Topic: What do the Eastern Orthodox think of the Novus Ordo Mass?

[TraditionalistThomas]

Hello again,

Just another question. How do the Eastern Orthodox regard the Novus Ordo Mass of the Roman Catholic Church? Do they see it as a blatant rupture with tradition? Do they have no problems with it?

Through the Hearts of Jesus and Mary,

Thomas.

[Alpo]

Welcome to the forum.

Tridentine mass with slight modifications (removal of Filioque, insertion of epiclecis etc.) has been authorized to use in several patriarchates but nobody seems to be interested in using Novus Ordo nor AFAIK it has been authorized anywhere. I guess that answers your question.

[Gorazd]

Just my personal POV:

As it is done in practice  in local RC parishes, it is often disgusting. Probably, it can somehow be done better in theory, but in practice, that doesn't happen often.

The Tridentine Mass feels much holier to me. I never understood why they needed to do this "mess destruction". Couldn't they just celebrate the 1962 mass in the local languages?

[TraditionalistThomas]

Just my personal POV:

As it is done in practice  in local RC parishes, it is often disgusting. Probably, it can somehow be done better in theory, but in practice, that doesn't happen often.

The Tridentine Mass feels much holier to me. I never understood why they needed to do this "mess destruction". Couldn't they just celebrate the 1962 mass in the local languages?

I agree wholeheartedly with you! That is what faithful Catholics have been asking for decades. The answer? Modernism, liberalism and freemasonry infiltrating the heirachy of the Church. It indeed makes us weep.

God bless.

[Gorazd]

I agree wholeheartedly with you! That is what faithful Catholics have been asking for decades. The answer? Modernism, liberalism and freemasonry infiltrating the heirachy of the Church. It indeed makes us weep.

God bless.

We surely have a lot in common, but we also have certain differences. I mean, how did modernist and liberalist tendencies in Roman Catholicism develop? I think, they are based on rationalist, philosophical thinking. And in that, they have a lot in common with official position of the Roman Catholic Church at their time. For example, the antimodernist oath requires to swear that the existence of God can be proven be philosophical means. And already in the theology of Thomas Aquinas, philosophy is used as a means to obtain knowledge about God.

And here, I disagree. I believe that we cannot know God according to his essence. We can only know him in his energies, through revelation and through mystical experience in our way to theosis. It is important to be aware of the mystical character of our encounter with God, in order to maintain the mystical character of the eucharistical service.

The Roman Catholic "mess destruction" does have a lot to do with rationalism. For example, the Priest was made to face the people, because that would increase their understanding of the procedure, but thereby destroing the mystery of the change from bread and wine to Body and Blood of our Lord.

[Dominika]

I've attended several times Novus Ordo Mass. Too short, lack of the Holy Spirit, more speeches than prayer. However, if it was celebrated by priest, who carries about tradition, it wasn't so bad. In Novus Ordo much more depends on the priest, so sometimes the new Mass is a disaster and sometimes there are used some elements of other rites e.g. byzantine. Some things, as restoration of the majority of the readings of the Paschal Vigil, are the positive side of the liturgical reform in 60'.

But, actually, I prefer much more eastern Liturgies.
Once I was on Tridentine Mass on Sunday. A bit longer than Novus Ordo, but I didn't feel nothing special in the spirituality. I couldn't "enter" the atmosphere. The priest was muttering something in Latin so long time, so I understood neither the gestures nor the content of prayers. Despite these (or maybe because of these) there wasn't any mystery. The Western hymnography is fairly poor than Eastern. The Tridentine Mass isn't so ancient as Eastern Liturgies. As for me, Latin rite had lost quite a lot even before Vaticanum Secundum. I see both Novus Ordo and Tridentine Mass rigid, artificial and without depth.

[Aindriú]

But, actually, I prefer much more eastern Liturgies.

Should have stopped here.

Once I was on Tridentine Mass on Sunday. A bit longer than Novus Ordo, but I didn't feel nothing special in the spirituality. I couldn't "enter" the atmosphere. The priest was muttering something in Latin  so long time, so I understood neither the gestures nor the content of prayers.

Sounds a bit like a westerner going to an eastern liturgy...

Despite these (or maybe because of these) there wasn't any mystery. The Western hymnography is fairly poor than Eastern. The Tridentine Mass isn't so ancient as Eastern Liturgies. As for me, Latin rite had lost quite a lot even before Vaticanum Secundum. I see both Novus Ordo and Tridentine Mass rigid, artificial and without depth.

There is a lot wrong here, and it's all rooted in personal preference and upbringing like a Western convert.

[Alpo]

Once I was on Tridentine Mass on Sunday. A bit longer than Novus Ordo, but I didn't feel nothing special in the spirituality. I couldn't "enter" the atmosphere. The priest was muttering something in Latin  so long time, so I understood neither the gestures nor the content of prayers.

Sounds a bit like a westerner going to an eastern liturgy...

Plus we have walls to separate altar from the laity, many of clergy's prayers are silent and many local churches do not use vernacular.

[TraditionalistThomas]

But, actually, I prefer much more eastern Liturgies.
Once I was on Tridentine Mass on Sunday. A bit longer than Novus Ordo, but I didn't feel nothing special in the spirituality. I couldn't "enter" the atmosphere. The priest was muttering something in Latin so long time, so I understood neither the gestures nor the content of prayers. Despite these (or maybe because of these) there wasn't any mystery. The Western hymnography is fairly poor than Eastern. The Tridentine Mass isn't so ancient as Eastern Liturgies. As for me, Latin rite had lost quite a lot even before Vaticanum Secundum. I see both Novus Ordo and Tridentine Mass rigid, artificial and without depth.

Hey, I find this somewhat offensive. I wouldn't call the eastern Divine Liturgies "artificial" and "without depth"!

God bless.

[mike]

nobody seems to be interested in using Novus Ordo nor AFAIK it has been authorized anywhere.

In the Philippines by Metropolitan Paul (the Antiochian one)?

[TraditionalistThomas]

Welcome to the forum.

Tridentine mass with slight modifications (removal of Filioque, insertion of epiclecis etc.) has been authorized to use in several patriarchates but nobody seems to be interested in using Novus Ordo nor AFAIK it has been authorized anywhere. I guess that answers your question.

Thanks!

Yes, I found out about this a couple of days back. I was shocked! Up until then I had no idea that some Eastern Orthodox offer a Roman (albeit modified) liturgy!

God bless.

[Alpo]

nobody seems to be interested in using Novus Ordo nor AFAIK it has been authorized anywhere.

In the Philippines by Metropolitan Paul (the Antiochian one)?

Is it some kind of interim option or permanent solution?

Anyway, it's just an exception to the rule. Orthodoxy is elsewhere more conservative than that. In fact pope Benedict XVI received a letter from patriarch of Moscow after Summorum Pontificum where patriarch commended pope's attachment to traditional liturgy.

[mike]

Is it some kind of interim option or permanent solution?

I was supposed to be a temporary solution but IDK what is the situation now.

[Dominika]

There is a lot wrong here, and it's all rooted in personal preference and upbringing like a Western convert.

I know it can sound so offensive, it's just my very personal opinion, but as I've participated in Liturgies in various traditions, I have claim that during ages there were too many changes in Latin rite and that affects on my reception of it.

Plus we have walls to separate altar from the laity, many of clergy's prayers are silent and many local churches do not use vernacular.

I appreciate iconostasis, as it's from the Old testament, the Holiest place. I know that in medieval times also Latin rite a similar thing was existing. For me the position of priest in Eastern Liturgies is quite diffrent from Tridentine one; my Roman Catholic friends always when they come first time for an Orthodox service wonder why our clergy  "is walking and walking". When the priests in some parts of the Liturgy go through the iconostasis or turn to the faithful and give the blessing (more times than in Latin rite), I feel there is a contact between laymen and clergy.
My parish uses mainly Church Slavonic, but for me it's much more understandable than Latin (although I know Spanish). In the lands where is used one of Romance languages, Latin is maybe a perfect solution: traditional and mystical language, but they can understand many parts of the prayers. For English speaking are I don't know what would be the best idea, but e.g. for Slavic lands Church Slavonic is great (again, in my opinion).
I know some Catholics, who are pious and in some way traditional, but don't like Tridentine Mass. E.g this year one of my friends went for the Tridentine Mass on Pentecost and was dissapointed. She had been told that it would be something great, like Heaven in the Earth, but hasn't felt it during the Mass.

But, actually, I prefer much more eastern Liturgies.
Once I was on Tridentine Mass on Sunday. A bit longer than Novus Ordo, but I didn't feel nothing special in the spirituality. I couldn't "enter" the atmosphere. The priest was muttering something in Latin so long time, so I understood neither the gestures nor the content of prayers. Despite these (or maybe because of these) there wasn't any mystery. The Western hymnography is fairly poor than Eastern. The Tridentine Mass isn't so ancient as Eastern Liturgies. As for me, Latin rite had lost quite a lot even before Vaticanum Secundum. I see both Novus Ordo and Tridentine Mass rigid, artificial and without depth.

Hey, I find this somewhat offensive. I wouldn't call the eastern Divine Liturgies "artificial" and "without depth"!

God bless.

I'm sorry you might had felt resentful. I wrote it only about Tridentine Mass and Novus Ordo. I know that there are other Latin rites, but I've attended only Tridentine, Novus Ordo and Mariavite (a Polish sect from XX century), so I don't want to generalize. For example, I love mozarabic chants and some Latin chants such as Exsultet

[Agabus]

I suppose that my answer falls somewhat similar to what I said in the Assisi thread in that these days I don’t really think about NO much, except when it comes up – well – here.

My basic line of thought is that the Romans may do as the Romans may do (and the same thing for the Episcopalians, the Presbyterians, the Baptists, etc.); it is their church, they can practice as they see fit. Inasmuch as I understand the circumstances that birthed it, I think the NO was an unnecessary break from the historic liturgy, but not the worst thing in the world. Celebrated properly the NO is not particularly beautiful, but is a reverent affair and the parishioners can draw what they may from the experience, and — leaving aside the debates about grace in non-Orthodox sacraments — they can still receive the Eucharist.

[William]

I think it's pretty lame.

[Orest]

Hello again,

Just another question. How do the Eastern Orthodox regard the Novus Ordo Mass of the Roman Catholic Church? Do they see it as a blatant rupture with tradition? Do they have no problems with it?

Through the Hearts of Jesus and Mary,

Thomas.

I have to be honest with you the Orthodox I know don't evn know anything about Roman Catholic churches, nevermind the services. 

[NicholasMyra]

freemasonry infiltrating the heirachy of the Church.

[Benjamin the Red]

I've never been to a prayerful N.O. Mass. They all seemed rather plain and bare-bones. Very Protestant, actually. It felt like being in a stuffy Reformed church (I say this coming from Presbyteriansm), except that there actually was an altar and a priest.

However, I have been to wonderful Latin Masses. I've attended both High and Low Masses, and found them very beautiful. Particularly the High Mass because I had more to focus on. My mind, unfortunately, tended to wander a bit during the Low Mass, with all of the silence. However, I found the silence of the Latin tradition to be very beautiful and sacred. I've never been to a Western Orthodox parish, but I do believe the Latin Mass (I think we sometimes call it the "Mass/Liturgy of St. Gregory") is served in some of them. Though, I understand they insert a Byzantine epiclesis, which really does make me sad. We complain about Latinization of the Eastern Catholics, but we shouldn't Byzantinize Western Orthodoxy. The only change needs to be the filioque, since it is a matter of doctrine.

All that, said, however...western liturgy is a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there myself. I feel at home in the Byzantine liturgy moreso than any other liturgical tradition, but I certainly have a lot of respect for others, including the west.

[neon_knights]

The Novus Ordo Mass can be a beautiful rite, if properly practiced.

Example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQnTMh9-CpI&feature=player_embedded

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO, the fault lies in how its practiced.

[Gorazd]

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO,

I respectfully disagree. The NOM offers a lot of choices, even the creed can be replaced by a song. Such options simply should not exist. Also, I think it is abhorrent that communion is handed out by laymen and -women in the NOM.

[Benjamin the Red]

The Novus Ordo Mass can be a beautiful rite, if properly practiced.

Example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQnTMh9-CpI&feature=player_embedded

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO, the fault lies in how its practiced.

Beautiful! That's actually the best NO Mass I've ever seen celebrated.

Except, they REALLY do need to flip the altar back around...

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO,

I respectfully disagree. The NOM offers a lot of choices, even the creed can be replaced by a song. Such options simply should not exist. Also, I think it is abhorrent that communion is handed out by laymen and -women in the NOM.

I would also have to agree with this, though. The Creed CANNOT be replaced, and "extraordinary ministers" are not acceptable.

[William]

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO,

I respectfully disagree. The NOM offers a lot of choices, even the creed can be replaced by a song. Such options simply should not exist. Also, I think it is abhorrent that communion is handed out by laymen and -women in the NOM.

Then there's the very idea behind the NOM that Eucharistic prayers should be written by a committee rather than received from the saints of old.

[ialmisry]

Welcome to the forum.

Tridentine mass with slight modifications (removal of Filioque, insertion of epiclecis etc.) has been authorized to use in several patriarchates but nobody seems to be interested in using Novus Ordo nor AFAIK it has been authorized anywhere. I guess that answers your question.

Somewhere here IIRC there is some debate about WRO Novus Ordo going on in the Phillipines.  I don't recall if we ever got to the bottom of the Truth of the matter.

[Deacon Lance]

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO,

I respectfully disagree. The NOM offers a lot of choices, even the creed can be replaced by a song. Such options simply should not exist. Also, I think it is abhorrent that communion is handed out by laymen and -women in the NOM.

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

[Gorazd]

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

Let's presume wht you say is true, then it is even worse. How can one receive Christ, even on weekdays, without confessing the faith?

And I assure you that I saw the creed replaced by a song on Sundays and Feastdays. That was the case, for example, last Coprus Christi, when I watched the local mass and procession. Also, the priest said "for all" instead of "for many". But what disturbed me most were some strange self-written prayers.

[JamesRottnek]

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

Let's presume wht you say is true, then it is even worse. How can one receive Christ, even on weekdays, without confessing the faith?

How did one receive Christ before the Creed was written?

[ialmisry]

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

Let's presume wht you say is true, then it is even worse. How can one receive Christ, even on weekdays, without confessing the faith?

If you mean by the Creed, the same way they did centuries before and after Nicea I (recitation of the Creed was introduced into the DL in the fifth or sixth century in the East and latter in the West (one of the reasons the filioque did not come to a head earlier).

[NicholasMyra]

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

I've been to Catholic churches with no creed on sunday.

[JamesRottnek]

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

I've been to Catholic churches with no creed on sunday.

It may be liturgical abuse.

[akimori makoto]

Though, I understand they insert a Byzantine epiclesis, which really does make me sad. We complain about Latinization of the Eastern Catholics, but we shouldn't Byzantinize Western Orthodoxy. The only change needs to be the filioque, since it is a matter of doctrine.

I'm surprised by this thought of yours, Ben.

I understand your point of view, but don't you think perhaps the presence or absence of the epiklesis shines a light on many other things?

[Joseph Hazen]

Ultimately the Novus Ordo is probably what got me looking into Orthodoxy. At first I figured I just didn't care for the contemporary, hippy music and lack of reverence, I just personally preferred the Latin Mass (which I attended when I could). Then I moved closer to the Latin Mass and got to attend it every week. I began to truly see the shocking irreverence in the Novus Ordo, and saw that it wasn't so much the style in which it was presented but irreverence inherent in the way the Mass was laid out. I didn't understand why the priest was facing the wrong way in the Novus Ordo, I didn't understand who thought they had the right to change all these things.

Then, because of something else, an Orthodox friend told me "find papal infallibility in the Early Church Fathers." I looked and couldn't find it. I realized that the Novus Ordo was a result of the scholasticism so foundational in Western Christianity. When one has determined that this is the exact moment of consecration, well, everything else is up for grabs. It can be changed around. When one has a logical answer for everything, when mystery is more suspect than central and tradition really is "just the way we used to do it" and not a core aspect of who and what you are, you're ultimately going to end up with something like the Novus Ordo, given enough time. That wasn't a proper Christian attitude. That whole paradigm was contrary to what we read in Christianity in the Early Church. Christianity is not ours to make do with what we like, it's supposed to have its way and we conform to it. The Liturgy does not belong to us, we do not have the right to concoct from whole cloth a new one. Tradition is not a toy.

The realization that things were not going to get better in Roman Catholicism, because the people in general didn't have a perspective that allowed them to see what was truly wrong with their church, coupled with reading the Early Church Fathers in context and explanation of how and why Orthodoxy is different from Roman Catholicism led to my being Chrismated just over a year ago.

[Big Chris]

"extraordinary ministers" are not acceptable.

Really?  What about St. Tarcisius?

[Maria]

The novus ordo is a protestantized liturgy.

If you can find a 1904 Lutheran Hymnal, please do so. The only copy I found and studied back in 1995 was tossed into the fireplace by my then Catholic priest-confessor who also stated that he would never celebrate the Novus Ordo again. 

The recent modifications in the Novus Ordo which were sanctioned by Pope Benedict are only superficial corrections as serious errors persist throughout this heretical Lutheran Liturgy. It is sad that Catholics have been brainwashed into accepting this Protestantized liturgy. Well do I remember attending parish education courses which painted anyone who refused to accept this novel liturgy as a "reactionary" who was "holier than the Pope."

[Joseph Hazen]

"extraordinary ministers" are not acceptable.

Really?  What about St. Tarcisius?

It is a weak argument to find one example of a possible Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion and hold him up as an excuse and validation for a practice now found in practically every Roman church in North America, particularly when his hagiography describes him as a member of the minor clergy and clearly says nobody else was available to take Holy Communion to prisoners.

It's also pointless, IMO, to bring up how people received Communion before the Creed was put into the Liturgy, since we're not living in a time without the Creed and it is in the Liturgy now.

[Big Chris]

It is a weak argument to find one example of a possible Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion and hold him up as an excuse and validation for a practice now found in practically every Roman church in North America, particularly when his hagiography describes him as a member of the minor clergy and clearly says nobody else was available to take Holy Communion to prisoners.
.

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

[Asteriktos]

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

First, isn't the status of that Saint as an acolyte in dispute? Second, in some times and places the early Church they let laymen take the eucharist home with them (besides other sacramental differences), so I'm not sure how much weight should be given to this or that practice--whether isolated event or even a regular occurence.

[Joseph Hazen]

It is a weak argument to find one example of a possible Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion and hold him up as an excuse and validation for a practice now found in practically every Roman church in North America, particularly when his hagiography describes him as a member of the minor clergy and clearly says nobody else was available to take Holy Communion to prisoners.
.

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

...and is not a layperson either. At any rate I agree with Asteriktos. We're not in the same situation as the Early Church anymore, not facing the persecutions they were or the other difficulties, and we don't really have proof that this was widespread.

[Big Chris]

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

First, isn't the status of that Saint as an acolyte in dispute? Second, in some times and places the early Church they let laymen take the eucharist home with them (besides other sacramental differences), so I'm not sure how much weight should be given to this or that practice--whether isolated event or even a regular occurence.

The first point is moot.  Acolyte or not, he wasn't a priest or deacon.
As to the second point, contingent upon the first, laymen were allowed to take the Eucharist home with them in some times and places in the early church.  What more need be said?

[Asteriktos]

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

First, isn't the status of that Saint as an acolyte in dispute? Second, in some times and places the early Church they let laymen take the eucharist home with them (besides other sacramental differences), so I'm not sure how much weight should be given to this or that practice--whether isolated event or even a regular occurence.

The first point is moot.  Acolyte or not, he wasn't a priest or deacon.

Some disagree. The Catholic Encyclopedia at New Advent, for example, says he may (or may not) have been a deacon. You're gonna have to come up with a situation a bit more clear if you want to use it as an example.

As to the second point, contingent upon the first, laymen were allowed to take the Eucharist home with them in some times and places in the early church.  What more need be said?

Yet no one would be ok with that today. You can't build a theology (even a theology of practice) on abnormalities. But multiple abnormalities do show that not everything was consistent, and thus it is even more dangerous to pick and choose an example out of thin air and try to use it as an evidence that it's how things should be done today.

[Joseph Hazen]

Ok, ignoring that he was probably clergy, the other point still stands - we don't mimic every practice of the Early Church. We don't confess to the entire congregation, we don't have a bishop presiding at every Liturgy, we don't expel the catechumens at "The Doors!" and we don't let lay-people touch Holy Communion.

[Big Chris]

Ok, ignoring that he was probably clergy, the other point still stands - we don't mimic every practice of the Early Church. We don't confess to the entire congregation, we don't have a bishop presiding at every Liturgy, we don't expel the catechumens at "The Doors!" and we don't let lay-people touch Holy Communion.

So, wait.  Now you're contradicting yourself.  Only a few posts ago you waxed poetic about how the Novus Ordo was contrary to "the whole paradigm" "to what we read in Christianity in the Early Church."  But now you admit that even Orthodox Christians don't mimic every practice of the early Church.  I smell a hypocrite.

[JamesRottnek]

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

First, isn't the status of that Saint as an acolyte in dispute? Second, in some times and places the early Church they let laymen take the eucharist home with them (besides other sacramental differences), so I'm not sure how much weight should be given to this or that practice--whether isolated event or even a regular occurence.

The first point is moot.  Acolyte or not, he wasn't a priest or deacon.

Some disagree. The Catholic Encyclopedia at New Advent, for example, says he may (or may not) have been a deacon. You're gonna have to come up with a situation a bit more clear if you want to use it as an example.

As to the second point, contingent upon the first, laymen were allowed to take the Eucharist home with them in some times and places in the early church.  What more need be said?

Yet no one would be ok with that today. You can't build a theology (even a theology of practice) on abnormalities. But multiple abnormalities do show that not everything was consistent, and thus it is even more dangerous to pick and choose an example out of thin air and try to use it as an evidence that it's how things should be done today.

Well, as I understand it, it was the norm in the Church for the first few hundred years for the Eucharist to be taken home and a piece of it consumed every day during the week.  I am under the impression that this changed as the Church grew, because some people were not treating it respectfully.

[Big Chris]

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

First, isn't the status of that Saint as an acolyte in dispute? Second, in some times and places the early Church they let laymen take the eucharist home with them (besides other sacramental differences), so I'm not sure how much weight should be given to this or that practice--whether isolated event or even a regular occurence.

The first point is moot.  Acolyte or not, he wasn't a priest or deacon.

Some disagree. The Catholic Encyclopedia at New Advent, for example, says he may (or may not) have been a deacon. You're gonna have to come up with a situation a bit more clear if you want to use it as an example.

As to the second point, contingent upon the first, laymen were allowed to take the Eucharist home with them in some times and places in the early church.  What more need be said?

Yet no one would be ok with that today. You can't build a theology (even a theology of practice) on abnormalities. But multiple abnormalities do show that not everything was consistent, and thus it is even more dangerous to pick and choose an example out of thin air and try to use it as an evidence that it's how things should be done today.

Seriously??

Tertullian, then:

"Are we not priests as well as laypersons?  It is written: 'He made us a kingdom of priests for God and his Father.'  The Church has by its authority established the distinction between hierarchy and people, and the hierarchy in turn divides into hierarchic degrees those who are consecrated to God.  Where there is no hierarchically organized assembly, you may baptize and preside at the eucharistic celebration and be your own priest; and in fact, whereever there are three, even if they be laypersons, there is the Church."  (De Exhortatione Castitatus)

[Joseph Hazen]

So, wait.  Now you're contradicting yourself.  Only a few posts ago you waxed poetic about how the Novus Ordo was contrary to "the whole paradigm" "to what we read in Christianity in the Early Church."  But now you admit that even Orthodox Christians don't mimic every practice of the early Church.  I smell a hypocrite.

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my other post. I do not demand that everything be done as it was in the Early Church. I believe that what is done in today's Church must be in line with the philosophy of the Early Church; the entire thing must be one great continually connected experience. The Novus Ordo broke with what had come before it far too much to be a continual part of Tradition, it was something new. If they had just changed a prayer here or there, or had just translated it into the vernacular, it wouldn't have been a break with previous Liturgies. Furthermore the idea of being able to change everything up, to alter whatever one saw fit, is what was contrary to the paradigm of the Early Church. The Church is conservative, preserving more than what it alters. Of course practices change, and we need to respect that. To think we can turn back the clock and do things exactly as they were centuries ago is ridiculous, because it ignores what has happened in between and how The Church has answered it. I took issue with the Roman idea that one can do so, or can play chop shop with tradition, and still maintain the same faith.

But "extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion" is a uniquely Roman problem, and one I'm happy to not have to deal with. Let the Romans have them if they want, that's not my problem.

[ialmisry]

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

First, isn't the status of that Saint as an acolyte in dispute? Second, in some times and places the early Church they let laymen take the eucharist home with them (besides other sacramental differences), so I'm not sure how much weight should be given to this or that practice--whether isolated event or even a regular occurence.

The first point is moot.  Acolyte or not, he wasn't a priest or deacon.

Some disagree. The Catholic Encyclopedia at New Advent, for example, says he may (or may not) have been a deacon. You're gonna have to come up with a situation a bit more clear if you want to use it as an example.

As to the second point, contingent upon the first, laymen were allowed to take the Eucharist home with them in some times and places in the early church.  What more need be said?

Yet no one would be ok with that today. You can't build a theology (even a theology of practice) on abnormalities. But multiple abnormalities do show that not everything was consistent, and thus it is even more dangerous to pick and choose an example out of thin air and try to use it as an evidence that it's how things should be done today.

Seriously??

Tertullian, then:

"Are we not priests as well as laypersons?  It is written: 'He made us a kingdom of priests for God and his Father.'  The Church has by its authority established the distinction between hierarchy and people, and the hierarchy in turn divides into hierarchic degrees those who are consecrated to God.  Where there is no hierarchically organized assembly, you may baptize and preside at the eucharistic celebration and be your own priest; and in fact, whereever there are three, even if they be laypersons, there is the Church."  (De Exhortatione Castitatus)

was that before he became a Montanist, the original Pentecostals?

[Big Chris]

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my other post. I do not demand that everything be done as it was in the Early Church. I believe that what is done in today's Church must be in line with the philosophy of the Early Church; the entire thing must be one great continually connected experience. The Novus Ordo broke with what had come before it far too much to be a continual part of Tradition, it was something new. If they had just changed a prayer here or there, or had just translated it into the vernacular, it wouldn't have been a break with previous Liturgies. Furthermore the idea of being able to change everything up, to alter whatever one saw fit, is what was contrary to the paradigm of the Early Church. The Church is conservative, preserving more than what it alters. Of course practices change, and we need to respect that. To think we can turn back the clock and do things exactly as they were centuries ago is ridiculous, because it ignores what has happened in between and how The Church has answered it. I took issue with the Roman idea that one can do so, or can play chop shop with tradition, and still maintain the same faith.

Your criteria that "what is done in today's Church must be in line with the philosophy of the Early Church" is sketchy, at best.  What do you mean by early Church?  Are we talking about the first-second generation of Christians? Or are we talking about the liturgy of the 7th-9th centuries (where most of the stasis in both East and West occurs)?  You'll be pleased to know that the Novus Ordo fits every criteria of the Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians (10:16-17), the Didache (chs. 9-10), not to mention the commonly cited quotation from St. Justin Martyr.  These fragments that we are fortunate to have from the earliest of Christians are the only philosophy of the early Church and its liturgical life.

What you say is still inconsistent and hypocritical.  On the one hand you are willing to allow for the historical development of the Divine Liturgy, stating that "practices change and we need to respect that," but then, on the other hand, you are unwilling and unable to grant any development in the Roman rite, much less are you able to respect those developments despite the reformed liturgy being 'in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers' (Pope John Paul II).

The Mass, just like the Divine Liturgy, is an ongoing growing thing that has been celebrated in all times and in all cultures since Christ did those strange things during the Last Supper which was a Passover seder much like the Jews still celebrate which would have probably been not in Latin (perhaps Greek) but in Hebrew and Aramaic.

[Joseph Hazen]

Your criteria that "what is done in today's Church must be in line with the philosophy of the Early Church" is sketchy, at best.

An anonymous strange Roman Catholic online isn't happy with my opinion of his church?! Forgive me for not loosing sleep.

You'll be pleased to know that the Novus Ordo fits every criteria of the Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians (10:16-17), the Didache (chs. 9-10), not to mention the commonly cited quotation from St. Justin Martyr.  These fragments that we are fortunate to have from the earliest of Christians are the only philosophy of the early Church and its liturgical life.

Your inability to grasp the distinction between organic and inorganic growth in the life of a church astounds me.

What you say is still inconsistent and hypocritical.  On the one hand you are willing to allow for the historical development of the Divine Liturgy, stating that "practices change and we need to respect that," but then, on the other hand, you are unwilling and unable to grant any development in the Roman rite,

It's not, and watch who you call hypocritical. I don't mind if the Roman Mass changes. slowly and in response to the changing world. I do mind if my church writes a brand new Mass and then says "it's just like the really old masses!" which is bull. The oldest Liturgies we have are nothing like the Novus Ordo (check out the Liturgy of St. James) I will repeat, and use small words: If the Romans had changed a few prayers, had translated to the vernacular, had changed their liturgy in the same manner that all liturgies have changed since Christendom began and not concocted a whole new thing it would not have been a big deal. Instead they produced an entirely new liturgy, one which very clearly broke with several distinctive aspects of Christian tradition.

much less are you able to respect those developments despite the reformed liturgy being 'in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers' (Pope John Paul II).

A pope can say anything he likes, that doesn't make it true.

But, just like your "extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion" the Novus Ordo is, thankfully, not my problem anymore. You can have all the Liturgical dancers and "Gather us in" you like, I'll stick with The Church, and not be responding to you again.

[Maria]

Your criteria that "what is done in today's Church must be in line with the philosophy of the Early Church" is sketchy, at best.

An anonymous strange Roman Catholic online isn't happy with my opinion of his church?! Forgive me for not loosing sleep.

You'll be pleased to know that the Novus Ordo fits every criteria of the Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians (10:16-17), the Didache (chs. 9-10), not to mention the commonly cited quotation from St. Justin Martyr.  These fragments that we are fortunate to have from the earliest of Christians are the only philosophy of the early Church and its liturgical life.

Your inability to grasp the distinction between organic and inorganic growth in the life of a church astounds me.

What you say is still inconsistent and hypocritical.  On the one hand you are willing to allow for the historical development of the Divine Liturgy, stating that "practices change and we need to respect that," but then, on the other hand, you are unwilling and unable to grant any development in the Roman rite,

It's not, and watch who you call hypocritical. I don't mind if the Roman Mass changes. slowly and in response to the changing world. I do mind if my church writes a brand new Mass and then says "it's just like the really old masses!" which is bull. The oldest Liturgies we have are nothing like the Novus Ordo (check out the Liturgy of St. James) I will repeat, and use small words: If the Romans had changed a few prayers, had translated to the vernacular, had changed their liturgy in the same manner that all liturgies have changed since Christendom began and not concocted a whole new thing it would not have been a big deal. Instead they produced an entirely new liturgy, one which very clearly broke with several distinctive aspects of Christian tradition.

much less are you able to respect those developments despite the reformed liturgy being 'in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers' (Pope John Paul II).

A pope can say anything he likes, that doesn't make it true.

But, just like your "extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion" the Novus Ordo is, thankfully, not my problem anymore. You can have all the Liturgical dancers and "Gather us in" you like, I'll stick with The Church, and not be responding to you again.

I agree, Joseph.

Honestly, I feel like Catholics are being cheated ... cheated with a cheap imitation of a Lutheran Liturgy ... cheated because they think that they have the truth but they have been given a lie.

Lord have mercy.

I am so glad that I left the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, I am praying for Catholics, as I know from personal experience how hard it is to repent and to accept the Orthodox Church as the True Catholic Church. During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

[JamesRottnek]

I am so glad that I left the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, I am praying for Catholics, as I know from personal experience how hard it is to repent and to accept the Orthodox Church as the True Catholic Church. During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

If you don't want me calling you "schismatic" at every turn, please stop posting things like this.

[PeterTheAleut]

I am so glad that I left the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, I am praying for Catholics, as I know from personal experience how hard it is to repent and to accept the Orthodox Church as the True Catholic Church. During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

If you don't want me calling you "schismatic" at every turn, please stop posting things like this.

If you do carry through on this threat, even against the express wishes of our site owner, you will land yourself on post moderation so fast your head will spin. So don't even think about it.

[JamesRottnek]

I am so glad that I left the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, I am praying for Catholics, as I know from personal experience how hard it is to repent and to accept the Orthodox Church as the True Catholic Church. During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

If you don't want me calling you "schismatic" at every turn, please stop posting things like this.

If you do carry through on this threat, even against the express wishes of our site owner, you will land yourself on post moderation so fast your head will spin. So don't even think about it.

So she is to continue portraying herself as a member of the Orthodox Church when, in fact, she is not?

[PeterTheAleut]

I am so glad that I left the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, I am praying for Catholics, as I know from personal experience how hard it is to repent and to accept the Orthodox Church as the True Catholic Church. During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

If you don't want me calling you "schismatic" at every turn, please stop posting things like this.

If you do carry through on this threat, even against the express wishes of our site owner, you will land yourself on post moderation so fast your head will spin. So don't even think about it.

So she is to continue portraying herself as a member of the Orthodox Church when, in fact, she is not?

1. In this post, our site owner gave you very clear instructions that you are not to engage in this behavior of calling Old Calendarists schismatics when their ecclesiastical status is irrelevant to the topic of discussion. Are you going to continue defying the wishes of our site owner when you know what the penalty for such defiance will be?

2. You are not to question moderatorial actions like this in public. You are required to use the private message system only for such questions. Question my directive in public like this again, and you will be placed on post moderation.

[JamesRottnek]

I am so glad that I left the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, I am praying for Catholics, as I know from personal experience how hard it is to repent and to accept the Orthodox Church as the True Catholic Church. During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

If you don't want me calling you "schismatic" at every turn, please stop posting things like this.

If you do carry through on this threat, even against the express wishes of our site owner, you will land yourself on post moderation so fast your head will spin. So don't even think about it.

So she is to continue portraying herself as a member of the Orthodox Church when, in fact, she is not?

1. In this post, our site owner gave you very clear instructions that you are not to engage in this behavior of calling Old Calendarists schismatics when their ecclesiastical status is irrelevant to the topic of discussion. Are you going to continue defying the wishes of our site owner when you know what the penalty for such defiance will be?

2. You are not to question moderatorial actions like this in public. You are required to use the private message system only for such questions. Question my directive in public like this again, and you will be placed on post moderation.

I didn't call her a schismatic, nor am I questioning moderatorial actions.  I am merely saying that her behavior is deceptive.

Yes, you are questioning a moderatorial directive, and you are trying to justify your defiance of an administrator's directive. For both of these offenses, you are back on post moderation for the maximum duration of 99 days. If you wish to appeal this decision, please send me a private message.

- PeterTheAleut

[Gorazd]

How did one receive Christ before the Creed was written?

Ummm one used another wording of the creed? Surely, the creed we have now was finished on the Council of Constantinople, but there were many local creeds before that, such as the so-called Apostles' Creed still used in Rome today.

[Gorazd]

Our Holy Apostles gave their lives for the Truth, Jesus Christ. Should we not be ready to give at least a small thing, like the right to post in this forum, for the truth? Christ is risen, the Orthodox Church is the Body of Christ, and anyone who calls himself a member of it, without being in communion with it, practices deception, both to the people he or she speaks to, and first of all to himself/herself. I am the first of sinners, surely much worse than all of you, but my conscience forces me to proclaim the truth. Let us call a spade a spade, a schismatic a schismatic, and ourselves and the whole world to repentance.

Maria and Fr. Anastasios, please, for the salvation of your own souls, return to the Orthodox Church, the Body of Christ, even if there are many more sinners in it than in Old Calendarist groups.

"Let us call a spade a spade..." - OK, you are trolling.

This forum allows EOs (both mainstream and hipster) and OOs (I'm not aware of any hipster OO groups) to participate on equal rights.

Each communion of Churches from these groups considers itself a one holy catholic and apostolic Church. You are not obliged to accept that but you also should not attack members of other groups without a reason. There are better places to discuss these issues than the thread about the NOM (did Fr. Anastasios's group accept NOM)?

"Our Holy Apostles gave their lives for the Truth, Jesus Christ. Should we not be ready to give at least a small thing" - yes, I will allow you to receive the crown of martyrdom if you want such. It would be much more severe than sufferings of the early Saints like crossed upside-down or boiled in hot oil - the times are harsher. You are receiving a 40-day-long warning for discussing moderator's decision in public.

MK

[arimethea]

Please keep to the topic of the Novus Ordo Mass. Anyone else who attempts to derail this topic will receive an escalation on their current status.

-Arimethea
Liturgy Section Moderator

[Big Chris]

Your inability to grasp the distinction between organic and inorganic growth in the life of a church astounds me.

I don't mind if the Roman Mass changes. slowly and in response to the changing world. I do mind if my church writes a brand new Mass and then says "it's just like the really old masses!" which is bull.

So, you would rather that Catholics continue attending Masses in Latin where virtually nothing is understood?  The only reason I attend the OCA parish that I currently do is because it's in English.  I tried attending a Greek Orthodox parish, and even knowing Greek I couldn't bear it.  The changes may have seemed abrupt, but every elderly Catholic who I have spoken to much prefers the NO to the traditional Latin - even priests and bishops.  What's more important to you - upholding tradition at the expense of personal salvation or a liturgical experience that aids in that salvation?

A pope can say anything he likes, that doesn't make it true.

Have you read Joseph Ratzinger's "Spirit of the Liturgy"?  Ratzinger was quite critical of the Novus Ordo, but his criticism nowhere concerns the fact that the Novus Ordo is not in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers.  The arrogance of your statement that "A pope can say anything he like..." is apparent.  It is plainly obvious to me that it is more convenient for you at this point to believe some delusion than to admit that anyone, especially a pope, has more knowledge than you concerning matters relating to liturgical development.

Furthermore, statistically speaking, there is really only a minute fraction of dissidents who share yours and other's opinion concerning the illegitimacy of the NO and its rupture with tradition.  Even Roman Catholic professors of liturgical history (see Enrico Mazza's excellent books) have maintained fidelity.

[biro]

Question: since the RCC instituted the new translation of the Mass, is there any general sentiment from the Orthodox as to whether the new one is 'better'? I am not talking about the subject of Communion, which is obviously a different matter. Just wonder if anybody's heard of any Orthodox bishop or writer of note who has commented on the new version of the RCC Mass. Thanks.

[mike]

So, you would rather that Catholics continue attending Masses in Latin where virtually nothing is understood?  The only reason I attend the OCA parish that I currently do is because it's in English.  I tried attending a Greek Orthodox parish, and even knowing Greek I couldn't bear it.  The changes may have seemed abrupt, but every elderly Catholic who I have spoken to much prefers the NO to the traditional Latin - even priests and bishops.  What's more important to you - upholding tradition at the expense of personal salvation or a liturgical experience that aids in that salvation?

Why can't you have traditional Mass in English?

[NicholasMyra]

Ratzinger was quite critical of the Novus Ordo, but his criticism nowhere concerns the fact that the Novus Ordo is not in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers. 

But it's like a frankenstein version, dredged up from the forgotten depths of centuries past and imperfectly re-created by the top authority and foisted upon the laity.

[Big Chris]

Ratzinger was quite critical of the Novus Ordo, but his criticism nowhere concerns the fact that the Novus Ordo is not in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers. 

But it's like a frankenstein version, dredged up from the forgotten depths of centuries past and imperfectly re-created by the top authority and foisted upon the laity.

While I think even Paul VI would agree that the initial reform of the liturgy was poorly executed, I don't think there is any objective standard for defining the NO as "a frankenstein version" "imperfectly re-created."  If you consider the DL to be the hallmark of Christian worship, that's one thing, and to consider it the only proper worship as Orthodox Christians makes perfect sense, but as I've demonstrated above, the NO keeps faith with the earliest of Christian documents concerning the celebration of the Eucharist.  In my opinion, based on the sources I've cited, the NO is closer to the liturgy of the apostles than the DL is.  I think Wybrew's history of the development of the Orthodox liturgy demonstrates this adequately enough.  Show me where St. Paul prayed the Litany of Peace or any of the current prayers used in the DL outside of the Psalms?  I respect that the DL was an organic development through the centuries, attempting to keep the core philosophy of earliest Christianity in sight.  I just think it's hypocritical when the so-called defenders of the Ancient Faith criticize an attempt to return to Christianity's roots.

[biro]

So, you would rather that Catholics continue attending Masses in Latin where virtually nothing is understood?  The only reason I attend the OCA parish that I currently do is because it's in English.  I tried attending a Greek Orthodox parish, and even knowing Greek I couldn't bear it.  The changes may have seemed abrupt, but every elderly Catholic who I have spoken to much prefers the NO to the traditional Latin - even priests and bishops.  What's more important to you - upholding tradition at the expense of personal salvation or a liturgical experience that aids in that salvation?

Why can't you have traditional Mass in English?

Well, the Novus Ordo was supposed to be a translation of the old, but it didn't turn out that way- the rendition came out in the 1960s and was seen as of pretty bad quality by most traditionalist RCC folks. The old text of the Latin Mass was therefore used for traditional Mass, if you had a dispensation from the bishop- which was pretty tough to get, as I heard. Thus most parishes wound up using the 1960s English text, so if you wanted to hear the 'old' Mass, you had to find a church that held it in Latin.

The New Translation of the Roman Rite RCC Mass came out last year, and it is available in the local vernacular- so you can have it in English or anything else the parish needs.

 

[mike]

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

[thetraditionalfrog]

Having been brought up Catholic (Conservative Novus Ordo), and then having been involved in the Catholic Traditional Movement, I can say I much preferred the Traditional Latin or "Tridentine" Mass. Without going in to great detail, let's just say there are multiple and grave issues inherent in the Novus Ordo, and in the Catholic Church in general since Vatican II. The Pslamist says "Worship the Lord in the beauty of Holiness...", I just never got a "beauty of holiness" from a Novus Ordo. The best Novus Ordo's I've seen are Pope Benedict's, EWTN's, and The NOM as offered at Holy Rosary in Indianapolis (interestingly the priest also offers the Traditional Mass daily as well). All in all, thanks, but no thanks!

While I understand the traditionalists point about maintaining latin (unity and the Decrees of Trent), I also feel that perhaps a reverent vernacular translation would have been in order perhaps leaving some latin hymnody and a few prayers (Pater Noster, Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei) as many ethnic Orthodox churches do now (75% English 25% Greek, Slavonic, etc). This is more in keeping with the older tradition of the church anyway. As for translation most Catholics had a Missal with latin on one page and the english on the opposite. It was BCP or "King's/Elizabethan" English. It was/is about Faith, not the Latin.

Now that I'm Orthodox, I rarely think or delve much in to the issues of Catholicism these days. I do pray for a return of tradition and sanity in the RCC. I have many friends and relatives who Catholics, and I pray for them. I am also grateful to the good priests and sisters who taught me about Our Lord, Our Lady, and the faith. I harbor no grudge or ill will toward Catholics. As I said before, I feel that rather than leaving Catholicism by becoming Orthodox, I've rather embraced it in its most full and traditional undiluted form!

[biro]

Well said.

[NicholasMyra]

AI've demonstrated above, the NO keeps faith with the earliest of Christian documents concerning the celebration of the Eucharist.

Not really. The Didache, for example, is a Jewish proselyte manual modified by Christians. We don't know if it was ever even used. The reason why the Eucharistic prayer is different from what we normally see is because they took a jewish prayer and modded it a little to keep in line with the rest of the document.

As for Justin Martyr's account, it describes the portions relevant for Marcus Aurelius to understand Christians weren't cannibals.

In my opinion, based on the sources I've cited, the NO is closer to the liturgy of the apostles than the DL is.

That's like saying a square block of granite is closer to Michelangelo's original King David than today's statue, because Michelangelo started with a square block of marble.

We know next to nothing about the liturgy of the apostles.

Show me where St. Paul prayed the Litany of Peace or any of the current prayers used in the DL outside of the Psalms?

Show me where in the Synoptics Jesus says he's the Bread of Life.

I respect that the DL was an organic development through the centuries, attempting to keep the core philosophy of earliest Christianity in sight.  I just think it's hypocritical when the so-called defenders of the Ancient Faith criticize an attempt to return to Christianity's roots.

The criticism is against top-down reconstructionism, whether done by Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Messianic Jews, Tibetan Buddhists, etc.

[Maria]

So, you would rather that Catholics continue attending Masses in Latin where virtually nothing is understood?  The only reason I attend the OCA parish that I currently do is because it's in English.  I tried attending a Greek Orthodox parish, and even knowing Greek I couldn't bear it.  The changes may have seemed abrupt, but every elderly Catholic who I have spoken to much prefers the NO to the traditional Latin - even priests and bishops.  What's more important to you - upholding tradition at the expense of personal salvation or a liturgical experience that aids in that salvation?

Why can't you have traditional Mass in English?

As I recall, when I was a child back in 1962 or 1963, when I was in the Archdiocese of San Francisco or the Diocese of Oakland (cannot remember which one as the SF Diocese was split around that time), the Catholic bishop allowed us to have the traditional Mass in English. Then we suddenly switched to the NOM, which left a lot of folks upset after the novelty faded which only encouraged more innovations. The modus operandi was to find any type of mass that would keep youth in the parishes: Guitar NOM masses, Clown NOM masses, Beer NOM masses, and even Bikini NOM masses at the beach.

If we could have kept the traditional Mass in English (using the 1962 Missal), I think there would have been less problems. However, the blasted ICEL wrecked everything by appropriating the Lutheran Liturgy and then revised it to please the feminists by using gender neutral language. When certain bishops insisted that readers substitute "her" for "him," and "she" for "he," Apostles were often referred to as women. Sheesh.

The proper use of pronouns are important. Therefore, when the political correctness squads object to the use of masculine nouns and pronouns like king, lord, master, he, him, his, then the liturgy and scripture readings become ambiguous and ludicrous with the result that any sacredness in the Liturgy is destroyed.

When my husband and I encountered the song "Her name is Jesus" which was being sung at our local Catholic parish back in 1993, then we finally bolted and joined the Melkite Church. We would have gone to the Maronites (my ancestry) but they had long ago been latinized and even offered the NOM at their parish.

[Deacon Lance]

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

Yes.
Comparison of Tridentine and NO side by side.
http://www.getholy.com/files/Side_by_Side2.pdf

Translation is a seperate issue and many(most?) of ICEL's old translations stinks.

[Maria]

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

Yes.
Comparison of Tridentine and NO side by side.
http://www.getholy.com/files/Side_by_Side2.pdf

Translation is a seperate issue and many(most?) of ICEL's old translations stinks.

I agree with you that ICELs NO translations stink. Was this the nasty odor to which Pope Paul VI referenced as "the smoke/odor of Satan"?

There are apparently two different Latin Masses:

1. The Tridentine Latin Mass (1962)

2. The NO Latin Mass from which the English NO Mass has been rendered by the ICEL.

When I was a Roman Catholic, the Catholic bishop allowed a couple of parishes to have the NO Latin Mass once on Sundays, but he absolutely forbade the Tridentine Latin Mass to be celebrated. Later, he allowed one Tridentine Latin Mass of 1962 to be celebrated in only one parish, but carefully rotated the selected parish from one end of his diocese to the other so that devout faithful would have to spend one hour traveling to find the Mass each Sunday. Then to discourage the faithful from attending these Traditional Latin Masses, he would ask that the priest distribute communion from the NO Mass reserved hosts in the common ciborium found in the tabernacle. IOW, people who attended those Latin Masses were not getting communion from the Latin Mass but from a NO mass.

Personally, since 1973, I never attended the Latin Masses whether Traditional 1962 version or the NO version. I did attend several Tridentine Latin Masses at 6:00 AM back during the early 1970s, but the priest said a very rapid Mass which took him only 20 minutes, and he often forgot that I was even present and thus forgot to give me communion.

[Gorazd]

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

No. "Latin Mass" only defines the language, and many kinds of masses can be celebrated in Latin. There is Latin NOM, there is the Tridentine ("old") mass, there are Sarum, Mozarabic, etc.

[Maria]

At St. Augustine Western Rite Parish in Colorado, Archimandrite John celebrates the Gregorian Latin Mass which is almost identical to the 1962 Tridentine Latin Mass.

There were some changes made, for example, the Nicene Creed has the "filioque" omitted.

Are there any current members of St. Augustine who can supply more information on this Gregorian Latin Mass?

To my knowledge, there are no WRO parishes which celebrate a variation of the NO Mass as it is a modern Protestantized liturgy.

Nevertheless, some WRO parishes appear to have a liturgy which is a modified Anglican form. Note: Some Anglicans do not consider themselves to be Protestants. When I attended the Mass at St. Michael's Antiochian Church in Whittier, that Mass was modified from the Anglicans. Again, if there are any members from St. Michaels perhaps they can enlighten us.

[mike]

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

Yes.

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

No.

Hmm...

[Deacon Lance]

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

Yes.

Are the NOM and Latin Mass really the same thing?

No.

Hmm...

I guess it depends what you mean by Latin Mass.  The NO can be Latin as the Tridentine must be.  The Mozarabic and Ambrosian Masses can also be in Latin.  When most people in the US refer to the Latin Mass they mean the Trindentine.  Are the NO and Trindentine the same thing?  Essentailly yes, I say.  Look at the link and judge for yourself. 

[Sleeper]

At St. Augustine Western Rite Parish in Colorado, Archimandrite John celebrates the Gregorian Latin Mass which is almost identical to the 1962 Tridentine Latin Mass.

There were some changes made, for example, the Nicene Creed has the "filioque" omitted.

Are there any current members of St. Augustine who can supply more information on this Gregorian Latin Mass?

To my knowledge, there are no WRO parishes which celebrate a variation of the NO Mass as it is a modern Protestantized liturgy.

Nevertheless, some WRO parishes appear to have a liturgy which is a modified Anglican form. Note: Some Anglicans do not consider themselves to be Protestants. When I attended the Mass at St. Michael's Antiochian Church in Whittier, that Mass was modified from the Anglicans. Again, if there are any members from St. Michaels perhaps they can enlighten us.

I'm not from St. Michael's, however my parish serves the Mass of St. Tikhon to which you are referring. It is definitely from the stream of Anglican's that do not identify as "Protestant." In fact, it is a direct descendant of the Scottish Non-Juror liturgy, a group that self-identified as the "catholick remnant of the British Isles" who held extensive discussions with the Orthodox Church about joining. The Mass of St. Tikhon is essentially the Tridentine Mass with certain elements from the Scottish Non-Juror tradition interpolated. It, along with the Mass of St. Gregory (essentially the Tridentine Mass in English) removes the filioque clause, contains a strengthened epiclesis, and and adds some pre-Communion prayers from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

[Maria]

At St. Augustine Western Rite Parish in Colorado, Archimandrite John celebrates the Gregorian Latin Mass which is almost identical to the 1962 Tridentine Latin Mass.

There were some changes made, for example, the Nicene Creed has the "filioque" omitted.

Are there any current members of St. Augustine who can supply more information on this Gregorian Latin Mass?

To my knowledge, there are no WRO parishes which celebrate a variation of the NO Mass as it is a modern Protestantized liturgy.

Nevertheless, some WRO parishes appear to have a liturgy which is a modified Anglican form. Note: Some Anglicans do not consider themselves to be Protestants. When I attended the Mass at St. Michael's Antiochian Church in Whittier, that Mass was modified from the Anglicans. Again, if there are any members from St. Michaels perhaps they can enlighten us.

I'm not from St. Michael's, however my parish serves the Mass of St. Tikhon to which you are referring. It is definitely from the stream of Anglican's that do not identify as "Protestant." In fact, it is a direct descendant of the Scottish Non-Juror liturgy, a group that self-identified as the "catholick remnant of the British Isles" who held extensive discussions with the Orthodox Church about joining. The Mass of St. Tikhon is essentially the Tridentine Mass with certain elements from the Scottish Non-Juror tradition interpolated. It, along with the Mass of St. Gregory (essentially the Tridentine Mass in English) removes the filioque clause, contains a strengthened epiclesis, and and adds some pre-Communion prayers from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

Thanks for this information.

[William]

I'm not from St. Michael's, however my parish serves the Mass of St. Tikhon to which you are referring. It is definitely from the stream of Anglican's that do not identify as "Protestant." In fact, it is a direct descendant of the Scottish Non-Juror liturgy, a group that self-identified as the "catholick remnant of the British Isles" who held extensive discussions with the Orthodox Church about joining. The Mass of St. Tikhon is essentially the Tridentine Mass with certain elements from the Scottish Non-Juror tradition interpolated. It, along with the Mass of St. Gregory (essentially the Tridentine Mass in English) removes the filioque clause, contains a strengthened epiclesis, and and adds some pre-Communion prayers from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

Can you provide some more info on these Scotsmen who considered being Orthodox? Thanks.

[Sleeper]

I'm not from St. Michael's, however my parish serves the Mass of St. Tikhon to which you are referring. It is definitely from the stream of Anglican's that do not identify as "Protestant." In fact, it is a direct descendant of the Scottish Non-Juror liturgy, a group that self-identified as the "catholick remnant of the British Isles" who held extensive discussions with the Orthodox Church about joining. The Mass of St. Tikhon is essentially the Tridentine Mass with certain elements from the Scottish Non-Juror tradition interpolated. It, along with the Mass of St. Gregory (essentially the Tridentine Mass in English) removes the filioque clause, contains a strengthened epiclesis, and and adds some pre-Communion prayers from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

Can you provide some more info on these Scotsmen who considered being Orthodox? Thanks.

Here are some excerpts of their correspondence: http://pages.uoregon.edu/sshoemak/325/texts/nonjurors.htm

[neon_knights]

At St. Augustine Western Rite Parish in Colorado, Archimandrite John celebrates the Gregorian Latin Mass which is almost identical to the 1962 Tridentine Latin Mass.

There were some changes made, for example, the Nicene Creed has the "filioque" omitted.

Are there any current members of St. Augustine who can supply more information on this Gregorian Latin Mass?

To my knowledge, there are no WRO parishes which celebrate a variation of the NO Mass as it is a modern Protestantized liturgy.

Nevertheless, some WRO parishes appear to have a liturgy which is a modified Anglican form. Note: Some Anglicans do not consider themselves to be Protestants. When I attended the Mass at St. Michael's Antiochian Church in Whittier, that Mass was modified from the Anglicans. Again, if there are any members from St. Michaels perhaps they can enlighten us.

Achronos goes to St. Augustine I think.

[Apotheoun]

I found the Ukrainian Catholic document below, which compares Eastern and Western liturgies, interesting:

[Gorazd]

Apotheoun,

I am not sure about Greek Catholics, but as Orthodox Christians, we emphasize Christ's divinity and humanity equally, we also emphasize the oneness of God and his three persons equally etc. and I think that is what all Christians should do.

[William]

I'm not from St. Michael's, however my parish serves the Mass of St. Tikhon to which you are referring. It is definitely from the stream of Anglican's that do not identify as "Protestant." In fact, it is a direct descendant of the Scottish Non-Juror liturgy, a group that self-identified as the "catholick remnant of the British Isles" who held extensive discussions with the Orthodox Church about joining. The Mass of St. Tikhon is essentially the Tridentine Mass with certain elements from the Scottish Non-Juror tradition interpolated. It, along with the Mass of St. Gregory (essentially the Tridentine Mass in English) removes the filioque clause, contains a strengthened epiclesis, and and adds some pre-Communion prayers from the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

Can you provide some more info on these Scotsmen who considered being Orthodox? Thanks.

Here are some excerpts of their correspondence: http://pages.uoregon.edu/sshoemak/325/texts/nonjurors.htm

Interesting. A shame they were so protestantized as to deny the Real Presence, though.

[Shiny]

Are there any current members of St. Augustine who can supply more information on this Gregorian Latin Mass?

As far as the changes/differences?

[Peter J]

So, you would rather that Catholics continue attending Masses in Latin where virtually nothing is understood?  The only reason I attend the OCA parish that I currently do is because it's in English.  I tried attending a Greek Orthodox parish, and even knowing Greek I couldn't bear it.  The changes may have seemed abrupt, but every elderly Catholic who I have spoken to much prefers the NO to the traditional Latin - even priests and bishops.  What's more important to you - upholding tradition at the expense of personal salvation or a liturgical experience that aids in that salvation?

Why can't you have traditional Mass in English?

That did exist briefly. I can't tell you too much about it, it was before my time.

[Peter J]

The novus ordo is a protestantized liturgy.

If you can find a 1904 Lutheran Hymnal, please do so. The only copy I found and studied back in 1995 was tossed into the fireplace by my then Catholic priest-confessor who also stated that he would never celebrate the Novus Ordo again. 

Interesting. So, I take it he was okay with the Novus Ordo before that?

[Rdunbar123]

. The Western hymnography is fairly poor than Eastern.

Hope I got the quote right. This is a matter of taste. Compare chanting to the masses in Latin by the great western composers IMO, no comparison, but then again I can't see what people saw in disco music.

[Peter J]

but then again I can't see what people saw in disco music.

Great Scott! Have you gone mad? 

[SubdeaconDavid]

It is a weak argument to find one example of a possible Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion and hold him up as an excuse and validation for a practice now found in practically every Roman church in North America, particularly when his hagiography describes him as a member of the minor clergy and clearly says nobody else was available to take Holy Communion to prisoners.
.

I don't think St Tarcisius is "one example" at all but a signal to a practice that occurred much more widespread in the early church.  And by minor clergy I'm sure you meant acolyte which still isn't a priest or deacon.

...and is not a layperson either. At any rate I agree with Asteriktos. We're not in the same situation as the Early Church anymore, not facing the persecutions they were or the other difficulties, and we don't really have proof that this was widespread.

n the Early Church the catechumenate was long and rigorous and the penalties for sin severe, and the Eucharist was not taken lightly, even if for a time laymen took the Eucharist home.  It is very different from the Novus Ordo where there are no obligatory communion preparation prayers, the hour Fast means you can just about eat a sandwich on the way to mass, and the use of women in the altar and distributing communion is an unheard of innovation. Add to the mix Roman Catholic priests who don't own a cassock, or know how to use incense, or amend the prayers in the order of mass to suit the congregation and you end up with Protestantism.

[WeldeMikael]

I remember some young people coming in my RC Church, chanting with guitars for the mass... I felt like.... Am I in a Catholic church or a Protestant one   

[Rdunbar123]

The Creed cannot be replaced by a song.  However, it is only called for on Sundays and Feastdays, not weekday Masses.

I've been to Catholic churches with no creed on sunday.

It may be liturgical abuse.

As an ex RC I promise you that no creed is an abuse. It is not optional.

Quoting tags editted - MK.

[choy]

The Tridentine Mass feels much holier to me. I never understood why they needed to do this "mess destruction". Couldn't they just celebrate the 1962 mass in the local languages?

I think this is one of those things where the RC Church legislated themselves into a hole they can't get out of.  I think they mandated that the Tridentine Mass be always in Latin.

[kevlev]

I have no first-hand experience of the NO mass. What I do know of it has been gathered through youtube and literature, and all of these encounters have left me cold and unaffected. Seems like it doesn't quite know what it wants to be: too liturgical for most protestants and too irreverent for traditionalists---the El Camino of liturgies. The Tridentine, on the other hand, looks truly awe-inspiring and absolutely gorgeous. I know which one I would go for if I professed Roman Catholicism. I really mean no offense to RCs, forgive me.

[primuspilus]

the El Camino of liturgies

This made me LOL for real.

PP

[Fotios1303]

I think this is a deep destruction of liturgy.

I don't know why they done this destruction.

[primuspilus]

I think this is a deep destruction of liturgy.

I don't know why they done this destruction.

Because their "innovations" somehow constitute the continuation of the early church I'd imagine.

PP

[TinaG]

UUUUCHHHH!  I've had plenty of occasions to attend Novus Ordo masses in predominantly RC South Texas (weddings, First Communions, etc..) and I can't recall one that I didn't cringe at, especially with the use of that horrible, insipid Gather hymnal.  And don't get me started on the Communion buffet line with Eucharistic Ministers.  There are so many things I love and respect about Roman Catholicism and wish East and West could overcome their schism, but not if it meant watering down our worship,  practices or beliefs as I see in the Novus Ordo and modern Catholicism.

[rodrigo_mendoza]

Technically, I'm not yet Orthodox.  God willing, I will be received into the Church on Holy Saturday 2013.

I do have a bit of experience with the Novus Ordo Mass though.  In the 24 months before becoming an Orthodox Catecheumen [March 2012], I attended daily Mass MON-FRI [more than 500 masses] at a small [35-seat] chapel in the residential house of a religious order.  We met at 0730 to read the office of Matins [Orthros] in community and began Mass at 0800.

Each day there were approx ten priests, ten religious brothers and a regular group of 10-12 lay faithful [including myself].  The Mass itself is a brief [but by-the-book and reverently offered] Novus Ordo format.  Prayers are read, rather than sung.  There is a sermon every day and no priest offers Mass on consecutive days.  The Eucharist is always distributed by an ordained priest.  Priests and religious brothers in attendance often receive the consecrated Host in the hand.  Lay faithful receive on the tongue.  All drink from the Chalice.  

The Novus Ordo Mass is what it is.  There are a number of options which - if not kept in check by the priest - can turn it into a Ringling Brothers event.  That's never happened "here" in the two years I attended regularly.  The rector runs a tight ship and the priests take their part seriously  For the glory of God.

For the record, the Roman Catholic Church delivered me directly to the doorstep of Orthodoxy.

With gratitude.

Roddy


  

[William]

I have no first-hand experience of the NO mass. What I do know of it has been gathered through youtube and literature, and all of these encounters have left me cold and unaffected. Seems like it doesn't quite know what it wants to be: too liturgical for most protestants and too irreverent for traditionalists---the El Camino of liturgies. The Tridentine, on the other hand, looks truly awe-inspiring and absolutely gorgeous. I know which one I would go for if I professed Roman Catholicism. I really mean no offense to RCs, forgive me.

Pretty much this. None of the "liturgy is stupid" crowd is particularly satisfied with a halfway liturgy. When we were discussing this in a class of mine everybody still preferred the rock concerts they give at the megachurch in town and complained about the NO being too formal(!).

[dzheremi]

99% of the liturgies I attended during my time in the RCC were Novus Ordo liturgies. I don't like them. Out of respect for the RCs here, I won't go into too much detail about how awful they are (as that can easily be answered by appeal to either the Eastern Catholic churches or the fact that "a properly celebrated N.O. mass can be just a reverent as anything else"; as though in the hundreds of masses I attended in several different places, said by many different priests, not one managed to ever properly celebrate it -- right). I'll just say that I much prefer this to anything like this. I am lucky in that the RC church I was received into was not quite as schlocky as you might imagine a Mass with plinky piano ruining everything to be, but that is par for the course in some other RC churches I had been to. Irreverent is the word, I suppose. I feel bad for RCs, when in their own history they have had beautiful, reverent, and traditional forms of worship like the Mozarabic, the Old Roman, the Gregorian of course, and even more, but today things like this absolute garbage (or if you prefer the "Eastern" spirituality of one of the non-Latin compatriots, this) is more often what people are offered. Lord have mercy!

[akimori makoto]

this.

In what universe is this considered good music by anyone?

I am sick of Christianity being taken over by incurable and insufferable dorks trying at coolness.

[dzheremi]

Hahaha. I don't know...no universe that I want to live in, that's for sure. Did you get to the modern RC mass a bit further down in the post? It is also quite...special.

I'm sorry, any RCs who might read this. You'll have to excuse me for having a bit of fun with how terrible these things are. In reality it's not very funny; it is entirely unnecessary and gross, in fact, but hey...if you can't laugh about it, you'll just get depressed or angry or doing something crazy and impulsive like get fed up and inquire into Orthodoxy, right?

[akimori makoto]

Hahaha. I don't know...no universe that I want to live in, that's for sure. Did you get to the modern RC mass a bit further down in the post? It is also quite...special.

I'm sorry, any RCs who might read this. You'll have to excuse me for having a bit of fun with how terrible these things are. In reality it's not very funny; it is entirely unnecessary and gross, in fact, but hey...if you can't laugh about it, you'll just get depressed or angry or doing something crazy and impulsive like get fed up and inquire into Orthodoxy, right?

Yes, I watched all of them. The Coptic liturgy was beautiful, of course.

[rodrigo_mendoza]

I'm sorry, any RCs who might read this. You'll have to excuse me for having a bit of fun with how terrible these things are. In reality it's not very funny; it is entirely unnecessary and gross, in fact, but hey...if you can't laugh about it, you'll just get depressed or angry or doing something crazy and impulsive like get fed up and inquire into Orthodoxy, right?

Right.

[kevlev]

this.

In what universe is this considered good music by anyone?

I am sick of Christianity being taken over by incurable and insufferable dorks trying at coolness.

Doxology set to "Oh My Darling Clementine"?? Wow. How sad  

[dzheremi]

If you go to the, uh...composer's website, you will see the following bio:

Stephen DeCesare has proven to be one of those prolific composers whose compositions have been widely acclaimed by audiences and critics alike for their dramatic strength, passionate melodies and rich orchestrations. His works are receiving numerous performances and commissions all over the world.

On May 1st 2011, Stephen was honored by conducting his Mass of Divine Mercy in Stockbridge MA on a worldwide EWTN telecast for the beatification of John Paul II.

In addition to his work for the theater, Stephen is active in sacred and orchestral music. To date, Stephen has over 800 compositions in his compositional catalog.

Wow! Impressive, huh? He was honored to conduct his Mass on ETWN TV network. I'm really bummed that I missed it, actually. No word on whether or not he's available for children's parties, either.

[kevlev]

If you go to the, uh...composer's website, you will see the following bio:

Probably Stephen DeCesare's mother[/b]]<<<Lulz
Stephen DeCesare has proven to be one of those prolific composers whose compositions have been widely acclaimed by audiences and critics alike for their dramatic strength, passionate melodies and rich orchestrations. His works are receiving numerous performances and commissions all over the world.

On May 1st 2011, Stephen was honored by conducting his Mass of Divine Mercy in Stockbridge MA on a worldwide EWTN telecast for the beatification of John Paul II.

In addition to his work for the theater, Stephen is active in sacred and orchestral music. To date, Stephen has over 800 compositions in his compositional catalog.

Wow! Impressive, huh? He was honored to conduct his Mass on ETWN TV network. I'm really bummed that I missed it, actually. No word on whether or not he's available for children's parties, either.

LOL

Seriously though, I think we've all been waiting long enough for our churches to catch up to the profundity that was "Blues Clues". Brothers and sisters, DeCesare has arrived.

[NicholasMyra]

I thought the RC had finally phased out "world without end" in favor of "for ever and ever" or something else not ridiculous.

[choy]

I don't think the Novus Ordo in itself is bad.  It just came at a bad time when priest themselves are heavily influenced by Protestant faiths.  They see that many of the people find Protestantism, especially those of the Evangelical variety, to be very appealing.  In an effort to get people interested in Mass, they start doing these things.  A lot of it is because people want them.  It is the sorry state of our spirituality as a people when we have secularized so quickly that priests have to resort to drastic measures just to keep us interested.

[kevlev]

Lex orandi, lex credendi.

[WeldeMikael]

I don't think the Novus Ordo in itself is bad.  It just came at a bad time when priest themselves are heavily influenced by Protestant faiths.  They see that many of the people find Protestantism, especially those of the Evangelical variety, to be very appealing.  In an effort to get people interested in Mass, they start doing these things.  A lot of it is because people want them.  It is the sorry state of our spirituality as a people when we have secularized so quickly that priests have to resort to drastic measures just to keep us interested.

I agree.

[Carefree T]

At St. Augustine Western Rite Parish in Colorado, Archimandrite John celebrates the Gregorian Latin Mass which is almost identical to the 1962 Tridentine Latin Mass.

There were some changes made, for example, the Nicene Creed has the "filioque" omitted.

Are there any current members of St. Augustine who can supply more information on this Gregorian Latin Mass?

To my knowledge, there are no WRO parishes which celebrate a variation of the NO Mass as it is a modern Protestantized liturgy.

Nevertheless, some WRO parishes appear to have a liturgy which is a modified Anglican form. Note: Some Anglicans do not consider themselves to be Protestants. When I attended the Mass at St. Michael's Antiochian Church in Whittier, that Mass was modified from the Anglicans. Again, if there are any members from St. Michaels perhaps they can enlighten us.

I'm not a "member," but I've visited St. Augustine and that parish has a good relationship with my home parish of Holy Transfiguration of Christ Cathedral in Denver (our icon writer has done some beautiful icons in their church, and parishioners from each of our churches visit each other often). But I don't have any more information than you've provided already; they do the Liturgy of Pope St. Gregory "by the book" down to the vestments, chants, acolytes, etc. except that it is in English save for the last Sunday of the month when everything is in Latin.

I pray for my best friend, who is Roman Catholic and he thinks

[#1Sinner]

I don't think the Novus Ordo in itself is bad.  It just came at a bad time when priest themselves are heavily influenced by Protestant faiths.  They see that many of the people find Protestantism, especially those of the Evangelical variety, to be very appealing.  In an effort to get people interested in Mass, they start doing these things.  A lot of it is because people want them.  It is the sorry state of our spirituality as a people when we have secularized so quickly that priests have to resort to drastic measures just to keep us interested.

The Novus Ordo was intentionally stripped of unambiguous and solid Catholic doctrine and language in order to make Protestants feel more comfortable with it. The Tridentine, or better called the Gregorian Mass, has remained unchanged in its essentials since about the 6th century.

Innumerable books and studies have been done on the origin, formulation and promulgation of the Novus Ordo. It is bad in and of itself, not simply because it was promulgated poorly.

A certain traditionalist priest has recently written a book on the Paul VI Rite called "Work of Human Hands, A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI" by Father Anthony Cekada. It is a devastating work on the New Mass.

[Schultz]

I have no first-hand experience of the NO mass. What I do know of it has been gathered through youtube and literature, and all of these encounters have left me cold and unaffected. Seems like it doesn't quite know what it wants to be: too liturgical for most protestants and too irreverent for traditionalists---the El Camino of liturgies. The Tridentine, on the other hand, looks truly awe-inspiring and absolutely gorgeous. I know which one I would go for if I professed Roman Catholicism. I really mean no offense to RCs, forgive me.

High mass, yes.

Low mass, which is what most Catholics of a certain age knew of as "mass," no. 

[choy]

The Novus Ordo was intentionally stripped of unambiguous and solid Catholic doctrine and language in order to make Protestants feel more comfortable with it. The Tridentine, or better called the Gregorian Mass, has remained unchanged in its essentials since about the 6th century.

Innumerable books and studies have been done on the origin, formulation and promulgation of the Novus Ordo. It is bad in and of itself, not simply because it was promulgated poorly.

A certain traditionalist priest has recently written a book on the Paul VI Rite called "Work of Human Hands, A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI" by Father Anthony Cekada. It is a devastating work on the New Mass.

I do not see it this way.  As one who grew up with the Novus Ordo, I like it.  I do know that priests tend to introduce Evangelical elements to it today because of the current success by Evangelicals proselytizing Roman Catholics.  But I still believe it to be good and holy.  What I feel lacks in Roman Catholicism which I am trying to see if I can find it in Orthodoxy (and people here will say I will find it there, but I must undertake this journey myself) is the theological aspects apart from the Liturgy which I am guessing is what led to abuses in the first place.  I personally believe that the Reformation was successful and it has changed the Roman Catholic faith, though not to what Martin Luther has intended and what the Catholic Church will admit.  But so much of the Latin faith today is a byproduct of the Reformation, directly and indirectly.

[WPM]

Its a modernized Mass service. The past year I've been attending Protestant services because of transportation issues.

[Nephi]

I didn't attend a NO Mass until after converting to Orthodoxy, and having never been to a RC service before. I could see the Protestant influences all through it, and it was a huge let-down to be honest. I was expecting a Tridentine Mass in English (ignorant, I know), and instead got what appeared to be an abridged compilation of traditional liturgy with contemporary Evangelical worship services. The priest didn't seem to view the affair as sacred whatsoever, and instead was laughing and making funny gestures at people as he walked down the center aisle near the end of Mass - ceasing to sing (as everyone else was doing) in order to do so.

I could see it being done beautifully if one had a reverent priest, removed the campy hymns that broke up the continuity of the service (it's as if they were like "OH! We forgot to add hymns. Protestants LOVE hymns! We'll just throw them in here, and here - we'll win so many converts now!"), and got rid of the casually dressed Eucharistic Ministers.

Nonetheless, it wasn't bad.

[Christopher McAvoy]

A certain traditionalist priest has recently written a book on the Paul VI Rite called "Work of Human Hands, A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI" by Father Anthony Cekada. It is a devastating work on the New Mass.

I'm with #1sinner, that is one of my favourite books, it was one of elements in a long list of experiences and events that helped me conclude that Orthodoxy is the true faith. The Youtube videos for it are stupendous
see link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeXfbdr1jlM&list=PLDA085477E90AC096

it answers these questions:

• Why do so many churches built for the Mass of Paul VI look so "un-churchy"?
• Why does the priest face the people now for Mass?
• Why did the tabernacle disappear?
• Why are there so few statues and images?

The answer isn't fads or bad taste. It's bad theology — specifically the modernist theology of the Mass as assembly.

Naturally, understanding the Mass primarily as an assembly supper rather that as a sacrifice offered to God will have a profound influence on the externals of the rite.

Chapter Seven of Work of Human Hands examines how assembly theology affected the new legislation governing the externals of the Mass of Paul VI — church architecture, the altar, the tabernacle and the rest.

If the last Catholic church you were in looked like a food court or a Pizza Hut on the inside, you'll find the explanation here.

If only that book were required reading for the latin catholic schools or RCIA classes, there would be some reckoning.

Another book that had an equal influence and reminds of that book is

"The Banished Heart: Origins of Heteropraxis in the Catholic Church
(T&T Clark Studies in Fundamental Liturgy) by Dr. Geoffrey Hull

You can read a bit of Dr. Hulls ideas in this essay here, which is famous in traditional catholic circles.

http://www.theanglocatholic.com/2010/04/the-proto-history-of-the-roman-liturgical-reform/

Dr. Hull's book was amongst the most persuasive books to encourage one to become an Orthodox christian, or at least dedicated old latin mass goer that I ever found. It had solid bit by bit analysis of what led to the novus ordo mass and all the accompanying panolopy of theological teachings/associations promoted with it since the 60s especially but originating in some places by the 30's/40's.  It showed how the laity of the latin church was like a frog put in the warm water, with the temperature gradually increased to a steady boil...

[sdecesare]

[sdecesare]

 

[sdecesare]

If you go to the, uh...composer's website, you will see the following bio:

Stephen DeCesare has proven to be one of those prolific composers whose compositions have been widely acclaimed by audiences and critics alike for their dramatic strength, passionate melodies and rich orchestrations. His works are receiving numerous performances and commissions all over the world.

On May 1st 2011, Stephen was honored by conducting his Mass of Divine Mercy in Stockbridge MA on a worldwide EWTN telecast for the beatification of John Paul II.

In addition to his work for the theater, Stephen is active in sacred and orchestral music. To date, Stephen has over 800 compositions in his compositional catalog.

Wow! Impressive, huh? He was honored to conduct his Mass on ETWN TV network. I'm really bummed that I missed it, actually. No word on whether or not he's available for children's parties, either.

I can be...if asked nicely.

tags editted - MK

[LBK]

If you go to the, uh...composer's website, you will see the following bio:

Stephen DeCesare has proven to be one of those prolific composers whose compositions have been widely acclaimed by audiences and critics alike for their dramatic strength, passionate melodies and rich orchestrations. His works are receiving numerous performances and commissions all over the world.

On May 1st 2011, Stephen was honored by conducting his Mass of Divine Mercy in Stockbridge MA on a worldwide EWTN telecast for the beatification of John Paul II.

In addition to his work for the theater, Stephen is active in sacred and orchestral music. To date, Stephen has over 800 compositions in his compositional catalog.

Wow! Impressive, huh? He was honored to conduct his Mass on ETWN TV network. I'm really bummed that I missed it, actually. No word on whether or not he's available for children's parties, either.

I can be...if asked nicely.

Self-promotion, much?

[Christopher McAvoy]

Wow! Impressive, huh? He was honored to conduct his Mass on ETWN TV network. I'm really bummed that I missed it, actually. No word on whether or not he's available for children's parties, either.

I can be...if asked nicely.

[/quote]


(capture taken from 2:46 mark of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwS9umpEkvs)

I'm certain that if you bring Pinocchio and Pope Francis along you will receive many requests to perform!

[stanley123]

Wow! Impressive, huh? He was honored to conduct his Mass on ETWN TV network. I'm really bummed that I missed it, actually. No word on whether or not he's available for children's parties, either.

I can be...if asked nicely.

(capture taken from 2:46 mark of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwS9umpEkvs)

I'm certain that if you bring Pinocchio and Pope Francis along you will receive many requests to perform!

I understand that a group of Catholics received into the Syriac Orthodox Church will be able to continue with the NO Mass.

[Cyrillic]

In answer to the question posed in the thread title, I think it's sad that the RCC threw away their beautiful liturgical traditions. The Tridentine Mass might have not been as impressive as the Divine Liturgy, but still...

[Arachne]

I've never attended a Mass, either Tridentine or NO, so I have no opinion to offer. I'm in favour of the vernacular in worship, but I've been scarred by the (all of two) happy-clappy Anglican services I've been to. Given how much I love Gregorian chant, I'd probably prefer the older style.

(I used to pass regularly outside the RC cathedral in Athens. It's a jewel of a building, and I hope it has stuck to tradition inside.)

[jmbejdl]

I've never attended a Mass, either Tridentine or NO, so I have no opinion to offer. I'm in favour of the vernacular in worship, but I've been scarred by the (all of two) happy-clappy Anglican services I've been to. Given how much I love Gregorian chant, I'd probably prefer the older style.

I've been to one NO Mass in Romania. There were none of the extreme abuses that some people here report but it felt exactly like an Anglican (not the really low Church, evangelical, happy clappy type, though) or Lutheran service. Not a patch on the Divine Liturgy. Honestly, if I was to wake up tomorrow and find the Schism had been healed, I'd still drive the 45 minutes on Sunday to get to DL rather than walk 10 minutes to the local RC parish.

James

[Alpo]

I've never attended a Mass, either Tridentine or NO, so I have no opinion to offer. I'm in favour of the vernacular in worship, but I've been scarred by the (all of two) happy-clappy Anglican services I've been to. Given how much I love Gregorian chant, I'd probably prefer the older style.

I've been to one NO Mass in Romania. There were none of the extreme abuses that some people here report but it felt exactly like an Anglican (not the really low Church, evangelical, happy clappy type, though) or Lutheran service.

That's also my experience with some Finnish NO Masses I've attended.

[mike]

Could you make your posts slightly more expanded? There is a rule about "low content posts".

[Peter J]

I understand that a group of Catholics received into the Syriac Orthodox Church will be able to continue with the NO Mass.

Interesting ... not just because this is the first mention I've heard of the Syriac Orthodox having a Western Rite, but even more because of the rarity of hearing about a group of Catholics being received into Orthodoxy.

[sheenj]

I understand that a group of Catholics received into the Syriac Orthodox Church will be able to continue with the NO Mass.

Interesting ... not just because this is the first mention I've heard of the Syriac Orthodox having a Western Rite, but even more because of the rarity of hearing about a group of Catholics being received into Orthodoxy.

There used to be another group in India who were Western rite before the IOC-SOC Schism. They were ex-Latin Catholics from Goa who converted under St. Julius Mar Alvares. They ended up continuing under the IOC using a slightly modified form of the Tridentine mass until the 1980's, when they ran out of priests that were proficient in the WR. They then gradually folded into the Malankara Rite.

[Agabus]

I understand that a group of Catholics received into the Syriac Orthodox Church will be able to continue with the NO Mass.

Interesting ... not just because this is the first mention I've heard of the Syriac Orthodox having a Western Rite, but even more because of the rarity of hearing about a group of Catholics being received into Orthodoxy.

They were the "Renewed Ecumenical Catholic Church of Guatemala". See this.

[Papist]

Personally, I believe that the greatest problem with the NO is the way that priests celebrate it. As many have noted, the campy, clappy, "let's hold hands and sing Kumbaya my Lord" music has no place in liturgical worship. In fact, because it is just aweful music, it prabably doesn't havce any place anywhere. It's insult to the minds of the faithful, but what is much worse, it does not direct the mind to God, but rather to the "community." This is a sort of soft idolotry, where attention to God is replaced with attention to man. I'm not sure how this can be called worship in any legitimate sense. Along similar lines is the problem of the priest facing the people rather than liturgical East. In his book, The Spirit of the Liturgy, Cardinal Ratzinger recounts the rich Christian symbolism that accompanies the tradition of a liturgy celebrated ad orientem. It's not about facing "away from the people" but rather, about the priest leading the community in worship of God, among other things. When the priest is turned towards the people, the community is again closed in on itself, and the focus is on man rather than God. I don't think it would be terribly difficult to fix these problems, though. All the Pope would have to do is mandate that the Liturgy is celebrated with sacred music, and ad orientem. Not sure why no Pope has gotten around to doing this.

[KShaft]

I've attended several times Novus Ordo Mass. Too short, lack of the Holy Spirit, more speeches than prayer. However, if it was celebrated by priest, who carries about tradition, it wasn't so bad. In Novus Ordo much more depends on the priest, so sometimes the new Mass is a disaster and sometimes there are used some elements of other rites e.g. byzantine. Some things, as restoration of the majority of the readings of the Paschal Vigil, are the positive side of the liturgical reform in 60'.

But, actually, I prefer much more eastern Liturgies.
Once I was on Tridentine Mass on Sunday. A bit longer than Novus Ordo, but I didn't feel nothing special in the spirituality. I couldn't "enter" the atmosphere. The priest was muttering something in Latin so long time, so I understood neither the gestures nor the content of prayers. Despite these (or maybe because of these) there wasn't any mystery. The Western hymnography is fairly poor than Eastern. The Tridentine Mass isn't so ancient as Eastern Liturgies. As for me, Latin rite had lost quite a lot even before Vaticanum Secundum. I see both Novus Ordo and Tridentine Mass rigid, artificial and without depth.

Good point D. The Hymnography is theology in song in the East. So is the whole Liturgy for the most part. It just isnt the same with the Western Liturgy.

[KShaft]

I think this is a deep destruction of liturgy.

I don't know why they done this destruction.

Because their "innovations" somehow constitute the continuation of the early church I'd imagine.

PP

What they "think" or rationalized in the scattered imagination of thier hearts is the continuation of the early Church, which was formed by a committe closely emulating a Lutheran "liturgy" from the begining of the 1900s.

[KShaft]

Personally, I believe that the greatest problem with the NO is the way that priests celebrate it. As many have noted, the campy, clappy, "let's hold hands and sing Kumbaya my Lord" music has no place in liturgical worship. In fact, because it is just aweful music, it prabably doesn't havce any place anywhere. It's insult to the minds of the faithful, but what is much worse, it does not direct the mind to God, but rather to the "community." This is a sort of soft idolotry, where attention to God is replaced with attention to man. I'm not sure how this can be called worship in any legitimate sense. Along similar lines is the problem of the priest facing the people rather than liturgical East. In his book, The Spirit of the Liturgy, Cardinal Ratzinger recounts the rich Christian symbolism that accompanies the tradition of a liturgy celebrated ad orientem. It's not about facing "away from the people" but rather, about the priest leading the community in worship of God, among other things. When the priest is turned towards the people, the community is again closed in on itself, and the focus is on man rather than God. I don't think it would be terribly difficult to fix these problems, though. All the Pope would have to do is mandate that the Liturgy is celebrated with sacred music, and ad orientem. Not sure why no Pope has gotten around to doing this.

The most reverent NO masses Ive seen were still banal XXXX (even with very good classicaly trained tenor leading the singing i.e. drowning out tone deaf parishoners)  compared to a Tridentine or more so St. John C's Liturgy. Cant polish a XXXX man. Stop with the lame XXX excuses for a piece of XXXX commiteed up by free masons.

Profanities Removed - Arimethea

You have been warned about using profanities numerous times. You are being placed on Post Moderation until you can demonstrate that you can post in a civil manner. You can appeal this through the normal channels.

Arimethea
Liturgy Section Moderator

[Gorazd]

That's also my experience with some Finnish NO Masses I've attended.

How does a Finnish NO Mass differ from a Finnish Lutheran mass? I guess the Lutherans have better music?

[rakovsky]

Modernism, liberalism and freemasonry infiltrating the heirachy of the Church. It indeed makes us weep.

What do people think of the claim that there was a Masonic influence in creating the New Order mass?

The following is a collage of fourteen pitiful table-like constructs that are used in Novus Ordo churches as “altars”


By comparison, this is what a real Catholic altar looks like:

St. Joseph’s Catholic Church in Wayne, Michigan

...in true Catholicism, the altar is rather important. It is the place of Sacrifice, on which the Immaculate Victim of Calvary, Christ Jesus the Lord, is mystically offered to the Most Holy Trinity... But the Modernists disagree. For them, Holy Mass is not about God but about them, first and foremost; it is to be a celebration of the community and of religious experience

The Novus Ordo “Mass” of the False “Pope” Paul VI, introduced in 1969, was essentially designed by Fr. Annibale Bugnini... It was later found out that Bugnini was in fact a member of the Freemasons, the archenemies of the Catholic Church. It is therefore not surprising that the sanctuaries of modern “Catholic” churches look an awful lot like the inside of Masonic lodges

Inside of a Masonic Lodge

http://novusordowatch.org/2013/11/novus-ordo-monster-altars/

This video seems to be making generalizations contrasting the New Order mass with the traditional one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69YEE7Zx58g

Traditional Latin Mass (Council of Trent) The Mass is the true and special sacrifice of the New Law. In it Jesus Christ, by the ministry of the Priest offers His Body and Blood to God the Father under the appearances of bread and wine...

Novus Ordo Missae (Pope Paul VI) The Lord’s supper, or Mass, is the assembly, or gathering together, of the people of God with the priest presiding to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.

To tell the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This needs to be said without ambiguity: the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.” – Joseph Gelineau, SJ, one of the experts involved in its formulation (The Tridentine Mass, p. 39) According to Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, in their study and letter to the Pope, the New Mass “teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith.”

http://churcheclipse.com/home/catholic-takeover/novus-ordo-mass/

Benedict XVI... came up with the “Motu” Hoax, by which “conservative” Novus Ordo parishioners would be drawn back into Church by a relaxed “indult” Mass , a bastardized form of the Traditional Latin Mass mixed with the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo “Mass”.

http://shrineofourladyoflasalette.blogspot.com/2011/04/truth-about-novus-ordo-mass.html

So now RC churches are using "indult" masses instead of the New Order ones?

[Cyrillic]

What do people think of the claim that there was a Masonic influence in creating the New Order mass?

You shouldn't bother with wacky conspiracy theories about masons.

[Iconodule]

I heard that some novus ordo masses feature tantric goat sacrifices where they smoke cannabis and cast aspersions on the Tome of Leo. Not sure how widespread this is, though.

[Luke]

I heard that some novus ordo masses feature tantric goat sacrifices where they smoke cannabis and cast aspersions on the Tome of Leo. Not sure how widespread this is, though.

[Mor Ephrem]

I heard that some novus ordo masses feature tantric goat sacrifices where they smoke cannabis and cast aspersions on the Tome of Leo. Not sure how widespread this is, though.

Dcn Kuraev would know. 

[TheTrisagion]

I heard that some novus ordo masses feature tantric goat sacrifices where they smoke cannabis and cast aspersions on the Tome of Leo. Not sure how widespread this is, though.

So they are back in communion with the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church?

[Sharbel]

Couldn't they just celebrate the 1962 mass in the local languages?

AFAIK, Brazil was the only country where, three years before imposing the Novus Ordo liturgy, the Vetus Ordo liturgy was temporarily celebrated in the vernacular.  I wonder if this was the case among other Portuguese speaking countries or Latin American countries.

[Sharbel]

In Novus Ordo much more depends on the priest, so sometimes the new Mass is a disaster and sometimes there are used some elements of other rites e.g. byzantine.

I think that you nailed it on the head.  Unfortunately, the Roman liturgy does allow some latitude in its celebration, but it's badly abused almost to the point of making one unrecognizable. For instance, ad hoc songs are allowed only as the fourth choice from the standard liturgical antiphons, yet their use is de facto standard.


Before VII, if a priest deviated an iota from the norms he'd fallen in mortal sin.  After VII, it seems that a priest who sticks to the norms sins mortally against the spirit of the age.

[Sharbel]

Also, I think it is abhorrent that communion is handed out by laymen and -women in the NOM.

Also, a great source of abuses and sacrileges.

[Sharbel]

There is nothing wrong with the rite itself IMO, the fault lies in how its practiced.

I once attended a Novus Ordo liturgy celebrated strictly according to the norms, including the priest facing East, responses in Latin and exclusive use of Gregorian Chant.  Yes, it was a much more reverent liturgy than at a typical Roman parish.  However, it also taught me how bad a shape the Roman Church is in that its most important prayer is so watered down virtually to be unrecognizable from how the Novus Ordo was intended.

[Sharbel]

Then there's the very idea behind the NOM that Eucharistic prayers should be written by a committee rather than received from the saints of old.

It's the spirit of the age.  Positivism may not have physically survived as a church, as Comte desired, but the whole West is now Positivist.  After all, we have not only a managerial state, but also a managerial church, the Roman Church.

[WPM]

If people pray for you to be truly converted to the Orthodox/Catholic way of doing things.

[Sharbel]

I didn't understand who thought they had the right to change all these things.

Rome has always acted imperially, as if the Church belonged to the clergy and the faithful were merely tolerated in liturgy, as long as they tithed.  Beginning with Charlemagne and culminating with the Council of Trent, the Roman liturgy was imposed all over Western Europe without consideration of local liturgies, which there were more than a few.  The brutal imposition of the shocking Novus Ordo liturgy was just par for the Roman course.

[Sharbel]

If you can find a 1904 Lutheran Hymnal, please do so. The only copy I found and studied back in 1995 was tossed into the fireplace by my then Catholic priest-confessor who also stated that he would never celebrate the Novus Ordo again. 

Wow!    I had heard that Lutherans had been consultants to the Vatican on concocting the Novus Ordo, but thought that it was just an urban legend.

[Sharbel]

It is sad that Catholics have been brainwashed into accepting this Protestantized liturgy. Well do I remember attending parish education courses which painted anyone who refused to accept this novel liturgy as a "reactionary" who was "holier than the Pope."

I do know a couple of families who left the Roman Church after the liturgical reforms of VII.  One family eventually found its way back to it, but the other became Orthodox.

[RobS]

You're wasting time replying to 5 year old posts.

[Sharbel]

During my catechumenate I wept when I encountered the truth about the Holy Orthodox Church.

As I find the truths obscured or forgotten by the Catholic Churches in the Orthodox Church, I smile in joy at the healing and peace that they bring me.  Not that it's less heavy a decision to make about my converting to Orthodoxy, but it does give me a light to follow.

[Sharbel]

You're wasting time replying to 5 year old posts.

Note to self: before jumping into a conversation, check the date of the posts. 

[Anthony1986]

In my opinion, even the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) Liturgy is so much beautiful than Novus Ordo Mass.

Novus Ordo Mass for me just like an activity in the summer camp...

[Pravoslavbob]

As I have mentioned in other threads....

Done properly, with proper reverence and music, give me the Novus Ordo any day of the week over the Tridentine.  Any day of the week.

There are problems with both masses.  The Tridentine mass is clerical beyond belief, with very little lay interaction, and the movements of the clergy performing it often so stiff and unnatural, although I suspect this could be remedied somewhat.

I don't wish to cast aspersions on the Western Orthodox who use a version of the Tridentine mass.  I have never seen a WR Orthodox mass, and I would like to.  I hope that they have managed to address some problems.  I don't know if they might be better served by adopting a different western liturgy or not.

[xOrthodox4Christx]

The Novus Ordo was a significant factor in why I didn't become Roman Catholic. I wouldn't say decisive reason, but it had a great impact.

[Faithseeker]

The NO varies from parish to parish/priest to priest. Introducing folk music or even a rock style music to me are blasphemous and do not belong in a religious atmosphere that is supposed to be celebrating the Eucharist.

My experience is stand, sit, kneel. No variation from week to week. If the mass is served facing the congregation,  the respectful thing at least would be to have the priest say the Eucharistic prayers facing the tabernacle. I've been to RC churches and the tabernacle is not even behind the altar,  I actually had to look for it and in one church,  it was in a side corner!

The "devout" spend the mass reciting the rosary. Kids have their crayons and toys to keep them busy.

"Eucharistic Ministers" shocked me. The Eucharist should be received from the priest alone but if there is only one priest,  people belly-ache about the length of the Mass because it takes so much longer for individuals to receive the Eucharist. The "Lay Readers" do all the Scriptural readings except for the Gospel reading by the priest.

I've seen the traditional (read: pre-VCII) congregants in line for the Eucharist who will only go into the line where the priest is, not the "Eucharistic Ministers."

It feels like a fellowship service one would find in various Protestant churches rather than the Liturgy.

Prayers are communal. The Apostles' Creed is recited except during Easter when depending on the parish,  the Nicene Creed is recited and the entire congregation fumbles their way through it - including sometimes the priest himself.

The only place I experienced any "spiritual" connection has been in semi-contemplative convents that accept women on personal retreats.

I've never been to a Western Rite Orthodox Liturgy so I can't compare the two.

I've been in both Russian Orthodox Churches who pray the Liturgy in English and Antiochian Orthodox also in English. In the English speaking Russian Orthodox,  I could feel the Holy Spirit within but not completely until I went to the Antiochian Church. I can understand the prayers,  I'm actively praying in the presence of God with the feeling of being embraced by the Holy Spirit.

All of this was lacking in every RC parish I attended.

[Alpha60]

As I have mentioned in other threads....

Done properly, with proper reverence and music, give me the Novus Ordo any day of the week over the Tridentine.  Any day of the week.

There are problems with both masses.  The Tridentine mass is clerical beyond belief, with very little lay interaction, and the movements of the clergy performing it often so stiff and unnatural, although I suspect this could be remedied somewhat.

I don't wish to cast aspersions on the Western Orthodox who use a version of the Tridentine mass.  I have never seen a WR Orthodox mass, and I would like to.  I hope that they have managed to address some problems.  I don't know if they might be better served by adopting a different western liturgy or not.

I don't see whats wrong with the clericalism of the Tridentine mass from an Orthodox perspective.   The elaborate ceremonies of the traditional Latin masses (Tridentine, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Dominican, Carthusian) mirror the elaborate ceremonies of the Orthodox Church.

If anything, the Tridentine Mass is less clerical than a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom where there is a choir and no congregational singing; within the Tridentine mass, you have the laity kneeling at prescribed times.

I suspect you would enjoy Liturgical Reform After Vatican II: the Impact on Eastern Orthodoxy, which is very pro-novus ordo and pro-liturgical reform in the EO church, particularly critical of the liturgical maximalism of ROCOR (which I personally favor).  The work is, on the whole, anti-clerical to a degree I find unacceptable, stressing the priesthood of all believers over the high priesthood of the bishop and the sacerdotal, hieratic priests who are his assistance.   We are all priests in that we can pray directly to God for ourselves and other people without intermediation, but we are not all priests in the sense of being able to offer the holy and rational sacrifice of the Eucharist in the altar; the sacerdotal priesthood of the Church serves in this capacity and then delivers the body and blood of our Lord to the faithful.

[Alpha60]

I heard that some novus ordo masses feature tantric goat sacrifices where they smoke cannabis and cast aspersions on the Tome of Leo. Not sure how widespread this is, though.

Oh that is brilliant!

[Alpha60]

What do people think of the claim that there was a Masonic influence in creating the New Order mass?

You shouldn't bother with wacky conspiracy theories about masons.

+1

The RCC is anti-Masonic, and there is no evidence of Vatican II or the Novus Ordo being a Masonic conspiracy theory.   There was some screwing around with the Vatican's finances linked to a controversial lodge which had been expelled from Italian Freemasonry, Propaganda 2, but this occurred closer to 1980 and appears to have been driven by pecuniary interests.

Freemasonry is a religion, a sort of mystical adjunct to Protestantism and any other monotheistic faith willing to tolerate it; it is incompatible with Eastern Orthodoxy, but we have to remember, at several points in history Freemasons were severely persecuted, for example, in Fascist Spain and Nazi Germany.

[Asteriktos]

Freemasonry is a religion, a sort of mystical adjunct to Protestantism and any other monotheistic faith willing to tolerate it

"You shouldn't bother with wacky conspiracy theories about masons."

[Alpha60]

My own view of the Novus Ordo is that it is fundamentally defective and an impediment to reunion with the Orthodox Church.

I specifically object to the following:

- Celebration of the mass versus populum
- The disappearance of Gregorian chant from the life of many Catholic parishes where the mass has been introduced
- The use of Lay Eucharistic Ministers
- The Three Year Lectionary, which is unprecedented in the history of Christendom
- The removal of the Last Gospel at the end of a Sung Mass
- Changes to the Paschal Triduum which began in 1955
- The excessive simplification of vestments to a degree which is minimalist and ugly
- The lack of the prepratory ritual which accompanies the Tridentine Mass
- The general lack of reverence, piety and dignity which characterize the Tridentine Mass and the Orthodox liturgies.

My preference would be for the RCC to revert to the Tridentine Mass rubrics as they existed following the reforms of Pope Pius X, albeit with the option of the mass being said wholly or partially in the vernacular.  A more explicit epiclesis, like the one the Antiochian Western Rite Vicarate inserted into their Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory, would be of great benefit.

The only change, aside from the use of the vernacular, which I can support, is the 1962 modification of the Good Friday litany to delete the phrase "perfidis iudeam."   Perfidy means faithless, but by extension, it has shifted in context to refer to treacherous acts, such as war crimes (it is a war crime, perfidy, for example, to surrender, and then attack the enemy, or to infilitrate the enemy by wearing their uniforms, or to kill an officer who is negotiating under a flag of truce).  In light of the change of context surrounding the word "perfidy," it creates a reading of the mass which looks anti-Semitic, even though the intent was actually pro-Semitic, for the conversion of the Jews, and because of that, I think Pope John XXIII was correct in deleting it.

[Alpha60]

Freemasonry is a religion, a sort of mystical adjunct to Protestantism and any other monotheistic faith willing to tolerate it

"You shouldn't bother with wacky conspiracy theories about masons."

I was a member of the Order of Jacques DeMolay, basically, the Freemasonry boys club in the US, and we had a distinctive liturgy, several specific rites served on different occasions, and a distinctive manner of praying (specifically, we prayed using a unique posture derived from that used by George Washington).  We also wore distinctive robes and other vestments during our meetings, and our leaders were the Junior, Senior and Master Deacon.

I have no ill will towards Freemasonry; I think it emerged due to the lack of mysticism within Protestantism, which created a vacuum which needed to be filled; I think on the whole Freemasons are good and ethical people; I personally received enormous assistance concerning some aspects surrounding the death of my father from a Freemason, and have been very good friends with several others.   Had I not joined the Orthodox Church I might well have sought out membership in Freemasonry proper.

I am opposed to the persecution of Freemasons, and towards the tendency of some people to blame all of the world's ills on some dark alliance between Freemasons and Jews.   Such a delusion is the seed from which fascism springs.

[MalpanaGiwargis]

As I have mentioned in other threads....

Done properly, with proper reverence and music, give me the Novus Ordo any day of the week over the Tridentine.  Any day of the week.

There are problems with both masses.  The Tridentine mass is clerical beyond belief, with very little lay interaction, and the movements of the clergy performing it often so stiff and unnatural, although I suspect this could be remedied somewhat.

I don't wish to cast aspersions on the Western Orthodox who use a version of the Tridentine mass.  I have never seen a WR Orthodox mass, and I would like to.  I hope that they have managed to address some problems.  I don't know if they might be better served by adopting a different western liturgy or not.

I think the Tridentine is far preferable in terms of the text of the service itself and its musical tradition. But you are absolutely correct that the spirituality with which it has been celebrated for a very long time virtually ignores the laity. There was a push in some quarters in the 1950s to celebrate the "Dialogue Mass" wherein the responses were made by the laity rather than the servers. That would have been the best option, in my opinion — no need to throw out an ancient liturgy, just improve the way it was celebrated, beginning with using languages "understood of the people."

[Sharbel]

I've been to RC churches and the tabernacle is not even behind the altar,  I actually had to look for it and in one church,  it was in a side corner!

[Pravoslavbob]

I don't see whats wrong with the clericalism of the Tridentine mass from an Orthodox perspective.   The elaborate ceremonies of the traditional Latin masses (Tridentine, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Dominican, Carthusian) mirror the elaborate ceremonies of the Orthodox Church.

If anything, the Tridentine Mass is less clerical than a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom where there is a choir and no congregational singing; within the Tridentine mass, you have the laity kneeling at prescribed times.

I really don't think this is the case.  The entire canon of the mass is mumbled by the priest under his breath in the Tridentine rite.  There are no responses to what he is saying either from the choir or lay singers.  The laity in the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom/Basil can at least hear some if not all of the priest's parts and can at least hear the choir respond if they do not sing quietly themselves.  There is simply no comparison at all.

I suspect you would enjoy Liturgical Reform After Vatican II: the Impact on Eastern Orthodoxy, which is very pro-novus ordo and pro-liturgical reform in the EO church, particularly critical of the liturgical maximalism of ROCOR (which I personally favor).

?  I am certainly not a crypto- Roman Catholic or Protestant as you seem to be implying.  I think there are admirable and not-so-admirable things to be found in the ROCOR approach, even though I don't think that doing everything the way it was done in late 19th century Russia is the same thing as "liturgical maximalism".   If you wish to adopt what I would call a pre-critical view of all things liturgical and dismiss all others who don't share your views as "modernists" (as it appears to me that you might be doing here), that is your choice. Am I right, is this your approach?   If so, I'm really not interested in a discussion.  I am starting to find polemics tiring and besides, they can provide me with just too much of a vehicle for sin, a vehicle for my passions.  Forgive me if I am judging you or the situation incorrectly. 

  The work is, on the whole, anti-clerical to a degree I find unacceptable, stressing the priesthood of all believers over the high priesthood of the bishop and the sacerdotal, hieratic priests who are his assistance.   We are all priests in that we can pray directly to God for ourselves and other people without intermediation, but we are not all priests in the sense of being able to offer the holy and rational sacrifice of the Eucharist in the altar; the sacerdotal priesthood of the Church serves in this capacity and then delivers the body and blood of our Lord to the faithful.

?  Who said anything about having laypeople serve at the altar instead of ordained clergy?  Clericalism, in which the clergy are somehow stlyed as a separate caste who are above everyone in the Church is not Orthodox.  Yes, the Church is a hierarchy, but it is a hierarchy of love in which all have different roles.  The clergy serve the Church in the Church, not above it.  A priest cannot serve Divine Liturgy by himself: at least one other Orthodox Christian, be they lay or clergy, must be present.  The liturgy is the work of all the people of God.

[Sharbel]

I don't see whats wrong with the clericalism of the Tridentine mass from an Orthodox perspective.   The elaborate ceremonies of the traditional Latin masses (Tridentine, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Dominican, Carthusian) mirror the elaborate ceremonies of the Orthodox Church.

I think that clericalism is not appropriate here.  Clericalism is actually more evident in the NO liturgy, since the clergy has the sole power to pick and choose among the choices given to him in the Roman Missal.  The fact that the NO liturgy can vary dramatically between parishes in the same diocese is the fruit of clericalism, or the power reserved to the clergy.

Now, of course the clergy is granted liturgical prerogatives, since ascending to the altar is reserved only to the clergy.  However, the liturgy, as etymologically the work of the people, also belongs to the faithful.  In the Roman liturgy, due to the latitude given to the clergy, the people is deprived of a consistent and coherent liturgy.  In this sense, this is the dark side of clerical prerogatives, or abusive clericalism.

I really don't think this is the case.  The entire canon of the mass is mumbled by the priest under his breath in the Tridentine rite.  There are no responses to what he is saying either from the choir or lay singers.  The laity in the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom/Basil can at least hear some of the priest's parts and can at least hear the choir respond if they do not sing quietly themselves.  There is simply no comparison at all.

According to Fr. Aidan Nichols, OP, the reasons for this are sadly less than liturgical:

The language of the Latin liturgy with its fine rhetorical cadences represents a unique point in the history of Christian Latinity: that moment when a large portion of the senatorial aristocracy of Rome sought baptism, in the course of the fourth and fifth centuries, bringing with them into the Roman Christian community their own high standards of purity of diction. One reason why the responses of the people in the Roman rite are so brief is that it was hard to find an ordinary congregation able to make longer responses in correct Latin. The gap between the classical Christian Latin of the liturgy and the vulgarised Latin of the common man grew wider in the succeeding centuries. The new Romance languages—Italian, French, Spanish, and so forth—did not grant an immediate understanding of their own original Latin base, and so the worshipping assemblies of the Western church withdrew into a degree of outward passivity, and silence."

[Dominika]

If anything, the Tridentine Mass is less clerical than a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom where there is a choir and no congregational singing;

There can be congragational singing at the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and it happens sometimes, somewhere.

within the Tridentine mass, you have the laity kneeling at prescribed times.

I wouldn't call it a big interaction/engagmenet of the laity into Liturgy.

[juliogb]

Here in Brazil, most RC parishes are influenced by the charismatic movement, so there is a lot of happy clappy kind of thing, worship bands, ''say to your brother that Jesus finds him precious and beautiful''....

There is also a lot of clergy influenced by liberation theology, so you'll find eventually a homily that is a socialist propaganda, those priests usually like to make ethnic version of the NO, like african mass or people's mass, indigenous mass....

[Alpha60]

If anything, the Tridentine Mass is less clerical than a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom where there is a choir and no congregational singing;

There can be congragational singing at the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and it happens sometimes, somewhere.

within the Tridentine mass, you have the laity kneeling at prescribed times.

I wouldn't call it a big interaction/engagmenet of the laity into Liturgy.

Indeed so, but I was comparing the Tridentine Mass to those examples where we don't have congregational singing (for example, a Byzantine Chant oriented parish vs. a congregational singing Ruthenian parish oriented around prostopinije).

[rakovsky]

I've been to RC churches and the tabernacle is not even behind the altar,  I actually had to look for it and in one church,  it was in a side corner!

St. John the Beloved, Mclean, VA

Notice that the altar is in the middle of the congregation room.

[sedevacantist]

Freemasonry is a religion, a sort of mystical adjunct to Protestantism and any other monotheistic faith willing to tolerate it

"You shouldn't bother with wacky conspiracy theories about masons."

you shouldn't comment on issues you know little about, leave it to people who actually researched the infiltration of masonry

[Alpha60]

I've been to RC churches and the tabernacle is not even behind the altar,  I actually had to look for it and in one church,  it was in a side corner!

St. John the Beloved, Mclean, VA

Notice that the altar is in the middle of the congregation room.

That looks nothing like a Masonic lodge. 

[rakovsky]

leave it to people who actually researched the infiltration of masonry

Can you please write about this a bit?

[Jackson02]

It's a gigantic joke.

[Justin Kolodziej]

I've been to RC churches and the tabernacle is not even behind the altar,  I actually had to look for it and in one church,  it was in a side corner!

St. John the Beloved, Mclean, VA

Notice that the altar is in the middle of the congregation room.

That looks nothing like a Masonic lodge.

Ironically the tabernacle is pretty easy to find there, but there was some instruction about it being preferred to have it in a side Eucharistic Chapel that's always open for prayer. So...some parishes put the reserved Eucharist in what amounts to a  broom closet. 

[LBK]

leave it to people who actually researched the infiltration of masonry

Can you please write about this a bit?

No. Just no.   

[Sharbel]

I've been to RC churches and the tabernacle is not even behind the altar,  I actually had to look for it and in one church,  it was in a side corner!

St. John the Beloved, Mclean, VA

Notice that the altar is in the middle of the congregation room.

That looks nothing like a Masonic lodge.

Ironically the tabernacle is pretty easy to find there, but there was some instruction about it being preferred to have it in a side Eucharistic Chapel that's always open for prayer. So...some parishes put the reserved Eucharist in what amounts to a  broom closet. 

Does it mean that the priest turns his back on half of the congregation when celebrating the mass? 

[TheTrisagion]

He's got it down. He can go Ad Populum for the young whippersnappers and Ad Orientem for the old timers.

[Sharbel]

He's got it down. He can go Ad Populum for the young whippersnappers and Ad Orientem for the old timers.

Actually, looking more closely at the altar steps, I actually think that the base rotates, probably like those panoramic restaurants or a merry go round. 

[TheTrisagion]

He's got it down. He can go Ad Populum for the young whippersnappers and Ad Orientem for the old timers.

Actually, looking more closely at the altar steps, I actually think that the base rotates, probably like those panoramic restaurants or a merry go round.

Oh, well that's just tacky.

[Alpha60]

leave it to people who actually researched the infiltration of masonry

Can you please write about this a bit?

No. Just no.   

+10000000

[Lepanto]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

[servulus]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

I've heard that if the Roman Catholic Church returns to Orthodoxy that the N.O. Mass might be an issue. Maybe this is why Eastern Orthodox are concerned about it.

[sedevacantist]

leave it to people who actually researched the infiltration of masonry

Can you please write about this a bit?

No. Just no.   

+10000000

admit you don't know what you are talking about and I will spare you

[wynd]

I've heard that if the Roman Catholic Church returns to Orthodoxy that the N.O. Mass might be an issue. Maybe this is why Eastern Orthodox are concerned about it.

There have always been differences in western vs. eastern divine services. The Novus Ordo (both in and of itself and the way it's usually celebrated) are too different IMO to be explained away as legitimate variances in the global church.

[primuspilus]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

I've heard that if the Roman Catholic Church returns to Orthodoxy that the N.O. Mass might be an issue. Maybe this is why Eastern Orthodox are concerned about it.

If we get that close to reunification, then its a done deal already. Just wait a few minutes and Rome will change it.

[Alkis]

Novus Ordo made me really dissapointed with the Roman Catholic Church. I didn't expect such a violation of the Holy Tradition. God directed us how to worship Him in the Holy Scriptures themselves. I love so much the Latin Rite. But Novus Ordo is a BIG and EMPHATIC NO!

[Gorazd]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

I am Orthodox and never was Roman Catholic, but still I care for two reasons.

1. Because the NOMs I have seen in practice in Switzerland and Germany have often been so far off that it hurts my stomach (I heard it's the same in the US, at least partially. In Poland and Italy, what I saw much better though).
2. Because the NOM, especially the extreme variants with guitars etc., destroys any sense of liturgical piety, and therefore also of understanding for Orthodoxy among the Roman Catholics.

The Extraordinary Form also isn't pure from an Orthodox point of view. But it is better, much better... why is Pope Francis so against a "reform of the reform"? Actually, I believe only a "reform of the reform" can save the NOM. It would mean clear guidelines against excesses. Otherwise, things maybe become in the whole world as they already are in France. Most RC become Atheists and only the adherents of the Extraordinary Form stay strong and growing.

Here in Switzerland, we are witnessing the same, although it is going more slowly. In some cantons, the NOM, hardly attended by young people anyway, has failed to produce priestly vocations for years. Instead of masses, often there is a non-Eucharistic Novus Ordu service, conducted by married deacons or even female pastoral referents. The FSSPX seminary in Ecône is thriving, though...

[The young fogey]

My guess from having known some born Orthodox is most don't think about Catholic services. Some of them who have seen the Novus Ordo don't like it. I agree, though of course I believe it's a real Mass. It's interesting and moving (and true) that the Orthodox see a reconciled West using variations of my traditional Mass, what the Western Rite Orthodox use. Yes, the bad old Tridentine Mass as the basis and bridge for unity. I like it.

[Alpha60]

My guess from having known some born Orthodox is most don't think about Catholic services. Some of them who have seen the Novus Ordo don't like it. I agree, though of course I believe it's a real Mass. It's interesting and moving (and true) that the Orthodox see a reconciled West using variations of my traditional Mass, what the Western Rite Orthodox use. Yes, the bad old Tridentine Mass as the basis and bridge for unity. I like it.

I suspect after his recent comments, given his desire for ecumenical reconciliation, if Pope Francis realized the extent to which his beloved Novus Ordo alarms us, he would throw a fit.

Here is a book not to read: Vatican II: Its Impact on Eastern Orthodox Liturgy

Aside from the fact that the chapter attributing ROCOR's liturgical maximalism and episcopal preference for ancient chant over the Obikhod exaggerates the latter and falsely attributes the former to the influence of Vatican II, albeit not as a negative reaction, the book praises to a grotesque degree the grotesque liturgical changes at New Skete.

But what is more interesting is that the author continually throughoutnthe book, in at times it seems every other paragraph, speaks of the need to modify the liturgy to be more inclusive of the laity, allowimg each Christian to exercise their "threefold ministry as Priest, Prophet and King," the author does not once, that I can recall, refer to the ordained Priests of the Orthodox Church as Priests.   Nor does he even use the word Hieromonk in describing the liturgy of his beloved New Skete.   Rather, he refere in all cases to the Priest as "the liturgical presider", the "liturgical celebrant" or various other terms.  This smacks of anti-clericalism; I believe he also criticizes ROCOR for clericalism implicitly.  Quite a nauseating book, that.

By a Dr. Nicholas E. Denysenko, so everyone can avoid reading it.

[Agabus]

I suspect after his recent comments, given his desire for ecumenical reconciliation, if Pope Francis realized the extent to which his beloved Novus Ordo alarms us, he would throw a fit.

I suspect that, despite his recent comments, the pope doesn't spend nearly as much time thinking about the TLM as his detractors fear he does.

[Alpha60]

A lot of the old secret societies by the way dropped the ritual and local chapters and became essentially mutual, or in some cases, de-mutualized, life insurance providers.  Since that aspect, life insurance, was a major reason for being a member of the Woodsmen and other such groups.

Freemasonry takes itself a bit more seriously, which is probably why it survives.

[Gorazd]

My guess from having known some born Orthodox is most don't think about Catholic services.

Oh believe me, they don't think about it until they see it. One of my acquaintances is a Ukrainian scholar of comparative religion, and parishioner of the UOC (MP). In Ukraine, she saw Greek Catholic liturgies, as well a conservative kind of NOM with Polish Catholics. But when she saw the NOM in Germany, as well as "Liberal" Vatican 2 fetishism etc., she was deeply shocked.

She had read and respected writings of Prof. Ratzinger / Pope Benedict before and expected to find something quite different.

[The young fogey]

I suspect after his recent comments, given his desire for ecumenical reconciliation, if Pope Francis realized the extent to which his beloved Novus Ordo alarms us, he would throw a fit.

You're right. As others have noted, the approach to new services that disparages the old ones is anti-ecumenical in that it's anti-Eastern. I suspect such churchmen don't really care. I think even ecumenism as it was understood 50 years ago has gone out of fashion; nobody thinks the churches are getting back together, at least any time soon.

[Gorazd]

As others have noted, the approach to new services that disparages the old ones is anti-ecumenical in that it's anti-Eastern. I suspect such churchmen don't really care.

Or they're not aware. If you see Pope Francis' speech to Roman Catholics in Georgia, he speaks about ecumenism in a way as if he had not heard or at least not understood Orthodox objections.

I think even ecumenism as it was understood 50 years ago has gone out of fashion; nobody thinks the churches are getting back together, at least any time soon.

If that's nobody who is aware of the facts, I agree. But I have heard so many naive statements on these issues. For example on the occasion of the Havanna meeting.

[Sharbel]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

Well, as an Eastern Catholic, I care about the appalling disaster, liturgically and doctrinally, of the Novus Ordo. The liturgy is the primary means of teaching theology to the faithful (something that the Vetus Ordo failed too, but I digress), and this is accomplished through not so much the homily but the worship.  The fruits of the liturgical reforms of the Roman rite are in plain sight.


I care about it because it's a Church in communion with mine.  I care about it because I care about other fellow Catholics spiritual growth.  I care about it because there aren't as many Maronite parishes in the country as Roman ones and every now and then I have to endure the Novus Ordo.


As others said here, I had great hopes for Pope BXVI's reform of the reform, but it's all been aborted by Pope FI.

[Cyrillic]

I suspect after his recent comments, given his desire for ecumenical reconciliation, if Pope Francis realized the extent to which his beloved Novus Ordo alarms us, he would throw a fit.

You're right. As others have noted, the approach to new services that disparages the old ones is anti-ecumenical in that it's anti-Eastern. I suspect such churchmen don't really care. I think even ecumenism as it was understood 50 years ago has gone out of fashion; nobody thinks the churches are getting back together, at least any time soon.

I think 'liberal' popes are more interested in ecumenism with protestants, and try to move the Roman Catholic Church in a more protestant direction; while more 'traditionalist popes' - like BXVI - are more interested in dialogue with the Orthodox and try to move the RCC in a more Orthodox direction.

[Cyrillic]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

Well, as an Eastern Catholic, I care about the appalling disaster, liturgically and doctrinally, of the Novus Ordo.

I've been to two Novus Ordo masses in my life. One was quite good - celebrated ad orientem with Gregorian chant and incense. The other, well, wasn't quite as good. You wouldn't have believed that the two masses were even in the same category.

I guess my point is that it's difficult to generalise about the NO.

[Dominika]

I wonder why the Eastern Orthodox should care about the Novus Ordo at all. It's a Roman issue. Let the Romans deal with it. Why even think about this? It's of no concern whatsoever for Orthodoxy. Also, I don't understand why Catholics keep asking the Orthodox about this. 
Let East and West each take care on their own that their respective liturgies stay pure.

I do care because the vast majority of the most important people for me (my mother, sister, friends) are RCs, many of them are pious, so it's from care for them and... From time to time I go to Novus Ordo Mass.

Oh believe me, they don't think about it until they see it. One of my acquaintances is a Ukrainian scholar of comparative religion, and parishioner of the UOC (MP). In Ukraine, she saw Greek Catholic liturgies, as well a conservative kind of NOM with Polish Catholics.

Well, as an Eastern Catholic, I care about the appalling disaster, liturgically and doctrinally, of the Novus Ordo. The liturgy is the primary means of teaching theology to the faithful (something that the Vetus Ordo failed too, but I digress), and this is accomplished through not so much the homily but the worship.  Th

I know some even quite conservative Polish RCs that are much in favour for  NOM served very properly and with great attention. Mainly because there was no interaction between the priest and the faitful. Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers! So from where/what could they learn theology? They weren't allowed to say many parts of the Mass, sometimes even including Our Father prayer except the last sentence. There were also popular silent Masses, so there was neither thelogy for fathiful at all, nor community prayer. There was too much focus - many times without explanation - how to keep fingers and other such detaiils while serving Mass.

[Sharbel]

Well, as an Eastern Catholic, I care about the appalling disaster, liturgically and doctrinally, of the Novus Ordo.

I guess my point is that it's difficult to generalise about the NO.

No, it's not.  The typical Novus Ordo is not shocking, but you probably experienced two instances of outliers.  Still, even the typical cases fall short liturgically and doctrinally as but a poor form of both.

[Alpo]

I guess my point is that it's difficult to generalise about the NO.

No, it's not.  The typical Novus Ordo is not shocking, but you probably experienced two instances of outliers.

Around here NO masses look and feel like Lutheran masses with a few Marian prayets added hear and there. Not shocking but I feel kind of sorry for them thinking what treasures they've lost.

[Sharbel]

Mainly because there was no interaction between the priest and the faitful. Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers! So from where/what could they learn theology? They weren't allowed to say many parts of the Mass, sometimes even including Our Father prayer except the last sentence. There were also popular silent Masses, so there was neither thelogy for fathiful at all, nor community prayer. There was too much focus - many times without explanation - how to keep fingers and other such detaiils while serving Mass.

Exactly!  I actually speculate that this, the lack of transmitting theology to the faithful, is the reason why the devils who invented the Novus Ordo liturgy came up with it, in spite of growing up with nothing but the most strict Tridentine liturgy.  Which begs the question why traditional Catholics insist on the Extraordinary Form almost superstitiously, when it failed to protect the Roman Church from the horrors of the Novus Ordo.


PS: traditional Catholics, what you seek for is in the East, not in the past.

[Sharbel]

No, it's not.  The typical Novus Ordo is not shocking, but you probably experienced two instances of outliers.

Around here NO masses look and feel like Lutheran masses with a few Marian prayets added hear and there. Not shocking but I feel kind of sorry for them thinking what treasures they've lost.

Very true.  Even the typical Anglo Catholic liturgy at an Anglican parish has preserved most of those treasures.  Of course, it still lacks the reason of being of any liturgy, the Eucharist, which at least the Novus Ordo unquestionably has.

[Cyrillic]

Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers!

God is in the silence.

They weren't allowed to say many parts of the Mass, sometimes even including Our Father prayer except the last sentence.

The lack of interaction was one of the good bits of the Tridentine mass. You could focus on the liturgy and on prayer without having to be mindful of when to say what. The 'et cum spiritu tuo' every now and then is more than enough.

Don't even get me started on the kiss of peace. Having the liturgy interrupted in order to shake hands is plain weird.

Mainly because there was no interaction between the priest and the faitful. Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers! So from where/what could they learn theology?

Doesn't the Polish Orthodox Church celebrate in Old Slavonic?

[michaelus]

I can not say I am surprised by the responses in this thread; Novus Ordo is the greatest embarrassment that Catholicism has accomplished in a long time.  Almost every NO liturgy I've been to has featured hand-holding, guitar-playing, and so forth.  One in particular did not even use the new Catholic hymnals (which are simply terrible) but instead favored songs such as "Open the Eyes of My Heart, Lord", "How Great Is Our God", "Let It Rain", and others.  This is Catholicism now, I fear for where it will be in 20 or 30 years.

I was talking to a Catholic deacon once, and when the topic of the Novus Ordo came up I could not help but express my absolute disgust in the service and my disappointment in the Church for adopting it.  He, on the other hand, claimed emphatically that the Novus Ordo mass was a return to the way that early Christians worshiped.  That claim might fool a hippie Boomer, but not I.  Sure, the Novus Ordo is in the vernacular, but such a shallow comparison ignoring all of the other critical changes is intentional dishonesty, and an insult to the collective intelligence of the people who favor traditional worship rather than this Protestant, cookie-cutter, artificial mass which is devoid of any spiritual value.

[Asteriktos]

"Open the Eyes of My Heart, Lord"

Good tune!

[Sharbel]

... this Protestant, cookie-cutter, artificial mass which is devoid of any spiritual value.

That's what happens when scholars are allowed to call the shots.  But I wouldn't call the Novus Ordo devoid of any spiritual value, just impoverished.

[Cyrillic]

  He, on the other hand, claimed emphatically that the Novus Ordo mass was a return to the way that early Christians worshiped. 

It's curious how reactionary arguments are used by 'progressive' Christians to argue for a more accessible and modern liturgy.

[Alpo]

Don't even get me started on the kiss of peace. Having the liturgy interrupted in order to shake hands is plain weird.

Not fan of that either but to be fair we have a lot more interruptions ourselves. People wandering around to venerate icons, kissing after receiving the Eucharist, somewhat random shouting of paschal greeting... There's quite a lot of those actually.

[Cyrillic]

Don't even get me started on the kiss of peace. Having the liturgy interrupted in order to shake hands is plain weird.

Not fan of that either but to be fair we have a lot more interruptions ourselves. People wandering around to venerate icons, kissing after receiving the Eucharist, somewhat random shouting of paschal greeting... There's quite a lot of those actually.

True, but that isn't awkward.

[Dominika]

Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers!

God is in the silence.

I've heard that in some (at least old) Orthodox liturgical books there is written, that [at services] there is no silence in the Orthodox Church.

They weren't allowed to say many parts of the Mass, sometimes even including Our Father prayer except the last sentence.

The lack of interaction was one of the good bits of the Tridentine mass. You could focus on the liturgy and on prayer without having to be mindful of when to say what. The 'et cum spiritu tuo' every now and then is more than enough.

Eastern Liturgies are based on the common worship, leaded by priest, that's a shepherd, so there is an interaction. I think that's one of the general Christianity roots.

Don't even get me started on the kiss of peace. Having the liturgy interrupted in order to shake hands is plain weird.

OOs have maintaed the kiss of peace. As for EOs, it's practiced at some parishes, and it should be. Now we have it only for Pascha, and in practice, for other feasts. It's, again, an ancient Christian practice. It gives the feeling of the feast joy, of the Liturgy joy, that all of us make one community.

Mainly because there was no interaction between the priest and the faitful. Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers! So from where/what could they learn theology?

Doesn't the Polish Orthodox Church celebrate in Old Slavonic?

Yes, the vast majority of the parishes celebrate in Church Slavonic. But the texts are pronunced loudly (in the Tridentine Mass not), at many parishes the readings are also in Polish, and, Polish is a Slavonic langauge, so for a Slav it's much easier to understand Church Slavonic than Latin.

[Gorazd]

I know some even quite conservative Polish RCs that are much in favour for  NOM served very properly and with great attention.

That's why I said, the NOM can be "saved" if proper measures are taken to stop abuse.

Maybe the Pope doesn't realise how bad it is in some places. His own masses look not bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gazna4HcU18

Compare to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WFjoQL3wog
(from 1:06)

[Mor Ephrem]

The typical Novus Ordo

How chimerical. 

[michaelus]

I know some even quite conservative Polish RCs that are much in favour for  NOM served very properly and with great attention.

That's why I said, the NOM can be "saved" if proper measures are taken to stop abuse.

Maybe the Pope doesn't realise how bad it is in some places. His own masses look not bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gazna4HcU18

Compare to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WFjoQL3wog
(from 1:06)

You may think that Benedict XVI made it look good, but Francis does the opposite:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-1LLFbZJCA

[Gorazd]

You may think that Benedict XVI made it look good, but Francis does the opposite:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-1LLFbZJCA

The Pope in my link also was Francis. But I am quite convinced that if an Orthodox Patriarch did such things as Pope Francis did in the video you linked, at least one other Patriarch would break communion with him... however this is by far not the worst I have seen of the NOM. And actually I liked that they did the kiss of the peace rather than that odd handshake.

[Sharbel]

You may think that Benedict XVI made it look good, but Francis does the opposite:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-1LLFbZJCA

I was there and at times it was difficult.  However, immediately after Holy Communion, there was such a silence that the only noise were the waves.  Given that there were over 3 million people at mass then, the silence was spoke more boldly than all the attempts at debasing the liturgy on this video.

[Sharbel]

Not fan of that either but to be fair we have a lot more interruptions ourselves. People wandering around to venerate icons, kissing after receiving the Eucharist, somewhat random shouting of paschal greeting... There's quite a lot of those actually.

And I find it awesome!  At least to me such spontaneous manifestations of piety are signs of devotion to the Faith, which is a very good thing.

[Sharbel]

God is in the silence.

Where isn't he?  But in public prayer (i.e., liturgy) silence shouldn't be present most of the time.

[Dominika]

Not fan of that either but to be fair we have a lot more interruptions ourselves. People wandering around to venerate icons, kissing after receiving the Eucharist, somewhat random shouting of paschal greeting... There's quite a lot of those actually.

And I find it awesome!  At least to me such spontaneous manifestations of piety are signs of devotion to the Faith, which is a very good thing.

For me it's one if signs that the faith is vivid, authentic, that relation with God and His people is closr.

[Alpo]

Not fan of that either but to be fair we have a lot more interruptions ourselves. People wandering around to venerate icons, kissing after receiving the Eucharist, somewhat random shouting of paschal greeting... There's quite a lot of those actually.

And I find it awesome!  At least to me such spontaneous manifestations of piety are signs of devotion to the Faith, which is a very good thing.

I like it too but it's kind of double-standard to critisize for EOs to criticize interruptions of mass. We do it all the time.

[Sharbel]

The typical Novus Ordo...

How chimerical.

😃

[hecma925]

Faithful didn't hear most of the prayers!

God is in the silence.

I've heard that in some (at least old) Orthodox liturgical books there is written, that [at services] there is no silence in the Orthodox Church.

Filled with prayer, not catching up on Russian gossip.

[servulus]

No, it's not.  The typical Novus Ordo is not shocking, but you probably experienced two instances of outliers.

Around here NO masses look and feel like Lutheran masses with a few Marian prayets added hear and there. Not shocking but I feel kind of sorry for them thinking what treasures they've lost.

Very true.  Even the typical Anglo Catholic liturgy at an Anglican parish has preserved most of those treasures.  Of course, it still lacks the reason of being of any liturgy, the Eucharist, which at least the Novus Ordo unquestionably has.

Anglo Catholic liturgy doesn't have Eucharist? I've never been to one but I always thought they did. This would be the same liturgy used by those who joined the Anglican ordinariate prior to their conversion, right?

[Sharbel]

Anglo Catholic liturgy doesn't have Eucharist? I've never been to one but I always thought they did. This would be the same liturgy used by those who joined the Anglican ordinariate prior to their conversion, right?

No valid orders, no grace.  No grace, no Eucharist.

Both priests and bishops welcome to the Anglican Ordinariate are ordained again, but only as deacons or priests, after individual consideration by Rome.

[The young fogey]

Anglo Catholic liturgy doesn't have Eucharist? I've never been to one but I always thought they did. This would be the same liturgy used by those who joined the Anglican ordinariate prior to their conversion, right?

No valid orders, no grace.  No grace, no Eucharist.

Both priests and bishops welcome to the Anglican Ordinariate are ordained again, but only as deacons or priests, after individual consideration by Rome.

Right. Catholics don't recognize Anglican orders. We never have after their original ex-Catholic bishops and the validly consecrated Thomas Cranmer, the first non-Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury. Pope Leo XIII made it official in 1896. Because Catholics and Protestants have views on the Eucharist that are too different. Many modern Anglicans believe what we all do about it but that church's framers didn't.

The Orthodox have a slightly different view. In practice it's the same as ours but in theory some, including the founding first hierarch of ROCOR, have opined that Anglicans could be received economically in their orders, the way many Orthodox receive ex-Catholic priests, if the whole Anglican Communion decided to enter Orthodoxy.

[Sharbel]

The Orthodox have a slightly different view. In practice it's the same as ours but in theory some, including the founding first hierarch of ROCOR, have opined that Anglicans could be received economically in their orders, the way many Orthodox receive ex-Catholic priests, if the whole Anglican Communion decided to enter Orthodoxy.

How about Anglican bishops?

[The young fogey]

It only makes sense according to this Orthodox opinion that ex-Anglican bishops would be received in their orders, as most Orthodox do with ex-Catholic clergy.