already downhearted

[JKirkLVNV]

One does not have to be “opposed” to the EF to prefer the OF, any more than one does not have to be opposed" to prefer the EF to the OF. There are some in both camps who are opposed to the other form of the Mass, but for most people, it seems to come down to a preferance. Triumphalism from either camp is totally unnecessary.

 

[Pious_Mat]

If this is your attitude to older people, not to mention a legitimate Mass of the Church, then I for one hope you closely re-examine any ideas you have as to what the priesthood entails. We don’t need priests who are dismissive of people and we don’t need priests who disparge the Church’s disciplines, either “liberals” or “conservatives.”

And devoutness and orthodoxy are NOT exclusive to the EF. The OF has been offered by four popes now and only very real extremists have questioned their orthodoxy.

I mean no disrespect to anyone. Also, I DO believe that the NO is a legitimate mass. I’m just not sure if it’s letting us get all we can get out of our Catholic faith, and I don’t think that it is a discipline that I was meant to follow.

As to older people, I meant no respect. In the heat of the moment, perhaps I used some language that was a little forward, but make no mistake that I truly care for everyone who belongs to our faith, and indeed all humanity, as Christ taught us. I grew up with a great affinity for older people, and still have many friends old enough to be my grandparents, some of which are traditional, and some are not. Believe it or not, they are I the people I would like to share the gift of the Tridentine Mass with the most, since it was they who carried out the great task of passing on the faith, and that was a hard thing to do, especially in the twentieth century.

My priestly heros are Padre Pio, who lived and breathed so that he could say mass–the Tridentine Mass, the mass of ages, and St. Jean Vianney, who heard confessions fourteen hours a day and took the penance of his parishioners upon himself through severe mortification. Please remember that although both men were filled with the virtue of love, they never hesistated to be stern with deviations from the faith, I think that people who deeply dislike the EF are deviating from the faith. I don’t want to criticize people. I just want to earn souls for Christ, and I think that the NO, with its lack of specific instructions, makes that a little harder.

Also notice that I never said I didn’t believe in it. In fact, if an NO is said in Latin and ad orientum, I would attend it just as quickly as I attend a tridentine mass. That said, I don’t think a priest who celebrates it is heretical. The Holy Father celebrates it, and I would never go against his word. In fact, I am trying greatly to work inside of his word, and he has made it easy for people like me to do so.

 

[otjm]

Your “statistical” approach only proves the old statement that one can say anything with statistics.
The whole reason there is a Motu Proprio on this issue to begin with is the radical behavior of the bishops in refusing to cooperate with JPII’s “collegial request” for them to do so. The radical bishops have denied and minimalized the indult for a quarter of a century. So any statistics only reflect what they made occur. The statistics have nothing whatsoever to do with reflecting the interest in the EF by either the faithful or priests during that period. Your 0.5%, if that is “accurate” in any sense, only reflects how dramatically successful the radical bishops have been in suppressing what Pope Benedict has just confirmed in his MP and accompanying letter to the Bishops (and released for publication to the faithful as well, think about why he had to do that for a minute) - the EF was never abrogated to begin with. It was always valid.

Hogwash. Even where it is offered, there is little evidence of people clamoring for more. The presumption is made that the demand is widespread and ahs been denied almost everywhere. It is just that: a presumption. It is not based on evidence repeated SRO Masses; some areas have a full church, others don’t.

Only time will tell as to how many people really want the EF, and it will not come about quickly for no other reason that there simply are not very many priests who can say the EF; even the Pope acknowledged this. And it was he who limited the EF to one public Mass on Sunday, not the radical bishops.

Unitl more priests are capable of saying the EF, there will be nothing except rpesumptions as to how many wish to make that their Mass of choice. And once it starts we will then be able to see, after the initial curiosity wears off, how many continue to make it the Mass of choice.

And I for one make no predictions. But it always amuses me the reaction I get to what the real response has been so far, as the real response does not line up with presumptions. If it changes in the future, I have no fear of relating that increase.

I also have no question that the indult was not widely granted. But I certainly do have a curiosity as to how many times it was actually requested; information that I seriously doubt we will ever have. Thus more speculation.

I will challenge you further; pick any area where the indult wa granted reasonably, and tell me how many parishes out of the total of that dioces had the indult, and how many Masses per parish were under the indult. Please, it was not repressed all over; have at it. Show that where the indult was granted reaonably, that it was wide spread. Otherwise, don’t complain about the facts being presented. I am not the one proposing that it will be all over everywhere in 20 years.

 

[otjm]

Of course he did - try reading the post for comprehension. When in your life have you ever heard a pastor declare that the Vatican should send a priest into his parish? When? When have you ever heard a pastor “offer” to be an altar boy for some travelling priest? When? Perhaps you can more easily get ahold of the word “facetious” than “wiseguy”. Either way, it amounts to the same thing. It was completely inappropriate. Try getting the meta-message. There’s no doubt what that is.
And as the only person posting here who actually knows this priest subsequently posted : “Yes, our priest is a smart aleck sometime…”.

When? When the priest is overwhelmed with what he has to do on a daily, weekly, monthly and yearly basis. Maybe you just don’t know very many priests.

Or maybe you have already decided that anyone who isn’t going out immediately to learn the rubrics and the Latin is against it. In some circles that is called making a decision and then looking for supporting evidence. You seem to be finding evidence that isn’t there; you might try to read what is actually said instead of trying to “comprehend”.

 

[Cat]

One does not have to be “opposed” to the EF to prefer the OF, any more than one does not have to be opposed" to prefer the EF to the OF. There are some in both camps who are opposed to the other form of the Mass, but for most people, it seems to come down to a preferance. Triumphalism from either camp is totally unnecessary.

Amen and Hallelujah!

I’m not opposed to TLM at all! If it’s the Mass, I’m for it!

I just prefer my own heart language.

 

[otjm]

I mean no disrespect to anyone. Also, I DO believe that the NO is a legitimate mass. I’m just not sure if it’s letting us get all we can get out of our Catholic faith, and I don’t think that it is a discipline that I was meant to follow.

If you wish to focus on the EF, then the FSSP may be the route to go. Keep in mind, however, that the leaders of the FSSP were forcefully reminded that they could not limit the FSSP priest to saying only the EF, something they were trying to do.

As to older people, I meant no respect. … Believe it or not, they are I the people I would like to share the gift of the Tridentine Mass with the most, since it was they who carried out the great task of passing on the faith, and that was a hard thing to do, especially in the twentieth century.

And the point yuou do not seem to get is that many of them welcomed the OF with open arms and have no desire to go back. My mother, who is 90, is an example; she thinks the best thing that ever happened was the vernacular. And this is a woman who taught us all to use missals at the EF and made sure we did.

I just want to earn souls for Christ, and I think that the NO, with its lack of specific instructions, makes that a little harder.

Again, you seem to be presuming that the OF makes it harder; I would suggest that the issue is not the OF vs. the EF, but catechesis (which has been sorely lacking in content).

You have great enthusiasm, and that is wonderful. But it needs to be temepered by a bit of wisdom. Life is not quite as black and white as you seem to perceive it.

 

[Cat]

I mean no disrespect to anyone. Also, I DO believe that the NO is a legitimate mass. I’m just not sure if it’s letting us get all we can get out of our Catholic faith, and I don’t think that it is a discipline that I was meant to follow.

The comment that I have bolded above is, in my opinion, a very wise comment.

All of us have a different road to travel to get to heaven, and all of us are called to different disciplines. The important thing is that we keep following Jesus and obey His voice.

We need to be careful not to try to force others to follow Christ the exact same way we do.

I think that Pious Matt’s comments show that he is willing to allow others to attend NO, even if he prefers TLM. That’s a good attitude that I want to have.

 

[Pious_Mat]

First, let me thank otjm for his comments and advice. I guess I do overdue a bit sometimes, but I’m still a young man in High School, and hopefully I’ll calm down a bit with age.

And by-the-by, I regularly attend the OF, since the nearest TLM to me is 4 hours away, a pilgrimage I can only make once in a while. I’m still recieving Jesus, even if I’m a little upset by the modern music, jokes during the homily, and occasional re-arrangement of words, but as otjm was getting at, this is not inherent to the OF, but rather the offspring of lack of catechis and misinterpretation.

That said, why don’t we make this discussion a little more constructive?

We’ve all speculated–I more than most–but I think that in order to keep this from becoming a full-blown argument, we should now turn to fact, and consider what might be done about the matter.

What about:

Number of seminarians learning the EF

Number of priests who currently know how to say the EF

Number of Dioceses and Parishes in which it is currently said,

And most important of all,

How do we promote the Tridentine Mass in our daily lives?

I don’t want to grumble or argue, and I’m sure that none of you do either. I just want to share with people Christ’s greatest gift on Earth–His presence in the Eucharist at the mass.

Be back when I’ve found everything I can,

Mat.

 

[Cat]

I hope that this post sounds kind.

I have a wee problem with people who seem to want to go to TLM “for the experience.”

What exactly is the difference between this approach, and the approach of charismatic Protestants who attend a weekly “worship experience” at their church?

And what is the difference between this and going to a rock concert for the “vibes.” (You can tell how old I am.)

I know a lot of Protestants who go to church for the music, the hand-raising, the ecstasy, the manifestations of the charismata–in other words, the “experience.” The feelings.

In fact, the megachurch in our city doesn’t say “worship services” or “church services.” Instead, they call it the “worship experience.”

I don’t agree with this approach. Although I think that humans should “enjoy” church and get something “good” out of church services (especially the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass!), I don’t think we should be going to any church, including the Catholic Mass, for the “experience” or to experience good “feelings.” I think we should go because we are obeying Jesus, our Lord, and because we want to receive Him.

I do believe that the main reason Catholics go to Mass is to receive Jesus, and that the 'experience" is secondary, so please don’t think I’m lumping everyone together. But it does seem like some talk more about the “experience” of TLM rather than the Jesus of TLM.

 

[30miller]

My own priest. Our former pastoral administrator, in this time of a priest shortage and in an effort to save on bills, wanted to consolidate the daily masses. We had one at 6:30, which was very sparsely attended and one at 8:00, which drew more people. He announced at each of those masses that one of the two would have to go and he allowed the attendees to vote on which one we’d keep. The 8:00 o’clock Mass won. One of the 6:30 attendees indignantly told the priest that the pope said we were supposed to have Mass more often, not less (no citation for this was provided). Our priest, who was also the diocesan vocations director (they often wear more than one hat), said in exasperation,“Then you tell the pope to come and say the Mass.” So yes, I’ve heard it. And I don’t think the “meta message” was necessarily what you interpret it as being. I thought it was obvious that he didn’t know how to say the Latin Mass. The fact that he was willing to serve as an altar “boy” (priests frequently help in the offering of the Mass) indicates a possible willingness to learn. So, contrary to your assertion, there is some doubt.

Good thing the Cure of Ars didn’t take a vote of the laity regarding how often he should be in the confessional - even though if he used the same thought pattern as your “former pastoral administrator” (whatever that is) had the laity of Ars would have voted that sacrament right out of town. The Cure acted as a shepherd - not a poll taker. Though initially no one went to confession (hence, he should have cancelled it using your thinking) he LED his sheep. In the end, people came from all over to go to confession to him. And, of course, in the end he was declared a Saint. That’s what a pastor is. So, please spare me the tales of the modern-day “multi-tasking” administrators who wear “one of their hats” as pastors and who somehow don’t find time to promote the use of the sacraments.
And I would be willing to bet (without even checking) that your diocese has a poor rate of vocations. Why? Because these things go hand in hand.
No priest when concelebrating ever refers to himself as an altar boy even though he may not be the main celebrant. Give it a rest.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I mean no disrespect to anyone. Also, I DO believe that the NO is a legitimate mass. I’m just not sure if it’s letting us get all we can get out of our Catholic faith, and I don’t think that it is a discipline that I was meant to follow.

As to older people, I meant no respect. In the heat of the moment, perhaps I used some language that was a little forward, but make no mistake that I truly care for everyone who belongs to our faith, and indeed all humanity, as Christ taught us. I grew up with a great affinity for older people, and still have many friends old enough to be my grandparents, some of which are traditional, and some are not. Believe it or not, they are I the people I would like to share the gift of the Tridentine Mass with the most, since it was they who carried out the great task of passing on the faith, and that was a hard thing to do, especially in the twentieth century.

My priestly heros are Padre Pio, who lived and breathed so that he could say mass–the Tridentine Mass, the mass of ages, and St. Jean Vianney, who heard confessions fourteen hours a day and took the penance of his parishioners upon himself through severe mortification. Please remember that although both men were filled with the virtue of love, they never hesistated to be stern with deviations from the faith, I think that people who deeply dislike the EF are deviating from the faith. I don’t want to criticize people. I just want to earn souls for Christ, and I think that the NO, with its lack of specific instructions, makes that a little harder.

Also notice that I never said I didn’t believe in it. In fact, if an NO is said in Latin and ad orientum, I would attend it just as quickly as I attend a tridentine mass. That said, I don’t think a priest who celebrates it is heretical. The Holy Father celebrates it, and I would never go against his word. In fact, I am trying greatly to work inside of his word, and he has made it easy for people like me to do so.

Thank you for your clarifications, but:

You would be deeply offended, PROFOUNDLY offended, if anyone made this statment: “I think that people who deeply dislike the OF are deviating from the faith.” Whether you can believe this or not, it is as offensive to suggest that those who deeply dislike the EF are deviating from the faith. I don’t personally know anyone who deeply dislikes the EF, but I know a great number of people who prefer the OF and are not remotely interested in attending the EF. They grew up with it, they were raised on it, if anyone should be “nostalgic” about it, they should, but they don’t want to go, they want to go to Mass in their own language. That doesn’t mean that they hate/dislike the EF and it certainly does not mean that they have deviated from the faith. They’re perfectly orthodox, Communion-taking, Confession-going, Adoration-making, Rosary-saying, magisterium-obeying, card-carrying Catholics. They aren’t liberals or modernists or any other kind of heretic. I prefer to attend a Mass in my own language, where I’m not forbidden to hear the glorious words of the Consecration, and where I make the responses instead of having them made for me. That doesn’t mean I dislike the EF, it simply means that given the choice, I’d attend the OF.

The idea that “those people” are going to die out and only the young matter, that “those people” are irrelevant, is completely contrary to Church teaching and Catholic culture. You mention the fearlessness of St. Pio and St. John Vianney. Yes, they’d castigate sinners. A lot of the castigation that “traditionalists” hand out in these forums, however, is GROUNDLESS and is predicated on assumptions about the faith rather than actual facts about the faith. And given half the chance, they’d like to see the OF repudiated and everyone forced to their standard (just like the liberal, modernist, progressivists have used their entrenched position of power in chanceries throughout this countries to keep the orthodox out of seminaries and disenfranchised). I’m no prophet, but I’m betting that the liturgy 50-100 years from now won’t be the EF as it stands today, OR the OF, but a happy medium. I bet it will be offered in every church in both the Latin and the vernacular, too. So both camps will have some things to get used to.

 

[30miller]

With the attitude you have, I suspect that you would not have liked what the Mass looked like in the early Church.

Anyone who has decided that those of a certain age are brain dead in matters of faith has a seriously judgemental attitude. If you want to play a “holier than thou” card, go play it somewhere else.

Oh, and by the way, our parish has the OF …

… and the great majority of the parish preferring the OF (and they go to perpetual adoration), the likelyhood of our getting the EF as a practical matter on Sunday is rather small…

… they just prefer the OF. But I guess they are all spiritually brain dead.

It’s pretty clear from your post who thinks they are “holier than thou”.
Oh, by the way, did you in your wildest imagination think you could be mistaken for belonging to an indult Latin Mass parish? Of course your parish has the OF…the language you speak is that of an OFer - never to be mistaken for an EFer.

The MP just came out in July. It’s first date of implementation was 12 days ago. How exactly is it that you claim to know that the “great majority” of your parish prefers the OF?
And even in the strongest 24 hour perpetual adoration parishes I’ve seen - none comes close to having a “great majority” participate in adoration. 25 to 40 % tops. Do you count walking past the adoration chapel on the way out of Mass or something as “going” to perpetual adoration?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Good thing the Cure of Ars didn’t take a vote of the laity regarding how often he should be in the confessional - even though if he used the same thought pattern as your “former pastoral administrator” (whatever that is) had the laity of Ars would have voted that sacrament right out of town. The Cure acted as a shepherd - not a poll taker. Though initially no one went to confession (hence, he should have cancelled it using your thinking) he LED his sheep.

This is soooooo sad and yet so typical. I never said I approved of the priest’s decision. Have you a window into my soul that tells you that I did? As it happens, I attended the 6:30 Mass when I was able to go to daily Mass, so you’re far off the mark (yet the attitude is, again, typical). The point was yes, I’ve heard exasperated priests say exasperated things.

In the end, people came from all over to go to confession to him. And, of course, in the end he was declared a Saint. That’s what a pastor is. So, please spare me the tales of the modern-day “multi-tasking” administrators who wear “one of their hats” as pastors and who somehow don’t find time to promote the use of the sacraments.

**We have regular Benediction, regular confession with long lines, etc., etc. This is where knowing what one is talking about is handy.

** And I would be willing to bet (without even checking) that your diocese has a poor rate of vocations. Why? Because these things go hand in hand.
No priest when concelebrating ever refers to himself as an altar boy even though he may not be the main celebrant. Give it a rest.

**No, I don’t mean concelebrating, I mean serving as an “server.” And I go back to the idea that that may well have been what the poor priest MAY have meant (unlike others, I cannot say definitively, having no certain way of knowing): that he would learn to offer the Mass that way or that he would humbly act as another priests altar “boy.” **

 

[30miller]

…the idea that that may well have been what the poor priest MAY have meant (unlike others, I cannot say definitively, having no certain way of knowing): that he would learn to offer the Mass that way or that he would humbly act as another priests altar “boy.”

Now the priest who you say you definitively don’t know is a “poor” priest. Where does that come from?

In between posts - I looked up the vocation rate for your diocese and see that I was correct: “…VOCATION-POOR DIOCESES
The nation’s dioceses with the lowest ratio of seminarians to Catholics (starting with the bottom-ranked diocese) are Honolulu, Hawaii; San Diego, California; El Paso, Texas; Rockville Centre, New York; Hartford, Connecticut; Santa Rosa, California; Las Vegas, Nevada; Paterson, New Jersey; San Bernardino, California; Dallas, Texas; Brooklyn, New York; and Rochester, New York.”
So, why am I not surprised! And all I made my prediction on was your limited explication revealing bits of yourself and your parish/diocese.
(That’s from a 2005 report from Catholic World Report - easy for anyone to google).

 

[Pious_Mat]

JKirk:

Again, I’m sorry if I offended anyone, but I must clarify a little bit.

First, I think that anyone who finds the OF deeply offensive is deviating from the faith. That would probably mean that they feel that consecration does not take place at the OF, which would be heresy.

Also, even though I promote the EF, and will always love it with all my heart, I do not tell people what to think. Padre Pio didn’t have any snide remarks about VII and the new mass, but simply preferred the old, as it was the one he taken ecstacy in all his life, and felt a deep spiritua communion with saints of the past who had said that same mass, word for word, since 1570.

Also, I would be perfectly happy if we lived in a world in which both rites were celebrated side-by-side (not literally side-by-side, of course, but you know what I mean) in every parish in the world. I am now in my late teens, and if I live to be 100 and see that happen, I will consider my EF mission more than accomplished.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Now the priest who you say you definitively don’t know is a “poor” priest. Where does that come from? I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you were having trouble with exact words, I’ll be more careful next time. I didn’t mean “poor” as in “lacking in funds.” I mean “poor” sympathetically, as in “poor old cat.” Let me know if you need me to clarify any other words/phrases.

In between posts - I looked up the vocation rate for your diocese and see that I was correct: "…VOCATION-POOR DIOCESES

The nation’s dioceses with the lowest ratio of seminarians to Catholics (starting with the bottom-ranked diocese) are Honolulu, Hawaii; San Diego, California; El Paso, Texas; Rockville Centre, New York; Hartford, Connecticut; Santa Rosa, California; Las Vegas, Nevada; Paterson, New Jersey; San Bernardino, California; Dallas, Texas; Brooklyn, New York; and Rochester, New York.
So, why am I not surprised! And all I made my prediction on was your limited explication revealing bits of yourself and your parish/diocese.
(That’s from a 2005 report from Catholic World Report - easy for anyone to google).

LOL!!! Have you BEEN to Las Vegas?!?!? Of COURSE, we’re one of the lowest, I’m surprised we’re not THE lowest!!! But even in Sin City, we manage to always have a few in seminary.
And you still don’t know ANYTHING about me or my faith in Christ and His Church OR my parish and I’d be careful about assumptions if I were you.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

JKirk:

Again, I’m sorry if I offended anyone, but I must clarify a little bit.

First, I think that anyone who finds the OF deeply offensive is deviating from the faith. That would probably mean that they feel that consecration does not take place at the OF, which would be heresy.

Also, even though I promote the EF, and will always love it with all my heart, I do not tell people what to think. Padre Pio didn’t have any snide remarks about VII and the new mass, but simply preferred the old, as it was the one he taken ecstacy in all his life, and felt a deep spiritua communion with saints of the past who had said that same mass, word for word, since 1570.

Also, I would be perfectly happy if we lived in a world in which both rites were celebrated side-by-side (not literally side-by-side, of course, but you know what I mean) in every parish in the world. I am now in my late teens, and if I live to be 100 and see that happen, I will consider my EF mission more than accomplished.

Good to know. And here’s a surprise for you (from an ancient 45 year old). If the EF was in the vernacular and had a few other minor reforms/organic developments, that’s the Mass I’d go to, all the time. If we’d simply done that after the council, we would probably have avoided all this mess.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Now the priest who you say you definitively don’t know is a “poor” priest. Where does that come from?

In between posts - I looked up the vocation rate for your diocese and see that I was correct: “…VOCATION-POOR DIOCESES
The nation’s dioceses with the lowest ratio of seminarians to Catholics (starting with the bottom-ranked diocese) are Honolulu, Hawaii; San Diego, California; El Paso, Texas; Rockville Centre, New York; Hartford, Connecticut; Santa Rosa, California; Las Vegas, Nevada; Paterson, New Jersey; San Bernardino, California; Dallas, Texas; Brooklyn, New York; and Rochester, New York.”
So, why am I not surprised! And all I made my prediction on was your limited explication revealing bits of yourself and your parish/diocese.
(That’s from a 2005 report from Catholic World Report - easy for anyone to google).

San Fran’s not on the list?

 

[maryalene]

**No, I don’t mean concelebrating, I mean serving as an “server.” And I go back to the idea that that may well have been what the poor priest MAY have meant (unlike others, I cannot say definitively, having no certain way of knowing): that he would learn to offer the Mass that way or that he would humbly act as another priests altar “boy.” **

I think this is exactly what he meant - that he was an altar boy when we used to have the Latin Mass so he would be happy to resume that role again. After he made the altar boy comment, he said something to the effect of knowing the prayers said by the altar boys, and he quickly said one for us. I don’t think he meant that he would concelebrate.

Again, I think it was meant as a joke, and I have no idea as to whether our priest would be opposed to learning the Latin Mass. He is very traditional and very much a “by the book” type of person so I can’t see him being opposed to the TLM.

I just brought up his comment to illustrate that there probably aren’t many priests who know the Latin Mass which is why we haven’t see a significant influx of Latin Masses since the MP. I probably should have just left our priest’s comment out, but live and learn I guess, lol.

 

[maryalene]

And now that I am feeling bad that my priest is being raked over the coals for something I said let me also add that since our priest came to our parish: he moved the altar to the center (it was off to the side) our servers now wear traditional robes, we have incorporated some Latin into the Mass, Gregorian chant is used, the folk group was banished and evening compline is offered several times a week among other things.