Rorate Caeli

A storm of pure fun!
A Vatican II Moment in Rio

Dance, theater, lots of music, and fun - together with adoration, benediction, and the inevitable Paul VI Mass - in a wildly entertaining event ("O Banquete do Cordeiro", i.e. The Lamb's Banquet) organized by the Archdiocese of Saint Sebastian of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), with the presence of Archbishop Tempesta.





It is really thrilling: they use the Benedictine arrangement on the mensa, so perhaps this is the super-new liturgical movement. The event happened on June 19. (More pictures and tip: Fratres in Unum)

39 comments:

Anonymous said...

Oh, but notice in the fourth picture that there are six candles on the altar and a crucifix between them. Must be that the priest has traditional leanings!

New Catholic said...

Yes, we noticed: see last comment.

Anonymous said...

Astonishing.

It does not make any sense to create Pontifical Councils for This and That, when such activities are allowed.

Mundabor

Anonymous said...

Anyone ever been to an FSSPX Mass like this?
Cruise the Groove.

j.g. ratkaj said...

Archbishop Tempesta is a typical hierarch of today's church: spineless celebrating here this banal mockery of the holy mass other times presiding over a TLM. whoever thinks that threre is a form of restoration on the way in our time suffers loss of reality. On the contrary the fatal cisis of the church, also evidently here in Brazil, is self-perpetuating without any serious attempt or even will to stop it.

Samuel Ferraro said...

While I am a traditionalist, I don't think it is fair or accurate to make an association between this nonsense in Rio and the Vatican II documents. These things are done in the so called "spirit of Vatican II" but absolutely nothing in the Council documents suggests or mandates this sort of liturgy.

Anonymous said...

Gee, I didn't even notice that he is supposed to be a bishop. The theatrical lighting...

This stuff is for the Twilight Zone!

New Catholic said...

Well... Samuel, I am pretty sure people involved with this would disagree with you.

Regardless of that, this is an ongoing series called "A Vatican II Moment". Click on the label, and you will understand its larger meaning (it is somewhat similar to your understanding of the last Council).

Agnes of Prague said...

Well, on the bright side, Our Lord does deserve fireworks, however unusual it may be to offer them in a specifically liturgical atmosphere...

Alvin said...

Sad. So very, very sad:(

Anonymous said...

Hei, folks.

Just a clarification. This event was broadcast by the archdiocese official radio. Dom Tempesta did not celebrate the Mass himself. In fact, it was a multi-activity event, combining a lot of rock musing, a campaign to attract new supports to fund the Archdiocese radio, Adoration to the Blessed Sacrament, dance, theater and Mass. Dom Orani just appeared to say 'hello', I mean, to say the first homily (which was a kind of ecumenical homily). Then other folks, including a lay man from the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement delivered his own. Between the readings and the Crede there were several homilies from different people and rock style music. The Mass was celebrated by other priest.

It's a liturgical shame indeed. And it is a reflex of the strong influence of Charismatic Renewal Moviment in Rio de Janeiro. The archdiocese events are all in the pop line.

Samuel Ferraro said...

A question for "New Catholic"
Do you think the Holy Father would either participate in or approve of such a liturgy?

Anonymous said...

Samuel,

Do you think sacriligous buffoonery like this would have gone on in Brazil before the Council?
I don't know, I am just asking.

Cruise the Groove.

Anonymous said...

No, maybe no link to Vatican II Documents but without doubt a link to the Pauline Mass. I think this is its' inherent flaw. Priests think they can do this because this is the new Mass. They would never think about it with the older form of Mass. The older form is respected and linked to following the rubrics. The Novus Ordo has its' rubrics as well, but the Mass is not respected and probably never will be by the majority. This more than anything else will be its' downfall and perhaps suppression in the future. And maybe it should be suppressed for 20 years or something until a respect can be reingrained in the faithful and Priests for Holy Mass. And while suppressed it may be adjusted accordingly for a release date in the future, when the shenanigans calm down. Something has got to be done, lay people are sick of this. And I agree wasting time evangelizing "wherever" in the world they plan with the NO, as is tool will never, ever take hold of the masses.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Ratkaj:

I beg to disagree with you, I'm afraid. A restoration can occur in two ways: either violently and suddenly or by degrees. The Pope will not choose the first because he fears losing these liberals (as if they are not already non-Catholics under false pretences). He hopes to bring everyone into one conservative camp by degrees.

This will mean tolerating the bad while promoting the good. Will it work? Not for me to say. But I think that genuine restoration is proceeding and that wild revolution is receding. But the wacko Masses will not go away in a day. The looney liturgies are now more common in Latin America, I've noticed, whereas those in wealthier countries have now become just tired of and bored with them.

P.K.T.P.

Samuel Ferraro said...

None of this would have gone on before the Council but that doesn't justify it's outright rejection, only it's erroneous definition and faulty implementation. While I much prefer the missal of 1962, on the occasions that I do attend the ordinary form in Chicago, it is done with solemnity and reverence. There are still many places where the ordinary form is offered properly and without abuses. To say otherwise is simply dishonest.

Knight of Malta said...

Thanks for making me run to the bathroom like a bulimic!

The Ecumenical Vatican Council II

New Catholic said...

Samuel,

I always try to be prudent regarding what our Holy Father thinks or of what he would approve. I would say that he certainly is aware of all the "variations" of the new liturgy.

NC

Hestor said...

Do you think the Holy Father would either participate in or approve of such a liturgy?

I don't know whether the present Holy Father would sit through this dross but I know what the English Martyrs would probably do: run out of the building in minutes... perhaps seconds, convinced they had been at a Protestant service.

BJR said...

Yes, the Benedictine arrangement for candlesticks and Cross on the altar.

The return of tradition or reform of the reform?

Brian said...

Samuel Ferraro said: I don't think it is fair or accurate to make an association between this nonsense in Rio and the Vatican II documents.

I disagree. Lifeteen Masses and similar versions of the "Lambs Banquet" tend to be attended by conservative Catholics who take their faith and Vatican II quite seriosly, many of whom are also Charismatic. Let us not forget, Cardinal Suenens was a leading figure in both the early Catholic Charismatic movement and in shaping the direction and documents of Vatican II.

The Folk Mass movement may be dying of old age. The Lifeteen/ Charismatic movement appears to be on the rise.

Timothy Mulligan said...

Hence, the SSPX.

And here's a little help: http://www.fsspx-sudamerica.org/fraternidad/prioratoderiodejaneiro.php

Prof. Basto said...

Archbishop Tempesta is a typical hierarch of today's church: spineless celebrating here this banal mockery of the holy mass other times presiding over a TLM. whoever thinks that threre is a form of restoration on the way in our time suffers loss of reality. On the contrary the fatal cisis of the church, also evidently here in Brazil, is self-perpetuating without any serious attempt or even will to stop it.

Agreed.

But as an inhabitant of this city, I must say that Archbishop Tempesta still manages to be an improvement over his immediate predecessor, Cardinal Scheid, who banned the TLM and even after Summorum Pontificum threatened with persecution those who would dare to think of celebrating the Usus Antiquor.

Tempesta was a huge improvement, in that he at least allows the TLM to co-exist with this mess.

Timothy Mulligan said...

Samuel, the problem is that the Novus Ordo is like a box of chocolates. One never knows what one is going to get. It lends itself to abuses. However, even at its most reverent, it is Protestantized, deliberately stripped of its sacrificial character to a great extent so as to make it palatable to Protestants.

Robert said...

This priest who celebrated this illicit whatever, needs to be de-frocked for an insult like this!.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Ferraro,

Mr. Mulligan is completely correct. The problems and deficiencies with the NO Mass are intrinsic and even when it is celebrated with solemnity and reverence the problems remain. I have attended very reverent and solemnly celebrated Anglican services but all the solemnity and reverence in the world could not make up for what was lacking.

Same goes for the documents of Vatican II. The problems are intrinsic to the documents themselves. When it's all said and done, and when sanity again reigns, they will be consigned to the dustbin of history and they will be forgotten, as they so richly deserve.

ATW

Knight of Malta said...

Dear Mr. Mulligan,

The problem with the new mass is not the priests presiding over it, it's the Bugnini-inspired, manufactured rite itself. Bugnini was a man inimical to the Faith Christ founded 2,000 plus years ago. Yet, he spearheaded the Novus Ordo Mass!

Now, we have a dearth of catachesis, and an almost zero belief in the True Presence. And this is, in large part, due to the silly choice on Paul VI's part to appoint Bugnini to create a new mass.

"And if someone passed through that door to introduce into the Church a Liturgy subversive to the very nature and primary end of the Sacred Liturgy...the responsibility for this, in the final analysis, is none other than the conciliar text itself." Msgr. Gherardini.

Msgr. Gherardini on Vatican II

David Werling said...

Samuel, are you saying that certain contents of the documents can't be questioned? If so, I beg to differ, as would many priests in the Institute of the Good Shepherd.

Anonymous said...

Has any one considered why it is that so many NO Catholics deny the True presence? Is it because deep down they know that He is not there, that the NO is a sham?

Jordanes said...

Is it because deep down they know that He is not there, that the NO is a sham?

No.

It's impossible to know things that aren't true, so we can rule out your hypothesis.

Oliver said...

People here talk of a restoration in small steps. But a restoration of what? How far do you want to go back? A reform of the reform is not a restoration but a tinkering of the controls to soften the jagged edges of revolution. The novelties still continue without pause and modern Rome is firmly committed to her Council.

Brian said...

Jordanes,
Although I do not believe the NO Mass is invalid, I do not understand your reasoning.

In response to Anonymous statement: Has any one considered why it is that so many NO Catholics deny the True presence? Is it because deep down they know that He is not there, that the NO is a sham?

You wrote: No. It's impossible to know things that aren't true, so we can rule out your hypothesis.,

Is it not the case that you know with certainty that I am NOT you and that you are NOT me? If I were to claim that I were you, you would KNOW that is NOT true.

Similarly, if, for example, there were a Protestant communion service, where the substance of the bread and the substance of the wine remain, respectively, bread and wine, would you not know that the bread and wine are not the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord? In this sense, one would, as Anonymous stated, "know that He is not there."

LeonG said...

Ah yes! The assiduous work of Bugnini which all along was preparing the ground for the most unprecedented liturgical revolution in the history of the church. Already accustomed to some changes, the liturgical revolutionaries were able exploit this tendency; to hijack the "reform" movement by stealth and then use every excuse the councils had given for liturgical reform to their own advantage. Let us not be too naive here - when liberals see the word "reform" & room given for some local discretion we have to expect what we witness now in a bewilderment of illicit & invalid liturgies round the pathetic remnant of NO'dom.

It is only too noticeable that The Vatican says and does nothing about them. This has a significance of its own.

M. A. said...

"Has any one considered why it is that so many NO Catholics deny the True presence? Is it because deep down they know that He is not there, that the NO is a sham?"

Immersion into protestant-like worship will, to various degrees, affect one's belief. Communion in the hand while standing, Eucharistic ministers, laity in the sanctuary, etc., it is no wonder so many Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence. This loss of Faith is a direct result of the N.O.

Jordanes said...

Immersion into protestant-like worship will, to various degrees, affect one's belief. Communion in the hand while standing, Eucharistic ministers, laity in the sanctuary, etc., it is no wonder so many Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence. This loss of Faith is a direct result of the N.O.

That's a big part of it. So too is inadequate and/or erroneous catechesis. Many Catholics weren't taught the Real Presence and transubstantiation, and many others were intentionally taught some false doctrine other than what the Church believes about the Real Presence and transubstantiation.

You wrote: 'No. It's impossible to know things that aren't true, so we can rule out your hypothesis.' Is it not the case that you know with certainty that I am NOT you and that you are NOT me?

Yes, but those things are true. It is, however, impossible for me to know that I am you or that you are me. Falsehoods are not "known," they are erroneously believed.

If I were to claim that I were you, you would KNOW that is NOT true.

Yes, because I know than I am not you (true). I could never know that you were me (false), however.

Similarly, if, for example, there were a Protestant communion service, where the substance of the bread and the substance of the wine remain, respectively, bread and wine, would you not know that the bread and wine are not the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord?

Of course -- because it is true. I could not know, however, that non-transubstantiated Protestant eucharistic-like elements are transubstantiated, because it is impossible to know things that are not true -- it's only possible to believe them to be true contrary to reality.

In this sense, one would, as Anonymous stated, "know that He is not there."

However, Anonymous said erroneously that the Mass of the Pauline Roman Rite does not validly confect the Blessed Sacrament, is a sham. It is impossible to know that "He is not there," since it is true that as long as there is valid form, matter, and intent, the Blessed Sacrament is confected. It is impossible to know that the reformed Roman Mass is sacramentally invalid, since it is sacramentally valid. Therefore the Catholics who assist at the reformed Roman Mass cannot know that Jesus isn't there, because He is there (and is grievously offended by the way He is being treated at Masses such as this one in Rio).

Anonymous said...

I have attended a Novus Ordo on Tuesday. The priest tried to celebrate a reverent Mass. There was the usual invasion of over-sixty altar girls and the usual mess of the eucharistic ministers (largely ignored, as always), but in general the priest tried to do something sensible.

Still, if you are accustomed to the Latin Mass you could just see that *the NO will never work*.

The shallowness of the Novus Ordo is simply beyond redemption. The sacrificial aspect is too much downplayed, the "gathering", "how-good-we-all-are" undercurrent omnipresent, the moments of solemn reflection totally absent. Everytime I assist to a NO Mass I think thesame: this is a clumsy attempt at entertaining people.

Of course the NO has sacramental validity. But every discussion about how to improve the NO reminds me of a discussion about how to let Coca Cola become Bordeaux wine. Yes, both quench your thirst. But you don't want to compare.

One day, I am sure, the NO will be relegated to the attic and stay there for good. That day, our descendants will be ashamed that something like that could be conceived in the first place.

Mundabor

Ben Vallejo said...

Is this an example of the Old rite enriching the new?

Anonymous said...

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the Sacrifice of the Cross, made present at the Altar.

Our Lord's Passion and Death is being re-presented at the altar.

Anything that diminishes this Truth must be rejected.

It's blasphemous to reduce it to such a show!

Paul Haley said...

The real question, I think, is what does His Holiness think of such Masses and, if he is mortified by such "productions" why doesn't he take immediate action to discipline those responsible? We can complain about such "events" 'til the cows come home and what does it matter if the Holy Father does not share our sense of outrage?

The only thing I can think of that might be relevant here is that he does not know such things are happening under his watch. That, however, is very, very hard to believe. One thing we can be sure of is that the FSSPX and their bishops, as well as the many other traditional enclaves that come to mind, would never allow such "Moments" in their chapels or places of worship. Could it be because they are truly Catholic? Hmmmn, I wonder.