Questions about the Novus Ordo Mass.

[Armor_of_Light]

I really need someone to explain to me why some of this stuff is allowed and why I should not be concerned about it.

Holy Eucharist to be distributed in the hand.
the priest to face the people
female altar servers
Eucharisitic ministers distribute communion in usual circumstances
guitars, drums, no silence, and there is basically never Gregorian Chant.

This would be a great chance for some of the replys to explain the benefits of the things you list, since they are allowed. The humility and obedience you can foster by quietly submitting to the will of the people in matters of how the Mass is conducted is all we have been given so far. That is important, no doubt…but…there must be some other benefits that merit definition. I’m sorry I don’t have any further insight other that ask others for (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[paul11b]

It is not your place to make this judgment.

CCC 1269 Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us.75 From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to “obey and submit” to the Church’s leaders,76 holding them in respect and affection.77…

Okay, if we are required to obey and submit then why do we not give out the Eucharist on the tongue and kneeling as the norm? This IS the ordinary way of reception of the Blessed Sacrament, The Council of Trent made this clear, and the Council of Trent made clear that only the priest should touch the Eucharist. Communion on the hand IS an indult. Why can we now disregard what Trent said and why do we not obey and submit to that, which by the way was not changed at Vatican II? I really want to know where it says that these new things are okay. Where did a Pope say that this should be the way of reception, as I stated earlier, I have not seen Pope Francis celebrate Mass but I know that Pope Benedict XVI made people recieve on the tongue and kneeling. And since the documents of Vatican II did not say to recieve the Blessed Sacrament on the hand while standing, then wouldn’t obedience be to recieve on the tongue and kneeling?

 

[McCall1981]

The “carrying your cross” really came home to me one day when I was struggling with some of the same things as the OP.

I realized that I was basically saying “Yes, Jesus, I will suffer along side You, and carry my cross by your side… just not this particular cross, because I REALLY don’t like this one, and I’d rather have that one over there, so please take this one away.”

This isn’t to belittle the crosses we have, they are VERY real, and can be VERY painful, but suffering is Jesus bringing us closer to Himself. Of course, saying this is sooooooo much easier than really living it.

I’m giving you this advice, but to be honest, I don’t follow it particularly well in my own life. It’s a constant struggle and probably always will be.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

I remember something that Pope Benedict XVI said, that what the Church needs right now is not liturgists as much as it needs saints!

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Okay, if we are required to obey and submit then why do we not give out the Eucharist on the tongue and kneeling as the norm? This IS the ordinary way of reception of the Blessed Sacrament, The Council of Trent made this clear, and the Council of Trent made clear that only the priest should touch the Eucharist. Communion on the hand IS an indult. Why can we now disregard what Trent said and why do we not obey and submit to that, which by the way was not changed at Vatican II? I really want to know where it says that these new things are okay. Where did a Pope say that this should be the way of reception, as I stated earlier, I have not seen Pope Francis celebrate Mass but I know that Pope Benedict XVI made people recieve on the tongue and kneeling. And since the documents of Vatican II did not say to recieve the Blessed Sacrament on the hand while standing, then wouldn’t obedience be to recieve on the tongue and kneeling?

A previous post gave a pretty good listing of where these things are stated to be allowed. Obeying doesn’t mean just doing things the same old way, or only doing the things that you like, it also means accepting that which you do not like.

 

[paul11b]

This would be a great chance for some of the replys to explain the benefits of the things you list, since they are allowed. The humility and obedience you can foster by quietly submitting to the will of the people in matters of how the Mass is conducted is all we have been given so far. That is important, no doubt…but…there must be some other benefits that merit definition. I’m sorry I don’t have any further insight other that ask others for (name removed by moderator)ut.

That would be great!

 

[CatholicGeek1]

This would be a great chance for some of the replys to explain the benefits of the things you list, since they are allowed. The humility and obedience you can foster by quietly submitting to the will of the people in matters of how the Mass is conducted is all we have been given so far. That is important, no doubt…but…there must be some other benefits that merit definition. I’m sorry I don’t have any further insight other that ask others for (name removed by moderator)ut.

I do not believe that I can adequetly explain the benefits of these things. I do not even know if anyone can (I am sure there are some, but I am making a point). The Holy Church has allowed these things under its guidance of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, I trust that whether I can explain it or understand it, the Holy Spirit sees good in these things, and that is enough for me!

 

[paul11b]

I was fortunate to be able to take a class that discussed how we got from the 1962 Missal to the Missal of Paul VI. The single best thing about this class was being able to read this document.

“Inter oecumenici” is what was given to the Concilium, established by Paul VI

It is well worth the read, but I will quote 2 parts here, first the introduction

And this, that addresses the OP assertion that “Mass facing the people” was never intended by VII.

Thank you for this.

 

[Southern]

Southern;10564802:

There are many changes in the Church since Vatican II has been in place that do displease God QUOTE]

And you know this how?? You know better that the pope and Bishops? Somehow you think they are working to displease God? perhaps you need to think again on your statement.

Perhaps you need to look into the apparitions that have been approved by the Church and made Saints by Pope John Paul the Great. Read the Dairy of St Faustina what Christ says about the Eucharist before the Vatican II was released. Try reading all 600 + pages then maybe you would understand a speck of God’s Divinity. The Church made her a Saint by one of the Greatest Popes in History. God Bless You!!

 

[chaunceygardner]

Let’s see. At Easter morning Mass at our parish there was one priest (male), two readers (female), three servers (female) and 7 EMHC’s (I recall that all but one was female). The priest faced the congregation and just about every word was in English (is “consubstantial” a real English word?). My observation was that about 98% of the communicants received in the hand. One could tell those who weren’t regulars since they got the wording of the responses and prayers wrong (after a year and a half, and with pamphlets in every pew!).

As others have posted, in most areas there are alternatives and variations to the Mass the OP dislikes. By variations I mean that at some churches the whole atmosphere and liturgy is at a different level, more “formal”, with more singing and chanting and less speaking by the celebrant and congregation, perhaps with a more “concise” liturgy (almost choreographed, it seems). I am aware of one parish that “advertises” that their late morning Mass is the “incense Mass”; almost like the “high Masses” from my childhood. Then there are the Latin Masses that are offered, sometimes as one of the Sunday Masses at some parishes.

From my observations of many parishes, I would say ours is in the middle of the range somewere, not too loose but not a lot of pomp, either. Perhaps more of the latter on the major Holy days, like Easter.

So many Catholics certainly have a choice as to what type and style of Liturgy they want to participate in. The basics are all the same, so it is a matter of preference.

If the Mass as we know it today was not what the council fathers intended, then how did the changes occur that were made in the decade following the council, instituted and approved by many of those same Bishops (the very Bishops from our dioceses were the ones at the Council, don’t forget)? If the liturgy as we know it is improper, then how do our bishops and the Vatican allow it to continue? I know very well that the “liturgy police” are always ready to report to their bishop something that Father says or does that doesn’t appear to be correct or allowed. I asked our pastor about that once, and he said that often the “liturgy police” are not really aware of all the variations (such as in the Eucharistic prayer and in the order of worship) that are still used, depending on the circumstances, the day, and the purpose of the Mass.

Keep in mind that 40 + years after these changes occurred, if the Mass was substantially changed now, most Catholics would wonder why we had to change what to them is the “traditional” Mass. Something like the reaction of many with the changes made a year and a half ago.

 

[paul11b]

Okay here is something else I should have said. I do not have a problem with the Novus Ordo Mass itself. And if most people enjoy the Novus Ordo Mass the way that it is normally celebrated then I can understand that as well. Why is it however, that it is VERY rare to find a Novus Ordo Mass that is celebrated Ad Orientum, with a communion rail. I have been to one Novus Ordo Mass like this at Guardian Angels parish in KY. I live in the Washington D.C. area and there are no Masses like this anywhere near me. I wish there were because I really enjoyed it. I guess what I’m saying is I like the Novus Ordo when it is celebrated in this way, and I wonder why it is so hard to find a Novus Ordo Mass said this way. I think that it is easier to find a Traditional Latin Mass that a Novus Ordo celebrated this way. As far as I know it is okay for a priest to celebrate Mass in this way but it is practically never done.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Thank you for this.

You’re welcome!!

Also, to address another one of your comments, in the US, CITH is no longer an “indult”. It can be suspended if there is danger of profanation, but I do believe that the Ordinary may have to be involved in any decision to “suspend” indefinitely. I will have to check on this, though.

From the GIRM160. The Priest then takes the paten or ciborium and approaches the communicants, who usually come up in procession.

It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves. The norm established for the Dioceses of the United States of America is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, no. 91).

When receiving Holy Communion, the communicant bows his or her head before the Sacrament as a gesture of reverence and receives the Body of the Lord from the minister. The consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or in the hand, at the discretion of each communicant. When Holy Communion is received under both kinds, the sign of reverence is also made before receiving the Precious Blood.

 

[Jaysuitical]

Keep in mind that 40 + years after these changes occurred, if the Mass was substantially changed now, most Catholics would wonder why we had to change what to them is the “traditional” Mass. Something like the reaction of many with the changes made a year and a half ago.

The cases are only roughly similar, because the changes 40 years ago were accompanied by massive vandalism in the destruction of altars, especially the removal of side altars in churches, in the absolute refusal of priests to give communion to anyone who knelt before them to receive. Even if people have gotten used to things in four decades, the experience would not be one of loss, but one of enrichment, except to people who had come to believe that the mass was nothing but a communal meal anyway.

 

[smndtupidisaftr]

Okay here is something else I should have said. I do not have a problem with the Novus Ordo Mass itself. And if most people enjoy the Novus Ordo Mass the way that it is normally celebrated then I can understand that as well. Why is it however, that it is VERY rare to find a Novus Ordo Mass that is celebrated Ad Orientum, with a communion rail. I have been to one Novus Ordo Mass like this at Guardian Angels parish in KY. I live in the Washington D.C. area and there are no Masses like this anywhere near me. I wish there were because I really enjoyed it. I guess what I’m saying is I like the Novus Ordo when it is celebrated in this way, and I wonder why it is so hard to find a Novus Ordo Mass said this way. I think that it is easier to find a Traditional Latin Mass that a Novus Ordo celebrated this way. As far as I know it is okay for a priest to celebrate Mass in this way but it is practically never done.

I’d argue that it’s due to culture. If you try to introduce these things you will get a backlash from many parishoners who wonder why the priest is separating himself from the people. Imagine if a priest tried to use Latin and say the EP silently! Many people today don’t understand these things because many people don’t have a great understanding of the Mass. How many people today would understand the difference between an altar and table? How many would understand the rationale for having the choir at the back of the church rather than the front? Our modern society is so radically opposed to the culture that the Church seeks that these things are jarring to many people. And so, since these things are not necessary, I think bishops would rather keep people around than celebrate with these extra symbols, despite their value. It’s unfortunate, but I am convinced that it’s true.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Okay here is something else I should have said. I do not have a problem with the Novus Ordo Mass itself. And if most people enjoy the Novus Ordo Mass the way that it is normally celebrated then I can understand that as well. Why is it however, that it is VERY rare to find a Novus Ordo Mass that is celebrated Ad Orientum, with a communion rail. I have been to one Novus Ordo Mass like this at Guardian Angels parish in KY. I live in the Washington D.C. area and there are no Masses like this anywhere near me. I wish there were because I really enjoyed it. I guess what I’m saying is I like the Novus Ordo when it is celebrated in this way, and I wonder why it is so hard to find a Novus Ordo Mass said this way. I think that it is easier to find a Traditional Latin Mass that a Novus Ordo celebrated this way. As far as I know it is okay for a priest to celebrate Mass in this way but it is practically never done.

I live on the other side of the river from you and recently looked at the websites of several parishes in your area. I think you can easily find very reverent Masses anywhere in the greater DC/Baltimore area. Bishop Loverde and Cardinal Wuerl and Archbishop Lori are all very orthodox, reverent men.

No, you may not find at OFM celebrated ad orientum, but you can find Masses that use chant, older style hymns, Latin ordinaries, etc. Why don’t you start going on some “field trips” and check out other parishes and other Mass times? I am sure that if you go with an eye to seeing what is done well instead of looking for things you don’t like, you will be pleasantly surprised.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

have never seen Pope Francis celebrate Mass, but I know that Benedict XVI only distributed Communion on the tongue while kneeling, if we are to follow the Pope then why didn’t the majority of priests follow his example?

Because they are not required to do so, not by Pope Benedict, anyway. If you read the book Light of the World by Peter Seewald, which is just one long series of interviews with Pope Benedict, the old Holy Father himself said that there was nothing wrong with communion in the hand.

Also comparing me to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi is ridiculous, I do accept all of the Churches teachings on the Mass, I have read many of the Papal encyclicals, Sacrosanctum Concilium, some other documents of Vatican II (not all but I’m working on it), points of view from both sides, and the fact of the matter is that the ordinary way of receiving Holy Communion is on the tongue while kneeling. I do agree with all of the Vatican documents, and what the Church teaches. Communion on the hand is an indult and should not be the norm, many Bishops have affirmed this. It seems to me that I am trying to obey the teachings of the Church, but that the indults have become the norm and then I am accused of disobedience by actually wanting to follow what the Vatican II documents said.

**But the indults exist by the proper authority, that of the Holy See itself. What the Holy See permits is not unlawful. Further, even the disciplines of the Church enjoy a negative infallibility in that no discipline of the Church can lead the faithful into impiety. The Church is incapable of legislating against Her own truth. Also, you are given a choice in the mode of reception. The Church has been equally clear on this: if you wish to recieve on the tongue (which is the only way I recieve), you have the right. If you wish to kneel, you cannot be denied Holy Communion. If you’ve had problems with these things, then you need to bring it to the attention of your pastor. If he’s a part of the problem, then you need to bring it to the attention of your bishop. **

Much of what you guys said is helpful, (like Mcall thank you very much for your post) and I am not trying to be rude, but I really don’t like being compared to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi when I do accept what the Church teaches about the Mass, but what we get at your average parish is not the Mass that the council fathers intended.

The Council Fathers were not and are not the final word on disciplinary issues (and no council has any force whatsoever, whether over discipline or doctrine, unless ratified by the Pope). The Fathers certainly and quite firmly came down on the side of the continued use of Latin (for example0, yet the wholly vernacular Mass rightly exists because it rightly exists on the proper authority, the authority of the Holy See, which said that bishop’s conferences could make the decision as to what extent the vernacular could/would be used in the Masses in their jurisdiction, upon approval of the Holy See. And the Holy See approved it all, from the greeting to the “Ite, Missa Est.” The Council cannot bind the Holy See in terms of this or any discipline.

 

[po18guy]

**“If you love Me, keep my commandments” John 14:15 **

He did not say “those commandment s you agree with”

"Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." Luke 10:16

He speaks through the Bishops

Brother JR teaches us much in these forums. A huge point he taught me is that Saint Francis vowed blind obedience to his Bishop in all things save for sin. The Church benefits greatly when we follow Saint Francis in his obedience.

Our faith life is a constant challenge of conforming our wills to that of our Lord, and of obeying those whom He has placed over us. When we insist on a “better way”, we become protestant. The Christian faith is one of discipline and of obedience. It is the Church militant. All militaries depend upon discipline and obedience.

 

[clem456]

Properly speaking (and properly lived), Catholicism itself is counter-cultural.

So – does that make us the new hippies?

My hair is short and I do own a home.
After 30 years I finally can’t stand classic rock and am listening to classical and appreciating ancient Church music.
So I am probably a lost cause.
But I’d still like to be countercultural in the Catholic sense.

 

[Armor_of_Light]

**“If you love Me, keep my commandments” John 14:15 **

He did not say “those commandment s you agree with”

"Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." Luke 10:16

He speaks through the Bishops

Brother JR teaches us much in these forums. A huge point he taught me is that Saint Francis vowed blind obedience to his Bishop in all things save for sin. The Church benefits greatly when we follow Saint Francis in his obedience.

Our faith life is a constant challenge of conforming our wills to that of our Lord, and of obeying those whom He has placed over us. When we insist on a “better way”, we become protestant. The Christian faith is one of discipline and of obedience. It is the Church militant. All militaries depend upon discipline and obedience.

This is all true, and would be 100% relevant to the discussion if all the changes listed in the OP were MANDATED, not simply allowed, or merely tolerated. If the Bishops come out and say “Communion in the hand (or altar girls, or whatever) is theologically great, and here’s why:” then OK…

 

[Southern]

**“If you love Me, keep my commandments” John 14:15 **

He did not say “those commandment s you agree with”

"Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." Luke 10:16

He speaks through the Bishops

Brother JR teaches us much in these forums. A huge point he taught me is that Saint Francis vowed blind obedience to his Bishop in all things save for sin. The Church benefits greatly when we follow Saint Francis in his obedience.

Our faith life is a constant challenge of conforming our wills to that of our Lord, and of obeying those whom He has placed over us. When we insist on a “better way”, we become protestant. The Christian faith is one of discipline and of obedience. It is the Church militant. All militaries depend upon discipline and obedience.

“When we insist on a better way we become Protestent.” Is that not what Vatican II is? Some things yes are good but changing what should not be changed is not good and not always for the best. Something as Holy and Sacred as Christ pure Heart in the Eucharist should not be handled exept by consecrated hands of a Priest. It was to go from the Priest hands to the person’s mouth. And also no longer continuing the St. Michael Prayer after the mass. Some of the older Priest that still say it but not too many any more. Vatican II was meant to “update the Church with the Modern Times” But God doesn’t change!