Two rites make a wrong
We are one church and we need just one Mass, this Catholic argues-even if that one Mass is celebrated in any number of languages.
At one end of the archdiocese where I live, a Mass is held in a gymnasium every Sunday, and a group of lively folk musicians accompany the assembly through a relaxed and informal liturgy. The mood reflects the music. Because it's a gym, children seem to act less restrained, feeling free to roam a bit. Folding chairs are set up in a semi-circle around a portable altar that this group has used for many years.
There are no kneelers, of course, reflecting to some extent the impracticality of portable kneelers, but reflecting to a greater extent the theology of those gathered: These are "looking up to God in trust, not bowing down to God in fear" Catholics, nurturing a view of church and theology that was born at the Second Vatican Council.
I know many of these Catholics and consider them to be very good people. Their liturgy is, I believe, a scandal.
At the other end of the archdiocese, a priest adorned in shimmering vestments murmurs prayers in Latin, facing the tabernacle, his voice barely audible to the assembly of worshipers kneeling behind him. Many of these are silently and privately praying the rosary. At certain moments there is an exchange of words between the priest and the assembly. These words are in Latin.
The atmosphere is reverent, reflecting to some extent the mood naturally created by silence, candles, and Latin, but reflecting to a greater extent the theology of those gathered: These are "kneeling before God in awe, not back-slapping brother Jesus" Catholics, preserving a view of church and theology set aside at the Second Vatican Council.
I know one of the people in the assembly to be one of the finest human beings alive-my father-but his liturgy is, I believe, a scandal.
An outsider observing the two rituals Would never guess they belonged to the same church. And in fact, many of the participants at the respective assemblies might admit that they don't really share a faith with the participants in the "other" group.
This is what makes these liturgies scandalous. They represent such polarized expressions of worship that they drift from the central purpose of liturgy as stated in the introduction of Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy: "to be a sign lifted up among the nations, to those who are outside, a sign under which the scattered children of God may be gathered together until there is one fold and one shepherd." A church practicing such divergent forms of worship will hardly unite the scattered children of God.
Currently we are many folds under a shepherd who last year stirred the pot with his apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum (Of the Supreme Pontiffs), sanctioning wider use of the old Latin or Tridentine Mass. Besides allowing individual parishes to conduct Latin Masses at the pastor's discretion, secondhand reports suggest that Pope Benedict XVI would like to see a Latin Mass offered at every parish. Upon hearing this, I felt a rumbling that I'm certain was Pope John XXIII, who opened the Second Vatican Council, rolling in his grave.
The problem with the gym mass is not the gym, or the folk music, or even the lack of kneelers. The gym liturgies I've participated in mostly adhere to the rite promulgated by the Second Vatican Council. The scandal is the fact that 100 yards from the gym, a splendid church sits where liturgy is celebrated by the other 90 percent of the parish every Sunday.
Once, when gym repairs required the gym Mass to move back into the regular church for a while, there was some talk that the gym altar should be moved in to replace the regular church altar. Two altars at one parish screams division to me: "Our church is not your church; our worship is not your worship; we are not you." Such practices divide the Body of Christ-not the sort of thing those who led the council had in mind when they promulgated changes.
In the zeal that followed the council, many well-intentioned but liturgically ill-informed experiments cropped up in parish liturgies. Some progressive liturgies went too far and abused the intent of the council's changes.
Many of these alternative practices have fueled the reaction of extremists who now want to rewind church history and drop us all back into a Bells of St. Mary's world, as black and white as the cassock and surplice of a 10-year-old altar boy. At one end of our church, progressives dance to the beat of their very own drummer, while at the other end nostalgic traditionalists turn back the hands of time.
In my judgment, the progressive, alternative Masses are much less troubling than the return of the Tridentine Mass. As mentioned, gym liturgies are mostly faithful to the changes promulgated in the council. While they may cross the line at times, at least they seem to be reaching in the direction the council members were pointing us toward.
And let's face it, my generation, the flower-power gang, is, well, beginning to push up daisies. Progressive liturgies are fading away as the jingle-jangle of our tambourines increasingly exits stage left.
But prancing in stage right are the Tridentine Troubadours, flipping the altar around and turning their backs to the monumental progress of the Second Vatican Council.
What is scandalous about this practice is not the Latin. After discussing the issue with theologians and liturgists Keith Pecklers, S.J. and Mark Francis, C.S.V., both independently made the distinction between the Tridentine Mass, celebrated by Catholics between 1570 and approximately 1965, and the post-conciliar rite practiced in the Latin language.
Pecklers explains that the church has, since the council, always allowed the use of Latin in the reformed liturgy. Saying the Mass in Latin is no different than saying it in Spanish or Polish or English.
The reformed liturgy is flexible enough to allow the use of Latin at times. Many parishes replace the "Lamb of God" and the "Holy, Holy, Holy" with the Agnus Dei and the Sanctus during the season of Lent. Besides being in complete conformity with the changes promulgated by the council, this appropriate use of the Latin can often deepen the spiritual tone of the liturgy and underline the gravity of the season.
But limited use such as this is far different from a complete 180-degree nostalgic return to an outdated rite.
The Tridentine Mass is not simply the current Mass (the one promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970) spoken in Latin. The Tridentine Mass, which dates from 1570, reflects a very different-and incomplete-understanding of the early church. Francis argues that "the 16th-century framers [of the Tridentine Missal] lacked adequate historical resources, as they were unable to refer to manuscripts dating earlier than the pontificate of Innocent III, around 1216."
A church digging in its defensive heels at the peak of the Reformation developed the Tridentine Mass, taking shots at pagans, heretics, schismatics, and "perfidious" Jews. The rich revelation of the Old Testament is mostly absent, and the participation of the laity barely exists.
The Second Vatican Council had some very good reasons to call for an end to the Tridentine Mass and to promulgate a new rite. More sophisticated research uncovered a fuller understanding of how liturgy was celebrated in the early church. Improved scripture scholarship developed into a new lectionary with a wider selection of readings. Better historical research removed fictional saints from the liturgical calendar.
Perhaps most important for the average Catholic, the Mass was celebrated in the language of the people. Interestingly, while the Tridentine Mass began to be used in 1570, Masses were celebrated in Latin as early as A.D. 350. Originally, the Latin replaced Greek because people understood Latin, and using Latin allowed more people to understand what was going on. In 1965 the church once again came to the seemingly obvious conclusion that people should understand what is being said in Mass.
The Mass that emerged from the reform of Vatican II is wonderful, divine, human, and sublime. It works, and it is enormously superior to the Tridentine rite. We do not need to celebrate an old rite. We need to get more people to celebrate the existing rite well.
The atmosphere is friendly,
By kiren (not verified) on Monday, August 15, 2011The atmosphere is friendly, reflecting to some extent the natural mood created by silence, candles, and America, but that reflects more on the theology of the meeting: They are "on their knees before God in fear, not backslapping brother of Jesus "Catholic, keeping a view of the church and theology aside in Vatican II.
Thanks a lot for sharing
By best hosting sites (not verified) on Saturday, July 23, 2011Thanks a lot for sharing these kinda valuable information's with us.I was looking for this from a long time.will look after for some more updates.
respond this topic
By JUDITHCole19 (not verified) on Tuesday, July 12, 2011Asking various people to submit social bookmarks? Nevertheless, nobody would assist you much better than bookmarks submission service.
Bells of St. Mary's
By Paul Bennett (not verified) on Saturday, November 6, 2010What could you possibly have against the Bells of St. Mary? You seem to spit on our traditions while claiming to venerate your father. Can't you see that the innocent social experiments of the 60's have failed miserably? Will you still be moaning about progress when the last Church shuts its doors? Your admiration for progress makes me wonder if you root for Lucifer, since he is the only winner when the Catholic Church is weakened. The attempts to "attract the kids" by making Church groovy and accessable is what divided us. We desire a return to the Bells of St. Mary's, when the Church was a lamp unto the world, not a flickering bic at a rock concert.
There is but ONE Roman Rite with TWO usages
By Kyle B. (not verified) on Thursday, May 27, 2010Ted Rosean, with all due respect, what a foolish and uninformed diatribe. Please read Summorum Pontificum and Liturgiam Authenticam; and read Sacrosanctum Concilium MUCH more carefully.
Agreeing with your views
By Rob (not verified) on Wednesday, September 1, 2010Ted Rossen is wrong regarding the Novus Ordo example he cites and most certainly the Tridentine Rite he mischaracterizes. Pope Benedict's Motu Propria gives permission for the celebration of the Mass of Pius V, provided the priest uses the Roman Missal of 1962 (a revision commissioned by John XXIII) and that the priest be familiar with and follow the rubrics as set out in the Roman Missal.
Therefore, both forms of the Mass are permissable.
Next, someone needs to inform Ted that Pope John XXIII's untimely death prevented him from calling a halt to Vatican II. Pope John was monitoring the proceedings and eventually came to believe that the Council was going too far. Exactly what Pope John had in mind for applying temperance is not known.
So many desire to recast Vatican II into something that was meant to bring Catholic devotions, Catholic practice, and Catholic teaching into a 20th Century framework into extreme liturgical reform. The Council was never meant to radically change all aspects of the Catholic Church.
Both forms of the Mass are equally acceptable which is what Vatican II decreed. There is no document that outlaws the Mass of Pius V, the Mass of all time, by Pius V's express order in a Papal Bull proclaimed following the close of the Council of Trent.
What this author doesn't
By Kyle B. (not verified) on Thursday, May 27, 2010What this author doesn't seem to understand is that the Novus Ordo and the Tridentine Mass are NOT two separate rites. They are two usages of the ONE Roman Rite, as stated by the Holy Father. "It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were 'two Rites'. Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite" (Letter of Pope Benedict XVI accompanying his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum)This author is adding to the confusion by postulating that there are two Roman Rites, creating a division where there isn't one.
The liturgical abuses we have endured at the hands of those who failed to properly implement the Council's directives, choosing instead to turn the Mass into their own private creation, is what has created the very atmosphere the author rages against. Thankfully Pope Benedict is trying to get us back on course by allowing the Tridentine Mass and moreover by bringing the Novus Ordo in line with the TRUE spirit of Vatican II in restoring the sense of the sacred to our liturgy. The next step is to get rid of the Marty Haugen-esque folk music and replace it with sacred song which reflects both Catholic tradition and sacramental theology in accord with the dignity that the Eucharistic celebration and the baptismal priesthood demands.
tridentine mass
By Ed (not verified) on Monday, December 14, 2009I still cannot understand why the Mass that was the correct rite for Catholics for hundreds of years somehow became too antiquated for the new age generation to which sadly I belong.
I am happy that the pendulum is swinging back the other way in my lifetime. My only hope is that the real Mass is completely restored before I die and the Church assumes its correct position in the world. My thanks to Benedict.
Two Rites Make A Wrong
By Dolorosa (not verified) on Wednesday, September 30, 2009The Latin Tridentine Rite was THE Rite before Vatican II and it should be so today. The "protestant" novus ordo (infiltrated by the enemies of Christ) has done great damage to the faith and to catholics and many have fallen into apostasy.
Rites
By SisterGMW (not verified) on Wednesday, September 30, 2009Anyone attended a Byzantine Catholic church recently? We sing the entire mysteries in English(acapella) and it is out of this world. No fighting about Latin or Novus Ordo. No "rainbow" vestments, either. Just solid, doctrinal worship in the Eastern Rite of the Catholic Church.


