Novus Ordo Mass/tridentine Mass

Is The Novus Odro Mass An Entirely New Mass Or A Derivitive Of The Traditional Latin Mass?

Well, our own pope calls it a “fabrication, a banal, on the spot, product” so…

[quote=Genesis315]Well, our own pope calls it a “fabrication, a banal, on the spot, product” so…
[/quote]

Could we get that quote in context possibly?

SCott

[quote=Scott Waddell]Could we get that quote in context possibly?

SCott
[/quote]

It was in a preface he wrote to a book on the Liturgy. I forget the title off the top of my head, but I’ll look it up.

I did not vote as the options were limited.
The Norvos Ordo is the Valid Mass as we are in obedience to the Magisterium. We all know there has been bad translations from the latin into english.
I had the good fortune to hear last sunday via a Bishop friends CD the lingua of the new new Mass and it is beautiful!
It has all the things we have been waiting for like “and with your spirit” “I belive, not we” more emphasis on the sacrificial nature of the Holy Mass, more appreciation of our Lady and a most sacred language spoken rather than the dull translation we have now.
"His most sacred and venerable hands"
God bless
Br CreosMary

[quote=Scott Waddell]Could we get that quote in context possibly?

SCott
[/quote]

It’s in the preface to Klaus Gamber’s “The Reform of the Roman Liturgy.”

The point was that the Liturgy had evolved organically over time, but this was a sharp break.

That has nothing to do with validity or which is “better” just that it was new and not a natural progression.

Whatever it is, it is the normative Mass of the Church, until the Pope says differently. Let us remember the wise words of our venerable and beloved Holy Father, Pope Pius XII, may his soul rest in peace, from *Mediator Dei *(thanks, Deacon Ed!):

“61. The same reasoning holds in the case of some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites and ceremonies indiscriminately. The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They, too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit, who assists the Church in every age even to the consummation of the world. They are equally the resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and procure the sanctity of man.”

Yes, yes, of course I know the Holy Father had been gone for a long time before the Mass of Paul VI, but it is NOW the normative Mass and the Holy Father here *seems *to admit that there might be adaptations or changes for “later times and new situations.” God bless the memory of Pope Pius XII.

As I have stated many times on this forum, I in no way doubt the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass. I am only trying to see what the people on this forum think. I have read many opinions ranging from it is the best thing possible to it is an abomination. While I am not the smartest person in the world I think the choices I put pretty much say how the Mass could have arrived in its current state. Or at least they offer a good starting point for discussion. I just want to know what people think about the development of the Mass, thats all.

I know it is the normative Mass, I know it is perfectly valid and have never said otherwise.

[quote=palmas85]As I have stated many times on this forum, I in no way doubt the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass. I am only trying to see what the people on this forum think. I have read many opinions ranging from it is the best thing possible to it is an abomination. While I am not the smartest person in the world I think the choices I put pretty much say how the Mass could have arrived in its current state. Or at least they offer a good starting point for discussion. I just want to know what people think about the development of the Mass, thats all.

I know it is the normative Mass, I know it is perfectly valid and have never said otherwise.
[/quote]

Didn’t say you did. In the end, however, it doesn’t matter terribly much how the poll results turn out. It still is what it is: “the source and sumit of our faith.”

[quote=CreosMary]I did not vote as the options were limited.

[/quote]

Ditto.

The Novus Ordo is not the only Valid Mass…The Indult TLM is also a valid Mass as per The Holy Father and the Magisterium…

[quote=JKirkLVNV]Didn’t say you did. In the end, however, it doesn’t matter terribly much how the poll results turn out. It still is what it is: “the source and sumit of our faith.”
[/quote]

Quite true, but as I said, I just want to know what people think about how it came to be.

Also, I don’t really see how the options are limited at all. What else could the Mass be except for one of the three options I gave? If not new in its’ entirety, it had to come from somewhere and where else could it have come from?

As I said, I’m not that smart, I’m just interested to see what people who apparently are much more knowledgeable than me think on this issue.

[quote=CreosMary]I had the good fortune to hear last sunday via a Bishop friends CD the lingua of the new new Mass and it is beautiful!

[/quote]

I must really be out of the loop…what “new”-“new” Mass?

I’m sure, Palmas, that your motives are pure. This isn’t the first poll of this nature and there are lots of contentious threads about TLM vs. the Novus Ordo (which isn’t its proper name). I’ve started to see threads and polls like this (not this one per se, but ones like it) as an effort to foster discontent and dissent with the normative Mass. Most people on here who like the Mass of Paul VI (provided it isn’t abused) don’t generally demonstrate their affection for it by denigrating the TLM. Some of those who love the TLM seem to think that part of their credo *HAS *to be a disdain for the Mass of Paul VI. And so we have a plethora of threads like, “Is the NO Mass valid,” in which the original poster makes it clear that he or she doesn’t think so, or “was the NO Mass made up out of thin air?,” or “The NO Ordo Mass: A Protestant/Free Mason Conspiracy?” (I made the titles up as examples, but they’re not far off). I fail to see what good it does the Body of Christ. Certainly, the Indult should be widely and generously applied. Certainly, abuses in the Mass of Paul VI must be dealt with. I think those are legitimate topics of conversation. I would have to acknowledge that we CAN discuss the objectionable threads, but they remind me of some of my fourth grade students who cannot let things pass, but who are forever fomenting problems between other students, carrying tales, etc. In my neck of the woods, we call that “stirring the turd.”

[quote=palmas85]Quite true, but as I said, I just want to know what people think about how it came to be.

Also, I don’t really see how the options are limited at all. What else could the Mass be except for one of the three options I gave? If not new in** its’** entirety, it had to come from somewhere and where else could it have come from?

As I said, I’m not that smart, I’m just interested to see what people who apparently are much more knowledgeable than me think on this issue.
[/quote]

An ’ with “its” is not used in the possessive . This is an exception to the rule. I learned that from Sr Mary Eugene, SC …the smiling nun.
The only time an ’ is used here is to form a contraction of “it is” being “it’s”.
Otherwise your logic is dead on. And the reason for your poll is every bit as valid (more so?) as the one on ordained women, which has 100’s of posts. So, carry on!
Proof reader.

[font=Arial]

Well, our own pope calls it a “fabrication, a banal, on the spot, product” so…

[/font]
[font=Arial][/font]

Could we get that quote in context possibly?]

“What happened after the Council was something else entirely: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it - as in a manufacturing process - with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Preface to the book The Reform of the Roman Liturgy by [/font]Mgr. Klaus Gamber

I was dismayed [by the ban of the old missal]. Such a development had never been seen in the history of the liturgy. I am convinced that the ecclesiastical crisis of today depends on the collapse of the liturgy…"
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger - Autobiography

“Today we might ask: Is there a Latin Rite at all anymore? Certainly there is no awareness of it. To most people the liturgy seems to be rather something for the individual congregation to arrange.”Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, The Feast of Faith

I would have chosen hybrid but did not like the fact that Protestant was listed with other elements, as if by choosing hybrid I had to subtly discredit the new rite. No one can claim that all the changes of the Pauline Rite represent organic growth, but some of the inorganic growth is actually just a misguided antiquarianism reinserting old elements of Western worship that had been long out of use.

“What happened after the Council was something else entirely: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it - as in a manufacturing process - with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Preface to the book The Reform of the Roman Liturgy by Mgr. Klaus Gamber

I was dismayed [by the ban of the old missal]. Such a development had never been seen in the history of the liturgy. I am convinced that the ecclesiastical crisis of today depends on the collapse of the liturgy…"
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger - Autobiography

“Today we might ask: Is there a Latin Rite at all anymore? Certainly there is no awareness of it. To most people the liturgy seems to be rather something for the individual congregation to arrange.”Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, The Feast of Faith

good stuff, thanks for the quotes. it is clear that B16’s overall opinion on the novus ordo mass is negative especially after reading the spirit of the liturgy. now there are some distinctions that are not so clear. i can’t tell if he is talking about the novus ordo mass celebrated according to the rubics with elements of latin, ad orientem, and gregorian chant, or the typical way it is celebrated in america with its horrible icel translation, ad populum, and no sacred polyphony or gregorian chant.

I see some elements from the Tridentine Mass still present in the Novus Ordo. I don’t think Vatican II intended on making a new liturgical rite, but in essence, that is what happened. I am still praying for the recognition of the Tridentine Rite under Bishops in union with the Holy Father.

Aren’t both Masses a derivative of what was?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.