What should the Church do next with the Liturgy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roman_Army
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Roman_Army

Guest
Apparently, the mass needs a bit of improvement and the Church needs to crack down on liturgical abuses. As former Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) put it, the Latin rite has to rediscover its traditions, such as the Priest and people facing East together, crucifix in front of the altar, tabernacle visible, and good liturgical music, etc. I recently read “Spirit of the Liturgy,” it’s a good book. In there he also says that the sign of the peace would be better done before the consecration of the Eucharist.

What do you guys think should be done with the liturgy?

(other than reintroduce the pre-Vatican 2, please no bashing against the current liturgy)
 
Roman_Army said:
Latin rite has to rediscover its traditions, such as the Priest and people facing East together, crucifix in front of the altar, tabernacle visible, and good liturgical music, etc.
Click to expand...

I don’t know how I feel about the people and the priest facing the same way. I grew up with the priest facing the people, and I like it that way.

I would like to see the tabernacle visible during the Mass. I like the chapel of repose that we have in our church, and I think that the Blessed Sacrament should be there except during liturgy in the Church. All weekday masses, and some other things are done in the Chapel. The Church is only used when there is a large congregation, usually Mass on the weekend.

Roman_Army said:
** I recently read “Spirit of the Liturgy,” it’s a good book. In there he also says that the sign of the peace would be better done before the consecration of the Eucharist.**
Click to expand...

This might be a good idea, the transition between the sign of peace and the Lamb of God is often not done well. The Lamb of God often becomes intermixed with the sign of peace by those who just don’t want to stop shaking hands. This is too important to let it be overshadowed, this is the time immediately preceding our receiving the Eucharist.
 
Reform the reform … I am very comfortable with the provisions that Ratzinger provides in Spirit of the Liturgy.
 
Roman_Army said:
Apparently, the mass needs a bit of improvement and the Church needs to crack down on liturgical abuses. As former Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) put it, the Latin rite has to rediscover its traditions, such as the Priest and people facing East together, crucifix in front of the altar, tabernacle visible, and good liturgical music, etc. I recently read “Spirit of the Liturgy,” it’s a good book. In there he also says that the sign of the peace would be better done before the consecration of the Eucharist.

What do you guys think should be done with the liturgy?

(other than reintroduce the pre-Vatican 2, please no bashing against the current liturgy)
Click to expand...

(above emphasis mine)

God bless you for what you wrote in the parentheses! As someone devoted to the Mass of Paul VI (in the vernacular), I’m grateful for your charity.

I think we should have the Indult generously applied, as the old Holy Father asked. If the bishops go all mulish :rolleyes: , then there should be erected a “Tridentine Rite”, though I’m sure that’s not the correct term, in much the same way that the Eastern Churches within the Catholic Church function.

I think we should scrap modern architecture and recapture the traditional view of what a church should look like. I don’t mind austerity (sometimes it’s soothing), but you can have an austere cross-shaped church. I like the huge marble/granite altars rather than the old wall mounted ones (like I imagine the altars of the Old
Testament or the Temple to be), but I don’t think we should have wooden “tables.”

I don’t care if the Sacrifice of the Mass is offered by the priest ad orientum or ad populam. I’ve experienced both (oddly enough, the ad orientum was in the Episcopal church) and neither has a monopoly on holiness or sanctity. If the Holy Father thinks it is important, then I bend to his wishes, as well as on the Sign of Peace.

The tabernacle should most definitely be visible. If the Blessed Sacrament is to have it’s own chapel or niche not in the center front, then at least at the front.

Always a Crucifix.

The parts of the Mass that are conventionally sung (Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, etc.) can be in Latin, well, the Kyrie in Greek and people should be taught the Latin for these. I think vernacular for the rest, with the canon audible and the responses made by the congregation.

Chant or plain-song should be encouraged. People should come together early or on another day to practice and learn to chant/sing.
 
Here is what I would like to see:

  1. *]Crackdown on the abuses on the current rubrics.
    *]Limit the variation allowed in certain parts of the Mass.
    *]Make the translation of the Mass to the vernacular more closely follow the Latin
    *]Put an empasis on re-introducing Latin to the Mass. Especially for parts like the Gloria, Sanctus and Agnus Dei.

    PF
 
How surprising to learn that nobody has voted for more dancing!

:dancing::clapping: :dancing:

Ahh but to poll is still young…
 
Keep it the same for a long while, but enforce the rules. We have had enough changes and turmoil for a couple of generations.
 
In Sacrosanctum Concillium, the Constitution on the Liturgy (Vatican II), it said the Gregorian Chant and the Pipe Organ are to have pride of place in the liturgy, and that Latin should be retained - at least for the ordinary parts of the Mass.

I’d be happy if the post-concilliar Church simply got in line with the Council’s vision. Ad orientum is nice since it doesn’t distract the people from praying and it takes the spotlight off of the priest and his personal charisma.

Whatever recapturing of the true spirit of Vatican II occurs, I seriously think it needs to be preceded by some mega-catechesis. People may be tempted to think of these “changes” as deviations from Vatican II when, in fact, they will be attempts to bring the church more in line with the Council fathers’ true vision.
 
Stop the practice of communion in the hand and lay people distributing holy communion to start.

Ken
 
I hope we don’t go back to the Tridentine Mass. It had become such a hodge-podge of devotions by the time Vatican II came along. The rites were disconnected and, at times, misplaced. You had things like repetitions of the same prayers at different times in the Mass, prayers of lifting up sacrifice before the consecration (we aren’t lifting up a sacrifice of bread and wine, but the Body and Blood of Jesus, yet bread and wine is what is present at that point in the Tridentine Mass), you had the dismissal and then the Last Gospel. Hello? I thought we were dismissed. It’s like, "Goodbye, hold it, not yet.

You had a a cycle of readings that was only like 40 readings the entire year. The new rite has drastically improved the cycle of readings by opening up the treasures of the scriptures. Proof of this is that every mainline Protestant liturgical religion has adopted our lectionary (Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, etc…).

You had problems with music being too disproportionate. The Mass didn’t flow because the Kyrie might take 5 minutes. There was a lot of discontinuity that the Council fathers addressed.

Now, in it’s defense, there was a lot more stress on the sacrificial nature of the Mass, whcih, I think, has been tragically lost in the new rite. so much so, that there are issues with many Catholics in the pews on what exactly the Mass and the Eucharist are.

While the music was a bit overdone, there was also a sense of holiness in the melodies that echoed in the sanctuaries. Nowadays, I get way more Mauty Haugen than I care to hear.

So, the Tridentine Mass had its problems that needed to be fixed. While I think there are still things that could be improved on, I don’t htink the way to solve our problems is to go back to the disjointed Tridentine Mass.
 
I would say just re introduce the Tridentine missal but properly translate it inthe vernacular. Allow indults for versus populum celebration and a audible canon for those who are truly attached to the way the current missal is celebrated most of the time.
 
40.png
Windmill:
I hope we don’t go back to the Tridentine Mass… While I think there are still things that could be improved on, I don’t htink the way to solve our problems is to go back to the disjointed Tridentine Mass.
Click to expand...
My personal opinion is that many problems in the Church started when they more or less abandoned the TLM. Just look at the numbers:
9 annulments in 1930 in the USA
61, 416 annulments in 1989 in the USA.
Or, look at the scandals. Shameful.
When I mentioned these things before, I was accused of throwing mud at the Church. So, I won’t say anything else, except that my personal opinion (if you want it) is that it would be better for the RCC to return to the TLM.
 
My personal opinion is that many problems in the Church started when they more or less abandoned the TLM. Just look at the numbers:
9 annulments in 1930 in the USA
61, 416 annulments in 1989 in the USA.
Or, look at the scandals. Shameful.
When I mentioned these things before, I was accused of throwing mud at the Church. So, I won’t say anything else, except that my personal opinion (if you want it) is that it would be better for the RCC to return to the TLM.
Click to expand...
Um…and I wonder how closely those figures correspond to society at large. It is illogical to correspond a change in the liturgy to society falling apart.
 
40.png
Windmill:
So, the Tridentine Mass had its problems that needed to be fixed. While I think there are still things that could be improved on, I don’t htink the way to solve our problems is to go back to the disjointed Tridentine Mass.
Click to expand...
Pope St. Pius V didn’t think so. Here’s an except from Quo Primum:

"We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.

Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription - except, however, if more than two hundred years’ standing. "
 
The poll appears biased. Why is there no choice for returning to the Tridientine Mass in Latin.
 
40.png
LCMS_No_More:
Um…and I wonder how closely those figures correspond to society at large…
Click to expand...
Good question.
Let’s look at the numbers for divorce at society at large and compare those numbers with the numbers for annulments in the RCC
Divorces in the USA
1930: 195, 961
1979: 1,179,000
1998: 1,135,000
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church in the USA:
1930: 9 (the RCC had the TLM in 1930)
1989: 61, 416. (the RCC had more or less abandoned the TLM in 1989)
The divorces in society at large have increased by a factor of about 6 (5.9)
The annulments in the RCC have increased over the same period by a factor of 6824, or more than one thousand times as much as the increase in divorces in the USA at large.
 
STanely123
My personal opinion is that many problems in the Church started when they more or less abandoned the TLM. Just look at the numbers:
9 annulments in 1930 in the USA
61, 416 annulments in 1989 in the USA.
Or, look at the scandals. Shameful.
When I mentioned these things before, I was accused of throwing mud at the Church. So, I won’t say anything else, except that my personal opinion (if you want it) is that it would be better for the RCC to return to the TLM.
Click to expand...
This wasn’t caused by the Novus Ordo, this is a reflection of the times we live in. Take ANY philosophy class and you will hear, correllation does not prove causation.

Windmill is absolutely right. What were Catholics doing during Mass, when they sat/knelt in silence while the priest consecrated the Eucahrist with only the server responding. They carried on their own devotions and didn’t pay attention during Mass, hence why we had sanctus bells. Go to a Greek Orthodox Divine Liturgy if you don’t believe me. People were wandering everywhere and only when the bells rang did they pay any attention. Priests were hearing confessions, people were praying before icons. The congregation was constantly moving.

Let’s also not forget.
Sometimes we would be lucky enough to have a choir go on for 7-8 minutes for the kyrie alone?!? The gloria could take 15-20 minutes depending on the Mass being sung. Not to mention that by the time the Sanctus was done being sung the bells had already rung for the second elevation.

The Novus Ordo is a very beautiful Mass properly done. Instead of complaining about how terrible the Mass is, which it IS NOT, we should be looking at ways to cull the abuses that have grown over the last 40 years.
 
Bud McDuell

The Pope has the authority everywhere and always to make changes to the Mass. Paul the VI was completely within the bounds of Church Tradition to effect the changes he did. This topic and this quote of yours have been dealt with in many other strings.
 
40.png
WanderAimlessly:
Here is what I would like to see:

  1. *]Crackdown on the abuses on the current rubrics.
    *]Limit the variation allowed in certain parts of the Mass.
    *]Make the translation of the Mass to the vernacular more closely follow the Latin
    *]Put an empasis on re-introducing Latin to the Mass. Especially for parts like the Gloria, Sanctus and Agnus Dei.

    PF
Click to expand...

  1. Although the above pretty much covers it, I can not help but wonder if what is really needed is Catholics to start learning and practicing their Catechism. When this happens, then liturgical abuses commence to cease. Those who propagate the abuses will fall to the way side or change their ways when the laity demand faithfulness to the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top