www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West St.Theodore Romzha:Greek Catholic Martyr

I maintain Mr Davies� criticism is fair and on the mark, with the possible exceptions, owing perhaps to cultural differences, of his objections to standing and to both species for the faithful, both of which are Byzantine standard operating procedure but perhaps this is beyond the scope of Mr D�s article. In his other writings he is respectful of, even sympathetic to, the Eastern rites.

There are reverent ways to have Communion under both kinds for the faithful. Most in the Novus Ordo ignore these options, perhaps deliberately. First, go visit the local Episcopal church and watch what they do. The priest or vested chalice-bearer holds the cup while communing the kneeling person. Second, I have seen some Roman Catholic churches use an �intinctorium� (a neat Latin term for this new piece of liturgical hardware), a gold mini-chalice attached to the center of a shallow bowl-like paten. The priest dips the Host in the Precious Blood and places It on the communicant�s tongue. Add altar boys flanking him holding a houseling cloth under the communicant�s chin and you have a perfect adaptation of a Byzantine style to the Roman Mass � and (though priests are told not to use it this way � which is a shame) a great practical deterrent to Communion in the hand.

I agree with Brendan that there are reverent Novus Ordo Masses. The monsignor who gave me my moral theology through Confession many years ago was one of the priests who did one. Mr Davies acknowledges that objectively the NO can and does have grace (�is valid� in Western parlance).

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</A>

[This message has been edited by Rusnak (edited 01-15-2001).]

//the Medievals had the aphorism: "Vox populi, vox Dei" ('the voice of the people is the voice of God'.)//


Dr. John,

But the Medieval Church also had a List of Forbidden Books. Our Church didn't like the 'vox populi' in the Greek Catholic newspaper Amerika Russki Viestnik (bad Rus spelling), and we all know what happened to it.

Joe

Dear Robert,
Thanks for the link.

I think Brenden and Rusnak bring of very solid points. There are those in the latin church who go to far in their dislike for the novus ordo missae. With Rusnak i agree that Michael Davies is "fair and on the mark". Davies rightly never denies the fact the the nouvus ordo is valid and is able to apply the merits of Christ to us.

Fr. Hugh Barbour O. Pream brings up a good point in and article he wrote, saying that the church does NOT forbid constuctive criticism of the new mass. Even Cardinal Ratzinger has many complaints about the novus ordo and how it is celebrated.

For me it is very simple. Take the Traditional Roman Mass and the novus ordo put them side by side and compare the text and rubrics of the liturgies. Then ask yourself which one of the two rings more Catholic? Which one more perfectly reflects the realities, mysteries contained in the mass?

Why is it that protestants, liberals, and modernists HATE the Traditional Roman Mass and love the novus ordo?

I have a friend who converted from a very traditional calvinist church. She does not like to attend the novus ordo because she says it reminds her of her former protestant worship. She tries to attend the Trad Roman Mass or an Eastern Divine Liturgy.

The strange thing that i still can't figure out is how the novus ordo ever came to be. catholics prior to the novus ordo for the most part loved the Roman Mass, there was no need to change. And Vatican II declared the the Trad Roman Mass was to be preserved and Latin was to remain in most of the parts of the mass, especially for the cannon.

[This message has been edited by Khaled (edited 01-17-2001).]

Dear All,

All of the links, insights and opinions that you are sharing about the Novus Ordo are most helpful. I am glad to be a part of the discussion.

I don't mean to be repetitive nor to display my ignorance in the true sense of that word. I am still in that state regarding how the Novus Ordo is or is not organic in origin nor apostolic in nature. Please enlighten the ignorant. In our Church it's considered a spiritual work of mercy, perhaps not in those terms, however.

If that discussion is not useful because the issues raised are not important, please let me know that. (If the answer is there I must have I missed it. Point out where it is and I will go quietly into my cubicle and read.)

Thanks, again.

Please do not let the written expression impede the thought


Joy

Dear Khaled & Rusnak,
Your welcome!

From my Orthodox thinking, I never liked the Novus Ordo and I would not go as far as to say that it is valid for the sake of unity.
I have been under the impression for a number of years that Catholicism and Protestantism are opposites of the same coin in regards to their worship and place of worship. I resent Eucharistic ministers from the laity(men & women), the administration of the "Body of Christ" alone, the music and instruments, forms of iconoclasm, etc. I feel no reverence for mystery whatsoever during Latin masses. I sometimes have to internally get a hold of myself and pray to God to have mercy upon me. The only reason I'm there is respect for my wife's family. I am sure that the pray for my conversion to Catholicism which is reflected many times in our conversations.
My mother-in-law once was puzzled as to why my wife stopped serving as an Eucharistic minister in their church. I believe she suspected that I was the culprit and she was right(LOL)! What is ironic about my mother-in-law is that she will only take communion from the priest only. I wonder why that is?!!! In my limited perspective, I do not want communion or to be in communion with Rome until the Unity of Faith has been achieved.

The "Novus Ordo" is certainly a legitimate and valid Catholic liturgy. From my travels and visits to RC churches the problem lies not with the Roman Mass itself but rather with the laziness in which it is often celebrated (a problem also found in the Byzantine Churches). The attitude in which people approach worship directly affects what they get out of it. If one approaches the liturgy in the spirit that it is a waste of time then one is most likely to get what he or she expects. If one prepares properly for the celebration of that liturgy and joins the worship prayerfully with an open mind and an open heart, then one is much more likely to feel the presence of the Spirit.

Regarding Eucharistic Ministers, I have no problem with them, provided that they are really necessary. For the priest to use an EM when there are only 12 people at a daily liturgy is silly. But in some Roman parishes there are thousands of people and only one or two priests. In this case it is a necessity (but even it being a necessity doesn't justify the poor training and poor attitudes often found in RC parishes). When I stop to think that in the early Church people used to take the Eucharist home with them to communicate themselves during the week, I am not so bothered by the whole thing.

Moose,

The objective character of the Byzantine (capital-O Orthodox) and traditional Roman rites, as well as other, non-Byzantine Eastern rites, means the quality of the liturgy really doesn�t seem to depend on the disposition of the priest, etc. The Mass/Divine Liturgy simply is and simply happens, �k por�adke� or �as usual� as we say in Russian, regardless of how the priest and congregation happen to feel that morning. Michael Davies touched on this loss of objective character in his to-the-point criticism of the Novus Ordo.

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</A>

Sorry, but a well trained and prepared cantor does wonders for the Byzantine Liturgy. Just walk into a Ukrainian parish some Sunday when the Divine Liturgy is recited and tell me again that there are no external factors that influence the quality of the Divine Liturgy. While I have seen many cases where the celebrant and people are transformed by the liturgy it is simply not correct to say that external factors don't contribute to a good or bad liturgy. The same is true of any liturgy - East or West. You get out of it what you put into it.

>>>Just walk into a
Ukrainian parish some Sunday when the Divine Liturgy is recited and tell me again that there are no
external factors that influence the quality of the Divine Liturgy.<<<

Please! I experienced that, once. I still have bad dreams.

Well I can say that I myself avoid receiving Eucharist from EMs whenever possible. If there is a deacon present (Lord let there be more in the West REALLY soon) or another priest then I'll proceed to him for the wine after receiving the host. If there is no deacon present, then I'll go to a male EM before a female. Sorry if this sounds sexist, but I strongly disagree with the abuse of EMs in especially the Church in the USA. The Vatican has repeatedly and strongly condemned this abuse. I also detest the not-so-subtle switch of their proper functional name of "EXTRAordinary minister" to "Eucharistic minister". This is NOT something like the priesthood or diaconate -- no matter how much libs would dearly love it to be. Frankly, because of these abuses it will take some time to die out. This is due not only to defiance but I honestly believe ignorance plays a large part in many parishes. Lord please let us have more priests AND deacons!!!

Ok, I've vented. How cathartic. Thank you.

Pax Christi,
John

Dear inawe,
You said....."I don't mean to be repetitive nor to display my ignorance in the true sense of that word. I am still in that state regarding how the Novus Ordo is or is not organic in origin nor apostolic in nature. Please enlighten the ignorant. In our Church it's considered a spiritual work of mercy, perhaps not in those terms, however."

It is no doubt my lack of clarity that hinders you. Instead of confusing you further i'll give some links where you can read what the experts say. Hope these help.
www.latin-mass-society.org/msshst.htm [latin-mass-society.org]

Also at www.unavoce.org/ [unavoce.org] click on "liturgy" there are many good articles on the subject.

Dear Khaled,

Thank you for the links. I have bookmarked them and will retire to my cubicle to read.

I appreciate your help.

Joy!

Dear Friends,
Glory to Jesus Christ!

It is such a wonderful experience for me to read all your thoughtful comments on so many interesting spiritual subjects! My heart is so filled with gratitude for the gift to have been led to this Forum!

While newly canonized Byzantine Catholic saints are few and far between, I agree completely that we should follow our own spiritual traditions in honouring and invoking our saints and martyrs such as Saint Theodore Romzha and others.

At the same time, what is preventing us from liturgically honouring Orthodox saints who have been glorified by the Orthodox Church?

St Maxim Sandovich is greatly honoured by both Greek Catholics and Orthodox. There are so many others, including the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of the Soviet period.

Father Sergius (Brian) Keleher used to have a parish here in Toronto and I was privileged to know him.

He regularly read out all the names of the Saints listed in the St Herman Orthodox Calendar. He told me that "we don't question each other's canonizations."

Roman Catholic prelates regularly attend Orthodox canonization (glorification) ceremonies. They receive and take with them the icons of the saints being honoured.

There are Byzantine Catholic parishes who so honour Orthodox Saints.

I think that having devotion to those saints who share our Byzantine tradition and who are also honoured by our Orthodox brothers and sisters will do much in the ecumenical field.

This even goes beyond the Catholic-Orthodox paradigm.

I have a friend who was an Episcopal Priest of Ukrainian background.

He became very involved with the Byzantine traditions.

Among other things, he had an English Orthodox Monk paint an Icon of "St. Charles, King and Martyr." He is an Anglican Saint, and his feastday is actually today.

King Charles the Martyr actually called himself the defender of the "Orthodox Church of England" and he had excellent relations with the Greek Church.

Well, this priest friend of mine converted to Orthodoxy and joined the Antiochian Church as a member of their "Rite of St Tikhon" which is a Rite that uses an adapted Anglican Liturgy, as you well know.

He has also placed a large copy of the Icon of St Charles in the back of his Church where people may light candles before it. His church is vibrant and he has had many converts, as I have witnessed myself.

I also know a High Church Lutheran Pastor who has great devotion to Saints, including those Lutherans in their Calendar. There is also a "Lutheran Rite" Evangelical Catholic Church that does the same. One of their priests honours Martin Luther as "Equal to the Apostles!"

A parish that my uncle attended, the Cathedral of St Josaphat, recently added an icon of a former parishioner who died to its roster of saints. It is a beautiful icon of someone who attended that parish, someone the people there knew. Whether or not he will be canonized is really irrelevent. He already has been canonized by his parish, in their hearts.

In Christ and His Saints,

Alex