Replies

Forget all these long citations. Instead, ask yourself some common sense questions.

1. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against kneeling? It is a posture indicating adoration. Why do they have an interest in eliminating it? Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

2. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against communion on the tongue? It is far more reverent than touching the sacred species with unconsecrated hands. Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

3. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against communion rails? The rails allowed the faithful to kneel easily while receiving communion--a posture of reverence and adoration. Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

4. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against tabernacles being given pride of place at the center of churches? The center of the sanctuary is the immediate focal point for anyone entering. Centrality clearly signifies importance. Christ in His Blessed Sacrament is certainly more important than any presider's chair. Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

5. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against ringing bells before the Consecration at Mass. In the old Mass bells were rung to alert the faithful that the Mystery of Faith was about to be enacted: the change of bread and wine into Christ's own Body and Blood. In the New Mass the words "Mystery of Faith" now refer to something else, a banal proclamation. Why does the liturgy pay so much attention to Christ's virtual presence in the Liturgy of the Word and in the assembly, but so little attention to his actual Presence as sacrificial victim? Can it be they don't believe in the Real Preence?

Can it be these people want to subvert and suppress a major Catholic dogma? Naaah! They wouldn't do such a nasty, heretical thing as that--would they?

Has it been that long since you have been into a RC church? Again, following the tenets of the GIRM, here are the answers to your absurdly ridiculous questions:

1. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against kneeling? It is a posture indicating adoration. Why do they have an interest in eliminating it? Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

At its meeting in November, 1969, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops voted that in general, the directives of the «Roman Missal» concerning the posture of the congregation at Mass should be left unchanged, but that no. 21 of the «General Instruction» should be adapted so that the people kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic prayer, that is, before the Lord's Prayer. They should kneel at the consecration unless prevented by the lack of space, the number of people present, or some other good reason.

2. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against communion on the tongue? It is far more reverent than touching the sacred species with unconsecrated hands. Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

On June 17, 1977, the Congregation of Sacraments and Divine Worship approved the request of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops to permit the optional practice of Communion in the hand. The Bishops' Committee on the Liturgy, in its catechesis about this optional practice, drew attention to these considerations:

a. Proper catechesis must be provided to assure the proper and reverent reception of Communion without any suggestion of wavering on the part of the Church in its faith in the Eucharistic presence.

b. The practice must remain the option of the communicant. The priest or minister of Communion does not make the decision as to the manner of reception of Communion. It is the communicant's personal choice.

3. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against communion rails? The rails allowed the faithful to kneel easily while receiving communion--a posture of reverence and adoration. Can it be they don't believe in the Real Presence?

Due to the increase in numbers of catholics AND reception of communion under both species, standing is more expedient. A proper gesture of reverence is expected, such as making the sign of the cross after placing the host in ones mouth. Since communicants are not kneeling, there is no need for a communion rail. I have been to catholic churches where the communion rails remain intact. Removal is optional.

4. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against tabernacles being given pride of place at the center of churches?

The Vatican II document which addresses this issue is "Sacrosanctum Concilium" (The Dogmatic Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy). Issued December 4th 1963, it emphasizes the nobility of the tabernacle in determining its place in a church.

7. An issue closely linked to that of the altar is the tabernacle. We can hardly give here prescriptions of a general and uniform character. An attentive study needs to be made in each case, with due attention to the material and spiritual circumstances proper to each place.

Artists will little by little suggest the best solution. But it is the business of priests to advise them and call attention to the principles that must safeguard the respect and honor due to the Eucharist. It is important to contribute to the development of Eucharistic worship, which should continue under all those genuine forms recognized by the Church as embodying true Christian piety.

Particularly in larger churches, a chapel specially set aside for the reservation and adoration of the Eucharist is advisable and might well be used for the Eucharistic celebration during the week, when there are fewer of the faithful participating.

Whatever the solution chosen .... the greatest care should be devoted to the dignity of the tabernacle. If the local Ordinary agrees to its location away from the altar, the place should be truly worthy and prominent, so that the tabernacle is readily visible and is not hidden by the priest during the celebration of the Mass. In a word, the location should make it possible for the tabernacle to serve unmistakably as a sign and to give a sense of the savior's presence in the midst of his people. (my emphasis) [Letter of Cardinal Lecaro to the Bishops, 30 June 1965, Concilium for Implementing the Decree on the Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council)

In 1969, revised in 1975, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) said the following:

276. It is highly recommended that the Holy Eucharist be reserved in a chapel suitable for private adoration and prayer. If this is impossible because of the structure of the church or local custom, it should be kept on an altar or some other place in the church that is prominent and properly decorated.

277. The Eucharist is to be kept in a solid, unbreakable tabernacle, and ordinarily there should be only one tabernacle in a church. <> The Code of Canon Law codified these developments in 1983.

Canon 938

º1. The Most Holy Eucharist is to be reserved regularly in only one tabernacle of a church or oratory.

º2. The tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved should be placed in a part of the church that is prominent, conspicuous, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.

º3. The tabernacle in which the Eucharist is regularly reserved is to be immovable, made of solid and opaque material, and locked so that the danger of profanation may be entirely avoided.

º4. For a grave cause, it is licit to reserve the Most Holy Eucharist in another safer and becoming place especially during the night.

º5. The person who has charge of the church or oratory is to see to it that the key of the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved is safeguarded most diligently.

Finally, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:

1183 The tabernacle is to be situated "in churches in a most worthy place with the greatest honor." The dignity, placing, and security of the Eucharistic tabernacle should foster adoration before the Lord really present in the Blessed Sacrament of the altar.

5. What have the Novus Ordo liturgists got against ringing bells before the Consecration at Mass.

I've attended several masses where bells were rung; perhaps it's optional.

Now, please stop belly aching and apologize to the posters on this thread for your insensitive comments against the liturgy faithfully followed by them. You have yet to raise a valid complaint.