Rapture and the Motu Proprio

My more traditionalist friends will forgive me for poking just a little bit of fun at the increasing mania over the motu proprio that is expected from Rome. If anyone is still ignorant about this, it is the rumour that Pope Benedict will soon grant universal freedom for the Tridentine Rite of the Catholic liturgy to be celebrated. (At present a priest needs permission from his bishop to use it.)

There is much talk about when the motu proprio will be released. Vatican watchers have spoken of significant events; every hint of movement in this direction is snatched up eagerly by lovers of the Latin Mass, and there is a growing fever pitch of excitement about it all that reminds me of the ‘rapture fever’ among the fundamentalists with whom I was brought up. “The Lord Jesus is about to return in power and glory in the clouds to take us all up to be with Him!” The newspapers were scrutinized, and the signs of the times were read like portents of the coming Day of the Lord.

OK, I’m exaggerating to make a point, but the excitement and anticipation feels much the same to me. Don’t we need to pause and catch our breath a little? If the motu proprio is promulgated it isn’t going to suddently make the Tridentine Rite the new norm. I expect the Novus Ordo will still be the main liturgical workhorse for 99.9% of Catholics worldwide. As I see it, those who want to celebrate according to the Tridentine Rite will be allowed the freedom to do so, and good for them. I’m in favor.

I admit I’m only a convert, and a very new Catholic priest, and maybe I’m missing the point, and maybe I’m just not a natural liturgist, but I have to admit that I can’t really see what all the liturgical fuss is about. Yes, there are some truly awful abuses in Catholic liturgy, but hasn’t that always been the case? When I talk to the old timers who remember the pre V2 days they tell me that most masses were not sublime worship experiences in which there were deacons, sub deacons, seventeen perfectly trained altar servers and a Palestrina Mass. Instead the church was full of ordinary people listening to words they didn’t understand in a liturgy that Fr. Magee was rattling through to set a new land speed record. Don’t jump the gun! I’m not down on the Tridentine Rite–only making the point that abuses you will have with you always.

Neither am I excusing the abuses–whether they be Novus Ordo Barney Masses or Tridentine mumblings. Abuses should always be corrected, and the liturgy should always be improved.

But I think we also focus too much on the abuses, and in a negative and critical spirit miss the fact that the vast majority of masses are not that bad. Over the last ten years in England I had a job which took me to a different Catholic parish each week. Over that time I experienced perhaps two or three masses that were totally awful in their abuses. The rest were celebrated with care, devotion and reverence. The music was not always the best, and there were bits here and there that made one cringe, but even then most of the ‘abuses’ were done by people of good will and sincere desire to serve God and make things better. If they got it wrong, well who hasn’t made a sincere mistake in their life?

Finally, I have to wonder at all the harsh criticism of the Novus Ordo. Why is it really so awful? Why are the critics so silent about the real advantages of the Novus Ordo? Why so much nit pcking? Why such a negative spirit and so much griping? Maybe I don’t see it because I’m a priest and I can say Mass the way I want to, and I belong to a fantastic parish where the Novus Ordo is celebrated beautifully. Maybe if I had to endure some awful parish with a flying saucer church, day glo vestments with grapes on them, a goofy new age priest and liturgical dance I would be howling with grief and rage and frustration too.

On the other hand, it seems to me that we have always had change and upheaval in the church in one way or another. Maybe, just maybe, the Holy Spirit really is with his Church. Maybe just maybe, the second Vatican Council was inspired and led by the Holy Spirit. Maybe, just maybe the Novus Ordo is part of that whole movement (complete with the arguments among the faithful) by the Spirit to take us into the 21st century. Maybe just maybe God knows what he’s doing.

About Fr. Dwight Longenecker
  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02575906703463685178 Kopp

    “the vast majority of masses are not that bad”What percentage of these masses that “aren’t that bad” violate the Vatican’s 1997 directive that habitual use of Extraordinary Ministers is an abuse that must cease? See the Vatican’s INSTRUCTION ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COLLABORATION OF THE NON-ORDAINED FAITHFUL IN THE SACRED MINISTRY OF PRIEST.Habitual use of Extraordinary Ministers at every mass makes those masses illicit. Are the vast majority of masses then not illicit? Are illicit masses really “not that bad”?

  • Anonymous

    Couple thoughts. 1. The Motu Proprio is not a rumor. Three different Cardinals have acknowledged its existence over the last few weeks. It is a matter of when it will be released, not if. 2. For many of us liturgy geeks, this is FUN (which you, in the recent past, have rightly reminded us is important). It is fun to speculate and theorize about any number of things to which people look forward, such as who your Super Bowl champion Colts will choose in the NFL draft or the outcome of tonight’s fight between De La Hoya & Mayweather (go Oscar!). The Motu Proprio deals with something infinitely more important than football or boxing, but the same psychology of anticipation and excitement is present. 3. I will not state my preference between the NO and TLM because it is complicated and I’m not sure what I think. Suffice it to say I love both when each is done well. With that stated, many of us believe the faith is more profoundly expressed in the TLM. Simply read the prayers of each and I think the TLM is far superior (not in what they accomplish, but in how they each accomplish the same thing). Also, although I love both the NO and TLM, the abuses of each don’t seem comparable to me. Mumbling or inattentiveness is surely bad. But the abuses many of us experience in the NO are much, much worse. I may be wrong, but I wonder if you truly appreciate how bad it is for so many people around the country.4. I agree that the Motu Proprio won’t change the fact that most people will still attend a NO Mass. One reason is that priests don’t yet know how to celebrate the TLM. Both the FSSP and the Institute of Christ the King are having training sessions this summer for diocesan priests to correct this problem. I expect these opportunities to grown in the future and for more and more young priests to take advantage of the training. If so, the hope is that (a) the TLM will be more widely available and (b) the presence of the TLM will positively impact the manner in which the NO is currently celebrated. Obviously this is a long term endeavor, but one must start somewhere and the implications are enormous. 5. The Motu Proprio is important to many of us because it is yet another unmistakable expression of the Holy Father’s dissatisfaction with liturgical life within the Church. It puts everyone on notice that things must change. That is encouraging, giving hope to people who yearn for a more reverent, faithful worship in the NO.I agree it is not a panacea, but many of us think it is a positive step in the right direction.Doug

  • Anonymous

    One last thing. Obviously God does know what He is doing. But maybe, just maybe, the Holy Spirit is prompting the Holy Father to use a freed TLM to help breathe new life into the NO during a much hoped for and needed “reform of the reform.”Doug

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12564684437473178371 Scott Lyons

    I appreciate this post, Father. I am a recent revert who has enjoyed being able to hear the liturgy in English. (If a return to the Tridentine Mass would also mean a return to Latin.)And I don’t understand why allowing a priest to tridentine (if I can create such a verbal) will make much of a difference in our parishes. After all, if we belong to a parish with abuses, the abuses will not end. And he’ll continue to use the Novus Ordo. At least this would be my suspicion. If our parish is a good parish and the priest tridentines, it will continue to be a good parish with few abuses.I do recognize that it will be a blessing for those who have so desperately longed for it.But ultimately, the hubbub makes little sense to me. If we’re going to return to a liturgy, why not go ancient? Why not return to the earliest liturgy possible? Why stop at a liturgy that is only 500 years old?Perhaps this comment only puts my ignorance on display.

  • Anonymous

    Pardon me for focusing on a side point, but did those “fundamentalists” with whom you grew up really give inordinate attention to the imminent coming of Christ? Do you disagree with their expectation that one should entertain the possibility that He might come at any moment?(The rest of you may return to the regularly scheduled program.)

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12564684437473178371 Scott Lyons

    I do appreciate Doug’s comments, and the spirit in which they’re given. This is the kind of response about the Tridentine Mass that I can appreciate, though still not totally comprehend due to my relative ignorance of the situation.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12373317560249811006 Fr. Dwight Longenecker

    Thanks for you comments Doug, I agree, and I also hope the motu proprio will take things in the right direction.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12373317560249811006 Fr. Dwight Longenecker

    re: fundamentalists and the rapture: I have no problem with looking for the immiment return of Christ. What I have a problem with is the extravagent and weird dispensational theological system with it’s accompanying obsessions through which this legitimate Christian expectation was expressed.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/11305092097247290243 Anita Moore

    Abuses should always be corrected, and the liturgy should always be improved.Uhhhh…when you say “the liturgy should always be improved,” do you mean that the liturgy itself should always be improved, or that the way the liturgy is celebrated should always be improved? Because the proliferation of priests who think they can and should improve the liturgy is part of the problem. Vatican II teaches that not even a priest has the right to change the liturgy.Now, if you mean that the manner of celebration should always be improved, I completely agree with that. I have a lot of respect for priests who strive to offer Mass as well and as carefully as possible.

  • Mariam

    I’m not sure whether you have ever seen a Tridentine Rite Mass said but it is enormously solemn and reverent. I can’t remember which pope said that it is the most beautiful thing this side of heaven. If you want to find out about some of the issues concerning with the Novus Ordo I suggest reading Cardinal Ratzinger’s book “The Spirit of the Liturgy”. To focus on the positive, the Tridentine Rite is clearly, clearly, clearly focused on God rather than the community. It is (or was) very universal, uniting all Catholics with a common rite (that was not open to interpretation) and language. Is the result of 2000 years (not just a couple) years of development and experience. It was not put together fairly quickly by a few.If you look at 2000 years of Catholic history, you will see that there were very few abuses of the Mass compared to what the Church is experiencing presently within the NO.People attend the TR because it is beatiful and they love it!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/13824256061658361536 Fr. Christopher G. Phillips

    I say “Amen,” Father (pronounced in the proper “Ah-men” form, not the N.O. “Aye-men” version).While I’m happy for those who are excited about the Motu Proprio, I confess that I really don’t share that excitement. About the only way I can begin to understand is to put it in terms of “1928 Prayer Book” versus “1979 Prayer Book.” I much preferred the ’28 book, but it wasn’t perfect. I disliked the ’79 book, mainly because it represented a whole agenda with which I disagreed and which tainted even its positive aspects.I guess when I think of it in those terms, I can begin to get a glimpse of what the TLM/N.O. issues are for many Catholics.

  • bernadette

    Doug, sorry anonymous, has nailed it perfectly. It is also a fact that many people who have a special love for the liturgy, want to defend and protect its purity as much as possible – the bride for the bridegroom etc – interesting that you mention “rapture” theology and the return of Christ. There is a definite sense of things coming together as one. Thank God for pope Benedict. He`s great news.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02853244433854822731 Adoro te Devote

    I think a lot of traditionalists forget that there were abuses with the Mass prior to the 2nd Vatican Council. And ironically, Pope Pius X was the first to call for reforms, 150 years prior to V2. I do believe V2 was a gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church, but what was stated was very much misunderstood, misimplemented, mistaught, and people with their own agenda, caught up in the anti-christ of the times made up their own interpretation of what it said. V2 was written by theologians and those who had an understanding of the history of the Churcy, and they wrote in theological terms which had longstanding definitions. The average lay person does not know these definitions and sadly, the culture has made up its own definitions to be consistent with the relativism that has run rampant. Speaking specifically of the liturgical document, “Sacrosanctum Concilium”, yes, there are ambivalent and problematic areas, but overall, it actually completely contradicts what happened to Mass (ie: with abuses) after the Council. I actually have not blogged about the Motu Propio because I don’t think it’ll really make a difference. Yes, I look forward to it, I have hope of attending a Tridentine Mass closer to home than 45 minutes away at 11 am, but I will likely continue to be a fan of and attendee of Novus Ordo Masses – reverently done, of course. I do think the “reform” needs to be reformed. The altar needs to be ad orientum because it’s simply theologically WRONG for it to be (is the term “pro populum”?) towards the people. It makes no sense because the priest is not speaking to the people during the Eucharistic prayers…he is speaking to God, and people mostly think he is speaking to them and presenting to THEM. (or us, as it were). So I’m for reform, I’m for the TLM, but I do love the Novus Ordo and find much grace there. I could go on but I don’t think you need me to write a novel in the combox. God bless!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149 Darwin

    I’m not sure whether you have ever seen a Tridentine Rite Mass said but it is enormously solemn and reverent. I can’t remember which pope said that it is the most beautiful thing this side of heaven.I’ve been to Tridentine masses about a half dozen times, and I must beg to do differ on this a bit.I can read and understand Latin pretty fluently, but at the Tridentine masses I’ve attended the priest has been speaking so quietly or so fast that it’s impossible for me to even keep up in the missal. In the one instance where the priest was annunciating clearly, he clearly didn’t know Latin at all and frequently ran words together, and other times paused in the middle of words.None of them had a choir or even an organ, and the altar servers clearly didn’t know the responses.Now, reading the Tridentine mass, I agree that the text is beautiful. But I don’t see that it is automatically a beautiful or even deeply ritual experience. Indeed, because so many of the gestures in the rubrics are small, and the priest is facing away from the congregation, it can often be the case if the priest is not exerting himself that you can neither see nor hear what’s going on. Now the Novus Ordo celebrated in Latin with organ, full choir, 6+ concelebrants, etc. at the Brompton Oratory… That I would happily label as “the most beautiful thing this side of heaven”.I would argue that both rights have beautiful texts and rubrics — and in both cases they can definately be obscured by poor execution, though the substance remains the same.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/17691145638703824456 kkollwitz

    TLM/NO discussions remind me of this cartoon about the Dreyfus Affair:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Caran-d-ache-dreyfus-supper.jpg

  • Anonymous

    Darwin describes the difference between a low TLM and a high TLM. Quite different. I agree the high Mass is more engaging and I greatly prefer it; however, there are delightful surprises in a low TLM. It does require more mental effort.Catholic Answers Live took up the topic of the growing popularity of the TLM today with Msgr. Michael Schmitz of The Institute of Christ the King. You can listen to the radio program at http://www.catholic.com and follow the link to Catholic Answers Live.Doug

  • Sage

    “I think a lot of traditionalists forget that there were abuses with the Mass prior to the 2nd Vatican Council.”This remark is so tiresome because 1) It isn’t true; and 2) If it were, it would make no difference.We should be clear that the kind of slack irreverence born of laziness is not “an abuse” in the way that most of us think of liturgical abuse. Nobody I know is stupid enough to think that there were no irreverent priests before V-II; the whole think is a straw man. Is the claim that the NO somehow fixed–or was intended to fix–mumbling? If so, it’s an outrageous claim. The point as far as I am concerned is that there was nothing so horribly wrong with the Mass as it existed that it needed to be virtually bulldozed into rubble and rebuilt. Whatever minor improvements can be said to have been suggested by the promulgation of the NO are obviously overpowered by the liturgical devastation that has followed in its wake.I’m rambling a bit, but the main thing I’m getting at is that of course there have always been lazy, willful priests. It insults the intelligence to suggest that people don’t know this. But nothing in the liturgical “reform” can be said to either address those kinds of issues, or could reasonably be argued were intended to. So it’s an absolute red herring, made worse by the forehead-slappiingly obvious observation that those problems have become massively worse under our current liturgical regime, rather than better.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/13074138642860577242 John Kearney

    I think you have it just about right, Father. I have defended the Tridentine Mass for its beautiful symbols, such as the priest and people facing East `for the comiing of Our Safviour, I have mentioned the Gospel to the North and the Epistle to the South. But I only knew all this when the Tridentine Mass had disappeared. I was not taught all these symbolic things and very few others were taught them. The Latin Mass was something the priest hurrid through before breakfast. Some managed it in ten minutes. Perhpas the Novus Ordo just needs some adjustments but I am sure it will still be the prevalent Mass. The advantage of the Latin Mass is that in these days when people now visit other countries so easily a Latin Mass would be one they could follow and understand. I have felt a stranger in Italy when they said the Mass in Italian, and in France when in French. The need for a Universal language is still there. God bless, John Kearney

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15692229876291491107 Mark

    Fr Dwight,This is an interesting post, and mostly I agree with you. I think you’ve given yourself some of the answer here, though, where you say you might feel differently were you to suffer these liturgical abuses. I personally feel this is key: for the people who have to go to awful Masses, it is a hurtful experience, despite it being a solemn sacrament. I think this is true whether it is a dire Novus Ordo with awful singing, or a mumbled and gabbled Tridentine Mass.I am fortunate in that the Tridentine Masses I have either attended or seen have been beautiful and solemn occasions. For that reason I like it. However, I have also seen Novus Ordo Masses whether in English or in Latin (and that was fantastic) where they were perfect. But also, I have seen awful ones.My main hope is that Sacramentum Caritatis combined with this Motu Proprio will re-emphasise the dignity and solemnity of Mass, whichever Missale is used. I pray that, if I am ever to enter seminary, I be taught both.

  • John

    I grew up with the Latin Mass. And loved it. Everyone old enough to read could follow along with little effort. I still have my parallel missal from those days; Latin on the left, English translation on the right. All Catholics spoke Latin in those days (with help from the all important translation). We were taught that we belonged to the Universal Church, and therefore we shared one tongue.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/00553184194930512732 Mephibosheth

    A lot of folks criticize “traditionalists” as being stuck in the past, but a lot of folks are just as entrenched in devotion to the Novus Ordo. I think we’ll get a taste of this in a couple of years when the new ICEL translation hits the parishes. I think even those few word changes will cause histrionics in quite a few liturgy committee meetings.And let’s face it…the only thing scarier than a Novus Ordo mass done sloppily may be a Tridentine mass done sloppily.

  • Anonymous

    This has been a fascinating topic and thread. Just to stir the pot a bit, I wondered about your take on this:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18528208/Blessings to all! Jenny

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12406920114311668605 Kat

    What percentage of these masses that “aren’t that bad” violate the Vatican’s 1997 directive that habitual use of Extraordinary Ministers is an abuse that must cease? See the Vatican’s INSTRUCTION ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COLLABORATION OF THE NON-ORDAINED FAITHFUL IN THE SACRED MINISTRY OF PRIEST.As and EME, among other things I do in my parish, there is a need for us at every Mass except perhaps Good Friday when both of our 2 priests and our 2 Perminate Decons are present. Where I am in The US it is nearly impossible to not have EME’s at each Mass. The Archdiocese of Washington puts us through a diocese wide training session and outlines the rubics, and yes there are still issues even with this system but calling all Masses that use EMEs illict is a bit much. Yes it is prefered that Priests and deacons distribute the Eucharst but it is allowed to have EMEs

  • Anonymous

    I find it interesting, but not very surprising that many converts, such as Frs. Longenecker and Phillips, are not very excited about the Motu Proprio or the opportunity to say or attend the Traditional Latin Mass. My take on this is that the Novus Ordo Mass, along with the true presence of Christ in the form of bread and wine, is so much more that what was experienced in the Protestant church that they converted from. Hence, they really appreciate the Novus Ordo Mass, and who can blame them.Miguel

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15692229876291491107 Mark

    Miguel,Good points, though not shared by all converts. I used to go to a very “High Church” Anglican Church where the rubric was essentially the Tridentine Mass translated into Cranmer’s exquisite Elizabethan English. Hence, I do like things done decorously…but then again, a Novus Ordo mass can be beautiful. Very.

  • Anonymous

    Mark – I see what you are saying and why you would say it. You are, perhaps, the exception which proves the rule. I understand that some “very high” Anglican liturgies can be very reverent and beautiful, but don’t they, in fact, lack the real Prescence, since the Anglicans presently lack valid Holy Orders? Miguel

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/17970851228593550726 Lynne

    Extraordinary Ministers would not be needed if Communion was not offered under both species and/or communion rails were put back.Also, the TLM stresses the vertical aspect of the Mass whereas the NO stresses the horizontal.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15692229876291491107 Mark

    Oh, I agree with you absolutely, Miguel–or I would not have left! ;-) And Lynne, too! Bring back the rails! :-D

  • http://www.rockyroadoffaith.blogspot.com Kat

    Lynne;N.O. Stresses the horizontal??? I have never seen that at a N.O. Mass, perhaps I have been and am lucky to be in a parish where the priests regularly preach on the meaning of the Mass and the need of the sacraments and who are extreemly revrent. As to EME’s, true that if the Eucharist under both species were not available the need for EME’s would be reduced, not eliminated, alter rails would accomplish this but in my parish and surrounding parishes this would make mass twice as long, creating the time factor that is discussed in the documents that allow for EMEs to begin with. So guys and gals the only solution I can come up with is pray for and encourage your sons toward priesthood.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/03262409097283751366 Larry

    I too am a convert. I attended my first Latin Mass celebrated by an FSSP priest yesterday. What struck me was that I felt as though I had just been to my first Catholic Mass. The NO liturgy is done very well in my home parish. But, the same “service” is done in the Episcopal Church, the Lutheran Church, etc. Even done well the NO Mass is more or less exactly like a Protestant communion service with a few Catholic bits added on. There was no doubt that the Mass I witnessed yeaterday was Catholic.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/17970851228593550726 Lynne

    Kat, some questions…Have you ever received communion at an altar rail? It’s extremely efficient.Also, I’m glad your priests stress the sacraments, how long do they offer confessions each week?By saying that the NO Mass is a type of horizontal worship, I refer to the following;the priest facing the peoplethe cantor up front, waving his/her armsorans during the Our Father (folks imitating the priest)the sign of the peace, totally in the wrong place in the liturgyapplause during the Mass (for various reasons)loud conversations before and after the MassI don’t attend a TLM but I’m praying for the motu proprio so that I’ll be able to in the future, God willing.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/17970851228593550726 Lynne

    Larry, amen.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12373317560249811006 Fr. Dwight Longenecker

    Lynn, I appreciate that the abuses you mention exist in many Novus Ordo Masses, but the NO itself does not call for them. Not even the priest facing the people is demanded by the rubrics. The NO itself is not necessarily ‘horizontal’ in its emphasis, although you’re right that this is the emphasis of those who abuse the NO.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15268829740071788802 Kat

    Have you ever received communion at an altar rail? It’s extremely efficient.Also, I’m glad your priests stress the sacraments, how long do they offer confessions each week?By saying that the NO Mass is a type of horizontal worship, I refer to the following;the priest facing the peoplethe cantor up front, waving his/her armsorans during the Our Father (folks imitating the priest)the sign of the peace, totally in the wrong place in the liturgyapplause during the Mass (for various reasons)loud conversations before and after the Mass.Lynne;yes I have recieved at an alter rail and no, it isn’t efficiant or atleast not in my experiance. (both in anglican and catholic Churches). and when you have 500+/- at an 8am at one of the local parishes… ant that isnt at Easter.For Confessions, there is the 1 hour weekly scheduled, however one priest every day he says daily mass he hears confessions after for about an hour or so. so in all 4=5 hours a week, and both our priests are known for dropping just about everything to hear confessions if asked. I had one of them put a meeting after mass on hold to hear my confession once. Don’t get me started on applause, or talking in the church before and after Mass, in my experiance that mostly happes (where I am) with the unchurched at Easter, Christmas and family events and drives the community nuts. Fr. L is right on the priest facing the people and with a hearing difficulty, it is better for me as I can read lips if he faced away there is no point in me attending Mass I would not know what was going on.The Orans position is a historical prayer position, there is debate among historians if it was common practice in various cultures. My community is pretty mixed on this. But thank goodness no hand holding *shudder*. And we don’t have the greeting before AND the sign of peace, just the sign of peace which I don’t have a problem with where it is, but that is just me. I don’t like the TLM personally, but that is just me. It is not because of the Latin because I actually understand and can follow latin (14 bloody years of it I should be able to pick out a few things) it is when I can hear the priest and the few times I have been it has not been as reverent as the N.O. mass at my parish. the MP doesnt really mean much to the DC area because our ArchBishops tend to allow the TLM, I think in the Archdiocese there are a few Parishes that offer it. I do believe that the NO needs to be revamped and more Latin used frequently. I know, god willing, if I ever marry there is bloody well going to be SOME latin at the nuptual mass. And when I die at the funeral one too.

  • Anonymous

    “Not even the priest facing the people is demanded by the rubrics.”On the other hand, a bishop may demand that a priest not say the Mass ad orientem. I understand that the Bishop where EWTN televises their Mass from forbade EWTN from saying any televised Masses ad orientem. Miguel

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15692229876291491107 Mark

    Kat,I’ve always found it efficient – but if there’s 500 people, then maybe you need to get a Deacon! ;-) Does anyone know if people making the orans during the Our Father is legit; I always found it annoying. Applause and loud conversations should not be tolerated, imho, neither should a stroppy cantor… :-o

  • Jeron

    I only have 1 problem with your post, Father: you’re not “only a convert.” You’re a Catholic … the same as any of us, cradle or no. You embrace the faith wholeheartedly and are a wonderful inspiration (to me at least). In my experience, converts are usually very much in love with the Church; they’re here b/c they CHOSE to be here. Please don’t ever say “only a convert” about yourself again. (And I’ve said my piece/peace Amen).

  • Anonymous

    See this link – http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/orans_posture.htm – for a good discussion about why the orans posture may not be appropriate for the congregation.Also, Adoremus:About that Orans PostureWhat is it? What does the GIRM say? Can a bishop require it?“The posture of the people during prayer at Mass is not one of the items in the GIRM list that bishop may change on his own authority (see GIRM 387). Thus it is not legitimate for a bishop to require people to assume the orans posture during the Our Father.” ArticleB.Donovan, STL, apologist EWTN:”The Orans is not discussed in the GIRM. Taken by itself it is not a licit posture for the laity, since it is associated in the liturgical rites with priests when they speak on behalf of all. Most of the time the only one doing it is the presider, except when concelebrants speak parts of the Eucharistic Prayer, or, when they all pray the Our Father.Some liturgists have taken the position that it is better to have the laity do something other than hold hands at the Our Father (which is definitely wrong and proscribed by Rome), so let’s have them do the orans. The postures of the laity are not spoken of much at all in the rubrics, so it appears to be a harmless custom to introduce. However, I do not think this is true. When this solution is adopted you end up with the anomaly that the priest and the people are doing the orans, but the deacon is not. This says sacramentally that the priest and people are interceeding, but the deacon is not? To correct it, so that the orans at the Our Father becomes a generic sign of the entire Mystical Body interceeding (and in principle that would be seem to be possible), would require an adaptation of the rubrics for the United States by the Holy See. To my knowledge such an adaptation has not been obtained.” New GIRM PosturesJames Akin apologist, Catholic Answers:“Neither may deacons or non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the same priest celebrant. It is a grave abuse for any member of the non-ordained faithful to “quasi-preside” at the Mass while leaving only that minimal participation to the priest which is necessary to secure validity [ICP, Practical Provisions 6~2] The ICP is the reference. It’s from the Vatican.” ‘Mass Confusion’ by James Akin pg 202AND TO RESPONDE TO THE INEVITABLE DISAGREEMENTS – The rubrics also do not explicitly forbid standng on our heads during Mass, but that wouldn’t be acceptable, would it?

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15268829740071788802 Kat

    Mark,Not only deacons but priests as well. That fortunatly isn’t my parish but we have a good number as well, a neighboring parishes averages 500 a sunday mass

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/05227411938775535934 Jeffrey Smith

    ROFLMAO! Right on all counts.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/05227411938775535934 Jeffrey Smith

    The post, I mean. Didn’t take time to read the comments.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X