Would you support a "novelty-free" OF Mass?

[mick321]

If your parish offered a Sunday Mass in the Ordinary Form - stripped of the most offensive novelties of the last 40 years - would you support it?

For starters, lets say the following features and practices were abolished.

• EMHC’s
• Communion in the hand
• Civilian clothing in the sanctuary
• Altar girls in the sanctuary
• Inappropriate music
• Bad vestments
• Cowardly ushers
• Overbearing greeters
• Hand holding
• Hand shaking
• Hands in the air
• Leaving pews during sign of peace
• Priests sitting around during Mass
• Late arrivals disrupting Mass
• Chatter in church at any time
• Consumption of food or drink in church

Are there other deal breakers which would require you to withhold support?
Are there any of these features or practices which you would wish to retain?
.

 

[MarkThompson]

• Consumption of food or drink in church

True food and true drink, I think, ought to be allowed.

 

[ljubim]

I never thought I would say this… but no. I have inadvertently fallen in love with the Last Gospel and the Judica me. There’s so much spiritual insight in both, I would hate to see them go.

You’re forgetting almost the most important novelty… ad orientum/versus populem (excuse my spelling, but you get it ). “Theology of the Mass,” “lex orandi, lex credendi,” whatever you want to call it, it’s important.

EDIT: Just clarifying, ANY improvement in reverence in the OF I would wholeheartedly support. But personally I’ll keep going to a TLM.

 

[ErichK]

I absolutely would.

True food and true drink, I think, ought to be allowed.

I hope you’re referring to the consecrated Body and Blood and not advocating for eating in church

 

[Oneofthewomen]

If your parish offered a Sunday Mass in the Ordinary Form - stripped of the most offensive novelties of the last 40 years - would you support it?
I would probably be alone in just about every parish in my Diocese!

For starters, lets say the following features and practices were abolished.

• EMHC’s
• Communion in the hand
• Civilian clothing in the sanctuary
• Altar girls in the sanctuary
• Inappropriate music
• Bad vestments
• Cowardly ushers
• Overbearing greeters
• Hand holding
• Hand shaking
• Hands in the air
• Leaving pews during sign of peace
• Priests sitting around during Mass
• Late arrivals disrupting Mass
• Chatter in church at any time
• Consumption of food or drink in church

Are there other deal breakers which would require you to withhold support?
Are there any of these features or practices which you would wish to retain?
.

Interesting thread…
for me EMHC, CITH, and Altar Girls are not a big issue.

Music and vestments - that is getting into “personal taste”.
For me, I like simple, yet elegant vestments and I have a wide range of musical tastes,
so I am open to many different styles of music at Mass, although I do wish that we heard more chant and polyphony in my parish, at least occaisonally.

Hand holding, I am assuming you mean during the Our Father.
If I am with my family, I will hold hands with them,
other than that, I do not hold hands.

Shaking hands during the sign of peace, I am not opposed to, so long as it is brief, reverent and only to those closest to me, so I guess that adresses the moving from the pews question.

As far as everything else on your list, I would have to say I agree with you!

 

[momor]

If your parish offered a Sunday Mass in the Ordinary Form - stripped of the most offensive novelties of the last 40 years - would you support it?

For starters, lets say the following features and practices were abolished.

• EMHC’s
• Communion in the hand
• Civilian clothing in the sanctuary
• Altar girls in the sanctuary
• Inappropriate music
• Bad vestments
• Cowardly ushers
• Overbearing greeters
• Hand holding
• Hand shaking
• Hands in the air
• Leaving pews during sign of peace
• Priests sitting around during Mass
• Late arrivals disrupting Mass
• Chatter in church at any time
• Consumption of food or drink in church

Are there other deal breakers which would require you to withhold support?
Are there any of these features or practices which you would wish to retain?
.

Clarification needed:

What is a cowardly usher?
When do priests just “sit around” at Mass?
Late arrivals at Mass. Was there a time when the church doors were locked during Mass to prevent this?

If we do away with EMHCs who is going to help distribute communion? Given that most parishes in my area have only one priest and no deacons, it could take over half an hour to distribute and would limit communion to receiving only the Host. Who would take communion to the sick and homebound?

I have no problem with CITH or altar girls. The rest I wouldn’t miss but don’t have strong negative feelings about any except the chatter.

 

[choy]

If your parish offered a Sunday Mass in the Ordinary Form - stripped of the most offensive novelties of the last 40 years - would you support it?

For starters, lets say the following features and practices were abolished.

• EMHC’s

only if there’s more priests/deacons. can’t get rid of this if you just want to. there’s a reason they’re there (lack of priests) and you need to address that reason and this will solve itself

• Communion in the hand

nothing wrong with it

• Civilian clothing in the sanctuary

question, do we either make volunteers pay for their robes? or take it out of the parish’s pocket?

• Altar girls in the sanctuary

only if boys step up to the plate. the preference for most parishes i believe would still be boys. but if only girls are applying to be altar servers, you can’t force boys into service

• Inappropriate music

what’s appropriate and whats not? would you consider everything in the songbooks approved by the diocese to be appropriate? or is it still subject to certain people’s tastes?

• Bad vestments

isn’t this a parish issue? if the parish can’t afford better vestments. perhaps if one wants to end this, put out the money or buy the vestments and donate it to the parish

• Cowardly ushers
• Overbearing greeters
• Hand holding
• Hand shaking
• Hands in the air
• Leaving pews during sign of peace

yes

• Priests sitting around during Mass

don’t they really sit during readings?

• Late arrivals disrupting Mass

are you suggesting locking the church during mass? or just limiting access of entry (side doors only)?

• Chatter in church at any time

would this include children?

• Consumption of food or drink in church

i’ve never been to mass where people would eat. well, except for babied and toddlers.

Are there other deal breakers which would require you to withhold support?
Are there any of these features or practices which you would wish to retain?
.

 

[Shin]

No.

It is too much man made and not from authentic liturgical tradition. So much of its innovations are harmful to a genuine appreciation of the mass. Instead of smoothness and grace, its movements are unscripted and casual – and this influences everything badly, to put it mildly. It may be ‘graftable’ onto authentic liturgical tradition by adapting it more and more, and restoring traditional rubrics from the Latin mass in it – but it should have sprung out of it naturally rather than have to be constantly worked on to try to bring it into a genuine conformity with the past.

That this has been allowed to happen to the mass is, certainly, a punishment for the sins of mankind.

 

[MarkThompson]

That this has been allowed to happen to the mass is, certainly, a punishment for the sins of mankind.

Now that is a statement that borders on heresy and treads pretty heavily on the anathemata levied at Trent.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

choy,

I agree with you all the way down the line on each issue.

Regarding locking the doors, that’s been tried in some places where I go, but it was illegal. You can’t lock a crowd in a large building without doors which can open.

Maybe they should put alarms on the doors so they would sound a horn when somebody leaves early.

Once when my kid got sick during Mass I left the sanctuary early so he wouldn’t barf on people. That day, I would still have left even if there was a horn.

Alan

 

[Shin]

Now that is a statement that borders on heresy and treads pretty heavily on the anathemata levied at Trent.

Certainly it does not. These sorts of troubles are well within the purview of the Church.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Certainly it does not. These sorts of troubles are well within the purview of the Church.

You presume to know God’s mind? You think something is the way it is because God punished the Church? I don’t know whether it’s heresy or anathema, but I suggest it is not good to broadcast speculation on how God conducts His business. :bigyikes:

More likely such things are there for the glory of God. Surely you’ve heard the following passage. If not, here it is:
John 9:1-3:

As he passed by he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, "Neither he nor his parents sinned; it is so that the works of God might be made visible through him.

Maybe God will fix the abuses. Maybe He will avail grace to those who are offended, so they can quit judging. Who knows, but to say the Church has been punished by God is out of line IMO. I wouldn’t have said anything if you hadn’t defended your position against MarkThompson. When another believer reacts like that to something you say, you might examine it more before you dismiss it out of hand.

If the current state is not for the glory of God, then I say you should get some God-colored glasses back on.

Peace and joy,
Alan

 

[MarkThompson]

Certainly it does not. These sorts of troubles are well within the purview of the Church.

To say that of the Mass itself is made the punishment for sin, that is, the wage of iniquity, when rather the Mass is the very sacrifice which redeems sin and pays the wage . . . that’s an absolutely outrageous statement, far, far beyond the pale.

 

[Shin]

To say that of the Mass itself is made the punishment for sin, that is, the wage of iniquity, when rather the Mass is the very sacrifice which redeems sin and pays the wage . . . that’s an absolutely outrageous statement, far, far beyond the pale.

A **false **comparison, this is not ‘the mass itself’ but ‘the changes to the liturgy’ – there are many liturgies, they are not all equal. There are many reforms throughout history – if there were no need for reforms, there would be no reforms.

The problems caused by the changes, the problems in the changes – Reality bears them out.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

That this has been allowed to happen to the mass is, certainly, a punishment for the sins of mankind.

You’ve defended your statement twice now, but with no substance.

Please explain what you mean; to me it sounds like you are blaming God for the problems, because He is punishing people.

If that isn’t what you mean, then please either clarify or retract your statement.

Alan

 

[Shin]

If you do not understand that Providence can punish mankind for its sins, you should pick up any of the books people regularly read about Providence, such as ‘Abandonment to Divine Providence’ ‘Trustful Surrender to Divine Providence’, etc. or simply the Bible.

If you’d like to read about how different liturgies can have different merits, try this article.

There are many good books on the problems with the revisions in the liturgy, the motivations for these revisions, and of course we see constant changes still being made – if these changes were not being made for a reason, one would wonder, what is the mass, some constantly changeable thing that it matters not at all what goes on in it? Is that the argument?

The great mass of Calvary, Our Lord’s sacrifice is infinite and perfect. The liturgies to the extent they are here on earth however, honor God more or less outside of this fact, and please Him more or less.

God’s infinite justice demands punishment for sins. He does not entirely delay His justice in this world, that would be unjust. He most certainly both directly and indirectly punishes mankind for its sins.

‘The most evident mark of God’s anger is the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifested when He permits his people to fall into the hands of clergy who are priests more in name than in deed. When God permits such things it is very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful anger on them. That is why He cries out unceasingly to Christians, return you rebellious Christians and I will give you pastors according to my own heart.’

St. Jean Eudes

‘Listen, all my enemies in the world, for I am not addressing my friends! Listen, all you clerics, archbishops, and bishops and all of lower rank in the Church! Listen, all you religious, of whatever order you are! Listen, you kings and princes of the earth and all you who serve! Listen, you women, princesses, queens, and all ladies and maidservants! All you inhabitants of the world, of whatever condition or rank you are, whether great or small, listen to these words that I myself, who created you, now speak to you! I complain, because you have withdrawn from me and given the devil your will, and you obey his suggestions. Truly, I have redeemed you with my blood, and I ask for nothing but your souls. Therefore, return to me with humility, and I will receive you as my children.’

The Lord, to St. Bridget of Sweden

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Shin,

Thank you for the information. It is interesting, but not conclusive, to hear those saints’ opinions on God punishing the Mass. I am beginning to see where you’re coming from on this.

On your one statement, though, I’ll give this one more chance.

In your statement “That this has been allowed to happen to the mass is, certainly, a punishment for the sins of mankind.” when you said “certainly” did you mean “certainly in my opinion” or “certainly possibly” or “definitely?”

If you meant “definitely,” then I still take issue with it.

If you meant “in my opinion” or “I think” then I’m OK with it.

Either way, I’m letting it go now.

Peace and joy,
Alan

 

[Ockham]

It is interesting to speculate as to why the Novus Ordo came upon us. Vatican II didn’t call for it. Originally it was to be in Latin. Yet incrementally many novelties crept into the liturgy. Arch Bishop Bugnini was ultimately ‘exiled’ and is not on the list for sainthood.

Good gives us free will. Sometimes we eat the apple and other times we listen to Him.

 

[mick321]

Clarification needed:

What is a cowardly usher?
When do priests just “sit around” at Mass?
Late arrivals at Mass. Was there a time when the church doors were locked during Mass to prevent this?

If we do away with EMHCs who is going to help distribute communion? Given that most parishes in my area have only one priest and no deacons, it could take over half an hour to distribute and would limit communion to receiving only the Host. Who would take communion to the sick and homebound?

I have no problem with CITH or altar girls. The rest I wouldn’t miss but don’t have strong negative feelings about any except the chatter.

Ushers are those employed to escort people to their seats in a theater, church, or stadium. They are also the official doorkeepers. The faithful depend upon these folks to provide and maintain a safe and orderly environment for the worship and glorification of God. Nothing less. Often their mere presence will deter unsafe and disorderly conduct. During Mass, they should be prepared to pleasantly, promptly and silently attend to the individual needs of worshipers and protesters alike.

Priests and Deacons should distribute Holy Communion in ordinary circumstances. Bishops and Cardinals my serve in extraordinary circumstances.

Church doors should never be locked during Mass.

 

[VetA]

If we do away with EMHCs who is going to help distribute communion? Given that most parishes in my area have only one priest and no deacons, it could take over half an hour to distribute and would limit communion to receiving only the Host. Who would take communion to the sick and homebound?

You’ve never been to a TLM have you. personal experience, EMHCs are not needed. only the priest gives communion, everyone kneels at the rail, it doesn’t take any longer than normal, and traditionally only the priest recives the Blood, so it wouldn’t matter.

EMHCs are for extraordinary circumstances, this could be considered one of those so they could, but the priest could still be able to do it unless there like 100 of them then EMHCs would defiantly be needed