Aloysius Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 I'm sorry, but if you can't notice a fundamental difference between the abuse of reciting two confiteors and abuses like ad-libbing and modifying the words of the eucharistic prayer and over-using eucharistic ministers then you're not thinking too deeply. The abuses here listed have been nothing but misplaced traditional catholic attempts at piety. Abuses that could be listed that occur in the current missa normativa are generally novelties and ad-libs. There is a huge difference there. Niether should happen. But excuse me for being more upset at an over-use of extraordinary ministers of holy communion or the ad-libbing of parts of the mass than at reciting two confiteors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
son_of_angels Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 [quote name='Cam42' post='952975' date='Apr 18 2006, 07:16 PM'] Anytime.....it is simply stating obvious..... [/quote] I'm sorry, what? Did you just echo me, because what I said applies to both Masses, not excluding one or the other.... Ah well, they say that imitation is the best form of flattery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 [quote name='son_of_angels' post='953154' date='Apr 18 2006, 10:35 PM'] I'm sorry, what? Did you just echo me, because what I said applies to both Masses, not excluding one or the other.... Ah well, they say that imitation is the best form of flattery. [/quote] Whatever......you need to let the scales fall off your eyes. It is only after I reverse your position that you make this clarification? Gee whiz..... [quote name='Aloysius' date=' Yesterday, 09:37 PM']I'm sorry, but if you can't notice a fundamental difference between the abuse of reciting two confiteors and abuses like ad-libbing and modifying the words of the eucharistic prayer and over-using eucharistic ministers then you're not thinking too deeply. The abuses here listed have been nothing but misplaced traditional catholic attempts at piety. Abuses that could be listed that occur in the current missa normativa are generally novelties and ad-libs. There is a huge difference there. Niether should happen. But excuse me for being more upset at an over-use of extraordinary ministers of holy communion or the ad-libbing of parts of the mass than at reciting two confiteors.[/quote] There is no fundamental difference Al. Abuse is abuse is abuse. If one does not follow the rubrics, then one makes the Mass illicit. This is just as true for the Tridentine as it is for the Missa Normativa. Even the indult mentality is subject to Sacrosanctum Concilium 22. [quote]22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. 2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established. 3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.[/quote] How can I say this? Because when Sacrosanctum Concilium was promulgated on 4 Dec 1963, the Church was still celebrating the Tridentine Mass. So, what does subparagraph 3 state? This would apply just with just as much fervor as it does to the Missa Normativa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 There are different degrees of abuses. Abuses described in this thread are only wrong because they technically violate the rubrics. Many abuses described regarding the Missa Normativa are wrong because they violate the rubrics [i]and[/i] because they are novelties inconsistent with Catholic teaching and tradition. There is a large degree of difference between retaining the second confiteor even though it was removed from the mass in the 50s and introducing novelties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 [quote name='Aloysius' post='953748' date='Apr 19 2006, 09:05 AM'] There are different degrees of abuses. Abuses described in this thread are only wrong because they technically violate the rubrics. Many abuses described regarding the Missa Normativa are wrong because they violate the rubrics [i]and[/i] because they are novelties inconsistent with Catholic teaching and tradition. There is a large degree of difference between retaining the second confiteor even though it was removed from the mass in the 50s and introducing novelties. [/quote] So we agree....abuse is abuse is abuse. There is no such thing as technically violating the rubrics; either one does or one does not. If something violates the rubrics, then it on some level departs from Sacred Tradition. How? Because liturgical law is subject to Tradition. If one departs from the approved text of 1962, then one is just as guilty of breaking liturgical law as one who celebrates Mass in a clown suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OLAM Dad Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 I don't know whey we continue to debate which rite is more prone to abuse. Anybody, even those with scales over their eyes, know the answer and in a moment of candor will admit such. The real issue is that some have a problem with others simply because they attend a TLM. The attacks are not against the TLM itself, rather they are ad hominem attacks against its attendees. This thread is just one case in point. It went from a serious discussion regarding rubrics at the TLM to this [quote]and to think the way some of these trads speak, it is as if the TLM is never abused.... [/quote] and this, [quote]You just shot a hole in their whole argument.....HOW DARE YOU!!!???? That makes my life a lot easier, thanks for the Easter gift!!!!! P.gif [/quote] and downhill from there. The original poster specifically asked for only those who could stay on topic to post. If you guys just want to insult and belittle people why don't you go to the democratic underground or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stbernardLT Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 [quote name='MichaelFilo' post='951369' date='Apr 17 2006, 07:26 PM'] While I disagree with cam, it's only because I disagree with the statement that Cam made it on. Anywho, to be human is to err, or something. No, there are no abuses, in the sense that someone is out to abuse it. We have two good priests, and parishoners who'd shoot a priest if he played with the Mass (in fact, one time a man got up in the middle of the homily and yield at a visiting modernist priest; not neccessarily the most humble way to do it, but I sure would say, it's certainly helps to keep the flock aware of shepards out to take our faith and turn it into another one of the products of this age, which too shall pass). God bless, Mikey [/quote] The fact that one of your parishioners got up and yelled at a priest during mass, sounds very,very unhealthy. I could never imagine someone doing this. And the crazy thing is that this guy was yelling at the priest about liturgical abuse, that's the pot calling the kettle black. But then I know a lot of traditionalists who think approaching a situation this way would be appropriate. Stuff like this makes me sick, and makes traditionals look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 If a Mass becomes to where it's not a Mass...walk out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 [quote name='OLAM Dad' post='953824' date='Apr 19 2006, 09:34 AM'] The real issue is that some have a problem with others simply because they attend a TLM. The attacks are not against the TLM itself, rather they are ad hominem attacks against its attendees. If you guys just want to insult and belittle people why don't you go to the democratic underground or something. [/quote] I for one am tired of people like EENS and StMore coming in here, telling us that the TLM is "superior" to the "inferior" NO mass or people like M. Filio telling us that people who go to the TLM are holier than people who attend Novus Ordo. I used to be sympathetic to the sspx to a degree. But now, after seeing how they act, there is no way on God's green earth that I feel an ounce of sympathy for them. [quote name='OLAM Dad' post='953824' date='Apr 19 2006, 09:34 AM'] I don't know whey we continue to debate which rite is more prone to abuse. Anybody, even those with scales over their eyes, know the answer and in a moment of candor will admit such. [/quote] Case in point [quote name='OLAM Dad' post='953824' date='Apr 19 2006, 09:34 AM'] The original poster specifically asked for only those who could stay on topic to post. [/quote] Please, as if EENS and St.ThomasMore stay on topic. They hijack more threads than the Creepy Aliens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelFilo Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 Note my hesitance as to the uncharitable nature of the act; but do not be fooled, while we are to be obedient to our superiors we are in no way enslaved to error. St. Athenasius (sp?) is a wonderful example, he knew his superiors, and he loved them, but he certainly would not bow down to injustice and error. It was hardly correct to yell at him during the Mass, but it ought to be noted, at least someone knows enough to speak up. The TLM crowd is almost unmistakably the better crowd at this. And as for Cam, yes an abuse is an abuse is an abuse, but to say that there is no degree of abuse then you misunderstand the nature of what an abuse is. Certainly, keeping to an older version of the Mass is hardly as reproachable as some new innovation. To note, my priest (from a good old suburban church) told me that another priest (from another different good ol' suburban church, which is but 2 minutes away from me walking) was wrong to bring up the children around teh altar for whatever the special occasion was, but that since it was done earlier, it was hardly as wrong as denying me communion for kneeling. Both are abuses, but which is worse? You see, the relaity is, there are degrees, and intent helps to create the sense of degrees. i would not hold a priest to as much responsability for saying the prayer to St. Michael before he leaves as I would to the priest who sings happy birthday after the petition. And certainly, I do not hold that same priest to as much error for saying the Hail Mary at the end of the petitions (as a final petition) even though it is an added prayer because it is not a break intended to severe the Mass and it may not even dawn on him it is a whole other prayer, simply another request, but in fact it is another prayer. I do not hold that to as much regard as I would denying communion to the kneeling. The reality is, some abuses are worse than others, but they are all indeed abuses and need fixing, but to judge the merit of something, you must recognize the degree of it's faults. God bless, Mikey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 If you hold all abuses as equal, then all would nullify the "Mass," such as changing the words of Consecration does. [quote] [...] abuse is abuse is abuse. There is no such thing as technically violating the rubrics; either one does or one does not.[/quote] Though not the same, this sounds similar to "a sin is a sin is a sin." However, just as not all sins are of the same degree and in the same respect - they have different levels of significance and culpability - the same can be said about abuses during the Mass. An abuse of one kind can not be said to equal another abuse of a completely different kind. Lastly, Mikey, do you really think that the Priest saying the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel is an abuse? I do think it was requested by Pope Leo after a vision... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC IMaGiNaZUN Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 The old priests tell me what TLM was the norm, that abuses were common. Now those who practice it, are so devout and serious, that they will do anything to not abuse, etc. It seems naive to claim that TLMs by necessity eliminate abuse. The problem is clearly those who do liturgies with agendas. BTW, whats the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist... ... ... ... ... ... You can negotiate with a terrorist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 [quote]The old priests tell me what TLM was the norm, that abuses were common.[/quote] Giving a Mass with more freedom might not have been a good idea at that time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 actually, there are some abuses at the TLM becausae of liberalism. some of th e priests mess with the rubrics etc. allowing english into the mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dspen2005 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 u say the same for the NO... so, as CAm said, abuse is abuse is abuse.... nothing inherent in the Mass itself, then... right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now