Why are we dividing ourselves?

[rpp]

What do homosexual rights, spirit guides, etc. have to do with the OF vs. the EF?!!

Sorry, part of that is my fault. I tried to bring it back onto the topic with my last post.

 

[MelanieAnne]

I am a convert and I prefer the EO Mass.

I agree with BrotherHRolf, the Council Fathers did get what they expected with Vatican II. While I will not speculate about specifics, I think the reasons are manifold and the solutions complex.

I believe both Roman Rite forms have benefits, but I would prefer to see a unification and a return to a single form of the Mass.

The current Ordinary Form is clearly not going to be a source of unity, and the current Extraordinary form is intimidating to many and disliked by those who think participating at Mass means being entertained. This is not caused merely by the abuses or styles in the OF MAss, but is a reflection of a change in society. In a world where people are bombarded by media, tv, radio, iPods, internet, email, video games, no one stops to read or think anymore; they are always “doing” something. THAT is why many people are intimidated by the EF, it is quiet, slow, unpretentious and requires them to do the one thing most people have forgotten (or never learned) how to do; contemplate and reflect. THAT is participating at Mass.

However, it is the Extraordinary Form which carries with it the centuries-old expressions of reverence and faith more fully than OF, thus it must be framework upon which a unified Roman Rite must be built on.

Your post reminds me of a pet peeve ~ clapping/applause. No part of Mass is entertainment. I cannot bring myself to clap at Mass, although many people do. I believe it is irreverent, even if it is meant as an expression of approval or praise. I endure it. I believe it should never occur.

 

[brotherhrolf]

This doesn’t have to do with anything else except it “gets me”
Hrolf is is the Norse equivalent of Rudolph, Rollo, Rolf.

It is my own old Society for Creative Anachornism (SCA) name - you know, those medieval reenactors. I am Brother Hrolf. You would probaly be floored at how many people know me down here in this neck of the country by that name So, it is not HRolf, it is Hrolf to be specific in SCA jargon - Lord Brother Hrolf Aethelstan of Cantwaraburh, Companion of the Dragon’s Eye, Order of the Rue. I could blazon my arms but that would bore you beyond measure.

 

[rpp]

This doesn’t have to do with anything else except it “gets me”
Hrolf is is the Norse equivalent of Rudolph, Rollo, Rolf.

It is my own old Society for Creative Anachornism (SCA) name - you know, those medieval reenactors. I am Brother Hrolf. You would probaly be floored at how many people know me down here in this neck of the country by that name So, it is not HRolf, it is Hrolf to be specific in SCA jargon - Lord Brother Hrolf Aethelstan of Cantwaraburh, Companion of the Dragon’s Eye, Order of the Rue. I could blazon my arms but that would bore you beyond measure.

Sorry about that. http://bestsmileys.com/oneofakind/9.gif

http://bestsmileys.com/oneofakind/12.gif

Now back to Liturgical forms. http://bestsmileys.com/eek/3.gif

 

[ethelzguy]

THAT is why many people are intimidated by the EF, it is quiet, slow, unpretentious and requires them to do the one thing most people have forgotten (or never learned) how to do; contemplate and reflect. THAT is participating at Mass.

The Latin Masses you attend must be far different than those I attended for my first 35+ years.

I’ve never heard the EF referred to as “quiet, slow, and unpretentious”, until now.

You’re also the first poster I’ve read to say “participating at Mass” in reference to the Latin Mass.

Thanks for something different!

 

[Freshman88]

You’re also the first poster I’ve read to say “participating at Mass” in reference to the Latin Mass.

One cannot participate interiorly? I would think interior participation, would be the most important of all, and the EF emphasizes this by creating a silent and prayerful atmosphere. Ironically, I would argue that a lack of outward participation leads to a deeper interior participation.

 

[rpp]

One cannot participate interiorly? I would think interior participation, would be the most important of all, and the EF emphasizes this by creating a silent and prayerful atmosphere. Ironically, I would argue that a lack of outward participation leads to a deeper interior participation.

Interior participation is my goal when I attend Mass. I really pull into myself and focus on the prayers, readings, the homily (sometimes ) and, most of all, the Holy Eucharist. This is why I tend to eschew hand-holding and applause. I find the “sign of peace” disruptive because right then, while I am focused on the priest holding in his hand the very Creator of the Universe, people start grabbing my hands and shake me out of it.

 

[FAB]

Interior participation is my goal when I attend Mass. I really pull into myself and focus on the prayers, readings, the homily (sometimes ) and, most of all, the Holy Eucharist. This is why I tend to eschew hand-holding and applause. I find the “sign of peace” disruptive because right then, while I am focused on the priest holding in his hand the very Creator of the Universe, people start grabbing my hands and shake me out of it.

I believe you finally hit on an underlying issue of traditionalist. Is the mass a time for individual contemplation as you indicate or of a community that comes together to praise Christ. My issue with the TDL is that it lacks the communial aspect of worship. The time of the sign of peace is the start of the most communial part of the service, when we truely become what we recieve, the body of Christ. There is much deeper meaning than just shaking hands. Using your words, it reminds of that we are part of that universe the priest is holding, that each of us are about to share.
In Christ’s own breaking of the bread, the aposltes were not in thier own thoughts, they were part of community. The celebration of the mass was communial for centuries.
What I have seen here is not that those of us that are called “modernist” don’t understand and appriciate the TDL and don’t respect it as part of traditon, but many “traditionalist” who either do not want to understand are just do care to understand the ordinary mass.

Peace,
FAB

 

[rpp]

I believe you finally hit on an underlying issue of traditionalist. Is the mass a time for individual contemplation as you indicate or of a community that comes together to praise Christ. My issue with the TDL is that it lacks the communial aspect of worship. The time of the sign of peace is the start of the most communial part of the service, when we truely become what we recieve, the body of Christ. There is much deeper meaning than just shaking hands. Using your words, it reminds of that we are part of that universe the priest is holding, that each of us are about to share.
In Christ’s own breaking of the bread, the aposltes were not in thier own thoughts, they were part of community. The celebration of the mass was communial for centuries.
What I have seen here is not that those of us that are called “modernist” don’t understand and appriciate the TDL and don’t respect it as part of traditon, but many “traditionalist” who either do not want to understand are just do care to understand the ordinary mass.

Peace,
FAB

Communities do not sin. Communities are not saved. Communities do not worship.

It is individuals that do these things.

The idea of “community worship” is as silly as the idea of trying to consecrate an ice cream cone. “Community” is what people do in the Parish Hall after Mass.

And I am not a traditionalist. While I prefer the EF, I attend it only rarely. I usually attend the OF.

You seem to be in the habit of making a lot of presumptions about people on this thread. I would encourage you to try to restrain yourself as each of your presumptions on this thread has been incorrect. Another example of an incorrect presumption is that I do not care to understand the ordinary Mass.

I admit that I myself made an assumption about your post here. I assumed that by “TDL” meant “TLM” or Traditional Latin Mass, aka Extraordinary Form (EF). If I am wrong, please let me know.

 

[Freshman88]

I believe you finally hit on an underlying issue of traditionalist. Is the mass a time for individual contemplation as you indicate or of a community that comes together to praise Christ. My issue with the TDL is that it lacks the communial aspect of worship. The time of the sign of peace is the start of the most communial part of the service, when we truely become what we recieve, the body of Christ. There is much deeper meaning than just shaking hands. Using your words, it reminds of that we are part of that universe the priest is holding, that each of us are about to share.
In Christ’s own breaking of the bread, the aposltes were not in thier own thoughts, they were part of community. The celebration of the mass was communial for centuries.
What I have seen here is not that those of us that are called “modernist” don’t understand and appriciate the TDL and don’t respect it as part of traditon, but many “traditionalist” who either do not want to understand are just do care to understand the ordinary mass.

Peace,
FAB

We are not united by shaking our hands, we are united by prayer and the Eucharist.

Is another parish any less of the community because I have not shaken their hands?

The most profound union occurs under the bloodless Sacrifice of our Lord, the TLM focuses on that more profound unity.

 

[rpp]

We are not united by shaking our hands, we are united by prayer and the Eucharist.

That is exactly right!

And that is why we are also united with every other church in the world that is celebrating Mass at that moment.

Communal worship is nothing more than individuals in the same place worshiping. It is not about being entertained.

 

[Cat]

We are not united by shaking our hands, we are united by prayer and the Eucharist.

Is another parish any less of the community because I have not shaken their hands?

The most profound union occurs under the bloodless Sacrifice of our Lord, the TLM focuses on that more profound unity.

I do not think that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is diminished in any way by handshaking or other physical contact with fellow believers. I imagine that Mary and the women and John the Beloved clung to each other and held not only hands, but embraced, supporting each other physically and psychologically throughout the awful crucifixion of the Lord Jesus. If I were to watch my children executed, I would need a whole crowd of people holding onto me. It would be interesting to see Mass done with all of us clinging to each other as we witness the Sacrifice. It would certainly be a more realistic reaction to a horrific Sacrifice rather than isolating ourselves inwardly and ignoring everyone else around us.

I think you are diminishing the “flesh” in favor of the “spiritual.” As I understand it, this is a heresy, part of gnosticism which claims that “matter” is evil.

A handshake or some type of human to human contact is important. Prayer and the Eucharist are “spiritual” contacts with each other, but we cannot discount the important of “flesh” contacts like a handshake, hug, kiss, wave, nod, lip-synched “hello,” etc.

We are not spirits only, but we are human fleshly beings with a desperate need for contact, including physical contact, with other human beings. Doctors and nurses use physical touch to help heal their patients.

Jesus took three of His human followers with Him when He prayed in Gethsemane, and He was clearly saddened when they couldn’t stay awake to keep Him company in His final hours here on this earth.

The Body of Christ is not just a “spiritual” concept, but it is a physical reality as well. The Body of Christ, i.e, Christians together, gives powerful witness to Christ when they work together in this world to bring about Christ’s Kingdom on earth. (e.g., manning a soup kitchen or helping victims of a natural disaster).

A physical contact, e.g., a handshake, reminds us that we are, TOGETHER, not individually, the Body of Christ. See I Corinthians 12-14.

 

[jmj603]

5. … We must never divide ourselves from each other based on our preference for either usage of the mass or for our preference for any other licit devotional practice.

Physics question. You and I are both standing in Place A holding hands. You prefer to go to Place B. I prefer to go to Place C. How can we both achieve our preferences without appearing to divide?

 

[consumedconvert]

Physics question. You and I are both standing in Place A holding hands. You prefer to go to Place B. I prefer to go to Place C. How can we both achieve our preferences without appearing to divide?

Real-life question. Say we attend the same parish. Say you attend the EF. Say I attend the OF. We both happen to meet in the fellowship hall one Sunday for coffee and donuts.

What’s to divide us?

 

[FAB]

I have mistyped more than once TDL meaning then type TLM. Some of you are way to senative.
From “Ask a Catholic Website”
*Question: One thing at Mass that I find really difficult is the “Sign of Peace”. How come we do this?

Dear Inquirer,

There is no better way to describe the custom of exchanging the greeting of peace at Mass than the words of St. Augustine in the 4th century: “After the Lord’s Prayer, say ‘Peace be with you.’ Christians then embrace one another with a holy kiss. This is the sign of peace.”

In the primitive church at Rome and in the Eastern Church, the kiss of peace was offered after the first part of the Mass and before the Eucharistic Prayer. Early baptismal documents also indicate that the exchange of peace was reserved only for the ‘faithful,’ and so catechumens were dismissed before the Prayer of the Faithful, which was followed by the Kiss of Peace.

In the Western Church the sign of peace was moved quite early to where it is as Augustine described it and where it is today. **The Western Church saw a close link between peace and communion–peace with one another before receiving the Prince of Peace. **

In the Middle Ages the laity were excluded from the sign of peace and it was then dropped altogether from the Mass; the only remnant of the rite was the action of the priest kissing the altar. Vatican II restored the ancient rite of peace to all who participate at mass.

Custom dictates how the kiss of peace is exchanged in each country: a handshake, an embrace, words of peace, or other actions. In Japan, for example, the celebrant bows deeply to the congregation who in turn bow towards him and then bow respectfully to one another. It is a sign that works well in their culture. How the sign of peace is given will vary, but its meaning remains the same.*

Community, a symbol of forgiveness to each other before as a community processing to recieve the Eucharist.
Remember “love your neighbor as yourself”

Peace,
FAB

 

[consumedconvert]

Physics question. You and I are both standing in Place A holding hands. You prefer to go to Place B. I prefer to go to Place C. How can we both achieve our preferences without appearing to divide?

And, I might add, the appearance of division is not actually division.

For example, we are in a different place than St. Thomas More, yet we are not divided from St. Thomas More, because of the Communion of Saints, of course.

But then there true division, which is not separation by physical location, but by bitterness and strife.

So the guy who goes to the 7:30 AM Sunday Mass and I may be united, even though we seldom if ever meet; while the guy who sits in the seat next to me may be divided by bitterness or partisanship.

CC

 

[brotherhrolf]

Since we are using “holding hands” as an example, here’s my :twocents:. Ours is a very traditional OF parish. I have absolutely nothing against the sign of peace but we do not hold hands for the Lord’s Prayer. Ours is also a cathedral parish so we get lots of visitors. Nothing disturbs me more than to have my hands folded in prayer for the Lord’s Prayer (we also don’t do the orans position) and have someone forcibly try to break open my hands. Since the choir doesn’t sing during the summer, I’m out in the congregation with my family and I have experienced it on more than one occasion.

When I am up in the choir loft, I can always tell we have visitors who seem to think that hand-holding and “the wave” are the norms everywhere. They are not. I have seen parishoners jerk their hands away from others. If I am in the pew, I will not make a scene. If they don’t accept the slight shaking of my head and insist, I will do it.

Now we can go back to the early Church, etc for signs that this was done. In the final analysis, this is a popular movement (orans, holding hands and “the wave”) of, really, the last 25 years or so? We really are dividing ourselves and I don’t think we recognize it.

What absolutely astounds me is that it is given as mandated practice. It is not an accepted at my parish or at several other parishes I can name in my diocese much less at our nearby abbey.

The thing I fear the most is that our unity WILL be divided into “high” church and “low” church as were the Anglicans. For me the Motu Proprio is a clarion call to all of us to return to our roots.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is still a very real “interior” thing for me.

 

[SacredHeartFan]

I would like everyone to take a deep breath and calm down a bit. Then I would like you to read a few statements.

**1. Every Catholic has a right to enjoy the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, and to prefer it. **

2. Every Catholic has a right to enjoy the Ordinary Form of the Mass, and to prefer it.

3. Every Catholic must assent that both the Ordinary Form and the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite Mass are equally valid and licit.

4. There is only one Church, and those who prefer the Ordinary Form and those who prefer the Extraordinary Form, as long as they are in communion with the Bishop of Rome, are in communion with one another and with Christ.

5. While labels like “Traditionalist” can be useful to denote belief or preference, they are only labels. We must never divide ourselves from each other based on our preference for either usage of the mass or for our preference for any other licit devotional practice.

What is going on here? Why do we war amongst ourselves? I understand why followers of SSPX criticize those who prefer the OF–they hold it to be intrinsically evil, which those in communion with Rome cannot hold. But why are the rest of us fighting each other based on such a thing as “Mass preferance?”

Saints help us! We are brothers and sisters! Why do we tear one another, as it were tearing the Body of Christ?

My preference is the EF because I find it more reverent, but I have nothing against the OF.

 

[elt1956]

This is a classic example of that 2nd religion, and the war that is being waged.

Getting in touch with our animal guides and praying to the spirits of the four winds of course should not be included in RCIA, but remember there are still cultures, ie. Native American, who have included rituals such as these in their religious ceremonies from time “beyond the clouds”. These rituals also show a respect, love and understanding of the environment which sadly our culture has lost. I think our white society has taken enough away from them without also denigrating their religion.

 

[elt1956]

I disagree.
There can be no peace in the Church until the New Mass finally dies and we have complete restoration of the mass of all ages, the TLM.

Bishop Fellay got it right when he said that the death warrant for the New Mass was signed with Summorum Pontificum. That was not the Pope’s intention but it will be the result in the future.

While the New Mass is valid, many including myself, believe it is bad liturgy, not sacred, and in no way was under the guidance of the holy spirit.

My generation will lead the charge to kill the Novus Ordo within the next twenty years once everyone under forty flocks to the TLM.
The experiment failed. The Church should have listened to Pope Pius XII who believed the Church would commit suicide if it altered her liturgy.

“The day the Church abandons her universal tongue {LATIN} is the day before
she returns to the catacombs.” Pope Pius XII

"A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God, that His Son is merely a symbol, a philosophy held by so many others, and in the churches Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them, like Magdalen weeping before the empty tomb, “Where have they taken HIM?” – Pope Pius XII

Ahhhh. The hopes and dreams of illusioned youth.