Since the New Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter EENS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EENS

Guest
“See what things the enemy hath done wickedly in the sanctuary.” Ps. LXXIII. 3

Since the New Mass…

Communion has been received standing and in the hand showing disbelief in the Real Presence

A table has replaced an Altar of Sacrifice, just as the protestants did

Girls have replaced altar boys, showing that they, too, can be priests

Eucharistic ministers have replaced priests in distributing Holy Communion, showing that that a priest and a layman are the same thing

The Mass has been turned around to face the people, showing that they are more important than the Tabernacle and what it contains

New “Eucharistic prayers” have been invented that do not even address Sacrifice, which are used to “get it over with,” whereas the Canon has existed from the time of St. Ambrose (“Eucharistic Prayer” Numbers 2-87 invented c. 1970)

Communion has been given to laymen under both kinds, showing that the Sacred Host is only half of Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity

Laymen have acted as “lectors,” showing that there is no need for Orders since all are “priests”

Anyone has been permitted to touch the Sacred Vessels, showing a lack of belief in the Real Presence

The vernacular has replaced the language of the Church, Latin, showing that Mass is merely a “commeorative meal” just as the protestants belief

The rejection of Pope St. Pius V’s Quo Primum, which states that the Mass he codified should last for all times, showing the rejection of Papal authority

The New Mass was fabricated by a “committee,” showing that 2000 years of Tradition is useless and that we are actually based on Bible-alone, just like out “protestant brothers and sisters”

The prayers at the foot of the altar were destroyed because the Psalm Iudica Me makes use of the term altar, something that is unacceptable to “our separated brethren” as well as to the “modern Catholics”

Almost all Signs of the Cross have been removed, showing a rejection of the belief in priest’s power to impart blessing from God

All stand for the final blessing, again rejecting the belief in power of the priest’s blessing

Any mystery, ritual, symbolism, and sacredity has been destroyed to turn the perfect Sacrifice into a commemorative hum-drum communion service

Innovations are rampant, as the new Liturgy lends itself to such, as even the rubrics allow for “like words” rather than strict regulations of the Mass

The words of Our Lord were changed in the Consecration of Wine

A new “mystery of faith,” “Christ has died, etc,” has been invented instead in place of the Eucharist, again showing rejection of Real Presence

An audible Canon (“Eucharistic prayers”) have been invented, along with other parts of the Mass always said inaudibly in order to make Mass for people the people, a social event, rather than a Sacrifice for God

The Offertory was destoryed, which had existed since the very first Mass

There is but one Confiteor at beginning of Mass, showing that the priest and people are equal

Women no longer cover their heads, even though St. Paul says that “very nature” tells us this is necessary and it has been explicitly commanded since the second Pope, St. Linus

Women are seen as equal to priests, as they can serve the altar, be “Eucharistic ministers,” lectors, and hold any office a man can, thereby equating them to priests

The Minor Orders were destoryed, and it their place was left the “permenant deaconate”

The prayers of the Mass are no longer Catholic because they had to be changed in order to be acceptable to “our separated brethren”

Prayers from the very first written missals of Mass were destroyed in order to change the Mass from a Sacrifice that is pleasing to God and explicitly Catholic to what is seen as possibly Lutheran (other than the fact that even they have a Communion rail)

The last Gospel, also existing from the first days of the Church, was destoryed for no reason whatsoever except to shorten the length of Mass

There have been made disrespectful and ugly vestments, whereas before the new Mass, everything, even the veil for the missal stand was designed as beautifully as possible in order to foster devotion to the sacred and as a way to praise God

Protestant auditoriums have been built and replace Catholic Sanctuaries

(please continue to next message)
 
(continued from above…)

There are no genuflections at Mass, instead all “bow to altar” even after Eucharist is present, showing, once again, a lack of belief in the Real Presence

The prayer Aufer a nobis has been omitted, which evokes the Old Testament sacrifice with reference to the Holy of Holies which the High Priest entered to offer the blood of the sacrificial victim because we no longer have a Sacrifice but a meal for the people

The mention of Saints at Mass was removed in order to make it more ecumenical and acceptible to the same services created by protestants

A new Canon Law has been invented that is not at all strict has lead to laxity of belief and practice of piety

A new Catechism also has been invented that contains unclear statements and outright heresy

The denial of Church dogma, especially Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, is rampant because of false ecumenism

There are no longer priests or religious because the Mass is no longer special, just the same as an ordinary protestant service

“…see what things the enemy hath done wickedly in the sanctuary.” Yes, we all see. Now, are we strong enough to stand up for the Church, defend Her against Satan, and act in the right way to defeat this enemy? We must all reject these terrible things the enemy hath done and return the Church to Her correct Self, of orthodoxy and of Sacrifice pleasing to Our Lord. God bless.
 
EENS said:
“See what things the enemy hath done wickedly in the sanctuary.” Ps. LXXIII. 3

Since the New Mass…

Communion has been received standing and in the hand showing disbelief in the Real Presence

A table has replaced an Altar of Sacrifice, just as the protestants did

Girls have replaced altar boys, showing that they, too, can be priests

Eucharistic ministers have replaced priests in distributing Holy Communion, showing that that a priest and a layman are the same thing
(please continue to next message)
Click to expand...

Oh, good heavens, where do I start?! Well, I suppose I should start by saying that shortly after my conversion a few months ago, I was tempted to buy into the TradLat nonsense. I can’t address every issue you’ve raised in the interest of time (job interview in an hour), but I’ll tackle a few while I can…

“Communion has been received standing and in the hand showing disbelief in the Real Presence” - If you are at all familiar with our history, altar rails, while indeed venerable and an ancient practice in the West (one that I’m in support of, don’t get me wrong…), were not in all Catholic churches, even at the time of the Council of Trent. Remember that our Eastern Catholic brethren receive Our Lord while standing and always have.

“A table has replaced an Altar of Sacrifice, just as the protestants did” - Uh… no. While I prefer the architecture and orientation of altars used for Masses said Ad Orientem, you must remember that sometimes Ad Orientem is FACING THE PEOPLE!!! This is the case at my parish, where the building was constructed in such a way that when the priest faces East, he faces the congregation. That said, bad architecture and decorum do not reduce the altar of God to a mere table. Remember that according to old Jewish law, altars were to be made of uncut stones. How’s THAT for bad form?

“Girls have replaced altar boys” - Again, WRONG. The Vatican has allowed girls to serve Mass, but has ALWAYS stated that it is vastly preferred for boys and young men to do it, since they alone will be our future priests. The Vatican constantly stands up for a male only priesthood. Any claims that the Church is trying to endorse the notion that women can be priests is absolutely false.

“Eucharistic Ministers have replaced priests…” Note that the term ‘Eucharistic Minister’ is a title reserved for the priest along. The correct term for lay assistants at communion is “Extraordinary Minister.” I agree with you that this office is being gravely abused, but I must point out that they have NOT replaced priests. Never have I or will I see a priest sit back and relax while Extraordinary Ministers give communion to the faithful.
 
you have some serious issues… i recommend the mass by james akin… to give you a different prespective on the mass… and you might need some minor counseling or anger management class…

Peace… 👍
 
Take it easy on this person. He/she makes some legitimate points. Let us not forget, for some of us, changes in the Mass may represent the relativism that has overtaken society.

I, for one, object to a number of the items he brought up, including female servers.

I, too, miss the Communion Rail.

I, too, object to the abuse of EMs.

I, too, think holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer, is distracting and unnecessary.

I, too, object to altering text in the liturgy in any way.

The Mass is a very personal thing and is worth protecting. That protection involves speaking out when necessary. For some of us, it’s downright offensive to see the Mass toyed with. I also think it presumptuous for anyone to automatically assume that anyone voicing any such objections “has issues” or needs “anger management”.

Some changes, I think, are good. I think the vernacular is an ideal way to make the Mass more understandable. In fact, I’m a little annoyed when the Sanctus or the Agnus Dei are sung in Latin, because I don’t know the words.

I still remember my older brother, some 40 years ago, as a child, reciting “dominoes and biscuits.”
 
EENS said:
“See what things the enemy hath done wickedly in the sanctuary.” Ps. LXXIII. 3

New ÒEucharistic prayersÓ have been invented that do not even address Sacrifice, which are used to Òget it over with,Ó whereas the Canon has existed from the time of St. Ambrose (ÒEucharistic PrayerÓ Numbers 2-87 invented c. 1970)

Communion has been given to laymen under both kinds, showing that the Sacred Host is only half of Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity

(please continue to next message)
Click to expand...

The new Eucharistic prayers of our Canon do not address the Sacrifice? How do you explain the following, then?

“Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per Iesum Christum, Filium tuum, Dominum nostrum, supplices rogamus ac petimus, uti accepta habeas et benedicas + haec dona haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata, in primis, quae tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta catholica: quam pacificare, custodire, adunare et regere digneris toto orbe terrarum: una cum famulo tuo Pap nostro N. et Antistite nostro N. et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicae et apostolicae fidei cultoribus. Memento, Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum N. et N. et omnium circumstantium, quorum tibi fides cognita est et nota devotio, pro quibus tibi offerimus: vel qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium laudis, pro se suisque omnibus: pro redemtione animarum suarum, pro spe salutis et incolumitatis suae: tibique reddunt vota sua aeterno Deo, vivo et vero. Communicantes, et memoriam venerantes, in primis gloriosae semper Virginis Mariae, Genetricis Dei et Domini nostri Iesu Christi: sed et beati Ioseph, eiusdem Virginis Sponsi, et beatorum Apostolorum ac Martyrum tuorum, Petri et Pauli, Andreae, (Iacobi, Ioannis, Thomae, Iacobi, Philippi, Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simonis et Thaddaei: Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Xysti, Cornelii, Cypriani, Laurentii, Chrysogoni, Ionnis et Pauli, Cosmae et Damiani) et omnium Sanctorum tuorum; quorum meritis precibusque concedas, ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio.
(Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.) Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostrae, sed et cunctae familiae tuae, quaesumus, Domine, ut placatus accipias: diesque nostros in tua pace disponas, atque ab aeterna damnatione nos eripi et in electorum tuorum iubeas grege numerari. Quam oblationem tu, Deus, in omnibus, quaesumus, benedictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemquw facere digneris: ut nobis Corpus et Sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui, Domini nostri Iesu Christi. Qui, pridie quam pateretur, accepit panem in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas, et elevatis oculis in caelum ad te Deum Patrem suum omnipotentem, tibi gratias agens benedixit, fregit, deditque discipulis suis, dicens: Accipite et manducate ex hoc omnes: hoc est enim Corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur.” …

Need I continue? Compare that with the Tridentine Canon and you’ll find that they’re pretty darn similar, AND that the Novus Ordo Canon CERTAINLY addresses the Sacrifice of Calvary.

“Communion has been given to laymen under both kinds.” - Big deal. This was permitted even after Trent. Pius X certainly encouraged it on feast days such as Corpus Christi. It does not diminish the fact that both species are indeed the True Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ. In fact, most people at Novus Ordo parishes still only receive under one species. Both are offered to strengthen people’s faith, not undermine it.

Ê

Ê
 
40.png
STJOMO:
I, for one …] The Mass is a very personal thing and is worth protecting. That protection involves speaking out when necessary.
Click to expand...
I’m with you most of the way (I can’t miss the rail, I never experienced it).

The Mass is worth protecting, to be sure. But stating point after point after point that can do nothing but mislead anyone who seeks the truth. To say that this or that aspect of the new Mass “shows” that or the other thing? Says who? To claim that the new CCC contains heresy? Well, them’s (at best) schismatic words, and that is the kindest thing I could say. And they must be spoken out against. If there are any legitimate points in that list, they are drowned out by all the illegitimate ones.
 
40.png
STJOMO:
Take it easy on this person. He/she makes some legitimate points. Let us not forget, for some of us, changes in the Mass may represent the relativism that has overtaken society.

I, for one, object to a number of the items he brought up, including female servers.

I, too, miss the Communion Rail.

I, too, object to the abuse of EMs.

I, too, think holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer, is distracting and unnecessary.

I, too, object to altering text in the liturgy in any way.

The Mass is a very personal thing and is worth protecting. That protection involves speaking out when necessary. For some of us, it’s downright offensive to see the Mass toyed with. I also think it presumptuous for anyone to automatically assume that anyone voicing any such objections “has issues” or needs “anger management”.
Click to expand...
The difference between your position and his position is that according to him, the things that he has alleged make the Mass completely Invalid and the authority of the Pope of Rome worthless. That is a position that we cannot accept. With the death of the last cardinal consecrated before Vatican II, most people like him now believe that the Church is officially “dead” and that the “See of Peter is Vacant.” Obviously, we know that this is not the case. It is not the objections that are wrong, but the delivery of those objections that has me and a few others concerned.

Notice, he does not argue that the Church should work harder to preserve our Western traditions, HE ARGUES THAT WE ARE NOT EVEN PART OF THE CHURCH! My advice to “TradLats” and Sedevacantists: If you are not going to help those of us who wish to end abuses of the Novus Ordo, find yourself an Ecclesia Dei Mass, sit down, shut up, and submit yourselves to the legitimate authority of the Church. Ok? Ok.
 
the wreckovations of the last 40 years have been tragic and a colossal waste of money
 
40.png
CatholicNerd:
The difference between your position and his position is that according to him, the things that he has alleged make the Mass completely Invalid and the authority of the Pope of Rome worthless. That is a position that we cannot accept. With the death of the last cardinal consecrated before Vatican II, most people like him now believe that the Church is officially “dead” and that the “See of Peter is Vacant.” Obviously, we know that this is not the case. It is not the objections that are wrong, but the delivery of those objections that has me and a few others concerned.

Notice, he does not argue that the Church should work harder to preserve our Western traditions, HE ARGUES THAT WE ARE NOT EVEN PART OF THE CHURCH! My advice to “TradLats” and Sedevacantists: If you are not going to help those of us who wish to end abuses of the Novus Ordo, find yourself an Ecclesia Dei Mass, sit down, shut up, and submit yourselves to the legitimate authority of the Church. Ok? Ok.
Click to expand...
For your information, I am a Catholic, not a Sedevecantist or SSPV or SSPX or independent. I go to an “Indult” parish in Atlanta. I am not saying the NO is invalid. It is valid. I am saying what the abuses are and how they are INTERPRETED. If a person walked into a NO Mass, would he think that what you receive is God? Or would he think you are just getting a piece of bread? The way people receive (hand and standing) is the LEAST possible reverent way to receive Communion while still being practical (lying down or sitting down would be worse, but that is not practical). The first thing protestants changed who do not believe in the Real Presence: Communion kneeling and on the tongue. Lutherans still receive kneeling! They think it is a piece of bread! (Luther believed “consubstantiation,” where the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ yet still remain as bread and wine.) The current lutheran heresy does not believe this, yet they still are more reverent in receiving a piece of bread than NO Catholics. Does that make sense? Like I said, I compiled a list of issues that suggest conclusions. EMs replace the priest. Of course, that doesn’t mean the priest doesn’t help. What it means is that they are holding the same office, yet someone who comes to a Mass for the first time not knowing any beliefs of the Church would see no difference between the priest and the laymen, for they can do the same things. And, by the way, priests do sit down and let EMs do it all A LOT. It happens regularly here in Atlanta. In any event, I may have presented these issues in a harsh manner, but who can defend any of the above changes? The fact that you can understand the vernacular means nothing. Then you shoudl take the initiative to learn Latin. The Mass is universal just like the Chuch. There shouldn’t be vernacular. If you can’t or don’t want to learn Latin, use a missal. Latin must be preserved because it is a Tradition, capital T, of the Church. John XXIII even stated so on the eve of Vatican Council II. I would like to see anyone just go through and defend the innovations of POST-Vat. II. For anyone who does not know, Vat. II did NOT change the Mass. Everyday at Vat. II there was a Traditional Mass, surely a Solemn High Mass with the Pope as celebrant. Vatican II didn’t make a new Mass, the FREEMASON Annibale Bugnini headed the council that did form it, helped by six PROTESTANT “ministers.” I would like to hear a theological reason for facing the people, for receiving in the hand (and causing sacrilege), using a wooden table instead of a reverent high altar, etc., etc. Facing the people was never done but in special circumstances when required. Churches were always made so to face East was to face the tabernacle, for clearly the tabernacle is more important than the people. The only reason a church would have been built so as to face the people and East would be that it was impossible to have built the church facing East and the tabernacle. You should read Michael Davies on this. He wrote many good short books (less than 100 pages) on these topics. I have to go eat dinner. I will be back. God bless all.

Gaude Maria Virgo, cunctas heresis sola intermisti,

Matthew (I am a HE by the way)
 
40.png
CatholicNerd:
The new Eucharistic prayers of our Canon do not address the Sacrifice? How do you explain the following, then?

<< snip >>

Need I continue? Compare that with the Tridentine Canon and you’ll find that they’re pretty darn similar, AND that the Novus Ordo Canon CERTAINLY addresses the Sacrifice of Calvary.
Click to expand...
It is the “Tridentine” (Roman) Canon, with the exceptions that some parts of it are optional and the Words of Institution have been changed. EP I is not the problem, nor really is EP IV (which comes I think from a West Syrian tradition, so it is traditional but not traditional to the Roman Rite); but EP III and especially EP II (the so-called ‘Hippolytic Canon’) are. I assume that this is what the original poster was referring to when he wrote about the “new” Eucharistic Prayers.
 
Yes, thank you, I was NOT referring to the Canon… if you read “Eucharistic Prayer II,” you will not notice anything concerning Sacrifice. It practically goes directly from the Preface to the Hanc Igitur. It is ridiculous. That i why I said it is a “get it over with” and how it was created c. 1970 (actually later than that, I think). God bless.

Matthew
 
40.png
EENS:
I am not saying the NO is invalid. It is valid. I am saying what the abuses are and how they are INTERPRETED.
Click to expand...
I am curious to know, have you ever presented your “interpretations” and conspiracy theories to a priest? I would be shocked and saddened if you were encouraged in these beliefs and rejection of current Church teaching.
 
It’s not a rejection of Church teaching. John Paul II has only said one thing infallibly: there can be no women priests. Anything I am point to as error are fallible disciplines. God bless.

Matthew
 
EENS - If I understand it correctly - the apostles were laying down (ie reclining) when they received the first Eucharist.

I also don’t believe latin is a capital T, tradition but I could be wrong - please give the official source for this; I would be interested in reading more.

Kris
 
40.png
EENS:
It’s not a rejection of Church teaching. John Paul II has only said one thing infallibly: there can be no women priests. Anything I am point to as error are fallible disciplines.
Click to expand...
And so the semantic wrangling begins once again. RS is very clear about the defined roles of the church, clergy and laity as regards the liturgy. Do not be a “cafeteria Catholic” who picks and chooses which teachings to obey and which to ignore.
 
40.png
kwitz:
EENS - If I understand it correctly - the apostles were laying down (ie reclining) when they received the first Eucharist.

I also don’t believe latin is a capital T, tradition but I could be wrong - please give the official source for this; I would be interested in reading more.

Kris
Click to expand...
No, to recline at table is not to lie down. It means to sit at table. It does not say that they received sitting, either. You should read “How Christ Said the First Mass.” You can get it from amazon.com. I have to go now, but I will get the sources for Tradition of Latin.

Matthew

By the way, if you asked anyone about that before Vatican II, you would get a universal, yes, it is a Tradition; however, now after Vat II people try to down play the fact that Latin is the language of the Church. God bless.
 
Melman,

You said, “I’m with you most of the way (I can’t miss the rail, I never experienced it).”

Why not try to experience it first before you comment on it?
 
40.png
aByzantineCatho:
Melman,

You said, “I’m with you most of the way (I can’t miss the rail, I never experienced it).”

Why not try to experience it first before you comment on it?
Click to expand...
Is English not your first language? I ask that sincerely. I can’t agree nor disagree with the statement “I miss the rail”. In the context, I think that is clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top