Was Novus Ordo a good idea

[Fergal]

**:tsktsk:Tut Tut for asking this question. Two things I wanna share here.

Firstly this question is implying that the Council was a human idea and not part of a greater divine plan.

Secondly if you want to consider it an idea, since when did the Holy Spirit have a bad idea? Are you asking us to judge the inspirations of the Holy Spirit through our own human perspective as good or bad?

---

Oh and another thing, which ‘novus ordo’ are you taking about? Cardinal Arinze has recently reminded us that in 1570 a new missal was published and was made obligatory for the entire Church except for dioceses and religious orders that had their own liturgy for at least 200 years. It lasted for 400 years.
**
See, Pope Pius V, whose task as pontiff was to carry out the edicts of the Council of Trent, saw in liturgical renewal the need for a new missal. He had 3 options: create an entirely new missal, select the time honored prayers from a variety of sources in line with the Renaissance spirit of rediscovery of antiquity, or select one Mass from those in existence, simplify it and impose it on the Church. Pius V chose the third option, a revision of the "Mass According to the Observance of the Roman Curia) and published it on July 14, 1570. It courageously suppressed many votive Masses and feasts of saints canonized by the popular piety of the medieval Church.

**Along its 2000 year path of evolution, the Eucharistic liturgy has undergone many changes and been celebrated in numerous ways as dictated by culture, the political environment and world events. Sketching the path of celebration in the past allows us to better appreciate the opportunities that the Eucharist in all its richness and diversity - as well as similarities - holds for us today and its possibilities for the future.

If people are being led away it is by the world, the flesh and the devil. Certainly not by the Holy Mass.
**

 

[BulldogCath]

Church,

I got lazy-God bless
Church Militant:

Hey Bulldog!
What happened to all the popes prior to Pius I and post Pius XII?

 

[BulldogCath]

Jkirk

**I take offense to the church holding the indult and the TLM as some sort of hostage or barganing chip over me and all who have “doubts” about the Novus Ordo Mass, or who just plain dont like it as it is chock full of abuses. **I go to church to worship God, not the person next to me who I have to shake hands with because some Protestant thought it was a good idea in 1970. I respect the NO Mass only because I have to, but for no other reason.

The church -and for that matter the posters and those who run this board-treat the Protestants, Schismatic Orthodox, the Jews, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Moslems, and all who are out for the destruction and have done severe harm to the church over the centuries----Better than they treat those who hold true to the church and all of her teachings and call themselves Traditionalists-and that is a darn shame!

I go to the indult mass as much as possible, and also attend an independent church with independent traditional priests who offer the traditional mass, sacraments, have their own seminary with 15 seminarians (more than my entire diocese seminaries have with over 2 M catholics), schools and convents. I also go to the Novus Ordo mass when it is convenient and when I can not make the Indult or Latin Mass. So now you know all there is to know about Bulldog and his family.

JKirkLVNV:

Sorry if I read you wrong, but see the highlighted above. Perhaps you go to the Mass of Paul VI, and then help others who attend the Indult in another diocese distribute fliers that deprecate the Mass (NO)? If so, one can only see that as activity intended to lead the faithful away from the normative Mass. The Indult is supposed to be for any and all who have a devotion to the traditional Mass and is not supposed to call into question the validity or efficacy of the NO Mass. Perhaps you go to the Mass of Paul VI, and then help others who attend the schismatic SSPX distribute fliers that deprecate the Mass (NO)? If so, that would be to materially aid in the schism. If I’m incorrect, perhaps you would enlighten me.

 

[Mycroft]

first, its true the holy spirit guides the church but the people in the church can and have made mistakes. i never heard of any good reasons why people wanted to change the mass, and if you look at the facts and polls, since vatican II many more catholics dont go to church every sunday, a lot think abortion and contraception is ok, and from what ive seen most of them just dont care about their religion at all. you cant just ignore it or say its a coincidence. and now a lot of people are having problems with liturgical abuses. i dont remember anything saying that god advised anyone to make changes in the church.

 

[pnewton]

Mycroft:

you cant just ignore it or say its a coincidence. and now a lot of people are having problems with liturgical abuses…

It is equally illogical to assume a causal relationship. There were a lot of other factors in the last forty years which could have had a negative impact on the general morality of America.

I would put the sexual revolution and the sin of abortion as a far greater danger to our moral fiber. Secular humanism and a corrupt media also play a role.

 

[Fergal]

Mycroft:

i dont remember anything saying that god advised anyone to make changes in the church.

Any dialogue or adult conversation about the role of the laity must take place with courage and openness to change. For a significant part of Catholic history, “change” has been somewhat of a dirty word. “The Church could not, has not, and never could change,” or so the faithful were taught. Certainly, reluctance to change has helped the Church in times of poor leadership within and heresy from without. But the Holy Spirit calls the Church to change when change is necessary. As the famous nineteenth century convert Cardinal Newman pointed out, changes have occurred constantly in Church practice and doctrine over its 2000-year history. The Church has changed more since the Second Vatican Council, than in the previous four hundred years. Indeed, from its earliest days the Catholic Church has been growing and changing according to the prompting of the Holy Spirit. cptryon.org - This website is for sale! - Passionist prayer Christian Compassion book reviews Catholic Hoagland Manresa Paul of the Cross cross Resources and Information. understand the Church’s evolution we must first understand this: the Church does not possess Christ, but rather Christ possesses his Church. This statement has profound theological implications for the shape of the Church over time. The Church exists to serve Christ, not the other way around. Therefore, the Church can change and indeed must change to serve Christ and the mission of the Gospel at a particular moment in history. The Church of the twenty-first century will be different from the Church of the thirteenth century, because the needs of our world today are different than they were 800 years ago.

cptryon.org - This website is for sale! - Passionist prayer Christian Compassion book reviews Catholic Hoagland Manresa Paul of the Cross cross Resources and Information. within the Church, therefore, need not be feared. The Holy Spirit inspires it.

 

[JNB]

frdave20:

here’s a thought…

the TLM when it was promulgated by pope St. Pius V was the Novus Ordo of its day…

Actually the TLM was the rite in use in Rome at the time, whose basis goes back to Pope St Gregory the Great. While some Gallacian influences had been aded, its core was largely the same.

 

[Mycroft]

was there actually a good reason for the church to change? is it really serving our needs better if so many people are now falling away from their beliefs?

 

[JNB]

Mycroft:

was there actually a good reason for the church to change? is it really serving our needs better if so many people are now falling away from their beliefs?

The state of the liturgy before Vatican II wasnt as great as some say it was. There was the 15 minuite mass that has the priest say the latin to the point it was a blur were people just got in their pews, recieved communion than walked out(hey that sounds like many typical suburban parish' minus bad music and women on the altar), so there was some need for renewal. That renewal was accomplished by the orginal 65 missal, that was a tridentine mass with the option for the vernacular except for the canon of the mass, at the time it remained in Latin. Sadly the elites pushed much further than needed to be done, and instead of liturgicval renewal, what took place was devastation.

 

[bear06]

Mycroft:

was there actually a good reason for the church to change? is it really serving our needs better if so many people are now falling away from their beliefs?

You want answers that can only come from God. We can wonder and we can ponder and we can guess all we like but the fact is that there are areas where we must submit regardless of our conclusions. See Pastor Aeternus ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm#6 It seems that some here think that the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Church for the last 40 years and that there is a “remnant” that safeguards the Church rather than the Magisterium. I do not.

I know hoards of people who have converted to the Faith and every year the number grows. It’s very much like a snowball effect. We’ve even had entire Anglican congregations convert when their own church started ordaining gay bishops and generally condoning homosexuality. That was their wake up call that the Roman Catholic Church was the real deal.

In my diocese we’ve also, after some very hard battles, received a bishop who has done wonders in the short time he’s been here. We’re receiving weekly announcements in the Church and in the bulletins that changes are coming and that we will be implementing the GIRM and RS as set forth by Rome. We’ve already seen many of these “changes” already implemented. Guess what? The laity at large is not even coming close to railing against this. Even those priests who’ve we’ve always considered the “trouble makers” are seeming to follow. So, while some of you are full of doom and gloom, I remain very hopeful.

 

[EddieArent]

JKirkLVNV:

Then if your bishop doesn’t permit the Indult, I can only surmise that you are attending the schismatic SSPX. Go to the Vatican website and see what the Holy Father said to those who attend this mass. He’s pretty firm. If you’re encouraging others to do the same, you’re encouraging schism, which is as wrong as abuses to the liturgy.

The very same document does not define what “formal adhersion to the {so called} schism” means. How is that firm? Even so, what is there to adhere to besides the Faith?

Then you have a statement saying that bishops should be generous in granting the Mass of all ages. I’m waiting for that to happen.

At the same token, you have Mgr. Perl saying one day, no to SSPX. The next day saying ok. I’d rather go SSPX then what I have seen my diocese numerous times and priests and bishops only laughing me off when I bring up these abuses. Like I said earlier, I’d rather go to a Mass where the priest lectures us about the readings of the Mass rather than to go back to my old parish where we had a mission priest compare his looks to Pee-Wee Herman during the homily and teaching the parishioners absolutely nothing. If going to this kind of church means that you are obiediant, than I guess anything is possible with this modern notion of false obiedance. It’s sort of like a person spiting in my face and I would say it’s raining. It doesn’t work that way.

“One of the heretics objected to the Saint, “You have the bishops against you.” The great Defender of the Faith answered: “That proves that they are all against the Church.” (Saint Athanasius).”

 

[JKirkLVNV]

EddieArent:

The very same document does not define what “formal adhersion to the {so called} schism” means. How is that firm? Even so, what is there to adhere to besides the Faith?

Then you have a statement saying that bishops should be generous in granting the Mass of all ages. I’m waiting for that to happen.

At the same token, you have Mgr. Perl saying one day, no to SSPX. The next day saying ok. I’d rather go SSPX then what I have seen my diocese numerous times and priests and bishops only laughing me off when I bring up these abuses. Like I said earlier, I’d rather go to a Mass where the priest lectures us about the readings of the Mass rather than to go back to my old parish where we had a mission priest compare his looks to Pee-Wee Herman during the homily and teaching the parishioners absolutely nothing. If going to this kind of church means that you are obiediant, than I guess anything is possible with this modern notion of false obiedance. It’s sort of like a person spiting in my face and I would say it’s raining. It doesn’t work that way.

“One of the heretics objected to the Saint, “You have the bishops against you.” The great Defender of the Faith answered: “That proves that they are all against the Church.” (Saint Athanasius).”

I quote from Ecclesia Dei: "c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and A) of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that** B)formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law**."(8) (emphasis mine, not the Holy Father’s).

I rather assume (with all due regard for Bulldog’s advice about the dangers of “assuming”) that “ceasing their support in any way” would at the very least mean “don’t help them pass out fliers.” “Adherence to the schism” would mean, I think, not receiving communion from an SSPX priest in the context of a Mass in an SSPX chapel. I’m not, as a Catholic, permitted to rec. communion in any other church or ecclesial community. That used to be the way one determined formal adherence, historically, in addition to the submission to creeds by signature or oath.

 

[Fergal]

Again I state it is not the Church responsible for the falling away but the lure of the world, the flesh and the devil.

I cannot for one moment ever accept that a change in the rubrics of the Holy Mass is responsible for the falling away.

I would even dare to say that one who suggests such a fallacy has no grasp of the actuality, reality and permanancy of the Holy Mass.

 

[Mycroft]

Fergal:

Again I state it is not the Church responsible for the falling away but the lure of the world, the flesh and the devil.

I cannot for one moment ever accept that a change in the rubrics of the Holy Mass is responsible for the falling away.

I would even dare to say that one who suggests such a fallacy has no grasp of the actuality, reality and permanancy of the Holy Mass.

well i myself am pretty sure the mass is real (why wouldnt i believe in its reality?), but considering how drastically it was changed it doesnt seem all that permanent to me…

 

[BulldogCath]

Give me a break-the mass before Vatican II wasnt that great. It is not meant to be an entertainment vehicle. I have not attended one high or low mass in which I got out in less than 90 minutes. The old mass had history back to the 3rd century and came to place in the Roman Rite around the time of Pope Gregory I. It had some evolution with some prayers added and the addition of the last Gospel -but the Canon never ever changed. It was sacred to all-except the Modernists whose ego was obviously bigger than all that came before them, and who shed their blood for the Mass, not to mention God

JNB:

The state of the liturgy before Vatican II wasnt as great as some say it was. There was the 15 minuite mass that has the priest say the latin to the point it was a blur were people just got in their pews, recieved communion than walked out(hey that sounds like many typical suburban parish’ minus bad music and women on the altar), so there was some need for renewal. That renewal was accomplished by the orginal 65 missal, that was a tridentine mass with the option for the vernacular except for the canon of the mass, at the time it remained in Latin. Sadly the elites pushed much further than needed to be done, and instead of liturgicval renewal, what took place was devastation.

 

[CreosMary]

Exporter:

I voted 'NO".
Mules pull wagons, did anyone ask the mule if he liked to pull wagons? No.

The question was, “Was the Novus Ordo a good idea?” Judge an action by its fruits.

Just look at its fruits: fewer go to confession now, fewer attend Mass now and fewer are attending a Seminary now. So it seems the new mass has had a negative effect!

I would hesitate to blame the new Mass for the effects that you mentioned. We must remember that Vatican II came at the same time time as the sexual rebellion, womens rights for gay whales and a host of factors that have altered society totally.
I would more inclined to question the catechists in the Catholic school system, the rise of heretics as pastoral associates and dissident theologians for the state of the Church today.
As for the new Mass, It is beautiful when done well as our Archbishop does. I also love the TLM. As others have said the Magisterium has spoken and as a Catholic I adhere to thier rulings

 

[Mycroft]

CreosMary:

I would hesitate to blame the new Mass for the effects that you mentioned. We must remember that Vatican II came at the same time time as the sexual rebellion, womens rights for gay whales and a host of factors that have altered society totally.
I would more inclined to question the catechists in the Catholic school system, the rise of heretics as pastoral associates and dissident theologians for the state of the Church today.
As for the new Mass, It is beautiful when done well as our Archbishop does. I also love the TLM. As others have said the Magisterium has spoken and as a Catholic I adhere to thier rulings

k i know im gonna get ripped on for this but since the sexual revolution happened at the same time as vatican II, is it so bad to suggest they were maybe related? oh wait never mind i should just shut up and blame society right, not pay any attention to what happened in the church. sorry

-but good point about catholic schools, the only thing i learned in my 10 years of catholic schooling was that god is good. and i obviously didnt already know that… i actually never heard a teacher mention the catechism or doctrine…

 

[BulldogCath]

It is not just the Mass, it is all of the baggage and new teachings that came along with it. For example, For centuries, Catholic woman and men for that matter, would stay virgins until they were ready to start a family. Was it the mass that was keeping them in a state of grace? Possibly yes. **But it was the teaching of the church, the fear of hell, the fear of sin, of shame, of respect **one had for the church, the Priest, the nuns (what is wrong with a little fear, getting your knuckles wacked, it kept many a young Irish and Italian Immigrants child, where the parent was working 14 and 16 hrs a day to support them) out of jail and in line. Now, the Priest wants to be your “friend”. It is now, hey Father Jim!, instead of hello Father Smith (last name). Now the nuns dress like your Aunt Molly-nothing to even distinguish they are even Nuns! The church has destructed and lost it’s identity and respect-It started with the council in 1962-ended with the Mass in 1970, continued with the new Catechism in 1983, continues with Cardinal Kasper and his brand of Ecumenism and “Eucharistic Hospitality” and the “One world religion” and “One religion is as good as another” as is being preached by our own Pope.

Now I am not going to say anything disrespectful, as I love Pope JPII-but would you ever ever think you would see a Catholic Pope actually Kissing a Koran-a picture that was sent all over the world? What message does that say to Catholics? That is the danger of ecumenism-it is like the occassion of sin, if you put yourself in a situation, as the church now has done by having thier own faithful doubt that we are the ONE TRUE FAITH and only through CATHOLICISM Can salvation be obtained-your message is distorted and is full of static.

We need Pope Pius X again

CreosMary:

I would hesitate to blame the new Mass for the effects that you mentioned. We must remember that Vatican II came at the same time time as the sexual rebellion, womens rights for gay whales and a host of factors that have altered society totally.
I would more inclined to question the catechists in the Catholic school system, the rise of heretics as pastoral associates and dissident theologians for the state of the Church today.
As for the new Mass, It is beautiful when done well as our Archbishop does. I also love the TLM. As others have said the Magisterium has spoken and as a Catholic I adhere to thier rulings

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Bulldog, if I may respectfully suggest…please PRAY for our Church. You sound dangerously close to despair. Don’t lose faith in Our Lord’s promise about the gates of hell not prevailing.

In times past, the Church has been in much worse shape than she is today. Does Arianism ring a bell?

Pray, pray, pray, and NEVER lose hope. It’s always darkest before the dawn.

 

[BulldogCath]

I will Doctor and do as well as my wife, we all pray for our Mother the church. It will get better. Maybe we need to just pray and not read so much to what is going on as it can get painful-sort of like getting on an airplane or caring dearly for something but knowing you have no real control over the situation. And you are correct, the church has withstood far worse times than now-I am sure during the reformation Catholics thought it was the end-but it was not. You are a good motivator!
Dr. Bombay:

Bulldog, if I may respectfully suggest…please PRAY for our Church. You sound dangerously close to despair. Don’t lose faith in Our Lord’s promise about the gates of hell not prevailing.

In times past, the Church has been in much worse shape than she is today. Does Arianism ring a bell?

Pray, pray, pray, and NEVER lose hope. It’s always darkest before the dawn.