if not, is it even a tridition that can be changed since it was instituted by Jesus?
Yes, it can be changed, and has been done many different ways over the centuries. It wasn’t done during Mass until very recently.
is it true that vatican caved to altar girls under pressure?
and i keep hearing a rumor that protestant ministers were involved in the writing of the new order of the mass. is that true?
There is some little truth to it, but it’s been over-exaggerated to the extreme.
how do we even know what’s right and wrong anymore if parishes aren’t following the rules? and i keep hearing different things all over the place.
We’re making some progress. John Paul the Great (in his later years) and Benedict XVI did much to help set the tone for the reform of the reform. There’s a lot of hope and promise in our new priests and seminarians.
Blessings in lieu of Holy Communion are strongly discouraged yet remain an option in many parishes. There is a sticky at the top of this forum that contains a letter from the Vatican regarding this.
Paschale Solemnitatis, the Church document regarding the order and structure of the Holy Week liturgies, states that twelve MEN should have their feet washed on Holy Thursday because Christ washed the feet of the twelve apostles, who obviously were men. There isn’t anything that says it MUST be twelve men, but it is strongly recommended.
If you are concerned about the doings in your parish, consult your pastor. It is your right to be concerned about conducting the Liturgy in a proper way.
The Roman Missal says ‘chosen MEN’ and Paschale Solemnitatis and other documents repeat that. That is a direct translation from the Latin, VIRI which means men as opposed to ‘mankind’ or the global ‘man’ which can include both men and women.
Note that the Roman Missal and Paschale Solemnitatis don’t suggest a number of men, just simply men. While 12 is the traditional number, better only 6 men than a combination of 12 men and women. Only 6 men would at least adhere to the rubrics.
That the Vatican “caved” is an opinon, not a fact.
The fact is that the Pope had the authority to do what he did. The fact is that the Pope issued a legitimate document of the Church. And the fact is that some people don’t like what he did, so they gripe.
Regarding the Protestant ministers being involved in the writing of the newer Mass, at the Second Vatican Council, some Protestant ministers were invited to act as consultants for the purpose of making the Mass and the presentation of the Catholic faith more approachable and understandable to non-Catholics. I don’t know all the details of their involvement, but I do know that it was for the good of the Church. As a convert to Catholicism from a Protestant faith, I am quite thankful for some of the changes that were allowed as a result of the Second Vatican Council, and the advice of those Protestant ministers. I was able to hear the Mass in my own language, follow along with the prayers, and overall feel welcome right from my very first Mass. I do know that some people believe that the involvement of Protestant ministers in helping the Council somehow invalidates the work of the Council, but I think that is totally wrong. The leaders of our Church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, opened up the Church to potential converts like me, in their use of the advice of those ministers. :signofcross:
again, there are a number of hard core type traditionalists that believe and support these ideas and they are on CAF. But that does not mean their view point is accurate and a number of the things they complain about with changes in the liturgy have nothing to do with doctrine of the Church but do have to do with submission to authority of the Church.
Not sure why some are attributing concern for proper liturgy to only ‘traditionalists’ or ‘hard core traditionalists’ whatever that means. Also not sure why some are so opposed to others having concern for proper liturgy. It is the Church’s highest form of prayer. I don’t think this priest would be considered a traditionalist…
The church and bishops declare what liturgy is. A proper liturgy is the one the church commands/allows.
The problem comes when people put their personal preferences and nostalgia above the church.
Do we trust the church in all things, believe they truly hold the keys to the kingdom? Or do we only believe that when the church agrees with our opinions? The latter transfers the keys to the individual.
The abuses of the sacred liturgy that followed the reforms of the Second Vatican Council are “strictly correlated” with a great deal of moral corruption that exists in the world today, says Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke.
ZENIT: Some also say that to be concerned with liturgical law is being unduly legalistic, that it’s a stifling of the spirit. How should one respond to that? Why should we be concerned about liturgical law?
Cardinal Burke: Liturgical law disciplines us so that we have the freedom to worship God, otherwise we’re captured – we’re the victims or slaves either of our own individual ideas, relative ideas of this or that, or of the community or whatever else. But the liturgical law safeguards the objectivity of sacred worship and opens up that space within us, that freedom to offer worship to God as He desires, so we can be sure we’re not worshipping ourselves or, at the same time, as Aquinas says, some kind of falsification of divine worship.
I see questions like this and I wonder what the point is.
I’ll assume that it bothers you that people go up for a blessing when others are receiving communion. Why? Does it take something away from you?
Let’s say that people come along and say “yes, it’s allowed.” Is it suddenly going to stop bothering you because a bishop said it was OK?
And if someone says “no, it’s not allowed,” what are you going to do about it? Are you going to let the fact that someone is offering a blessing when it’s not specifically authorized take away from your experience of the Mass?
I think we all may have our pet peeves regarding the way Mass is celebrated. My personal one is that I hate (Hate!Hate!Hate!) when the priest says “he broke the bread” during the Eucharistic prayer and then actually breaks it at that point. We’re not play-acting the Last Supper here and I can show you various documents that say not to break the bread at that point. But ultimately I’ve never confronted a priest about doing this. He’s at the altar, I’m not. He’s been ordained to make the Eucharist possible, I haven’t. And even if he’s not celebrating the Mass absolutely correctly in my opinion, he’s still making it possible for me to receive Christ in the Eucharist. Why should I let distractions take that away from me?
Ultimately, all these distractions aren’t coming from God! And they aren’t serving to draw you closer to God. So why pursue them?
the points Op brought up are complaints usually brought up on “traditionalist” type sites. They have nothing to do with having a proper liturgy and even that can mean different things to different people based on personal preferences. Op stated that the Vatican caved in on girl altar servers. That is just conjecture and opinion and the use of girl altar servers is more controlled by the local Bishop and again has nothing to do with whether the liturgy is “proper”.
Complaining about whether people not receiving go up with crossed arms for a blessing is again more to do with the bishop and even the priest than anything else. I once heard a homily by a priest who I would consider very orthodox in his theology make that suggestion himself. To begin to fuse over these issues which should be addressed to one’s priest to begin with gives Catholics a black eye because it makes Catholics look like a bunch of fussy nit picking crybabies when there are bigger fish to fry and content with.