|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 15, 2021 11:03:19 GMT
Clericalism is a real thing. In Ireland, my husband was chewed out for picking up a dropped host as a child. All that is gone now. People have begun to realize that Christ does not remove Himself from the Sacred host depending on the person handling it. Remember, the Apostles all received in the hand. There is no place in Passover rubrics, or Jewish history where the head of the house feeds the people at table. In the past we were receiving AFTER Mass, which is wrong, and unfortunate. We are just as much participating and praying the Mass as everyone else. To make us receive after the community had left was cruel and unnecessary. Priests are much more compassionate these days. To say that today were are treating the Eucharist trivially is to do a great injury to holy priests. I respect what you do here as moderator, and I appreciate the fairly liberal approach you take to allowing lively discussion of various points of view (unlike another forum which shall remain nameless), but I must charitably offer some points to the contrary:
I don't think anybody imagines that Christ leaves the Sacred Host "depending on the person handling it". In fact, that's the whole issue --- should the Body of Christ be handled, without a grave reason (such as preservation from sacrilege or a need for a hermit to self-communicate), by a layperson whose hands have not been blessed, and where is always the danger of sacrilege from unseen crumbs and unpurified hands? (I have to wonder if such a hermit would use gold-plated tweezers, or a spoon, or something similar, to avoid touching the Host. That is what I'd want to do, if I were a hermit and were self-communicating.) The Apostles were all bishops. I have heard that in Middle Eastern cultures, the host (no pun intended) might place food up to the mouth of the person eating, as a gesture of hospitality --- though, as you allude to, the Apostles probably did not do this at the Last Supper. If I were an organist, or musician, or usher, or what have you, I would have no problem with receiving after Mass. I would just be happy to receive Our Lord under any circumstances. The practice of having EMHCs and CITH is not per se "treating the Eucharist trivially", but that could be true of poorly catechized or immature communicants, the kind you see giggling, mugging to others as they approach the Holy Table, even chatting with one another or (God forbid) chewing gum. They don't grasp the seriousness of what they are preparing to do, and there needs to be some deep, remedial catechesis to get them to this point, with abstaining from communion until such time as they "get their minds right" about the matter.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 15, 2021 11:20:18 GMT
The answer to all these oddities, innovations, liturgical abuses and excesses is simple. Either do away with the novus ordo completely and restore the latin mass as the ordinary (something I don't personally advocate for but would happily settle for if the alternative is to stay the present course). Or, faithfully and FULLY implement the changes called for by the Second Vatican Council (which would essentially be the Latin Mass, but in the vernacular). Bring back altar rails and patens and a single priest can commune an entire parish by himself in the same time (or even less) than usually happens with a diocesan priest, deacon and small army of EMHC. This, about twenty times over.
I would be so happy, that I might die of joy over it, if the Traditional Latin Mass were restored at the ordinary, normative Mass of the Roman Rite.
People properly reflecting over their worthiness to receive communion before doing so, and going to confession frequently before communion, could also reduce the number of people going to communion at any given Mass. I have noticed at Spanish Masses that the people (who are overwhelmingly Mexican or Central American) do not all receive communion, it is probably about 50-60%. This stands in sharp contrast to Anglo Masses where pretty much everyone receives.
I am even willing to bet that more frequent use of confession, having larger families, and the use of NFP instead of contraception, would eventually result in more vocations to the priesthood, and thus less of a perceived need for EMHCs. Marriage doesn't seem like such an attractive proposition, when you know that you can't have unbridled sexual relations without consequences, and cannot be absolutely sure of how many children you will have. A man could always end up marrying a woman who is hyper-fertile and gets pregnant at the drop of a hat, NFP or no NFP. Having to work hard all his life, to provide for a larger family than desired, could make the priesthood more attractive by comparison. Ditto for women who don't want to have babies all the time and everything that goes with raising such a large family, the convent starts looking pretty good.
NOTE: I was shellacked over on CAF for expressing such views, objections to the effect of "a priestly or religious calling has to be absolutely pure, and unaffected by anything that could happen, to make the person consider it as an alternative, such as not wanting to risk a large family, or falling flat of one's face in secular pursuits". That's a noble thought, but people have followed this way of life, or that one, for mixed reasons, in many, many cases, and I'd be hard-pressed to see what harm comes of it. Pray tell, what is wrong with a man or woman opting for a secure life, a fulfilling ecclesiastical career (unfortunate word, but that's the only way I know how to describe it), a life devoted to service to God and to the faithful, rather than taking on the burdens that having a family always entails? I wouldn't be in the least bit scandalized by a priest saying "I preferred the priesthood over getting married, because unless celibacy is just too much to ask, you're able to have a good life, get a good education, enjoy the respect of the people, have security in your temporal life, and offer the Holy Sacrifice and administer sacraments unto the salvation of souls"? Medieval people wouldn't have had the slightest issue with such a sentiment.
|
|
|
Post by pianistclare on Apr 15, 2021 18:55:22 GMT
No, the answer is education. Adherence to the Roman Missal is right and proper, but praying in a language that most people do no know and young people are not accustomed to is simply the wrong idea. Maybe it makes people "feel" holy, reverent, ....maybe. But Mass is not about the "feels". We have many elderly parishioners (indeed, they are the only people actually showing up for Mass anymore, and every single one of them do not want the Latin back. They want to pray in their own native tongue, just like the Hispanics do. And let me tell you, that old saw about Spanish being a romance language and that all Hispanos understand Latin, is simply not true. They look at the various ministers, lectors, and other liturgy assistants with sorrow and dismay, for it's all foreign to them, yet again. They have just now learned English, and we're switching it up again. No wonder our Baptist brethren are harvesting our people. It's not pandering to allow people to worship in their native tongue, which is a key concept put forth in Vatican II. Yes, Latin and organ music have pride of place, but if a community is not being elevated by it, we cannot and should not offer it as a "solution". The solution is education. It is for most every ill. I see it driving people from our parish, away from the Sacraments, and falling into despair. Why is that the Lord sent for the the Apostles to preach to every nation and gave them the gift of tongues? Not to claim that His own language was superior, but that He is there for all.
|
|
|
Post by ratioetfides on Apr 15, 2021 21:26:59 GMT
Indeed, education seems to be a good answer, as do accommodation and inculturation.
Mass in a beautiful cathedral or basilica with a massive pipe organ, choir, and all the beauties well attended can a worthy mode of worship. Mass in a Catholic Worker house with a simple alter, a few bare ‘church decorations,’ accompanied by an upright piano and a acoustic guitar can be a worthy mode of worship. Mass in the parking lot of a homeless shelter on a folding table with no instrumental accompaniment can a worthy mode of worship. The wants and preferences of some groups seem to express some level of disdain for the last two modes of worship.
Might some few elements of Latin be appropriate in the cathedral or basilica setting? Perhaps. Might these same elements be less appropriate in others settings? It would seem so.
Some may have a preference for the cathedral basilica type worship with an army of ordinary ministers of communion. Others may have a preference for the simplicity of the Catholic Worker House or the availability and lack of judgment at the homeless shelter. Some may fall in between and have a preference for a middle of the road parish type worship. This is the ‘catholicity’ of The Church. This catholicity manifests itself in thought and in worship. Both offer the faithful a wide berth. Person or groups claiming schools of thought or worship styles within these berths are not ‘authentic’ or ‘less authentic’ seem to have a very narrow or myopic view of the church.
It seems odd persons believing in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species would express a preference for less of the faithful to approach for communion. The Church has clearly advocated for more of the faithful to receive communion more often. Attempting to make determinations about who is and who is not worthy to approach may prove a dangerous endeavor.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 15, 2021 23:13:04 GMT
pianistclare Well the traditional Catholic rebuttal would be that education needs to include teaching current and future generations latin, like it used to be done. But like I said, "I" am not advocating for a return of the latin mass as the sole mass unless it was the only viable alternative. I would like to see the novus ordo faithfully implemented everywhere and tried first. Get rid of communion in the hand, female "acolytes", altar servers, etc. Restore the communion rail and patens. Restore the incense and bells at every Mass. Priests saying Mass ad orientem. Replace singing contemporary protestant sounding songs with gregorian chant and/or sacred polyphony but have the prayers of the Mass chanted in English (what Vatican II described). This kind of gives an idea what I mean. Though this is the Eastern Divine Liturgy, it's the same idea www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKWfKSul7eQ
|
|
|
Post by ratioetfides on Apr 15, 2021 23:58:53 GMT
pianistclare Well the traditional Catholic rebuttal would be that education needs to include teaching current and future generations latin, like it used to be done. But like I said, "I" am not advocating for a return of the latin mass as the sole mass unless it was the only viable alternative. I would like to see the novus ordo faithfully implemented everywhere and tried first. Get rid of communion in the hand, female "acolytes", altar servers, etc. Restore the communion rail and patens. Restore the incense and bells at every Mass. Priests saying Mass ad orientem. Replace singing contemporary protestant sounding songs with gregorian chant and/or sacred polyphony but have the prayers of the Mass chanted in English (what Vatican II described). This kind of gives an idea what I mean. Though this is the Eastern Divine Liturgy, it's the same idea www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKWfKSul7eQ The ordinary form offers options inclusive of bells, incense, patents, chant, and the use of the propers. Options are also offered for their lack of use. Each of the options is equally authentic and approved for use. Furthermore female altar servers and communion in the hand while standing are also authentically sanctioned for various jurisdictions. Those wishing to receive kneeling and/or on the tongue have also been affirmed in their right to do so. The 1970 missal was compiled in the wake of The Second Vatican Council and composed by liturgist informed by the council and its decrees. The missal was affirmed by the Bishop of Rome and is reflective of the mind of the church in the ordinary mode of worship. The following missals are the same and affirmed by the succeeding bishops of Rome. The options provided do not differ in authenticity, rather these options are reflective of preference and/or pastoral sensitivity. Authentic options are available to worship in the ordinary form in ways very similar to the extraordinary form; authentic options are also offered for worship in ways very different from the extraordinary form. Both can be, and largely are, faithful to The Second Vatican Council. It seems worth considering the fruits of The Second Vatican council are not necessarily only the textual documents promulgated, but perhaps also inclusive of the way these documents have in formed the mind of the church and been implemented into the life of the church. This expression and implementation has been done in some part by those directly involved in the council and more recently by those who are of the succeeding generation(s). In regards to education in Latin some readers may wish to ponder the proportion of the faithful over the last several hundred years who received an education in latin to the extent they were able to throughly understand all parts of liturgy conducted in Latin.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 16, 2021 0:50:15 GMT
We have many elderly parishioners (indeed, they are the only people actually showing up for Mass anymore), and every single one of them do not want the Latin back. I don't doubt that most of them prefer the vernacular, but I would just add that, when the Novus Ordo vernacular was introduced, they were told that this is what they were supposed to prefer. The mindset of this generation was that you blindly follow the Church, and that no priest can ever lead you astray. (With regard to the latter, I have to think that there were many personal crises of faith, when the priestly sex abuse scandal blew open in such a way that nobody could deny it.)
Blind obedience is better than no obedience at all, but going forward into future generations, I would like to see people instructed in the "whys and wherefores" of Catholicism, that there is such a thing as authority and obedience, but the Catholic Faith explains and justifies itself, does not rely upon "authority behind it", and it is up to us "always to have a reason for the hope that is in us". I think that in past generations, the mindset was more "the catechism is true because the Church says it is", which left countless numbers of Catholics unable to explain why we believe and do what we believe and do.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 16, 2021 3:29:18 GMT
ratioetfides Well perhaps Rome needs to consider tightening the regulations surrounding the Novus Ordo a bit. Fine tuning is clearly in order. The fact there are so many options for less and less reverence and propriety is clearly related directly to the loss of faith in the Real Presence and the loss of faith in God in general. I'm not saying it's the "cause" or even the "main reason". But it's clearly tied and needs to be addressed alongside all the other societal and cultural reasons the youth and men in general, are leaving the Church in droves.
|
|
|
Post by ratioetfides on Apr 16, 2021 3:47:51 GMT
ratioetfides Well perhaps Rome needs to consider tightening the regulations surrounding the Novus Ordo a bit. Fine tuning is clearly in order. The fact there are so many options for less and less reverence and propriety is clearly related directly to the loss of faith in the Real Presence and the loss of faith in God in general. I'm not saying it's the "cause" or even the "main reason". But it's clearly tied and needs to be addressed alongside all the other societal and cultural reasons the youth and men in general, are leaving the Church in droves. It would seem the history of the church, at least since the introduction of a more centralized regulation of liturgy, envisions such alteration/reforms to the order of worship. The years since the close of The Second Vatican Council and the promulgation of the 1970 missal are merely a small sample in the life of the church. Such alterations or reforms have already been seen in the promulgation of succeeding missals, as well as their translations. Further alterations/reforms should be expected in the future as should changes in the way the church attempts to interact or inform the culture at large. As to which direction these changes will lead, much is unknown.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 16, 2021 5:54:25 GMT
ratioetfides It's worth noting, despite how it makes any one feel in particular, that the evidence is showing the younger generations flocking to the traditional latin mass only communities. While most diocesan parishes are hemorrhaging out their men and their youth, TLM only communities seem to be exploding with young families (lots of children). TLM seminaries are bursting at the seams with large waiting lists and active fundraisers to expand seminaries. Same with religious vocations in traditional orders. Meanwhile, in many places, diocesan/novus ordo seminiaries are barely getting more than a few ordinations each year, religious vocations are drying up, diocesan/novus ordo parishes are merging and closing and shrinking. While I admit there must be many reasons for this, I think it's worth noting that the particular way a Mass is offered seems to have a huge factor, possibly even the deciding factor, for where the young will attend.
|
|
|
Post by pianistclare on Apr 16, 2021 18:33:17 GMT
homeschool: Everyone says this, but we do not see it happening. We have over 79 seminarians at any given time, at various seminaries. The good sister are yes, drying up. But vocations are doing well around here.
|
|
|
Post by pianistclare on Apr 16, 2021 18:37:45 GMT
ratioetfides Well perhaps Rome needs to consider tightening the regulations surrounding the Novus Ordo a bit. Fine tuning is clearly in order. The fact there are so many options for less and less reverence and propriety is clearly related directly to the loss of faith in the Real Presence and the loss of faith in God in general. I'm not saying it's the "cause" or even the "main reason". But it's clearly tied and needs to be addressed alongside all the other societal and cultural reasons the youth and men in general, are leaving the Church in droves. There are zero options for for less reverence. It's not a Novus Ordo thing, People love to blame everything on the Mass. Drives me nuts. The Roman Missal is CLEAR. Maybe some priests just don't follow the rubrics. That's an ENTIRELY different thing. "Tightening" does not appeal to most people. They already feel the church is too wound up. Not saying this is correct, of course, but the fact is, most children have been raised to believe that whatever they do is just fine, so long as they don't hurt anyone else. Parents have failed to teach kids that their SOUL is worth saving. Worry less about your social circle, and worry more about your relationship with Christ.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 16, 2021 22:52:52 GMT
pianistclare That ties into my point though. It all ties together. If we continue to offer horrendously watered down and protestant looking/sounding Liturgies, the youth will continue staying disengaged and disinterested and will continue losing their faith. We are long past the point of making justifications for poor liturgy.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Apr 17, 2021 14:02:12 GMT
pianistclare That ties into my point though. It all ties together. If we continue to offer horrendously watered down and protestant looking/sounding Liturgies, the youth will continue staying disengaged and disinterested and will continue losing their faith. We are long past the point of making justifications for poor liturgy. Just to play the devil's advocate here a bit, and without necessarily agreeing that it is a good thing, I really have to think that most Catholics --- at least in Anglo-American culture --- want to worship more in the fashion of Protestants (at least the higher-liturgical ones such as Anglicans, Lutherans, and arguably Methodists, who, mirabile dictu, retain more remnants of Catholicism than you would think), and to imagine that their faith is more or less compatible with Protestants whose liturgy is, in the Novus Ordo, not all that different. I have visited Anglican Masses where you would really be hard-pressed to realize you're not at the Novus Ordo, except for the absence of the Vatican flag (which AFAIK is not required by any rubrics) and prayers for the Pope. There has been more of a convergence in recent years, where Catholics have become more Protestant, and Protestants have become more Catholic. Anything Baptist and to the "right" of Baptists (for lack of a better way to put it) would be an exception to this.
Given this backdrop, I have to think that, at least in our lifetimes, the Traditional Latin Mass will remain pretty much of a niche novelty. I do not like that realization, but I'm afraid it's the truth.
I would love for future events to prove me wrong.
|
|
|
Post by stjosephprayforus on Apr 18, 2021 2:26:29 GMT
homeschooldad Well if we see the Liturgy implemented according to the desires of the Council, we'd see the novus ordo operating like a latin mass, but with far more lay involvement and more prayers in the vernacular. That would certainly be a huge improvement, one that I think most Catholics could live with.
|
|