A comment by Martin Luther foretold the end of the church if the mass is taken away. The battle pitting the traditional catholic mass and the new mass seems to become the next battle front. It is billed to be a controversy with the potential of splitting Catholics down the middle. Several leaders over the years have voiced their concern with different views depending on individual inclination and formation background.
The Vatican II appears to be a point of reference with its injection of modernism. The argument against modernism suggests that the call for ecumenism has led to false faith. It is an attempt to restore or maintain the tradition of a church that has survived centuries following the same format.
The desire to modernize the liturgy is not monopolized by the current generation. History has it that St. Athanasius was faced with the same quest in the fourth century. His letter to the faithful helped to stop a wave that sort to change the status. He encouraged Catholics to remain faithful to tradition and resist the urge to adopt practices that would cripple the body of Christ.
Proponents of Trindentine were worried about the radical changes that came with the new version. It had taken two thousand years to develop the existing version. The fact that by a stroke of a pen, all this would be changed became a mystery. The faithful has an obligation to follow the pope in his Extraordinary Magisterium.
The entry of a new version did not mean that the old one was to be abandoned. The pope formed a commission that was to advise him on the best way forward. The difference can be felt in the order of mass and arrangement at the altar. These differences make the two versions distinct.
The priest began his Eucharistic celebration in the sacristy by blessing water with salt. It was to be sprinkled to congregant during the entry procession. Vestments for the main celebrant differed from those of his co-celebrants. There was a distinct psalm to signal the beginning of Eucharistic celebrations.
The procession entered the church with a chalice that was placed on the credence table. All the while, the deacons, altar servers and priests had their back on congregants. An antiphon is recited before the sign of the cross can be made.
Vatican II allowed the communion to be received using hands. This is a major departure from tradition where priests placed the communion on the tongue. Only the priest was allowed to administer it and the receiver knelt while receiving the communion. The tabernacle has also been moved from the center of many churches to the side.
It is uncertain if the new version has saved the church or led to its fall. An example is the decline in vocations as the number of nuns, brothers and priests reduce. Conservatives argue that there was no crisis that necessitated the change. Statistics indicate a dangerous decline in congregations as well as vocations. The debate now is whether things would improve if the traditional version is reintroduced.
The Vatican II appears to be a point of reference with its injection of modernism. The argument against modernism suggests that the call for ecumenism has led to false faith. It is an attempt to restore or maintain the tradition of a church that has survived centuries following the same format.
The desire to modernize the liturgy is not monopolized by the current generation. History has it that St. Athanasius was faced with the same quest in the fourth century. His letter to the faithful helped to stop a wave that sort to change the status. He encouraged Catholics to remain faithful to tradition and resist the urge to adopt practices that would cripple the body of Christ.
Proponents of Trindentine were worried about the radical changes that came with the new version. It had taken two thousand years to develop the existing version. The fact that by a stroke of a pen, all this would be changed became a mystery. The faithful has an obligation to follow the pope in his Extraordinary Magisterium.
The entry of a new version did not mean that the old one was to be abandoned. The pope formed a commission that was to advise him on the best way forward. The difference can be felt in the order of mass and arrangement at the altar. These differences make the two versions distinct.
The priest began his Eucharistic celebration in the sacristy by blessing water with salt. It was to be sprinkled to congregant during the entry procession. Vestments for the main celebrant differed from those of his co-celebrants. There was a distinct psalm to signal the beginning of Eucharistic celebrations.
The procession entered the church with a chalice that was placed on the credence table. All the while, the deacons, altar servers and priests had their back on congregants. An antiphon is recited before the sign of the cross can be made.
Vatican II allowed the communion to be received using hands. This is a major departure from tradition where priests placed the communion on the tongue. Only the priest was allowed to administer it and the receiver knelt while receiving the communion. The tabernacle has also been moved from the center of many churches to the side.
It is uncertain if the new version has saved the church or led to its fall. An example is the decline in vocations as the number of nuns, brothers and priests reduce. Conservatives argue that there was no crisis that necessitated the change. Statistics indicate a dangerous decline in congregations as well as vocations. The debate now is whether things would improve if the traditional version is reintroduced.
About the Author:
You can visit traditionalcatholicpriest.com for more helpful information about The Traditional Catholic Mass Debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment