Why did we need a New Mass?

[RomanRiteTeen]

I thank everyone very much for the helpful and insightful replies.

Christ’s Peace,
RomanRiteTeen

 

[pnewton]

terrcatholic:

That is very well articulated, by the time we get a new Pope, he may get into the Guiness books for flip flops and cannonizations. He is not a leader but a follower and an appeaser of everyone but the conservative catholic. There is a web page which lists over 100 heresys he has committed that someone sent me. I think it is time to post it.

Who is the “he” you are refering to committing 100 heresies and flip-flopping?

 

[pnewton]

terrcatholic:

That is very well articulated, by the time we get a new Pope, he may get into the Guiness books for flip flops and cannonizations. He is not a leader but a follower and an appeaser of everyone but the conservative catholic. There is a web page which lists over 100 heresys he has committed that someone sent me. I think it is time to post it.

 

[csbyrnes84]

It “can” be done, but rarely ever is. In my opinion we didn’t need the Novus Ordo at all. The modified liturgies of 1964 or 1967 would have been fine.

If you want to see what we are missing today go and see a High Latin Mass (a High Solemn mass if possible) and then go to your average Novus Ordo parish, I am sure you will see the difference.

I was not born pre-Vatican II so I have never known of any abuses that took place in the Latin Mass before the Council, and whatever abuses did occur before Vatican II no longer take place in Latin Masses which are said today. Luckily for me there are two excellent Tridentine-Only-Parishes within 20 minutes of where I live which have the approval of the Bishop.

“Novus Ordo” Mass at Brompton Oratory appears to have all of that. It demonstrates that it can be done.

 

[katherine2]

philipmarus:

I just want to say that you owe to yourself to at least attend a Tridentine Latin Mass before smuggly writing the old mass off.

Just for the record, I went to the Tridentine Mass for decades. I can report:

1. Reverence in the Liturgy? Not always. A mumbled, quickie Mass with raggety fiddleback vestments and people ignoring the action of the altar was not uncommon.
2. Beautiful Chant at High Mass. I don’t understand why this was removed in the New Mass?

Never had it at most Masses and not always beautifully done at High Mass. It was encouraged by the progressives while pre-conciliar conservatives were often indifferent.

1. LONG, LONG lines to Confession-I went to service where one Priest said Mass while another continued to hear confessions through the entire Mass.

Before the Council confession was more frequent. But if we are just chalking up the frequency of a sacrament, communion was very infequent. I have noticed TIME in the confessional is up from the pre-counciliar era. if someone was in the confessional more the 4 minutes, people woudl wonder what aweful sins th eperson had. Nowdays, I need to allow 10-15 minutes for each person ahead of me in line.

1. Last Week they had Six Altar Boys or Servers.

I’m not sure the number of severs has changed much but I’m not sure large numbers mean anything.

1. Rich Homilies that are firmly grounded in Catholic Tradition.

Actually, one of the reforms of the Council was to require a homily. It had previously been optional and was usually a sermon (on a topic of the preacher’s choosing) as opposed to relating to the readings.

 

[csbyrnes84]

I guarantee you that whatever abuses existed in the Latin Mass before the Council, are no longer present at Latin Masses said with an indult.

katherine2:

Just for the record, I went to the Tridentine Mass for decades. I can report:

1. Reverence in the Liturgy? Not always. A mumbled, quickie Mass with raggety fiddleback vestments and people ignoring the action of the altar was not uncommon.
2. Beautiful Chant at High Mass. I don’t understand why this was removed in the New Mass?

Never had it at most Masses and not always beautifully done at High Mass. It was encouraged by the progressives while pre-conciliar conservatives were often indifferent.

1. LONG, LONG lines to Confession-I went to service where one Priest said Mass while another continued to hear confessions through the entire Mass.

Before the Council confession was more frequent. But if we are just chalking up the frequency of a sacrament, communion was very infequent. I have noticed TIME in the confessional is up from the pre-counciliar era. if someone was in the confessional more the 4 minutes, people woudl wonder what aweful sins th eperson had. Nowdays, I need to allow 10-15 minutes for each person ahead of me in line.

1. Last Week they had Six Altar Boys or Servers.

I’m not sure the number of severs has changed much but I’m not sure large numbers mean anything.

1. Rich Homilies that are firmly grounded in Catholic Tradition.

Actually, one of the reforms of the Council was to require a homily. It had previously been optional and was usually a sermon (on a topic of the preacher’s choosing) as opposed to relating to the readings.

 

[Vincent]

csbyrnes84:

If you want to see what we are missing today go and see a High Latin Mass (a High Solemn mass if possible) and then go to your average Novus Ordo parish, I am sure you will see the difference.

I occasionally go to both, and yes, the differences are striking. On the other hand, that seems to be an unbalanced comparison: the best of one vs. the average of the other.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if Rome were to give a universal indult. An article in the Latin Mass magazine argued against it, claiming that, in the current state of widespread liturgical indiscipline, we’d see abuses of the 1962 missal just like we see abuses of the 1970 missal. When that happens, we’d be able to compare average Tridentine vs. average N.O, or well-done Tridentine with well-done N.O.

 

[katolik]

1.A raggety fiddleback is not a sin, perhaps the priest is poor.
2.In cursed America it was this way. Even today people are against dialogue Masses in TLM circles in the USA. When they go to France or Germany they are shocked by this!
3.Maybe that’s becuase most priests don’t do daily confession today.
5. WHat’s wrong with sermons?

katherine2:

Just for the record, I went to the Tridentine Mass for decades. I can report:

1. Reverence in the Liturgy? Not always. A mumbled, quickie Mass with raggety fiddleback vestments and people ignoring the action of the altar was not uncommon.
2. Beautiful Chant at High Mass. I don’t understand why this was removed in the New Mass?

Never had it at most Masses and not always beautifully done at High Mass. It was encouraged by the progressives while pre-conciliar conservatives were often indifferent.

1. LONG, LONG lines to Confession-I went to service where one Priest said Mass while another continued to hear confessions through the entire Mass.

Before the Council confession was more frequent. But if we are just chalking up the frequency of a sacrament, communion was very infequent. I have noticed TIME in the confessional is up from the pre-counciliar era. if someone was in the confessional more the 4 minutes, people woudl wonder what aweful sins th eperson had. Nowdays, I need to allow 10-15 minutes for each person ahead of me in line.

1. Last Week they had Six Altar Boys or Servers.

I’m not sure the number of severs has changed much but I’m not sure large numbers mean anything.

1. Rich Homilies that are firmly grounded in Catholic Tradition.

Actually, one of the reforms of the Council was to require a homily. It had previously been optional and was usually a sermon (on a topic of the preacher’s choosing) as opposed to relating to the readings.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Why did we need the new Mass?

Because no matter how good solid food is for the soul, those who are not ready for it will not be able to digest it.

 

[katolik]

Vincent:

I occasionally go to both, and yes, the differences are striking. On the other hand, that seems to be an unbalanced comparison: the best of one vs. the average of the other.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if Rome were to give a universal indult. An article in the Latin Mass magazine argued against it, claiming that, in the current state of widespread liturgical indiscipline, we’d see abuses of the 1962 missal just like we see abuses of the 1970 missal. When that happens, we’d be able to compare average Tridentine vs. average N.O, or well-done Tridentine with well-done N.O.

The average TLM would win out…
Lets look at the statistics. Number of seminarians preVatican II with plenty of normal TLM’s versus today. In my diocese it was about 60 new priests each, now about 5…

 

[Vincent]

katolik:

The average TLM would win out…
Lets look at the statistics. Number of seminarians preVatican II with plenty of normal TLM’s versus today. In my diocese it was about 60 new priests each, now about 5…

Maybe. On the other hand, we don’t want to commit a post hoc fallacy. We need something more than just bare statistics to give us a clear indication of causation.

 

[katolik]

Deacon Ed:

Just to add to what Katherine has said. Prior to the 1940’s it was a violation of canon law to print any parts of the Mass in any language other than Latin without dispensation (there were dispensations for Chinese and a couple of Slavic languages). In the late 1940’s a “concession” was granted (a broad indult) that allowed the printing of the Missal in the vernacular on one side and Latin on the other. The Germans were the first to do this, followed closely by Fr. Steadman with his My Sunday Missal.
Katherine is precisely correct.
Deacon Ed

What are you guys talking about?
I have Polish-Latin missal printed in 1938 with an Imprimatur and I know of people who use missals from the 1910’s that are Polish- Latin.

There are also EnglishLatin missals from the 1920’s and 30’s.
What are you guys talking about?

 

[terrcatholic]

Well, I am a bit to smart to get myself kicked off. Lets just say a leader like St Pius V or St Pius X would be much appreciated right about now by about 60Million Catholics in the US. Our Holy Father is a loving, caring wonderful man, but we need a disciplinarian, like a Father is in the household. Kind of reminds me of the 1980’s when after years of liberals like the Kennedy’s, Johnson, Carter, with the country mired in immorality and 18% inflation, we asked for and got some direction once again in Ronald Reagan.

pnewton:

Who is the “he” you are refering to committing 100 heresies and flip-flopping?

 

[CatholicCrusade]

Vincent:

Fr. Anthony Cekada’s book? Elsewhere he wrote,

“We must therefore, as Catholics who affirm that the Church is both indefectible and infallible, reject and repudiate the claims that Paul VI and his successors have been true popes.”

Perhaps a different book ought to be recommended.

So since he’s a sedevacantist, that means he can’t be righ about something else?

That is similar to saying: the Eastern Orthodox are wrong about a, b, and c (and a, b, and c are all Catholic propositions) simply because they are Eastern Orthodox. (And sedevacantists are closer to the Church’s unity than the eastern schismatics are). That is an illogical proposition. His book is great, although the end may be a bit overboard (saying the New Mass is invalid). You can follow the same argument yet not come necessarily to the same conclusion.

 

[terrcatholic]

Catholic

That is very interesting, I never thought about that. I have heard Father Cekada many years ago, when the break happened and he is very intelligent. I dont believe in sedavacationsism, but I do sympathise and hold many of the traditionalists views, as where else are you going to hear and have someone articulate the Orthodox point of view. There are very very few left in the church, the only ones who speak out are the traditionalists and write the books and have the web sites that conservative Catholics like us can reference. It seems Ok for someone to reference a Father Greely or a Kung, who are heretics by definition, but if you are a trad, the double standard is still there. Sought of like when you debate anyone over race or religion, when they can not refute the facts, they throw the old “well you are a so and so”

CatholicCrusade:

So since he’s a sedevacantist, that means he can’t be righ about something else?

That is similar to saying: the Eastern Orthodox are wrong about a, b, and c (and a, b, and c are all Catholic propositions) simply because they are Eastern Orthodox. (And sedevacantists are closer to the Church’s unity than the eastern schismatics are). That is an illogical proposition. His book is great, although the end may be a bit overboard (saying the New Mass is invalid). You can follow the same argument yet not come necessarily to the same conclusion.

 

[bear06]

Who says it’s OK to quote Greely or Kung? It seems that the double standards are being applied by both sides but not those of us in the middle. Heretics on either side should be used!

 

[terrcatholic]

Just posted on the BBC, note how the liberal press and Catholics are even using the sex scandal to promote their agenda of female participation, as they describe the “upheaval” as due to greater laity participation and woman involvement

Church sex scandals’ heavy legacy

By Robert Pigott
BBC religious affairs correspondent


**The agreement of a Roman Catholic diocese to pay $100m (£53m) in compensation to victims of sex abuse takes the Church in America past another milestone in the settlement of its long drawn out scandal. **

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40692000/jpg/_40692689_church203.jpg Several US archdioceses had to file for bankruptcy over the scandals

The fact that the Diocese of Orange, in Los Angeles, is spending so much in meeting the claims of only 90 people, with another 544 cases outstanding there, gives an idea of the crippling financial burden on the Church.

Lawyers working on the litigation say abuse could eventually cost $1bn.

Other dioceses have found the price of abuse more than they can manage.

The Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon filed for bankruptcy last July. Tucson in Arizona and Spokane in Washington chose to follow suit.

The Archdiocese of Portland has begun an advertising campaign, calling on anyone abused by priests there to come forward, as part of the bankruptcy procedure.

The story is far from over. A report published last February by a committee of inquiry showed that more than 4,000 Roman Catholic priests had been credibly accused of abuse since 1950.

There were more than 10,000 victims, mostly boys.

Fewer donations

Groups representing those assaulted by priests and church workers insist there could be thousands more.

They say it can take decades for victims of abuse to come forward, and that the average age is 44.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img...bc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif **It may be some time before the Church in America recovers the prestige and authority lost since the scandal unfolded **http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif

People often wait for their parents to die, thinking that to reveal the abuse would shame and disillusion them needlessly. For its part the Church in America says the abuse crisis broke out suddenly and then died rapidly away.

However, the scandal’s legacy could be profound, because it comes at a time of upheaval for the Church. There is already restiveness among American Catholics over the Church’s reluctance to give lay people - especially woman - a greater role, and rebellion over the Vatican’s stern line on contraception.

The sex abuse scandal is likely to produce greater pressure for a review even of the compulsory celibacy of priests.

There could be physical changes too. Congregations are declining in many dioceses, and the supply of priests dwindling.

Falling collections

The large compensation payments - coupled with the move of Roman Catholics to the suburbs - have already forced the Archdiocese of Boston to close a sixth of its parishes.

Boston - one of the four largest archdioceses in the US with an estimated two million Catholics - has paid almost as much in compensation as Orange.

Since the scandal first broke in Boston, churches there have been getting significantly less in the collection plate.

As part of the settlement in Orange, Bishop Tod Brown is to make a personal apology to each person assaulted by a priest, nun or church worker. Bishop Brown told a press conference he knew that the victims had already begun their healing process. However it may be some time before the Church in America recovers the prestige and authority lost since the scandal

QUOTE=bear06]Who says it’s OK to quote Greely or Kung? It seems that the double standards are being applied by both sides but not those of us in the middle. Heretics on either side should be used!

 

[Vincent]

I’m not arguing that Fr. Cekada can’t be right about other things because he’s a sedevacantist, but I don’t think my reservation about recommending works by sedevacantists is misplaced.

I have in my hands an an edition of an introduction to Catholicism book that has many orthodox elements. However, it cites Bernard Haring and Teilhard de Chardin. You can understand why I don’t recommend it, and why I rather suggest other works, instead.

 

[pnewton]

terrcatholic:

Well, I am a bit to smart to get myself kicked off. Lets just say a leader like St Pius V or St Pius X would be much appreciated right about now by about 60Million Catholics in the US. Our Holy Father is a loving, caring wonderful man, but we need a disciplinarian,.

I for one would accept anyone God places in that position, as I always have. I do no like to second-guess God, and that is what obedience is all about. I would never, as a simple Catholic layman accuse the Holy Father of heresy.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

CAN SOME ONE HELP ME UNDERSTAND
“Why did we need a New Mass?”…
I am speaking assumptions for most of my thoughts concerning this because i simply dont know…

First of all i am way too young to know what the old mass was. i have never been to one. i have been looking all over the web for info and 99% is anti-NO . One thing i am sure about is that i would never have come back heart and soul into the church if it was in latin (i would bet that Catholic Answers wouldnt exist if the mass in america was not said in english), i was still struggling to follow along in the NO in the beginning. however i am very conservative. i found some translations on line of the old mass and i thought they were amazing (deep,sacred, historical), but i have never heard or seen one in real life. I saw more things like Psalm 42 which i dont see know, why? it like they threw it out or something.

one thing that bothers me now is that the NO seems rushed and simply going through the motions in most masses. yet i read on this thread that the old mass was only about 20min because of the same problem? this seems more like an abuse than a flaw in the design. i think in one way this proves nothing of either one, except that they both can be abused and turned into fast food. both should be good if they are done properly, with the right heart and mind. those who say they didnt understand a word of the old, im with you, but i would love to learn!

a lot of the old timers say that it was a perfect example of Church global unity when the Tri mass was used. this is amazing. when i was reading the latin and english translation i used some of my high school spanish and understood better a lot of the latin before it was translated. and came to the conclusion that english is a lousy language IF you have options.

i feel (key word) that it would be a good idea if they continued to use the NO to teach the Faith and bring in people, but there should be a point at which, when a person is ready to go back to the old version. it seems what the new mass did was bring people in/revive while keeping the others in the back preserving tradition. i dont think one came to abolish the other.
i will say this again the NO is good…but wouldnt it nice to fully understand the old mass . what is it lacking that the NO has when a person fully understands?

is this crazy? do i not know what i am asking?

p.s. im not one of those rebels, i accept what the Church teaches/commands. fully understanding why would be even better!