Do you think that High-Church Anglicanism is much more elaborate and ornate than Novus Ordo Catholicism?

[mick321]

Originally Posted by ByzCath

I can not enter into the discussion because the original question is flawed.

There is no such thing as Novus Ordo Catholicism.

I wish there were no such thing.

I pray that it will disappear from the earth within my lifetime.

If you have not encountered it - you are indeed fortunate - or need to get out more.

Blessed be God. Blessed be His Holy Name.

[Friar David, O.Carm]

Originally Posted by mick321

I wish there were no such thing.

I pray that it will disappear from the earth within my lifetime.

If you have not encountered it - you are indeed fortunate - or need to get out more.

Blessed be God. Blessed be His Holy Name.

You are operating under a false premise.

As the Holy Father has stated, there is only one rite within the Latin Church. This rite contains two forms, the Ordinary and the Extraordinary.

I would also add that your offensive comment that I need to get out more just shows how flawed you thought is. To make such a comment to someone who disagrees with your premise shows a disrespect and an feeling of superiority that makes the further reading of your posts unnecessary.

[mick321]

Originally Posted by ByzCath

You are operating under a false premise.

As the Holy Father has stated, there is only one rite within the Latin Church. This rite contains two forms, the Ordinary and the Extraordinary.

I would also add that your offensive comment that I need to get out more just shows how flawed you thought is. To make such a comment to someone who disagrees with your premise shows a disrespect and an feeling of superiority that makes the further reading of your posts unnecessary.

Br. David:

You are under no obligation to read or respond to this.

I agree with you and the Holy Father that there is only one Rite within the Latin Church. I further agree that the Rite contains both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms.

Novus Ordo Catholicism is neither a rite nor a form within the Catholic Church. It's a toxic attitude of superiority - introduced to the Church in the 70s and 80s - that continues to infect many parishes today. It is about intolerance, disrespect, suppression of ideas, gratuitous exercise of authority, crushing of opposition, desecration of what is sacred, elevation of what is not.

What is obvious to some may be less so to others. Indeed, one who sees no evidence of the existence of racism or sexism may benefit from a closer look. Or not.

Peace. Out.

[Jordan Francis]

It really depends where you go.

Certainly, there are many, far too many banal celebrations of the Liturgy in NO parishes everywhere. But reverence in the Mass has not died.

Currently, I am living in Germany. I have had an oppertunity to attend a number of Catholic Masses in Europe, and many of them have been very aware of the need for preserving its sacred quality. A Mass I attended for All Souls, for example, had all the sung ordinaries in Latin gregorian chant. The priest was robed in black, there were six candles behind the altar, insense and even nine altar servers.

Also, last weekend in Amsterdam, I found a Church that offered a Novus Ordo "Latin high Mass", even though I would say about 50% of it was still in Dutch. Nonetheless, the sung parts pf the ordinary were done so in Gregorian Latin chant. Of course, this was very fitting for the age and decor of the church itself.

I have also noticed that, back in Canada, some of the parishes in my city are becoming more reverent, especially at the Cathedral.

Coetibus Anglicanorum can only have the great benefit of spurning on a true and proper Liturgical reform.

[The Reginator]

I grew up an Anglican and never entered a Catholic Church until my early 20s. I was 38 when I finally converted.
I entered the Church at an FSSP parish. That was after attending a OF Mass for over a decade. In spite of the language difference I found that the EF Mass was more like the Anglican services than the Masses at our home parish.
None of the Anglican parishes I had attended in my youth were particularly 'high church'. No smells and bells. But lots of reverence!

[CradleCath]

corsair;5909489]It doesn't take much to be more reverent than the Novus Ordo.

Agreed. We, for 8 Months had a parish in our city that celebrated the Novus Ordo, as it was supposed to be said. Latin was given a prominent place in the Liturgy.....as was Gregorian Chant. We could either kneel at the old altar rail for Communion.....or remain standing & receive in the hand. It was a true relief from the Masses I'd been attending for so long & if it were still available here, I might still be going to that parish.

However, The Novus Ordo........
even when prayed with reverence, is mundane & NOISY compared to the TLM. The awe-inspiring majesty of the Mass of Trent just isn't there &, for me at least,
meditating on the Sacrifice that is taking place on the Altar, becomes harder & harder as the busy-busyness increases.

I feel comfortable saying that here on the "traditional" forum. But watch some libs come over to attack.

Cheers

[/quote]

Oh oh.....You shouldn't feel comfortable. The number of liberals posting on the "Traditional forum" is infinite. They come here to monitor the Traditionalists.......to make sure that we aren't guilty of "heresy".

[ProVobis]

Originally Posted by otjm

And if the change in the form of the Mass was such a cause of defection from the Church, then please explain why western Europe has had a far, far greater defection from weekly Mass attendance than the US, and why an area, such as Poland, which also had the change to the form of the Mass, has had such far, far greater attendance. All three - the US, western Europe and Poland, all had the same form of the Mass change; Europe fell so far off the edge of the earth that they make us look great; and Poland is so far beyond us that your conclusion makes no sense. Both the US and Poland should be showing attendance rates similar to Europe if the change in the Mass form was the cause of loss of attendance, but they don't. However, Europe is far more secualrized than the US, and the US far more than Poland.

Not exactly a ceteris paribus argument. Poland has had a very high (estimated at 90%) Catholic population and will stay Catholic and attend Mass no matter what, even their divorced and remarrieds. Pope JPII was from Poland and thus the Polish took even greater pride in their faith when he disrupted the long line of Italian Popes. Also the Polish consecration does have the words "for you and for many" and you'll find a much higher percentage of Poles who take confession before communion a lot more seriously than other countries. If the US only took half of the same pride Poles (and Hispanics, for that matter) have in their Catholic faith.

[Timothysis]

Originally Posted by ProVobis

Also the Polish consecration does have the words "for you and for many" ...

Are you suggesting that Mass attendance has declined due to the singular fact that the English translation of the liturgy reads "for you and for all?" In my entire life I have never heard the argument regarding "for all" vs. "for many" until I started visiting here. I think it is absurd to suggest that the Pauline Missal is the cause of the decline in religiosity in America post 1960s. As has been posted here before mainstream protestant denominations experienced the same decline post 1970. To place the blame on "for all" vs "for many" is to greatly over exaggerate the degree of knowledge of the average Catholic (the only ones I see who object to "for all" are the militant "Trads" who post here) and to underestimate the influence of the secularization that occurred in the post World War II world.

[ProVobis]

Originally Posted by Timothysis

Are you suggesting

No, I'm not suggesting anything. You focused on a by-the-way and jumped to unwarranted conclusions again.

Just merely offering some explanations on how it's unfair to lump all cultures together on the Post-Vatican II issues.

Actually post Vatican II is more about cultures than pre-Vatican II, though prior to Vatican II, the Poles seemed to have stuck together about as much as they do now, but that's only an observation.

[wisdomseeker]

Originally Posted by Claire from DE

My overall experience has been at OF masses that are said reverently. I realize that this hasn't been the experience of all the posters on this thread. At a recent daily mass, when my pastor sat down after communion he began to sing "Oh, Lord, I am not worthy", IMHO the perfect after-communion song. He is 65 and recently ordained, after 34 years as a Franciscan brother. Thank God, for holy pastors!

Our former pastor was the youngest in the diocese, also one who was obviously committed to his priesthood and the Lord. He always did everything according to the rubrics. (well there was one aberration on Holy Thursday washing of the feet of some who were not men but I don't expect perfection in this world).

I'm not liberal, not conservative, just Catholic. I'm so happy to be Catholic all my life beginning way before Vat.2. I'll go to mass anywhere: OF, EF, other rites, English, Spanish, French, Latin. Just give me Jesus and I'm happy!

In my Parish the holy Thursday the wash of feet was only women and children. talk about aberration.

[wisdomseeker]

Originally Posted by mick321

Br. David:

You are under no obligation to read or respond to this.

I agree with you and the Holy Father that there is only one Rite within the Latin Church. I further agree that the Rite contains both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms.

Novus Ordo Catholicism is neither a rite nor a form within the Catholic Church. It's a toxic attitude of superiority - introduced to the Church in the 70s and 80s - that continues to infect many parishes today. It is about intolerance, disrespect, suppression of ideas, gratuitous exercise of authority, crushing of opposition, desecration of what is sacred, elevation of what is not.

What is obvious to some may be less so to others. Indeed, one who sees no evidence of the existence of racism or sexism may benefit from a closer look. Or not.

Peace. Out.

good points..

may be to those who have never experienced the dissecration in the Church of today may not understand why we say these things.

but i can tell, in my area. all those i talk to have something to say about the Parishes in my area, each one is worse than the other. from disrespect of the Liturgy by priests and parishoners to rock roll band music. where is the Bishop on all this. nobody knows.

the feeling i have is that some priests thinks that they own the Church. each is doing their own adding and taking as they please.

the radio music in my Parish is torturous. but no sign of changing.


Lord have Mercy.

[otjm]

Originally Posted by ProVobis

Not exactly a ceteris paribus argument. Poland has had a very high (estimated at 90%) Catholic population and will stay Catholic and attend Mass no matter what, even their divorced and remarrieds. Pope JPII was from Poland and thus the Polish took even greater pride in their faith when he disrupted the long line of Italian Popes. Also the Polish consecration does have the words "for you and for many" and you'll find a much higher percentage of Poles who take confession before communion a lot more seriously than other countries. If the US only took half of the same pride Poles (and Hispanics, for that matter) have in their Catholic faith.

The peak in church attendance was 1957 - 1958 in the US, well before Vatican 2 was even an idea. Attendance fell off gradually since then, with one or two spikes upward; there are no statistics showing any rapid drop after the introduction of the OF. Comments that the loss of attendance in weekly Mass are due to the introduction of the EF do not explain why, long before the EF was introduced, attendance was already dropping; further, the gradual erosion of attendance does not fit the picture of people leaving because of the EF as that was introduced extremely rapidly and in the US as has been admitted elsewhere and repeatedly, with little effective catechesis. Because of the way it was introduced, if there was to be a significant drop, it would have occured soon thereafter. There is no such drop. The fact is, the vast majority of people attending Mass at the time of the EF, whether they liked it or not, continued attending, with an erosion to attendance at about the same rate as before it was proposed.

However, your responses about Poland completely miss the point; John Paul 2 was not named pope until well long after the EF was introduced in Poland; so if the EF was the cause of a major drop, it should show long before his being named pope. However, there was no such drop. Why? Because the Polish bishops as a group made serious and repeated efforts to implement the documents of Vatican 2, and implemented the EF, both by strong and continuous catechesis. These points are simply ignored by those who dislike, dispise and/or hate the EF because it does not fit into their theory; their theory is constructed of whole cloth and never mind the facts.

Interestingly, Poland since it was out from under the command and control of Communism, has started to show the same erosion pattern to Mass attendance. What changed? Not the Mass; the EF is primarily celebrated there. Not the Pope, as it started occuring while John Paul 2 was alive.

So what changed? The first issue was changes to the economy, and freedom from government control; with that economic change came a society more capable of achieving material goods, and with that came the issue of materialism; and not long behind that came the issue of secularism, as the press and entertainment outlets were much more open to Western practices and thought.

[PA650]

Originally Posted by Kyprianos

Why does Catholic Church deny its rich liturgical heritage?

Although the simplifying of the liturgy within the Catholic Church is saddening, I still find the loss of the traditional Lutheran liturgy to a more "contemporary" service in many parishes to be a step in the wrong direction. Alas, these are the times that we live in.

[DarkNight]

Originally Posted by Kyprianos

" No more smells&bells,Mozart,Bach in church "

Why does Catholic Church deny its rich liturgical heritage?

If you are going to mass expecting smells & bells & 18th century music and other such pageantry then you are going with the wrong expectations. You expecting a certain entertainment.

Go to mass expecting to find God. In focusing on Him the incidentals always become glorious.

Music from the heart, whether Gregorian chant or folk songs, are all part of the rich liturgical heritage of the church.

I have been to Tridentine, Byzantine and Novus Ordo masses; I found God at them all.

Go with Love, Go with God

[gurneyhalleck1]

In response to the OP, actually even the regular Anglican parish here in town that I have attended is much more reverent and pius in ritual than the novus ordo Catholic Mass, and this Anglican Church is really middle church, not high with the bells and whistles, but by no means low evangelical either.

Going to Mass here in central California is a kind of purgatory. Happy-clappy guitars with synthesizers, Hispanic-style music infused even into the English Mass music, people holding hands during the Our Father, everyone taking communion in the hand. It blows.

Honestly when the Swine flu came and no one was able to hold hands during the Our Father, I felt like it was just awesome! And no hand-shaking, even better! That H1N1 wasn't so bad liturgically!

Now if they could just come up with a virus that requires latin, incense and no guitar-strumming as a cure, I'd be in business!!