Why Do We Primarily Attend Mass?

[japhy]

We primarily attend Mass to Worship the One, True, Living and Triune God.

Nope. We primarily attend Mass to be at the crucifixion…

Perhaps you should have named this thread “Why We Primarily Attend Mass” and not invited other people to provide answers, since you have the answer.

If a person is at Mass and fails to worship God, I don’t think the re-presentation of Calvary is gonna make a difference for them.

The Mass is “the crowning act of Christian worship” (in the words of Absp. Fulton Sheen).

“The holy sacrifice of the Mass is an act of worship offered to God in the name of Christ and the Church. … For the Mass, together with the Divine Office, is the summit of all Christian worship; it is the fullness of praise offered daily to Almighty God in public, and external ceremony.” (De Musica Sacra, nn. 2, 35)

“Pastors should, therefore, ‘insistently teach the faithful to take their part in the entire Mass,’ by showing the close connection that exists between the liturgy of the word and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, so that they may clearly perceive how the two constitute a single act of worship.” (Eucharisticum Mysterium, n. 10)

“The Mass is the chief act of divine worship; it should also be the source and center of Christian piety.” (Mediator Dei, n. 201)

None of these quotes lessens the fact that we are at Mass to witness (and when possible, receive the fruits of) the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Calvary. But that crucifixion – which, in the gospel according to St. John, Jesus associates with his glorification – is part of the whole act of worship, and that act of worship is the purpose for our attending Mass: to worship God as a corporate body, the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ.

I attend Mass to worship God, even if I were to get absolutely nothing out of it. Now, I totally agree with you that too many people look at Mass as a device for receiving Holy Communion and nothing more, and that’s very wrong. But I would say the primary reason is to offer God the Father the worship due Him through His Holy Spirit in the offering of the perfect sacrifice of His Son.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

You see these things?

At the Pauline Rite? :bigyikes:

I mean from everything I’ve seen posted the Pauline Rite is attended only by worshipful focused parishners. They loudly proclaim the responses, belt out the hymns in a resounding voice, follow the Priests intently, pay attention to the Gospel and the Homily and reverently receive Holy Communion. They all actively participate in the liturgy and join in worshipful fellowship.
In short I had been led to believe that those at the Pauline Rite were all educated in the faith, know exactly what is going on at the Altar and actively participate at all times.

Not like in the horrid, uneducated and primitive days of pre-Vatican II.:tsktsk:

Well I guess that coming late and leaving early can be excused as minor glitches. I mean after all these people aren’t doing something really bad, you know like praying their rosaries or something else equally heinous like practicing private devotions of one sort or another. Besides that traffic is probably bad and parking not even available at some of the parishes that claim Mass attendance in the thousands for every Mass.

I say relax, don’t sweat it. After all, at least the Mass is in someones vernacular, even if its not yours and rosaries are pretty much a thing of the past…

I’ve been around a while. Leaving after communion started well prior to Vatican II! The mind-set then was to fulfill the Sunday obligation it was necessary to be present at the offertory, consecration, and communion. And there were the men who came early so they could bag a seat in the last row. And the ones who came late so they could stand in the back (last in first out). So don’t blame this behavior on the Novus Ordo. The best that can be said is that back then they did it quietly (memories of being rapped on the head by Sister for whispering at mass).

 

[bpbasilphx]

Do you have any recommendations for books/websites that discuss any medieval views of “being present” at the crucifixion while at Mass?

This is discussed in great detail in THE SHAPE OF THE LITURGY by Dom. Gregory Dix. He shows the develoment of this devotional view and how it influenced the early reformers, even to the various reformed liturgies.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**
Are you saying that the term “crucifixion” was used in the prayers of the Mass in the Middle Ages but is no longer used.?**

**I didn’t say that at all, or anything remotely resembling it.

I said that the DEVOTIONAL emphasis on hearing mass (itself a curious term) as “being present at the Crucifixion/Calvary” developed in the Middle Ages in the West, but is not at all said in the actual prayers of the Rite of Mass itself, and never was.

(Various “methods” of assisting at Mass expanding on the theme of the Crucifixion intended for lay people are another issue.)**

 

[ethelzguy]

I’ve been around a while. Leaving after communion started well prior to Vatican II! The mind-set then was to fulfill the Sunday obligation it was necessary to be present at the offertory, consecration, and communion. And there were the men who came early so they could bag a seat in the last row. And the ones who came late so they could stand in the back (last in first out). So don’t blame this behavior on the Novus Ordo. The best that can be said is that back then they did it quietly (memories of being rapped on the head by Sister for whispering at mass).

The real irony here, is that my generation and my children’s generation were taught, specifically, what parts of Mass you had to be present for in order for it to “count”.

My grandchildren (based on conversations with them) were NOT taught this.

So, which is better/worse? Knowing specifically what you HAVE to do to “get by” and working the system, or being a little late simply because you didn’t get up in time…???

 

[palmas85]

I’ve been around a while. Leaving after communion started well prior to Vatican II! The mind-set then was to fulfill the Sunday obligation it was necessary to be present at the offertory, consecration, and communion. And there were the men who came early so they could bag a seat in the last row. And the ones who came late so they could stand in the back (last in first out). So don’t blame this behavior on the Novus Ordo. The best that can be said is that back then they did it quietly (memories of being rapped on the head by Sister for whispering at mass).

Hey, I’m not blaming anything on anything. I thought all these problems had been resolved and were non issues these days. We’ve been told for years that the alleged apathy demonstrated by many in the old days was a direct result of not having any idea what was going on at the altar., and the people being disconnected from the Mass and the Priests. The Pauline Rite was suppossed to snap people out of their apathy and make us all active participants. Well now everyone knows whats going on, we are all on the same path, equals as it were, and the apathy apparently continues.

So where to put the blame now if you can’t put it on the Traditional Mass as has been done for years and years?

 

[ethelzguy]

Hey, I’m not blaming anything on anything. I thought all these problems had been resolved and were non issues these days. We’ve been told for years that the alleged apathy demonstrated by many in the old days was a direct result of not having any idea what was going on at the altar., and the people being disconnected from the Mass and the Priests. The Pauline Rite was suppossed to snap people out of their apathy and make us all active participants. Well now everyone knows whats going on, we are all on the same path, equals as it were, and the apathy apparently continues.

So where to put the blame now if you can’t put it on the Traditional Mass as has been done for years and years?

Apathy isn’t a Church problem alone…it totally mars our society today.

 

[jmeyer3131]

Apathy isn’t a Church problem alone…it totally mars our society today.

Well said.

 

[palmas85]

Apathy isn’t a Church problem alone…it totally mars our society today.

Thats very interesting. For many years now we have been fed a steady stream of BS basically, that implicated the Traditional Mass as being the cause of the apathy within th Church and that it was what necesitated the formation of the Pauline Rite which was to solve these problems.

Question: Since one of the most oft quoted reasons is apparently flawed what does that do to the credibility of the other arguments put forth as to the necesity of the formation of the Pauline Rite?

I mean if the people are still apathetic, come late leave early and don’t pay attention in spite of the reforms, what good did they do?

 

[ethelzguy]

Thats very interesting. For many years now we have been fed a steady stream of BS basically, that implicated the Traditional Mass as being the cause of the apathy within th Church and that it was what necesitated the formation of the Pauline Rite which was to solve these problems.

Question: Since one of the most oft quoted reasons is apparently flawed what does that do to the credibility of the other arguments put forth as to the necesity of the formation of the Pauline Rite?

I mean if the people are still apathetic, come late leave early and don’t pay attention in spite of the reforms, what good did they do?

I don’t ever recall being taught that the Pauline Mass was instituted to stem apathy within the Church.

But, I do shudder to think where the Church would be today without it.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please remember, everyone, that comparing rites of the Church is banned on CAF. Thank you all.

 

[tessi]

I attend Mass to receive from God the graces that Jesus with His perfect offering allowed me to get and to thank Him for those graces even though I do not always see them.

 

[palmas85]

I don’t ever recall being taught that the Pauline Mass was instituted to stem apathy within the Church.

But, I do shudder to think where the Church would be today without it.

Why? Apparently the problems persist. The Pauline Rite was designed to make us more active participants, I mean that was specifically brought out in the documents wasn’t it? The congregation should be more involved through postures gestures and responses right? Yet, apparently the apathy continues, the disconnect continues and the apparent lack of concern with the totality of the Mass continues. I mean if it is as some posters here have said that the Church may be half empty prior to Holy Communion, fill up for Holy Communion and empty out right afterwards, what change if any has taken place? In fact, it sounds worse than it was before…

We’ve been told repeatedly these type of abuses had been corrected, stopped and that all was well. Now we hear, the problems persist.

So why shudder if things are still basically the same as we’ve been told over and over again that they were?

I’m confused

 

[ethelzguy]

Why? Apparently the problems persist. The Pauline Rite was designed to make us more active participants, I mean that was specifically brought out in the documents wasn’t it? The congregation should be more involved through postures gestures and responses right? Yet, apparently the apathy continues, the disconnect continues and the apparent lack of concern with the totality of the Mass continues. I mean if it is as some posters here have said that the Church may be half empty prior to Holy Communion, fill up for Holy Communion and empty out right afterwards, what change if any has taken place? In fact, it sounds worse than it was before…

We’ve been told repeatedly these type of abuses had been corrected, stopped and that all was well. Now we hear, the problems persist.

So why shudder if things are still basically the same as we’ve been told over and over again that they were?

I’m confused

The world changed much slower for the first 1900+ years after Christ than it has in the last 50. The changes in the world in the last 50 years have been at a mind-boggling pace.

What do you really think the state of the Catholic Church would be today if Vatican II and the NO Mass hadn’t occured, and everything just stayed the same?

Now, I’m sure some tradtionalists will try to paint a rosy picture of how holy and reverent everything would now still be.

I suspect we would have closed, empty church buildings all over the place. Apparently, the Church leadership could see the handwriting on the wall and made needed changes before it was too late.

Many posters only see what they perceive to be negatives. I personally feel that Vatican II saved the Church from a collapse in membership in many countries.

I also suspect that many of you will think I am wrong. I will cast my lot with the Church leaders.

 

[palmas85]

The world changed much slower for the first 1900+ years after Christ than it has in the last 50. The changes in the world in the last 50 years have been at a mind-boggling pace.

What do you really think the state of the Catholic Church would be today if Vatican II and the NO Mass hadn’t occured, and everything just stayed the same?

Now, I’m sure some tradtionalists will try to paint a rosy picture of how holy and reverent everything would now still be.

I suspect we would have closed, empty church buildings all over the place. Apparently, the Church leadership could see the handwriting on the wall and made needed changes before it was too late.

Many posters only see what they perceive to be negatives. I personally feel that Vatican II saved the Church from a collapse in membership in many countries.

I also suspect that many of you will think I am wrong. I will cast my lot with the Church leaders.

We have closed empty and church buildings all over the place right now and more closing all the time. We have entire religious orders that have practically disappeared The Priest shortage shows no sign of being rectified anytime soon and the divisions within the Church get deeper and deeper every day.

You say that some traditionalist might try to paint a rosy picture of the way the Church was then. It seems to me that maybe some more progressive types are painting a more rosy picture of the Church now than it really is.

I mean lets get real, how much worse do you really think it could have been? No hyperbole, just a statement of fact How much worse?

 

[japhy]

What do you really think the state of the Catholic Church would be today if Vatican II and the NO Mass hadn’t occured, and everything just stayed the same?

I don’t think the Novus Ordo Mass as must Catholics know it was a necessary outcome of Vatican II. I think the Mass as celebrated Fr. Joseph Fessio, the priests on EWTN, and priests in parishes like Assumption Grotto (Detroit) has a far greater spiritual impact than the way the Mass is celebrated in most of the country.

I personally feel that Vatican II saved the Church from a collapse in membership in many countries.

Feelings are great. But there’s been more than just a collapse in membership in many countries. There’s been a collapse of faith and doctrines and morals. There are Dutch bishops and priests who are spreading pamphlets calling for a lay-led Mass that doesn’t require priests; this is sacramentally-void mindset. A hundred years ago, these dissenters would have been denounced immediately and unequivocally. Today, the response is slower and sometimes too ambiguous, and the problem is allowed to fester and sink in and cause real rot.

 

[ethelzguy]

We have closed empty and church buildings all over the place right now and more closing all the time. We have entire religious orders that have practically disappeared The Priest shortage shows no sign of being rectified anytime soon and the divisions within the Church get deeper and deeper every day.

You say that some traditionalist might try to paint a rosy picture of the way the Church was then. It seems to me that maybe some more progressive types are painting a more rosy picture of the Church now than it really is.

I mean lets get real, how much worse do you really think it could have been? No hyperbole, just a statement of fact How much worse?

Probably a whole lot worse. Have you seen/read the Religion in America survey that came out yesterday? It’s hard enough now, in a modern world to keep Catholics in line with Church teaching. If we were still in old-school mode, we would be in a huge minority by now.

 

[Our_Refuge]

Probably a whole lot worse. Have you seen/read the Religion in America survey that came out yesterday? It’s hard enough now, **in a modern world **to keep Catholics in line with Church teaching. If we were still in old-school mode, we would be in a huge minority by now.

Do you really believe if Catholics actually knew what the Church teaches that we would be a minority? I recall that statistics show that 78% of Catholics went to Mass in 1958. No so today.
The modern world has nothing to do with it. Priests need to teach from the pulpit that anyone knowing that the Church is the One True Church and refuses to stay in it will not be saved. If that were taught we would be a huge majority.

 

[ethelzguy]

Do you really believe if Catholics actually knew what the Church teaches that we would be a minority? I recall that statistics show that 78% of Catholics went to Mass in 1958. No so today.
The modern world has nothing to do with it. Priests need to teach from the pulpit that anyone knowing that the Church is the One True Church and refuses to stay in it will not be saved. If that were taught we would be a huge majority.

Catholics do not live in a bubble. We live in the real world. The rogue tradtionalist crowd likes to insist that the Church went down the toilet after Vatican II, while others can see that sticking the Church’s head in the sand regarding what goes on around it would have been folly.

The truth is, neither side will ever REALLY know, now, will they?

Many churches preach that THEY are the only path to Salvation now, don’t they?

 

[japhy]

Catholics do not live in a bubble. We live in the real world. The rogue tradtionalist crowd likes to insist that the Church went down the toilet after Vatican II, while others can see that sticking the Church’s head in the sand regarding what goes on around it would have been folly. The truth is, neither side will ever REALLY know, now, will they?

Why hasn’t the doctrine of the Church been taught at Mass? Vatican II demanded the homily be restored to the liturgy, but I guess it needed to make it clear that only orthdox Catholic homilies are allowed. You can’t deny that formation in the true (and traditional) faith has suffered greatly for the past few decades. The bigger problem is not that people don’t know their faith well enough, it’s that people who don’t know their faith well enough (and know things that are directly opposed to the faith) TEACH the others! And aren’t censured or disciplined!

Many churches preach that THEY are the only path to Salvation now, don’t they?

What does that have to do with anything? There have been false churches – i.e. heretical “churches” – since the birth of the one true Church.