it, as it is in the High Mass. Confetior at the Foot, Kyrie and Gloria at the Penitential Rite.

 

[otjm]

The primary worship of the Catholic Church, the sole ark of salvation, is certanly a matter of faith and morals.

However, the matter of whether or not the Ef was abrogated is not a matter of faith and morals. It is a matter of law. And the Church has the ability to make law and to remake law. If they wanted to abrogate the EF they certainly could do it - the wisdom of doing so would be open to challenge, but not the morality of doing so, nor would it be a doctrinal matter.

The format of the Mass - Scripture and Eucharist - has been universal since the founding of the Church. You may be unaware of the Eastern rites, and the format the Mass (or Divine Mysteries) has varied over the centuries. The Church has the authority - which it exercized at the time of Trent - to suppress or abrogate any form of the Mass it deems necessary or appropriate. It could have abrogated the EF, and most people assumed that it had done so; given the fact that it had done so at the time of Trent, it was not hard to presume that it had done so again. There was no great conspiracy. The OF was to become just that - the Ordinary form.

So the issue of whether or not the Ef had been abrogated was not a matter of faith or morals; it was simply a matter of law. What was finally decided when the question was finally asked, was that it was not abrogated. It was a technical question, not a moral question.

And if it had in fact been abrogated, the Church has both the power to abrogate and to re-instate.

The Church has the power to make law. The Church has the power to insert a prayer, to delete it, to re-write it, and to go back to status quo ante if it so chooses.

 

[RJames]

ojtm:

However, the matter of whether or not the Ef was abrogated is not a matter of faith and morals. It is a matter of law.

Disciplines are both matters of faith and morals and matters of law.

Do you think that Canon Law can contain errors in faith and morals?

 

[Joysong]

RJames,

You have completely hijacked this thread the moment you entered it, in order to further your own agenda. This is most unfair to the OP and those who wish to discuss his topic.

If you wish to discuss the purported deficiencies of John Paul II concerning the indult, as you view them, kindly start another thread.

Pax,
Carole

 

[I_Believe]

I would say no to the Leonine prayers because they were never intended to be part of the Mass. They were ordered for a specific temporal concern. The Church is not desirous of permanently affixing extraliturgical prayers to rites. This is borne out by the fact that they were not to be said after Sung Masses, and various Low Masses (such as the main Sunday Mass) that met certain criteria - in other words, for the most ideal and solemn worship of the Church. They were only to be said after “private” Masses which shows their private character.

They were also added after the Mass because the rules for commemorations, the usual method of expressing petitions in the TLM, would have excluded them on occasion and would have also complicated the other rubrics. The OF has the General Intercessions which are adequate, IMHO, for expressing petitions for whatever temporal needs are desired or ordered.

I don’t think that their recitation would really prevent people from talking, wherever this happens. People would just consider this as the “new” end of the Mass and talk after them.

All true. But if they would indeed wait until the prayers of thanksgiving and /or Leonine Prayers were prayed, and participated, their souls would be better for it, and surely it would please God.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

All true. But if they would indeed wait until the prayers of thanksgiving and /or Leonine Prayers were prayed, and participated, their souls would be better for it, and surely it would please God.

But at SOME point, Mass ends. That’s one reason the priest says, “Ite, missa est.” We could add prayer after prayer, sub prayer to sub prayer. If we add them “officially,” with the given expectation that people will stay for them, that’s simply adding to the Mass, cluttering it (I believe we SHOULD keep things pruned back so as to avoid clutter, which is why I think the Pauline Rite has a noble simplicity and austerity to it).

This isn’t about getting out on time, either. It’s about how liturgy works.

 

[I_Believe]

But at SOME point, Mass ends. That’s one reason the priest says, “Ite, missa est.” We could add prayer after prayer, sub prayer to sub prayer. If we add them “officially,” with the given expectation that people will stay for them, that’s simply adding to the Mass, cluttering it (I believe we SHOULD keep things pruned back so as to avoid clutter, which is why I think the Pauline Rite has a noble simplicity and austerity to it).

This isn’t about getting out on time, either. It’s about how liturgy works.

What makes you think I don’t have a grasp on when the Mass ends ?

I have not said a word about adding a single thing to the Liturgy.

I’m talking about piety, reverence, and an awareness of standing before the Real Presence and you are zeroed in on the precise moment the Mass ends.

If you don’t feel that mundane chatter is out of place in our places of worship, just say so.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

What makes you think I don’t have a grasp on when the Mass ends ?

I have not said a word about adding a single thing to the Liturgy.

I’m talking about piety, reverence, and an awareness of standing before the Real Presence and you are zeroed in on the precise moment the Mass ends.

If you don’t feel that mundane chatter is out of place in our places of worship, just say so.

Let’s not make assumptions about one another, shall we, or try to gain oneupsmanship with rhetorical devices? I do not intend to imply that you don’t understand when Mass ends. And rather obviously, you more than likely understand that I do believe mundane chatter IS out of place in our places of worship AND you more than likely understand that I’m not “zeroed in” on the precise moment the Mass ends, I’m “zeroed in” on what’s a part of Mass and what isn’t, at least liturgically speaking (all that we do and are rises out of the Mass).

When you said this:

“But if they would indeed wait until the prayers of thanksgiving and /or Leonine Prayers were prayed, and participated, their souls would be better for it, and surely it would please God,”

I was lead to believe, at least regarding the Leonine prayers, that you WERE advocating adding to the end of the Mass and my point then became that, liturgically speaking, Mass had ended. If we add other prayers, with the understood expectation that people are to attend, then the Mass has NOT, at that point and liturgically speaking, ENDED. If I misunderstood you, my apologies.

 

[ProVobis]

do you think that Christ only accepts extroverts and socialites?

With all due respect, you sure make it sound like He does.

 

[ProVobis]

So now it is wrong to operate on what is widely perceived to be the case, and working to remedy it in what is perceived to be the best way to right the wrong?

It’s going to take a heck of a lot of remedy to forget 30 years of such perceived abrogation. Let’s face it, there will be scars forever. And the OF, though legal and pastoral and perhaps the best of what the late 60’s had to offer, will be a constant reminder of those scars.

 

[PKinsale]

I would suggest that you pick up the Bible and read it then, paying particular attention to the New Testament. The Mass is modeled in part on Jewish religious practice. Christ Himself went to synagogue on Saturday - and what did He do there? He didn’t celebrate the whole of the Mass; but he celebrated the first part of the Mass, the reading of Scripture. And look to the Acts; it tells of how early Christians gathered for scripture and the breaking of the bread.

The scriptures are not the point of Mass? No, you are partially correct, they are not the sum total of the Mass. However, they are an integral part of the Mass - one of the two points, if you will - since the Mass began.

**Sorry if I was not clear. **What I meant to say was that those who faulted the EF for not having enough readings are incorrect. It is incorrect to speak of the OF as superior insofar as it has more readings from the Bible in the Liturgy of the Word.

 

[I_Believe]

It did cross my mind that in most parishes, this would be the only Ad Orientum part of the Mass. I don’t know if this would be good or bad, but it would definitely be odd at first

Yes, the PATFOTA are a preparation for what is to follow. Entering the Holy of Holies/aproaching the Tabernacle.

I can’t see Rome doing it. Not in their present form anyway.

I would say no to the Leonine prayers because they were never intended to be part of the Mass. They were ordered for a specific temporal concern. The Church is not desirous of permanently affixing extraliturgical prayers to rites. This is borne out by the fact that they were not to be said after Sung Masses, and various Low Masses (such as the main Sunday Mass) that met certain criteria - in other words, for the most ideal and solemn worship of the Church. They were only to be said after “private” Masses which shows their private character.

They were also added after the Mass because the rules for commemorations, the usual method of expressing petitions in the TLM, would have excluded them on occasion and would have also complicated the other rubrics. The OF has the General Intercessions which are adequate, IMHO, for expressing petitions for whatever temporal needs are desired or ordered.

I don’t think that their recitation would really prevent people from talking, wherever this happens. People would just consider this as the “new” end of the Mass and talk after them.

All true. But if they would indeed wait until the prayers of thanksgiving and /or Leonine Prayers were prayed, and participated, their souls would be better for it, and surely it would please God.

Hm. At the end of Mass we hear “go, the Mass is ended.”

There is absolutely nothing wrong with private prayer in any way, shape or form. But to imply that people being in a social gathering is somehow bordering on sacriligeous is to say that the ancient formula is meaningless. Gathering in a social gathering is not per se un-Christian; in fact, it can be one of the most Christian things to do. It is a place where we have an opportunity to actually be part of a Catholic community. It amazes me to find parishes in which people act as if they were total strangers, bent on leaving those “others” as quickly as possible.

“…to love and serve the Lord.”.

Yes, the Mass has ended, but does one’s awareness that he/she has placed themselves before the Real Presence and received the Blessed Sacrament, end at that point ? Evidently, for many it sure does.

There is no time limit on how long one should spend in thanksgiving and praise after the Mass, I agree. But the narthex of the church is a place for reverence and prayer, not idle chatter, no matter how warm and brotherly it may be. Take it outside, or to the parish hall.

But at SOME point, Mass ends. That’s one reason the priest says, “Ite, missa est.” We could add prayer after prayer, sub prayer to sub prayer. If we add them “officially,” with the given expectation that people will stay for them, that’s simply adding to the Mass, cluttering it (I believe we SHOULD keep things pruned back so as to avoid clutter, which is why I think the Pauline Rite has a noble simplicity and austerity to it).

This isn’t about getting out on time, either. It’s about how liturgy works.

What makes you think I don’t have a grasp on when the Mass ends ?

I have not said a word about adding a single thing to the Liturgy.

I’m talking about piety, reverence, and an awareness of standing before the Real Presence and you are zeroed in on the precise moment the Mass ends.

If you don’t feel that mundane chatter is out of place in our places of worship, just say so.

Let’s not make assumptions about one another, shall we, or try to gain oneupsmanship with rhetorical devices? I do not intend to imply that you don’t understand when Mass ends. And rather obviously, you more than likely understand that I do believe mundane chatter IS out of place in our places of worship AND you more than likely understand that I’m not “zeroed in” on the precise moment the Mass ends, I’m “zeroed in” on what’s a part of Mass and what isn’t, at least liturgically speaking (all that we do and are rises out of the Mass).

When you said this:

“But if they would indeed wait until the prayers of thanksgiving and /or Leonine Prayers were prayed, and participated, their souls would be better for it, and surely it would please God,”

I was lead to believe, at least regarding the Leonine prayers, that you WERE advocating adding to the end of the Mass and my point then became that, liturgically speaking, Mass had ended. If we add other prayers, with the understood expectation that people are to attend, then the Mass has NOT, at that point and liturgically speaking, ENDED. If I misunderstood you, my apologies.

JKIRK, as you can see throughout my participation in the thread, which in the OP, focuses on prayers before and after Mass. I’ve never said a thing about the end of the Mass, suggested changing the way it is ended, nor did I dispute when it ends.

I’m offering my opinion on how we may show due reverence to the Real Presence. Along with the total disregard of fellow parishioners who are. I’ve seen folks show more respect to total strangers in a grocery line.

 

[otjm]

Disciplines are both matters of faith and morals and matters of law.

Do you think that Canon Law can contain errors in faith and morals?

Faith and morals cannot change - that is they cannot be right one day and wrong the next; nor are they done away with; the Immaculate Conception is not a doctrine that is going to be withdrawn, and for morals, adultery is not going to be permitted.

However, the Cod of Canon Law is disciplinary; the code can be changed or done away with. The Code cannot violate morals or faith and that is where you seem to not follow. The curent code does not violate faith or morals, and the previous code did not either. So also rules that are not part of the code, such as the GIRM.