A sad day at St Martin DePorres, Jensen Beach, FL

[rciadan]

Perhaps you should have been more clear in your OP. You said “indefinately suspended” but didn’t say then that it was simply because the priest was being transferred.

Perhaps the best solution for those who prefer the EF is to go to the priest’s new parish. Or ask the bishop if another priest who can say the EF be transferred to a central parish. Attending a DL is not the same thing.

You are right. With hindsight it is clear I should have stated the reason. I did not consider that the assumptions which have been made would take place.
I know many at the priest’s new parish and they all,* without exception*, say that it would take nothing short of a miracle for that pastor to allow the EF to be celebrated there. And yet, the future is not certain, except to God. Maybe Father* will* be allowed to say the EF at the new parish. After all, ours is a faith that believes miracles are daily events! They wish it would be so for they all were regulars at St. Martins…
It is more of a shortage of priest able to say it than any willingness to allow it. Our bishop is very willing to allow any priest to say the EF, and St Martins was about as central as you could get.
No, attending the DL is not the same, but, it is viable, still Catholic, close, and wonderful…
I will state for the record that I began attending the DL weeks before this news about the suspension of the EF at St Martin DePorres. My reasons for attending the DL are not related to this news…

 

[bmadamsberry]

True, but it rarely is. In most of the NO Masses it is not in Latin and there are a great many abuses taking place, though with the recent corrections, I think less than before.
For me, the problem is not which language is used, but the overall result. EMHC’s are the norm. Half of the people I know have not received the Eucharist from actual blessed hands in years! Many of the EMHC’s consider themselves as normal ministers of communion…
And don’t get me started on the choices that the music directors make, many of whom I have spoken to who favor very unorthodox ideas, to say the least…

While the Ordinary Form of the Mass does not often occur in Latin, that does not mean that the Extraordinary Form is to be called the “Latin Mass,” or the “Traditional Latin Mass.” Both suppose something that is not true.

I think you may be surprised in regards to abuses. Abuses occur in all forms and Rites. While they are more rare in the Extraordinary Form (nowadays. They were very prevalent in pre-Vatican II days), they do exist. Furthermore, it only requires time before the Ordinary Form balances itself out and the abuses minimize. As with any change, abuses are going to occur in a top-heavy manner (more at the beginning, dissipating with time).

Furthermore, I totally respect your desire to attend the Extraordinary Form instead of the Ordinary Form. However, attending a Divine Liturgy instead of Mass in your own Rite is a pretty big deal, one which I don’t think people properly understand or think about.

Finally, in regards to some of the “abuses” you listed (I think the word is sometimes used too flippantly sometimes, though maybe appropriate in this case). There do exist reverent Ordinary Form Masses.

 

[rciadan]

]While the Ordinary Form of the Mass does not often occur in Latin, that does not mean that the Extraordinary Form is to be called the “Latin Mass,” or the “Traditional Latin Mass.” Both suppose something that is not true.

I use those terms because in other discussions I have had, those are the terms that were used to describe what I have usually referred to as the “Tridentine Mass”

I think you may be surprised in regards to abuses. Abuses occur in all forms and Rites. While they are more rare in the Extraordinary Form (nowadays. They were very prevalent in pre-Vatican II days), they do exist. Furthermore, it only requires time before the Ordinary Form balances itself out and the abuses minimize. As with any change, abuses are going to occur in a top-heavy manner (more at the beginning, dissipating with time).

I am not surprised; in fact I am well aware and have made that same point myself. I would note though, that the abuses with the NO have been going on without abatement for over forty years now. They have not minimized…

Furthermore, I totally respect your desire to attend the Extraordinary Form instead of the Ordinary Form. However, attending a Divine Liturgy instead of Mass in your own Rite is a pretty big deal, one which I don’t think people properly understand or think about.

I disagree. I also wonder if you make that same statement in reverse to the myriads of Eastern Rite Catholics that attend the Latin Rite because it is more “convenient”? “Latins” are welcome to attend a DL, and as long as it is at a Church that is in communion with the Holy See one’s “Sunday obligation” is met. I do agree that actually switching Rites is big deal, not to be taken lightly. I would have to attend the DL for at least a year, while studying Eastern theology, etc, before I could even consider switching Rites. It is not like one can “switch back” if they decide they don’t like it after all!

Finally, in regards to some of the “abuses” you listed (I think the word is sometimes used too flippantly sometimes, though maybe appropriate in this case). There do exist reverent Ordinary Form Masses.

I do not use the term “abuse” lightly or flippantly. It is a very serious charge. I never use it without good cause and usually instruct others to do the same.

 

[Laetus]

Actually, my suggestion has nothing to do with protest. I take umbrage that you would insert such a motive into my statement. It is because most of those who attend the TLM prefer a more traditional liturgy, and the DL at Sts Cyrily and Methodius is close which makes it a good alternative. I am not suggesting anyone move away from Rome. I am sharing a great find that I have discovered… The Divine Liturgy is beautiful and where one can still be in Communion with Rome.

What do you even mean by this?

The Eastern Divine Liturgies are hugely different than the EF Mass. Why are you trying to use them as you are?

 

[Laetus]

You should not make assumptions… The TLM is being suspended because the priest that has been saying the Mass for the last 3 or 4 years is being transferred to another parish and the one who said the Mass for twenty or more years before that is quite aged and is too infirm to do so anymore. It has nothing to do with attendance. The attendance at the -]TLM/-] EF is as good as some of the other, -]NO/-] OF Masses…
I am encouraging them to attend the DL because;

• It is beautiful! I am falling in love with it. At times during the liturgy, I am moved to tears and my soul is lifted in ways I am unable to aptly describe…
• Many of those attending the -]TLM/-] EF are traveling 2 or more hours to do so and will not attend a -]NO/-] OF Mass… The DL has the same claim to Tradition as the -]TLM/-] EF and none of the abuses that seem to abound in the -]NO/-] OF liturgies. I would much rather they attend an Eastern Rite than to cease going…

Your use of “NO” is very sad. It also tips your hand. You clearly have an agenda.

You’re trying to attract people to the DL because they will not attend the OF Mass? They would rather quit? Why won’t they attend the OF Mass? To be quite honest they sound like the type that might well bring trouble to the parish offering the DL. The last thing an Eastern Catholic parish needs is Latin Rite Catholics gossiping bitterly about “abuses” and the “NO Mass.”

The OF and EF can lay claim to the same tradition (not “Tradition”) and it is fairly distinct from that of the Eastern Divine Liturgies.

 

[rciadan]

What do you even mean by this?

The Eastern Divine Liturgies are hugely different than the EF Mass. Why are you trying to use them as you are?

I mean what I said. I am aware of the differences. I am also aware of the similarities, which you seem to be ignorant of. I am not “using” them at all. I know people who are feeling lost: unsure of where to go from “here”, and I am sharing something beautiful that I am still in the process of discovering and merely suggesting they take a look.
Why are you so angry?

 

[rciadan]

Your use of “NO” is very sad. It also tips your hand.

You’re trying to attract people to the DL because they will not attend the OF Mass? They would rather quit? Why won’t they attend the OF Mass? To be quite honest they sound like the type that might well bring trouble to the parish offering the DL.

The OF and EF can lay claim to the same tradition (not “Tradition”) and it is fairly distinct from that of the Eastern Divine Liturgies.

It tips nothing. It is merely easier to type. Novus Ordo is a perfectly licit term.
I am not trying to “attract” anyone, but, yes, I know some who will not attend a Novus Ordo Mass and who may end up going to a SSPX church, which is not in Communion with the Holy See. Yes, I would rather they go somewhere that is in communion with Rome. Am I wrong in that?
According to your profile, you are Catholic. May I assume, Latin Catholic? Is that why you are so defensive? You think I am trying to lure people away from the Church? Do you not know that the Byzantine Catholic Church is in Communion with Rome and any Catholic is welcome to attend and receive the Eucharist there, even on a regular basis? Would you insist that those who are not comfortable with the “OF” attend there even though there are alternatives that are licit that they may be more comfortable with?
What is* your* agenda? Why do you respond so vehemently towards me?
Of course it is distinct! So what!? Your point is…?

 

[Laetus]

I mean what I said. I am aware of the differences. I am also aware of the similarities, which you seem to be ignorant of. I am not “using” them at all. I know people who are feeling lost: unsure of where to go from “here”, and I am sharing something beautiful that I am still in the process of discovering and merely suggesting they take a look.
Why are you so angry?

The DL of St. John Chrysostom has far more in common with the OF Mass – beginning with the fact that it’s typically celebrated in the vernacular.

I don’t like your use of NO Mass." It smacks very strongly of negativity.

 

[Laetus]

It tips nothing. It is merely easier to type. Novus Ordo is a perfectly licit term.
I am not trying to “attract” anyone, but, yes, I know some who will not attend a Novus Ordo Mass and who may end up going to a SSPX church, which is not in Communion with the Holy See. Yes, I would rather they go somewhere that is in communion with Rome. Am I wrong in that? I think that with some of the responses I am getting here, the DL has enough “trouble” of its own.
Of course it is distinct! So what!? Your point is…?

"Easier to type “NO” than “OF?”

“Novus ordo” is an offensive term used by some to denigrate the OF Mass. There is absolutely no other reason to use the label.

 

[rciadan]

"Easier to type “NO” than “OF?”

“Novus ordo” is an offensive term used by some to denigrate the OF Mass. There is absolutely no other reason to use the label.

NO was a term I became used to before the term OF came into common usage. Novus Ordo is the name printed by Rome on the cover of the instuctions for the priest on how to say the Mass. It is not negative, it merely is…

 

[Stylites]

It tips nothing. It is merely easier to type. Novus Ordo is a perfectly licit term.

Actually, the Church uses the term “Ordinary Form.” We need to converge our minds and ways of thinking with the Church’s, and not use terms often used by others to denigrate the Church. I believe that is what Laetus was referring to.

 

[rciadan]

The DL of St. John Chrysostom has far more in common with the OF Mass – beginning with the fact that it’s typically celebrated in the vernacular.

I don’t like your use of NO Mass." It smacks very strongly of negativity.

I would disagree. What do they have in common other that the vernacular. BTW- Latin was the vernacular at the time is was in common usage, and you missed my point that, for me, the language issue was not even a concern to me. Read my posts before you attack me.

The DL is sung, using only the human voice. There are no guitars, no drums, no songs with lyrics that are heretical. How is that similar to the OF. Note that I use “OF” even though either NO or OF are correct…

I will not further debate this particular issue on this thread, as it was not the point of the thread. My point in creating this thread was to announce that the “EF” or the Tridentine Mass will no longer be said at St Martin DePorres after June 27 and to let people know of a viable alternative. This alternative is viable and licit whether you like it or not. If you do not, start another thread debating that issue.

 

[Stylites]

NO was a term I became used to before the term OF came into common usage. Novus Ordo is the name printed by Rome on the cover of the instuctions for the priest on how to say the Mass. It is not negative, it merely is…

“Common usage” among whom? The Church called it “Novus Ordo” once when it was still being formulated. When the Pope calls it “Ordinary Form” then Catholics of good will need to conform with the mind and heart of the Church.

 

[rciadan]

“Common usage” among whom? The Church called it “Novus Ordo” once when it was still being formulated. When the Pope calls it “Ordinary Form” then Catholics of good will need to conform with the mind and heart of the Church.

Read the cover of the instructions the priest uses to determine how Mass will be said on any given day. The last time I looked, the cover said “Novus Ordo”. Get over it. Why do you want to argue over which word I use, even when the very word is used by Rome!? Quit being so defensive.

 

[bmadamsberry]

It used to be the term used, you are correct. Recently (3 or so years, I believe), however, the Vatican has begun to employ the terms ordinary and extraordinary to refer to the form of Mass (for example here

and here).

I am not surprised; in fact I am well aware and have made that same point myself. I would note though, that the abuses with the NO have been going on without abatement for over forty years now. They have not minimized…

I shouldn’t have assumed that you were unaware of the abuses that can be found in the Extraordinary Form and in the Divine Liturgy; I apologize.

However, in regards to giving time for the abuses within the Ordinary Form to subside, you state that they have been occurring for 40 years and have not minimized. In a historical context, 40 years is no time at all. I am thinking in terms of 100 years. Furthermore, if one looks at the abuses occurring 20 or 30 years ago, and the ones today, one might agree that they have dropped in number and severity (not to say that they are gone and not severe, but rather that they are generally fewer in number and severity). So, in another 60 years, my guess (hope/prayer, lol) is that they will be rare and generally not horrible.

I disagree. I also wonder if you make that same statement in reverse to the myriads of Eastern Rite Catholics that attend the Latin Rite because it is more “convenient”? “Latins” are welcome to attend a DL, and as long as it is at a Church that is in communion with the Holy See one’s “Sunday obligation” is met. I do agree that actually switching Rites

is big deal, not to be taken lightly. I would have to attend the DL for at least a year, while studying Eastern theology, etc, before I could even consider switching Rites. It is not like one can “switch back” if they decide they don’t like it after all!

I would certainly push Eastern Rite Catholics to attend Divine Liturgy rather than attend a Latin Rite form of the Mass. I think one’s history, culture, and heritage is very important. Not attending a Mass within one’s rite deemphasizes (is that a word?) that important connection. Of course, if a Latin Rite form of the Mass is the only one possibly available, then that’s a different story. But I would really push someone to attend a Mass that they don’t like/doesn’t properly orient their worship to the extent that they would normally like, rather than attend a different rite’s Mass.

Also, some of my hesitation would come from an instinctive reaction developed here on the Catholic Answers Forums. I often encounter people who look down on the Ordinary Form and those that attend that form of the Mass (not saying that you do/did that). Therefore I sometimes react stronger and quicker at perceived arrogance and religious superiority than I should.

I do not use the term “abuse” lightly or flippantly. It is a very serious charge. I never use it without good cause and usually instruct others to do the same.

I didn’t mean to imply that I thought you did. Rather that many of the things others might think in regards to abuses might instead be unwise/dumb decisions or things that are not appropriate, but at the same time are not abuses.

P.S. Thank you for this continued (and polite!) discussion. It’s been a while since I’ve just been able to sit down and actually discuss something this sensitive (and often volatile) without it descending into name-calling and arguments!

 

[bmadamsberry]

Ah, I found it!

The motu proprio Summorum Pontificum first laid out the Extraordinary Form and Ordinary Form usages and terms, as well as the letter to the bishops which accompanied the motu proprio. The first can be found here, and the second can be found here.

 

[Cathryn]

Many of those attending the TLM are traveling 2 or more hours to do so and will not attend a NO Mass…

This is why my pastor will not start the TLM at our parish, although he has been trained to do so. He is seriously concerned about his parishioners developing this mindset.

 

[rciadan]

This is why my pastor will not start the TLM at our parish, although he has been trained to do so. He is seriously concerned about his parishioners developing this mindset.

Yet, Rome has decreed that if people ask for it it should be offered…

 

[Cathryn]

Yet, Rome has decreed that if people ask for it it should be offered…

Maybe it is not a real decree.

 

[BertBlyleven]

I’m sorry, but I missed the pun. I would not attend at a SSPX church as it is not in communion with the Holy See.

SSPX is in the process of being regularized, which would allow you to regularly attend their Masses, both in the sense of often and in communion with the Church.