Forums26
Topics35,511
Posts417,517
Members6,161
|
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311 |
(Sigh) Dr. Eric, if I were a cardinal, I'd vote for you. If I were pope, I would remove half of the American bishops. Not depose them exactly, but "transfer" them, heh heh. For example, Cardinal Mahoney would find himself the new Bishop of Komodo Island... there he could build another hideous cathedral for the reptiles and teach THEM to dance and flick the Gospel book around on their tongues or something. God bless, Karen
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346 Likes: 1
Jessup B.C. Deacon Member
|
Jessup B.C. Deacon Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346 Likes: 1 |
Several years ago, Cardinal Mahony issued a pastoral letter on the Eucharist. In reading it, I really had questions about his Orthodoxy. It really left the reader thinking that this man had no idea that Christ was really present in the Holy Eucharist. One may question if he is in communion with us.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
Karen, I posted: For me, it's enough that the novus ordo form of the Mass was promulgated by an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church and all the popes since then. And you responded: But without the approval of most of the bishops. The NO isn't invalid, nor officially heretical, but it IS inferior. And my reply is: I don't know if the majority of Catholic bishops approved of the novus ordo or not, but I find the point to be irrelevant. Catholics are supposed to obey the pope and a Catholic ecumenical council. That is basic to the Catholic idea of Church authority. The Second Vatican Council decreed the novus ordo form of the Mass for Latin Rite Catholics, and the popes since then have endorsed it. The question now for Roman Catholics about the novus ordo form of the Mass is simply one of obedience. As for the novus ordo form of the Mass being inferior, I disagree. It has an abundance of scriptural references throughout; it contains all the elements of a Divine Liturgy; and, most importantly, it has the Eucharist. It also allows a certain amount of flexibility, which is makes it adaptable to a variety of cultures -- especially non-Western cultures. Hence, it is well-suited for Roman Catholic worship around the world. I posted: Pope John Paul the Great celebrated Mass in the novus ordo form. So too has Pope Benedict XVI. And you responded: With all due respect, what is that supposed to show? Every pope who reigned before Paul V-- that's like 1500 years of popes-- didn't. And I reply: The popes' usage of the novus ordo form of the Mass since Vatican II shows that the popes endorse it. It is also an example of obedience to the decree of the Second Vatican Council that Latin Rite Catholics should imitate: both in the fact of using the novus ordo and in the reverent form of using the novus ordoI posted: The novus ordo is the norm for Divine Liturgy in the Roman Catholic Church. The problem is not the novus ordo; the problem is that the novus ordo isn't being followed by some of the priests and bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. And you responded: I would disagree that the novus ordo isn't a problem-- although it's a symptom of a larger problem that started centuries before the 1960's. I would say that there is something about the novus ordo Mass that gives rise to liturgical abuses. You didn't have these circus masses with the Mass of Pius X. And I reply: What is this larger problem that you allude to? There was a time when I thought that the Roman Catholic Church went off the rails when it stopped being Orthodox -- starting, roughly, in the 800s and continuing ever after. But, eventually, I came to the conclusion that both the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church drifted apart from each other and their common apostolic patrimony. While each was weaker in some ways due to the lack of the other, each nevertheless possessed apostolic patrimony and authority, and each continued to grow and develop according to the basic paradigm of each. Now, for myself personally, I also decided to cast my lot with the Catholic Church because I believe in the pope. So, I do not anymore see a worsening condition in it overall and lasting for centuries. I see instead the life and development of the Catholic Church. Again, I don't think that the novus ordo is bad or inferior. I think it is the new norm for Latin Rite Catholics to celebrate the Divine Liturgy: duly decreed by the Second Vatican Council and the popes since then. And I don't think there is anything inherent in it to give rise to liturgical abuses. When celebrated properly (such as the Vatican and at many ordinary Roman Catholic parishes), the novus ordo can be a beautiful, powerful, moving form of Divine Liturgy. The problem, instead, in my opinion, is one of pride and disobedience. It is the problem of the liturgists and priests and bishops who decided that novus ordo means "no order" or "my order" or "do-it-yourself" order. The abuses don't invalidate a duly decreed form for celebrating Divine Liturgy; the abuses are just that -- sins of pride, disobedience and (often) blasphemy, such as were evidenced in that video. -- John
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,724 Likes: 2
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,724 Likes: 2 |
I believe you are quite mistaken that Vatican II decreed the Novus Ordo. There was a 1964-65 missal promulgated by Vatican II, and the English version was used in the U.S. until around 1969, if I remember correctly. The Novus Ordo was promulgated in 1969 by Paul VI, several years after Vatican II ended. The Novus Ordo is not the mass of Vatican II. Get the two missals in English and compare them.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311 |
Dear John, I really don't want to get into this here... but I invite you to learn about the origin of the Novus Ordo Missae (which was not decreed by Vatican II, but was inflicted upon us after the Council, in 1970), and about its Masonic and Protestant authors. Familiarize yourself with the Ottaviani Intervention, and check out the book I mentioned by Michael Davies. Now, I'm going to drop the subject and wish you a peace-filled and blessed evening. God bless, Karen
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133 |
Hello,
This was the closing Liturgy for the 2006 Religious Education Congress.
This event is held annually during Lent. It is organized by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles at the Anaheim Convention Center (now technically not part of our jurisdiction, but the Bishop of Orange has always be an excellent host).
This year attendance exceeded 40,000.
The closing Liturgy was very good. I know this is not an opinion shared by many of those who feel they can judge a Liturgy by watching a video of it, but I was there and I do have very high standards to evaluate a Liturgy.
Maybe my standards are different than yours, but I challenge anyone to show that my standards are more relaxed than mine.
The first thing we need to take into consideration is that this was not a regular parish Sunday Mass. This was a special celebration for a special event. I have seen things done at Papal Mass that I wouldn't do during a regular parish Sunday Mass, but that done with care, dignity and decorum do have a place in a special celebration.
Liturgical dancing is one of these things. Yes, I know this is not an official part of our Liturgy, but I have yet to see a solid argument of why it should not be. After all, our bodies are also a creation of God and are also capable of giving Him glory. If our lips can do this, I do not see why not our feet.
In the Archdiocese of Los Angeles there is a conscious way to "try out" Liturgical dancing. This has been approved by our Cardinal Archbishop and he has not received instruction from the Vatican to reverse his decision.
So, his decision stands.
Now, I am not personally in love with Liturgical dancing, I think it can be pretty silly and it is one of the things most easily corrupted into mere vanity.
Dancing during this Liturgy was very good. My only request would be perhaps for more masculine expressions from the male dancers, but since they were so few, compared with the female, I think harmony was considered more important.
Now the rest of the celebration went pretty much according to the book. That is, our book.
The readings were executed excellently, especially the Gospel. Deacon Vince Tonkovicz (the Deacon of the Word in this Liturgy) serves at my parish. He is a phenomenal speaker, pretty orthodox (I'd criticize his "low" Christology, but given the trend here in LA, his position is rather moderate in that regard). He is just very good at whatever he does. I have the privilege to work under his direction in the RCIA team and he is a bright role model for people, like me, considering a possible call to the Diaconate.
The Liturgy was concelebrated by 12 bishops (in addition to Cardinal Mahoney as presiding celebrant) and by dozens of priests. Technically only the two deacons sitting by Cardinal Mahoney are considered to be officiating, but dozens of other deacons were present, vested in alb and stole.
The Cardinal celebrated the last Scrutiny for the Elect and then dismissed the Elect and the Candidates for full communion with a very special and very beautiful prayer and blessing. We had around 300 of them present at the closing Mass alone.
The music was fantastic (even with the little technical mishap they had at one point).
The Cardinal's homily was impeccable. It is a tradition that his homily is "translated" in its entirety to sign language for the hearing impaired, but this year His Emminence surprised us all by "sayng" himself a few sing language sentences to that section of the arena at the very beginning of his homily. Then he spoke in (a pretty decent) Spanish and of course, in English.
Everything was conducted with dignity and decorum and I think all of us that were there benefted from all of these expressions in our participation of the celebration of the Eucharist, but also in thanksgiving to God for an extraordinary event of Grace, as always is the R.E. Congress.
Hundreds of workshops.
A dozen of "thematic" Masses Friday and Saturday evenings.
A huge crowd of High-school kids on Youth Day (Thursday).
Morning, Evening and Night prayer every day.
Taize.
Concerts.
40,000 attendees.
And all you can see is the Liturgical dancer you don't like?
Really?
Shalom, Memo
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311 |
Dear Memo,
All I could see what a bunch of people worshiping themselves.
I can't believe you're actually defending this, but okay...
God bless,
Karen
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,724 Likes: 2
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,724 Likes: 2 |
Praise the holy trinity - I, myself, and me. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,716
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,716 |
Originally posted by MizByz1974: I would disagree that the novus ordo isn't a problem-- although it's a symptom of a larger problem that started centuries before the 1960's. I would say that there is something about the novus ordo Mass that gives rise to liturgical abuses. You didn't have these circus masses with the Mass of Pius X. Karen No but you had priests mumbling the Latin and getting Mass over in as short a time as possible. There were abuses of the Mass promulgated by Trent. No, the problem is not with the Novus ORdo Mass but with the formation of those priests offering it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885 |
XBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBXBX
The trouble with many who are advocates for the Pious V missal is they were never around when it was the norm. They dont know of the masses that were done at break neck speed in the early hours of the morning. They dont know that many Catholics were lucky to see the full or High Mass only now and again, as their normal Mass was the Low Mass.
As for the Latin Liturgy on the recording it would have to be said that yes we are in communion with them. That we do or do not like what we saw has little bearing on it. As a Byzantine I really dont care what the Latins do. I just stick to the typicon and keep plodding on ever eastwards.
ICXC NIKA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 194
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 194 |
Thank you Memo Rodriguez:
It is refreshing to hear the testimony from someone who was there and knows all of the facts, as opposed to those who rush to judgment based on a 20 minute video tape.
It reminds me of Senator Frist of Tennessee who had the audacity to make a medical diagnosis of Ms. Shiavo of Florida based solely upon his review of a video tape. The autopsy confirmed that the treating physicians were correct in their diagnosis; more than 50% of the brain had degenerated over the years into a watery mush.
The Florida case is the same as a case in Massachusetts. A boy, who was beaten by his father, is being kept alive by a feeding tube. The father wants to keep the feeding tube in place. The State wants to disconnect the feeding tube so that they can prosecute the father for murder after his son dies.
Where is the uproar from President Bush, Senator Frist, the Catholic, Orthodox and Evangelical Protestant Churches, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and others of their mindset about disconnecting the feeding tube in the Massachusetts case? Where are their venomous attacks in the Massachusetts case, when such attacks were made 24/7 in the Florida case?
But, to get back to the question at hand. Let's hear testimony from another person who attended the event before we figuratively tar and feather the Los Angeles clergy.
For those of you who are upset about the service in Los Angeles, you should write a letter to your Bishop instead of writing a post on The Byzantine Forum. It would be a lot more productive.
I also recommend that you do not attend Mass at the Cathedral Basilica of St. Louis on December 12, the Feast Day of Our Lady of Guadalupe. During the Mass, the Hispanic community of St. Louis puts on a tremendous, colorful spectacle which includes the reenactment of Juan Diego's presentation of the roses from Our Lady to the Bishop.
You will probably be offended.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,686 Likes: 8
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,686 Likes: 8 |
Dear John, While I wouldn't call all the Mass in the video heretical or particularly offensive, I would question the motives of those who plan such events (or at least which documents they reference when planning). I think all of us on these boards recognise authentic worship within the context of cultural celebration. The Procession is common to Latin America as is to nearly all the Churches, re-enactments are also common as the Good Friday Liturgy (or even every Mass/Divine Liturgy) is an example. But questions arise when something just looks and feels out of place. Where did this form of liturgical dance originate, how is it more than a created form, rather than a natural outgrown of local worship? Below I will quote something I ran across on Zenit regarding this subject, not that this is the final answer, but I think it succintly explains how many of the people here stand: Liturgical Dancing With a Key 1975 Article
ROME, 5 OCT. 2004 (ZENIT)
Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.
Q: Is so-called liturgical dancing allowed in English-speaking countries where traditionally dancing is not regarded as culturally proper? Can it be carried out during solemn occasions such as the celebration of the Mass? � F.Y., Auckland, New Zealand
A: The document that comes closest to being an official commentary on this theme hails from an essay published by the official organ of the then Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship, Notitiae, 11 (1975) 202-205.
This article is labeled as a "qualified and authoritative sketch." It is considered by the congregation as "an authoritative point of reference for every discussion on the matter." Therefore, it is commended for study by diocesan liturgical commissions and offices of worship. (The English translation below first appeared in The Canon Law Digest, Vol. VIII, pp. 78-82.)
The article was later republished with permission in the April/May 1982 Newsletter of the Bishops Committee on the Liturgy of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, which consequently published directives that "all dancing, (ballet, children's gesture as dancing, the clown liturgy) are not permitted to be "introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever."
Although not specifically mentioned in the instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," dance can be included in the overall prohibition on introducing elements not contemplated by the liturgical books.
On some recent occasions a certain form of dance has been introduced within the context of papal liturgies on the occasion of regional synods of bishops or canonization ceremonies. But these were usually associated with elements of African or Asian culture and are to be considered as special exceptions in virtue of the Pope's universal mission.
On recent occasions Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, has publicly criticized certain forms of introducing dance into Western liturgy especially in forms which reduce the sacred rite to a spectacle.
I am also aware that he has reiterated these criticisms privately to the bishops of several countries during their five-yearly "ad limina" visits to Rome.
The 1975 article from The Canon Law Digest follows:
� The Religious Dance, an Expression of Spiritual Joy �
The dance can be an art: a synthesis of the measured arts (music and poetry) and the spatial arts (architecture, sculpture, painting).
As an art which, by means of the body, expresses human feelings, the dance is especially adapted to signify joy.
Thus, among the mystics, we find intervals of dancing as an expression of the fullness of their love of God. Recall the cases of St. Theresa of Avila, St. Philip Neri, St. Gerard Majella.
When the Angelic Doctor wished to represent paradise, he represented it as a dance executed by angels and saints.
The dance can turn into prayer which expresses itself with a movement which engages the whole being, soul and body. Generally, when the spirit raises itself to God in prayer, it also involves the body.
One can speak of the prayer of the body. This can express its praise, its petition with movements, just as is said of the stars which by their evolution praise their Creator (cf. Baruch 3:34).
Various examples of this type of prayer are had in the Old Testament.
This holds true especially for primitive peoples. They express their religious sentiment with rhythmic movements.
Among them, when there is a question of worship, the spoken word becomes a chant, and the gesture of going or walking towards the divinity transforms itself into a dance step.
Among the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers and in the conciliar texts there is mention of dancing, an evaluation of it, a comment on the biblical text in which there is an allusion to the dance; more frequently there is a condemnation of profane dances and the disorders to which the dances give rise.
In liturgical texts, there are at times allusions to the dance of the angels and of the elect in paradise (cf. "Among the lilies thou dost feed, surrounded by dancing groups of virgins") in order to express the "joy and the "jubilation" which will characterize eternity.
Dancing and worship
The dance has never been made an integral part of the official worship of the Latin Church.
If local churches have accepted the dance, sometimes even in the church building, that was on the occasion of feasts in order to manifest sentiments of joy and devotion. But that always took place outside of liturgical services.
Conciliar decisions have often condemned the religious dance because it conduces little to worship and because it could degenerate into disorders.
Actually, in favor of dance in the liturgy, an argument could be drawn from the passage of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, "Sacrosanctum Concilium," in which are given the norms for adaptation of the liturgy to the character and the traditions of the various peoples:
"In matters which do not affect the faith or the well-being of an entire community, the Church does not wish, even in the Liturgy, to impose a rigid uniformity; on the contrary, she respects and fosters the genius and talents of various races and people. Whatever in their way of life is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error, she looks upon with benevolence and if possible keeps it intact, and sometimes even admits it into the Liturgy provided it accords with the genuine and authentic liturgical spirit." [1]
Theoretically, it could be deduced from that passage that certain forms of dancing and certain dance patterns could be introduced into Catholic worship.
Nevertheless, two conditions could not be prescinded from.
The first: to the extent in which the body is a reflection of the soul, dancing, with all its manifestations, would have to express sentiments of faith and adoration in order to become a prayer.
The second condition: just as all the gestures and movements found in the liturgy are regulated by the competent ecclesiastical authority, so also dancing as a gesture would have to be under its discipline.
Concretely: there are cultures in which this is possible insofar as dancing is still reflective of religious values and becomes a clear manifestation of them. Such is the case of the Ethiopians. In their culture, even today, there is the religious ritualized dance, clearly distinct from the martial dance and from the amorous dance. The ritual dance is performed by priests and levites before beginning a ceremony and in the open are in front of the church. The dance accompanies the chanting of psalms during the procession. When the procession enters the church, then the chanting of the psalms is carried out with and accompanied by bodily movement.
The same thing is found in the Syriac liturgy by means of chanting of psalms.
In the Byzantine Liturgy, there is an extremely simplified dance on the occasion of a wedding when the crowned spouses make a circular revolution around the lectern together with the celebrant.
Such is the case of the Israelites: in the synagogue their prayer is accompanied by a continuous movement to recall the precept from tradition: "When you pray, do so with all your heart, and all your bones." And for primitive peoples the same observation can be made.
However, the same criterion and judgment cannot be applied in the western culture.
Here dancing is tied with love, with diversion, with profaneness, with unbridling of the senses: such dancing, in general, is not pure.
For that reason it cannot be introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever: that would be to inject into the liturgy one of the most desacralized and desacralizing elements; and so it would be equivalent to creating an atmosphere of profaneness which would easily recall to those present and to the participants in the celebration worldly places and situations.
Neither can acceptance be had of the proposal to introduce into the liturgy the so-called artistic ballet because there would be presentation here also of a spectacle at which one would assist, while in the liturgy one of the norms from which one cannot prescind is that of participation.
Therefore, there is a great difference in cultures: what is well received in one culture cannot be taken on by another culture.
The traditional reserve of the seriousness of religious worship, and of the Latin worship in particular, must never be forgotten.
If the proposal of the religious dance in the West is really to be made welcome, care will have to be taken that in its regard a place be found outside of the liturgy, in assembly areas which are not strictly liturgical. Moreover, the priests must always be excluded from the dance.
We can recall how much was derived from the presence of the Samoans at Rome for the missionary festival of 1971. At the end of the Mass, they carried out their dance in St. Peter's square: and all were joyful.
Endnotes
[1}Vatican Council II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, no. 37; C.L.D., 6, p. 44.
In favor of the insertion of artistic dancing into the liturgy, reference can also be made to the text of "Gaudium et spes," nn. 53, 57, 58. However, the cited texts speak of manifestation of culture in general, and of art which elevates with the true and beautiful. They do not speak of dancing in a specific manner. Dancing also can be an art. Nonetheless, it cannot be said that the conciliar Fathers, when they were speaking of art in the Council, had "in view" also the reality of dancing.
N. 62 of the said constitution, "Gaudium et spes," can certainly not be appealed to in this instance. When such number speaks of the artistic forms and of their importance in the life of the Church, it intends to make reference to the artistic forms as relative to the sacred furnishings. The counter proof stands in the texts cited in the footnote: article 123 of the Constitution on the Liturgy and the allocution of Paul VI to the artists at Rome in 1964 (C.L.D., 6, pp. 64 and 735 respectively). ZE04100522 As for the case of 11 year old Haleigh Poutre, the court has already reversed it's erroneous decision to terminate her nutrition and life support because the little girl started breathing on her own. There's more about that at this ABC News site: Girl Beaten Into Coma Breathing on Her Own [ abcnews.go.com]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,189 Likes: 2
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,189 Likes: 2 |
John Patrick,
Are you making a medical diagnosis of the boy in Mass.? Are you even a medical Doctor? For that matter what the heck does this have to do with the strange Mass in LA?
On another thread you insist that we ECs follow your lead in instituting the Latin Divine Mercy celebration. I wonder if you will understand our disinclination to do so when you compare the Divine Liturgy with the LA Mass?
CDL
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 12
Member of the Modernist Resistance
|
Member of the Modernist Resistance
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 12 |
Just saw this travesty.  All I can say is, it's a good thing my computer room is next to the bathroom so that I could do my own worshipping if I had to - of the Porcelain Goddess. However, there was one part of this "performance" that I found extremely appropriate, although unintended I am sure: when the neopagan prancers lifted their legs en masse in front of the altar. Trinity
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 311 |
Originally posted by Trinity: Just saw this travesty. All I can say is, it's a good thing my computer room is next to the bathroom so that I could do my own worshipping if I had to - of the Porcelain Goddess.
However, there was one part of this "performance" that I found extremely appropriate, although unintended I am sure: when the neopagan prancers lifted their legs en masse in front of the altar.
Trinity Hey Trinity, welcome! And what a wonderful observation... God bless, Karen
|
|
|
|
|