As a choir director at a local suburban parish, I appreciate these talks a lot. One thing I’ve felt since I’ve started is just a sense of being lost and without direction. I so wish we had diocesan lead liturgists who could guide the diocese to be faithful to the missal, but the sad reality is that many bishops simply don’t have time or don’t care about facilitating something like “right worship” in their diocese. As a convert who craves direction and tutelage (as a child from a parent) I often feel lost and that I have to “make my own way”. Mother Church may be mother, but she often feels like an absent mother, and that hurts my heart.
This was by far the best of the Liturgical focused interviews lately. Love this man and his passion. Going through VII right now and have been coming to the same Spirit-led conclusion: we must actually do Church the way the Council Fathers taught, it really has not been fully tried.
What a thoughtful and intelligent conversation, gentlemen! The comment that the reforms in the Church perhaps neglected personal transformation over liturgical, was especially enlightening. As far as retaining Latin in the liturgy, wasn’t it wonderful when the Roman rite worldwide was known to all in its universal and sacred language?
Something that a lot of Traditionalists bring up when they compare the Novus Ordo with the Tridentine Mass is the differences in the Collects and Post Communion Prayers. I've done a few comparisons myself and some of them are pretty different. So while a lot of the "smells and bells" of tradition are called for in the current liturgical books, many Traditionalists point to the changes in these prayers as a reason the current Missal is "manufactured" and breaks with tradition. I feel like I haven't heard that addressed from those in favor of more Traditionally celebrated Novus Ordo. As someone who aligns very much with Benedict XVI and the two in this conversation, I have a hard time wrapping my head around why these prayers were changed and if they ought to be restored is some way. I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts on that.
I like the idea of the Church offering the Holy Mass in the same language the world over. There is no reason why the.vast majority of Catholic school children can't master Latin. There is also the added benefit of fidelity and uniformity of Catholic worship.
@@aglenriosit isn’t Guff. The Church is not just the Roman rite and you also forget all the various rites within the Roman rite as well. Thus romanticized search for “uniformity “ is a dead end
@@briandelaney9710 Just because I am speaking specifically of one Catholic rite doesn't mean I am somehow unaware of all the others. The only uniformity that I was interested was within one of the 24 rites of the Catholic Church. To conflate what I said about one rite to be about unformity between all the rights is an incorrect assumption regarding what I was saying.
A practice that I saw during the pandemic was to kneel and receive on the hand. I’ve taken up that practice, and I think it shows due reverence and receptivity. It was kind of neat to see that practice emerge.
At my diocesan parish about a third receive on the tongue and about ten people also kneel. Our priests are fine with either way and all is harmonious. So long as the Church allows both that is how it should be. I was 18 in 1968!
The Last Supper was a Passover Seder, which (at our best guess) began with the father of the family breaking the matzo and placing a piece on the tongues of all the family members. Validity is a very low bar, and while liturgical mortification can be sanctifying, quiet tweaking of practice can nudge a parish
I have looked into the history of the way in which the Eucharist was shared. Firstly, of course, we have the words of Our Lord himself “Take and eat.” It is difficult to picture the Apostles sticking out their tongues in response to this particular request! Then, there is no doubt at all that, in the early Church, the practice was for communicants to take the sacred species in their hands. We know this because of the Council of Constantinople. Pious ladies in the Church began the practice of bringing gold or silver spoons with them so that the sacred species could be put onto the spoon and then straight into their mouth, to avoid having to touch it with their “unclean” hands. The Council taught, specifically, against this error, stating that all parts of the body of a Christian, washed clean by the waters of Baptism, were equally clean and that the hands of a Christian were not in any way “unclean” as far as taking the sacred species was concerned. The practice of communion on the tongue is relatively recent in the history of the Church. It was not introduced because there was any objection to the sacred species being placed into the hands of the communicant - the Council of Constantinople had refuted this particular error. Once all of society was Christian and everyone, whether a believer or not, was expected to attend Mass and to receive the Eucharist, it was easy for those practising Satanic rituals to take the host in their hands and keep it for later use in a Satanic ritual. So, the Priest was instructed to place the host directly onto the tongue of each communicant and make sure that he did swallow it. The same rule still applies. The Priest is required to watch the communicant as he takes the host from his hand and places it into his mouth. If he endeavours to walk away with the host still in his hands, the Priest must call him back and watch him place the host in his mouth. While I can understand the nostalgia for the “good old days” there is no historic evidence that communion on the tongue was ever the practice of the early Church. For example, the Eastern Orthodox Churches have always followed the practice of communion in the hand - from the days when the Church was founded, until now, without interruption.
If receiving kneeling on the tongue is also a legitimate option by Mother Church, even if most people at Mass are receiving on the hand, why is Larry being so judgemental?
Genuinely curious what your theological opposition to altar girls are. Altar servers are not consecrated as priests and gender seems irrelevant to the station.
Post-modernism came so fast in the last thirty years that the reforms to simplify and do a back-to-the-basics-liturgy is already outdated and pointless in this overtly secular,stale and disconnected and troubled age we’re in now.
I found the introduction to the new mass a very very disturbing event that damaged or made more difficult my Catholic faith. The initial change, preserving some Latin was almost okay, but they got rid of that and went with the warm and fuzzy Jesus, at the same time, all catechesis, which was rather normative from the pulpit went away, as did most of the sense of the sacred: communion rails, even confessionals, ugly altars, moving the Tabernacle, and basically destroying the sense of the sacred. It was an assault on the sensibilities and norms of the Catholic people everywhere. The mass became this flexible plaything, and still is. Many people fell away, many. I asked myself why should I bother going? They never talked about Christ, the mass was bereft of any sense of the sacred, indeed, to this day some do not wear all the vestments, nor perform the lavabo. I look up there and see a priest in his liturgical underwear. Just today, Palm Sunday, they alienated me as they do every single year. There was no real reading of the Gospel, just a short reading at the very beginning of mass, and the two usual readings before the Gospel, but when the time for the Gospel came, we got a homily and then they moved to the eucharistic part, and we were informed that the confirmation class would be doing a passion play after the mass, and we were all invited to stay. It's shit, okay, shit is what they are doing. They have made this thing a flaming hoop for the poor buggers getting confirmed to all play dress-up and do a play AT MASS, basically. Add to that the lousy music and you can see it is still raining shit in some parishes. One time in the past, a few years back, maybe 10 years? They only did the eucharistic part of the mass and launched into the flaming hoop passion play right after, it was nuts. Here's the thing, they abuse the mass, all the time, nearly everywhere. At the local Cathedral the "hymns" are predicably uninspired crap that would 95% of the time be just fine in any Episcopalian church with some woman pretending to be a priest. Add to that the unending noise from the professional cantor and try to pretend this is an improvement from any disconnect in the former Latin mass. It is criminal what they did. It is criminal what they do now. Then I see in one parish bulletin about the parish being assessed 1.9 million for settlement for abuse of "clergy and laity". Laity my ass. And we must "in justice" make these amends for healing etc..... Well what a pile of crap that is. I am not responsible for predatory clergy, nor for that matter, slavery, bestiality, nor the bombing of Hiroshima or Tokyo. So, the mass still sucks in many places. Many. If we had an actual pope, a father, a leader, a man who loves children and families, then, something would be done, and Germany would have a lot of red-assed clergy from the very most needed ass beating they so richly deserve, and quite frankly a bunch of murals done by a sexual predator would be ripped down and some actual listening to abused nuns would take place, after which said predator would receive public corporal punishment on his rear-side and back. You may think I am off topic from the mass and liturgy BUT I AM NOT, it is all part and parcel of the same zeitgeist. A nice German word explaining it all rather succinctly. We need to bring back corporal punishment ABSOLUTELY for prelates. Caning would be a nice start. I would nominate a few lay people as well, the baby killing ones would be a start. We need to punish crime, not pretend. Let's NOT continue let's STOP "Defining Deviancy Down" Old Moynihan had it dead right. Let the beatings begin!! The hour is late, the day is dark.
![GEEK TIMË [OFFICIAL AUDIO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ry-6RvkH880/mqdefault.jpg)
As a choir director at a local suburban parish, I appreciate these talks a lot. One thing I’ve felt since I’ve started is just a sense of being lost and without direction. I so wish we had diocesan lead liturgists who could guide the diocese to be faithful to the missal, but the sad reality is that many bishops simply don’t have time or don’t care about facilitating something like “right worship” in their diocese. As a convert who craves direction and tutelage (as a child from a parent) I often feel lost and that I have to “make my own way”. Mother Church may be mother, but she often feels like an absent mother, and that hurts my heart.
This was by far the best of the Liturgical focused interviews lately. Love this man and his passion. Going through VII right now and have been coming to the same Spirit-led conclusion: we must actually do Church the way the Council Fathers taught, it really has not been fully tried.
What a thoughtful and intelligent conversation, gentlemen! The comment that the reforms in the Church perhaps neglected personal transformation over liturgical, was especially enlightening. As far as retaining Latin in the liturgy, wasn’t it wonderful when the Roman rite worldwide was known to all in its universal and sacred language?
What a measured and astute approach. I would love to continue listening on the upcoming podcast.
Larry, you are great! Happy triduum to you and yours.
YOU HAVE BEEN ON CATCHING FOXES! It was the greatest day of my life. Good times.
I knew it! Ha
Something that a lot of Traditionalists bring up when they compare the Novus Ordo with the Tridentine Mass is the differences in the Collects and Post Communion Prayers.
I've done a few comparisons myself and some of them are pretty different. So while a lot of the "smells and bells" of tradition are called for in the current liturgical books, many Traditionalists point to the changes in these prayers as a reason the current Missal is "manufactured" and breaks with tradition.
I feel like I haven't heard that addressed from those in favor of more Traditionally celebrated Novus Ordo. As someone who aligns very much with Benedict XVI and the two in this conversation, I have a hard time wrapping my head around why these prayers were changed and if they ought to be restored is some way.
I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts on that.
Is there a bibliography of liturgical history posted any place? Books, articles, and/or videos.
I like the idea of the Church offering the Holy Mass in the same language the world over. There is no reason why the.vast majority of Catholic school children can't master Latin. There is also the added benefit of fidelity and uniformity of Catholic worship.
There are 24 different Rites in the Catholic Church with many different liturgical traditions. There was never a uniformity
@@briandelaney9710 Don't give me that guff. The context of the video and my comment is obviously the Latin Rite.
@@aglenriosit isn’t Guff. The Church is not just the Roman rite and you also forget all the various rites within the Roman rite as well. Thus romanticized search for “uniformity “ is a dead end
@@briandelaney9710 Just because I am speaking specifically of one Catholic rite doesn't mean I am somehow unaware of all the others. The only uniformity that I was interested was within one of the 24 rites of the Catholic Church. To conflate what I said about one rite to be about unformity between all the rights is an incorrect assumption regarding what I was saying.
If the Church had a universal official language, it should be Greek, not Latin
A practice that I saw during the pandemic was to kneel and receive on the hand. I’ve taken up that practice, and I think it shows due reverence and receptivity. It was kind of neat to see that practice emerge.
At my diocesan parish about a third receive on the tongue and about ten people also kneel. Our priests are fine with either way and all is harmonious. So long as the Church allows both that is how it should be.
I was 18 in 1968!
The Last Supper was a Passover Seder, which (at our best guess) began with the father of the family breaking the matzo and placing a piece on the tongues of all the family members. Validity is a very low bar, and while liturgical mortification can be sanctifying, quiet tweaking of practice can nudge a parish
Taste and See the goodness of our Lord. Come and follow me. The Substance is more important than the forms.
Can someone _please_ recommend a first rate book on Mariology? I don't want a popular level book but something more in-depth and profound.
Daughter Zion by Joseph Ratzinger
@@Javier-un5nbMary, The Church at the Source by Balthazar and Ratzinger
@bayreuth79 - Mariology by Manfred Hauke (CUA Press)
I have looked into the history of the way in which the Eucharist was shared. Firstly, of course, we have the words of Our Lord himself “Take and eat.” It is difficult to picture the Apostles sticking out their tongues in response to this particular request! Then, there is no doubt at all that, in the early Church, the practice was for communicants to take the sacred species in their hands. We know this because of the Council of Constantinople. Pious ladies in the Church began the practice of bringing gold or silver spoons with them so that the sacred species could be put onto the spoon and then straight into their mouth, to avoid having to touch it with their “unclean” hands. The Council taught, specifically, against this error, stating that all parts of the body of a Christian, washed clean by the waters of Baptism, were equally clean and that the hands of a Christian were not in any way “unclean” as far as taking the sacred species was concerned. The practice of communion on the tongue is relatively recent in the history of the Church. It was not introduced because there was any objection to the sacred species being placed into the hands of the communicant - the Council of Constantinople had refuted this particular error. Once all of society was Christian and everyone, whether a believer or not, was expected to attend Mass and to receive the Eucharist, it was easy for those practising Satanic rituals to take the host in their hands and keep it for later use in a Satanic ritual. So, the Priest was instructed to place the host directly onto the tongue of each communicant and make sure that he did swallow it. The same rule still applies. The Priest is required to watch the communicant as he takes the host from his hand and places it into his mouth. If he endeavours to walk away with the host still in his hands, the Priest must call him back and watch him place the host in his mouth. While I can understand the nostalgia for the “good old days” there is no historic evidence that communion on the tongue was ever the practice of the early Church. For example, the Eastern Orthodox Churches have always followed the practice of communion in the hand - from the days when the Church was founded, until now, without interruption.
❤
Humpty Dumpty can’t be out back together again
If receiving kneeling on the tongue is also a legitimate option by Mother Church, even if most people at Mass are receiving on the hand, why is Larry being so judgemental?
👍
Actually, I think they are getting worst, due to altar girls now being more and more normalized, among other things.
Genuinely curious what your theological opposition to altar girls are. Altar servers are not consecrated as priests and gender seems irrelevant to the station.
You can thank your priests for that. Seemingly the young girls are safer in the sacristy than the boys were
The problem is that the post conciliar missal is just a truncated, impoverished version of the old missal
Post-modernism came so fast in the last thirty years that the reforms to simplify and do a back-to-the-basics-liturgy is already outdated and pointless in this overtly secular,stale and disconnected and troubled age we’re in now.
Wish Larry didn’t have that Calif bias
I found the introduction to the new mass a very very disturbing event that damaged or made more difficult my Catholic faith. The initial change, preserving some Latin was almost okay, but they got rid of that and went with the warm and fuzzy Jesus, at the same time, all catechesis, which was rather normative from the pulpit went away, as did most of the sense of the sacred: communion rails, even confessionals, ugly altars, moving the Tabernacle, and basically destroying the sense of the sacred. It was an assault on the sensibilities and norms of the Catholic people everywhere. The mass became this flexible plaything, and still is. Many people fell away, many.
I asked myself why should I bother going? They never talked about Christ, the mass was bereft of any sense of the sacred, indeed, to this day some do not wear all the vestments, nor perform the lavabo. I look up there and see a priest in his liturgical underwear.
Just today, Palm Sunday, they alienated me as they do every single year. There was no real reading of the Gospel, just a short reading at the very beginning of mass, and the two usual readings before the Gospel, but when the time for the Gospel came, we got a homily and then they moved to the eucharistic part, and we were informed that the confirmation class would be doing a passion play after the mass, and we were all invited to stay. It's shit, okay, shit is what they are doing. They have made this thing a flaming hoop for the poor buggers getting confirmed to all play dress-up and do a play AT MASS, basically. Add to that the lousy music and you can see it is still raining shit in some parishes.
One time in the past, a few years back, maybe 10 years? They only did the eucharistic part of the mass and launched into the flaming hoop passion play right after, it was nuts.
Here's the thing, they abuse the mass, all the time, nearly everywhere. At the local Cathedral the "hymns" are predicably uninspired crap that would 95% of the time be just fine in any Episcopalian church with some woman pretending to be a priest. Add to that the unending noise from the professional cantor and try to pretend this is an improvement from any disconnect in the former Latin mass.
It is criminal what they did. It is criminal what they do now. Then I see in one parish bulletin about the parish being assessed 1.9 million for settlement for abuse of "clergy and laity". Laity my ass.
And we must "in justice" make these amends for healing etc..... Well what a pile of crap that is. I am not responsible for predatory clergy, nor for that matter, slavery, bestiality, nor the bombing of Hiroshima or Tokyo.
So, the mass still sucks in many places. Many. If we had an actual pope, a father, a leader, a man who loves children and families, then, something would be done, and Germany would have a lot of red-assed clergy from the very most needed ass beating they so richly deserve, and quite frankly a bunch of murals done by a sexual predator would be ripped down and some actual listening to abused nuns would take place, after which said predator would receive public corporal punishment on his rear-side and back.
You may think I am off topic from the mass and liturgy BUT I AM NOT, it is all part and parcel of the same zeitgeist. A nice German word explaining it all rather succinctly.
We need to bring back corporal punishment ABSOLUTELY for prelates. Caning would be a nice start. I would nominate a few lay people as well, the baby killing ones would be a start.
We need to punish crime, not pretend. Let's NOT continue let's STOP "Defining Deviancy Down"
Old Moynihan had it dead right.
Let the beatings begin!! The hour is late, the day is dark.