Posted on 12/20/2024 2:39:02 PM PST by ebb tide
It happened again a while ago. The Mass was honoring a former member of the parish who had just professed final vows. Visiting clergy were present. After the procession, when all were assembled on the altar, the pastor made the sign of the cross, looked at the packed house, gave a big smile, and said, “Yep, just another ordinary Mass at St. ‘X’.” A laughter of good will broke out. He introduced the visiting priests; and each, in turn, received a round of applause.
Whatever solemnity there may have been received a huge blow.
This is not another rant of how priests are deforming the Mass by their impromptu remarks. Rather, I am raising the question of whether the Mass, specifically the Novus Ordo Mass by its nature, may be deforming our priests. This is true even when it is celebrated reverently and on special occasions. In fact, it seems the more special the occasion, the more egregious the transgression.
Sign up to get Crisis articles delivered to your inbox daily
I don’t impute any fault to those involved. There needs to be knowledge of a transgression for that to be imputed, and the point of this piece is that we’ve come to the point where the knowledge seems to be lacking through no fault of the participants. I know each priest involved and had been to confession with most of them. They were solid on Church teaching and the guidance of souls.
By “deforming the clergy,” I mean that the Novus Ordo can seem (and I emphasize “seem”) to alter the nature of the priest from one who performs a sacrifice to one who is in charge of a ceremony. His whole attitude and demeanor changes. I am sure this is unconscious and that the vast majority of priests view their celebration of the Mass as a solemn event. They take what they are doing very seriously. They intend no disrespect to our Lord, nor do they intend in any way to make the Mass about themselves.
But that’s the problem: despite their intent, the Novus Ordo, by its nature, can (I could say “does”) make the personality of the priest an issue. It has become second nature to the clergy just as “lining up” to receive the Eucharist has become for the laity.
A Catholic priest is different in kind from Protestant clergy. At ordination, his soul undergoes an ontological change. The fact that he is called a “priest” and not a “minister” reflects this, for a priest is, by definition, one who offers a sacrifice. Only a priest, because of the change he has undergone at ordination, can act in persona Christi and change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord at the Consecration. He says, “This is my body,” “This is my blood.” That is what it is all about. Anything that gets in the way of that is suspect.
The Novus Ordo makes the priest self-conscious in the very act of which he should be most unself-conscious. During the time when they should believe themselves to be a “useless tool,” to use Ronald Knox’s phrase, they are made to feel the center of attention. And who would not, facing a large group of people with a microphone magnifying his every word?
Again, I do not blame them. This is how they have been formed—if not by how they have been taught in the seminary or by the example of those they have followed, then by the nature of what they are doing in the Novus Ordo. For the Mass is not only a supernatural act but a natural act as well; and the natural act they are doing in the Novus Ordo is facing people, looking at them, and speaking out loud. It is stretching the limits of human recollection to think they would not be conscious of the “them” they are facing and who respond to them rather than the One to whom they are offering the sacrifice.
This seeps in in so many ways: the “greeting” many priests feel compelled to give after the opening sign of the cross; the ad-libbing of parts of the Mass (allowed by the directions in the Novus Ordo to use “similar words”); the stress, with the increased selection of readings, on making an impression during the homily during daily Mass; the asides at the end of Mass to “have a blessed day” or comment on the announcements (a decidedly jarring break just after one has received the King of kings, the Lord of Lords).
It does not help when the laity are up there doing their part: lectors trying their best to intone the readings in just the right way; choir directors interjecting directions; Eucharistic Ministers arising from the pews to take their place around the altar and then jockeying around to find their positions in the church.
Again, I intend no slight at all to those in these positions. It is all done with the best, the holiest, of intentions. But the intention of an act does not override the nature of an act.
Imagine a young man discerning a vocation. I remember when I was doing so. My mother told me that you become a priest because “your life would not make sense if you were not holding up that host as the Body and Blood of our Lord as a sacrifice to God.” She said nothing about giving a memorable homily, making the Mass “relevant” or “interesting.”
But is that how a young man sees the priest today? Forget what is said on vocation retreats and in the seminary; he may not get that far. What he sees, what he experiences Sunday after Sunday, on a natural level, is a man leading others in a ceremony. If he is at all diffident, if he is at all self-conscious, he will have significant qualms. And if he is not diffident or is instead one who feels comfortable in leading others, the pitfalls are more grave.
How can he follow Fr. “X” who seems so at home up there? Who seems so at ease in speaking to others? Who gives the homilies that others talk about? Who is able to give those memorable quips at the end of Mass? You have to wonder if even St. Jean Vianney would have been cowed from pursuing his vocation.
This effect of the Novus Ordo has other ramifications. Because there are different Masses for different groups (the Children’s Mass, the Young Adult Mass, the Charismatic Mass, etc.), the priest may feel the need to cater to the particular audience. The parish needs a liturgy committee; and Fr. X must now have skills as a negotiator, deciding what’s appropriate for the various groups, what music is allowed, how “far” the Mass can go for the various groups. Walking this tightrope is not for the faint of heart. It also takes time away from a priest’s other duties, such as confession, counseling, and praying the Office.
I wonder if this emphasis on the personality of the priest doesn’t have effects going “up the chain.” It is a small step from “facilitator” to “administrator” to “CEO.” The more outgoing and affable priests are certainly talked about and noticed more (through no fault or desire of their own).
But might not this give them more stature when episcopal or pastoral vacancies are discussed? Certainly, such “people skills” are important, but the emphasis the Novus Ordo puts on them can overshadow more important qualities such as the prospect’s life of prayer, personal holiness, and orthodox beliefs. When a priest feels almost bound to make personal comments during Mass, he may later feel bound to comment on other things, whether in his purview or not.
Added to this is another discomforting thing facing clergy today: the danger of the “celebrity” priest. Many priests and bishops have their own outlets on social media. As much as I loathe technology and social media, I can admit—somewhat—the value of this. Today, this is how most people are reached, and some priests and bishops have used this well.
But again, there is the temptation—the almost irresistible temptation—to post or comment or “like” or “share” one’s views, and that is not good, especially for a priest. This is a problem for priests anywhere on the liberal/conservative spectrum, but it seems to me more natural, and therefore more dangerous, for the priest who feels at liberty to do this during the very act which should overshadow his personality more than any other: the sacrifice of the Mass.
Yes, many priests reverently celebrate the Novus Ordo, and let’s just say that that is most of them out there. But I ask you, how often have you been to a Novus Ordo Mass where the priest followed the rubrics—and only the rubrics—from start to finish: no comments at the beginning, no comments at the end, no fumbling with the microphone, no hint of trying to get the congregation “more involved” by his gestures, glances, or tone? In my experience, that is extremely rare and becomes almost nonexistent the more experienced (or comfortable) the priest is. (And this leaves out the peccadilloes of those assisting at the Mass, such as lectors, choir leaders, and extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist.)
Perhaps all this is a misperception on my part. It wouldn’t happen if I were more recollected and followed the missal and blocked out the imperfections or faults of the priest and others. I plead guilty. But I offer as extenuation that this is very hard to do when a man with a microphone is facing me and—for all intents and purposes—speaking to me. (And, again, made more difficult when I must shift my attention to others giving me directions.)
When I go to the TLM, I can say that I am never troubled by one thought that haunts me when I attend the Novus Ordo: Who will the celebrant be? I can honestly say it makes no difference at the TLM. Be he hermit or comedian, his personality disappears; he is bound by the strict and overwhelming dictates of the rite. I find it liberating.
If I could recommend one book for a Catholic to read from this year, it would be Dr. Peter Kwasniewski’s Turned Around: Replying to Common Objections Against the Traditional Latin Mass. It is as much good spiritual reading as it is apologetic. The first four chapters (on the ad orientem posture, the separation of the priest from the people, the “courtliness” of the TLM, and the rituals and rubrics) make convincing reading of why the TLM is more beneficial for the spirituality not only of the laity but also for the priest. And make no mistake, a rise in the quantity of vocations will be of little avail unless the quality of those vocations rises as well.
The Novus Ordo has been the standard for almost sixty years. Most Catholics—including clergy—know no other. It has become second nature to us. But spiritual writers warn us that the more natural a fault is, the more difficult it is to notice and overcome. We also know that slight faults over time become large holes later. My point, again—and once more excusing those who do this—is that this has become so natural for us now.
Not to be unecumenical, but a distinctive difference between Catholics and Protestants used to be the way we worshiped, and that was seen most clearly in the behavior of the priest at Mass. How he did what he did visibly showed a fundamental contrast between the faiths. The Novus Ordo has blurred this distinction and thus obscures the essence of the priesthood. It does for the laity, and I’m afraid it does so for many priests. If we are to evangelize the Catholic Faith, we must show what is different about it. That begins with the Mass, which begins with the priest.
Ping
The primary flaw of Roman Catholicism.
Rome believes He is sacrificed over and over and over and over (Faith of Millions).
The Bible teaches He was sacrificed once....and that is all. Never to be sacrificed again.
*****
11Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
12but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,
13waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.
14For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
Hebrews 10:11-14 NASB 95
No, do so e research before posting falsehoods.
The Eucharist is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ. Protestantism is the blasphemy that says it’s just a symbol. If y’all, at a bare minimum, listed to what he said in the upper room you would believe.
Here, read this and be educated.
https://www.catholic.com/tract/eucharist
"Do this in remembrance of Me."
Read the Bible and be educated and possibly saved.
And that's exactly what every Catholic priest does at Mass: he turns bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, just as He did, Himself, on Holy Thursday.
They are literally following Christ's command. Something no protestant pastor could ever do.
| John O' Brien, Roman Catholic Priest in the Faith of Millions. | Hebrews 9:24-28 | Hebrews 10:11-13 |
| When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command. | 24For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him. | Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. |
And that's exactly what every Catholic priest does at Mass: he turns bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, just as He did, Himself, on Holy Thursday.
Nope.
| Matthew 26:26-29 | Mark 14:22-24 | Luke 22:14-20 | John 13:21-26 | 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 |
| 26While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29“But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.” | 22While they were eating, He took some bread, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is My body.” 23And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24And He said to them, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. 25“Truly I say to you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”. | 14When the hour had come, He reclined at the table, and the apostles with Him. 15And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16for I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” 17And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; 18for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.”19And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood. | 21When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me.” 22The disciples began looking at one another, at a loss to know of which one He was speaking.23There was reclining on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24So Simon Peter gestured to him, and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom He is speaking.” 25He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ bosom, said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” 26Jesus then answered, “That is the one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.” So when He had dipped the morsel, He took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. | 23For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. |
Key Phrases/words:
Poured out: In the OT the blood sacrifice was never consumed; it was always poured out. We further have the drink offering which was poured out before God as a sacrifice (Ex 29:40, Numbers 15:4-5).
29.11 ἀνάμνησις, εως f: (derivative of ἀναμιμνῄσκω ‘to cause to remember,’ 29.10) the means for causing someone to remember—‘means of remembering, reminder.’ ἀλλ’ ἐν αὐταῖς ἀνάμνησις ἁμαρτιῶν κατ’ ἐνιαυτόν ‘but in those (sacrifices) there is a yearly reminder of sins’ or ‘… that people have sinned’ He 10:3. Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 347). New York: United Bible Societies.
Anything to distract Romans from the Truth.
Read the Church Fathers and believe.
Read the Bible and believe....maybe.
5 Extraordinary Eucharistic Miracles that Left Physical Evidence (With Pictures!)
If the words of the Bible are insufficient to convict a person of their sins....which apparently for you isn't sufficient.
It's why you've turned to the scapular...wearing that idol is a total denial of the one time sacrifice Christ made for our sins.
So the bible-thumpers are hypocrites.
You continue to be in denial of your idolatry.
The Trinity isn’t either but are you going to deny that?
You must have me confused for someone else. I'm a Catholic; I reject "sola scriptura" in toto.
I find it ironic how most protestants accept and practice divorce and remarriage, even though approval of it is not in the Bible. And many sects approve and perform sodomite "marriages"; also not in the Bible.
So they don't actual live by "sola scriptura", they live by "mea parva ecclesia", which makes them hypocrites.
You state....”I find it ironic how most protestants accept and practice divorce and remarriage, even though approval of it is not in the Bible.”......
“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce. ‘ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
“But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? – 1 Corinthians 7:10-16
So name him. We’ve got our share of backsliders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.