ok everyone read this, then im out for the day… i cant take it anymore, just read this right here…
immaculata-one.com/section_16.html
now that write is someones opinion, but the opinion has theoligical texts and other Church writings cited in order to back it up.
Where?
Consider some of his arguments…
The integrity of the Mass was considered so sacred that when Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604) sought to add the words "diesque nostros in tua pace disponas"to the Hanc Igitur of the Canon the Catholics of Rome were so outraged that they threatened to kill him!
St. Gregory almost being thrown into the Tiber is a later story. I agree thoguh, that the Mass was prized highly.
- Common Penitential Rite:
The traditional Mass begins with the priest reciting personal prayers of reparation to God called “The Prayers at the Foot of the Altar.” The New Mass begins instead with a “Penitential Rite” which the priest and people recite together. Who were the first to introduce a common penitential rite? The 16th century protestant heretics, who wanted to promote their teaching that the priest is no different from the layman.
Sorry to disappoint, but if you look at a number of 16th century Protestant liturgies you’ll see no such thing.
- The Offertory:
The Offertory prayers of the traditional Mass clearly express a number of Catholic teachings, as that the Mass is offered to God to satisfy for sin and that the saints are to be honored. The protestant heretics rejected these teachings and so abolished the Offertory prayers. “That abomination called the Offertory,” said Luther, “and from this point almost everything stinks of oblation!” In the New Mass as well, the Offertory is gone – it has been replaced with a ceremony called “The Preparation of the Gifts.” The prayers “offensive” to protestant heretics have also been removed. In their place is the prayer “Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation,” based on a Jewish grace before meals.
Yes, the Offertory was omitted, and yes that is lamentable, but it was not for the reason of Luther. See here
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3405456&postcount=19
If it was for the reason of Luther, the NO would not have the prayer “In spiritu humilitatis”, the “Orate Fratres” or the sacrificial references in the “Prayer over the Gifts”
- The “Eucharistic Prayer”:
The traditional Mass has only one “Eucharistic Prayer,” the ancient Roman Canon. The Canon was always a favorite target of “lutheran” and other protestant heretic attacks. Instead of just one Canon, the New Mass now has a number of “Eucharistic Prayers,” only one of which we will mention here. Eucharistic Prayer No. 1 is an “edited” version of the Roman Canon. The lists of Catholic saints, so despised by protestant heretics, are now optional, and hence rarely used. The translators did some further “editing.” Among other things, the idea that Christ the Victim is offered at Mass (a notion Luther condemned) has disappeared. All the Eucharistic Prayers now incorporate some typical protestant heretic practice. They are recited in a loud voice instead of silently, and they have an “Institution Narrative” instead of a Consecration. (According to protestant heretic false “beliefs”, they do not consecrate the Eucharist like Catholic priests do; they just narrate the story of the Last Supper.) The various signs of respect toward Our Lord present in the Blessed Sacrament (genuflections, signs of the cross, bells, incense, etc.) have been reduced, made optional, or eliminated.
The list of saints was abbreviated in EP I because it was felt to be too local. Furthermore, some saints have to be mentioned in any case, and the naming of the saints is inconsequential, in a sense, because the theological objection is to asking their intercession, not naming them.
The notion of Christ the Victim has disappeared……
I disagree. EP I retains the “pure Victim, holy Victim, unblemished Victim”, EP III speaks of the “holy and living sacrifice” and asks the Father to “see the Victim whose death has reconciled us to yourself”. EP IV states “we offer you His Body and Blood”. The one which people take objection with his EP II which says “we offer you Father, this life-giving Bread [lit. Bread of Life], this saving Cup [lit. Cup of Salvation]” These are acknowleged as Ecuharistic terms and are borrowed form the Canon- they are not in the original source text.
And if there be a doubt, shouldn’t we lok to the interpretation placed on these terms in the GIRM. It speaks about this area as follows:
Offering: By which, in this very memorial, the Church—and in particular the Church here and now gathered—offers in the Holy Spirit the spotless Victim to the Father.
Not necessarily is the loud voice a Protestant practice. Was not the Canon itself initially recited aloud? Neither is the vernacular. These things are “neutral”, so to speak.
Now as to the “Institution narrative”. The current GIRM reads in the first place, “Institution narrative
and consecration”. This position is further strengthened by the fact that the priest must bow when reciting, genuflect after the elevation, the Host and Chalice are called consecrated after each of the Words, and must be shown to the congregation. Umpteen proofs can also beadduced from the GIRM- for example
- If the priest notices after the consecration or as he receives Communion that not wine but only water was poured into the chalice, he pours the water into some container, then pours wine with water into the chalice and consecrates it. He says only the part of the institution narrative related to the consecration of the chalice, without being obliged to consecrate the Bread again.
Clearly the words are meant to be consecratory.
(contd.)
