W
wanner47
Guest
What do you mean by “civilian clothing”? I wasn’t aware that uniforms were ever required at Mass…?
- Status
F
floresco
Guest
I’m not sure what you mean by support. I would not consider such a Mass as good as the TLM, but I would be willing to attend such a Mass if the TLM were not available. But then, I already put up with some “offensive novelties” (short of outright sacrilege or heresy) at Mass when I cannot make it to the TLM, so what you are suggesting would be an improvement.
The Traditional Latin Mass is objectively superior due to its underlying theology more closely and clearly adhering to Church teaching on the nature of the Eucharist. One would need to change the prayers themselves in the Ordinary Form in order to address this problem.
I was at a concert last week and there was a whiny child in the row behind me. Eventually his mother took him away. That was an improvement, but it made no difference to the music being played. Similarly getting rid of the altar girls, the hand-holding, the inappropriate vestments, etc. at Mass would be an improvement, but it would not affect the problems at the core of the OF of the Mass.
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
Hey Mick,
Good question. My answer is still no. I went to such a Mass last night and it is an improvement that I applaud. The Novus Ordo is valid, licit, but intrinsically designed to communicate a democratization and blurring of lines between priest and laity which was the main reason, it seems to me, that the Traditional Mass came under such severe criticism by people who couldn’t reconcile egalitarianism in their politics with hierarchy in their religion. I recognize that the Novus Ordo isn’t always and necessarily an occasion of indecorum, yet I have one main reason to object to almost every change in the New Mass. I will give for an example the expanded Sign of Peace as directed in the Ordinary Mass.
I don’t think the timing of the Kiss of Peace is as scandalous as some Traditionalists seem to believe. I do not think its insertion at this point intends any disrespect for the Real Presence of Christ. According to my 1962 Missal published by Angelus Press its inclusion in the Solemn Traditional Masses, also between the Consecration and Communion, have an ancient purpose expressed by St. Cyril of Jerusalem:
Of course, in the Traditional Mass it is considered adequate that the Celebrant and Deacon exchange the sign with decorum whereas in the New Mass, the entire people often turn it into a distracting and scandalous hugfest. I go to the Novus Ordo so seldom, but last night I assisted at a Baccalaureate Mass (also the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart) almost entirely in Latin with a good children’s choir and chant. The Mass was done with solemnity and when the sign of peace came there were mostly smiles and nods of the head with perhaps a few handshakes with near neighbors. It doesn’t necessarily have to result in a celebration of our own ability to greet each other.
I don’t say this to defend the Novus Ordo or the expanded kiss of peace. I seldom go and last night did not give me any regrets about having abandoned it for most purposes. I think it is important to remember that there is supposed to be a teaching that is attached to the practice which has traditionally occurred in the same place in the Mass as it is in the 1962 Missal. What I find to be wrong with it is that without the proper understanding between all who assist at Mass, it lends itself to any ordinary greeting.
The symbolism of suppressing any grudges we might hold before receiving Holy Communion is lost. But the agenda driven liturgy of the Novus Ordo Mass is furthered because as with ripping out altar rails and having the people say the Our Father, it is a successful attempt to democratize the Mass according to the political beliefs of modern children of the French and American Revolutions. It is an attempt to bypass the hierarchical structure that Christ established when He placed His Kingdom in the hands of St. Peter, the Apostles, and the bishops and priests who would carry on their work. These politicoes who changed the Mass didn’t appear to me to help people more readily forgive offenses, but they once again arranged it so that if priests get to do something so must the lay people. That is why I despise the expanded kiss of peace, and not for the reasons often given by Traditionalists.
C
corsair
Guest
I still could not support the OF. I have been sort of excited about the up-coming changes to the OF, but have decided to reserve my opinions until after I see them “in action”. If and when my financial situation ever gets better I’ll attend the EF exclusively. Right now it costs a small fortune in fuel and vehicle wear and tear to travel the distances.
A
Adeodatus
Guest
Throw in ad orientem posture and the new, more faithful translations and you’ve got yourself a deal. Not that I would stop going to the TLM, but that I would acknowledge that the NO is being presented in a reverent way and in accord with the Catholic Faith. I would be happy to attend such a NO when I did not have the opportunity to attend the TLM.
M
momor
Guest
Does anyone else find it ironic (or even hypocritical) that some traditionalists who support the TLM and EF and denigrate the NO are most often the ones that throw around terms like “cafeteria catholic” and “heresy” when talking about modernism in the Church?
Well, doesn’t choosing the TLM/EF to the exclusion of the NO (and encouraging others to do the same) strike anyone as cafeteria catholicism?
Don’t comments about the NO being less valid, less pleasing to God, and the source of bad fruits worthy of punishment strike anyone as heresy?
OK. Let the pummeling begin…
Well, doesn’t choosing the TLM/EF to the exclusion of the NO (and encouraging others to do the same) strike anyone as cafeteria catholicism?
Don’t comments about the NO being less valid, less pleasing to God, and the source of bad fruits worthy of punishment strike anyone as heresy?
OK. Let the pummeling begin…
M
momor
Guest
V
VetA
Guest
indeed. when we talk about cafitiria catholicism we mean those catholics that pick and choose about what the church teaches (for example the sacrements, the real presence, abortion, sola scriptura [yes i have had catholics who claim to believe in that], wether or not they need to go to Mass every Sunday and Holy Days of obligation, the primacy of the pope, the issue of gay ‘marriage,’ and weather or not a woman can be a priest just to name a few). not what form of the Mass is more right or which one we rather attend
not at all. it is preferring tradition to modern practices. what is wrong with that?
I happen to think the NO is valid and licit, but im going to say exactly what you asked me not to… i think that the EF is more reverent, respectful, and closer to what the apostles would have done, therefore more pleasing to God. if my views offend you sorry your offended by them, not sorry i hold them
EDIT: yes i do know the Mass was originally in Greek, but seeing as there is no RC church that has the Mass as it originally was in Greek (not NO masses with Greek used as the vernacular) we cannot go to them.
V
VetA
Guest
P
PaulinVA
Guest
I would be on board with you if we could also put all the the intolerant, inflexible, holier-than-thou people in the cry room.
V
VetA
Guest
like shorts and t-shirts and ratty clothing… in short he would rather people wore their “Sunday Best”
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
W
wanner47
Guest
Then why not say “inappropriate clothing” instead?
If one’s “Sunday Best” consists of ratty clothing because they can’t afford better, I don’t think they should be banned from or unwelcome at Mass.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Probably no more than I support it now.
Going through this list, though, except for possibly priests sitting around during Mass and altar girls, I don’t see an item that is PART of the Mass itself.
The deal breaker for me would be to hear more Latin in the Mass. To me, that would be the real equalizer, if you will. And tough to introduce novelties in Latin.
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
Hi momor…
Catholics are clearly permitted to prefer any licit and valid liturgical rite. It is not cafeteria Catholicism, but a necessity to choose between different rites of the Mass. Is one like me a “cafeteria Catholic” because they prefer not to assist at a Byzantine or Maronite Mass, even though those are closer than the nearest Traditional Latin Mass. The Holy Father has clearly created the conditions where Latin Rite Catholics must choose between either form, and can go back and forth if they wish. Our choices of liturgy shows that in some areas of Catholic life, the cafeteria is open and approved of by Rome for the time being.
“Cafeteria Catholicism”, when used negatively, refers to imagining to be able to choose between believing in defined dogmas or not. One can choose either form of the Latin Rite Mass; one cannot choose between whether or not to believe in The Trinity, or the Right to Life from conception without violating Catholic teaching and incurring the pejorative expression, “Cafeteria Catholic”. Clearly, other choices are permissible and even necessary.
Does validity come in degrees? I thought validity was an either/or proposition. I hold that the Novus Ordo is 100% valid or 0% valid. The same rules that would invalidate a Traditional Mass apply to the Novus Ordo in regards to form, matter, minister, and intention. I am convinced that there is nothing in the form of the Novus Ordo that would invalidate it. Presumably we are in agreement. I haven’t seen Traditionalists suggest that the Novus Ordo is “less valid”. Maybe you could point to some examples.
Heresy is confined to dogma. Even if someone had formed a wrong opinion on the fruits of any liturgy and its value before God, we could not say it qualified as heresy unless the Church had definitively taught that every valid Mass, no matter the abuses associated with it, are equally pleasing to God and bear equal fruit. I disagree with the party who said something about certainty that the Novus Ordo is punishment from God. But the Church permits us to have opinions, even far-fetched opinions without calling us heretics. To be heretical, we have to oppose a defined teaching, and to my knowledge the Church has never taught anything about whether a liturgy could be divine punishment.
So in conclusion, I have a clear conscience about evaluating the fruits, the rubrics, and the intentions behind the Ordinary Form of the Mass. To suggest it is heretical or disobedient to to so, it seems necessary for you to cite the church documents which outline where the Church has ever taught that both forms of the Mass are equal as to the way they communicate Catholic Tradition and teaching.
If there is full equality in every way, and no negative analysis or criticism of either Mass is permissible, then there is never any reason for liturgical reform. Clearly, the very idea of having a new liturgy implies that improvements are possible to liturgies that are already fully valid. Wouldn’t you have to agree? But if improvements are possible, does it follow that liturgical change is always beneficial? I don’t think the Church has ever taught that every liturgical change must of us necessity be wise or prudent. Traditionalists think it is also possible that the liturgical changes that were brought about in the 1960’s have been to the detriment of the Church. Instead of calling us heretics and hypocrites point us to what Council or even fallible encyclical ever expressed the teaching that all liturgical changes will always be for the better. Until you can do that, it seems that it is licit to freely discuss and entertain the idea that the liturgical changes under Pope Paul VI were unwise, imprudent, and detrimental to the faith, WITHOUT fear of being condemned by the Church as a heretic or hypocrite.
I hope you’ll give some consideration to why I can’t be concerned that it is heretical to question the prudence of the reforms of the 60’s. I cannot speak for my fellow Traditionalists. I hope they are not guilty of abusing the word heresy. If you think it is heretical for anyone to disapprove of some liturgical changes, I think you condemn the entire Church with the popes and bishops first, because they certainly have differences of opinion on the liturgies too. I could quote where Cardinal Ratzinger said things about the formation of the Novus Ordo that have been the foundations for my own disapproval.
R
RoryMcKenzie56
Guest
wanner47,
He talked about “civilian clothes” in the sanctuary, not at Mass. There is seldom anyone without robes serving at the altar during the Traditional Mass. I am sure no one wants anyone to feel too poor to come to Mass. In fact, this is one practical reason for robing of priests, choirs and altar servers. No one’s dress should call attention to the ministers themselves either for good or bad.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
nope! the Mass must be what it always has been. no more novelties.
M
mick321
Guest
Clarification:
- Civilian clothing = tuxedo, business suit, pantsuit, wetsuit, cute dress, etc.
- Religious clothing = cassock, surplice, alb, chasuble, dalmatic, etc.
- Sanctuary = the area around the altar.
In our TLM community, no person approaches the Altar of God unless they are properly attired for their specific role in the sanctuary. Only the priest may authorize access to the sanctuary and it can be revoked at any time.
Altar servers and schola members suit up in white surplice, black cassock, trousers, socks and shoes. The schola leader / lector is a religious brother and seminarian. He wears the habit of his order. Priests wear the proper vestment for the liturgical season or feast that is being celebrated.
Lay faithful who are in the proper state of grace are invited to kneel at first step of the sanctuary and receive Holy Communion on the tongue if they are physically able to do so. There is no communion rail.
V
VetA
Guest
cry room?
V
VetA
Guest
by ratty clothing i meant people who have better cloths to ware but just throw on what they have on from the night/ day before not poor people who ware the best cloths they have but just happen to be old, what kind of person do you think i am? i take offense to know that you just assume the worst of me because i think people should ware appropriate cloths to the Holiest of Sacrifices the Mass
- Status