Can the Church withhold the TLM?

[CyrilSebastian]

In Father Anthony Brankin’s Latin Mass Homily II (2007), Father Brankin mentioned:

Pope Benedict XVI has said that the older form of worship cannot die  -  because it is so beautiful, so rich in history and human experience and supernatural value that it may not be withheld from the world any longer.       
    
Since the Latin Mass had been celebrated in Roman Catholic churches before 2007 and in 2007, why would Father Brankin remark that the Latin Mass "may not be withheld from the world any longer"?        :highprayer:

 

[Waynec]

In Father Anthony Brankin’s Latin Mass Homily II (2007), Father Brankin mentioned:

Pope Benedict XVI has said that the older form of worship cannot die  -  because it is so beautiful, so rich in history and human experience and supernatural value that it may not be withheld from the world any longer.       
    
Since the Latin Mass had been celebrated in Roman Catholic churches before 2007 and in 2007, why would Father Brankin remark that the Latin Mass "may not be withheld from the world any longer"?        :highprayer:

Maybe he was just reiterating what Pope Benedict XVI said.

 

[tawny]

Maybe he was just reiterating what Pope Benedict XVI said.

Agree.

 

[TheDoctor]

And remember that in almost all cases when we read “Pope Benedict said” we are reading a translation into English and not the full translation at that. Not having the entire quote we cannot speculate that the Pope was speaking strictly about linear time. Perhaps he was speaking metaphorically?

 

[Usige]

It is likely in reference to the fact that before 2007 each bishop had to give permission for the 1962 missal to be used in their diocese. In many areas bishops were… reluctant… to grant that permission. Some bishops had seen the 1984 and 1988 proclamations as a betrayal of the reforms of Vatican II and flat out refussed to allow the older mass to be celebrated in their diocese. In that way the old mass form was withheld from many of the faithful who desired it.

Summorum Pontificum opened the doors to allow a priest to celebrate the EF in private masses or in public masses when a groups of the faithful requested it. This decision was basically left to the individual priest rather then the bishop. It does not require that a priest celebrate the EF, but rather says that the bishop cannot suppress it.

 

[Strevel]

I love the TLM, and am moved to tears during it often
Also, I live in the Southern United States. As in all regions if the United States we have our own pronunciation habits of our common language, English. It is so interesting to see a Priest say a proper Latin Mass. And in doing so he turns to the people and shares a warm Andy Griffith style, “pahx voe-bis-cum”…I am almost hear the ya’ll. I love the Latin Mass, and I love participating in its celebration here in the South. It is our history!

Don, thanks so much yawl

 

[corsair]

When I was in high school, many moons ago, my Latin teacher was from Texas and had a deep Texas drawl. It was really fun to listen to her read Latin . Almost as much fun as listening to our recently moved assistant pastor, who was from Scotland.

I can remember being told that I had “just the cutest little ole’ accent” when I was at a party in Norfolk, VA. I’m a native Washingtonian.

 

[Tarpeian]

It is likely in reference to the fact that before 2007 each bishop had to give permission for the 1962 missal to be used in their diocese. In many areas bishops were… reluctant… to grant that permission. Some bishops had seen the 1984 and 1988 proclamations as a betrayal of the reforms of Vatican II and flat out refussed to allow the older mass to be celebrated in their diocese. In that way the old mass form was withheld from many of the faithful who desired it.

Summorum Pontificum opened the doors to allow a priest to celebrate the EF in private masses or in public masses when a groups of the faithful requested it. This decision was basically left to the individual priest rather then the bishop. It does not require that a priest celebrate the EF, but rather says that the bishop cannot suppress it.

I suspect you are correct. Unfortunately some priests are still denying the TLM to the faithful who have requested it in their parish.

Pax,
Tarpeian

 

[otjm]

I suspect you are correct. Unfortunately some priests are still denying the TLM to the faithful who have requested it in their parish.

Pax,
Tarpeian

I would be a bit careful about saying that any priest was denying the EF to anyone.

To begin with, Summorum Pontificum does not require any priest to say the EF.

It does say they are to accommodate the faithful (there are a few more requirements than that) but that is not he same as saying they must celebrate it.

And it says further that if the priest cannot accommodate the faithful, the faithful are to request it of the bishop - and he is to do his best.

It says further that if he cannot, it is to be referred to Rome.

In no diocese is that interpreted that the EF is to be said in every parish when someone requests it. In addition to that, there are requirements for the priests who do say it, that they are properly trained; but there is not a requirement that priest have to be trained in it; it is up to the priest.

The last time I looked, the Archdiocese of Chicago seemed to have the most EFs; and that was 12 out of something like 300 to 350 parishes. That Archdiocese is not refusing it to others; but the fact is, there are few priests even now trained to say the EF. And that is well within the rules set out by Pope Benedict.

If you actually have proof that a priest is denying it - aand I am not sure what would be proof - then you can contact your bishop; and if you do not receive satisfaction, contact Rome.
What would be proof? That he was trained in the EF and refused to say it? That is not only an oxymoron, but also presumes he personally is required to provide it - something that SP does not require,

He has not found someone else to say it? You would need to show that he knew someone… which is not highly likely.

I don’t know what proof you have; but again, I would be very hesitant to make the remark that priests are denying. Neither SP nor Benedict’s accompanying letter indicate that it is to be held in every parish, or even necessarily those which have the necessary number - a point that SP clearly avoided.

 

[Tarpeian]

I would be a bit careful about saying that any priest was denying the EF to anyone.

To begin with, Summorum Pontificum does not require any priest to say the EF.

It does say they are to accommodate the faithful (there are a few more requirements than that) but that is not he same as saying they must celebrate it.

And it says further that if the priest cannot accommodate the faithful, the faithful are to request it of the bishop - and he is to do his best.

It says further that if he cannot, it is to be referred to Rome.

In no diocese is that interpreted that the EF is to be said in every parish when someone requests it. In addition to that, there are requirements for the priests who do say it, that they are properly trained; but there is not a requirement that priest have to be trained in it; it is up to the priest.

The last time I looked, the Archdiocese of Chicago seemed to have the most EFs; and that was 12 out of something like 300 to 350 parishes. That Archdiocese is not refusing it to others; but the fact is, there are few priests even now trained to say the EF. And that is well within the rules set out by Pope Benedict.

If you actually have proof that a priest is denying it - aand I am not sure what would be proof - then you can contact your bishop; and if you do not receive satisfaction, contact Rome.
What would be proof? That he was trained in the EF and refused to say it? That is not only an oxymoron, but also presumes he personally is required to provide it - something that SP does not require,

He has not found someone else to say it? You would need to show that he knew someone… which is not highly likely.

I don’t know what proof you have; but again, I would be very hesitant to make the remark that priests are denying. Neither SP nor Benedict’s accompanying letter indicate that it is to be held in every parish, or even necessarily those which have the necessary number - a point that SP clearly avoided.

Sadly I’m well aware of the criteria you have listed. In fact the Bishop requested in writing how many in the parish wanted the TLM. The response was over 70%. One of our priest’s was willing and wanted to offer the TLM. He admitted that he would need to be retrained since it had been decades since he prayed the Mass. Some of the parishioners donated the money to send Father away for eight weeks to be retrained. Accommodations were also made for the altar boys who wanted to assist at the TLM. Our other parish priest and our other “retired” parish priest, were able to cover all of the liturgies for the eight weeks that Father was going to be gone. Even after all protocol was followed, the Bishop said no. Interestingly enough the priest in question was “reassigned” to another parish. What is even more interesting is we have had 4 priests reassigned in seven years for unexpected reasons.

Out of respect for the Office of the Bishop and his authority, it was then and only then, that Rome was contacted. But I digress. Just offer it up to the Lord and pray for our bishop that God’s will be done.

Pax,
Tarpeian

 

[otjm]

Sadly I’m well aware of the criteria you have listed. In fact the Bishop requested in writing how many in the parish wanted the TLM. The response was over 70%. One of our priest’s was willing and wanted to offer the TLM. He admitted that he would need to be retrained since it had been decades since he prayed the Mass. Some of the parishioners donated the money to send Father away for eight weeks to be retrained. Accommodations were also made for the altar boys who wanted to assist at the TLM. Our other parish priest and our other “retired” parish priest, were able to cover all of the liturgies for the eight weeks that Father was going to be gone. Even after all protocol was followed, the Bishop said no. Interestingly enough the priest in question was “reassigned” to another parish. What is even more interesting is we have had 4 priests reassigned in seven years for unexpected reasons.

Out of respect for the Office of the Bishop and his authority, it was then and only then, that Rome was contacted. But I digress. Just offer it up to the Lord and pray for our bishop that God’s will be done.

Pax,
Tarpeian

Well, it does not sound like priests are denying the EF.

If the issue resides with the bishop, and he is not moving to accommodate, then Rome is the next step.

 

[ProVobis]

In Father Anthony Brankin’s Latin Mass Homily II (2007), Father Brankin mentioned:

Pope Benedict XVI has said that the older form of worship cannot die  -  because it is so beautiful, so rich in history and human experience and supernatural value that it may not be withheld from the world any longer.       
    
Since the Latin Mass had been celebrated in Roman Catholic churches before 2007 and in 2007, why would Father Brankin remark that the Latin Mass "may not be withheld from the world any longer"?        :highprayer:

I’ve been to this pastor’s Masses many times. He gives great sermons you can find online. He says the EF, the English Mass, and the Spanish Mass. Large confession lines at his parish on Saturday, with usually 3 or 4 priests. He frequently contacts other priests to say the EF in his parish as well. And he has occasional concerts at the parish. Loves art and music. Let’s just say he’s Latin Mass friendly and wants to expand it.

 

[Cojuanco]

In Father Anthony Brankin’s Latin Mass Homily II (2007), Father Brankin mentioned:

Pope Benedict XVI has said that the older form of worship cannot die  -  because it is so beautiful, so rich in history and human experience and supernatural value that it may not be withheld from the world any longer.       
    
Since the Latin Mass had been celebrated in Roman Catholic churches before 2007 and in 2007, why would Father Brankin remark that the Latin Mass "may not be withheld from the world any longer"?        :highprayer:

The Pope may indeed suppress the TLM. It is the Pope’s power to suppress even a valid rite, which he has done in the past (see the Sarum Use, for example).

Of course, Summorum Pontificium does state that the TLM is not, in fact, suppressed, and that the priest and bishop should find some way to justly accomodate the faithful who desire its celebration.

That said, it is unlikely that the TLM would be in the near or medium term suppressed, or even restricted (barring some special cases, i.e. certain friars which I will not discuss further per their request). The present Holy Father confirmed as much.

 

[Silver_Thread]

The Pope may indeed suppress the TLM. It is the Pope’s power to suppress even a valid rite, which he has done in the past (see the Sarum Use, for example).

Of course, Summorum Pontificium does state that the TLM is not, in fact, suppressed, and that the priest and bishop should find some way to justly accomodate the faithful who desire its celebration.

That said, it is unlikely that the TLM would be in the near or medium term suppressed, or even restricted (barring some special cases, i.e. certain friars which I will not discuss further per their request). The present Holy Father confirmed as much.

Put yourself in the position of the priest. He may want to say the EF and be trained, but if the Bishop says not in my diocese, what can he do? He could find himself in a parish in tim-buck-two or a menial position not to his liking. Life could be made miserable by the Bishop. Pray pay and obey. (people) Do as I say (Priest_).