The hardest thing about my last 20 years as a priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What has this priest been doing for the last 20 years if his congregation behaves this way? Has he not been teaching and setting the example he desires?

I see this article as nothing more than a slam on the OF and everything post-VII, I call it the “If only… syndrome” “If only we still had altar rails…”
“If only there was no communion in the hand…” blah, blah, blah,
“then the Church would be perfect!”

Well, I hate to break it to you Father, et. al, the Church is made up of sinners like me, who are not perfect, so the Church will never be perfect, and all the wishful thinking and nostalgia of a time the never existed in real life is not going to change that.
 
CRV said:
When I do attend the OF Mass, I hardly see anyone bow before approaching for Communion, yet we are supposed to make that gesture.
Click to expand...
In the US all that is required is a bow of the head. It should not be discernible to anyone other than the person receiving and the person distributing.
 
CilladeRoma said:
all that is required is a bow of the head
Click to expand...
Correct.

Bit hard to not see when I usually sit a few pews from the front - therefore I do see those before me who either bow or not bow. They just ‘step up’, hold their cupped hands out, some say Amen - most don’t, then return to their pews. There are two lines up the centre isle at my parish.
 
OK, I will take your word for it.
I am an EMHC, 99.9% of the people I have served in my lifetime show some sort of reverence. However, I don’t really pay attention if I am not acting as an EMHC, so maybe it is a bigger problem than I see it as.
 
CilladeRoma said:
and all the wishful thinking and nostalgia of a time the never existed in real life
Click to expand...
I think father addressed this in his article.
This is not nostalgia. It is a pastor’s reaction to seeing the terrifying collapse of faith in the West. These liturgical gestures are important not because they are old, but because they express an attitude towards the majesty of God which has been lost.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
On the positive side I have to say that my recent OF parish Mass celebrates the ordinary form quite reverently. We use altar servers with patens, minimize the use of EMHC’s, and everything is done with great reverence. It is possible.
 
JimG said:
On the positive side I have to say that my recent OF parish Mass celebrates the ordinary form quite reverently. We use altar servers with patens, minimize the use of EMHC’s, and everything is done with great reverence. It is possible.
Click to expand...
The problem is that seems to be the motto of and the defense of the Novus Ordo Missae. The Tridentine rite does not need a clarifying statement like “it is possible” It simply IS.
 
I think my grandfather and Uncles would argue that the typical early morning EF they were altar boys at was anything but reverent. Priest would speed through prayers and take short cuts back then too. It’s just since no one could hear anything and what they could hear was in a language most of them didn’t understand except for a few responses, no one knew.

Vatican II was called for because all was not perfect with the Church and St. John XXIII knew it.
 
It’s obvious that it was rampant in the pre-Vatican II Church with roots in the seminaries and minor seminaries. What was found in the Pennsylvania report dates back 70 years. Abuse victims oftentimes become abusers. Its familiar and normal. It’s what they know. It feeds upon itself in an unbroken chain, unless that person is able to break free from the cycle. That’s why I have great compassion for abuse victims and abusers. Abuse warps you, until what is evil appears good.

I don’t have proof, but the problem is systemic, worldwide and involves perhaps thousands of priests. Logic dictates that clerical sexual abuse has been an unacknowledged problem for hundreds of years. That’s why the Vatican can’t effectively address the rot and root it out once and for all. It’s too deeply embedded. It will take a century or more to truly cleanse the Church.

We need a council. A holy council with lay participation must be called by the Pope to reform the priesthood. We must follow the example of the East and once again have celibate and married priests. Lay oversight is no longer optional. The laity can no longer allow Christ’s Church to be enslaved and harmed by a tradition with no biblical basis.

I also suspect that there’s a small, but significant percentage of priests that hate Jesus and abuse his sheep to destroy the Church. They worship Satan and are fully aware of their mission. Spiritual warfare is real.
 
Last edited:
Bushum said:
he problem is that seems to be the motto of and the defense of the Novus Ordo Missae. The Tridentine rite does not need a clarifying statement like “it is possible” It simply IS.
Click to expand...
I do admit that with the OF, at least at this stage of the game, one must make a conscious effort to ensure reverence. And some pastors have done that.
 
Yes I am familiar with all of the anecdotes about the low masses of the past.
CilladeRoma said:
Vatican II was called for because all was not perfect with the Church and St. John XXIII knew it.
Click to expand...
So to fix it they burnt the whole thing down and started over! That’s what I normally do when I have a needed repair in my house or vehicle. If it was meant to fix the Church then why was it considered a purely ecumenical council with no clarification of dogma or doctrine and no infallible teaching? The reason for its calling is speculation and opinion from both sides. We can never get inside the head of those who called for it.
 
Last edited:
Actually, I don’t think that John XXIII had any particular updates in mind when he called the Council, including any possible Mass revision. At my parish they sent out questionairres asking for ideas on what should be brought up at the Council.
 
I sometimes go to adoration, but I think the East is correct in saying that consuming Jesus, becoming one with him, and then sharing him with the world is the reason the Eucharist was instituted by God.
 
Last edited:
glencor63 said:
I don’t have proof, but the problem is systemic, worldwide and involves perhaps thousands of priests.
Click to expand...
That’s a rather strong assertion considering your note that you lack proof.
May God bless you and all who visit this thread.
Amen.
 
Last edited:
How many priests do you think it involves? How many dioceses exist and how many priests? There have been cases worldwide. The sexual abuse crisis is truly a spider’s web. Here’s an article for you. Do your own research. Peace.

www.google.com

Sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church – Face the systemic issues

The Catholic Church faces one of its biggest crises since the Protestant Reformation: the recent and ongoing exposé of clergy sex abuse. This time it has also revealed an entrenched culture of covering up such abuse by high-ranking church officials. There is no end in sight unless a number of...
www.google.com www.google.com
 
Last edited:
glencor63 said:
I sometimes go to adoration, but I think the East is correct in saying that consuming Jesus, becoming one with him, and then sharing him with the world is the reason the Eucharist was instituted by God.
Click to expand...
It was primarily why Jesus instituted the Eucharist.

Your previous post caught my attention because you said it was not meant for worship. What came to mind is the story in St John’s gospel when Jesus healed the blind man, the man worshipped Jesus. Jesus did not say “no need for that, I’ve come to serve”.
 
He did not institute the Eucharist to be worshipped. It was instituted to be consumed, to infuse us with grace so that we could go out and evangelize. The Roman Catholic Church made it an object of adoration and worship outside the Mass. The Eastern Rite Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church has never had adoration or Eucharistic processions. It’s a western tradition. It started in the Middle Ages. It’s not necessarily a bad tradition, but it’s not something in which the early Christians participated, otherwise it would be an Eastern practice too. It’s not a practice there.
 
Last edited:
farronwolf said:
But there are many, many factors that have contributed to changes which have affected the Church.
Click to expand...
Yes, I was rather surprised by what he said.

I am in the US and he in the UK, so I imagine the experiences were very different. Plus, he has been a priest longer than I’ve been alive, and he’s been a priest so he has entirely different conversations with people than I do.

For these reasons, he may have a better vantage than we do for what he is saying.

My main thought, here in the US and too young to have made a decision for myself at the time, is that a lot of those people who left were ordained and/or brought up in the pre-V2 church so I think a lot of other things came into play.
 
glencor63 said:
He did not institute the Eucharist to be worshipped. It was instituted to be consumed, to infuse us with grace so that we could go out and evangelize. The Roman Catholic Church made it an object of adoration and worship outside the Mass. The Eastern Rite Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church has never had adoration or Eucharistic processions. It’s a western tradition. It started in the Middle Ages. It’s not necessarily a bad tradition, but it’s not something in which the early Christians participated, otherwise it would be an Eastern practice too. It’s not a practice there.
Click to expand...
If you believe the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus is present in the Eucharist then why not take the time to adore Jesus in Eucharist? Would there be any harm?
 
It’s true.
Also I notice not many people make a profound bow during the Credo. We all are supposed to bow at the part about the incarnation.
In the EF you kneel.( Though I believe it is also prescribed to kneel for this in the OF on the Nativity and the Annunciation.) But i feel like if we are taught to kneel during it, it becomes more of a known gesture, whereas bowing it seems many people just aren’t aware of because it isn’t as defined for many people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top