Can the Novus Ordo be reconciled with pre-Concillar documents on the Liturgy?

[ncjohn]

It is a shame that people have to drive so far every Sunday to attend Mass when they are driving by dozens of parishes and feel they can’t attend because they don’t know what to expect or what they will have to subject themselves to… With the Tradtional Mass they do know what to expect.

But it’s not because they don’t know what to expect. It is explicitly because they want a TLM that isn’t offered at those parishes. The people at those parishes who want an NO Mass aren’t driving somewhere else.

I agree that it’s a shame that people have to drive the distances they do to get to a TLM, but the fact that they drive by parishes that don’t have a TLM has no correlation with anything at all.

And as in Kirk’s case, our parish is overcrowded to the point of having to build a new building. Mass attendance across our diocese is growing rather than declining. I think you will find that in areas that are in periods of growth that Mass attendance is growing, and in areas where the population is dropping, that Mass attendance probably drops off also. Both where I am now, and where I previously was in Florida, were experiencing large growths, with new parishes coming into existence and existing ones expanding.

Of course all of this is off the topic, so I’ll cease with that discussion.

 

[Uxor]

But it’s not because they don’t know what to expect. It is explicitly because they want a TLM that isn’t offered at those parishes. The people at those parishes who want an NO Mass aren’t driving somewhere else.

I agree that it’s a shame that people have to drive the distances they do to get to a TLM, but the fact that they drive by parishes that don’t have a TLM has no correlation with anything at all.

And as in Kirk’s case, our parish is overcrowded to the point of having to build a new building. Mass attendance across our diocese is growing rather than declining. I think you will find that in areas that are in periods of growth that Mass attendance is growing, and in areas where the population is dropping, that Mass attendance probably drops off also. Both where I am now, and where I previously was in Florida, were experiencing large growths, with new parishes coming into existence and existing ones expanding.

Of course all of this is off the topic, so I’ll cease with that discussion.

Talk to people who attend a Traditional Mass…it is not mainly preference, it is because they could no longer take what was happening at their old parish.

 

[St_Isidore]

Sounds like your parish is an anamoly as well.

You are incorrect again, as I have shown below using your own referenced link. I also viewed this website and you may have not noticed the trend over decades. It is a common mistake. Please see your own link:

All indications are that in the US there was a steady decline from 1957 through around 2000. Since 2000 the Mass attendance has stayed relatively consistent. It’s interesting to note that the decline began long before the implementation of the new Mass.

Here is a statistical analysis:

cara.georgetown.edu/AttendPR.pdf

Yes I see what your are considering but again check the study on your link and you will see the declinations along with dips/jumps. The small period you speak of is a little bump or jump if you may.
(or mini-trend)
Let us look here at your own reference link:
cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg

If you notice the mini-trend of which you speak is from 2000-2004. But these have occurred before in 1965, 1987, 1994, 1997, 2004. Yet the declination overall is unchanged. That is the trend or slope of the line, on average, is declining (y=mx + b you can determine slope with this simplistic equation). So yes, you are correct, there exists a mini-trend of stability (which have occurred before), however, as much as you would like to defy the laws of mathematics/statistics, you cannot prevail, as these disciplines must account for the larger trend of decades. Since it is an overall average and ‘no line’, in this respect, can be perfectly linear. Again, I used your reference to show your err.

Also you may want to browse this book: Index of Leading Catholic Indicators (RCB) The Church Since Vatican II by Kenneth Jones

 

[TNT]

Talk to people who attend a Traditional Mass…it is not mainly preference, it is because they could no longer take what was happening at their old parish.

That would be only 1 of several reasons.
IMHO, the overarching reason embedded in all the others is that it is the fullest expression of their Sensus Catholicus. It expresses the Catholic Faith in no uncertain terms regarding the Sacrifice of the Mass. The NOM just does not rise to that level for many Catholics.
The reverence of the Priest, his proper place without ambiguity, its quiet solemnity are all part of that.
Finally, one day you attend the NOM and the Gospel reading in English includes:
Mark 14
24 And he said to them: This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many.

Afew minutes later the celebrant says:
“…which shall be shed for ALL…”

A Gong goes off in yur ears.

 

[Ham1]

You are incorrect again, as I have shown below using your own referenced link. I also viewed this website and you may have not noticed the trend over decades. It is a common mistake. Please see your own link:

Yes I see what your are considering but again check the study on your link and you will see the declinations along with dips/jumps. The small period you speak of is a little bump or jump if you may.
(or mini-trend)
Let us look here at your own reference link:
cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg

If you notice the mini-trend of which you speak is from 2000-2004. But these have occurred before in 1965, 1987, 1994, 1997, 2004. Yet the declination overall is unchanged. That is the trend or slope of the line, on average, is declining (y=mx + b you can determine slope with this simplistic equation). So yes, you are correct, there exists a mini-trend of stability (which have occurred before), however, as much as you would like to defy the laws of mathematics/statistics, you cannot prevail, as these disciplines must account for the larger trend of decades. Since it is an overall average an no line, in this respect, can be perfectly linear. Again, I used your reference to show your err.

I’m glad you brought up the slope of the line. It’s pretty interesting that the most severe decline (slope) occurs from 1957 through 1970. So, the steepest decline came about with the old Mass and not the current Mass.

 

[Ham1]

Talk to people who attend a Traditional Mass…it is not mainly preference, it is because they could no longer take what was happening at their old parish.

I totally agree. Most people don’t desire the TLM, they desire orthodoxy and in some areas (sadly) they can only find it in the TLM.

 

[Uxor]

That would be only 1 of several reasons.
IMHO, the overarching reason embedded in all the others is that it is the fullest expression of their Sensus Catholicus. It expresses the Catholic Faith in no uncertain terms regarding the Sacrifice of the Mass. The NOM just does not rise to that level for many Catholics.
The reverence of the Priest, his proper place without ambiguity, its quiet solemnity are all part of that.

That is true and that is what people discover after they attend their first Traditional Mass. They clearly see the difference and don’t ever want to return to the NO Mass because of what you stated above.

 

[TNT]

I’m glad you brought up the slope of the line. It’s pretty interesting that the most severe decline (slope) occurs from 1957 through 1970. So, the steepest decline came about with the old Mass and not the current Mass.

Jist so’s everone sees what yur talkin about:
http://cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg

I’d have to say as someone completely disinterested that the big slide was '65-74.
However, Pius XII died in '58 & John XXIII began his reign in '58…referred to as the first Conciliar pope. But here may be no connection there.
Many blame the Beetles (63-74).

 

[St_Isidore]

I’m glad you brought up the slope of the line. It’s pretty interesting that the most severe decline (slope) occurs from 1957 through 1970. So, the steepest decline came about with the old Mass and not the current Mass.

Once again, either your judgment over mathematics is flawed or you are Blatant Liar. *The Steepest Slope is from 1965 to 1974.This is after VATICAN II CHECK IT AGAIN. This is your own reference, and now you are going to cite the contrary! What darkness is this that you perform? *(cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg)

I have proven before that others of* this modernist movement will stop at nothing to prove their fading arguments. Lie, deceive, mislead, misquote, subvert, etc., this HAS TO STOP!* Why are you purposely trying to deceive the innocent? What you and others practice here whether you realize it or not, is not of Christ but the opposite.

 

[paramedicgirl]

But it’s not because they don’t know what to expect. It is explicitly because they want a TLM that isn’t offered at those parishes. The people at those parishes who want an NO Mass aren’t driving somewhere else.

I agree that it’s a shame that people have to drive the distances they do to get to a TLM, but the fact that they drive by parishes that don’t have a TLM has no correlation with anything at all.

Actually, if people knew they could get a reverent Novus Ordo Mass, most wouldn’t drive the distances they do to get to a TLM. It is precisely because they want to be at a Mass that they trust will be reverent, sacred and holy, that they drive great distances to go to a TLM. I know, because I am in that boat. Right now, I am driving 600 KM round trip once a month (starting in April) to go to a TLM, just because there isn’t a reverent Mass of any rite anywhere on the map between here and there.

 

[TNT]

…Right now, I am driving 600 KM …

It’s alot easier to drive a car if there’s roads where u r. I’ve never driven a KM…are they made in Canadian? Why d ya need 600 of em anyway.

… there isn’t a reverent Mass of any rite anywhere on the map between here and there.

Actually, there isn’t anything else either between “here n there”.

 

[TNT]

… Why are you purposely trying to deceive the innocent? …

Actually, we here on the TRAD Forum are not that innocent. We just have that look.
We kinda know when we’re bein snookered.

But thanks fer the heads up.

 

[Uxor]

Actually, if people knew they could get a reverent Novus Ordo Mass, most wouldn’t drive the distances they do to get to a TLM. It is precisely because they want to be at a Mass that they trust will be reverent, sacred and holy, that they drive great distances to go to a TLM. I know, because I am in that boat. Right now, I am driving 600 KM round trip once a month (starting in April) to go to a TLM, just because there isn’t a reverent Mass of any rite anywhere on the map between here and there.

Your email box is full.

 

[TNT]

Your email box is full.

Ya mean PM “container?”

 

[Uxor]

It’s alot easier to drive a car if there’s roads where u r. I’ve never driven a KM…are they made in Canadian? Why d ya need 600 of em anyway.

Actually, there isn’t anything else either between “here n there”.

This is at Yahoo…

121 - 150 g/km Find a wide range of cheap 121 - 150 g/km cars for sale in the UK with Yahoo! Cars UK. Details of all 121 - 150 g/km cars available including (where appropriate) saloon, estate, hatchback, and convertible models.

LOL

 

[Uxor]

Ya mean PM “container?”

Yes. I stand corrected Oh Innocent One.

 

[Caesar]

Ok, just to get back on topic…

My question was not about which Rite is better (I think that answer is rather obvious ), or when the steepest drop in Church attendance was, or how “reverant” some Novus Ordos are. My question is whether or not it is possible for the Novus Ordo to be in line with pre-Concillar documents regarding Liturgical practices.

 

[TNT]

Answer:
YES it is in perfic harmony with pre-Conciliar stuff.

There can be no doubt about it. Just read those P-C documents…it lines up perficlee.
Jist don’t be readin the ones issued by the Catholic church.

 

[Ham1]

Jist so’s everone sees what yur talkin about:
http://cara.georgetown.edu/bulletin/gallup.jpg

I’d have to say as someone completely disinterested that the big slide was '65-74.
However, Pius XII died in '58 & John XXIII began his reign in '58…referred to as the first Conciliar pope. But here may be no connection there.
Many blame the Beetles (63-74).

THANKS!

I couldn’t figure out how to do that!

I see what you are talking about. I was looking over a longer time period. And yes, there is a sharp decline from '65 - '74 it looks like a decline from 67% to 56% or 9 percentage points in 9 years. If we look at the previous 9 years ('56 - '65), we see a decrease of 7 percentage points over 9 years…somewhat worse.

My question here is that many like to say that the decrease was from the NO Mass. But when was that implemented? (I don’t know exactly). If it was 1970, then let’s look from 1970 - 1980. That looks to be a decrease from 60% to 54% or 6 percentage points in 10 years. If we compare that to 1960 - 1970, we see a decrease of 10 percentage points from 70% to 60%. I just don’t see overwhelming evidence that the NO Mass caused the decline in Mass attendance. The decline seems much more likely to be caused by a general decline in society that started in the late 50’s.

 

[ncjohn]

Talk to people who attend a Traditional Mass…it is not mainly preference, it is because they could no longer take what was happening at their old parish.

I have talked to them, including on this site. The reason always expressed is that they want to go to a TLM or they no longer want to go to an NO Mass, for whatever their reasons. That is preference. Those who favor the TLM favor it strongly, usually to the point of feeling that the NO Mass is inferior, if not worse.

You might know a few that go for the reasons you state, and that’s fine, but from everything I’ve ever heard from them it is only that they specifically want a TLM or specifically don’t want an NO. People who prefer the NO just do not go to the TLM unless there is no other choice or they are visiting for the experience. But those just visiting don’t drive that distance to do so.

I’m not saying that it never happens, but from my experience it is an extreme rarity and I can’t imagine being able to find any statistical evidence to support people driving those distances to escape a single NO parish unless, like Paramedicgirl, they feel there just is no NO Mass available. If you can show me something besides some anecdotal evidence from a couple people, I’d love to see it, but the reason expressed by those at this site alone would seem not to support the idea.