I don’t get it; but I do get it. My generation of priests, some younger and some older than me, were taught and believed, even prior to entering the seminary, because of their parish priests and nuns experience, that the so-called “new” Mass was vastly improved over the “old” Mass.
In other words, the old Mass was bad. Why? Because it wasn’t the new Mass that allowed for more of a horizontal approach to the Mass, more flexibility and free-lancing, and, this is the most important, a post-Vatican II ecclesiology that allows for lay lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, Common Chalice, Sign of Peace and a casual atmosphere.
Yet, these Catholics who despise the Latin Mass (and let’s face it, a goodly number simply despise the Latin (and with the Latin, I can understand why people don’t like the EF Mass—they like their own language) they have no problem with ecumenism and Protestant worship. Yet, these very same progressives in the area of ecumenism will not be ecumenical with their own fellow Catholics who prefer the EF Mass and the Church as it was prior to Vatican II. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.
As everyone who reads my blog, I am eclectic when it comes to the Liturgies of the Church. I love the vernacular “new” Mass when the priest and the laity “read the black and do the red”. I have said this before, the only official change that I wish would be mandated, isn’t ad orientem, although I think it would lead to a healthier Church, but kneeling for Holy Communion, even if receiving on the hand is maintained as a legitimate option. Standing and receiving on the run does nothing for building up the Church true believe in the Real Presence.
I love the Latin Mass too, in its ancient form. I could easily be a pastor in an exclusively EF parish although I have no disdain for OF parishes which I have been a part of since the transition phase beginning in late 1965.
Therefore, those bishops and priests who see EF Catholics as ecclesiological part of the post-Vatican II Church should be praised and congratulated.
Our past two bishops actively allowed the EF Mass in parishes throughout the diocese. Our new bishop, Bishop Stephen Parkes greeted EF Mass goers at our Cathedral after Mass a week ago Sunday. He was in his episcopal cassock to boot.
And in two Sunday, the Sunday after All Saints Day, he will “preside” from the throne at the Cathedral’s EF Mass with our Vicar General and my former altar boy and parishioner in Augusta, Fr. Daniel Firmin.
Bishop Parkes, brother, the other Bishop Parkes of St. Petersburg, celebrated an EF Confirmation Liturgy last year.
Why poke EF Catholics in the eye by ignoring them and making them feel as though they are lesser than Protestants that these same “poke in the eye of EF Catholics” are glad to assist?
8 comments:
Thank you Father. When you told us that the giant bishop Parks celebrated an EF Confirmation, that was the most hopeful thing I've heard about the new bishop--hopefully the older brother influenced the younger one. I've had enough of bishops who have selective amnesia and an allergy to tradition.
And as far as the hypocrisy of Novus Ordo Catholics who despise the old Mass...you nailed it. That is the Mass that led us here. That is the Mass that formed the saints. How can people have all of these devotions to say, St. Padre Pio, yet despise the very Mass that he offered? How can anyone venerate St. Francis of Assisi, but denounce the only Mass he ever attended? The sheer stupidity of it is beyond me.
The Catholic Church always had liturgies where the vernacular was used. However, the TLM engages on a verbal and emotional levels whereas the new Mass uses the vernacular language of various quality and supplements it with music of no quality at all.
Expression of faith requires no words. St. Francis used to say 'use words when-if necessary. He had faith in God transcending mere human understanding. Gregorian chant is universally well loved even by non Christians. That liturgical music is proscribed at most Catholic Masses today.
There is no Catholic culture left at your suburban parish today. The TLM seems to say nothing to those people who cannot understand and even hate it, for them them it is just a museum piece. The new Mass with its usual shoddy musical programs satisfies until the congregation can transit to socializing with each other in the parish hall (consuming the eucharistic coffee and doughnuts).
What is left of Catholicism can be found at TLM gatherings. It is the future smaller Church Benedict XVI talked about.
I understand perfectly why people hate the EF. They were actively taught to hate it. The only way the promulgation of the new Mass would be wildly successful was to cast the old Mass in a negative light. Talk to the Catholics who hate the EF that lived during Vatican II or who grew up immediately after and you'll start to hear the exact same phrasing of the exact same criticisms of the old Mass. It's almost creepy.
I think that's part of the reason why younger laymen and clergy are less likely to hate the EF. By the time my generation came along, the overt criticism of the old Mass had largely let up and the permanence of the new Mass was assumed to be assured. I recall people like my parents occasionally mentioning that Mass used to be in Latin, but otherwise the topic just never came up. I didn't have any negative perception of the old Mass foisted upon me.
“Our past two bishops actively allowed the EF Mass in parishes throughout the diocese.”
No, sorry to disagree Fr. Bsp. Boland did not allow the EF here when petitioned by many parishioners in 2009-10.
Bishop Boland gave permission to me in 2007 to do so in Macon.
“Bishop Boland gave permission to me in 2007 to do so in Macon.”
Yes, I/we here know. That is what made it doubly hard when he refused us the same here. You began the EF here before your transfer to Macon.
The Latin Mass I celebrated regularly at MHT was the Ordinary Form. I never celebrated the EF there.
Yes, of course, sorry Father. Not the EF, rather the OF in Latin.
Post a Comment