Countercultural San Francisco parish attracts growing congregation

[steve_b]

My understanding is that the sexually inappropriate materials were given - in error - to school children as young as 8. Parents protested and the Archbishop relieved the pastor and the assistant of their duties at the school.

The Archbishop should have removed everyone involved, not just the priest, speaking as a father and grandfather

 

[steve_b]

Yes, I imagine some non-progressive parents can be found just about anywhere.

They are the voice of wisdom in a society of fools

Ecc 10:2 A wise man’s heart inclines him toward the right,
but a fool’s heart toward the left.

 

[otjm]

It occurred to me that my own use of the term “ultra-traditionalist” was doing what I accuse others of doing. For that I apologize. Not sure at this point how I can address those folks who label “liberals and modernists” without myself labeling. At both ends of the spectrum, the problem is one and the same, intolerance of divergent viewpoints.

For now I’ll say “Catholics intolerant of opposing viewpoints”. At least until I slip up again

Maybe the rest of us can call ourselves “Catholics caught in the middle…”

Given that the term “Traditionalist” is the term most used by those who consider themselves to be such, it is not an “us” labeling “them”. The problem comes when we label someone a traditionalist who is merely somewhere into the conservative end of the spectrum.

While I would prefer that we not use any terms, as a practical matter (and in spite of repeated comments that we not use liberal and conservative in speaking about the Church) there is no other way to adequately describe the reality.

The difficulty comes when terms are used in a derogatory manner, particularly when it is simply used as a put down and a means of indicating “I am holier than thou”. And it is compounded when the person speaking in a pejorative manner shows an almost complete lack of understanding of the terms being slung about.

It would be a curious, but interesting exercise to see if, for example, Alfred Loisy and George Tyrrell would be excommunicated by, for example, Benedict 16.

The difficulty in trying to have that conversation is that some people have such locked minds that the discussion would never start.

And as to the use of the terms liberal and conservative, it is difficult to not use them if one were, for example, noting the different positions of Cardinal Frings and Cardinal Ottaviani . Ultimately it comes down to how the user (and the listener) define the terms.

But we digress from the OP.

 

[Boy_Wonder]

This is a hopeful sign. SF has a strong bishop. Pray the local media doesn’t harrass this parish as they did one which had recently taken a more conservative bent and certain liberal parishioners raised a ruckus on social media and then with sympathetic reporters.

Some bishops get irritated with parishes like these because people flock to them and pastors of parishes with uninspired or more contemporary liturgies complain that the more traditional parish is cherry picking.

Sometimes a diocese will have one ultra conservative parish and one ultra liberal one in areas that no longer have many Catholic families. The idea there is to siphon off “problematic” parishioners and allow them to cluster in like-minded enclaves.

 

[reggieM]

It occurred to me that my own use of the term “ultra-traditionalist” was doing what I accuse others of doing. For that I apologize.

You’re among the rare few who would note that and apologize - so I’ll :tiphat: and say thank you. I’m afraid to admit how often I have done much worse in years of internet discussions. I hope I’ve learned by now and offered some good in reparation. Yes, it certainly is difficult to comment about various kinds of people in the Church or society without falling into the use of labels, which may often be derogatory, even if we don’t mean it as such.

 

[27lw]

Sometimes a diocese will have one ultra conservative parish and one ultra liberal one in areas that no longer have many Catholic families. The idea there is to siphon off “problematic” parishioners and allow them to cluster in like-minded enclaves.

This is a fascinating idea. I wonder to what degree this actually happens?

 

[Richard_White]

Well it seems like everyone kind of freaked out at my comment from yesterday, so let me clarify what I meant and then I think everything will be alright!

What I meant by “liturgical liberal and modernist” was simply those people who like to water down the liturgy, making it like a Protestant service and taking away all of its depth, beauty, and tradition. When these things happen, parishes do not succeed, but as can be seen but his story, even in San Francisco of all places, a return to more traditional forms of worship really helped to build up the community. Now, I’m not saying that all Masses must be said in Latin and ad orientem. I have never been to a Latin or ad orientem Mass myself, and so I do not absolutely crave that as you might have thought. (I do think ad orientem during the Liturgy of the Eucharist would be a nice touch, but that’s beside the point.)

As for asking God to lead us back into all Truth, I was not referring to the Church as a whole. Obviously we have always held on to the Truth of God’s one True Faith. However, I was referring to a hope that all people in the Church will return to that Truth and stop watering down the Faith that God has given to us.

So, maybe I used some bad terminology, for which I apologize. I did not mean to offend anyone, and I should have been clearer in what I was saying.

Thanks, and God bless you all!

 

[reggieM]

Well it seems like everyone kind of freaked out at my comment from yesterday, so let me clarify what I meant and then I think everything will be alright!

What I meant by “liturgical liberal and modernist” was simply those people who like to water down the liturgy, making it like a Protestant service and taking away all of its depth, beauty, and tradition. When these things happen, parishes do not succeed, but as can be seen but his story, even in San Francisco of all places, a return to more traditional forms of worship really helped to build up the community. Now, I’m not saying that all Masses must be said in Latin and ad orientem. I have never been to a Latin or ad orientem Mass myself, and so I do not absolutely crave that as you might have thought. (I do think ad orientem during the Liturgy of the Eucharist would be a nice touch, but that’s beside the point.)

As for asking God to lead us back into all Truth, I was not referring to the Church as a whole. Obviously we have always held on to the Truth of God’s one True Faith. However, I was referring to a hope that all people in the Church will return to that Truth and stop watering down the Faith that God has given to us.

So, maybe I used some bad terminology, for which I apologize. I did not mean to offend anyone, and I should have been clearer in what I was saying.

Thanks, and God bless you all!

That seems totally reasonable and well-stated to me. But then again, I understood you the first time. But anyway, I agree - even slightly more traditional forms and usages can help in various parishes where most of that was taken away over the past decades.

 

[phil19034]

Well it seems like everyone kind of freaked out at my comment from yesterday, so let me clarify what I meant and then I think everything will be alright!

What I meant by “liturgical liberal and modernist” was simply those people who like to water down the liturgy, making it like a Protestant service and taking away all of its depth, beauty, and tradition. When these things happen, parishes do not succeed, but as can be seen but his story, even in San Francisco of all places, a return to more traditional forms of worship really helped to build up the community. Now, I’m not saying that all Masses must be said in Latin and ad orientem. I have never been to a Latin or ad orientem Mass myself, and so I do not absolutely crave that as you might have thought. (I do think ad orientem during the Liturgy of the Eucharist would be a nice touch, but that’s beside the point.)

As for asking God to lead us back into all Truth, I was not referring to the Church as a whole. Obviously we have always held on to the Truth of God’s one True Faith. However, I was referring to a hope that all people in the Church will return to that Truth and stop watering down the Faith that God has given to us.

So, maybe I used some bad terminology, for which I apologize. I did not mean to offend anyone, and I should have been clearer in what I was saying.

Thanks, and God bless you all!

I think I can agree with this.

Personally, while I do sometimes attend the Extraordinary Form of the mass, I much rather prefer the Ordinary Form of the mass when celebrated using sacred music and antiphons are sung instead of hymns.

While I personally, I prefer some use of Latin in the OF, like during Sanctus & Agnus Dei; (and the Kyrie in Greek) but I’m totally fine with English.

For me, I personally prefer a very solemn mass and I think using a little Latin and chant helps me with that.

Basically, what I’m saying is that if every Ordinary Form of the mass was done like it is at my Cathedral, I would be very happy.

I personally do not like the music from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s (church music nor secular music). I while I have some favorite songs from the 1990s (which I consider the best era for rock music), prefer to listen to Gregorian Chant and Classical Music (even outside of Church).

To be honest, I really think the 20th century was overall, horrible for music (not just church, but secular too). But that’s just me… People love the Beatles… I don’t understand why, besides a couple of songs… most of their music doesn’t resonate with me. Same with Elvis.

But again, that’s me.

My preferred Pandora stations consist of Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, & Chant. And I often listen to the “Sacred Music” channel on the Immaculate Heart Radio app when driving.

I love Opera, Ballet too… so perhaps that’s why I like Solemn High Masses in the Extraordinary form (but I couldn’t attend them every week).

Personally, I wish that each parish could have at least ONE mass each Sunday that used sacred music, sang the antiphons, psalms and other prayers and used Mass settings created before the 20th century. Doesn’t have to have any Latin… just use a traditional mass setting, the Confiteor and Eucharistic Prayer #1

I guess I just miss how reverently the Mass was celebrated at my parish when I was a child in the 1980s. My pastor was awesome… and he didn’t use any Latin. I often have to visit the Cathedral to witness what I had every week as a child (though my current parish does a pretty decent job too)

 

[OraLabora]

Mass myself,

I have, and interestingly, in the Ordinary Form. It was at Monte Cassino, the abbey founded by St. Benedict in Italy. I’ve been there three times in fact.

It is ad orientem for one simple reason: that’s what the configuration of the altar allows. The Mass is concelebrated and it doesn’t make it particularly effective for concelebration. The concelebrating priests are off to the side in several rows of pews.

At the abbey I’m associated with, the Mass is also OF, and it is hybrid Latin/French: the Propers and Ordinary are in Latin/Greek Gregorian chant, the rest (including the readings) in French plainchant. The monks concelebrate facing both the choir and the faithful; the choir stalls are between the nave and the sanctuary. There are usually around 19 priests +/- concelebrating, depending on how many visiting priests there are. They all stand around the altar, facing the people, in a semi-circle. It has a much more community dimension, something important to the Benedictines. In our sanctuary’s configuration, ad orientem simply wouldn’t work. With a priest and a deacon facing the altar but away from the people, you can still see what is going on. In our abbey, the altar would be completely obscured, and would leave the non-priest monks completely out of the loop in addition to the faithful, contrary to the spirit of the Rule which specifically insists on no division in rank, explicit or implied, being created between priest and non-priest monks. Even before Vatican II, in many monasteries the Mass was always at least versus populum, at least for the monks in the choir stalls.

So it really boils down to the configuration of the place. Both the Mass at Monte Cassino, and our abbey, are extremely beautiful and reverent regardless of which way the celebrant faces; proving in fact, that orientation really has nothing to do with a creating a beautiful liturgy or a sense of the sacred.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

This is a hopeful sign. SF has a strong bishop. Pray the local media doesn’t harrass this parish as they did one which had recently taken a more conservative bent and certain liberal parishioners raised a ruckus on social media and then with sympathetic reporters.

Some bishops get irritated with parishes like these because people flock to them and pastors of parishes with uninspired or more contemporary liturgies complain that the more traditional parish is cherry picking.

Sometimes a diocese will have one ultra conservative parish and one ultra liberal one in areas that no longer have many Catholic families. The idea there is to siphon off “problematic” parishioners and allow them to cluster in like-minded enclaves.

My diocese has imlemented half that idea at all the parishes.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

My diocese has imlemented half that idea at all the parishes.

In the Episcopal dioceses I know, parishes have their own personality, as it were. Some are very high church, and some are politically active. Some revel in liturgical innovations, and some are known for their splendid music. It doesn’t detract from other neighboring parishes, nor are they pitted against each other. People who prefer big organs and magnificent choirs tend to frequent parishes that offer that. I think it’s building community around what brings meaning to you. If that is where you find God speaking to you and calling you deeper, what is the difficulty?

 

[Samuel_Mary]

I think I can agree with this.

Personally, while I do sometimes attend the Extraordinary Form of the mass, I much rather prefer the Ordinary Form of the mass when celebrated using sacred music and antiphons are sung instead of hymns.

While I personally, I prefer some use of Latin in the OF, like during Sanctus & Agnus Dei; (and the Kyrie in Greek) but I’m totally fine with English.

For me, I personally prefer a very solemn mass and I think using a little Latin and chant helps me with that.

Basically, what I’m saying is that if every Ordinary Form of the mass was done like it is at my Cathedral, I would be very happy.

I personally do not like the music from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s (church music nor secular music). I while I have some favorite songs from the 1990s (which I consider the best era for rock music), prefer to listen to Gregorian Chant and Classical Music (even outside of Church).

To be honest, I really think the 20th century was overall, horrible for music (not just church, but secular too). But that’s just me… People love the Beatles… I don’t understand why, besides a couple of songs… most of their music doesn’t resonate with me. Same with Elvis.

But again, that’s me.

My preferred Pandora stations consist of Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, & Chant. And I often listen to the “Sacred Music” channel on the Immaculate Heart Radio app when driving.

I love Opera, Ballet too… so perhaps that’s why I like Solemn High Masses in the Extraordinary form (but I couldn’t attend them every week).

Personally, I wish that each parish could have at least ONE mass each Sunday that used sacred music, sang the antiphons, psalms and other prayers and used Mass settings created before the 20th century. Doesn’t have to have any Latin… just use a traditional mass setting, the Confiteor and Eucharistic Prayer #1

I guess I just miss how reverently the Mass was celebrated at my parish when I was a child in the 1980s. My pastor was awesome… and he didn’t use any Latin. I often have to visit the Cathedral to witness what I had every week as a child (though my current parish does a pretty decent job too)

I completely agree and I think if we saw more OF Masses celebrated in this solemn and traditional manner, there would be less interest in revival of the EF, especially among the young. While there will always be the hardcore EF devotees who reject the very OF itself and most other things post-1962, those who have ‘become’ devoted to the EF since Summorum Pontificum (especially the young) are not necessarily devoted to it for its own sake; they have not become ‘‘trads’’, they are just seeking out an oasis in the desert of contemporary music and informality, and the EF Masses are somewhere they know they will find it.

Something like how EWTN’s televised Masses are celebrated, are a good balance between modern and traditional.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Something like how EWTN’s televised Masses are celebrated, are a good balance between modern and traditional.

I agree with you, however, I’ve heard some folks describe EWTN as “ultratrad, ultra neo con, rigid, etc” and it’s founder, the Saintly Mother Angelica in all kinds of vile epithets

 

[Samuel_Mary]

I agree with you, however, I’ve heard some folks describe EWTN as “ultratrad, ultra neo con, rigid, etc” and it’s founder, the Saintly Mother Angelica in all kinds of vile epithets

I’ve heard that too, although I assumed it came from their political stance (such as on American politics on the World Over with Raymond Arroyo show, etc) and previous rows between Mother Angelica and Archbishop Mahoney, and so on, rather than from its liturgy. Its liturgy seems very ‘via media’ to me, and they’ve made no attempt to celebrate regularly in the Extraordinary Form since the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum, and so on. But I guess what constitutes ‘conservative’ when it comes to liturgy will always be somewhat subjective.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I’ve heard that too, although I assumed it came from their political stance (such as on American politics on the World Over with Raymond Arroyo show, etc) and previous rows between Mother Angelica and Archbishop Mahoney, and so on, rather than from its liturgy. Its liturgy seems very ‘via media’ to me, and they’ve made no attempt to celebrate regularly in the Extraordinary Form since the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum, and so on. But I guess what constitutes ‘conservative’ when it comes to liturgy will always be somewhat subjective.

They do celebrate the Extraordinary Form, but not on TV except by special permission. That was the “Mahoney compromise” - lest the world go mad at the sight of reverence in the EF :bigyikes:

 

[27lw]

In the Episcopal dioceses I know, parishes have their own personality, as it were. Some are very high church, and some are politically active. Some revel in liturgical innovations, and some are known for their splendid music. It doesn’t detract from other neighboring parishes, nor are they pitted against each other. People who prefer big organs and magnificent choirs tend to frequent parishes that offer that. I think it’s building community around what brings meaning to you. If that is where you find God speaking to you and calling you deeper, what is the difficulty?

I kind of wish our diocese might do this on a limited scale. The problem in my parish is that we used to have a very old-school traditional pastor, then his replacement was more middle-of-the-road, tending towards a liberal-liturgical style.
So, the people who had sought out the old-school style, were left with a somewhat different situation than they had chosen. We have a neighboring parish with a new young “old-school” pastor, and guess where our parishioners are headed? Half of our pews sit empty, and our school had a major migration out (we lost close to half the students).

 

[reggieM]

In the Episcopal dioceses I know, parishes have their own personality, as it were. Some are very high church, and some are politically active. Some revel in liturgical innovations, and some are known for their splendid music. It doesn’t detract from other neighboring parishes, nor are they pitted against each other. People who prefer big organs and magnificent choirs tend to frequent parishes that offer that. I think it’s building community around what brings meaning to you. If that is where you find God speaking to you and calling you deeper, what is the difficulty?

It’s an interesting point and question and I think answer to why it is a “problem” is that in the Catholic Faith, unlike the Episcopal, there’s a higher emphasis placed on unity of practice - as reflecting union with the Holy See.
This has been changing, and interestingly, it is the use of the Extraordinary Form as an alternative usage that has opened that.
But another key factor is that in the Catholic world, along with that idea of unity is the idea of consistency - which is an older concept which actually was supported when the Latin Mass was universal.
The argument then to “why Latin language?” was that you could go anywhere in the world to a Catholic Mass and it would always be the same.
Consistency then, became a hallmark.
So, in a diocese, bishops would want all parishes to be essentially the same, with minor differences.
Finally, since any variety in parishes really comes from the pastor’s style and not the congregation itself (that is changing somewhat), with bishops rotating pastors every 7 years or so, a standard template for parish liturgy is in place and parishes will not be distinguished by liberal or conservative styles.
The exception as noted above is that bishops will place extreme examples (liberal or conservative) as outposts that draw the misfits away from the mainstream approach.

 

[reggieM]

Even before Vatican II, in many monasteries the Mass was always at least versus populum, at least for the monks in the choir stalls.

Yes, but they didn’t concelebrate. Thus “side altars”, which we can find in old Benedictine monastery churches offered the priest-monks the opportunity to celebrate their daily Masses Those would not be strictly, “ad orientem” since they’re on the side facing north and south. But as some would say they’re “ad deum” (facing the altar or tabernacle) or not facing the people.
For me that was a beautiful custom where you could go into a church and attend Mass at side altars.
We do hear about how St. .Peter’s Basilica main altar always had Mass facing the people, but that was to preserve facing the East. Plus, the numerous side altars at St. Peter’s even today have priests offering Mass turned towards the altar, not towards the people. I’ve attended several there, even with fairly large congregations at side altars.
So, that was envisioned as the norm.

 

[phil19034]

In the Episcopal dioceses I know, parishes have their own personality, as it were. Some are very high church, and some are politically active. Some revel in liturgical innovations, and some are known for their splendid music. It doesn’t detract from other neighboring parishes, nor are they pitted against each other. People who prefer big organs and magnificent choirs tend to frequent parishes that offer that. I think it’s building community around what brings meaning to you. If that is where you find God speaking to you and calling you deeper, what is the difficulty?

1. In many Episcopal churches I know around here, while the parish might have their own “personality” each liturgy is done differently. For example: if they have 3 on Sunday, one will use traditional music, one contemporary, and the other whatever is unique that that church.

I actually like that approach. It an opportunity for people to attend the time this is most aligned to their spirituality, while remaining a member of the local church.

1. For Catholics (esp priests) the difficulty is because like bishops, pastors are in charge of all the souls (Catholic and non-Catholic) who live in the geographic boundaries of their parish. Also many dioceses in the Northeast and Great Lakes Region used to have a number of Personal Parishes which were established based on national origin. This was PRIMARY done because people from different countries often had different devotions they were accustom to. For example: Polish people have a devotion to Our Lady of Czestochowa, while the Irish have devotions to St. Patrick, etc. These Personal Parishes had a lot of positive and negative affects. However, many clergy today believe that the negative affects out weigh the positive ones, so a lot of Bishops are very hesitant to create new Personal Parishes. Furthermore, territorial parishes need to be focused on the people who live there, and should not morph themselves into a Personal Parish.

I pray I’m making sense.

God bless.