Bishop Schneider backs the SSPX

[otjm]

That could very well be. However, I’m not saying this is happening but welcoming them is a lot different than welcoming a philosophy which is diametrically opposed. Sure, I can say my local parish welcomes me by inviting me to participate on its liturgical committee but where’s the sincerity in that if my preference is the EF?

It is not a matter of sincerity so much as it is a matter of reality. Very, very few people have a desire for the EF.

There is a process set up, in Summorum Pontificum, for requesting the EF. And it takes a stable group; if you have 3,000 members in a parish and can’t muster 20 who are truly serious about it, then the 20, should they be found, need to get together with others from neighboring parishes and form a sizeable enough group that they can move the matter forward.

There is a reason that Benedict 16 said, clearly, that he did not anticipate that the EF would become widespread. I think that he saw that it was a significantly small, and widespread minority which prefers the EF.

The last time I counted, while the Archdiocese of Chicago had a Cardinal who supported the EF, right about 3% of all the parishes in the archdiocese had an EF - either as a weekly Mass, or a more occasional one. That in itself speaks volumes; but many do not want to hear.

We are now also starting to get reports that some parishes which established the EF, to much enthusiasm, are now seeing attendance drop off significantly - in one comment, from 200 to 250 attending, to somewhere about 50. This is undoubtedly in part because people move; in part because the 250 represented people from surrounding parishes, and people get tired of going a longer distance to get to Mass, or desire a “parish” (meaning that during the week, and on weekends other than the Mas itself, they want to be working with each other); and I am sure there are other reasons.

No matter where you look, the EF is not widespread. The vast majority of those sitting in the pews either have no opinion, no interest, or no enthusiasm for the amount of work it would take. The net is that unless there are people who really want the EF and are willing to do the work, it won’t happen. My archbishop is clearly a proponent of Gregorian Chant. The number of people who showed up to a seminar on chant was, to put it politely, underwhelming.

 

[Xantippe]

I was once at a Mass in Germany where one of the readings was replaced with a recitation of the Three Little Pigs.

But that was the high water mark for OF shenanigans that I have ever personally experienced.

I think we need another Godwin’s Law corollary.

Okay, take an incident of sin, be it a priest having a clown Mass, or a priest caught in a sexual sin. Neither one is an act of the Church changing doctrine toward either the importance of the Eucharist, or the sinfulness of sexual immorality. While we can be understanding to the one that allows the act of a priest to lead him to abandon the Catholic Church, can we at least agree that some sort of break over an act of sin is wrong? It some people in the pew should not leave the Church over a scandal of sex, why are we trying to justify this same action over a scandal in liturgy?

 

[Xantippe]

the sheep started scattering during the papcy of Pius 12th, and there was a gradual but fairly continual loss of people well into the 1990’s and beyond.

There is an urban myth that there was some sort of major exodus shortly after the release of the OF, but there is simply and absolutely no proof of it.

If you had family members leave the Church, it is easy to go from that to projecting it out across the United States, and the myth lives on - but the reality was and is different.

I am always struck by those who (supposedly) were so strong a Catholic during the EF, and all of a sudden, they fled the Church with the introduction of the OF.

So what I am being told is that (allegedly0 they had this deep understanding of the Eucharist, and all of a sudden they left it.

Somehow, that simply does not ring true - at all.

Right.

 

[Denise1957]

It is not a matter of sincerity so much as it is a matter of reality. Very, very few people have a desire for the EF.

And yet they do exist, and this is obvious from the Catholics who attend SSPX chapels, and FSSP parishes. The numbers are not great, but not so insignificant that Bishops like Bp. Athanasius Schneider aren’t willing to go to bat for them to a certain extent. If the Catholics who want the TLM are so few, then why would Rome bother with talking to the SSPX?

 

[Denise1957]

My archbishop is clearly a proponent of Gregorian Chant. The number of people who showed up to a seminar on chant was, to put it politely, underwhelming.

Do you mind if I ask how it is that you know that the number of people who showed up at the Gregorian Chant workshop was underwhelming?

 

[pianistclare]

And yet they do exist, and this is obvious from the Catholics who attend SSPX chapels, and FSSP parishes. The numbers are not great, but not so insignificant that Bishops like Bp. Athanasius Schneider aren’t willing to go to bat for them to a certain extent. If the Catholics who want the TLM are so few, then why would Rome bother with talking to the SSPX?

Ever hear the one about the Good Shepherd?
He reaches out to the one lost one.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

It is not a matter of sincerity so much as it is a matter of reality. Very, very few people have a desire for the EF.

There is a process set up, in Summorum Pontificum, for requesting the EF. And it takes a stable group; if you have 3,000 members in a parish and can’t muster 20 who are truly serious about it, then the 20, should they be found, need to get together with others from neighboring parishes and form a sizeable enough group that they can move the matter forward.

There is a reason that Benedict 16 said, clearly, that he did not anticipate that the EF would become widespread. I think that he saw that it was a significantly small, and widespread minority which prefers the EF.

The last time I counted, while the Archdiocese of Chicago had a Cardinal who supported the EF, right about 3% of all the parishes in the archdiocese had an EF - either as a weekly Mass, or a more occasional one. That in itself speaks volumes; but many do not want to hear.

We are now also starting to get reports that some parishes which established the EF, to much enthusiasm, are now seeing attendance drop off significantly - in one comment, from 200 to 250 attending, to somewhere about 50. This is undoubtedly in part because people move; in part because the 250 represented people from surrounding parishes, and people get tired of going a longer distance to get to Mass, or desire a “parish” (meaning that during the week, and on weekends other than the Mas itself, they want to be working with each other); and I am sure there are other reasons.

No matter where you look, the EF is not widespread. The vast majority of those sitting in the pews either have no opinion, no interest, or no enthusiasm for the amount of work it would take. The net is that unless there are people who really want the EF and are willing to do the work, it won’t happen. My archbishop is clearly a proponent of Gregorian Chant. The number of people who showed up to a seminar on chant was, to put it politely, underwhelming.

Your view is an interesting one. But it jumps to conclusions. How do we know most people would not prefer an EF Mass? So few people have any experience with them. They are offered rarely and within great distances. Honestly they are almost like separate Churches. In my diocese there is no licit EF within reason of attending. But the SSPX chapel 45 minutes away is absolutely packed. Imagine if the Bishop planted an EF parish geographically close to the SSPX one? Want to see the SSPX have less attedees? That would do it. Heck, half of the SSPX attendees are there not because they consider themselves “SSPX” (which the laity cannot be) but rather for love of an EF that is not offered anywhere else. Saying the EF is not popular is like saying Girl Scout Cookies are not popular because they are only sold one month a year. There is zero exposure to this Mass for the VAST majority of Catholics, yet, some happy clappy 60s Mass in the grass and BBQ is attended well because people like the novelty or are just used to that type of “worship”
I can tell you that where I am (not too far from you) that there is 1 priest who wants to say the EF, and a slew of people ready and waiting for the opportunity. And the door has been shut.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Ever hear the one about the Good Shepherd?
He reaches out to the one lost one.

Unless that one is a conservative, then it is good riddance…

 

[commenter]

I was once at a Mass in Germany where one of the readings was replaced with a recitation of the Three Little Pigs.

And I thought our Liturgy of the Word for Children was bad!

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

And I though our Liturgy of the Word for Children was bad!

It probably is bad, maybe just not as bad…

 

[Denise1957]

In my diocese there is no licit EF within reason of attending. But the SSPX chapel 45 minutes away is absolutely packed.

The SSPX chapel that I formerly attended was packed, too. Which wasn’t very comfortable on warm summer days, being so close to one’s neighbor in the pew, with very little wiggle room. I was amazed that they could get that many people into a little church. They didn’t seem to mind the uncomfortable aspect of it all that much. Used to it, I guess.

 

[ProVobis]

The last time I counted, while the Archdiocese of Chicago had a Cardinal who supported the EF, right about 3% of all the parishes in the archdiocese had an EF - either as a weekly Mass, or a more occasional one. That in itself speaks volumes; but many do not want to hear.

What’s with the statistics? The Archdiocese of Chicago had many, many more Masses and many more parishes when the EF was the only game in town, and especially so on Holy Days of Obligation. But you keep criticizing those who attended them.

 

[otjm]

And yet they do exist, and this is obvious from the Catholics who attend SSPX chapels, and FSSP parishes. The numbers are not great, but not so insignificant that Bishops like Bp. Athanasius Schneider aren’t willing to go to bat for them to a certain extent. If the Catholics who want the TLM are so few, then why would Rome bother with talking to the SSPX?

Rome bothers talking with the SSPX for the same reason that Rome talks with the Anglican/Episcopal churches, and the various Orthodox Churches, and the Lutherans… They are separated off from the Church.
Rome isn’t talking with any of those groups “because (of) the Catholics who want the TLM”.

There are provisions for EF parishes; and they are few and far in between the 17,00 +/- parishes in the US. There is a process for requesting an EF Mass to be said. There are people who have availed themselves of the process and have those Masses.

And there are people who are not going to get to have an EF Mass said in a reasonably close distance (a term that varies from person to person); just as there are people who want the Ruthinian rite Divine Mysteries, or the Maronite rite, or any of the other 20+ rites which are in union with Rome and don’t have a priest ordained in that rite, or one who is bi-ritual anywhere near. And if they do not have their rite celebrated within a reasonable distance, then they do like other Catholics; they go to the OF.

Let’s not play cat-and-mouse with this. The SSPX are not about having the EF; they are about challenging the legitimacy of the OF, and the continuity of Vatican 2 documents with prior theological statements. Not all who attend an SSPX chapel do so because of the positions of the bishops and most, if not all of the priests of the SSPX, but let’s not play an innocent card about it. It is not for no reason that Catholics are warned from attending SSPX chapels.

 

[Denise1957]

Rome bothers talking with the SSPX for the same reason that Rome talks with the Anglican/Episcopal churches, and the various Orthodox Churches, and the Lutherans… They are separated off from the Church.
Rome isn’t talking with any of those groups “because (of) the Catholics who want the TLM”.

There are provisions for EF parishes; and they are few and far in between the 17,00 +/- parishes in the US. There is a process for requesting an EF Mass to be said. There are people who have availed themselves of the process and have those Masses.

And there are people who are not going to get to have an EF Mass said in a reasonably close distance (a term that varies from person to person); just as there are people who want the Ruthinian rite Divine Mysteries, or the Maronite rite, or any of the other 20+ rites which are in union with Rome and don’t have a priest ordained in that rite, or one who is bi-ritual anywhere near. And if they do not have their rite celebrated within a reasonable distance, then they do like other Catholics; they go to the OF.

Let’s not play cat-and-mouse with this. The SSPX are not about having the EF; they are about challenging the legitimacy of the OF, and the continuity of Vatican 2 documents with prior theological statements. Not all who attend an SSPX chapel do so because of the positions of the bishops and most, if not all of the priests of the SSPX, but let’s not play an innocent card about it. It is not for no reason that Catholics are warned from attending SSPX chapels.

You didn’t address my question about how it is that you know that the number who attended the Gregorian Chant workshop in your diocese was underwhelming.

 

[otjm]

What’s with the statistics? The Archdiocese of Chicago had many, many more Masses and many more parishes when the EF was the only game in town, and especially so on Holy Days of Obligation. But you keep criticizing those who attended them.

I have not criticized anyone. People who think that a critique is a criticism are people who are looking for an insult where none is given.

What is with the statistics is like asking what is with reality.

The Archdiocese of Chicago had around 370 parishes last time I looked and 12 of them had the EF - and that under a Cardinal who favored having them. I have no idea how many parishes there were, say, in 1955 although I am sure someone could dig that out. It was also a time when the entire population of the US was lower, and a time when 70% + Catholics attended weekly Mass.

However, the exodus started around that time, and contrary to popular urban mythology, there was never a significant drop after the introduction of the OF; it (the continued reduction in the number attend Mass weekly) simply continued to gradually erode.

Frankly it would be fine with me if each an every parish had the EF each weekend. But when a parish in a city offers it and has 250 to 300 show up at the start, that is hardly an overwhelming number - which simply reinforces the fact that there is no large contingent wanting the EF; and when that number starts to dwindle, it does not speak well for the alleged enthusiasm.

Those are facts, not criticisms.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I have not criticized anyone. People who think that a critique is a criticism are people who are looking for an insult where none is given.

What is with the statistics is like asking what is with reality.

The Archdiocese of Chicago had around 370 parishes last time I looked and 12 of them had the EF - and that under a Cardinal who favored having them. I have no idea how many parishes there were, say, in 1955 although I am sure someone could dig that out. It was also a time when the entire population of the US was lower, and a time when 70% + Catholics attended weekly Mass.

However, the exodus started around that time, and contrary to popular urban mythology, there was never a significant drop after the introduction of the OF; it (the continued reduction in the number attend Mass weekly) simply continued to gradually erode.

Frankly it would be fine with me if each an every parish had the EF each weekend. But when a parish in a city offers it and has 250 to 300 show up at the start, that is hardly an overwhelming number - which simply reinforces the fact that there is no large contingent wanting the EF; and when that number starts to dwindle, it does not speak well for the alleged enthusiasm.

Those are facts, not criticisms.

There is only one NFP teaching couple in my entire diocese. They have no current students. So, using this critique of the statistics are we saying that NFP should not be offered as a Catholic way of life?
Or shall we just assume everyone is infertile in my diocese.

Or shall we take stats and observations even further.
This is by far the holiest diocese I have ever seen. My parish offers weekly confession. There is no line. Another parish in my town has no hours for confession but two priests at the parish. I am limited to Tuesday at from 1145-1200 or Saturday at most parishes from 300-330. And no lines… Hmmm At my old parish in a different diocese where the EF was said confession was about a 1-2 hour wait daily.
Why are OF people so much Holier?

 

[Tomdstone]

There is only one NFP teaching couple in my entire diocese. They have no current students. So, using this critique of the statistics are we saying that NFP should not be offered as a Catholic way of life?

Are Catholics avoiding NFP and choosing ABC instead?

 

[otjm]

Do you mind if I ask how it is that you know that the number of people who showed up at the Gregorian Chant workshop was underwhelming?

Sorry, I did not see the question. It was held at the Brigittine Monastery, which in and of itself is small, and there were pictures of the attendees. It was public knowledge.

 

[Xantippe]

It probably is bad, maybe just not as bad…

However, on reflection, I should add that we also participated in a Marian procession there between one tiny village to the next one.

This was in May in Bavaria–quite lovely! (We were visiting family.)

 

[Walking_Home]

Rome bothers talking with the SSPX for the same reason that Rome talks with the Anglican/Episcopal churches, and the various Orthodox Churches, and the Lutherans… They are separated off from the Church.
Rome isn’t talking with any of those groups “because (of) the Catholics who want the TLM”.

There are provisions for EF parishes; and they are few and far in between the 17,00 +/- parishes in the US. There is a process for requesting an EF Mass to be said. There are people who have availed themselves of the process and have those Masses.

And there are people who are not going to get to have an EF Mass said in a reasonably close distance (a term that varies from person to person); just as there are people who want the Ruthinian rite Divine Mysteries, or the Maronite rite, or any of the other 20+ rites which are in union with Rome and don’t have a priest ordained in that rite, or one who is bi-ritual anywhere near. And if they do not have their rite celebrated within a reasonable distance, then they do like other Catholics; they go to the OF.

Let’s not play cat-and-mouse with this. The SSPX are not about having the EF; they are about challenging the legitimacy of the OF, and the continuity of Vatican 2 documents with prior theological statements. Not all who attend an SSPX chapel do so because of the positions of the bishops and most, if not all of the priests of the SSPX, but let’s not play an innocent card about it. It is not for no reason that Catholics are warned from attending SSPX chapels.

---

Yes.