Firstly, apologies for missing the last two weeks. Summer haze and all that.
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments has not been similarly lazy, it would seem. There is in preparation a manual to help priests celebrate the Mass properly and the faithful to participate better. This can only be a good thing, of course – especially if its recommendations are taken on board.
Here is an excerpt from an interview with Cardinal Antonio Cañizares, the prefect of this congregation:
He stressed that the objective of the liturgy ‘is the adoration of God and the salvation of men, which is not a creation of ours, but source and summit of the Church.’
The prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments criticized existing abuses such as showmanship, and praised moments of silence ‘that are action’, which enable the priest and the faithful to talk with Jesus Christ and which exclude the predominance of words that often becomes showmanship on the part of the priest. The correct attitude is the one ‘indicated by Saint John the Baptist, when he says he must decrease and the Messiah must increase.’
The cardinal criticized the effort to make the Mass ‘entertaining’ with certain songs – instead of focusing on the mystery – in an attempt to overcome ‘boredom’ by transforming the Mass into a show.
He added that the Council did not speak of the priest celebrating Mass facing the people, that it stressed the importance of Christ on the altar, reflected in Benedict XVI’s celebration of the Mass in the Sistine Chapel facing the altar. This does not exclude the priest facing the people, in particular during the reading of the word of God. He stressed the need of the notion of mystery, and particulars such as the altar facing East and the fact that the sacrificial sense of the Eucharist must not be lost.
The whole article may befound here.
Let us pray that this manual, when it comes out, may be gratefully and willingly received in New Zealand.
P.S. for those of us who are uncomfortable with Mass facing the altar, I encourage you to read the rubrics to the Missal of Paul VI (1970, and retained in the latest typical edition), which presume that very thing.
Marty,
Thank you for both your worthwhile post and for the link concerning the wonderders of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and how it should be celebrated ….
Michael Voris spoke about it on this episode of the Vortex…
http://www.churchmilitant.tv/daily/?today=2013-01-21
Since reading it earlier I have been praying too, that it will be taken up seriously here in New Zealand without too many objections . The statement about periods of silence I would love to see happen …. after receiving our Blessed Lord in Holy Communion we are never given quiet time to be one on one with Him … we are led into some or other song instead and when that is finished Father is ready for the final prayers …. After Holy Mass is finished there is so much talk going on throughout the church that it is difficult to spend quiet time in thanksgiving .
As you said let us pray for our Holy Church, particularly that this effort from Rome will lead to all its recommendations being followed everywhere .
Shalom,
Mrs Mac
I echo your sentiments Barmac. Please God our Bishops will not ignore this directive from Rome when it comes. There are far too many priests who “conduct” the Mass like the ringmaster of a circus and musicians who believe they are there to entertain and expect to be clapped.
We have lost the ability to be silent and so long as we are loud we will not hear God.
Sounds to me, Bamac and Sienna, that the answer could well be the Traditional Mass – Low Mass, at least.
Marty,
Or the Novus Ordo as originally envisioned? Out of interest, do you think there is anything that makes the Traditional Mass inherently superior? (Disregarding all abuses or innovations to the Novus Ordo)
Well – Jesus shows up in whatever form of the mass you have, OF or EF (provided that the rubrics are followed and that it’s valid etc).
But I think, we need to clearly define what we presume the EF is more superior at carrying out. Because it is clear that the OF is far superior at having lay people in the sanctuary and reading the readings, because in the EF no such permission exists, excepting for marriage or for servers etc.
When it comes to conveying the awesomeness of God then of course EF is superior, or when it comes to facilitating attitudes of reverence and stillness then I think the EF is superior again.
The OF is superior in its readings…and some other things I’m sure (although I can’t seem to think of many things)
I think also we can safely say that even formally, there are some ‘problem areas’ in the OF like the offertory prayers which are almost completely made up and don’t seem anything like Catholic or Jewish prayers of offering, despite the new translation, which is also quite poor for the second time round. Another point can be the 2nd Eucharistic prayer. People like to say that it is more ancient than the Roman Canon because it comes form the anaphora of Hippolytus, but they fail to realize that it is such a bad paraphrase of that anaphora that it is almost unrecognisable. It’s like calling Coke and Pepsi the same thing (well not really, but you get what I mean).
Anyway, that’s a little bit of a rant from me.
So yeah, in some ways,the EF is superior to the OF. and vice versa, but probably more from the other way.
Peace
Tridentine Tortoise,
For me the old Traditional Latin Mass that I grew up with was more God centered than what the N O Mass has now so often become. Now the emphasis seems to be geared more to the community.we distract ourselves by shaking hands with those around us just after God has worked the miracle of coming down to us through the action of the Holy Spirit, and is really present on the altar for us … we get so busy making sure that we greet everyone we can even to turning our backs on Him so as not to miss those behind us .
When the Holy Mass was first changed into the venacular it stuck so much more to what the Mass had always been prayer-wise but bit by bit over the years it has lost so much of that …. somewhat like water dripping on a stone.
In the old days we did not need a liturgy commitee, nor what seems, at times, to be an endless stream of lay ministers of this that or the other. I keep being told how today we are able to participate more by our prayer responses and by yet more songs ( sorry but so many of them don’t feel like hymns to me ) not so in my books, for we knew what the altar boys were saying in their responses , responses given on our behalf, even without reading the transalations in our missal… there was so much more quiet time for prayer.. we had quiet time to absorb the readings and the homily ( which we then called a sermon)
Maybe I ramble on somewhat … I am very grateful to God that He still makes it possible for me to go to weekday N O Holy Mass nearly every day but I do so miss still the Holy Mass of old.
Shalom,
Mrs Mac
I sincerely hope the manual does make a difference but in my heart of hearts I feel that the only hope for the Church is a return of the EF Latin Mass because of the growing incursion of lay people into the Ordinary form of the Mass
The Novus Ordo Mass is becoming more and more of a people parade on Sundays with (in Hamilton at least) an accompanying band. The intrusion of lay people in the Mass is a complete distraction. Instead of us being uplifted by a sense of the sacred we are dragged down to the banal and the ordinary. Recently I attended a Mass at the Cathedral in Hamilton where a lay person even assisted with the asperges. The altar servers consisted of two very scantily dressed young women, both wearing very short skirts, one with very little on top. I thought it was scandalous and set no example to the rest of the congregation who in the main were all decently attired. Surely there should be some form of dress code.
I had hoped with the new translation that there would be an improvement, but unless Eucharistic Prayer 1 is said by the priest (which is very rare) then I don’t think there is much change. Surprisingly in the Hamilton Diocese it is the older priests who are saying Eucharistic Prayer 1.
There is an interesting article from Fr Martin Fox “Why priests should pray the Roman Canon”. It was written before the new changes to the Missal came out and one would think there is even more reason for Eucharistic Prayer 1 to be said now.
http://frmartinfox.blogspot.co.nz/2008/03/why-priests-should-pray-roman-canon.html
I wonder why he says “priests shy away from it” although to me it seems as though they do.
The Novus Ordo does not mandate lay involvement any more than the EF, regardless of innovations post-council. Why not just have the N.O in Latin as was originally intended? What precisely do you have against the Mass of Paul VI, assuming it is ad orientum, in Latin, etc ??
There seems to be a somewhat idiotic idea in some circles that the Novus Ordo itself is to blame for the various abuses that have become familiar over the last few decades. The Novus Ordo was intended to be celebrated in Latin, priest fscing the altar, with music of appropriate solemnity. What is wrong with the N.O ?
I have pointed out two problems already with the OF or Novus Ordo as you put it (and I attend the OF all the time btw).
To start with, the offertory prayers, and the the other Eucharistic prayers are inventions, I say this because they are paraphrases of the text from which they were taken, written up less than 50 years ago.
The multiple options which the priests so often opt out of.
The prayers which were said separately by the priest which have been turned into one prayer with the congregation e.g the ‘confiteor’ and ‘misereatur’ and the ‘Domine non sum dignus’, lead to a blurring of the differences between priest and people.
The memorial acclamations, which are also an absolute invention of a post-council committee.
The loss of the great octaves (which have been mentioned on this blog before)
The genuflection before the major elevations. Although this is a personal one, I believe that the priest should first adore before he can expose/ elevate/ show, you get what I mean.
Cutting out many of the outward, external gestures e.g sign of the cross at the ‘benedictus’ of the ‘sanctus’, at the end of the creed, genuflection in the creed etc. These external signs help our inward disposition towards the mysteries that take place.
T Tortoise,
thanks for your question in post #4. It’s a really good one. I’m a little busy at present, and would like some time to think about it. I’ll get onto a response soon, I promise!
Marty,
This post has brought back so many memories to me of when we used to have the Traditional Latin Holy Sacrifice of the Mass ,a Holy Mass that was celebrated in the Sanctuary … never hear of that term now do we . The sanctuary was considered a holy place dedicated to the worship and adoration of Our Blessed Lord who’s home it was … the priest,altar boys , maybe a visiting bishop or other member of the hierarchy, and the sacristan were the only people who entered there… now that the altar rails have been removed ( can not find any instruction from Vat 11 requesting their removal by the way… has anyone else?) there seems to be no limit to the number lay ministers who do so … we have had school children up on the steps singing and dancing at different times but, thank Heavens , not for some time.
If so many of us in the congregation found it hard to concentrate and feel part of the Holy Sacrifice with everything being so different, how hard it must have been for the priest too.
When the change first came about I was spending time in the mission field in New Guinea …. a Priest from Perth WA was up there, spending his sabatical leave helping out and experiencing mission life first hand. Father told us how very hard he personally was finding the change ( and I had been feeling sorry for myself!!!)
Gone were the days when , facing God, he was able to pray quietly to God in the language he had come to love …. maybe , like me, most of us in the congregation did not understand the words but we knew, very well, the sentiments that they conveyed, and so felt part of it. During the consecration, Father found that facing the congregation, for him, was a big distraction to prayerful thought and closeness to God. Father told us how much he missed the quiet short time he had had between receiving Our Blessed Lord and then distributing Him to everyone as they knelt at the altar rails…. how would he feel now days with being surrounded by so many lay people gathered around the altar with him at this important moment?
All this long ramble tells me that I definitely find the the Traditional Latin Holy Mass preferable if not superior to to what the modern N O has become now in so many areas.
Shalom,
Mrs Mac
Mrs Mac
Think you need to play a few Bing Crosby records and have a lie down.
Neither he or the Latin mass are on the way back!!
What a strange remark HB. The ‘Latin Mass’* is increasingly popular.
*’Latin Mass’ is a silly term, the official Missal for the new Mass is in Latin as well
Oh, and Bing Crosby doesn’t need to come back. He never went away. Enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CuP2YQTUlE
Thanks Marty. It’s an interesting issue. Often obscured by (for want of a better word) ‘poilitical’ tensions.
H.B.,
Thank you for your concern…I did have a lie down as a matter of fact but played me some Gregorian chant instead,
God Bless dear Bing … and God Bless you too,
Mrs Mac
Tridentine Tortoise, you ask what do I have against the NO Mass. What I have against the Novus Ordo Mass is that the vast majority of my family and friends who attended the Tridentine Mass when I was young now no longer attend the Novus Ordo Mass – I think the NO Mass has led to a loss of faith for the reasons expressed by Cardinal Ottaviani, who said that the Novus Ordo Mass is “a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent”. Cardinal Ottavani refers to the “innovations in the Novus Ordo” and it is those innovations I believe that have led to a general watering down of the Faith and belief in the Real Presence, and also a general disregard of the moral teachings of the Church.
In writing to Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Ottaviani ensured that the Tridentine Mass was not lost all together, and I believe that the restoration of the Tridentine Mass (EF)will be what will lead to the restoration of the Church because the EF Mass presents the essentials of the Catholic Faith which the Novus Ordo does not.
Helens Bay, I hope you don’t have to lie down and take an asprin after you read this:
”
It’s late I know, but I’ll reply. Just a mo
And deo gratias Teresina for both of your two last comments.
… hope that the asprin helps H.B.
Shalom,
Mrs Mac
Teresina,
It seems to me that there are three distinct but not seperate issues:
1.) The theology of the Mass.
2.) The liturgy as it is enacted at the local (parish) level.
3.) Demographic changes over the last 50 years.
It is possible that the N.O has caused a decline in Mass attendance. However the decline in Church attendance experienced by mainline protestant denominations in (for one) the United States over the last 50 years has mirrored decline in Mass attendance. — And protestants aren’t losing faith because of the N.O.
A lot of the complaints I have seen directed at the N.O seem to relate to its implementation not theology. For example; — both the N.O and the Traditional Mass have Latin as their mother tongue. There is no inherent reason for a believer in the Latin Mass to favour the ’62 Missal over the N.O. (Ignoring HB’s ignorant terminolgy). And so on, for communion in the hand, choice of music etc.
If the Traditional Mass is inherently superior, that fact will turn on fundamental theology. I know Marty knows far more about liturgy than me, which is why I asked him that question in #4.
Marty, hey bro, here is Cardinal Canizares on video speaking about similar stuff.
Marty,
Another link along the lines of the post ….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sToEy7c4mk
Mrs Mac
Another link… how does one go about putting more than one link in a comment?
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/the-rise-of-latin-mass-youth
I found the comment from one who didn’t think much of the traditional Holy Mass at first but persevered a few times and found more beauty in it…
Shalom
Mrs Mac
Hi T Tortoise,
Thanks, firstly, for your patience. I cannot promise, in what follows, complete coherence, but I’ll make every attempt. To remind ourselves:
Let us set the scene: We are comparing a Traditional Mass (TLM) celebrated in its normative best form (Solemn High Mass) with a Novus Ordo (NO) in its best form as envisaged by the Church: (ad orientem, primarily in Latin but with the readings in English, Gregorian chant in pride of place singing the propers and ordinary, beautiful sanctuary, reverent gestures, humble liturgical attitudes, qualitative signs, vestments, vessels, etc).
If we allow this representation to stand as described, let us proceed.
Our first point is, perhaps, the most important. At a fundamental level, Christ is made present at each Mass. It is the same Christ who is offered, the same grace made present, the same effect in terms of sacramental grace on offer, whichever Mass is in question. Neither Mass could be ‘superior’ at this level; each Mass brings Jesus and the Sacred Mysteries of His Life to us, and offers us entry into the Saving Mysteries of His Life, to participate in that and be fruitful, etc. At this level, there is no ‘comparison’.
However, we must also consider, in a broader way, the external signs which constitute each Form, and consider whether these are more helpful, richer, better framed, more stable, more developed, better arranged, and more qualitative in one Form or another (EF/TLM or OF/NO).
These external signs are there…
(1) in order to give greater glory and thanksgiving to God with our best efforts and best art (the virtue of magnificentia), whilst celebrating the sacraments, which have been given to us by Jesus; and
(2) in order to enable us (people and priest) to be more disposed spiritually to enter what the Mass is giving us at a fundamental level – Jesus and the Saving Mysteries.
Some of these external signs are gestures (signs of the cross, bows, movements, genuflections etc), some are words (prayers), some are sounds (chants), some are fragrance (incense, beeswax candles), some are visual and tactile (vestments, altar frontals, candles) etc – these are many and varied.
These external signs have two main reasons (among others) for existing in the Form of the Rite of Mass: ADORATION and FORMATION (Didacticism/Disposition).
ADORATION (Latria): We adore God with our best art. Though it is never ‘enough’ for the infinite God, we still make the effort to offer Him the best that we can muster, to manifest our adoration, our thanksgiving, our reverence. So, the external signs which constitute the Form of the Rite should manifest the virtues of justice, religion, piety, magnificentia, and others, offering Jesus to the Father, through the use of our best offerings, our best efforts…
FORMATION: (Didacticism/Disposition): Because we are incarnated spirits, our spirit/soul (intelligence and will) needs help at our bodily level and at our sensual level to enter the spiritual dimension of what Holy Mass offer us. We can only enter by grace (a complete gift of God), but grace builds on nature, and respects the demands of our nature, which includes our bodily life, and its limits. Grace pulls our nature forward into what it cannot achieve by itself, but in harmony with out nature, never against it. We need help at the bodily level (through these external signs) to dispose us, in order to help us to spiritually enter more deeply (by grace) the invisible spiritual realities, which the Mass brings to us, under its fundamental signs (bread and wine – which are required for validity).
This help comes in the mode of these other external signs which constitute the Form of the Rite and frame the fundamental signs, which Christ instituted (e.g., bread and wine, and the words of consecration). This is the relationship between the law of prayer and the law of belief and the law of life: lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi. We’ll end up living (in charity) as we believe, and we’ll end up believing (in faith) as we pray (in the liturgy).
These external signs which make up the wider structure the Rite (over and above the basic sacramental signs), may be more present, in a more qualitative way (helping us more to believe as we pray), in one Form of Mass than the other. And the other Form might contain some signs under a particular mode, which the other doesn’t have, and which help in another way.
Each Form could have different respective qualities – which in fact they do. But one might have some more than the other; and be more proven through time than the other to be beneficial for all (priest and people)…even for our age and its pastoral ‘needs’.
I think it would be fruitful to consider these external signs in two ways: how they might help the priest, and how they might help the people.
How do they help the priest who celebrates the Mass? How do they help the people who assist at Mass?
These are but a few to consider – in no particular order. There are many others (obviously).
1. Prayers at the Foot of the Altar
These prayers are beautiful, and are a reminder to the priest that he is about to enter the Holy of Holies, that he is under the Mystery, as it were. This sense of gravity is absent from the ‘introductory rites’ of the NO, in my opinion – to its detriment. The priest is reminded by these Prayers at the Foot that he is a sinner in need of mercy and has no ‘right’ to approach the Altar, but only by the Mercy and Grace of God. He is reminded how this privilege to offer Mass is a great gift and a joy that he needs to consider each time he approaches the Altar.
Additionally, the compulsory inclusion of the Confiteor in the TLM helps the priest always acknowledge his sins in a proper way, and begin by humility, littleness, and dependency.
2. Reverences
Here is a clear point of departure between the TLM and the NO. The number of blessings and genuflections all contribute to an overwhelming sense of reverence in the TLM, and again sign to the priest and people that they are in the midst of Something Great, something Incredibly Important. This is very true for the formation of children; they see that this is not some show happening up the front but super real, super different anything they have experienced before. It is true for all of us. At its maximum, the NO allows only three genuflections. While number isn’t the crucial thing here, the atmosphere such bodily attitudes naturally inspire is very different.
3. Adoration
Something which may seem minor, but which to me is crucial, is that in the TLM, immediately after the consecrations, the priest genuflects in adoration before showing the Host and Chalice to the people. It is a far better sign and manifests belief in Christ’s presence more deeply.
4. Sacrifice
With all the gestures of reverence in the TLM and the different offertory prayers (upon which I can expand if you wish), I think there is a stronger sense that the priest is offering sacrifice, and therefore it guards and deepens his identity as a priest. I’m not saying that this is not present in the NO. But I wonder whether the TLM helps this more for the priest and his growth in his priestly heart?
5. Options
The TLM has fewer options at different points of the Mass, and this allows for greater stability and uniformity (in a good way) between different celebrations of the Mass in the same Church, between parishes, between dioceses etc. People are not thrown about by the particular preferences of the local priest, and his sticking on one lesser option for years – as does happen a lot these days. Especially in regard to the Canon, it’s important to have stability.
6. Mystery
There can be no doubt that the priest is encouraged to be completely under the mystery (He must increase and I must decrease). Even in an ad orientem NO Mass, the priest still faces the people for a number of prayers.
7. Silence
Silence during the high point of the TLM, especially the Consecrations, is something greatly underestimated and misunderstood today due to our busy and noisy world, which, in its scientific tyranny, wants to ‘understand everything’. In my view this is a wonderful advantage of the TLM over the NO. The Gesture of Love of the offering of Christ, manifested in the gestures of the priest during the Consecrations, is more powerful when the words of the Consecration drop to a whisper, and everything is pulled into that gesture at the Altar.
Hope that helps a little T Tortoise.
Marty.
Marty.
#26.
An excelent analysis, and one in which I completely agree.
I was raised on the TLM, and in the days of the change – what, late 60′s? can’t quite recall – went along with the changes, but recognised that “something” was lost. Couldn’t put my finger on it at the time.
We now have the TLM on the first Saturday of each month, to which a growing number of people are attending – usually 20 or 30. When it first started here about 7 years ago, i went with my mother ( God rest her soul), and found it to be a pleasant recolection, but did not go again for about 4 years.
But what I have come to realise what was lost, was the sense of worship, with the priest leading the people of God toward Christ on the altar. And a realisiation that much of the symbolism of the TLM had been lost – eliminated – with the NO. The Catholic Church does much of its teaching and understanding of the faith through symbolism, and to me, the NO has dumbed down our understanding and our worship, and therefore eliminated something very Catholic. I wonder how long it will take to recover it?
Having served every now and then, it only took 2 or 3 Masses for the Latin to come roaring back from the dim recesses of my memory; and with that has come much of the language (I did Latin at school for 5 years – could speak almost like an ancient Roman :wink_wp:
Hi Don,
thanks for that.
You know, it’s funny, but for those who knew and lived and prayed the TLM for much of their youth, it doesn’t take long for it to come back, as you’ve said.
I once read a beautiful story about two older businessmen who, having discovered (when meeting for the first time) that each was Catholic, and that each had served as altar boys, were able to recite the Prayers at the Foot without error, 40 years after having last served it.
The bonds that good (and bad) liturgy lays upon us are strong.
Thank you, Marty. I agree with Don the Kiwi that you have given us an excellent analysis – actually the best I have read. I totally agree with your statement that:
That belief in the Real Presence of Christ is what has kept many of the faithful going all these years, through thick and thin, when many times it was hard to recognise that we were at a Mass of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. It would have been easy to walk away and unfortunately many have. Good holy priests also kept our hopes alive, telling us to stick with it and that eventually all the errors would be overcome. They have been proven right.
Mrs Mac, thanks for those links. Like you I found some interesting comments comparing the OF and EF Mass. This comment describes what often occurs in the OF of the Mass. There is no doubt that in many instances the OF of Mass is being brought down to the lowest common denominator:
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21568357-its-trendy-be-traditionalist-catholic-church-traditionalist-avant-garde