Christmas Eve Mass in Rome

[HeIsMyRighteousness]

Hey Guys,
I know Catholic doctrine and have studied it here and there, but I have never seen the mass being done. I decided to watch the Christmas Eve Mass in Rome. All I can say is I almost fell on my face out of mind numbing boredom! Their was no passion! Every prayer is read, the Pope sits there on his throne and reads his whole "sermon." With the "singing" prayers and reading every word for prayer, there was just a sense of boys playing dress up and playing religion. Aghhh! God doesn't want us to read our prayers to Him! He wants to empower us with His Holy Spirit and our prayers to come from the heart. It was utterly boring! Bottom Line...There was no passion whatsoever, no gladness, no excitement or any enthusiasm!

 

[LeeJUk]

Would you be happy if you thought you could lose your salvation at any moment even after being a priest for years lol?

 

[Philip]

Of all the complaints you could have about the Christmas Mass, this was it? That they read their prayers? What's a responsive reading, do you think? Just because a prayer is read, doesn't mean it's not from the heart. I often quote the Psalms or even the prayers of Church Fathers in my prayer time. I have many problems with the Roman liturgy, but this isn't one of them.

 

[HeIsMyRighteousness]

I didn't just say they read their prayers. Do you quote the Psalms like you would a grocery list in your prayers? I guess I have this weird notion that if a man gets up to preach about God and man he should have passion, that he can speak from his heart and not from paper. I have nothing against a man quoting Scripture for prayer (as he should because from it he knows the will of God), but to read everything with no passion for what we ought to be passionate about is just a sad display.

-----Added 12/27/2009 at 11:20:35 EST-----

im not sure what your saying Lee

 

[JennyG]

im not sure what your saying Lee

I think he means: no wonder they don't look full of gladness and enthusiasm, when what they believe is that no-one can ever be confident of their salvation!

 

[JoyFullMom]

My husband and I were struck by the bowing before the pope and referring to him continually as the *holy father*. (even as the pope himself looked bored and sleepy...)

It is so blasphemous and yet we have several friends and family members who are NOT Catholic who will defend to the end that this is acceptable to God and that Catholics are saved.

 

[johnbugay]

I decided to watch the Christmas Eve Mass in Rome. All I can say is I almost fell on my face out of mind numbing boredom! Their was no passion! Every prayer is read, the Pope sits there on his throne and reads his whole "sermon." With the "singing" prayers and reading every word for prayer, there was just a sense of boys playing dress up and playing religion. Aghhh! God doesn't want us to read our prayers to Him! He wants to empower us with His Holy Spirit and our prayers to come from the heart. It was utterly boring! Bottom Line...There was no passion whatsoever, no gladness, no excitement or any enthusiasm!

Believe it or not, this is one of the "selling points" of Roman Catholicism -- Ratzinger has a book out, "The Spirit of the Liturgy".

Over the centuries (up through Vatican II), "the Mass" (the "Tridentine" Mass -- the only game in town) was just a jumbled-up mess of medieval superstition, repeated in Latin.

Then around Vatican II, they raided the works of Hippolytus, an "antipope" of the third century who wrote about some of the religious practices and worship services of that time. They got rid of the Latin and incorporated some Hippolytus, and voila, they've got an "ancient Liturgy."

Like most things RCC, it has a very "worshipful" sound to it (and I once thought that it was worshipful), but as you say, in real life, it translates into what you saw on TV: something very dead and repititious.

 

[Curt]

This liturgy of the mass is what has some folks turning to Rome. Thy cite the smells and bells and the "beauty" of the mass as a major reasons for making this backward move.

I also desire to see solemnity and beauty in the worship service, but not at the cost of having to venerate saints and Mary and "sacrificing" Jesus at every mass.

 

[JoyFullMom]

I have three friends who recently *returned* to the Catholic church, each after extremely hard times hit. All three made the comment that they found comfort and security in the liturgy and mass of the church.

I have to wonder if it comes from being in willy nilly services where everything is *feelings* and mystical *sensing* of the Spirit of the Lord....and when we are suffering we often feel so distant. Therefore, they are grasping for something *tangible*.

It grieves me.

 

[Philip]

I'll just say that there is something really comforting about having a solid standard liturgy to turn to. Speaking for myself, I have found the language of the BCP to be useful for my own devotions, particularly Cranmer's collects and prayers, which are heavily saturated with Scripture.

I don't think anyone here should have a problem with standard liturgies persay so long as a) we don't put them on a par with Scripture b) we don't impose it on other Christian c) the liturgy is in line with scriptural teaching as far as is humanly possible.

 

[HeIsMyRighteousness]

I understand all your comments guys. Thanks for responding. Based on all the heresy of the RCC this was just something else I saw that was saddening to me.

 

[PresbyDane]

I am quite sure that Johnathan Edwards read all his sermons aloud from a manuscript in the light of a candle and in a monotome voice.
I am sure I read that somewhere.

I think it childish to discard or talk condesendingly about people for "the way" they say thing, rather than focus on the things they say.
Granted in this case both things are bad, but our focus should be on the second not the first.

I find it most shamefull the trend in these days, that if something is not said with wow an aw, preferably with a following light show and a band to follow along it is not worth listening to.

Take this Osteen he has band, light show and thw wow and aw.
Paul the apostle made a guy fall asleep and drop out the window and die.

12 wild horses could not drag me into Osteens "church"
but dying listening to pauls words read aloud in a montome voice would be a nice way to die if I had to choose.

So please judge from content and not from performance

P.S. if you have not noticed I hate this era of stupifying, short-attentionspan creating, media hype of nothingness.

 

[JoyFullMom]

I think Martin makes a good point. I have heard people dub a very rich sermon as *dry* because the person who delivered it was not a *salesman*. kwim?

It's the *content* that should keep our attention...or not.

 

[CatherineL]

I dunno, if there's one time I sort of miss the RCC mass its Christmas. I don't know about the mass in Rome, but it was always an especially lovely service at our family's church. Sometimes its neat to have a bit more "ta dah!" Not saying I'm going back over that, though.

There's plenty to criticize in the the RC doctrine without sniping at the monotone and pagentry, in my opinion. I have pentacostal friends who say the same thing over PCA ministers who wear robes and generally following a liturgical format. Better not to go there I think.

 

[Megan Mozart]

I just recently learned that during a Catholic mass that another sacrifice for the sins of the people is being offered. What?!? I know there are many things wrong going on in that mass, but out of all of them it appears to me personally that this is the most disgusting.

 

[au5t1n]

I just recently learned that during a Catholic mass that another sacrifice for the sins of the people is being offered. What?!? I know there are many things wrong going on in that mass, but out of all of them it appears to me personally that this is the most disgusting.

The Romanist apologists today try to get away with saying that the Mass is not re-sacrificing Christ, but pulling from his one sacrifice, outside of time, each Mass - so it is not multiple sacrifices, they say, but drawing on the one sacrifice at each Mass. The problem is, they can say this all they like, but it has not been their true position historically. Historically, Rome has taught that Christ is re-sacrificed every Mass. You're right, it's a serious issue, and it totally flies in the face of Galatians and Hebrews, not to mention Jesus' precious words, "It is finished."

 

[Berean]

I just recently learned that during a Catholic mass that another sacrifice for the sins of the people is being offered. What?!? I know there are many things wrong going on in that mass, but out of all of them it appears to me personally that this is the most disgusting.

The Romanist apologists today try to get away with saying that the Mass is not re-sacrificing Christ, but pulling from his one sacrifice, outside of time, each Mass - so it is not multiple sacrifices, they say, but drawing on the one sacrifice at each Mass. The problem is, they can say this all they like, but it has not been their true position historically. Historically, Rome has taught that Christ is re-sacrificed every Mass. You're right, it's a serious issue, and it totally flies in the face of Galatians and Hebrews, not to mention Jesus' precious words, "It is finished."

The official term is "the sacrifice of the Mass". They can deny all they want.

The Eucharist is a true sacrifice, not just a commemorative meal, as "Bible Christians" insist.

The Sacrifice of the Mass

 

[HeIsMyRighteousness]

Well, I guess I am childish. It was not criticism for criticisms sake and neither do I just have a problem with the way the mass was done. I don't know, it is hard to see someone talking about God to millions of people with no enthusiasm. I did not bring up doctrine because I assumed everyone already knew the heresies of the RCC. I respectably say that a man such as Paul, who was filled with the Holy Spirit, can preach and yet a man be hard as a rock. Just because a man falls asleep doesn't mean he was speaking with no enthusiasm or in a monotone voice.

 

[HeIsMyRighteousness]

I am quite sure that Johnathan Edwards read all his sermons aloud from a manuscript in the light of a candle and in a monotome voice.
I am sure I read that somewhere.

I think it childish to discard or talk condesendingly about people for "the way" they say thing, rather than focus on the things they say.
Granted in this case both things are bad, but our focus should be on the second not the first.

I find it most shamefull the trend in these days, that if something is not said with wow an aw, preferably with a following light show and a band to follow along it is not worth listening to.

Take this Osteen he has band, light show and thw wow and aw.
Paul the apostle made a guy fall asleep and drop out the window and die.

12 wild horses could not drag me into Osteens "church"
but dying listening to pauls words read aloud in a montome voice would be a nice way to die if I had to choose.

So please judge from content and not from performance

P.S. if you have not noticed I hate this era of stupifying, short-attentionspan creating, media hype of nothingness.[/QUOTE

Spurgeon said in his lecture "on the voice" to his student, "Exceedingly precious truths may be greatly marred by being delivered in monotonous tones." I was just taken aback by "I think it childish to discard or talk condesendingly about people for "the way" they say thing, rather than focus on the things they say."

I am in no way in favor of this trend of entertainment in the church. I despise it because it appeals to the flesh and not the spirit. But why should I have to sit under a preacher that speaks entirely different in the pulpit then in conversation? I am in no way suggesting that if a man speak lies but does it in an exciting way, that would be ok.

 

[SemperEruditio]

Brought up RC I can say that there was a reverence to the monotone. I visited a few Protestant churches in my youth and their "enthusiasm" was just a bunch of hollering and screaming. It all seemed so contrived. Rome has plenty of major issues but being monotone in their presentation of their gospel is for me at the bottom of the list. The best priests I've heard were all former Protestants. Invariably they all went over to Rome because the Christianity they knew was charismania, anti-intellectual.

 

[JennyG]

...just wanted to say I love your beetle, SemperEruditio. It always has me leaning to blow it off the screen.
sorry - back to the topic!

 

[Galatians220]

While I think it's empirically much more likely that I will grow a second head on my right shoulder than it is that I will return to the RCC, there are some things I miss about it:

1) The friendliness of people in nearly every CC of which I was ever a member. In all three of the Reformed churches of which I have been a member, coldness, rigidity and exclusion from fellowship due to things that have nothing to do with our being true brothers and sisters in Christ rule the day.

2) Some of the RC hymns, especially those in Latin ("O Salutaris Hostia," "Pange Lingua," "Tantum Ergo," etc.) are beautiful. Those sung in praise of Mary are not. A Catholic Tre Ore service, in which the men's choir sings, a cappella, Sir John Stainer's "God So Loved the World" is really not bad. It was at one of those services that when I was 10, it first popped into my head that "maybe God loves me..." The Lord used that constant refrain (I used to sing it a lot when there was no one around) later when He saved me.

But the mass is a horrid, blasphemous ritual with the stamp of Satan all over it and through it. I would have to be hog-tied, gagged and heavily sedated ever to attend a Catholic mass again. This world is evil, though, and even churches with "right doctrine" are nowhere near perfect.

I can't wait to get to heaven and worship the Lord Jesus Christ for eternity - in His rite.

Margaret

 

[JoyFullMom]

Margaret, I have heard those EXACT words from one of my friends who returned to the Catholic church. She feels *reformed Christians* focus more on being *right*, while the parish she left focused on loving you.

 

[JennyG]

Margaret, I have heard those EXACT words from one of my friends who returned to the Catholic church. She feels *reformed Christians* focus more on being *right*, while the parish she left focused on loving you.

I've heard talk like that too, and it worries me when people focus on the "feel" of a congregation's worship. The whole RC ethos completely rubs me up the wrong way and even makes my flesh crawl at times - but if I hear someone else say something similar, I'm thinking, I hope that isn't your only reason for holding aloof from that church, because if so, one day it may happen not to be the case any longer.....and then where will you be?

 

[au5t1n]

I have noticed that when you institute unbiblical practices into church services against the RPW, it tends to detract from the instituted elements, which are of the most spiritual value, and so you end up losing the value of the church service to begin with. Thomas Watson notes this about Romanist worship in The Godly Man's Picture:

"They who will bring in a tradition, will in time lay aside a command. This the Papists are very guilty of; they bring in altars and crucifixes, and lay aside the second commandment. They bring in oil and cream in baptism, and leave out the cup in the Lord's Supper. They bring in praying for the dead, and lay aside reading the Scriptures intelligibly to the living. Those who will introduce into God's worship that which he has not commanded, will be as ready to blot out that which he has commanded."
-Thomas Watson, The Godly Man's Picture, p. 36, Puritan Paperbacks, Banner of Truth Trust (I hope that is enough for proper credit).

I used to think the RPW was restrictive and legalistic, but now I realize that it is actually liberating because when we do only those rites and elements of worship God has commanded, we get the things that are of most spiritual benefit to us, e.g. preaching and reading the Word, the Lord's Supper, corporate prayer, singing praise, etc. Incense and ornate vestments and statues just distract from these things, and cripple us, not to mention being disobedience as well.

N.b. Watson's point about leaving aside the cup in the Lord's Supper is no longer true of the RCC mass, I believe, but offering the cup to the laity is a very recent development for them. It didn't exist in Watson's time.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

While I think it's empirically much more likely that I will grow a second head on my right shoulder than it is that I will return to the RCC, there are some things I miss about it:

1) The friendliness of people in nearly every CC of which I was ever a member. In all three of the Reformed churches of which I have been a member, coldness, rigidity and exclusion from fellowship due to things that have nothing to do with our being true brothers and sisters in Christ rule the day.

2) Some of the RC hymns, especially those in Latin ("O Salutaris Hostia," "Pange Lingua," "Tantum Ergo," etc.) are beautiful. Those sung in praise of Mary are not. A Catholic Tre Ore service, in which the men's choir sings, a cappella, Sir John Stainer's "God So Loved the World" is really not bad. It was at one of those services that when I was 10, it first popped into my head that "maybe God loves me..." The Lord used that constant refrain (I used to sing it a lot when there was no one around) later when He saved me.

But the mass is a horrid, blasphemous ritual with the stamp of Satan all over it and through it. I would have to be hog-tied, gagged and heavily sedated ever to attend a Catholic mass again. This world is evil, though, and even churches with "right doctrine" are nowhere near perfect.

I can't wait to get to heaven and worship the Lord Jesus Christ for eternity - in His rite.

Margaret

Interesting.

I came out of the RCC and left initially in search of a Church that was as good as the RC Church of my youth. I couldn't find another that didn't bore me to death and where the people were generally very cold to me.

My home Church had a praise team and we even raised our hands in worship. We hugged during the sign of peace and held hands during the Lord's Prayer.

But I have found it all to be very vacuous. It was friendly but "Sunday friendly." I've had two siblings get divorces and not a single word of caution or rebuke was given them. All are re-married or dating and attending the same Church. It's friendliness not borne out of real love or concern but just good, old-fashioned "I'm doing fine, thank you for asking now give me a hug" friendliness.

I also used to think that the Priest was "in tune with the Spirit" because he could just give off the cuff homilies and I would "ooh" and "ahh" at how he could just make something up on the spot. And then I was exposed to expository preaching and what it meant to get into the Word.

I don't want to dismiss your concern so please forgive me if it sounds as if I'm dismissive. I have no doubt you've had these experiences but I'm just telling you what my experiences are.

I've been through the gamut and I am very blessed to have been in congregations with people that *really* cared including Pastors that would rebuke me when I was too mean to my wife.

There's nothing I miss about being in the RC Church. It was all so "window dressing" for me as pretty as it was when I thought window dressing was the sun and the moon.

 

[johnbugay]

There's nothing I miss about being in the RC Church. It was all so "window dressing" for me as pretty as it was when I thought window dressing was the sun and the moon.

There are a few things that I miss, especially some of the contemplative aspects. I used to attend "retreats," and these were very well done.

Of course, as you and others have said, it's not really about the outward forms; Rome's doctrines are corrupt. And in such a way, as Calvin has said, "satan has, through the papacy, polluted every good thing that God has given to us for our salvation." (Paraphrase from memory, Institutes 4.1.1.)