Larry Chapp praises the latest document from the DDF, Gestis verbisque which confirms what so many have been saying, no one is happy with the Modern Roman Mass, no one and everyone wants to improve it because it is such a mess in a variety of ways. We can all agree on that, both traditionalists and heterodox.
Larry says this, which I have said over and over and over again: "...Gestis...emphasis [is] upon liturgical abuse as a manipulative form of clericalism." Here Chapp is referring to bishops, priests and deacons using the Roman Missal has their own creative guide, changing words and gestures according to their narcissistic pleasures. Think of the ad libbing prior to the Penitential Act, as though the celebrant is the host of the guests before him not realizing he is one of them who together belong to God and His Church, he is no owner or host who is the one who welcomes as no one who is Catholic needs to be welcomed to their own home!!!!!
In other words read the black and do the red, got it?
The ad libbing and manipulation of words and gestures according to the narcissistic pleasures of the celebrant has led to "a crisis of [liturgical] abuse and a crisis of sanctity! Just view the professional video of the sacrilege at St. Patrick's Once Great Cathedral at a politically motivated funeral for LGBTQ+++ ideologies. That could never have happened with the 1962 Roman Missal--not possible!
Bishop James Conley recommends, as do I, that we recover the "reform of the reform" that has lost steam because of the preference for the TLM that modern reformers of the 1970 Roman Missal prefer, thus they have given up on the "reform of the reform." That needs to change and orthodox traditionalists must once again take up the call to reform the Modern Mass which everyone agrees is a mess and needs a major overhaul in rubrics, ritual and sanctity and reverence!
17 comments:
For all of the talk of "say the black, do the red," there is one problem with this thesis regarding the missal promulgated by Paul IV--there are a number of spots that allow ad-libbing (e.g., "using these or similar words"). Notably, it's much harder to ad lib in Latin.
Nick
The Novus Ordo is the Rite of disunity - too many options - the Mass can be radically different from place to place - suppress the 3 Eucharistic Prayers and mandate only the Roman Canon and then I may take the reform of the reform seriously
And how is this supposed crack down on liturgical abuse any different than the others we have had over the past 30+ years? These pronouncements from Rome mean nothing because the DDF or the Dicastery (?) for Rites/Worship (what ever it is called these days) have no intent to pressure individual bishops to actually do anything - and most bishops will not discipline the priests/deacons who commit the abuse.
Will the "crack down" also target the "traditionalists" who import rubrics/gestures from the so-called TLM into the NO?
Priests who pray the opening prayer at the altar? (The GIRM says the prayer is prayed from the chair.)
Priests who rest their arms on the mensa when speaking the words of consecration? (The GIRM says "He bows slightly.)
Priests who bow and incline this way and that during the Confetior? Priests who cover/unconver/cover/uncover/cover/uncover/cover the chalices/ciboria using the pall or the ciborium lids?
What's sauce for the goose.... DISCIPLINE!
Heavens! You just described the reform of the reform!
Ah, one man's abuse is another man's reform......
Yet the Novus Ordo has been a flop but arrogant clerics concerned only with their comfort level ignore that reality
Gladly, the 2002 edition of the Missal says that the manner of offering the Mass should be informed by the traditions of the Roman rite. And offering the orations at the altar is explicitly permitted under certain circumstances.
And eulogies are forbidden.
But maybe I'm not sophisticated enough to understand things like celebrating Mass in a way that rejects our traditions and allowing eulogies. After all, I'm not even a priest!
Nick
Nick,
There are a lot of braindead priests
Nickie - "...under certain circumstances..." sounds an awful lot like "...using these or similar words..." to me. Wisely, allowances are made for circumstances and similiarities.
A family member offering a remembrance of the deceased at a funeral following the prayer after communion is not, despite what you may think, a eulogy. It has been described as, "...a reflection on the life of the deceased in the light of faith” which is, in the eyes of many, entirely appropriate.
Fr K,
Do you reflect on all the babies killed by your Party’s love affair with abortion?
TJM,
And ignorant, prideful ones.
Nick
In the past decade I haven't been to more than a dozen Masses where the Confiteor was prayed. Usually it's a direct march to the Kyrie. Just an observation from Upstate New York.
TJM - Because I have the capacity, I reflect on many things.
As you have shown here repeatedly, you do not have the capacity to reflect on anything, including yourself.
A rose by any other name is still a rose, and a eulogy by any other name is still a eulogy. There is a place for that — the wake, the internment, the repast — but not at the Mass, whose focus should be on the worship of God and prayers for the deceased. The Mass is not a memorial service. Calling a eulogy by another name, just like calling a homily by a layman a "spiritual reflection," is just a word game, a dishonest attempt to do what is forbidden.
Fr K,
Go to confession and ask God’s forgiveness for your Hitlerian voting pattern before it’s too late!
Anthony - You are wrong. You can claim to be the definer of terms, and then proceed to do so to fit your preferences. You can define a cat as a dog, a car as a turtle, or a cubic zirconia as a diamond. But, the cat will still meow, the car will still turn on with a key, and Bulgari will laugh you to shame.
Post a Comment