Pope Benedict to celebrate AD ORIENTEM!

[patrick457]

Novus ordo has become part of the rich tradition that you are saying.although it is stripped of medieval additions,the very essentials are preserved–the Liturgy of the Word and of the Eucharist and the Apostles’ Creed.

If we are to remove any ‘medieval’ additions in the Mass and restore the ancient practices, here’s a rough list of what we need to remove and reintroduce:

-Remove the Creed (the Creed which we are to say at Mass is not the Apostles’ Creed, but the Nicene Creed, despite the widespread practice in the Philippines) as it was only introduced in Rome during the 11th Century.
-Remove the Elevation of the Host and Chalice. There was originally no elevation at Mass.
-Remove the Offertory Prayers: There was originally no Prayer during the Offertory, which means the NO Offertory ‘Blessed are You, O God of all Creation’ has got to go.
-Priests can only say the ‘Gloria in Excelsis Deo’ during Easter Sunday.
-There should be no candles on the Altar; seven Acolytes carrying candlesticks should stand in front of the Altar during Mass.
-The Celebrant should be facing Ad Orientem.
-There should be curtains which should cover the Celebrant during the Consecration.
-The Choir should sing in Latin; in fact, the whole Liturgy should be in Latin.
-There should be no pews in church; the men and women are on different sides of the church.

Very strange, is it not? Yet that is how the Mass looked like in Rome around the 6th-8th centuries.

by the way, Christ when He instituted the Eucharist, he was facing the disciples.

‘Do this in memory of Me’, yes but not literally. If we are to recreate exactly how Jesus held the Last Supper, we should all be wearing tunics and cloaks, recline at U-shaped tables (the customary Jewish eating position at that time, along with standing) and consecrate matzohs at Mass.

More likely a U shaped, three-sided table like this (called a Triclinium):

http://www.biblicalresources.net/last_supper.JPG

was used in the Last Supper, as per ancient dining practices. This does not resemble the present practice of Versus Populum, in which all the people face the Priest up-and-front.

Ad Orientem (Facing the East) was done since the time of the Early Christians; they prayed, celebrated their liturgy, and was even buried, facing the East. There were Churches where priests faced people in order to face the East (such as St. Peter’s and some of the Churches in Rome), yes, but at parts of the Mass, the people were required to also face the East, thus having their backs turned from the Priest.

novus ordo has done charity actually to his words “Do this in memory of me” facing the disciples not ad orientem.and the priest is “alter Christos”.so, in behalf of Christ, he is re-enacting the Last Supper. let’s not forget that we are having the Eucharistic celebration in obedience to the Lord’s command.

Again, just because Jesus did something at the Last Supper does not mean we should copy it exactly, just as it looked like 2000 years ago. I mean, how can we follow Jesus’ command if we don’t even know how the proceedings looked like then? Have we failed to keep Jesus’ mandate to ‘Do this in memory of Me’? I did not know we are to take that command in a really literal sense.

Novus ordo is essentially rooted to tradition beginning from Christ Himself.

If the NO was used since Christ Himself, then how come we have no records of any liturgies that looks remotely like it that is used by the Church of Rome? Even the Mass used in Rome during the 6th-8th Century looked more solemn and more full of ceremonial than the NO. (No, no, I’m not bashing the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite here) And yet the Roman Liturgy, when compared to the other Liturgies at this time, looks even more ‘simpler’ than these other liturgical rites!

The ill-refute of the novus ordo is due to departure from strict interpretation and implemenation.

Unfortunately true. The NO can be beautiful if celebrated with dignity and properly. Yet people just abuse aspects of it, ‘clown’ it up or worse turn it into some pagan-like ritual with almost no relation to Christianity.

 

[patrick457]

Continued…

related to the Mass is the place of worship. While visual aids add to the edification and reinforcement of the Faith, the place of worship should not be overwhelmed by paintings and images all over the church that tend to distract the faithful from full attention to the Liturgy.the church is a place of worship not a museum.Central to the Mass is the Liturgy of the Eucharist so visual aids should be in the presbytery to help the people to focus their attention to the center of liturgical celebrations.

Correct, yet sadly many Churches seem to take this to an extreme: they remove any work of art whatsoever that you’ll think you’re in a huge, bare storage room rather than in a Church.
But why are works of art in churches ‘distractions?’ Many of the works of art we see in old churches help the mind focus to God, at least for me. Where is the ‘distracting’ in that?
Did the artists who painted/sculpted those works of art in churches made them to serve as a distraction to people?

I grew up with novus ordo.the Church here in the Philippines is novus ordo and yet historical churches bearing old paintings in the ceiling are preserved as they were.Only for those recently built churches that the novus ordo directives were adapted with some exception.

I also grew up in the Philippines, attended the NO for all my life and originally had very much the same mindset as you. Until I did some research on the Early Christians and the Liturgy, in which case I became more and more ‘Traditionalist’ in thinking.

As far as I know, there are no ‘directives’ from Vatican whatsoever that I know of that says New ‘versus populum’ Altars should be built and the Old ones discarded (Actually, the NO itself is originally conceived to be celebrated Ad Orientem, with the Versus Populum as the exception to the rule), that the Church should be as bare and devoid of any art as possible, or that Crosses should show the Risen Jesus. Or for that matter, to celebrate Masses while wearing only stoles and chasuble-albs, or hold hands during the Our Father, or to include dance during the Mass, or to use guitar music, etc etc.

I was told that before the novus ordo,the people instead of participating in the Mass,would tend to say their rosaries and private devotions or pray before the statues of their favorite saints stationed at the door area of the church while the Mass was going on.with the advent of the novus ordo,in many parishes the removable statues were put somewhere else, like museum or chapel built adjacent to the church were the people can say their private devotions without distracting others attention from the Mass.

Sure some people did them, but just because people did them does not mean that all who attend the TLM do not pay attention and mind their own business! Many do so because either they’ve been taught to do that or they do not have enough money to buy a Missal or for other reasons.

 

[eelpis]

I am struck by this answer from a priest on AOL (although not from exactly the same question):

Quote:
So, it is God that is listening to the readings? It is God that is receiving Communion? The point of reference is given by Jesus: “Do this in remembrance of me”. It is also, God the Father’s words, “This is my beloved Son, listen to him.” Both of these commands involve man, not God as the point of reference. So, from God’s view point it is all about man. From man’s view point, we have the apostolic witness, “How can you love the God you cannot see, if you do not love the man who you can see.” Thus, it is also about man, as the means to “seeing” God. That is why it demands a community, not just hiding in one’s closet and engaging in a “me and God” session. The priest is there to represent Christ to the people and speaks for Christ in the liturgy of the word and the liturgy of the Eucharist but also speaks in the person of the people to God, that is why the prayers he says are in the plural. The liturgist who wrote that above quote may thing it is all about God, but God doesn’t think that, and he has said so. He sent his Son so that we might be saved, not that he will have an audience at a religious ceremony worshipping him. The liturgy of the word is for the people, the Eucharist is for the people. Any liturgist who does not seen this as the primary purpose of the Mass is a poor theologian and liturgist. God has no need of our worship, we add nothing to his greatness. We have need of the Mass for through it we hear the words of “everlasting life” as Peter taught and we receive Christ’s flesh and blood without which we have “no life within”.

That priest could just as well be Lutheran.

The Mass is first of all a sacrifice, where the sacrifice of Christ is perpetuated and that sacrifice is indeed to God and not to man, even though it’s for us and we recieve the benefits. He never mentions it. But that’s the main purpose of mass, a sacrifice for the living and the dead.

Communion can be recieved outside mass and the bible can be read outside mass. The Sacrifice can never be except in Mass.

 

[CradleCath]

eelpis;3253764]I am struck by this answer from a priest on AOL (although not from exactly the same question):

That priest could just as well be Lutheran.

The Mass is first of all a sacrifice, where the sacrifice of Christ is perpetuated and that sacrifice is indeed to God and not to man, even though it’s for us and we recieve the benefits. He never mentions it. But that’s the main purpose of mass, a sacrifice for the living and the dead.

Communion can be recieved outside mass and the bible can be read outside mass. The Sacrifice can never be except in Mass.

The quote you are responding to is part of the theology of those who stole Vat II & turned it’s teachings into what they wanted them to be. The very word 'SACRIFICE" goes against everything that they believe. Man is seen by them as everything, while “God ‘needs’ no Sacrifice”??

You are correct, the Sacrifice of the Mass is an unbloody sacrifice. It’s not a “community meal”. It’s not a “reenactment”. It IS Calvary with the manner being all that is changed… from bloody to unbloody. What would be the purpose of offering such a sacrifice to ourselves??? Therefore the Mass is not a Sacrifice, as far as the leftists in our Church are concerned…period. Poof…don’t like it, just ignore it or change it.

While we needed to be redeemed through the death of the Lamb, God had needs, too. He needed a Sacrifice to allow our redemption & gave His Son as the Lamb.That’s what the Mass is about…this Sacrifice.
But for liberals who DON’T like to think that God is merciful AND just…well, the very idea that He would demand a Sacrifice for our sins…is just unthinkable. How could He be so “mean”??? If it weren’t so sad, it would be funny. Since you are saying that a Priest said the words you quoted, you can see that it isn’t funny…but tragic.

 

[Geremia]

Pope Benedict XVI Celebrates Ad Orientem