To me the liturgies of the Church should focus on worshipping God through the Church's praise and thanksgiving for the one Sacrifice of Christ which alone merits our eternal salvation.
By Church I don't mean a self enclosed congregation but rather the Catholic Church's three expressions: the Church Militant, the Church Suffering and the Church Triumphant. All three are present in EVERY VALIDLY CELEBRATED HOLY MASS. From the lowest to the highest valid Mass the Church, the entire Body of Christ, is present with the One who makes this possible, the Head of the Body, Jesus Christ, the eternal High Priest.
It doesn't get any better than that, good Liturgy that is!
Read this America Magazine article on what comprises "good liturgy." I find it depressingly lacking:
How do you rate the quality of liturgy in your parish?
When asked to rate the quality of their parish liturgy, the majority of respondents told America that it was either high (29 percent) or very high (27 percent). Juanita, of Florida, rated the quality of liturgy at her parish as very high, writing, “We have a priest who makes everyone feel welcome, says Mass with great reverence and gives meaningful homilies.”
Readers who judged their parish liturgy to be of high quality were more likely than others to call for better lay engagement at their parish. Sheila, of Minnesota, explained, “We are a welcoming parish, with well-done liturgies, but we want all present to be actively involved and feel they belong.”
Other respondents told us that liturgy was of neither low nor high quality in their parish (22 percent). Only 21 percent of readers rated their parish liturgy as low (16 percent) or very low (5 percent). Kelly, also of Minnesota, told America: “I always have high hopes. The congregation seems responsive, but a sense of togetherness is missing. Our parish has been suffering for a number of years. I appreciate our pastor; his homilies just usually lose me.”
Readers who were dissatisfied with the quality of liturgy at their parish repeatedly cited preaching as most in need of improvement. Daniel, of Arkansas, described the preaching at his parish. “We have a very small parish and do the best we can. If enthusiasm were the criterion, we’d have great homilies,” he said. “But lack of preparation, disorganization, questionable (when not simply incorrect) theology, and verbosity don’t equal good preaching.”
12 comments:
Most of the respondents have not the slightest idea of what constitutes liturgical worship. That's hardly surprising, since they have no experience of it. It is no longer part of a shared Catholic culture. It is simply going to church and liking or disliking the service based on the music, the preaching (that alone speaks volumes) or the extent to which they can be involved in the sense of taking an active role.
Paul VI and Bugnini were all too successful in their barely disguised aims, and there is no going back. In this respect Pope Francis is right. Uproot a plant and it dies. Two millennia of organic development cannot be reinstated. The Church will struggle on with ever-decreasing congregations but Catholic culture is dead, although a semblance of it may reside in small pockets.
Also, surveys have revealed that most of the people who attend 'parish liturgies' don't accept the Church's teaching on faith and morals. For all the good it does them, they might as well stay at home or arrange meetings with like-minded people over coffee and doughnuts.
America is a left-wing loon rag, so ignore it.
John Nolan's comments are spot on. The way things are going, in 10 years we might not even have ChristEasters around. Any religious vitality left appears to be in the Latin Mass communities.
John Nolan said..."Also, surveys have revealed that most of the people who attend 'parish liturgies' don't accept the Church's teaching on faith and morals. For all the good it does them, they might as well stay at home or arrange meetings with like-minded people over coffee and doughnuts."
The rejection of Church teaching exists also among "traditional" Catholics. There are "traditional" Catholics who reject that Pope Francis is Pope. They insist that Pope Benedict XVI is Pope.
Therefore, at this or that TLM, there exist schismatics.
If "traditional" Catholic bloggers are to be believed, as well as comments posted to the bloggers' commentary boxes, the widespread rejection of Church teaching and Papal authority exists within TLM communities.
To begin, Pope Francis is consider "heretical" by many "traditional" Catholics. However, when the TLM is offered, the priest and Faithful present, via the Roman Canon, testify that His Holiness Pope Francis holds the orthodox, Catholic Faith.
Therefore, those who assist at the TLM, but reject Pope Francis to the point that they insist that he's heretical, are two-faced. That is, during the TLM, they are united to the holy priest and the prayers that he offers.
Said prayers include the Roman Canon's Commemoration of Pope Francis, and the priest and Faithful's testimony that they believe that Pope Francis holds the orthodox, Catholic Faith.
But said Commemoration is rejected by many at the TLM who, pretend outwardly, that they are united to the holy priest and his commemoration of His Holiness Pope Francis. Said folks are two-faced.
Amoris Laetitia, for example, is rejected by many "traditional" Catholics." Pope Francis' Encyclicals have been rejected by many "traditional" Catholics."
The Novus Ordo, promulgated by the True Church, is considered "evil," and even "heretical," by many who assist at the TLM.
There are people at TLMs who insist that the Apostolic See has fallen into heresy.
However, the Catholic Faith assures us that "in the Apostolic See, the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate."
Therefore, at TLMs, there are people who reject the Faith.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
******* May Bishop Fellay, who has called His Holiness Pope Francis to correction, accept, in turn, with humility, the True Church's correction which, since 1988 A.D., has been offered to him in mercy to restore him to full-communion with the True Church. *******
TJM said..."The way things are going, in 10 years we might not even have ChristEasters around. Any religious vitality left appears to be in the Latin Mass communities."
That doesn't apply to Africa and Asia. The Catholic Church, via, if you will, "Novus Ordoism," is booming throughout Africa and Asia.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
******* May Bishop Fellay, who has called His Holiness Pope Francis to correction, accept, in turn, with humility, the True Church's correction which, since 1988 A.D., has been offered to him in mercy to restore him to full-communion with the True Church. *******
I cannot even try to improve upon John Nolan's well constructed argument. That there are those who will defend ceaselessly how things have changed or, could change regardless of necessity, orthodoxy, or, benefit, rationalizing ad nauseam those changes to themselves and others only serves to reinforce how uprooted the plant has become.
Mark Thomas,
This is the last time I will address you, since your positions are are incoherent.
1) Since you approve of whatever a Pope does (sin of papalotry) then confirm your approval of Rodrigo Borgia's and Leo X's doings. You keep avoiding this issue.
2) You are a left-winger because you NEVER criticize the left which is vehemently anti-Catholic. Moreover, you are kidding yourself that a lefty is pro-life. Pro-lifers never vote for pro abortion politicians. Lefties vote for the Party of Death, the modern Democratic which supports intrinsic evils such as abortion and gay marriage. FYI, the Republican party does not. To my knowledge the Republican Party supports no intrinsic evils as defined by the Catholic Church.
TJM
Hang on - Leo X excommunicated Luther. Francis seems to want to canonize him. Alexander VI was worldly, but doctrinally orthodox and liturgically meticulous. Most of the lurid tales about him were put about by his enemies. The same Borgia family produced a saint.
TJM, you pose questions to me. That is fine. But please answer the following:
Is Pope Francis orthodox?
Has the Apostolic See preserved the Catholic Religion immaculate?
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
**** Since 1988 A.D., the True Church has offered merciful correction to Bishop Fellay to facilitate his return to full-communion with the True Church. Sadly, Bishop Fellay has refused to accept Holy Mother Church's merciful correction in question.
May Bishop Fellay, who is keen to "correct" His Holiness Pope Francis, accept, in turn, the correction that Holy Mother Church has, since 1988 A.D., offered to him. *******
TJM said..."This is the last time I will address you, since your positions are are incoherent."
That is fine. Then, I will respond this final time to you. That will end our back-and-forth with each other. Thank you.
TJM said..."1) Since you approve of whatever a Pope does (sin of papalotry) then confirm your approval of Rodrigo Borgia's and Leo X's doings. You keep avoiding this issue."
I "approve" the teachings of Holy Mother Church in regard to my submission to His Holiness Pope Francis God-given authority to teach, govern, and sanctify me.
I give thanks unto God that I have been gifted to hold to the Catholic Religion. The Catholic Religion commands the following of me:
"In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.
"This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will."
TJM, I submit happily to the above teaching. I submit to, and give thanks unto God, for Pope Francis' God-given teaching authority over me.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
******* May Bishop Fellay, who has called His Holiness Pope Francis to "correction," accept, in turn, the merciful correction that Holy Mother Church has offered to him since 1988 A.D. to restore him to full-communion with the True Church. *******
John Nolan,
Notwithstanding Leo X's excommunication of Martin Luther, whose life and works Pope Francis seems to be celebrating for God knows what reason, I would be weary of trying to canonize the Medici pope. I have read a great deal about Leo X from many sources and I think the Diabolis Advocatus might have his hands full.
TJM
The Advocatus Diaboli (both nouns are second declension, by the way) must have been on Sabbatical when the second worst pope of modern times was beatified by the worst.
Leo X was mediocre. I have a sneaking admiration for Julius II but would not want to canonize him. Canonizing popes should be rarer than it has become. The greatest pope of the High Middle Ages (Innocent III) and the greatest pope of the 19th century (Leo XIII) seem to have been overlooked.
John Nolan,
My Latin is a bit rusty! On reflection I believe the Latin term is advocatus diaboli. I LOVE your first sentence. I have to say, in my highflown opinion, that this mania of beatifying recently deceased Pope's who are barely in the ground is unseemly. A truly heroic figure and one of my favorite saints, St. Thomas More, was martyred in 1535 but was not canonized until 1935 by a heroic Pope, Pius XI, a stark contrast to Pope Francis. Pius XI faced real menaces,and not bogey men like Global Warming.
Your point is well taken with Innocent III and Leo XIII. I also admire Julius II who charged armed into battle when in his 70s!
Post a Comment