I don’t particular care for that question or phrasing it that way. But it is what it is.
I think many who comment here are a bit too harsh on Ordinary Form parishes and their Catholics.
There are many orthodox ordinary form parishes with wonderful faithful, prayerful Catholics. They have been formed properly in the post-Vatican II Church and have no desire for an all Latin Mass, although they might be open, if properly catechized, to ad orientem and kneeling for Holy Communion, but neither are pressing issues for them and their Catholic faith.
A good traditional vernacular Mass, facing the congregation and with standing for Holy Communion means the following.
1. There is attention to detail and the red is followed and the black is said or chanted.
2. Altar Servers and lector’s are properly prepared, properly dressed and are attentive in what they do.
3. The priest is well prepared and downplays his personality although there is room for personality and friendliness at the homily and announcement time which is after the Prayer after Holy Communion.
4. The music/chants can be eclectic. But the theology of the words must be Catholic and orthodox and the idiom of the music should be seen as sacred not has banal or secular or dripping with Protestant devotional sentimentality, like Amazing Grace and How Great Thou Art, to mention only two.
5. There is post-Vatican II reverence at Communion time. The laity sing or speak their parts robustly.
6. The sanctuary is uncluttered and the altar has the so-called Benedictine altar arrangement.
In your experience of “good liturgy” in the modern form, what do you appreciate?
6 comments:
#3 and #4 are by far the biggest problems
The medium is the message said M. McLuhan. The objective of the message is to achieve control. Thew TLM's message was vertical, the OF message is horizontal. Even those of us who do not fully understand this insight, viscerally perceive the different result obtained by regularly participating in one medium or the other. Ultimately, when all is said an done, it is apparent to this commenter, the TLM retains the Catholic Church as came to us from Jesus and the Apostles, through the Church Fathers all the way until V-2. The No Church has only superficial connections to Trent and Vatican 1 only. But you will say the V-2 documents are just pastoral and did not change anything. That is true. However, the NO medium tells a different story. It is the product of the "spirit of the council" not of the Council. The NO order message is confusing. It is the German Catholic Church, it is the inability of the Supreme Pontiff to answer the dubia submitted by the 4 cardinals. Had he answered them the HF would have lost control of the reform, the Catholic reform.
Sounds like what used to be the Episcopal Church!...and, baby, won't you look at it now!
Father McDonald,
Well trained in the Faith is the real issue and problem with the OF because only about 30% of OF attendees believe in the Real Presence. So this form of the Roman Rite is not getting the job done. I think it could if it resembled the EF, ad orientem, kneeling for Holy Communion, etc., but unfortunately there are not many bishops on board with even these changes which might help.
FrZ is right over the target and getting flack.
the Egyptian,
You are correct. Interesting that it takes a convert to Catholicism like Father Z to remind cradle Catholics what it is really all about.
Post a Comment