Questions about the Novus Ordo Mass.

[paul11b]

If you have a spiritual director then he has no doubt instructed you on prayer.

If he has not then shame on him and you need a different spiritual director. If he has then you know that the proper place to go with a “Crisis of faith” is prayer, not an internet message board.

I think your prayers are a wonderful place to go.

-Tim-

Yeah you are right about that. I do plan on praying about it more. I probably should stay off of these forums since they only tend to confuse me further.

 

[GangGreen]

Change will only come about slowly. Let’s not forget that the majority of priests are still Vatican II era priests. We don’t have a lot of younger priests. I believe that as the ranks of younger priests grow, we will start to see a return to more traditional practices. Many of the younger priests look at the more traditional practices in a better light than the the group of priests that you see today who are in their 50s and older.

In terms of the COTT issue. I think part of the issue is not only is it the norm (as was said in another post, if you watch at Mass, probably 98% of the people receive in the hand), but it’s also that priests are teaching people that way. It’s not that people are watching everyone else and saying “I’m going to do it like everyone else.” Priests teach in RCIA and RE that people who are receiving Communion for the first time should receive in the hands. COTT is practically an after thought. When priests start teaching the children and people who come into the Church via RCIA to start receiving only on the tongue, that’s when you’ll see a change. If children are taught to receive on the tongue, then there’s also a chance that their parents will change too. Until then, it’s a cross you have to bear. I try my best not to look up (or keep my eyes closed) during Communion time because I can’t bear to watch everyone receive on the hand.

 

[codefro]

I am not trying to be judgemental or rude in posting this forum. I just need some help and direction because everthing that I am about to mention causes me great spiritual anguish. I have problems determining God’s will, and I really need someone to explain to me why some of this stuff is allowed and why I should not be concerned about it. I have gone back and forth, thinking I should only go to Latin Mass, and then thinking the Novus Ordo was okay. I have even entertained the idea of attending an SSPX chapel.

I have read the Vatican II document Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) which calls for reform of the Liturgy. I do not necessarily have an issue with the reform, or with the Novus Ordo Mass, but I have a problem with the way that it is celebrated. SC never calls for the Holy Eucharist to be distributed in the hand. I personally think that Eucharist in the hand is wrong, and there is all kinds of evidence to support that. Communion in the hand was an indult, which expired and yet it continued after its expiration. It was even started as an abuse and is a way to show that the person receiving does not believe that Christ is truly present.

SC also never called for the priest to face the people. Ad Orientum Mass is a way for the priest to lead the faithful to God. The Priest and the faithful all face God and it is obviously a sacrifice that is taking place. I have only ever been to one Ad Orientum Novus Ordo Mass and it is two states away from me so I can’t go to it whenever I want to, although I would if I could. When the priest faces the people the nature of the sacrifice is taken away and the Mass becomes more of a meal. And the priest is no longer facing God, it is as if we are there to worship ourselves.

SC also never called for female altar servers, it only called for Eucharistic ministers in unusual circumstances. It also said that there should be a period of silence, that Gregorian Chant should be the norm, and that the music shouldn’t take away from the sacredness of the Mass.

Almost every Catholic Mass that you go to every weekend goes against what SC say. The priest faces the people, the Eucharist is distributed in the hand, Eucharisitic ministers distribute communion in usual circumstances, there are female altar servers, guitars, drums, no silence, and there is basically never Gregorian Chant. When Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi received Holy Communion at the Pope’s Mass it was very disheartening for me. I don’t understand hoe Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi are Catholics in good standing but the SSPX are not. I am really having a crisis of faith about this, and I am a husband and a father of two boys with one more boy on the way. I want them all to go to Heaven so I want to follow Jesus the way he wants to be followed. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

It’s interesting to ask this. I myself wonder what holds a lot of priests back to implement what BXVI called for in his book Spirit of the Liturgy. There is a local parish I attend sometimes that is run by Norbertine Priests. These Norbertines have an affinity for tradition. The abbey of these Norbertines celebrates different kinds of mass throughout the week- Latin OF, EF, English OF. This parish though just OF, and 1 EF Mass every Sunday. I emailed the Pastor to find out why the priests do not celebrate the mass Ad Orientum or use incense every Sunday for the OF Mass. His answer was basically about obedience. He says they celebrate mass the way our bishop celebrates the mass. As far as incense, they cannot secure enough altar servers for the OF mass to use incense. I thought that was interesting. I never thought about it from a standpoint of obedience to the Bishop.

 

[agnes_therese]

Well are you not picking and choosing? The ordinary way to recieve in on the tongue and kneeling, are you not picking and choosing to recieve in the extraordinary way? Perhaps you should pray not to divide yourself from Tradition, or maybe you’re comparing me to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi because you feel that you are being like them by recieveing in the same way that they do, I don’t know. I don’t like being called a cafiteria Catholic because I accept the Traditions that have made thousands of saints and blesseds holy. God bless you!

I’m so sorry you feel the need to make personal attacks on people who responded in good faith to your original post, to deliberately misinterpret what they say even after it’s been reiterated, and accuse them of not accepting Tradition and not believing in the Real Presence. It makes it appear that you have quite a lot of hatred in your heart for anyone who doesn’t think exactly the same as you do. I will pray that you find release from it.

 

[paul11b]

I’m so sorry you feel the need to make personal attacks on people who responded in good faith to your original post, to deliberately misinterpret what they say even after it’s been reiterated, and accuse them of not accepting Tradition and not believing in the Real Presence. It makes it appear that you have quite a lot of hatred in your heart. I will pray that you find release from it.

You know nothing about me or what is in my heart. I did not say anything about you believing in the Real Presence, and you were the first person to compare me to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi. Again I said that reception of the Blessed Sacrament on the hand was started as an abuse in order to show disbelief in the Real Presence, and you cannot change that, regardless of how you interpret the documents of Vatican II. You did not answer my question in good faith, you told me not to join Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, and told me that I should pray to be in union with the Church. I am in union with the Church and I do accept what the Church teaches, the fact of the matter is that you know nothing about me. And it seems that you do not know the history of why Communion in the hand was started, and you took offense to what I initially said when I am genuinely trying to find real answers.God bless you!

 

[choliks]

To the OP who has not seen Pope Francis celebrate Mass in the Ordinary Form:

Easter Mass

 

[agnes_therese]

You know nothing about me or what is in my heart. I did not say anything about you believing in the Real Presence,

Yes, you did. You said that Communion in the hand " is a way to show that the person receiving does not believe that Christ is truly present."

and you were the first person to compare me to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi.

I’ve told you twice that I did no such think, I merely asked you not to join in their attitude. I’m very sorry you can’t see the difference.

you took offense to what I initially said when I am genuinely trying to find real answers.God bless you!

Yes, I took offense at being told that by doing what the Church allows, I am showing that I “do not believe that Christ is truly present.”

I withdraw from this conversation. Since you find it offensive that I follow what the Church teaches, there is nothing else to say.

 

[paul11b]

To the OP who has not seen Pope Francis celebrate Mass in the Ordinary Form:

Easter Mass

Thank you!

 

[paul11b]

Yes, you did. You said that Communion in the hand " is a way to show that the person receiving does not believe that Christ is truly present."

I’ve told you twice that I did no such think, I merely asked you not to join in their attitude. I’m very sorry you can’t see the difference.

Yes, I took offense at being told that by doing what the Church allows, I am showing that I “do not believe that Christ is truly present.”

I withdraw from this conversation. Since you find it offensive that I follow what the Church teaches, there is nothing else to say.

Please do, because I looked up what you said as well, your very first post said that I was uniting with Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi by “picking and choosing” what I believe. Please read my posts, I never said that you do not believe Christ is present, I do not know you or what you believe, I just said that Communion in the hand was started as a way to show that the person receiving does not believe that Christ is truly present. That is no longer the case, but that is the history of it, read Communion in the Hand by Fr. Juan Rodolfo Laise, which is sold on the FSSPs website, a Traditional group in full communion with Rome. And to be clear, THE CHURCH DOES NOT TEACH COMMUNION IN THE HAND, THE ORDINARY FORM IS ON THE TONGUE AND KNEELING, COMMUNION IN THE HAND IS AN INDULT. God bless you!

 

[curlycool89]

Sometimes I say things that are really good, so I’m just going to quote me (and I give me permission to do so ):

For those who may be struggling, pray for Faith and Hope. Heck, make an Act of Faith and an Act of Hope, everyday if you have to. And be open to the graces of Faith and Hope that ultimately come from God.

If you don’t have Faith and/or Hope, then the rest really becomes meaningless, or it becomes all about “I think, I want, I believe, I, I, I”.

Here’s the other thing that people need to understand: In the end it really doesn’t matter what I think. The Fullness of Truth Objectively subsists in the Catholic Church, and whether or not you choose to believe it is, frankly, irrelevant. Jesus asks us to follow Him, not peer-review what goes on.

The real danger of what happened in the Modern period is what’s called the “inward turn of modernity”. This is the enduring legacy of Descartes: that everything is referenced back to the “I” and that I become the final arbitrator of what is truth. This is what leads to Protestant ideas: the idea that I need to be able to fully understand something before it is confirmed as truth, and that it stands as nothing until I say so.

How many threads have we seen in this forum that, at their essence, say something like "I can’t reconcile with <some-pre-VII-document/practice/tradition>". Frankly speaking, such questions are ultimately not valid. If you have Faith and Hope (which have their ultimate source in God), then you know that that is not even a question, because we know that God is not a deceiver nor a trickster. To presume that I have to be able to reconcile or understand all these things inverts the pyramid and puts me at the top as if I were a shareholder demanding an explanation of a company management (the Curia) or CEO (the Pope), which is not how the Church operates nor how it ought to operate (and Thank God for that).

And that is ultimately the goal of the Evil One, to try and get you to put you at the centre. To try and get you to be judge. And he really doesn’t have to work all that hard, because as the old saying goes, “pride goes before the fall”. All he really has to do is whisper “What do you think of this?”, and as soon as you answer “I think” or “in my opinion” then you are already caught in the trap that is the Supremacy of the Individual.

You know what I realized while writing this? Protestantism is essentially (and ironically) work-based. It’s all about their ability to keep their church doctrinally pure, and when they believe it’s not happening then its their job to go and break off. No Hope in God’s grace or protection, but only in themselves as guardians and watchman and final arbitrators.

As soon as you start going on about “I need to understand this” and “I’m not satisfied until someone proves it” and “I’ve read and I think that the Vatican is interpreting it wrong” then you’ve set yourself up as the final judge and arbitrator against the authority of the Church.

There are many changes in the Church since Vatican II has been in place that do displease God but as long as the Priest says in the Mass… " This IS my body and This IS my blood" then it is valid.

I’m sorry, but that’s just wrong. The Church cannot institute something that is displeasing to God, that’s would suggest that Hell has overcome the Church.

I just want to say that I never said that the Novus Ordo was invalid, I know that it is a valid Mass. And I 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? 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.**

Actually, the ordinary way of receiving communion is up to individual Episcopal Conferences. For instance:
GIRM 160:

In the Dioceses of Canada, Holy Communion is to be received standing, though individual members of the faithful may choose to receive Communion while kneeling.

 

[paul11b]

Actually, the ordinary way of receiving communion is up to individual Episcopal Conferences. For instance:

I can only answer for the things I posted.

The question of receiving in the hand or on the tongue was first treated in an instruction entitled Memoriale Domini, published in 1969, just four years after the conclusion of Vatican II. In this instruction, the congregation stated that the Holy Father has decided **not to change the universal practice of receiving on the tongue **for three reasons: it had “many centuries of tradition behind it,” it avoided the possibility of profanation, and it expressed a proper “respect, decorum, and dignity” for the Eucharist.

However, the document noted that if the discipline of receiving in the hand prevailed by popular practice, then an individual conference of bishops could request an exception from Rome to allow Communion in the hand provided that the traditional usage of receiving on the tongue was not excluded. [NB: it is an exception which can be granted.]

Following this instruction, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) did indeed request permission that Communion in the hand be allowed in their territory. For this reason, the 2002 General Instruction [Institution] of the Roman Missal (GIRM), the official instruction manual for the Mass, states that in the U.S. the communicant “may choose whether to receive in the hand or on the tongue.”

 

[chaunceygardner]

…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.

The part I highlighted is really your personal view; others may see that taking the Lord in our hands is much more enriching and meaningful, as when we take our new born child into our hands, or when comforting an ill or dying person. It is a sign of love, respect and devotion to do this. Granted that some do not see it that way, and there are some who receive communion very nonchalantly, and without respect. Whether that attitude would change by receiving on the tongue is questionable. At least the disrespect would not be as obvious. But is what we view occurring externally most important, or what occurs within that person?

As was quoted by another poster, it is acceptable for a communicant to receive either way, so we should leave it to the individual to decide for themselves.

Your view of the changes at some churches as being “massive vandalism” and “destruction” is again a matter of opinion. But I personally have not noticed that. In older churches that I have been to a new “freestanding” altar was put in place, leaving the old in place, often surrounded by intricate and beautiful woodcarving and statuary. In some the communion rail remains, whereas in others it has been removed, the only noticeable change. I still see side altars in many of the larger, older churches. I have not noticed the “massive vandalism” that you claim. In newer churches the design reflects the current requirements and the liturgy; nothing was vandalized, it just never was there.

Personally, I am comfortable in either type of church. I am not there to admire the interior design of the church (although I will admit there are some that are too utilitarian and without any character at all) but to worship the Lord and be in communion with God and with those around me. I have done that in awe inspiring Cathedrals and in tiny churches made of rough stone and adobe. Makes no difference; God is there, no matter the surroundings.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

**“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.

I couldn’t agree with you more. The Church has said that these things are valid, so whether we like them or not, to argue that they are not valid and/or not what was originally intended is to head down a very dangerous path.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

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…

I think the point is not that they have said it is required, but rather that because it is allowed, we should not criticize it as that is criticizing the wisdom and decision making of those that have allowed it. In this case, those that have allowed it are the successors to the Apostles.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

“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!

God doesn’t change, but that does not mean that our understanding of him cannot change. I think that what Vatican II was really saying was that, in light of our current understanding of the Lord and tradition, etc, there are some rules that we are able to change and adapt in such a way that they not only fit better within the needs/wants of the modern parishioner, but also still fit within the teachings of Christ and the Church.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Very good point. You call it mumuring or grumbling, which the Lord condemns. Did not the apostles and disciples question things? I’m speaking for myself here…but also I’m sure for a sizeable number of people…when I say it’s more ‘questioning’ than ‘murmuring’. At least, that’s how it is intended. I have not found a way in the written word to convey the difference between the 2 without spelling it out every time!

Earlier…I did have some legitimate questions that have gone un-answered.

There was questioning among the early Church the same way that there is today. It was settled in the same way that it should be today, by the Bishops and if need be the Pope. In this case that has happened, the Vatican has stated that these things are allowed or has delegated the authority to the Bishops who have said that they are allowed. Therefore, there should no longer be questioning of these things as the questions have been settled by the proper authorities.

Also, questioning is one thing, saying that the Magisterium is wrong in allowing something, is not questioning, it is putting your judgement above theirs and that is not something any true Catholic should ever want to do. (I am not saying that you have done this, but some of the posts I have read come pretty close so I wanted to make the point.)

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Well are you not picking and choosing? The ordinary way to recieve in on the tongue and kneeling, are you not picking and choosing to recieve in the extraordinary way? Perhaps you should pray not to divide yourself from Tradition, or maybe you’re comparing me to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi because you feel that you are being like them by recieveing in the same way that they do, I don’t know. I don’t like being called a cafiteria Catholic because I accept the Traditions that have made thousands of saints and blesseds holy. God bless you!

The if you read the GIRM for the US, you will find that receiving in the hand actually is the ordinary way in the US.

It is not the same picking and choosing, he is not arguing that receiving a different valid way is wrong.

 

[Armor_of_Light]

I think the point is not that they have said it is required, but rather that because it is allowed, we should not criticize it as that is criticizing the wisdom and decision making of those that have allowed it. In this case, those that have allowed it are the successors to the Apostles.

I (we) am questioning…not criticizing. I’d like to see / hear / read some of the spiritual benefits to the things on the OP’s list. Since the Mass is the ‘source and summit’ of our lives as Catholics, then it stands to reason that the rubrics and traditions of how the Mass is offered is of theological significance. Everything should make some sort of sense in relation to the goal. The TLM and the way it is done has this sort of relationship…every last detail of it does. So must the NO…right?

 

[CatholicGeek1]

I (we) am questioning…not criticizing. I’d like to see / hear / read some of the spiritual benefits to the things on the OP’s list. Since the Mass is the ‘source and summit’ of our lives as Catholics, then it stands to reason that the rubrics and traditions of how the Mass is offered is of theological significance. Everything should make some sort of sense in relation to the goal. The TLM and the way it is done has this sort of relationship…every last detail of it does. So must the NO…right?

If you are expecting an internet forum to enlighten you on the benefits of the NO than I think that you are looking in the wrong place. None of us are those that make, can make, or should make those decisions. They are made for us by our leaders and I am confident that our leaders had/have good reasons for allowing what they allow. This is part of what faith is all about. It is about having faith in God and those that He has chosen to lead His Church on Earth.

 

[Armor_of_Light]

If you are expecting an internet forum to enlighten you on the benefits of the NO than I think that you are looking in the wrong place. None of us are those that make, can make, or should make those decisions. They are made for us by our leaders and I am confident that our leaders had/have good reasons for allowing what they allow. This is part of what faith is all about. It is about having faith in God and those that He has chosen to lead His Church on Earth.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to get solid catholic answers to solid catholic questions on CATHOLIC ANSWERS!!

Faith, yes! Absolutely! Blind following…no! Absolutely not. Some of us want to know the reasons in order to understand the reasons and that is NOT rebellion or complaining or arguing. It’s prudence and discernment. The lack of proper catechesis among the laity is a huge problem (we all agree on that) and questions beget learning. You have a chance here to educate. I was not asking for YOU to make the decisions as you suggest…I was asking for the information to be presented.