G
giuseppeTO
Guest
See, I knew were lightening up Newt! I am still trying to picture you smiling though.
- Status
P
pnewton
Guest
One can prefer simple worship and still be very knowledgable on liturgy.
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. - Matthew 18:3
Simplicity can have greater beauty than complexity. Likewise, there is a beauty in the more intricate and meaning-filled liturgy.
O
Onegin
Guest
Okay, so here’s a bargain. You can call it the “so called Tridentine Mass” if I get to call them the “so called excommunications.” Sound fair?
I thought so.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Good way of putting it. I prefer to call it great art. If each gesture or each symbol or each rubric is worth a thousand words, then certainly the EF conveys more meaning in the same Mass. But simplicity has its place too, although you don’t want to insult intelligences either.
You’re okay pn, no matter whether you smile or not.
O
otjm
Guest
Clearly some of us have seen both. And some of us have seen a lack of reverence in both.
There is an assumption, false at its presumption, that the EF is in and of itself, per se, more reverent.
Reverence is as reverence does. You would only have to have attended one of the 6:30 a.m. Masses I was an altar server for in my youth (1957 - 1960) with a parish pastor (we had assistant priests in the parish then) who had a severe problem with alcohol. He could come into the sacristy and if he was lit - whether he had been drinking before then or was still lit from the night before I don’t know - and you had better be on your mark; we swore he could say Latin not only breathing out but breathing in. The early Mass was not particularly long, 20 to 22 minutes; if he had been drinking it got down towards a 15 minute Mass. And when the altar boy had to do something - move the Missal from the Epistle side to the Gospel side, or get the water and wine, you had better be hustling.
Not all Masses he said were such; the drinking came and went. And when he wasn’t drinking, he was a good priest.
The point I am trying to make is that I have been to very reverent OF Masses, as well as very reverent EF Masses; and I have been to irreverent Masses in both the EF and the OF form.
What is happening is that the EF is so infrequent, and there are so few priests saying it, that what we have is a clergy and parishoners who are very focused on it and very reverent. What we had before Vatican 2 was far less chaos in the rubrics - the EF was cut and dried - but some were more reverent than others, just as in the OF today some are more reverent than others.
However, the presumption is that because the very few Masses said in the EF are said very reverently, and because we see the average; - good, bad and indifferent in the OF - that the EF is intrinsically more reverent. That is just hogwash; it confuses the reverence of the priest, or lack of it, with the form. The Mass I go to in my parish is the OF (not surprisingly in Oregon - the EF is noted by its absence) and is very reverent. The Masses I attend at the local Trappist Abbey are very reverent, and in the OF. And I am sure if some priest were to pick up the EF and start saying it, it would also be very reverent. But to say that one form is more reverent than the other is to miss the point, primarily for lack of experience.
The EF is a more complicated rubric. There is more genuflecting; there is more of an issue of transendence. None of that makes it more reverent, as it can be said with sloppiness (and has been in the past).
In addition, for those whose experience of the EF is what we had called a high Mass (and if Malphono is lurking he can give the correct terminology) or a sung Mass and not the EF that was said weekdays, they might be a bit disappointed in that there was no singing on the part of a choir, the priest did not intone any of the prayers, and it was relatively short in duration. Those who presume that the EF is always with all of the pomp and circumstance are simply unaware that such used to be anything but the normal, everyday or even every week experience. If they are seeing an EF Mass with incense used, they need to understand that was not the norm even for the one sung Sunday EF Mass back then. Incense came out in two circumstances then - for a funeral, and for the two Solemn High Masses we had each year. I have seen far more incense used in the OF than I ever saw in the EF.
None of this is to say that the EF does not lend itself much more to pomp and circumstance; but only that there seems to be a presumption that such pomp and circumstance was what “always happened”. It didn’t to the degree that we now see (because in part it is so rarely said).
M
mick321
Guest
For the record, I did not intend to misquote the Holy Father, only to inject a bit of my own opinion into my own opinion. Within the context of this thread, there have been a few opinions stated, no?
Cardinal Ratzinger did not order the excommunication of SSPX’s Bishops. When he became the Supreme Pontiff in 2005, he inherited the unfinished business of the previous administration. To his credit, he has worked to bring an unfortunate and embarrassing situation to resolution, for the good of the Society and the Church.
Some folks [myself included] believe that the matter was largely resolved before the excommunications were lifted. Otherwise, why would they be lifted? What remains is the preparation of the two press releases and selecting a date for the public declaration that SSPX is in full communion with the Church.
I pray that this happens sooner rather than later. Until that day, there will be no place for faithful Catholics to confess - and receive absolution for - accepting communion in the hand.
F
fish90
Guest
otjm, wonderful post!!!
Great point about how there is a misconception between reverence and the OF and EF. What do you think about the lack of latin and the lack of Gregorian Chant, though?
[36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
[116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.
But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.]
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
Great point about how there is a misconception between reverence and the OF and EF. What do you think about the lack of latin and the lack of Gregorian Chant, though?
[36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
- But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.]
[116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.
But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.]
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
O
otjm
Guest
- considering that it is not a sin, there is nothign to confess. That was how the early Church received it, and there is evidence of it continuing into the 10th century. It is only those who were taught that it was a sin who get stuck on a non-point.
O
otjm
Guest
I happen to love Gregorian chant done correctly. part of the reason that Chant was included in the documents is that world wide bodfre V2 it was already falling off. I had the grace to be in seminary at the time that we had a professor who was trained in Europe in Chant. During my second year of college, the college minor and the majors were pulled together to record a record of chant (LP to anyone who has a clue what that means). He could walk up and down the isle, stop, listen, and sort out one person out of a group of what - 75 maybe? who was singing flat. Anyone who could not sing on key was out. And then the work began.otjm, wonderful post!!!
Great point about how there is a misconception between reverence and the OF and EF. What do you think about the lack of latin and the lack of Gregorian Chant, though?
And I can’t stand Gregorian Chant slaughtered. As much as I love our local Trappist Abbey, they are growing old and have lost some of their good voices, and the others are mostly aged now. While it may not be Gregorian Chant, they still sing chant (all English), but not anywhere near what they could do 40 years ago. When I was poking my nose around the Abbey some 45 or so years ago, one of the requirements then was that you could sing well (not necessarily a trained voice, but you had to be able to hit the notes square on). Now, it seems as if they have put a lid on the wash tub so the notes don’t go too far astray…
And frankly, I have a problem with choirs which are too good. It comes all too close to a concert, and I don’t go to Mass to go to a concert or be entertained, so I am at a dilemma. I have yet to hear a congregation that does much better than slaughter it. It grates.
As to Latin: I took it in high school 2 years) then 2 years of Homeric Greek, then 2 more years in college seminary. I have no problem with some Latin retained - and a bit of Greek! - butr I would not lie and say that I don’t prefer the vernacular for the majority of the Mass. I wondered why, in 6th grade when I was learining to parrot the latin responses in 1957 why we had to ahve the Mass in Latin.
Does Chant seem to flow better in Latin? To me, sometimes yes, sometimes no.
These are simply matters of my personal taste. For a while we had a totally professional choir who performed (sorry, my take) at the Saturday night Mass in one of the parishes in Portland. I would always take the RCIA class down to that, because the Mass was all in Latin, and the choir would do a Mass, say, from Palistrina in razor sharp 4 part voices, or some other of the older works. We had a retired bishop from New Zealand who would say the Mass, or one of the older priests of the diocese; the incense came out, and the pomp and circumstance to one who was not familiar with the EF was a wonder to behold. And RCIA members were of mixed opinion; some raved, and some quietly thanked me for taking them and had comments about it not being their taste.
But interestingly, aw our parish in the suburbs is about a 25 minute drive to that parish, I never heard of anyone going back. Apparently even those who loeved it could not be induced to drive that on a Saturday night.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
If a layperson is edified with the Novus Ordo (NO or OF) as it exists in his vicinity, fine. If he has children who grow up strong and well-educated in the Faith, also fine. This whole situation came about through an inextricable mixture of ‘bad’ things that happened around the same time. Most obvious was the collapse of discipline, so that outrageous abuses went unchecked for decades – whole young lifetimes. It was because I was seeing teenagers lapsing in droves during the late 70s & 80s that I began to question what was going on. I noticed that most of the older generation did not notice the many omissions & ambiguities in the Novus Ordo (see the Ottaviani Intervention, linked here several times, and Pope Paul’s New Mass by Michael Davies, etc.) … and most of the younger generation never learned the parts that are omitted. In such a situation, to ‘hold fast to what is good’ is common prudence. It has been recommended many times down the centuries by the saints. “In times of doubt, go to the Past”.
Here is a perfect illustration of the way people have been confused. In Pope John’s Opening Address, he stated that the Council would be “mainly pastoral”. Every time the more tradition-minded council Fathers asked for more clarity and precision, they were told, “But this is a pastoral council – we need to talk simply to Modern man”. Yet the minute their defective texts were voted in, they decided they were dogmatic as well – and exploited the ambiguities. By now, in the year 2010, this has been clearly and frequently documented. there is no point denying it. that is why the discussions between the Vatican and the SSPX are going on now.
Having studied these documents, I know for a certainty that this is not so. Yes, it is possible to fish true Catholic teaching out of them, and only one statement is perhaps clearly heretical (about the right to practise one’s false religion in the public forum. Luckily the charisma of infallibility was not invoked on this document) … But they give endless scope for error, which scope was fully exploited for decades. Nothing of the kind has ever been done with the documents of earlier ecumenical councils, for the simple reason that they were stated unambiguously.
In some cases, the Vatican II documents state almost word-for-word a proposition that had previously been formally condemned as a modernist error.
Padre Pio never offered Mass according to the Novus Ordo in his life, and prayed that he would die before he was formally commanded under his vow of obedience to do so. His prayer was heard. I was told this in the Convent near Rome founded by himself & Dom Putti, where his vestments and chalice, with many relics, are kept in a small museum.
A
Aramis
Guest
My dad is a deacon. At his ordination to the deaconate, he made solemn promises to obey the bishop under penalty of sin. Being promises, not vows, the bishop may dispense or release them, but until that time, it is in fact a sin for my dad to disobey the bishop, or the Pope. Likewise, every deacon I know has made promises of obedience, except those in religious communities. And every priest has been ordained a deacon. The last priestly ordination I saw included renewal of promises of chastity and obedience.
Religious clerics make vows, which require papal release, of obedience to their lawful superiors as religious; those remain binding when ordained. (Not just the bishop and pope, but their superior, be he hegumen, protohegumen, abbot, superior, or superior general, and whomever such should assign over him.)
It’s part and parcel of clerical life. And it is in canon law that disobedience by a cleric is a grave sin.
Obedience is not a promise taken by the average parishioner; where the minor orders exist, they may be placed under promises of obedience, but the promises or vows of obedience mark them as different from normal laypersons. For a layman, disobedience is a minor sin, for they have not taken that oath to obey.
In disobeying, they sinned gravely. Whether that grave sin is mortal or not is a matter between them, their canonically mandated confessor (for the bishops in question, the pope, due to the nature of the act), and God.
M
mick321
Guest
- Keep telling yourself that.
- Recently? What has he done now, questioned some of the numbers on global climate change? Would it be helpful if he was ordered to apologize to everyone on earth who has a hybrid vehicle in their garage?
- The Church and its clergy would do well to concentrate their efforts on the salvation of souls - a field in which they have expertise.
.
P
pnewton
Guest
I think this is the statement that was being referred to where Bishop Williamson said, "Therefore, either the Fraternity betrays itself or Rome converts, or it is a dialogue of the deaf.”
catholicnewsagency.com/news/bishop_williamson_calls_talks_between_sspx_and_vatican_dialogue_of_the_deaf/
Only one can sit in the Chair of Peter. It’s not a sofa.
Here is another article on who this man is.
content.usatoday.com/communities/Religion/post/2010/01/holocaust-jews-catholic-vatican-pope-benedict-richard-williamson/1
If you reading the comments you will see that this man does have some who agree with him. I regret that it appears any reconcilliation with the SSPX will spin off a dissident group (again) of those that will not be reconcilled to the Church.
G
giuseppeTO
Guest
I too was around before the council and certainly a priest with a severe alcohol problem in 1960 is no different thant one in 2010. There is no predicting what he will do during Mass. Very simply, and I don’t think I am painting with a broad brush, I find that it is more the mindset that has developed around the OF over 40 years, and the mindset of the church before the modernizing reforms of the council.
In general, when one goes into a church where the OF is exclusively offered, whether the Mass itself is more reverend or the Mass is a hootenanny (drums, flutes, guitar, clapping, etc), the atmosphere in the church prior to Mass is one of a social gathering. In other words, people conversing in the pews, in the back of the church, and not always in subdued tones and whispers but in a normal voice. There are certainly churches where the rosary is recited before the Mass, but my experience is that this is the exception. It is not unusual to see people greet and shake hands even as they are returning from Communion. This is generally also the case immediately after Mass. That has been my experience in the past across many churches in different cities.
In churches which exclusively offer the EF, prior to Mass the church is generally silent and people are praying. Frequently, the rosary is recited. After Mass, ingeneral, more people remain in the pews for a longer time to make their thanksgiving after Mass and again, there is very little small talk while still in the church proper out of a IMHO a keener respect for those still at prayer.
Of course, there is always the exception on both sides, but in my experience from the pre-conciliar church, through many years in the modern church, and then again in churches offering the indult, in FSSP and SSPX churches, this is what I have found.
The interesting thing I found when attending the indult Mass in Baltimore, is that in the early Mass in the OF, people behaved as the do prior to and after Mass in most churches … that is “chatty”. In the same church, prior to the TLM, people acted as i have characterized those in the exclusive TLM parishes, quiet and prayerful.
So I agree with OT that it probably has less to do with how reverend the particular Mass itself is in either form, but rather the mindset of the faithful preparing for either form.
P
ProVobis
Guest
This is your time bomb, which epitomizes many of the Vatican II documents. Basically, given enough time, it makes you wonder if any Vatican II “teaching” will still be applicable.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I guess I can’t relate. So what do they say “Bless me father for I have sinned. I disobeyed my bishop 4 times”? I don’t think you understand moral theology beyond kindergarten if you keep using the word “obedience” over and over. I would expect someone who is educated use a little less generalizations in his attacks and be a lot less judgemental as well.
A
Aramis
Guest
If you see the truth of the church’s canon law, you realize it is not “attack.”
For a cleric to disobey breaks a promise made before God. That is axiomatically a sin. If you can’t understand that, it is your understanding that is limited to the kindergarden level.
A cleric is called by their promises or vows to be obedient, even as Christ was obedient.
Provobis, go reread the Gospel story of the Wedding at Cana… Jesus did not want to perform the miracle, but in obedience to Mary, he did so anyway. Obedience has always been part of the Jewish understanding of the 10 commandments, as well.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
I agree.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
The Tridentine rubrics left the very minimum to the discretion of the priest – knowing that “we hold a treasure in earthen vessels”. The rubric for the TLM was (and presumably still is, under its new name of the Extraordinary Form) that the Missa Lecta (Low Mass) is to take no less than 25 minutes and no more than 35. See, they had even this catered for. The priest you speak of was disobeying the rubrics.
otjm, would you not agree that the TLM operates to hide the personality of the priest, while the NO brings it into prominence?
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
Amen to all that. Thank God for Pope Benedict. Only, Mick, do be careful to label opinions as such, or you will draw rebukes.
- Status