Skip to comments.Ancient Roman Catholic ritual making a comeback in Minnesota
Posted on 01/30/2005 6:27:26 PM PST by Catholic54321
click here to read article
Don't you think though that with this trend toward more 24/7 Adoration is bringing people (including some priests) out of this confusion?
There is a lot of catechesis that is going on in the church right now. Perhaps some are not aware of this renewed movement toward Faith Formation for all ages, including adults.
Beautiful Tabernacle. We're not there, yet, by a long shot. Construction is a messy business.
We are breaking ground this year to add 500 seats!
We had 150 families join last year and I am soooo Blessed to be one of them!
This is why open churches are so important. We need to be able to get near Jesus!
And we will eventually move up to perpetual adoration. I suspect it won't be long before we add day 3.
We have been blessed with an abundance of Altar Boys. Our darling Pastor will squat down next to the little boys and ask how old they are. If they say "three" he will tell them that next year they can be Altar Boys! He then assigns an older boy (or even unmarried man) to help them. (no Altar Girls, our girls form the choir!)
After the Consecration, two of the older boys move kneelers in front of the Altar. There are six of them in the front. No one has a problem kneeling. Even the seniors can get up because of this system. Short of an Altar rail, this looks like the best system to me.
You are wrong about the transposition of the words "Mystery of faith." It was not a matter of translation only--the original Latin likewise had deliberately removed these words from the Consecration so that they no longer refer to Transubstantiation. As for kneeling for Communion, taking Communion on the tongue, etc.--why even mention your own experiences since they are clearly atypical?
why even mention
You asked a question. You got an answer. Perhaps the answer was not what you expected? Perhaps the answer was not to your liking? Perhaps you should adjust your perception of reality based on that answer?
>>As for kneeling for Communion, taking Communion on the tongue, etc.--why even mention your own experiences since they are clearly atypical?<<
I think that they are becoming more and more typical. Just VERY slowly.
Here in the Detroit Archdiocese, we now have 4 parishes that I know of just like mine, within 20 miles of my house. People are flocking to them. South of us, I'm not sure, but our Latino population is growing and they want tradition. We also had a TLM put into a downtown parish.
As they cluster and close parishes, who do you think they will do away with? Those parishes that are growing or those that are bleeding parishoners? The Charistmatic parishes are bleeding and scared. Ours is growing. (Thank You God and Father Ben for our true religion)
My experience of perpetual adoration is that it reaches out to a large number of people. In addition to the scheduled adorers who committ to at least one hour per week, there are also the "visitors" who may drift in for 10 minutes or so when they drop the kids off at school or on their way to work. During my scheduled hour I see all sorts of people drift in and out. Either they haven't the stamina (yet) or the time to kneel for an hour before the Blessed Sacrament but who knows where God will take them.
Yes, there is still a long way to go in paying the Eucharist due reverence. Perpetual adoration is a good way to start on the long road back after all that's passed these several decades.
I wouldn't be detecting a little pique that others apart from the chosen few SSPXers are kneeling in humble adoration, would I? Don't worry. The fact that us Novus Ordo sinners are also getting in on the act doesn't mean that you're any less special in God's eyes.
Remember the hissy fit of the older brother in the story of the Prodigal Son when he found that his father had slain the fatted calf (or was it sheep?) for the recently returned younger wastrel after all his own faithfulness, labor and toil?
It would be a shame to go that way.
Very inspiring. Thank you for posting this. Being a clunky old convert, it strengthens my heart to be a part of such a community. Those who take the time and have the mind and heart to show such devotion to the Lord are truly people of Faith. The Lenten season is approaching so this is a good time for all of us to renew our commitment to be faithful to Him who has shown such faith and devotion to us.
The words "mysterium fidei" had been in the formula of the Consecration itself since about the 5th century. They were removed and placed after it in the 20th. Why?
My own view is that it was done to bring the Catholic Liturgy closer to the Protestant Lord's Supper. Archbishop Lefebvre, in 1975 published a study called "Luther's Mass" in which he compared the Novus Ordo to Luther's liturgy. It's extremely informative. Here is a brief excerpt.
Let us examine the manner in which Luther achieved his reform of the liturgy, that is implemented the "evangelical Mass", as he himself called it. Of particular interest in this effort are the actual words of Luther himself, or of his disciples, with respect to the reforms. It is enlightening to note the liberal tendencies which inspire Luther:
In first place", he writes "I would kindly and for God's sake request all those who see this order of service or desire to follow it: do not make it a rigid law to bind or entangle anyone's conscience, but use it in Christian liberty as long, when, where, and how you find it to be practical and useful."(T,C. Tappert, ed., Selected Writings of Martin Luther, vol. 3,p. 397). "The cult", he continues, "was formerly meant to render homage to God; henceforth it shall he directed to man in order to console him and enlighten him, Whereas the sacrifice formerly held pride of place, henceforth the most important will be the sermon". (from Léon Christiani, Du luthéranisme au protestantisme (1910), p. 312)...
"The first wall built by the Romanists is the distinction between the clergy and the laity. It is pure invention that pope, bishop, priests, and monks are called the spiritual estate while prince', lords, artisans and peasants are called the temporal estate. This is indeed a piece of deceit and hypocrisy. All Christians are truly of the spiritual estate, and there is no difference among them except that of office... The pope or bishop anoints, confers the tonsure, ordains, consecrates, and prescribes garb different from that of the laity. He might well make a man into a hypocrite in so doing, but never a Christian or a spiritual man... Whoever comes out of the water of baptism can boast that he is already a consecrated priest, bishop, and pope, although of course it is not seemly that just anybody should exercise such office". (Tappert, Ibid., vol. 1, 23-65)...
Luther's second grave doctrinal error flows from the first and is founded upon its guiding principle: salvation comes from faith and confidence in God alone, and not from good works. thus negating the value of the sacrificial act which is the Catholic Mass.
For Luther, the Mass is a sacrifice of praise, that is an act of praise, of thanksgiving, but most certainly not an expiatory sacrifice which recreates the Sacrifice of Calvary and applies its merits.
Describing the liturgical "perversions" he observed in some monasteries, he wrote: "The Principal expression of their cult, the Mass, surpasses all impiety and abomination in that they make of it a sacrifice and a good work. Were this the only reason to leave habit and convent and abandon the vows, it would be amply sufficient". (Christiani, p. 258)
For Luther, the Mass, which is meant simply to be a communion, has been subjected to a triple bondage: the laity has been deprived of the use of the chalice, they have been bound as to a dogma to the Thomistic opinion on transubstantiation, and the Mass has been made into a sacrifice.
"It is, therefore, clearly erroneous and impious", he declared, "to offer or apply the merits of the Mass for sins, or the reparation thereof, or for the deceased. Mass is offered by God to man, and not by man to God". (Christiani)
"With respect in the Eucharist, since it ought first and foremost to move one to the Faith, it is fitting that it be celebrated in the vernacular in order that all may comprehend the grandeur of God's promise to man". (Christiani, p. 176)
The logical consequence of this heresy was for Luther to abolish the Offertory of the Mass, which expresses unequivocally the propitiatory and expiatory aims of the Sacrifice. Similarly, he abolished a major part of the Canon, retaining only the essential passages as a narrative of Christ's Last Supper. In order better to emphasize the latter event, he added to the formula of the Consecration of the bread the words "quod pro vobis tradetur" ("which will be given up for you"), and deleted both "mysterium fidei" ("the mystery of faith") and "pro multis" ("for many"). He considered that the passages which both immediately precede and follow the actual Consecration of the bread and Wine were essential.
For Luther, the Mass is firstly the Liturgy of the Word, and secondly a Communion. For us that fact that the current liturgical Reforms have adopted precisely these same modifications is nothing short of astounding. Indeed, as we well know, the texts in use by the faithful today no longer make reference to the Sacrifice, but rather to the Liturgy of the Word, to the Lord's Supper and to the breaking of bread, or to the Eucharist. Article VII of the instruction which introduced the new Liturgy reflected a clearly Protestant orientation. A corrected version which followed in the wake of the outraged protests of the faithful remains sadly deficient.
It goes without saying that, added to these substantial alterations, the large number of lesser liturgical modifications have contributed further to the inculcation of Protestant attitudes which seriously threaten Catholic doctrine: the suppression of the altar stone, the use of a single altar cloth, the priest facing the people, the Host remaining on the paten rather than on the corporal, the introduction of ordinary bread, sacred vessels of less noble substances, and numerous other details.
There is nothing more essential to the survival of the Catholic Church than the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. To play it down is to threaten the very foundation of Christ's Church. The whole of Christian life, and the Priesthood, is founded upon the Cross, and upon the re-enactment of the Sacrifice of the Cross, upon the altar.
LUTHER DENIES TRANSUBSTANTIATION AND THE REAL PRESENCE AS TAUGHT BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. For Luther the substance of bread remains. Consequently, in the words of his disciple Melanchton, who strongly opposed the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, "Christ instituted the Eucharist as a memorial of His Passion. To adore It is therefore idolatry".
It follows that Communion is to be taken in the hand and under both species, which reinforces the denial of the presence of Our Lord's Body and Blood; it is thus normal to consider the Eucharist as incomplete under a single species.
Once again we note the strange resemblance between the present renewal and Luther's Reform. Every recent promulgation on the Eucharist tends towards a lessening of respect, a retreat from adoration: Communion in the hand and its distribution by lay men and lay women; the reduced number of genuflections, which many priests have discontinued altogether; the use of ordinary vessels and ordinary bread, all of these innovations have diminished belief in the Real Presence as taught by the Catholic Church.
One cannot but conclude that, principles being inseparable from practice ("lex orandi, lex credendi"), the fact that the Liturgy of the present day imitates Luther's reforms leads inevitably towards the adoption of the very principles propounded by Luther. The experience of the six years which have followed the promulgation of the Novus Ordo is sufficient proof. The consequences, of this so-called ecumenical effort, have been nothing short of catastrophic, primarily in the area of faith, and especially in terms of the perversion of the Priesthood and the serious decline in vocations, in the scandalous divisions created among Catholics the world over, and indeed in the Church's relations with Protestants and Orthodox Christians.
Protestant concepts on the essential questions of the Church, the Priesthood, the Sacrifice and the Eucharist are irrevocably opposed to those of the Catholic Church. It was for no idle purpose that the Council of Trent was convened, and that the Church's Magisterium has spoken so frequently on these very questions for more than four centuries since Trent.
It is impossible in psychological, pastoral and theological terms for Catholics to abandon a Liturgy which has always been the true expression and sustenance of their Faith, and to adopt in its place new rites conceived by heretics without exposing this Faith to the most serious peril. One cannot imitate Protestantism indefinitely without becoming Protestant.
Glad to hear it! and perfect perspective.
"Could I get a 'hooray, perpetual adoration is spreading' shout from you? Or is this your usual "woe, woe, thrice woe" post?"
Sure I'm glad these devotions are reviving. But they don't really get to the source of the problem in the Church today--which is the destructive effect of the Novus Ordo on belief in the Real Presence.
If you want to make your point, instead of the late Msgr. Lefevbre's point (whatever it is; I didn't read it), why not just compare the Tridentine Mass with the Novus Ordo Mass.
HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI, NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI: MYSTERIUM FIDEI: QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM.
Accipite et bibite ex eo omnes: hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei novi et aeterni testamenti, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Hoc facite in meam commemorationem.
< elevation >
Now, I don't like mucking about with the Mass either ... and moving that phrase was a bad idea. But separating it from the Consecration, and attaching it to the "Christ has died etc." acclamation was a misdeed of ICEL. Let us be sure to apply blame where it is due.
BTW, aren't you pleased to know that some of us out in "Novus Ordonia" aren't a bunch of almost-protestant, liturgical lunatics?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.