A Diocese Smells the Coffee: Starts Planning for Decline of the Ordinary Form and Growth of the TLM

  • Thread starter Thread starter yankeesouth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I love how something is going to happen “over the next few decades” and they want to be prepared.

I don’t think one diocese preparing is any indication that TLM is coming back for everyone. That is just wishful thinking on their part.
 
Irishmom2 said:
I don’t think one diocese preparing is any indication that TLM is coming back for everyone. That is just wishful thinking on their part.
Click to expand...
No, but I definitely think we have, and will continue to see, a shift towards a more “traditional” celebration of the OF. In my experience (and I realize this may vary widely by region), younger priests are far more likely to chant, use incense, etc…
 
I don’t think that’s what was said. But all things considered, looking at particular dioceses in the U.S., there are some where there has always been a particular appreciation of the Catholic faith and a distinct and historically noted theological underpinning of the majority of those places that has led them to first, a desire to experience both valid rites of the Mass and second, a particular need/desire/appreciation which has led them to not so much ‘reject’ the OF but, for themselves, to desire more of the EF.

That isn’t wishful thinking, it is a very thoughtful and pastoral understanding of the needs of the people in a given diocese. Now, as time goes by we might see more dioceses where the people would like more of the EF, we might see others where the people are not interested in the EF. I’d expect, were I the bishop of a diocese, that if more and more of the people in my diocese expressed a desire for the OF that I would spend a lot of time making sure the people had the best possible OF, where if they wanted the EF I would make sure they had the best EF.

Now the EF and the OF are both valid rites. The OF has a lot more flexibility (which some people prefer) so assuming that every OF adheres to the GIRM (say the black, do the red) one could have an OF with many parts in Latin, smells and bells, processionals, lots of statues, devotions, etc. and one could also have Lifeteen, amps, guitars; or a ‘full choir’ with traditional hymns, or a children’s chorus, or no music at all, one could have piano, guitar, organ, handbells, cowbells. . .one could have a starkly plain minimalist church, a Gothic 19th century church, church in the round, church in an airport, Father in tie dye, Father in lace, male servers, female servers, 6 candles, ‘no candles’, Risen Christ cross, crucifix, tabernacles to the left of them, tabernacles to the right of them. . . etc. Again, so long as everything according to GIRM, if most people in the diocese want a ‘vernacular Mass that has some Latin and trappings’, then the bishop would be trying to get that; if most people wanted a small plain service with little music, he’d aim for that. And if most people wanted the EF, then a good bishop would try to get the people what they wanted.
 
stpurl said:
a particular appreciation of the Catholic faith
Click to expand...
Not exactly what you are trying to say here.
I appreciate the Catholic faith for her Sacraments and her holding the fullness of truth. I appreciate the Church for looking for new ways to reach more people, including the use of the vernacular.
I appreciate that the Church is a “big tent” filled with spiritualities and devotional practices of every sort for every sort of personality.
And I appreciate the fact that the Church has given us 2 forms of Mass so that those who do appreciate the EF can have access to it.
What I don’t appreciate is that far too many people who prefer the EF don’t want to give me to even have the OF and thinknthat they are somehow better, more pious, more appreciative Catholics.
 
Balance, moderation in all things. What is so distasteful about the reverence, music and beauty of the ‘old mass’ combined with the vernacular and the active participation of the faithful in the ‘new mass’?

Does no one here read of the problems with the ‘old mass’ which lead to the new? Passive laity, the praying of Rosaries during the mass etc. We all know the problems with the implementation of the new. Why not fix what’s broken?

Latin is not magic. You want genuine? You want original?

As Fr. Mitch Pacwa says, “Demand the Aramaic mass!”

But only he and Jim Caviezel know the verbiage.
 
po18guy said:
Latin is not magic.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the exorcists who have witnessed its power first hand.

I personally suspect that the “magic” has less to do with Latin itself, and more with having a timeless language dedicated to communicating with the divine. Lastly, I suspect that the appeal of the Latin Mass has less to with the language itself and more with the sacred, reverent rubics.
 
Last edited:
Misunderstanding! I said “Magic”

It is the language of the Church and so the devil hates it. Understood.

But, it is not the language which will stem the decline of the Church. It is not the form of the mass that caused the decline or will bring about a restoration.

It is the human heart, and teaching that heart the content of the faith.

Again, Latin is not the magic potion that many seem to think it is - especially those who would impose their will upon others. Not even God does that.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

And yes, either form is better in Latin.

I bet Pope St John XXIII would agree 😉
 
I disagree. In the diocese I live in TLM has grown very much. All parishes where TLM is established are in unison. There are no differences of interpretation or anything of the sort. Anytime I travel, which is a lot, I try my best to find a LM and whenever I do, they are always exactly the same. This includes international travels as well. That’s what I love about it, wherever in the world I go, I don’t have to wonder if This or that will be occurring at the mass I’m about to attend.

This isn’t to say there aren’t those who go against true tradition, such as the Sedes, but those in communion with Rome are all the same basically. Aside from a couple of customs maybe regarding the number of times the bells are rung at consecration.

Also, there is no protest going on with TLM concerning the magisterium? With the Sedes yes, but not within TLM in communion with Rome. Just because the faithful don’t want to attend a mass that they see is generally less reverent and has some abuses allowed, does not mean they protesting the magisterium. They simply are clinging to their heritage, the heritage that is rightly all of ours. The heritage that was good enough for 1500+ years, That the greatest saints of the church participated in, versus the New Form that has been here for 50 years.
 
Last edited:
Preference for Latin has little to do with what is oldest or the most original. This conflates traditionalism with antiquarianism, the latter of which is a condemned heresy. I would say that the overwhelming majority of traditionalists are well aware that Latin did not come first. The preservation of Latin, as well as all traditional elements, has more to do with what has developed organically over the centuries, as the Church made adjustments based on what best preserved authentic teaching while giving due honor to God. Our greatest theological treatises, most sacred prayers and solemn chants have all been written in Latin. There is no reason to discard what the Church has held to be its own sacred language. Even the very documents of the Second Vatican Council, an apostolic constitution by the very Pope who called the council, and the writing of every post-conciliar Pope hold to this.
 
Last edited:
ThomasMT said:
Does it really offend you that much, that one would prefer to receive Christ’s true and holy presence on one’s knees and on the tongue?
Click to expand...
You can do this in an OF Mass context as well… as is the norm for about half the congregation at all 7 Sunday and 4 daily Masses at our cathedral…
 
Without being accused of trying to draw attention to self? Without dirty looks? Without risk of being reproached for it by the priest himself? As if someone inclined towards such reverence and devotion does it purely for pretentious and sanctimonious reasons?? Perhaps in your diocese, certainly not all. Besides, why should one be deprived the opportunity to celebrate a Holy Mass with a congregation where everyone is in agreement on the respect, reverence, humility, and devotion that the Eucharist deserves.

If only someone had made me aware (least of all the priest himself) of the options you presented, during my first communion. I had no idea… I never got the memo, not about kneeling, and certainly not about receiving on the tongue. I just went with the only program I was taught. And if I did know, as a kid I probably would have been too preoccupied with how others would have viewed it, unequipped and too immature to stand for my faith. Hence, another reason for my earlier reference to a like-minded, nourishing congregation .

I was fortunate enough to witness an Extraordinary First Communion a few weeks ago. I was so happy for the child. Unfortunately, at the same time I couldn’t help but to feel a bit cheated. Rest assured, I will do everything I can to prevent my own children from being denied the glorious heritage of our Holy Church.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top