Attracting people to the TLM

[At_Trent]

As I pointed out in another thread, this is also a good argument to have never let the Bible reach lay Catholics in the vernacular, let alone to have printed inexpensive and widely available Bibles, so that Holy Scriptures could be unchained from the ambo.

Too late.

Cardinal McIntyre was speaking of the Liturgy itself of course, but as far as the bible, I don’t like to read it and discuss it with anyone, unless a member of the clergy is present. The reason being, people can get carried away interpreting it for themselves, and walk away from the discussion mistaken. Not always, but the danger is there.

I suppose the Bible does give non-Catholic denominations a false sense of assured salvation. I must say, I admire the Amish though lol. They have rejection of the evils of this world down pat.

 

[Ockham]

Just one example, but told to let remind you that the “smells and bells” do make a difference and when they are tilted in favor of the OF, it can be very difficult for an EF low Mass to ‘compete’.

In fact, the best way to increase the overal reverance of a parish is to institute a time of Adoration. Organizing Adoration is traditionally a lay role. Even starting with just a few hours a week (from after that Wednesday night EF until say 10pm) can make a huge difference to the spiritual life of the parish.

It’s not appropriate to compare the two forms as we would entertainment. Of course the EF can be said irreverantly just as it’s possible to find a reverent OF. However, placed side by side and all things considered equal there is a considerable difference between them. The Mass itself is a prayer and even a rushed Low Mass is still meant to be participated by the congregation. I’ve attended Low Mass in the EF with a sermon so I’m not sure this is an issue.

 

[Ockham]

From Father Z’s blog yesterday: wdtprs.com/blog/2010/04/no-brainer-from-germany-44-would-go-to-the-old-traditional-mass/

"Paix Liturgique Exclusive Survey: in Germany, 44% of practicing Catholics would regularly attend the traditional Mass if the Motu Proprio was applied!

At least 44% of practicing Catholics in Germany would regularly participate in an Old Mass, if the requirements of the Motu Proprio ‘Summorum Pontificum’ were established in their country."

From the Catholic Knight’s blog a few years ago: catholicknight.blogspot.com/2007/11/poll-53-of-catholics-want-latin-mass.html

“Arkansas Catholic’s weekly poll question beginning Oct. 25, 2007, asked, “In Arkansas Catholic this week, we read about priests attending a Tridentine Rite (Latin) Mass during their recent meeting. If a Latin Mass was offered in your area, would you attend regularly?”

53 percent said yes.

27 percent said no.

20 percent said, “I already attend Latin Mass regularly.”"

 

[EasterJoy]

Are you sure you’re Catholic ?

The giant calligraphy bibles of the old days took decades to make. And so were tied onto the table because if they lost it it meant no lay Catholics got to hear the readings for a very long time.

The printing press was invented in 1436, and Luther rebelled in 1517. There were lots of approved vernacular editions put out, and a lot condemned because they were very badly translated. Here’s a few Catholic vernacular bibles to make note of: Caedmon’s in the 600s in Britain, St. Cyril’s in 836, etc.

I really hope you’re being sarcastic because this is one of the false accusations that Protestants throw at the Church to try and justify themselves. If you’re falling prey to their lies, I’d recommend some Catechesis, and fast

Yes, I’m a Catholic, a Catholic who is sick to death of hearing how the Church effectively became Protestant when the TLM was suppressed and how the statistics prove this and on and on and on. For some reason, some people can’t make a defense of such a beautiful rite as the EF without going on a head hunt against the OF. And yes, I’m being a bit sarcastic about the Bible being chained to the ambo, sorry about that. It is just that I grew up hearing Catholic Bible study groups getting the same criticisms I hear about the OF. These pointless accusations get very tiring. It is not as if the OF or study of the Holy Scriptures by the laity could go away, let alone ought to. All one can do is take steps to make both Catholic Bible study and the OF Mass exercises in orthodoxy, because neither one is going anywhere.

To those who think that a person is not really Catholic who does not believe the Pauline Mass to be a Protestant innovation that should be abolished forever: well, too bad. When Rome’s on my side, I’ll not worry that I’m accused of being not Roman Catholic enough, or not traditional enough, or Traditional enough, or whatever. If our dear Holy Father is branded a liberal, then I’ll take what he’s having, but I have my own ideas about where I fall on the continuum from traditional to not traditional. (Harrumph.)

Oh, and just for the record: I don’t think that being traditional makes me a better Catholic than someone who is not. I think a Catholic could become a saint without being particularly moved by the EF, Latin, or any of a number of other treasures. As long as a Catholic loves the Eucharist, avails themselves of the sacraments, loves virtue, hates sin, does justice, and walks humbly before God, a lack of appreciation for Latin is not going to prevent them from being shown the Beatific Vision. But that’s just me. I’m pretty sure Rome hasn’t made an official statement on that one.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I say these things because I see on certain forums a vocal minority of those who also attend the EF (and a few trolls to be sure) who are angry and bitter about it. The people who yell “the OF is an abomination” and other such things PUSH people AWAY from the EF. Are most people who go to the EF like that? No, but there are a minority of vocal ones whose attitude is damaging, not only to themselves, but to others as well.

Thank you

Blessed Karl,
It is exactly this reason that I have stayed away from the EF Masses offered in my diocese.

I have often been disparaged by more “traditional minded” Catholics, had my level of spirituality and “Catholicity” called into question, and at some times have even been called a “heretic” because I believe that girls should be allowed to be altar servers, that lay involvement in the liturgy is a good thing (so long as the “rules” are followed) and that, in some cases, lay preaching of the homily should be allowed.

I could go on and on, but I would have to say that my biggest issue is with the animosity and venom that the people who prefer the EF spew towards our Bishop. The man can do nothing right in their eyes and in some cases has been verbally attacked, using the most hateful and vulgar language I have ever heard (and I have a real “potty mouth” sometimes!).

Based on my experiences, I will take the OF anyday of the week and will not be going to an EF anytime soon, at least in my home diocese.

 

[ProVobis]

Blessed Karl,
Based on my experiences, I will take the OF anyday of the week and will not be going to an EF anytime soon, at least in my home diocese.

Even if we give you altar girls, give you more lay ministers, and lay preachers in the EF?

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Even if we give you altar girls, give you more lay ministers, and lay preachers in the EF?

Enjoy your altar girls, more lay ministers, and lay preachers.

A perfect example of the high & mighty attitude of the people who attend the EF in my diocese, and a perfect example of why you will not find me there.

 

[ProVobis]

A perfect example of the high & mighty attitude of the people who attend the EF in my diocese, and a perfect example of why you will not find me there.

The people I encounter when I go to the OF don’t seem to have such an attitude. Godspeed.

 

[dmorgan]

To “OneoftheWomen” I would like to appologize for any comments made to you by the pre V-II Traditionalists that you found offensive. Some folks get a little caught up when they are defending what they Believe to be the true Faith. In all honesty we should not be judging each other. But we do have the duty to try to restore the Church to what it was meant to be. For some insight into the issues that preV-II Tradisionalists have with the NO and what has happened to our faith give this link a read. If you have the time read the Papal Encyclicals that are linked to the main topic. I believe if more Catholics were taught this in Catachism we would not be having these arguments.

fisheaters.com/traditionalcatholicism.html

 

[Timothysis]

If our dear Holy Father is branded a liberal, then I’ll take what he’s having, but I have my own ideas about where I fall on the continuum from traditional to not traditional. (Harrumph.)

:clapping:

 

[Ockham]

A perfect example of the high & mighty attitude of the people who attend the EF in my diocese, and a perfect example of why you will not find me there.

Well that’s too bad. I know some traditional Catholics in Western New York and they are some of the nicest people I’ve ever met. Pro Vobis was just trying to make the issue a little lighter for you. Have you considered changing your approach or at least not letting other people bother you so much?

 

[EasterJoy]

:clapping:

Yeah, anybody who wants to know the “right way” to be traditional, they can just ask you or me!

Seriously, though, even if I did not care for the TLM myself, I would think it is worthwhile to attract people to the TLM for no other reason that some of them will find a whole new way to fall in love with the Blessed Sacrament, with the Eucharist. Whatever anybody has to say from the other side of the fence, you can’t deny that many people who start going to the TLM find themselves in an attitude that is more reverent, more adoring, of the Eucharist. That is the result I find more than anything. That is the main thing, in the end: The Mass is for lovers, or at least the Mass is where Catholics learn what Love truly is.

The Sister Bertha Better-Than-You thing is something anyone can fall into, in any denomination, on any part of the continuum within any denomination, and it can happen to any one of us. I’m hardly immune, at least…which is probably why it is so irritating to me in someone else, let’s be honest! If fate catches two of us in that attitude who are Better-Than-You about different things on that particular day, there will probably be a cat fight, but that hardly means that there is anything wrong with what is being fought over. It is bad “advertisement”, but even the most beautiful Mass doesn’t turn us into angels. OTOH, there isn’t anything in another denomination that will make you fall in love with the Eucharist. That is from Heaven.

 

[Lormar]

And if anyone wants to know how to be the perfect and obedient OF Catholic, they can just ask me!

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Yes, I’m a Catholic, a Catholic who is sick to death of hearing how the Church effectively became Protestant when the TLM was suppressed and how the statistics prove this and on and on and on. For some reason, some people can’t make a defense of such a beautiful rite as the EF without going on a head hunt against the OF. And yes, I’m being a bit sarcastic about the Bible being chained to the ambo, sorry about that. It is just that I grew up hearing Catholic Bible study groups getting the same criticisms I hear about the OF. These pointless accusations get very tiring. It is not as if the OF or study of the Holy Scriptures by the laity could go away, let alone ought to. All one can do is take steps to make both Catholic Bible study and the OF Mass exercises in orthodoxy, because neither one is going anywhere.

To those who think that a person is not really Catholic who does not believe the Pauline Mass to be a Protestant innovation that should be abolished forever: well, too bad. When Rome’s on my side, I’ll not worry that I’m accused of being not Roman Catholic enough, or not traditional enough, or Traditional enough, or whatever. If our dear Holy Father is branded a liberal, then I’ll take what he’s having, but I have my own ideas about where I fall on the continuum from traditional to not traditional. (Harrumph.)

Oh, and just for the record: I don’t think that being traditional makes me a better Catholic than someone who is not. I think a Catholic could become a saint without being particularly moved by the EF, Latin, or any of a number of other treasures. As long as a Catholic loves the Eucharist, avails themselves of the sacraments, loves virtue, hates sin, does justice, and walks humbly before God, a lack of appreciation for Latin is not going to prevent them from being shown the Beatific Vision. But that’s just me. I’m pretty sure Rome hasn’t made an official statement on that one.

What you read on here being posted from Traditional Catholics is more than just “pointless accusations”. I think a mistake some non-Traditionals make when coming on this section to post is that they think the Traditional Catholics will have a viewpoint nearly identical to theirs, except they attend the TLM more than the Novus Ordo. That’s not the case, though. Traditional Catholics are going to stick up for the TLM and for tradition on this forum, not say there is no problem with Vatican II, the Novus Ordo, or anything else that does not go by tradition.

No one here has said that attending the Novus Ordo does not make you a Catholic, but the fact is protestants were present at the Vatican II reform, and that the reform was an attempt at trying to draw the Catholic faith closer to the Protestant denominations. Pope Benedict XVI is not a liberal, he’s closer to being traditional than any Pope we’ve had since Vatican II. I greatly admire him for freeing up the TLM more. However, Traditional Catholics know the TLM is the true Mass, and aren’t going to regularly attend a Novus Ordo Mass just because the Pope says it’s ok.

And in case you haven’t noticed, there has never been a recorded case of anyone dying for the Novus Ordo. I’m not saying you have to attend the TLM at all times to become a saint, but nearly every one of our saints to this day were before the Vatican II reform. Not knowing about Latin or the TLM is one thing, but not liking Latin or the TLM is crossing the line.

 

[Timothysis]

No one here has said that attending the Novus Ordo does not make you a Catholic, but the fact is protestants were present at the Vatican II reform, and that the reform was an attempt at trying to draw the Catholic faith closer to the Protestant denominations.

Perhaps you can comment on this;
*
“The sacred and holy, general Synod of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost … grants, as far as regards the holy Synod itself, to all and each one throughout the whole of Germany, whether ecclesiastics or seculars, of whatsoever degree, estate, condition, quality they be, who may wish to repair to this ecumenical and general Council, the public faith and full security, which they call a safe-conduct … so as that they may and shall have it in their power in all liberty to confer, make proposals, and treat on those things which are to be treated of in the said Synod; to come freely and safely to the said ecumenical Council, and there remain and abide, and propose therein, as well in writing as by word of mouth, as many articles as to them shall seem good, and to confer and dispute, without any abuse or contumely, with the Fathers, or with those who may have been selected by the said holy Synod; as also to withdraw whensoever they shall think fit.*”

And what is this from? The thirteenth session of the Council of Trent.

"*We should make several important observations here.

First, the Council of Trent both invited and offered safe passage to Protestants who wished to come and participate at this ecumenical council.

Second, Trent invited Protestants of all social and ecclesiastical rank to share their theological views, propose topics for debate, and generally participate in the daily affairs of this ecumenical council. "*

So, your constant mantra of “there were protestants at Vatican II” can just as well be applied against the Council of Trent, yet you refuse to do that. Why? If protestants are bad at one council they should be bad at another. Do you have the intellectual honesty to admit this?

Traditional Catholics know the TLM is the true Mass, and aren’t going to regularly attend a Novus Ordo Mass just because the Pope says it’s ok.

This is nothing but a type of religious bigotry. What do you mean “the true Mass?” Does that mean that every other liturgy in the Church is somehow false? How is one form of the Mass superior to another in the means by which its efficacy is heightened or lessened? Is it possible for Christ to be “more present” in one Mass and “less present” in another or is Christ “equally present” in all valid consecrations? If Christ is “equally present” in a non-TLM Mass, is this or is it not a “true Mass?”

And in case you haven’t noticed, there has never been a recorded case of anyone dying for the Novus Ordo. I’m not saying you have to attend the TLM at all times to become a saint, but nearly every one of our saints to this day were before the Vatican II reform.

Its only been 40 years since the promulgation of the Pauline Missal. What do you want, wholesale massacres of 20 year olds in order to have someone die for the Mass?!?!?

Not knowing about Latin or the TLM is one thing, but not liking Latin or the TLM is crossing the line.

You don’t like the “Novus Ordo;” is THAT crossing the line?!?!?

 

[Indyann]

So, you are saying that all the persecuted Christians and martyrs who are dying to this day, all died at a Latin Mass?

You should really stop and think before you post. You are sounding quite ignorant. Stop spouting off and do your homework, before you make such ridiculous statements.

 

[Ockham]

You are sounding quite ignorant. Stop spouting off and do your homework, before you make such ridiculous statements.

I’d really like to see the use of the word ignorant curtailed. Do you really think you’ll sway someone to see the merit of your argument by use of adversarial terms?

 

[Ockham]

You don’t like the “Novus Ordo;” is THAT crossing the line?!?!?

It appears most people don’t like the Novus Ordo. Why is it on threads like this there needs to be such hotly exchanged debate? What is your agenda?

 

[ProVobis]

So, your constant mantra of “there were protestants at Vatican II” can just as well be applied against the Council of Trent, yet you refuse to do that.

I don’t think they invited communists and other wackos to the Council of Trent. In the 17th century people were a little more serious about their faith, it seems.

 

[Timothysis]

It appears most people don’t like the Novus Ordo. Why is it on threads like this there needs to be such hotly exchanged debate? What is your agenda?

It appears that most people are at least ambivalent to the “Novus Ordo” than passionate or hostile (except on this forum), since one really needs to go to Church in the first place to have an opinion on it in one way or the other. The “hotly exchanged debate” occurs because of factions like yours who heap nothing but abuse on a valid form of the liturgy because it doesn’t suit your personal preference. If I have any agenda it is to defend the Presence of Christ in the Sacrament, whether that sacrament is consecrated in the EF, OF, the Divine Liturgy or what have you. If “most people don’t like the Novus Ordo,” then I think it speaks volumes about their grasp of the Church, the liturgy and Christ’s Presence in Holy Communion.