C
Crusader
Guest
Deacon Ed:
They must have skipped all this in the priest’s school he attended…
- Status
D
deogratias
Guest
Thats a pretty strong accusation - impersonation - can you back that up?
I happen to know he is who he says he is - a priest and a pastor of a parish and one who is as human as we are and moved to defend himself when attacked by you.
You don’t like what he said and so you in turn reply that he is a phony. I might not agree with his language but I do agree that often you are arrogant, condescending, rude and give yourself some self-appointed authority to always be right in your posts. You challenge everyone and their authority and knowledge in the meantime. You question the Deacon about his education. You are not helpful but like to prove you are right and have no charity towards your fellow posters at all. Perhaps I should be booted also but at least I will no longer have this supressed anger and feel good to have said this publically now.
O
otm
Guest
I would suggest that you re-read post 39 (and perhaps one or two others by Father JLT). It is more than just language; it is an ad hominem attack that was entirely unnecessary and disrespectful. While you are commenting on Crusader’s attitude, I found his query to Deacon Ed totally innocuous; I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps you don’t like Crusader ( he is a bit strong), or perhaps you don’t like his position. But between the two, if I were conversing with them, I would have a much harsher response to the statements from Father JLT.
D
deogratias
Guest
What I don’t like is the turn this thread has taken and I think it should be locked so no further harsh words ensue.
It does not excuse his accusing the good father of impersonating a priest -
St. Josemaria Escriva writes
It does not excuse his accusing the good father of impersonating a priest -
St. Josemaria Escriva writes
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
In regards to the letter on the Old Mass in post #4, here is a different perspective offered by Fr. George William Rutler (I believe he appears at times on EWTN) in his book “A Crisis of Saints” (Ignatius Press). He is also a Priest who is old enough to have experienced the liturgy both before and after the changes. The emphases in bold are mine:
A Liturgical Parable
The Hard Truth
…We seem to slip out of that golden sense of ultimate truth in two ways. The first is by losing any real awareness of the holy. The second is by denying that it has been lost. Without lapsing into cricitism that would be out of place, suffice it to say that the worship of holiness is weak in our culture, and the beauty of holiness has been smudged in transmission through the revised liturgy. For without impugning its objective authenticity in any degree, its *bouleversement *[Complete overthrow; a reversal; a turning upside down] of the traditional Roman rite marks the first time in history that the Church has been an agent, however unintentionally, in the deprivation of culture, from the uprooting of classical language and sensibility to wanton deprreciation of the arts.
…It is immensely saddening to see so many elements of the Church, in her capacity as Mother of Western Culture, compliant in the promotion of ugliness. There may be no deterrent more formidable to countless potential converts than the low estate of the Church’s liturgical life, for the liturgy is the Church’s prime means of evangelism. Gone as into a primeval mist are the days not long ago when apologists regularly had to warn against being distracted by, or superficially attracted to, the beauty of the Church’s rites. And the plodding and static nature of the revised rites could not have been more ill-timed for a media culture so attuned to color and form and action.
(Pp. 107-108)
A Liturgical Parable
The Hard Truth
…We seem to slip out of that golden sense of ultimate truth in two ways. The first is by losing any real awareness of the holy. The second is by denying that it has been lost. Without lapsing into cricitism that would be out of place, suffice it to say that the worship of holiness is weak in our culture, and the beauty of holiness has been smudged in transmission through the revised liturgy. For without impugning its objective authenticity in any degree, its *bouleversement *[Complete overthrow; a reversal; a turning upside down] of the traditional Roman rite marks the first time in history that the Church has been an agent, however unintentionally, in the deprivation of culture, from the uprooting of classical language and sensibility to wanton deprreciation of the arts.
…It is immensely saddening to see so many elements of the Church, in her capacity as Mother of Western Culture, compliant in the promotion of ugliness. There may be no deterrent more formidable to countless potential converts than the low estate of the Church’s liturgical life, for the liturgy is the Church’s prime means of evangelism. Gone as into a primeval mist are the days not long ago when apologists regularly had to warn against being distracted by, or superficially attracted to, the beauty of the Church’s rites. And the plodding and static nature of the revised rites could not have been more ill-timed for a media culture so attuned to color and form and action.
(Pp. 107-108)
D
deogratias
Guest
I not too long ago read an address by John Paul II regarding beauty and I do wish I could locate it.
I don’t know how anyone can look at or hear what is beautiful and deny there is a God.
You may find this article By JAMES LIKOUDIS regarding the beauty of the liturgy interesting also.
credo.stormloader.com/Liturgy/liturgy4.htm
O
otm
Guest
Brennan Doherty:
Over time (from 6th grade through high school) I was an altar server pre Vatican 2, and I am well aware of the pomp and ceremony (and beauty) of a Solemn High Mass; I made my way from candle bearer (six of us) to alter server, to thurifer, to master of ceremonies.
Since Vatican 2 I have attended a Mass with over 9000 people in the Portland Coliseum, and numerous Masses on Christmas Eve at Our Lady of Guadalupe (Trappist) Abbey, Easter Vigil Masses at my parish, and Masses elsewhere (e.g. Mount Angel Abbey) for various occaasions, and found them to be somewhere betwen awesome and absolutely awesome. God is both transcendent and imminent. The current Ordo Missae can put too much emphasis on the imminent, but in my experience, that is neither a prerequsite nor is it intrinsic. The transcendent element is there and can be brought forward by those who understand liturgy. Sadly, not all priests have much depth in liturgy, and a few lack reverence. But even with a lack of depth in liturgy, reverence can do wonders. There can be tremendous beauty in the Ordo Missae, and it doesn’t need to be “renewed” or “revised” to accomplish it. There can be plenty of color and form and action, and it can be done reverently. I’ve seen it lots of times.
All of which proves the old adage: “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.
Over time (from 6th grade through high school) I was an altar server pre Vatican 2, and I am well aware of the pomp and ceremony (and beauty) of a Solemn High Mass; I made my way from candle bearer (six of us) to alter server, to thurifer, to master of ceremonies.
Since Vatican 2 I have attended a Mass with over 9000 people in the Portland Coliseum, and numerous Masses on Christmas Eve at Our Lady of Guadalupe (Trappist) Abbey, Easter Vigil Masses at my parish, and Masses elsewhere (e.g. Mount Angel Abbey) for various occaasions, and found them to be somewhere betwen awesome and absolutely awesome. God is both transcendent and imminent. The current Ordo Missae can put too much emphasis on the imminent, but in my experience, that is neither a prerequsite nor is it intrinsic. The transcendent element is there and can be brought forward by those who understand liturgy. Sadly, not all priests have much depth in liturgy, and a few lack reverence. But even with a lack of depth in liturgy, reverence can do wonders. There can be tremendous beauty in the Ordo Missae, and it doesn’t need to be “renewed” or “revised” to accomplish it. There can be plenty of color and form and action, and it can be done reverently. I’ve seen it lots of times.
K
katolik
Guest
Show me where Traditionalists believe that 1950 was perfect and there were no abuses.
D
Deacon_Ed
Guest
Although I almost never post my own opinion, let me offer it here since Crusader thinks he now understands my though process (something I sincerely doubt since I don’t understand my own thought process).
To put things in context: I was raised in the final days of the Tridentine Mass. I was an altar server who spent eight years serving the Tridentine Mass. I have served it twice as a deacon. I grew up with the Baltimore Catechism and the good nuns of three different orders teaching me. I am a cradle Catholic of the Latin Rite. I grew up in a very conservative houshold in three different conservative communities.
I well recall time as an altar server wondering what all the people were doing praying the rosary, reading the bulletin, or the Sunday paper while Father and the two altar servers were “doing” Mass for them.
I was ready for the reforms when they came because I could see the disrespect that the Mass was getting, not just from the people but from priests who rushed through the Mass (15 minutes on weekdays, 35 to 45 minutes on Sundays).
I watched the reforms, often without understanding what was being done or why. Yet, in general, I felt the reforms brought the Mass closer to the people (not the people closer to the Mass). In all, the reforms generally did precisely what they were engineered to do.
Looking back some 40 years now, I also see the cost of the reforms. We lost the sense of the sacred. By overemphasizing the common priesthood of all believers, by eliminating the altar rail, by many little things, we lost a sense of the sacred. The Mass became plebian in execution while remaining Divine in nature. The vast dichotomy between the execution and the purpose left people without that sense of the sacred. It also eroded the sense of Mystery that is present in the Eucharist.
Yet, the reforms alone did not cause this. The society into which the reforms were introduced had already begun to trivialize virtually everything of merit. Marriage became the subject of jokes on late night television. Sexual faithfulness was considered a useless concession to the non-birth control era and was discarded by an ever more callous society bent on narcissism as the ultimate sense of self expression.
The combination of these two things lead to an errosion of the basic structure of the family which, ultimately, led to an errosion of the power of the Church to speak to the moral crisis that faces us.
Everything is interconnected, and to attmpt to lay the blame on Vatican II is simply to ignore the reality of what is happening around us.
Deacon Ed
To put things in context: I was raised in the final days of the Tridentine Mass. I was an altar server who spent eight years serving the Tridentine Mass. I have served it twice as a deacon. I grew up with the Baltimore Catechism and the good nuns of three different orders teaching me. I am a cradle Catholic of the Latin Rite. I grew up in a very conservative houshold in three different conservative communities.
I well recall time as an altar server wondering what all the people were doing praying the rosary, reading the bulletin, or the Sunday paper while Father and the two altar servers were “doing” Mass for them.
I was ready for the reforms when they came because I could see the disrespect that the Mass was getting, not just from the people but from priests who rushed through the Mass (15 minutes on weekdays, 35 to 45 minutes on Sundays).
I watched the reforms, often without understanding what was being done or why. Yet, in general, I felt the reforms brought the Mass closer to the people (not the people closer to the Mass). In all, the reforms generally did precisely what they were engineered to do.
Looking back some 40 years now, I also see the cost of the reforms. We lost the sense of the sacred. By overemphasizing the common priesthood of all believers, by eliminating the altar rail, by many little things, we lost a sense of the sacred. The Mass became plebian in execution while remaining Divine in nature. The vast dichotomy between the execution and the purpose left people without that sense of the sacred. It also eroded the sense of Mystery that is present in the Eucharist.
Yet, the reforms alone did not cause this. The society into which the reforms were introduced had already begun to trivialize virtually everything of merit. Marriage became the subject of jokes on late night television. Sexual faithfulness was considered a useless concession to the non-birth control era and was discarded by an ever more callous society bent on narcissism as the ultimate sense of self expression.
The combination of these two things lead to an errosion of the basic structure of the family which, ultimately, led to an errosion of the power of the Church to speak to the moral crisis that faces us.
Everything is interconnected, and to attmpt to lay the blame on Vatican II is simply to ignore the reality of what is happening around us.
Deacon Ed
K
katolik
Guest
These parishes could be mistaken as anglican, possibly…
D
deogratias
Guest
??? how so
I don’t know about the other one but St. Agnes is definitely Catholic and their Latin Novus Ordo Mass is so lovely that some people thought they had attended a TLM -
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
There are simply objective standards to beauty. There are reasons why a Mozart symphony is actually a greater work of art, and better for the world, than a pop song, even if more people listen to pop songs. There are reasons why a Shakespeare play is a greater work of art than a romance novel, even if romance novels are more popular and someone says they get more out of one than a Shakespeare play.
I must also say I have attended the Novus Ordo where it was celebrated with as much reverence (and no abuses) as anywhere in the country. The Gregorian chant is great, yet I can think of no better terms for the nature of the new rite than the words used by Fr. Rutler: “plodding and static.”
Here is a quote from Dietrich von Hildebrand’s essay, “The Case for the Latin Mass”
When St. Bonaventure writes in *Itinerarium Mentis ad Deum *that only a man of desire (such as Daniel) can understand God, he means that a certain attitude of soul must be achieved in order to understand the world of God, into which He wants to lead us. This counsel is especially applicable to the Church’s liturgy. The sursum corda-the lifting up of our hearts-is the first requirement for real participation in the mass. Nothing could better obstruct the confrontation of man with God than the notion that we “go unto the altar of God” as we would go to a pleasant, relaxing social gathering. This is why the Latin mass with Gregorian chant, which raises us up to a sacred atmosphere, is vastly superior to a vernacular mass with popular songs, which leaves us in a profane, merely natural atmosphere.
The basic error of most of the innovations is to imagine that the new liturgy brings the holy sacrifice of the mass nearer to the faithful, that shorn of its old rituals the mass now enters into the substance of our lives. For the question is whether we better meet Christ in the mass by soaring up to Him, or by dragging Him down into our own pedestrian, workaday world. The innovators would replace holy intimacy with Christ by an unbecoming familiarity. The new liturgy actually threatens to frustrate the confrontation with Christ, for it discourages reverence in the face of mystery, precludes awe, and all but extinguishes a sense of sacredness. What really matters, surely, is not whether the faithful feel at home at mass, but whether they are drawn out of their ordinary lives into the world of Christ-whether their attitude is the response of ultimate reverence: whether they are imbued with the reality of Christ.
C
Crusader
Guest
Deacon Ed:
I asked about your educational background because I have had some difficult moments with a deacon in person, in the past.
To a large degree I attributed his personality to his limited education – a HS graduate plus 18 months in a formation. His attitude baoiled down to this: “I’m right because I’m ordained.” It was problematic to say the least.
I was just curious about your background prior to joining a diaconate formation – which hopefully lasted longer than 18 months.
Please don’t get so defensive.
I asked about your educational background because I have had some difficult moments with a deacon in person, in the past.
To a large degree I attributed his personality to his limited education – a HS graduate plus 18 months in a formation. His attitude baoiled down to this: “I’m right because I’m ordained.” It was problematic to say the least.
I was just curious about your background prior to joining a diaconate formation – which hopefully lasted longer than 18 months.
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
deogratias, great article! Thanks!
C
Crusader
Guest
What’s a “Traditionalist?”
Sounds like a new Protestant denomination of some sort…
D
Deacon_Ed
Guest
Well, I don’t think the graces of ordination have anything to do with me being right! I do think that when I post what the Church teaches I am right because the Church is right. When I post my own opinion – that’s when I’m probably wrong.
As for my diaconal formation – it was four years in length.
BTW, I also hold a certificate in Sign Language Education which took me three years to earn going to school part time (no more than two classes per semester).
Deacon Ed
P
Paul_Stephens
Guest
Charity Warning
The level of charity on this thread has deteriorated to a point where it is dangerously close to being closed should things not take a dramatic turn for the better.
Please self edit for tone and content before pressing the submit button.
Paul Stephens
Moderator
The level of charity on this thread has deteriorated to a point where it is dangerously close to being closed should things not take a dramatic turn for the better.
Please self edit for tone and content before pressing the submit button.
Paul Stephens
Moderator
D
deogratias
Guest
How many times have you asked that question in the past?
I submit that you are a traditionalist - i.e. an orthodox Catholic.
With all charity, I also submit when you keep posing this question, you are looking to pick a fight.
I am hanging up my gloves where you are concerned as the moderators request we do in this thread. Have a nice time.
K
katolik
Guest
deogratias said:
Let me show you:
High church Anglican
www.stmarythevirgin.org.uk/Images/ServicesProcessions/HighMass.jpg
www.stmarythevirgin.org.uk/Images/ServicesProcessions/Midcomm.html
See don’t it look like a TLM?
O
oat_soda
Guest
Brennan, you always post good stuff.
i’ve heard the mass being compared to a drama or work of art. when you’re at a divine liturgy or tridentine mass, they have this same aspect to it. the latin tongue, beautiful prayers, chant, vestments, and the movements of the priest and servers elevate you from the ordinary and mundane. for me, it feels like there is this cosmic dimension to it and heaven and earth are united on the altar in a mysterious way.
the first time i went to a latin mass, i felt an attraction to the priesthood. i’m sure it has to do with the allure of the latin mass. the new mass seems more choppy and dry. it doesn’t flow like the divine liturgy or tridentine mass. i even went to a novus order latin mass done ad orientem but it still didn’t flow like the old mass. this is my experience and other people may think differently but for me the new mass should have retained more of the old. this would have made the changes more organic.
why couldn’t they leave it an option to say the psalm 42 at the foot of the altar or the silent cannon?
i’ve heard the mass being compared to a drama or work of art. when you’re at a divine liturgy or tridentine mass, they have this same aspect to it. the latin tongue, beautiful prayers, chant, vestments, and the movements of the priest and servers elevate you from the ordinary and mundane. for me, it feels like there is this cosmic dimension to it and heaven and earth are united on the altar in a mysterious way.
the first time i went to a latin mass, i felt an attraction to the priesthood. i’m sure it has to do with the allure of the latin mass. the new mass seems more choppy and dry. it doesn’t flow like the divine liturgy or tridentine mass. i even went to a novus order latin mass done ad orientem but it still didn’t flow like the old mass. this is my experience and other people may think differently but for me the new mass should have retained more of the old. this would have made the changes more organic.
why couldn’t they leave it an option to say the psalm 42 at the foot of the altar or the silent cannon?
- Status