Would you like to see a phasing out of the Novus Ordo Missae leading to a return to only the TLM?

[vocatio]

Be careful that you are not unfair to the secular clergy. They have been called by God to the deaconate, priesthood and episcopacy. They have not been called by God to the consecrated life. There is no reason to expect them to live and work as do consecrated religious. They are not religious. God and the Church does not want them to be religious. They are mean to remain in the secular world and to bring the faith through the functions that are proper to those in Holy Orders.

Just as religious are not necessarily called to both Holy Orders and and the consecrated life. Those who are called to the Consecrated life are called to place their religious commitment to their order before their ministry to the laity, unless the founder included minisry in his charism. Not all founders did.

For example, St. Bernard did not include ministry in the consecrated life. Therefore, Cistercians are not allowed to minister to the liaty, unless they approach them at the monastery and even there, it is with limits.

In fairness, let’s not compare those who are diocesan priests and priests who are religious. Priests who are religious are first and foremost Consecrated Men and then priests. Diocesan priests are first and foremost priests, then secular men. Very different callings for specific reasons. Both can lead others to great holiness. Also, it it not the duty of clerics or religioius to run ministries that the laity should run. It is their job to oversee that it is faithful to the Church. Eventually, they pull back to allow the ministry to grow without being dependent on one person. Ministries that are dependent on one person tend to suffer when that person is not longer there.

Yes, secular priests do take a day off, like all secular men and women. They do go home at night, like all secular men and women. They live independent lives, like all secular men and women. Christ called them to Holy Orders, not to live the Consecrated Life. They make a promise of obedience to the local bishop, not to a community and this promise only binds them in matters regarding ministry, not their personal life. They take no vow of poverty and they take no vow of chastity, so they are not bound to a community. They make a promise of celibacy, which binds them to the single life. Big difference between a solemn vow of chastity and a promise of celibacy.

JR

That’s right…we don’t want no religious priests in my diocese… That just sounds so funny. I know what you mean. But you are off here.

Friars…are not Monks. They take vows of poverty and reach out. They are wonderful priests and so far the best I’ve ever known. I’ve lived among the Benedictine Monks and now am getting aquainted with Franciscan Friars. I’m a Benedictine at heart but am growing steadily towards the Franciscans. I’ve even met a few secular priests that live holy lives. We need them. But I’d prefer to see more married clergy, deacons assigned to every parish. That will take some doing. We need men that live in the world as we do, men that have to raise children and put up with wives… just kidding. I love my convert wife. She’d run if the TLM was shoved down her throat being so new and all.

Latin taks time to learn and might discourage a lot of folks. I’m a die hard, so it doesn’t bother me. I love it.

PAX et bonum

 

[Gara3987]

What about the fact that the Institute of Christ the King has had overwhelming success in saying the TLM in places such as central and North Africa?

I for one think that if everybody would simply study the basic differences between the TLM and NO theology, everyone would soon see that we are attending a Mass Luther would be proud of. Not a good thing if you ask me…

I for one agree with you all the way.

The Novus Ordo for one was and is not a translation of the Latin Rite. To be honest the Novus Ordo services now remind me of Protestants for some reason.

 

[Spiller]

I don’t think you’re being objective when you say it that way. I think you know that there is plenty of documentation (try a google search on “Bugnini six Protestants”) but you’re ready to discredit all sources which you don’t like, and you should based upon your convictions. But I for one will not take the bait.

When I searched for “Bugnini six Protestants” here are the garbage sources that came up first using Google:

www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/fmass.htm
www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m002rpMisunderstandingMass.htm
www.novusordowatch.org/bugnini.pdf
www.sspx.org/Bishop_Lazo/my_return_to_catholic_tradition_II.htm
www.sspxasia.com/Newsletters/2000/March-April/Declaration.htm
www.andrewcusack.com/blog/2007/07/
freemasonrywatch.org/bugnini_vaticanII.html
www.traditio.com/comment/com0112.htm
www.catholictradition.org/Eucharist/melchisedech-appx3.htm
www.sspxafrica.com/documents/2003_January/Renouncing_service_on_icel.htm
www.ecclesiamilitans.com/novusordomissae.html

Pure garbage resources. The very sort that twists peoples’ minds and faiths.

 

[nannygirl]

I for one agree with you all the way.

The Novus Ordo for one was and is not a translation of the Latin Rite. To be honest the Novus Ordo services now remind me of Protestants for some reason.

As a former Protestant, I very much agree. The NO service I attended in my parish looked like a non-denominational service. I thought I accidently went to the wrong church.

institute-christ-king.org/ResourcesHome/Documents.htm#AgathaChristie

 

[pnewton]

I for one agree with you all the way.

The Novus Ordo for one was and is not a translation of the Latin Rite. To be honest the Novus Ordo services now remind me of Protestants for some reason.

As a former protestant I have to disagree. I have never been to a non-denominational, or any other service, that has:

1. vestments
2. altar servers
3. set scripture readings
4. kneeling
5. altar candles
6. a crucifix on the altar
7. Entrance procession

This does not include the things that we also have at my Mass like bells and incense.

 

[AmyS]

No!

 

[nannygirl]

As a former protestant I have to disagree. I have never been to a non-denominational, or any other service, that has:

1. vestments
2. altar servers
3. set scripture readings
4. kneeling
5. altar candles
6. a crucifix on the altar
7. Entrance procession

This does not include the things that we also have at my Mass like bells and incense.

The church I attended had no crucifix, no kneeling, no altar candles, no entrance procession, no bells, no incense. There were 2 girls in shorts and tennis shoes who were the altar servers and one woman EM also wore shorts. People were talking and moving about. The whole thing was really strange to me. I have been to a couple of wonderful NO Masses, so I had something with which to compare it. I honestly thought I was at a Protestant church.

 

[JReducation]

If we read the letter that the Holy Father wrote to the bishops regarding the Motu Proprio, the question on this thread is not even a possibility. It’s not worth asking, because it’s not going to happen.

Both forms of the Roman rite are equally important to the Church and both forms must be protected. Both forms communicate sanctity and lead people to God.

The divisions, arguments and abuses, within the liturgy and abuses against each other is what has to go, not the new form of the liturgy.

**Letter of Pope Benedict XVI to the Bishops of the World to Present the “Motu Proprio” on the Use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the Reforms of 1970.
Benedict XVI **

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/b16SummorumPontificum2.htm

I hope this helps put this question to rest.

JR

 

[nannygirl]

The divisions, arguments and abuses, within the liturgy and abuses against each other is what has to go, not the new form of the liturgy.

YES!

 

[pnewton]

The church I attended had no crucifix, no kneeling, no altar candles, no entrance procession, no bells, no incense.

That is strange and violates the rubrics is several areas. On the original topic, if a priest deliberately ignores key neccessities with the ordinary form of Mass, though, there is no reason to think such a maverick would not ignore the same elements with the TLM.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

The church I attended had no crucifix, no kneeling, no altar candles, no entrance procession, no bells, no incense. There were 2 girls in shorts and tennis shoes who were the altar servers and one woman EM also wore shorts. People were talking and moving about. The whole thing was really strange to me. I have been to a couple of wonderful NO Masses, so I had something with which to compare it. I honestly thought I was at a Protestant church.

This sounds just a bit far out. Care to name the parish and city where someone can check this out. If it is true, the bishop definitely should be notified.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[saint_rafael]

This sounds just a bit far out. Care to name the parish and city where someone can check this out. If it is true, the bishop definitely should be notified.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Sadly, this the NORM for most parishes and dioceses.

The Bishops won’t do anything. They are part of the problem. They haven’t done anything about the abuses of Communion in the hand, altar gils, modesty, or lay ministers of Holy Communion.

The U.S. bishops have ignored all the requests from Rome to stop abuses. Rome and the U.S. are in an unofficial schism.

 

[saint_rafael]

St Rafael, I wish you hadnt quoted statistics. I get edgy when this happens. You see the stats you quoted whilst real, carry behind them a huge history.
in 1965 the family was still intact. Then in 1968 Humane Vitae was released to counter the burgeoning sexual revolution, and guess what? HV was rejected virtually en amsse by the whole world and especially by the Catholic world, who should have embraced this great gift from God.
As a result of rejection of HV, and the sexual revolution, and the development of contraceptive mentality, a new mentality began emerging, ABORTION. If conception was refused, then God the Holy Spirit “The Lord and Giver of Life” was rejected, and guess what the Holy Spirit was shut out from the bedroom and He left “Marriage” Now we have marriage breakdown, abortion, NO to family. No to children. No to God. No to Life.
In a 35 year time span we have gone from a society whose value of the family was never in question to a society where the family is mostly imperiled. And guess what St Rafael? Where do seminarians and priests come from? the family.
Today we have sortage of priests/religious because of wounds against life. Because of offence against the Third person of the Blessed Trinity. Because of sins against the communion of beings (family). The final assault against family, life, will be euthanasia, now that abortion (killing of new life, new seminarians, new priests) is a “right”
So, I am sorry the style of Mass is not the problem, the problem is deeper and the wounds are against God the Holy Spirit.

I agree that part of the problem has been contraception and the the decline of the Catholic family. Priests came from big families when the parents actually had faith and lived it out.

That doesn’t explain the vast majority of men who have been born to Catholic parents even with only one, two, or three siblings. Many of the remaing men just refuse to answer the call because they never felt anything sacred about the new Mass.

In the Latin Mass, The altar was against at wall, and the tabernacle was actually on the altar.
Now added to these outrages, only men could serve in the sanctuary, and only altar BOYS were allowed. Everyone had to receive at the altar rail, on their knees, and on the tongue, given by the priest. Priests actually had the audacity to wear colorful hand embroidered chasubles, and some useless things called birettas, cassocks and maniples. Priests gave something called a “sermon” where they actually taught the truths of the Faith, and had the very bad habit of discussing things like morals, sin and Hell. How can we now have less then 5,000 men in our seminaries, since we have changed every possible thing in the Mass, the way of teaching the Faith, and with all that wonderful “help from the laity?”

Why would Catholic men want to be priests now when they can be lectors and ministers of Holy Communion? They can almost do some of the sacred things only priests did before. Most altar severs are girls, so boys don’t even get the chance to be impressed by the Mass or priest.
Why would men consider priesthood when there is no respect or awe shown to their status. No one stands when they enter a room or even opens doors for them. They always see priests in secular clothes and never in cassocks that would indicate that they are an Alter Christus.

 

[Channy]

An unofficial shiscm? That is really sad. I was a protestant preacher for 4 years and all the division and pain of scandals almost cost me my faith. It is the unity of the Catholic churches and their focus on the Holy Eucharist that lead me back from complete apostacy. That and the Blessed Virgin. To think what is wrong with the moral fiber of our country. The Episcopal USA went all nuts and now the US RC may be falling to modern revisionist? I pray not I am only Old Catholic, but my respect and love of the Holy Mother Church still runs very deep. Do you think the Holly Father’s visit will help put things back on track? Hey I think I’ll make that a thread!

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

The Bishops won’t do anything. They are part of the problem. They haven’t done anything about the abuses of Communion in the hand, altar gils, modesty, or lay ministers of Holy Communion.

The U.S. bishops have ignored all the requests from Rome to stop abuses. Rome and the U.S. are in an unofficial schism.

I don’t think my eyes were deceiving me when I was watching the papal mass at St. Patrick’s this morning. Lo and behold, our Holy Father Pope Benedict was giving out Communion in the hand. I guess many other people know better than him on how to properly give out Communion. Ya think someone should tell him. forums.catholic-questions.org/images/smilies/ani/ani_tsk.gif
:tsktsk:
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Cat]

Sadly, this the NORM for most parishes and dioceses.

The Bishops won’t do anything. They are part of the problem. They haven’t done anything about the abuses of Communion in the hand, altar gils, modesty, or lay ministers of Holy Communion.

The U.S. bishops have ignored all the requests from Rome to stop abuses. Rome and the U.S. are in an unofficial schism.

This is quite an audacious statement. Have you really attended every Mass in every diocese in the U.S. to be able to substantiate this claim?

I’ve only been Catholic 4 years, and I’ve only attended Masses in four states. I’ve never seen anything resembling this. All the Masses I’ve been part of were reverent and according to the rubrics. If there were abuses, they were minor (e.g., the priest says “Good morning, everyone at the beginning of his homily.”)

 

[saint_rafael]

I don’t think my eyes were deceiving me when I was watching the papal mass at St. Patrick’s this morning. Lo and behold, our Holy Father Pope Benedict was giving out Communion in the hand. I guess many other people know better than him on how to properly give out Communion. Ya think someone should tell him. forums.catholic-questions.org/images/smilies/ani/ani_tsk.gif
:tsktsk:
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Dominicae Cenae
On the Mystery and Worship of the Eucharist
His Holiness Pope John Paul II
Promulgated on February 24, 1980

1. …In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has been introduced. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. **However, cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the eucharistic species have been reported, **cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior but also to the pastors of the church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist. It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where the distribution of Communion in the hand has been authorized…

the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary!
**To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist.
**
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict have caved in to the disaster of communion in the hand. Early in his pontificate, JPII refused to give Communion in the hand. In the early 80’s he was tricked in Germany when an official wanted to recieve Communion in the hand. Not wanting to look awkward he did it and after that caved in to giving it in the hand.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

So, go tell him
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[JReducation]

Sadly, this the NORM for most parishes and dioceses.

The Bishops won’t do anything. They are part of the problem. They haven’t done anything about the abuses of Communion in the hand, altar gils, modesty, or lay ministers of Holy Communion.

The U.S. bishops have ignored all the requests from Rome to stop abuses. Rome and the U.S. are in an unofficial schism.

Let’s separate some things here

The following were not abuses. They were approved by the Conference of Bishoops, which even under the Motu Proprio they have the final word in each country.

1. Communion in the hand - approved even at the Vatican
2. Female altar servers - left up to each bishop to decided
3. Altar rails - not required as long as the sanctuary is visibly distinct from the rest of the church (they don’t have them in St. Pete’s Basilica (they have a barrier which they remove when they need to do so.)
4. Tabernacle to the side of the sanctuary - approved by the Holy See as long as it is conspicuous
5. Incense - required only when the rubrics indicate, optional any other time

The following are required by the rubrics of the NO with some exceptions

1. Entrance procession (there are several exceptions).
2. Crucifix - there must be a crucifix or a simple cross in the center of the sanctuary and be conspicuous. If there is none that is permanently hanging, there must be one on the altar. For example, at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception the crucifix is not very conspicuous because the architecture of the shrine is such that it distracts your attention, so they have one on the central altar.
3. Incense - as I said above, must be used in certain celebrations, optional in others, the same applies to holy water.

I will disagree that the bishops are part of the problem or the cause of the problem. I think this is unfair. I know many bishops and have worked for five. The ones for whom I have worked and those whom I have known are very devoted to the Eucharistic celebration and to shepherding their parishes.

I have also know very good pastors and priests. If something is a local problem, we have to be careful not to throw blame on everyone. People are not always guilty by association.

If there is a problem in a parish it should be reported to the Vicar of the diocese, with respect, charity and a spirit of obedience should the Vicar disagree with us.

In our parish we have two priests who have physical disabilities. They cannot walk. They do not perform certain rituals. Those that can be delegated to the deacons or Brothers are delegated and those that belong tot he priest, but are physically impossible are omitted, such as genuflecting after the consecration or kneeling at an point in the mass. However, they are very holy priests and holy religious.

JR :

 

[JReducation]

That’s right…we don’t want no religious priests in my diocese… That just sounds so funny. I know what you mean. But you are off here.

Friars…are not Monks.

PAX et bonum

I know friars are not monks. I’m a Franciscan. I was not trying to identify all the forms of religious life. I was trying to say that we have to be careful on how we look at secular/diocesan priests and not expect them to live the religious live, because they are not called to such a life.

As to their holiness, all people are called to a life of holiness.

In fact, Franciscans identify themselves as religious first and priests second, not because they minimize the priesthood, Good forbid. But because the priesthood is a Sacrament, not a way of life. To be a Franciscan, Dominican, Benedictine, Caremelite and so forth, those are ways of life with a very clear charism and rule. The sacraments do not have such rules that govern daily life that strictly.

I hope this clarifies why I didn’t go into the breakdown of religious life. Religious life is not the topic of this thread. There is a thread on secular priests and religious on Sacraments and Liturgy.

Thanks

JR