should we stick to traditional catholicism?

[Sirach2]

When did I make any derogatory remarks? When did I make a post talking about the inferiority of the OF? Actually, if you look above, I said that they both have deficiencies. To not accept that is to accept almost a flood of logical paradoxes, considering that the Missal for the OF has been revised by the Roman Curia several times now, indicating that it wasn’t absolutely perfect the moment it was promulgated. I added that I think one of its flaws, which is accepted by many (possibly only the exceptionally stupid, though), is the ambiguous language regarding what exactly the Sacrifice is. I don’t know why you’re so defensive over that point.

From the horse’s mouth, beginning at post #62, and shortly afterward:

The shorter Eucharistic prayers and altered Offertory, compared to the TLM, firmly emphasize that the Mass is a memorial supper but de-emphasize that it is the Sacrifice on Calvary.

Most people have no clue that the Mass is the Sacrifice on Calvary when they attend the OF, but it’s made painstakingly clear in the EF

---

---

 

[EphelDuath]

From the horse’s mouth, beginning at post #62, and shortly afterward:

The shorter Eucharistic prayers and altered Offertory, compared to the TLM, firmly emphasize that the Mass is a memorial supper but de-emphasize that it is the Sacrifice on Calvary.

Most people have no clue that the Mass is the Sacrifice on Calvary when they attend the OF, but it’s made painstakingly clear in the EF

---

---

That’s a derogatory remark?

It’s a comparison. I think the TLM has a strength here. Nowhere did I say that the OF was inferior to the TLM. Nowhere did I say the TLM was perfect. In another thread, I talk about some of the strengths the OF has over the TLM (though I didn’t bring that up here because it’s not relevant to the point that Phyllo brought up per Davies). So when your witch hunt for sedevacantists is done, come back and talk to me about what I actually said.

 

[ProVobis]

You are just one person, and not a majority who do not come under the umbrella of your assertions. How many (100%, 75%, 30%) EF trads know the mass is a sacrifice and what that means? Where are your statistics for this?

In fairness, one still needs instructions outside the Mass (either in either the OF or EF) in order to see that the Holy Sacrifice is taking place. I guess it doesn’t hurt that some of the older missals and prayerbooks had illustrations and descriptions to show this and where it occurred in the Mass. Not to mention the Baltimore Catechism left no doubt as to the sacrifice being offered.

 

[Sirach2]

In fairness, one still needs instructions outside the Mass (either in either the OF or EF) in order to see that the Holy Sacrifice is taking place. I guess it doesn’t hurt that some of the older missals and prayerbooks had illustrations and descriptions to show this and where it occurred in the Mass. Not to mention the Baltimore Catechism left no doubt as to the sacrifice being offered.

That was my point. It was suggested that this is only understood by those who attend the EF, yet no statistics or proof is offered – just private opinion.

It is even more clear in the CCC:

1365 Because it is the memorial of Christ’s Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: “This is my body which is given for you” and "This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood."187 In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he "poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."188

1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it *re-presents *(makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its *memorial *and because it *applies *its fruit:
[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper “on the night when he was betrayed,” [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.189

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.” "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."190

1368 The Eucharist is also the sacrifice of the Church. The Church which is the Body of Christ participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she herself is offered whole and entire. She unites herself to his intercession with the Father for all men. In the Eucharist the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his Body. The lives of the faithful, their praise, sufferings, prayer, and work, are united with those of Christ and with his total offering, and so acquire a new value. Christ’s sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering.

 

[ProVobis]

It is even more clear in the CCC:

Like a 10-yr old will understand that.

 

[EphelDuath]

That was my point. It was suggested that this is only understood by those who attend the EF, yet no statistics or proof is offered – just private opinion.

No acknowledgement or apology for smearing me, and then you distort my argument. I never said THIS IS ONLY UNDERSTOOD BY THOSE WHO ATTEND THE EF. What I said was, it’s more easily understandable in the EF because it’s more emphasized, which is why a lot of people in my experience don’t realize it until the first time they experience the EF.

It is even more clear in the CCC.

What’s the CCC got to do with this? I’m talking about the text of the OF of Mass.

 

[TimothyH]

Most of these that you list, will at some time or another come out with anti-Catholic rhetoric.
A local Baptist Church offers once or twice a year offers “Catholic rehabilitation” to stayed faithful telling them that they don’t need all that structured liturgy and all those sacraments, I I’m sure that is not the only protestant church that does so.
Non-denomination church’s are even worse. All of them will tell our faithful that they have not personally accepted Christ if the were baptized as infant and as such must be re baptized. No my friend, the protestants are just as active against the one true church as they were in the 1500’s. This despite the efforts of the Church to reach out to them.
We will keep working at it, perhaps in time they will stop being protestants.

How do you know that Protestant Churches are as active against Catholicism as they were in the 1500’s?

Did you not read that I have significant first hand experience with these Churches - Presbyterian, Southern Baptist, Evangelical Non-denominational, Methodist, etc? Did you not read that I was a member of the United Church of Christ and United Methodist Churches I’ll tell you what else; my best friend is an ordained Methodist, pastor of two Churches.

Most of them are not “throwing out anti-Catholic rhetoric”. It happens as you say, from time to time, but not as often as people think. They are not spending their time trying to tear down the Church but are simply trying to correct what they see as error.

We are not at war people.

Did you people not read the thread on triumphalism?

-Tim-

 

[ProVobis]

Most of them are not “throwing out anti-Catholic rhetoric”. It happens as you say, from time to time, but not as often as people think. They are not spending their time trying to tear down the Church but are simply trying to correct what they see as error.

We are not at war people.

Not everyone feels that way. Why are so many people leaving the Church? My pastor jokingly tells us that “ex-Catholics” now form the biggest denomination in the U.S.

At a Vietnamese wedding I attended several years ago I asked afterward if the service was Catholic. The bridegroom told us it was Baptist and you should have heard the diatribe he levelled against us Catholics. And this was in the workplace.

 

[Sirach2]

No acknowledgement or apology for smearing me, and then you distort my argument. I never said THIS IS ONLY UNDERSTOOD BY THOSE WHO ATTEND THE EF. What I said was, it’s more easily understandable in the EF because it’s more emphasized, which is why a lot of people in my experience don’t realize it until the first time they experience the EF.

You need to calm down and consider what the argument was based upon. Do you deny these are your words?

Most people have no clue that the Mass is the Sacrifice on Calvary when they attend the OF, but it’s made painstakingly clear in the EF. Now, whether or not this was done with the Protestants in mind, I cannot say. But it is certainly an imperfection with the current text of the OF.

I asked for proof that “MOST” people have no clue in the OF. It is insulting to assume that the text is an “imperfection” implying that you know better than those who issued the missal. You also claim that it is better understood when a person attends the EF. No statistics either, just a claim that those who attend the EF have a better understanding of “sacrifice.” Again, only personal opinion, perhaps based on a few isolated comments from your associates.

In my interpretation of your words, you are most definitely casting aspersions on the OF’s text and asserting that the EF is “painstakingly” clear.

Now if I need to apologize for reading your words wrong, I will be glad to do so, but at this point, there is no doubt in my mind about the trajectory of your posts.

 

[ProVobis]

Sirach2:
In my interpretation of your words, you are most definitely casting aspersions on the OF’s text and asserting that the EF is “painstakingly” clear.

I wouldn’t call it “painstakingly” clear but there are these prayers in the 62 Missal that were dropped.

---

Aufer a nobis, quæsumus, Domine, iniquitates nostras:
Take away from us, we beg, Lord, iniquities our:

ut ad Sancta sanctorum
that to Holy of holies

puris mereamur mentibus introire.
with pure we may be worthy mind to enter.​

Suscipe, sancte Pater, omnipotens æterne Deus,
Accept, holy Father, all powerful eternal God,

hanc immaculatam hostiam,
this stainless Victim, (this translation is more consistent)​

Suscipe, sancta Trinitas, hanc oblationem,
Accept, holy Trinity, this oblation,

quam tibi offerimus ob memoriam passionis, resurrectionis,
which to You we offer in memory of passion, resurrection,

et ascensionis Jesu Christi Domini nostri:
and ascension of Jesus Christ Lord our:​

Placeat tibi, sancta Trinitas, obsequium servitutis meæ:
May it please You, holy Trinity, homage of service my:

et præsta; ut sacrificium
and grant; that sacrifice

quod oculis tuæ majestatis indignus obtuli,
which in sight of Your majesty unworthy I offered up,

tibi sit acceptabile,
to You may be acceptable,

mihique, et omnibus pro quibus illud obtuli,
and to me, and to all for whom that I offered up,

sit, te miserante, propitiabile.
may it be, to You by Your showing mercy, propitious.

Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.
Through Christ Lord our. Amen​

 

[FAB]

How do you know that Protestant Churches are as active against Catholicism as they were in the 1500’s?

Did you not read that I have significant first hand experience with these Churches - Presbyterian, Southern Baptist, Evangelical Non-denominational, Methodist, etc? Did you not read that I was a member of the United Church of Christ and United Methodist Churches I’ll tell you what else; my best friend is an ordained Methodist, pastor of two Churches.

Most of them are not “throwing out anti-Catholic rhetoric”. It happens as you say, from time to time, but not as often as people think. They are not spending their time trying to tear down the Church but are simply trying to correct what they see as error.

We are not at war people.

Did you people not read the thread on triumphalism?

-Tim-

Mine are first hand experiance as well. The Baptist church that regular hold siminars on shedding ones Catholic identity and speaking againt the sacraments is Southern Baptist.
Perhaps instead of saying most, I should say many or some. Still it does happen and happens on a regular basis. It as visable as it once was, but it is still very present.

I am not certain what you mean by triumphalism. If it referes to calling the Church the one true Church,with the fullness of God’s salvation, it is and it what the church continues to teach.

I do want it clear that I strongly believe in Ecemunicalism as we work for the betterment of human kind. In the places that we agree we can work to do so.

 

[TimothyH]

There is another point I want to make. I don’t think people realize how much tradition has changed over the life of the Church.

Prior to the tenth century, the introduction of Aristotlean philosophy and reason into things of faith was unheard of. The introduction of reason and philosphy into what was monastic theology based on the prayerful meditation upon the Scriptures was radical. Arabia and the Arabs had become the center of philosophy in the world and its introduction all but ripped the Church apart.

There was no such thing as active religious prior to 1222. If you wanted to meet a consecrated religious person you had to go to a monastery or convent. In twelve years St. Francis went from stripping off his clothes in the town square to having thousands of Friars working all over Europe and St. Dominic followed. This was a radical change for the Church and it occurred in a very short time.

Embracing “continual renewal” is a hallmark of Benedictines and has been since St. Benedict founded his fist monastery in the sixth century. So if you want to embrace “tradition” then you have to be open to change in anything other than revealed truth. Change for the sake of renewal is very traditional in the Church and much of it was rapid and tumultuous.

-Tim-

 

[fdeunha]

I think things inherently go down hill when you start comparing new and old devotions in Catholicism, unless they’ve been formally abolished.

Is the Rosary good? Yes.
Is the Divine Mercy Chaplet good? Yes.

Is the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite good? Yes.
Is the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite good? Yes.

Is the old Breviary good? Yes.
Is the new Breviary good? Yes.

 

[Sirach2]

ProVobis:

Sirach2:

It is even more clear in the CCC:

Like a 10-yr old will understand that.

Keep in mind that the CCC was written for adults, PV. That’s why we need parents and catechists to bring it to their level. However, there is the YouCat for the younger folks.

In the spirit of the OP, asking “Should the changes in our faith like the mass and the rosary be followed?” Yes, of course, because as you know, the Church is a living entity governed by the Spirit for each age. That’s not to say the older traditions should be laid aside.

I noted your extensive translation of the prayers that were omitted from the '62 missal. In my discussion with Ephel, it was claimed that the prayers in the OF are flawed because they fail to convey that the Mass is a presentation of Calvary, whereas, it is explicit in the words prayed at the EF. I still do not see anywhere in what you provided that this is “painstakingly” clear. Calvary is not even mentioned, nor is it implied.

My favorite EP is IV, since it unfolds the history of salvation and is even more clear about “sacrifice” than what you presented, IMO.

Therefore, O Lord, as we now celebrate the memorial of our redemption, we remember Christ’s death and his descent to the realm of the dead; we proclaim his Resurrection and his Ascension to your right hand; and as we await his coming in glory, **we offer you his Body and Blood, the sacrifice acceptable to you which brings salvation **to the whole world.

Look, O Lord, upon the Sacrifice which you yourself have provided for your Church, and grant in your loving kindness to all who partake of this one Bread and one Chalice that, gathered into one body by the Holy Spirit, they may truly become a living sacrifice in Christ to the praise of your glory.

Therefore, Lord, remember now all for whom we make this sacrifice: especially your servant, N. our Pope, N. our Bishop, and the whole Order of Bishops, all the clergy, those who take part in this offering, those gathered here before you, your entire people, and all who seek you with a sincere heart.

Remember also those who have died in the peace of your Christ and all the dead, whose faith you alone have known. To all of us, your children, grant, O merciful Father, that we may enter into a heavenly inheritance with the blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, and with your Apostles and Saints in your kingdom. There, with the whole of creation, freed from the corruption of sin and death, may we glorify you through Christ our Lord, through whom you bestow on the world all that is good.

Beauty speaks to each heart from the indwelling Holy Spirit who causes us to find joy, peace and inspiration in the words we hear. It is good for us to respect His work in the hearts of His people, and not find fault because the words another hears are seemingly deficient, imperfect, flawed. We simply MYOB in that regard, trusting that God is present in each liturgy, and sanctifies His people according to their attentiveness and good will as they participate.

 

[bcuster]

should the changes in our faith like the mass and the rosary be followed or should we stick to the old ones.?

We move with the Church. The Church has not abandoned the Mass or the Rosary. The Church is the wise steward who brings out the old and the new. We must be careful, though not to burst the wine skins. Jesus says, “See I make all things new.” Rev. 21:5

 

[EphelDuath]

You need to calm down and consider what the argument was based upon. Do you deny these are your words?

I have already explained my words. But I take this to mean that you have no intention to retract and apologize for these comments, which are objectively and demonstrably false?

What is offensive is the fact that you brought up the subject, as many trads often do… Do you ever see posts initiated from persons who attend the OF and make derogatory remarks about your form, pointing out how deficient it is? Your post was begun to let all of us know how inferior the OF is in comparison to yours. That will earn you a lot of disrespect.

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

Forget it, EphelDuath. It’s only okay to say that the OF is superior to the EF. To suggest in that the EF is superior, that the OF did not improve upon the older mass in every respect, or that the Novus Ordo project was misguided in any way is thought crime.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Forget it, EphelDuath. It’s only okay to say that the OF is superior to the EF. To suggest in that the EF is superior, that the OF did not improve upon the older mass in every respect, or that the Novus Ordo project was misguided in any way is thought crime.

: npatrol:

 

[Saints_Alive]

Forget it, EphelDuath. It’s only okay to say that the OF is superior to the EF. To suggest in that the EF is superior, that the OF did not improve upon the older mass in every respect, or that the Novus Ordo project was misguided in any way is thought crime.

Bingo !

The Indoctrination process is coming along nicely :tiphat:

 

[hammerofjezabel]

should the changes in our faith like the mass and the rosary be followed or should we stick to the old ones.?

Stick with the rosary as given to us by St. Dominic.

Also do not add prayers such as the Fatima prayer.