A California Catholic Daily exclusive by Anna Rose:
After Cardinal Robert Sarah addressed the Sacra Liturgia Conference on July 5, 2016, at least two churches in the Oakland diocese have taken his request to heart: “Dear Fathers, we should listen again to the lament of God proclaimed by the prophet Jeremiah: ‘they have turned their backs to me and not their faces.’ Let us turn again towards the Lord! Since the day of his Baptism, the Christian knows only one direction: the Orient. ‘You entered to confront your enemy, for you intended to renounce him to his face. You turned toward the East (ad orientem), for one who renounces the devil turns towards Christ and fixes his gaze directly on Him’ (From the beginning of the Treatise on the Mysteries by Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan).”
Two parishes, St. Margaret Mary in Oakland and St. Joseph the Worker in Berkeley, have decided to the use the ad orientem posture in their parishes, beginning on the first Sunday of Advent. Before the change took effect on Sunday, Nov. 27, Fr. Glenn Naguit of St. Margaret Mary’s spent time every week educating his parishioners about the ad orientem posture and more of Cardinal Sarah’s suggestions. He said that he was willing to provide further education on the issue should anyone be interested and has made pamphlets on the subject available to parishioners.
Many parishioners at St. Margaret Mary’s had requested the ad orientem posture for their Ordinary Form Masses over the years and were happy to see it finally implemented. “I am thankful to Father Glenn for celebrating the Mass ad orientem,” said parishioner Ron Durling. “Some people see it as some kind of offense aimed at them. It might be due to a lack of education on the matter, but the comment around our diocese has always been ‘ad orientem means the priest is turning his back on the congregation.’ The reality is that the priest is joining with us in adoring the Lord.”
So far, the ad orientem posture seems to have been accepted by parishioners at both parishes, with very little opposition. Joy, shoulder shrugs, and even pleasant surprise seem to have been typical responses to the change. Any apprehension about the modification seems to have faded with its actual implementation. Pope Francis himself has used the ad orientem posture on occasion.
“The unity of worship with the celebrant was more obvious than I had expected,” noted parishioner Nick Libby following implementation of the new posture. “By facing the same direction, the faithful are more included in the actions of the priest and altar servers.”
Beth Hockel, another St. Margaret Mary’s parishioner, commented, “I am very happy with the change to having the priest face the same direction as the people, in unity, toward God. To me, this more closely follows what Vatican II envisioned. It allows the focus to be more on God, and less on the person of the priest. The Mass feels more reflective, more sacred, more prayerful. I especially appreciate that it is available in the English and Latin Ordinary Form of the Masses and not just the Extraordinary Form.”
Cliff Price, a parishioner of St. Joseph the Worker in Berkeley, said: “One of the main reasons I became a Catholic almost 40 years ago, was that I read the documents of Vatican II and really took them to heart. So, it has always saddened me that here in the Bay Area, it was almost as if none of the priests or people who organized the liturgy in the parishes had even read Sacrosanctum Concilium, much less taken it seriously. Such a waste, such a lost opportunity! But, what we have now at our neighborhood parish, St. Joseph’s, is a powerful step towards restarting the implementation of what Vatican II intended for the People of God in the liturgy. Celebrating the Mass ad orientem is a big help in a restoration of the profound sense of the sacredness, mystery, and sacrificial nature of the Mass. From my reading of Vatican II, I believe that you can’t begin to achieve ‘active participation’ in the liturgy without effectively developing that sense first.”
Parishioners from the two parishes said they are hoping that more of the faithful will accept Cardinal Sarah’s request, educate their fellow parishioners to the beauty of this posture, and embrace it on Ash Wednesday — the next date suggested by Cardinal Sarah.
I hope our nation will turn once again toward the Lord also.
I agree with Cardinal Sarah! It is wonderful, that these two Oakland Diocese churches are implementing the change, to “ad orientem,” for all Masses! I have been a registered parishioner at St. Margaret Mary’s, for many long years! ! What was so strange, after Vatican II– was to see our priests change to face the people, in the new, Vatican II “Novus Ordo Mass”– and yet, at that time, in other traditional churches similar to ours, that had not yet “modernized” their Eucharistic liturgies, the priests still faced God. It hurt much, to know that! Our huge, awesome, ancient, highly-respected Catholic Church seemed suddenly ridiculous, irreverent, embarrassing, and foolish, by comparison!
Of course– it was a huge shock, overall — the implementation of the Novus Ordo Mass!
Yes– when your once-holy, reverent, highly-respected, very dignified and very strict, serious, Catholic Church suddenly looks foolish, with a more secularized, “pop-culture”-influenced, and “ecumenized” liturgy, and goofed-up priests– it is an embarrassment, as others will laugh, and wonder how this Church’s world-class, highly-educated, very pious, dignified Pope and religious leaders, could do such a childish thing!
The Catholic Church became, in your words, “suddenly ridiculous, irreverent, embarrassing, and foolish”, all in one fell swoop, just because the priest celebrating Mass faced the people?
Yes– because the Mass was no longer solemn, holy, reverent, and religious– elements of the worldly, irreligious, secular American “1960’s pop culture” (which was also very anti-Catholic, and immoral!) were allowed into the Church, and the focus was often more on worshippers and their psychological feelings, than on God. Many priests also suddenly wanted to follow the “youth pop culture,” and to be called by their first names only, like a teenager (thus, a “Fr. John,” instead of a “Fr. Smith,” etc.). And many priests suddenly seemed to want to change from a more adult, pious, dignified, priestly demeanor, to a more youthful, bubbly, boyish personality, which often became glaringly noticeable, when facing the people, and…
I will continue, with my above post. “..when facing the people, and this did not reflect the traditional mature dignity, and piety, of a good priest. Of course, not all priests changed to this demeanor– many remained reverent, mature, and very respectful of God, when saying the New Mass! But overall– these new trends, at that time, gave our Church a bad name! People of that time, were used to good religious and moral training, and very high standards, for the Church! Also, nuns who suddenly dumped their habits, and turned to silly, secular dress, political activism, and etc.– looked very cheap and silly– not like serious, respectable nuns, with very high standards! “Did Sister So-and-So,” in her crisp habit, and strict…
I will finish my post, above. …”Did Sister So-and-So, in her crisp habit, and strict demeanor, suddenly turn into a teenager?” Were all the Catholic school-children laughing at her?? Why was cheap, worldly involvements, in the youth movement, and political activism, so important, suddenly– more important, than God, and leading a serious religious life, of prayer and service to God?
I will finish my post, above. …when facing the people, and saying the Novus Ordo Mass. Of course– not all priests changed, in this way! Of course not! Many still continued to say Mass, with dignity and reverence!
Of course, roberto vicente, not all priests conducted the Novus Ordo Mass in an irreverent manner. Many have always been, and will always be, very dignified, mature, prayerful, and reverent– whether they face God, or face the people. But the whole point of worship of God– is to devoutly, and prayerfully, turn and face God!
The Priest is joining us or is leading us ? As for Francis, on occasion Ad Orientem ? This has been one of the problems for about 50 years. We must pray that all parishes will follow.
GOD bless them!
Ad orientem in in Greenville TX, St. William the Confessor began This past Sunday
Now re-institute the TLM (yes, it is understood that St. Margaret Mary has TLMs but under different circumstances). All parishes should have at least one TLM on each Sunday and Holy Day at a regularly scheduled, and convenient time, such as Noon or 1 pm. These should replace a NO Mass.
Also Traditional sacraments need to be offered as alternatives.
Too bad Cardinal Sarah has been so abused by the Pope, still his words have borne fruit.
Perfect Linda Maria well said, it has everything to do with the Novus Ordo “forced” on us after Vatican II and Ann T. kudos to your response as well. Now we need to implement the TLM in ALL of our churches, cathedrals, convents, seminaries and monasteries.
Why would we want to do that? The vast, vast majority of Church-going Catholics prefer the Novus Ordo.
The key word there is church-going Catholics. The vast majority of Catholics have already voted with their feet. 75% of Catholics do not go Mass. 75% of Catholics do not go to the Novus Ordo. Only 25% of Catholics are church-going and attend Sunday Novus Ordo Masses. That is a huge indictement and failure on the part of the Novus Ordo Mass. It’s a failed and bad liturgy.
If they had the TLM Mass side by side with the Novus Ordo Mass every Sunday, we would really see which Mass church-going Catholics prefer.
O.1% of catholics attend EF Masses. You are kidding me if you think you are bringing the other 75% back to the pews.
And Our Lord began His Church with 12 Apostles. So go on and kid yourself.
“YFC” the majority of Catholics would “prefer” a video game Mass if that is what the Church fed them exclusively for 50 years. No one is kidding you, “YFC” the TLM is the Mass of All Time, not the NO, which will eventually find its place as a footnote, or in the “newChurch” that you and your pals may choose to attend.
Are you suggesting that the fall in Mass attendance was directly and SOLELY due to the introduction of the Novus Ordo? Absolutely no logical reasoning in that. Rather, it is the perennial logical FALLACY of “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”. Still, if you hold that the TLM is the only valid form of Mass, the SSPX will be glad to accommodate you.
No it wasn’t solely responsible. There were other factors like the cultural revolution and Vatican II orientation in the Church, but the Novus Ordo was the main factor for the drop in attendance. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a fallacy, but sometimes post hoc ergo propter is true . That is why there is investigation, whether there is a fallacy or A did cause B.
The Novus Ordo is a valid Mass, I didn’t say it was invalid with no Eucharist. I said it was bad liturgy. It’s a valid Mass but so deficient and bad, that it has damaged the Church. The Church needs a new missal and the TLM.
The SSPX holds that the Novus Ordo is valid, Roberto. You may want to check the wide brush and stereotypes.
Having said as much, Linda Maria’s observations having lived through the shift speaks to a reality many cannot understand because they have been acclimated to accept less or different. So, yes, the shift seemed ridiculous, absurd, and, in many areas, entirely unacceptable.
The cause of any event can often be attributed to myriad factors, those that allow for a build up to the even and those that actually begin the event. Tensions between the United States and Japan were not good prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor. That attack resulted in the open declaration of war, but the signs were there to inform those with eyes to see…
…that war was coming.
Your statement is inaccurate, AMalley. As I recounted a few months back, I got handed a little seemingly harmless blue devotional book with prayers and pious meditations called “Christian Warfare.” In the examination of conscience of that book, it asks, “Have you attended and participated in the New Mass”? I looked at the publisher, and predictably enough, it’s published by your beloved SSPX. They consider attending the “New Mass” a sin, would you believe. So, any denigration of the Ordinary Mass in these posts, I regard as a word from the beloved SSPX. Beware folks.
Sorry “roberto vicente,” but your point is specious. There was no NO prior to there being an NO Mass. All went to the TLM and all were obedient to the Church when it tore through its titurgical wreckovation and simply spat on what it considered holy for centuries. (A point made by Benedict many times.)
Do you think that people just stopped going to the TLM voluntarily one day? Not so. Today, Catholics suffer by being told that Tradition is wrong regarding the Mass and that the NO is the, in effect, sole Mass for them. People need to relearn Tradition. Once they taste it again, as many youth have done, they want more.
jon, the Society holds that the NO is a valid mass, but not necessarily efficacious in that it can and often does scandalize. The sacrifice of the mass is the highest prayer of the Church and thus should be an august event, not a rite that is, by its very nature, open to abuse by way of myriad options, invention, and novelty.
So, any denigration of the NO you perceive on my part, despite your confusion, is, in truth, legitimate observation of the rite itself. If you’re so ill informed that you cannot see the forest for the trees, that is not the fault of your beloved scapegoat. More likely your indoctrination elsewhere.
Perhaps one day you will grow to take responsibility for your own misunderstandings and narrow views instead of…
..denigrating those who obviously understand more about the actual position of others. Not everyone goes doe-eyed to a prayer book and learns by rote what is written, but rather has their experiences confirmed by what they read.
Ann, the SSPX holds that the the validity and legitimacy of the Ordinary Form is doubtful.
REALLY? The Society holds that the Ordinary Form is a valid Mass? Does Fellay know about that? Are you speaking for your beloved SSPX? AMalley, I say, you are quite uninformed about the real position of your beloved SSPX vis-a-vis the Ordinary Form. Just look at their convoluted rationale in their own website concerning the validity of the OF at https://sspx.org/en/new-mass-legit
Plus, as I said above, I have definite proof that they consider the OF sinful and therefore in their eyes invalid. It’s in the blue book of theirs. Please AM, inform yourself!
Yes, jon, Bishop Fellay knows that. And, J Hallet, you’re incorrect.
I am speaking the truth of the Society’s actual position, not the projected position and/or fear of individuals, jon. What you “say” is nothing more than your own projections, vis-a-vis your desire to project fear mongering and misstatements upon those you consider your opponent.
Your understanding of proof is similarly based on your erroneous foundation which is riddled through with bias, jon. That is why your notion of what constitutes “convoluted” is not accurate, but rather based on having been reared/formed beneath a confusion of ambiguity that is ever flowering.
No, Ann. You are incorrect. This is not a projection, it is a reality. Considering that you have no idea where the foundation of my knowledge of the SSPX comes from, it might be you that is projecting. https://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q5_novus_ordo_missae.htm
“Therefore, these Masses can be of doubtful validity, and more so with time.”
Why should what people prefer have any relevance to the discussion whatsoever? This isn’t a democracy. They “prefer” it, if they they do, because they know nothing else. They’re completely unqualified to have an opinion on the subject and it’s not a subject where opinions matter anyway. The bottom line fact is that the principle author of the Novus Ordo was a later exposed Freemason (exiled to Iran by Paul VI), who used his Masonic sensibilities to distort the Mass as means to undermine the faith. And he did a helluva great job at it, too.
Thank you for emphasizing the thoughtful, not convoluted, critique of the New Mass, based on the position of two of the most orthodox and profound theologians of the Church, Cardinals Bacci and Ottaviani: https://sspx.org/en/new-mass-legit
Everyone should read, at least the summary conclusion (“The Theological Context”) and the 3 bullet points which are absolutely spot-on about the New Mass: 1) propitiation from sins is stripped from the New Mass; 2) the New Mass is commemoration, not sacrifice; 3) Christ as Victim and Priest is replaced by the symbolic and vague “Lord of the resurrection.”
The New Mass, as the article says, defects from the perfection of the Traditional Mass, and privation of good is an evil.
Romulus Augustus, I agree– but Catholics only know what they are taught, and given! Catholics have had no Tridentine Latin Mass, nor religious and moral training in the Catechism– for fifty years! Many today, have no idea as to what a Tridentine Latin Mass is! Many have never seen it, nor heard of it! Many never were even born, until well after Vatican II! My view, is that what we really need, first and foremost– is a solid Catholic religious and moral training, in the Catechism! And a Church that is firmly dedicated to upholding Christ’s holy teachings, starting with the Pope and the Vatican!! Then, I think many Catholics would request to have the Tridentine Latin Mass, in their parishes!
Linda Maria, you make a good point, which I have been trying to communicate for some time, to no avail Most Catholics today don’t know what the TLM is. Contrary to popular belief among many on this site, the millions who attend the OF on weekends don’t hate the TLM. They don’t know what it is. I know a couple of Priests who have never seen a TLM or would know how to say the Mass. For one thing they never studied Latin to the point of using it in Liturgy. There were a few years back in the 70s when Latin wasn’t taught in some seminaries. All that does’t mean that Catholics aren’t taught the faith in CCD, RCIA, etc.
‘ pope francis has used the ad orientem posture on occasion’….when celebrating mass in the sistine chapel, he has had no recourse but to follow the architecture that enshrined the tradition in stone. i think that occasions such as that are the only instances that would cause him to pivot eastward. btw, remember that in the earliest baptismal rite spitting to the west, the seat of darkness was part of the renunciation of satan… after that, all life was lived eastward, heavenward.
As an ordained deacon, I would be interested in the rubrics of facing the altar during Mass. Using the ordinary form, I guess you would face the congregation for the Mass of the Catechumens (penitential rite, collect, readings and homily) then face the altar during the Mass of the Faithful (intersessions, consecration, Eucharistic prayer and dismissal). I’ve seen an instructional video from SSPX on the Extraordinary Form, so it may be similar. Hopefully, the priest has a microphone as he faces the tabernacle. I’ve never seen the Latin Ordinary Form. If done correctly, I believe it would be a more devout expression during the consecration and Eucharistic Prayer. I would gladly serve that type of Mass. Deacon Vince
About two years ago, I saw – much to my amazement – a Lutheran Eucharist celebrated ad orientem. It was definitely a shock. I get what it was trying to do theologically, but I actually think it fits a protestant theology moreso than a catholic one. Just my opinion.
It seems you don’t know the tradition and history of the Catholic Church. Ad oriemtem had been the position of the Mass for centuries. Under 2,000 years. It was the Protestants who first started facing the people in the 16th century, the 1500’s. They started facing the people because they wanted to deny the Catholic theology of the Mass. They wanted to deny the sacrifice of the Mass and the Catholic tradition of ad orientem. In England, Thomas Cramner, the Anglican, introduced the Cramner table. A simple table altar facing the people.
Mr. Fox, you have no basis on which to assess the state of my knowledge about the “tradition and history of the Catholic Church”. Your comment is arrogant.
Why is Asbury Fox’s factually correct assertion regarding Cranmer’s/other Protestant denominations’ “arrogant”? Is s/he going to be accused of “micro-aggression”, next? Are facts “arrogant? ( Yea: to the uninformed)
The most thorough and factually incontrovertible thesis on the topic is “Cranmer’s Godly Order”, by Michael Davies (praised by someone named Ratzinger), who historically confirms everything Asbury Fox mentions.
Though perhaps unconsciously arrogant to have done so.
The basis for assessment is your commentary, Roberto.
Mr. Fox is exercising charity, not arrogance in assigning your apparent dispositions to a lack of knowledge. Perhaps you should review your own posts and ask others why they perceive you as unknowing. If anything, doing so would give you greater information instead of having to resort to that of making your own unfounded assessments.
Roberto Vicente, my post that you are referring to, was in response to Your Fellow Catholic, not you. I was responding to Your Fellow Catholic’s post of 12/14 1:36pm
YFC, the Roman Catholic Mass was said facing the altar for hundreds of years. Mass facing the people was started about 60 years ago. One of the novelties of Vatican 2.
John Feeney, you are completely incorrect. Masses have been celebrated versus populism in the Roman basicilicas including St Peters since they were built, and presumably elsewhere before that.
In the traditional Anglican and Episcopal churches, the ministers/priests all used to face ad orientem. However, in the 1970’s, they had big, modern liturgical reforms, just as we did, in the 1960’s! I have no idea, as to these liturgical reforms, as I have never been to one of their modernized Eucharistic liturgies. However, I have talked to many Episcopalians and Anglicans, who broke away from their modernized churches, also because of women clergy and gay clergy, and etc.– and they have returned to their beautiful, old liturgies, which they prefer, and love. The original American Episcopal “Book of Common Prayer,” is a masterwork of the King’s English! And Thomas Cranmer, of England, was very excellent, with his liturgical…
I will finish my post, above! Thomas Cranmer, of England, was excellent, with his English vernacular liturgical works, for the new, Anglican Church of England! Of course, the Reformation period was also in Shakespeare’s time, when our English language was at a historical high point! Our language later began to slowly deteriorate, after that historical period.
Also, Deacon Vincent, I appreciate your comment about the use of the microphone. I don’t have a problem with one orientation or the other, but it seems to me that the celebrant should be reverent, loud enough to be heard, clear, and unrushed. What I recall about the previous rite is the opposite: Silent or nearly so, mumbling, and raced through. Maybe better enunciation is more important than better orientation?
Your Fellow Catholic– some people mistake the silence, or soft whisperings of the priest at prayer, when saying certain parts of the old Latin Mass (in the Canon of the Mass, during the Consecration) — as so-called “mumbling.” This is due to a total lack of education on the subject! Some parts of the old Latin Mass are considered VERY HOLY and the priest either says the all the Latin words in silence, to God– or else, he whispers them. Talk to a good priest about this, who loves to say the old Latin Mass, and he will explain all about this to you. He might even show you how to serve for the old Latin Mass, and ask for you to do so! Wouldn’t you like that?
P.S. The Latin words are addressed to Almighty God, not to anyone else. It does not matter, if the priest pronounces his Latin beautifully, or not– or how well he enunciates each word. What matters, is for the priest to perform the holy Mass correctly. Transubstantiation is a MIRACLE!!
P.P.S. When I was young, I knew of several altar boys, who also confided that they were homosexuals. (The word “gay” had not yet been invented, then.) Each of these young men, before and after Vatican II, believed in the Church’s authentic Catholic teachings, had lifelong deep devotions to the Blessed Mother, and led very chaste lives. There were some homosexuals of past eras, who were devout, conservative, practicing Catholics, with their daily Rosaries, and deep devotion to Our Lady– happy to lead pure, chaste lives, by the grace of God– and prepare for Heaven!! The homosexuals I knew, were also from deeply devout, immigrant, hard-working Catholic families, happy to be blessed to come to America!
Of course, the “Secret” in the Offertory, is also said inaudibly, by the priest, as everyone knows. The priest is our “alter Christus,” on the holy altar of God, our mediator, speaking to God for us!
Well, LM, at least part of your post DIRECTLY contradicts Vatican II, which talks extensively about the active participation of the laity in the Mass. By mumbling inaudible words, the laity becomes, as it had become by 1950, a mere spectator in the drama of their own salvation. This is true whether priest faces the people or the wall.
Tin Pan Malley— Those who consider me “unknowing” include you, *Catherine* [of Akita fame], Steve Phoenix, Linda Maria and the newly-arrived Asbury Fox. Enough said.
Well, in celebration of the Season of Our Lord’s Incarnation, I see that Don Roberto V. is compiling his “enemies list”: and I am disappointed to be No. 3 behind Ann (Not the Tin Man) Malley and Catherine of Akita.
In fact 3 of the top 4 are women, which is clear gender discrimination: I am filing a formal complaint with Cal-Catholic and I demand a recount.
“…I demand a recount.”
Just what everyone wants this Christmas, Steve. But methinks suppliers are plum out ;^)
Do you mean “priest?”
It is true that at times the “Old Rite” unfortunately is, in my observation, irreverently said, too (YFC), and there is no denying that—at times, appearing rushed and perfunctory according to the practice of certain clergy. It is sad.
It becomes especially notable when said individuals “rattle off” the Confiteor, the Credo, Our Lord’s Own Prayer, and esp. the Last Gospel–the most beautiful summary of the Father, the Savior, and the Redemption, in about 150 words. The reverse of that is when Fr. Moreau, for example, of the Inst. Christ the King, says it with such serenity and involvement, that you as participant are totally drawn in and involved.
I have written personally to the “rushed-type” clergy, asking their…
…reflection on the matter. You get varying responses. The worst is the defensive “ex opere operato ” response, that one doesn’t have to do anything except the basic minimal intent of what the Church intends, with the essential “right” words and actions. Oh, brother!
Well, I know it can be disappointing, when a priest or prelate is not so great with certain things, at Mass! One can be fooled, however! When young, I recall admiring some of our clergy, who had beautiful speaking and singing vices, beautiful talents leading Mass and other public liturgies, attracting many worshippers! And a few of them (priests and prelates) got convicted of crimes, later– such as pedophilia, womanizing, gay lovers, embezzlement of money, etc.! A great shock! But still– it is wonderful, to find priests who are excellent with saying Mass (either the Old Mass or New Mass!!)!
I’m glad we agree Steve Phoenix
Some priests and prelates are better at publicly saying Mass (either the Old Mass, or the New Mass)– and some are very shy in public, too! Some have better speaking or singing voices, some are better with Latin, some are good public speakers with their sermons– well, they all vary! When very young, I was critical of “deficiencies” of priests and prelates, at Masses. but as I grew older, and got to know many priests and prelates, I saw that some struggled with public liturgical duties at times! I became much more humble, up in the Choir Loft, and devoted myself only to adoring God, at Mass– and let the good priests and prelates (bless them!) do as best they can do! They love Him too– but some are not gifted with singing,…
I will finish, with my post, above. …some are not gifted with singing, speaking, giving sermons, etc. And some seem to rush through the Mass, and are not comfortable in public, leading the Mass and other public liturgies. Unfortunate– but that’s the way it goes!
Ideally, the tabernacle should be in the center of the sanctuary with the altar in front of it. The chairs for the priests and assistants should be a little off to the side of the tabernacle and altar. So in the Mass of the Catechumens, with the penitential rite and collect, the priest can either do this standing in front of his chair on the side or he can do it in front of the altar ad orientem. So, the readings and sermon are facing the people from the lectern. Now as a deacon, I hope first and foremost that you are wearing a dalmatic, if not already doing so for any Mass that is celebrated.
If you are a Catholic deacon, why are you looking for liturgical guidance from the schismatic SSPX, which is outside the Catholic Church?
Vincent Kelch: In reply to your 1o:31 post of 14 Dec. If you are a Catholic deacon, why are you looking for liturgical guidance from the SSPX, which is not part of the Catholic Church.
The CCD Moderator seems determined to place this post as far away as possible from the one I am responding to. Incompetence? An agenda?
Thank you for your comments. Unfortunately, the moderators don’t have the ability to move posts, just to edit or delete them if they don’t comply with the comments policy.
Oh, good grief, the CCD moderators have got to have better things to do with their time then to plot Don Roberto’s undoing. (Like last-minute-Christmas shopping, for heavens sake.) Is everything a ‘plot’?
And maybe we can save the canonical examination of Deacon Kelch til after New Year’s? You know, Advent, Christmas, peace, joy, charity?
RE the last sentence of your most recent post: START PRACTICING WHAT YOU PREACH.
And, by the way, my ego is not wounded when I point out [in your first line] that the grammatically correct word is “thAn” and not “thEN”. But, of course, you never admit to making a mistake.
…have a happy Advent and Merry Christmas, which I do hope then/than for him.
…just because you have an agenda and are incompetent with regard to the reality of the SSPX and the fact that they are, in truth, Catholic doesn’t mean everyone else suffers as much.
But thank you for the gift of projection just the same, jon. You are no Scrooge and just keep sharing what you have ;^)
AMalley, your beloved SSPX in truth doesn’t have any canonical legitimate ministry in the Catholic Church. Their sacraments are all illicit and illegitimate, save for the sacrament of reconciliation, thanks to the Holy Father Pope Francis (and yet I haven’t heard Ann Malley once thank Francis for such a gracious and pastoral generosity, quite ungrateful). Just read Pope Benedict’s Letter To Bishops from March 2009 concerning your beloved SSPX: “As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church.”
A lot of people have responded to Deacon Kelch. There is a long chain responses and replies to another people’s replies. No conspiracy. You just have to follow the right chain of replies. Remember you initially got involved in Deacon’s reply thread by accusing me of insulting you when I was replying to YFC. You weren’t even part of Deacon’s reply thread. Were you were involved in a separate thread in the comments section. Now they are replying under Deacon Kelch’s post, it is up to the deacon to see all his replies an answer if he so chooses. He might not reply.
Ah, I see that the Deacon is you,Deacon Kelch. For a moment, I thought YFC was referring to Roberto Vincent.
Please accept my apologies. And, no, the TLM is not celebrated with the priest wearing a microphone while facing the tabernacle. The faithful follow along in their missals, although the priests generally speak quite clearly.
It’s not my intention to sidetrack this article, but I hope that CCD will begin a discussion about this fascinating article on the post-conciliar papal leadership of the Church: https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/different-popes-different-personalities-and-underlying-continuity
In particular, Fr. Cameli’s six foundations for continuity bear a lot of reflection. Briefly:
* Engagement with the world
* Unencumbering the church
* Prominence accorded to more immediate experiences of faith and church
Oh yes! I remember the verses in the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper which describe Jesus turning his back on the Apostles when he prayed the words of consecration. Was not Cardinal Sarah recently admonished by the Holy Father for his ad orientem remarks? I grew up prior to Vatican II and now attend the Ordinary Form of the Mass. The Extraordinary Form is fine for some Catholics but should not be forced on all!
It’s very interesting you pointed out the Last Supper. Have you seen the several depictions of it? Kind of looks like the picture that went with the article. LOL!
And, no, Cardinal Sarah was not admonished for his ad orientem remarks. Might be a spin on the situation but read Fr. Lombardi’s comments. Cardinal Sarah didn’t set any norms. He simply invited people to join and already acceptable posture.
The Pope is not happy with Cardinal Sarah. He removed Cardinal Sarah from various posts and scheduled activities. Very sad, but predictable!
I’m not going to put words into anyone’s mouth on the Pope and Cardinal Sarah despite my guesses. I simply stated that Cardinal Sarah was not admonished for his ad Orientem comments and, if he was, I’m sure Fr. Lombardi would have been happy to say so
Herold, the book “Spirit of the Liturgy” by Cardinal Joseph Radzinger explains that the Jewish rabbis did not set around a table as is shown in Michelangelo’s painting; they lounged on the same side of a long table. At the Last Supper on Holy Thursday, the Lord and His apostles were all facing the same direction. The point to ad orientem is that we are all facing “east” toward Christ, the Sun of God, the Light of the World. All the ancient Christian symbolism is explained in another book, too, “Turning Toward the Lord” by U.M. Lang, Ignatius Press Publisher.
Correction: I meant Da Vinci’s painting. Actually in the full Da Vinci painting there are two apostle on the other side at each end.
The priest in the older rite turns toward Christ on the altar when he is speaking to God, and turns toward the people when he is speaking to the people – when blessing them and during the sermon.
I have to admit that, explained this way, the ad orientem position makes a lot of sense.
Many things do make sense when one stops to listen and learn “why” something was/is done a certain way.
J Hallet: Da Vinci’s beautiful Last Supper painting looks like the photo above? Nice try but I am unconvinced!
It’s not about convincing. It’s reality. Christ and the apostles faced the same way in the Da Vinci Last Supper and the priest and congregation are facing the same way in the photo.
Have you ever looked at the Sacramentary for the Ordinary Form Mass? That is really what should convince anyone. It instructs the priest when he must turn and face the people and it mirrors the times that it is done in the ad Orientem posture Mass. Wouldn’t need to turn if he was already that way.
VII never said a word about abolishing the ad Ortientem posture. It only provided for the possibility of a free-standing altar and did not order the disuse of the high altar. Getting rid of it another mistranslation of what VII actually said. Why do we…
J. Hallett, actually in the full Da Vinci Last Supper there are two apostles are the other side of the table at the two ends. I mistakenly called it Michelangelo’s painting.
When I paint a picture, it is what I want it to be. When you see the actual fresco in Milan, it is designed to fit the end wall of the refectory of the monastery/church. It is an artist’s rendition of what he thought it might have looked like or that he wanted it to look like. I is a wonderful work of art, but it can’t be raised to the level of Magisterium teaching. You also might want to check out who pained the fresco.
At our particular and general judgement, I think God will not ask: “Did you celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass facing Ad Orientem?”” Instead, I think God will ask: did you follow my Son, Jesus, by feeding the poor, showing mercy, visiting the sick and the imprisoned, giving water to the thirsty, clothing the naked, etc.?” These types of fastidious disputes turn people away from Catholicism.
You’re setting up a false competition here, George. Can’t we do the Mass well AND feed the poor, show mercy, visit the sick, etc.? Most Catholics in the pews aren’t doing the latter things now which is sad. Maybe if the Mass wasn’t taken so casually, neither would the rest of the Faith.
Not entirely true, “George”: Jesus instructs the Samaritan woman at the well that “God is spirit, and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth” (Jn.4:24):
Part of the Christian injunction is to feed the hungry and clothe the naked, but that doesn’t justify the purely humanistic social “gospel” (small “g”) which has virtually engulfed the comtemporary church (small “c”).
In John’s Gospel, and in the tradition we held until 1969, as Anne T. pointed out above, the worship in spirit and truth is not turned to man, but to God (ad orientem), the pure Spirit, in spirit and in truth. The specifics of that worship does indeed “matter”.
A reading of the documents of Vatican II also helps to make sense of why the OF Mass is celebrated as it is, particularly Sacrosanctum Concilium. There is a certain amount of freedom in the Church as Pope Benedict XVI so stated. One form of the Mass is not more licit than the other; thus, the EF Mass should not be FORCED on all. One can be a Catholic in good standing by worshipping God through the Ordinary Form of the Mass.
J Hallett: are you saying the OF Mass is not done well or is illicit? And what is the factual basis for your assertion that the OF Mass is linked to a decline in charitable works by Catholics? Your sympathy seems to lie with the SSPXers which Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI stated were schismatics.
George, you seem to want to read outside the scope of what was said. I attend an OF Mass just about every time I attend Mass with an occasional EF. I am telling you what the OF Sacramentary says. I will tell you that churches with a more reverent Mass Ef or OF, and the ones that follow the rubrics as closely as possible seem to have people who practice the rest of the Faith much more closely including the corporal works of mercy. Are they perfect people? No but they also are aware of their deep need for the sacraments.
And, BTW, I have no sympathies with the SSPX. You’ve got to spewing that everyone who wants a well said Mass sympathizes with them. It’s just silly and a slanderous attempt to win an argument.
So, again, have your read the Sacramentary? Don’t you think we can follow that AND perform the corporal works of mercy?
BTW, this is the rest of what got chopped from my earlier post. Apparently 750 characters includes spaces.
… wait so long to get VII right? It took us 40 years to get the right translation.
This is the article to which Anne refers: https://frcoulter.com/presentations/ad-orientem.html
Your comment, “J Hallett” is ridiculous. No Vatican statement has ever been made that the SSPX was in a state of “schism” from the Church. Pope Benedict only said — what a surprise — that the SSPX has “no canonical status” within the Church, only a legal definition; he did not refer to them as “schisamatics” (which would have been crazy anyway given that Benedict lifted their excommunication status). Take a look at a very good summary article from the Remnant, here: https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/traditional-catholic-answers/item/2043-is-the-sspx-in-schism-a-point-by-point-rebuttal-to-cmtv-s-catholi-schism-video.
I have no idea what comment to which you are referring but it isn’t mine. I didn’t make ANY statements on the topic of the SSPX and schism. You’re debating with the wrong person.
If I were to speak to topic I would say that these were only ones declared in schism: https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CBISLEFB.HTM
I would also say that the Church said the priest of the fraternity would only be in schism if they formally adhered to the schism. Lay people are not involved in any declarations since it is a priestly fraternity.
The Remnant? I pay little attention to them. They rarely deal in reality.
Steve: it is a big stretch to assume from John 4:24 that Jesus was referring to Ad Orientem. So are you asserting that worshipping God using the OF of the Mass is unspiritual and untrue? Is the Church in error when celebrating the OF of the Mass?
Tell me William Roberts why was the OF forced on us all???
J Halley: my response was based on your statement that Catholics who attend the OF Mass are somehow taking the Mass and their faith casually. You are entitled to your opinions, however, assertions such as this must be backed up with facts!
That’s a misstatement of what I said George and I think you know it. Again, I attend an OF Mass regularly. I agree with the need to get the facts straight and the need stop jousting at windmills. It has nothing to do with the OF. It has every thing to do with the casualness of many in the pews about the Mass.
So, for clarity, this is what I actually said: “You’re setting up a false competition here, George. Can’t we do the Mass well AND feed the poor, show mercy, visit the sick, etc.? Most Catholics in the pews aren’t doing the latter things now which is sad. Maybe if the Mass wasn’t taken so casually, neither would the rest of the Faith.”
Again, read the Sacrementary for the Ordinary Form.
The thoughtful, not convoluted, SSPX critique of the New Mass, based on the position of two of the most orthodox and profound theologians of the Church, Cardinals Bacci and Ottaviani is here: https://sspx.org/en/new-mass-legit
Everyone should read, at least the summary conclusion (“The Theological Context”) and the 3 bullet points which are absolutely spot-on about the New Mass: 1) propitiation from sins is stripped from the New Mass; 2) the New Mass is commemoration, not sacrifice; 3) Christ as Victim and Priest is [often] replaced by the symbolic and vague “Lord of the resurrection.”
The New Mass, as the article says, defects from the perfection of the Traditional Mass, and the privation of good is therefore…
Also, from https://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q5_novus_ordo_missae.htm
Speaking of the New Mass:
“However, the celebrant must intend to do what the Church does. The Novus Ordo Missae will no longer in and of itself guarantee that the celebrant has this intention. That will depend on his personal faith (generally unknown to those assisting, but more and more doubtful as the crisis in the Church is prolonged).
Therefore, these Masses can be of doubtful validity, and more so with time.”
As time passes, the New Mass changes more and more (many here have said “that’s a good of the New Mass”)—more union protest “masses” a la Fr. Jon Pedigo, more puppet and clown “masses”, more social justice and…
..immigration “masses”, more of anything—it’s all there in the recipe of the “New Mass”. Christ is no longer High Priest and Victim at the center of the universe and the Mass.
Robert, I have been going to Mass for nearly four score, and every one of them has been said for somebody or group of people, usually for the repose of the soul. Yes, it is perfectly ok to have a mass to celebrate a great occasion, Mass of Thanksgiving, or a Blue Mass for first responders, or a Red Mass fo the legal profession, etc. Your idea of what the church should be is at odds with the teachings of VII, which is the Church of Today.
I see that you are quoting from an SSPX source to discredit the Catholic Church. Surprise!!! That’s like expecting PRAVDA to endorse capitalism. The SSPX is not part of the Catholic Church. It is a schismatic sect.
There is no discrediting of the Catholic Church, but rather the ambiguity with which she has been garbed by those who should adorn her as befits her station. The sacrifice of the mass is the highest prayer of the Church and, as such, should be surrounded by rites that uphold and point to that dignity, not detract from it, Roberto.
As to your last statement, you may want to refrain from declarations above your station. You’re playing pope again.
1) “the ambiguity with which she has been garbed by those who should adorn her as befits her station.” This is subjective, not objective opinion. Should be taken with a grain of salt.
2) The OF upholds and points to the dignity of the sacrifice of the Mass, AMaley.