Criteria for judging the efficacy of The Mass / a Mass

[Layman]

What are, or are there, official criteria for judging the efficacy of The Mass, or any particular Mass?

I think that’s the nub of the N.O./O.F. versus the TLM/E.F. debate. I’ve read a lot of back-and-forth on this forum over what’s allowed, or should be allowed/disallowed, but I think the ultimate criterion is efficacy. We bang on about the rubrics but don’t address clearly what their ultimate object is.

As in:

• Conversion of sinners;
• Conversion of atheists, apostates and heretics;
• Fostering vocations;
• Conduit of graces;
• Increase in individual and congregational sanctity;
• Honouring Christ;
• Assuaging God’s wrath.

That sort of thing.

Is there an official list of criteria somewhere about this subject? I admit I’m biased. I think the TLM is much better than the N.O.-plus-novelties.

I might go to an ad-Orientem Latin N.O. in London when I return, just to compare and contrast.

 

[Lancer]

I can answer your “efficacy” question in one word…UNION.

Why did God make me?To know him, to love him and to serve him in this life and to be united [UNION] with him forever in eternal life.

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Calvary) is the “vehicle” that gives me the most profound, deepest and holiest UNION with Our Lord Jesus Christ …along with the entire Holy Trinity…with all the angles and all the saints in (the Lamb’s Supper/Banquet) in heaven…in this present life…by/when receiving Our Lord Jesus Christ in Holy Communion/Holy Eucharist (and with him the Trinitarian God).

That is my understanding of the “efficacy” of the Mass. Anything else that comes from it…to me or to anyone else…may be a great gift or blessing…but it is The Lord Jesus and the Trinitarian God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) that I desire and seek…and nothing else…and I mean nothing else comes close…to that UNION at Holy Mass and Holy Communion. By that primary UNION I am also in UNION with my brothers and sisters In Christ at Mass…and beyond the boundaries of time and history. Yes…the saying is true: Thank be to God, as a Catholic, at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…I am not a prisoner of this current time and place!

Lastly, I like the E.F./TLM for many reasons (only get to pray/serve at it 1x per quarter)…but high on the list of “why” is that it removes/severely dampens all the “priest’s-personality stuff” (even from good holy priests who celebrate the N.O./O.F. with reverence and ) that you get in the N.O/O.F. I find all this “stuff” distracting and disorienting…no matter what the motive or how is presented.

Pax Christi

 

[WhollyRoamin]

It is a dangerous line of thinking to presume the Lord’s satisfaction.

 

[Cluny]

I hope this is not being used as an excuse to say that the EF makes more powerful juju than the OF.

The value and efficacy of any Eucharistic Sacrifice in any authorized rite is infinite. Period.

You don’t have higher or lower degrees of “infinite.”

 

[Layman]

I hope this is not being used as an excuse to say that the EF makes more powerful juju than the OF.

I am. I believe I perceive a different effect between of OF and EF. Now, if I went to an OF without the novelties, and in Latin, that might be interesting.

I am taking a ‘greedy’, ‘primitive’ view. I want the Mass to have an effect on me. Greater sanctity, more graces. So I want to know if any authority has been down this road before i.e. a saint, and has written about it.

Arguments for ‘licity’ and ‘validity’ won’t cut it. You can have a valid Mass with a lot of shenanigans that I doubt will incline those attending to greater piety. I attended O.F. Masses even before they introduced the more recent distractions. At them I recall being bored. At the modern ones I get irritated.

And before anyone says, that’s my fault, let me save you the trouble.

I propose the saints of old made conversions because pagans could see they had spiritual power, like Saint Padre Pio. It was hard to deny.

I’ve read about a German chap who became an Orthodox priest because he attended one of their vigils(?), and reasoned that if he could stay on his feet for 18 hours without being bored or tired, there must be something in it.

The value and efficacy of any Eucharistic Sacrifice in any authorized rite is infinite. Period.

You don’t have higher or lower degrees of “infinite.”

So a OF-plus-novelties done by a liberal priest is as good as a TLM done by a holy one, in terms of efficacy?

Note: I do not say that Heaven would not attend the former. But I wonder at the juju available to me. I want as much as is reasonably possible. More juju!

Life is short. I’m middle-aged. I don’t want to live purely by an intellectual religion. I want effects. I need them. I perceive a lot of crowd-pleasing stuff going on in the modern OF, that detracts and distracts from the sacred.

[Where I am currently at the moment has no Sunday TLM. It has one a month, on a weekday. The nearest are about 50-100+ miles away, and not accessible by public transport on the day, in time. It also has a vocations crisis. 40+ years is long enough for an experiment. It hasn’t worked. Time to try the tried-and-tested.]

 

[Timothysis]

I am. I believe I perceive a different effect between of OF and EF. Now, if I went to an OF without the novelties, and in Latin, that might be interesting.

I am taking a ‘greedy’, ‘primitive’ view. I want the Mass to have an effect on me. Greater sanctity, more graces.

I believe that you are totally ignorant of what the Mass is. As Cluny pointed out, the value and efficacy of a Mass, a Eucharistic Sacrifice, of any given rite is infinite. To desire “greater sanctity, more graces” from the Mass is childish at best, sinfully proud at the worst. All Masses “have an effect” on those who participate; namely, the sanctification of the soul. If this is not the effect that your " ‘greedy’, ‘primitive’ view" aspires unto, then perhaps you have a fundamental misunderstanding of yourself, God, Christ’s sacrifice and the Mass.

 

[Cluny]

I believe I perceive a different effect between of OF and EF.

The Church disagrees with your subjective perception. It’s just as much 100% the Body and Blood of Christ in an EF mass celebrated by Padre Pio as it is in the OF by Fr. Laidback.

Or did you think that his hosts only partially consecrated?

So I want to know if any authority has been down this road before i.e. a saint, and has written about it.

In spiritual effects, one mass is exactly the same as the next or previous mass.

Now, there IS someone who has gone down this road before. It’s the infamous Bishop Leadbeater of the Liberal Catholic Church in his lurid book THE SCIENCE OF THE SACRAMENTS, where he discusses the various bubbles and forces emanating from both the Roman Mass and their own revision; he clearly thought theirs made stronger juju.

It’s an amusing read, but don’t take it seriously. I think you can find it on line, if you’re really interested.

But look out–this is where you’re headed.

You can have a valid Mass with a lot of shenanigans that I doubt will incline those attending to greater piety. I attended O.F. Masses even before they introduced the more recent distractions. At them I recall being bored. At the modern ones I get irritated.

What you’re saying is that you find the things of God boring and irritating.

(I’m not saying the priest should play with the Liturgy in terms of trying to improve it. Say the black, do the red. How simple!)

So a OF-plus-novelties done by a liberal priest is as good as a TLM done by a holy one, in terms of efficacy?

Yep. The fruits are exactly the same.

But I wonder at the juju available to me. I want as much as is reasonably possible. More juju!

It’s all the same. The problem is your attitude.

To use another Sacrament to help my analogy: A person baptized by Padre Pio or St. Nicholas Kassatkin of Japan (who converted 15,000 Japanese personally and baptized them, to say nothing of the Japanese he ordained to the Priesthood) is just as much baptized as one done by Fr. Relevant (provided he didn’t mess up the essential form).

You’re either baptized, or you’re not. You can’t get more baptized than baptized.

It’s either the Body and Blood of Christ, or it’s not. There are not degrees of Body-of-Christness.

Time to try the tried-and-tested

That’s why I attend the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. It dates back to before Pope Pius V played with the Latin Rite.

 

[EasterJoy]

Objectively, people cannot limit the efficacy of the Mass, per se. There is a degree to which every Mass opens up and untouchable infinity of grace, from which we have the promise that the Holy Spirit will make Christ truly present, with a truth and efficacy which is par excellence.

Therefore, the only way one Mass differs from another is in whether those celebrating and assisting are more or less open to what every Mass offers and are doing so in a way that is edifying to their brothers and sisters worshipping with them. Are they doing the work that is theirs to do, towards the end that God set them to do it?

One could beat that avenue to death. I think the easiest thing to do is
a) be thankful for God’s generosity, for he does not disdain our poor efforts
b) ask constantly for help in being more faithful to the graces offered, in every way.
c) ask constantly to be on the lookout for ways to accept others whereever they are and to help them in recognizing God’s thirst to show his love and mercy.

 

[EasterJoy]

We might also consider the counsel of the demon Screwtape to the junior tempter Wormwood, in Chapter 17 of CS Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters:

I think I warned you that if your patient can’t be kept out of church, he ought to at least be violently attached to some party in it. I don’t mean on really doctrinal issues; about those, the more lukewarm he is, the better. And it isn’t the doctrines on which we chiefly depend for producing malice. The real fun is working up hatred between those who say “mass” and those who say “holy communion” when neither party could possibly state the difference between, say, Hooker’s doctrine and Thomas Aquinas’, in any form which would hold water for five minutes. And all the purely indifferent things–candles and clothes and whatnot–are an admirable ground for our activities. We have quite removed from men’s minds what that pestilent fellow Paul used to teach about food and other unessentials–namely, that the human without scruples should always give in to the human with scruples. You would think they could not fail to see the application. You would expect to find the ‘low’ churchman genuflecting and crossing himself lest the weak conscience of his ‘high’ brother be moved to irreverence, and the ‘high’ one refraining from these exercises lest he should betray his ‘low’ brother to idolatry. And so it would have been but for our ceaseless labour. Without that the variety of usage within the Church of England might have become a positive hotbed of charity and humility.

Now that we Roman Catholics are in an age which gives us a variety of usages, we ought to take care that we are not caught in one of Screwtape’s traps!

 

[Layman]

Objectively, people cannot limit the efficacy of the Mass, per se. There is a degree to which every Mass opens up and untouchable infinity of grace, from which we have the promise that the Holy Spirit will make Christ truly present, with a truth and efficacy which is par excellence.

---

Therefore, the only way one Mass differs from another is in whether those celebrating and assisting are more or less open to what every Mass offers and are doing so in a way that is edifying to their brothers and sisters worshipping with them. Are they doing the work that is theirs to do, towards the end that God set them to do it?***

[My emphasis.]

That makes sense.

I didn’t understand the Screwtape reference. C.S. Lewis is not the kind of authority I was looking for, nor a Liberal Bishop.

I have a sense that those who say the O.F.-plus-novelties is fine are kind-of sticking their fingers in their ears and going “La la la, it’s a sociological phenomenon” when confronted with declines in vocations, Mass attendance and good catechesis. Plus the odd increase in more participant-focused additions to the Liturgy.

[e.g. The Mass I went to yesterday had a presentation ceremony to lay-people shoe-horned into where the sermon normally occurs. A bit jarring. Is that allowed?]

It’d be funny-peculiar, and sad, if Darwinism is going to bring back rigour to the Church i.e. Liberal dioceses suffering a vocations crisis leaving those orders/dioceses which offer greater rigour/efficacy/ju-ju/x-factor still going.

Frankly, I find this harrowing. I hope the touted return to tradition bears much fruit, and fast. I’m not a fanatic (I think ). I just want at least to tick the internal box which says: “Pious Mass attended on Sunday? Check!”.

And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to want more graces/sanctity/efficacy from a Mass. The saints expelled demons and healed the sick. If they blessed you, you were blessed. If they cursed you, you could drop down dead.

If I was consecrated, I’d use it. It’s in the job description, isn’t it? Seven years in a seminary, just to become a religious social-worker-cum-Mass-presider, or something?

More ju-ju, less jaw-jaw, I think. Satan is having things too much his own way at the moment.

 

[Cluny]

I didn’t understand the Screwtape reference. C.S. Lewis is not the kind of authority I was looking for, nor a Liberal Bishop.

I well understood EasterJoy’s very appropriate quote from Screwtape. Well put, dear soul! Thanks!

The Liberal Catholic Church is a Theosophical split off the Old Catholic Church–Mathew succession.

Leadbeater ran a long way in the same direction you’re headed towards

Now, if the EF offers you more spiritual refreshment than the OF, by all means go.

But there’s no more grace inherent in one than in the other, or in the Maronite Qorbono, or Liturgy of Addai and Mari, or that of St. John Chrysostom.

They are all equal in grace, efficacy, power, and yes, juju.

I will mention here that because of heath issues and other reasons, I cannot attend Divine Liturgy every Sunday. All this has done is emphasize how precious the Eucharistic Sacrifice is.

 

[Cluny]

And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to want more graces/sanctity/efficacy from a Mass. The saints expelled demons and healed the sick. If they blessed you, you were blessed. If they cursed you, you could drop down dead.

If you’re not getting all the blessings from the Mass that are available, it’s not the fault of the priest.

It’s your own.

Charismatic gifts, such as healing, have nothing to do with the efficacy of a Mass.

You seem to be implying that if the Father A is not as holy as Padre P, a mass Fr. A celebrates is not as grace-filled.

This is nothing more or less than the heresy of Donatism, which taught that the efficacy of Sacraments depended on the spiritual state of the priest or bishop celebrating them.

 

[Layman]

I’m aware of the heresy of Donatism.

I believe it refers to the validity of a sacrament, not its efficacy, Donatism being the belief in sanctity as requisite for church membership and administration of all sacraments i.e. if your priest ain’t holy, your baptism is invalid.

That’s not what I’m asking about.

If valid Sacraments are all that’s needed, and there’s no spiritual/efficaciousness/juju difference between what was done pre-and-post-Vat. II, then why the immediate loss of clergy and religious and the increase in impiety and laxity amongst the Faithful and the clergy?

We’ve had decadence in our society before: e.g. the Jazz era and the Art Nouveau era.

I think ju-ju is the answer. Or graces. Or efficacy. That which we try to get or receive when we ‘do’ religion. What people are looking for when they go on pilgrimages or seek out relics.

 

[Timothysis]

If valid Sacraments are all that’s needed, and there’s no spiritual/efficaciousness/juju difference between what was done pre-and-post-Vat. II, then why the immediate loss of clergy and religious and the increase in impiety and laxity amongst the Faithful and the clergy?

Two incredibly separate issues. The decline in religious vocations actually was starting to show signs in the depression-era 1930’s. What you call the "increase in impiety and laxity amongst the Faithful and the clergy" is more attributable to the rise of the mass media in the 1950’s and 60’s than to the Vatican II council. Society changed in the post-war economic boon. Think of a person who was born in 1929 and one who was born in 1949 and see how radically different things were when they were growing up.

We’ve had decadence in our society before: e.g. the Jazz era and the Art Nouveau era.

We have always had decadence. Do you think that there was no sex outside of marriage, homosexuality or masturbation until the 1960’s? Do you think that no one ever drank too much, beat their wives, yelled at their kids, missed Mass and kicked the dog until the 1960’s?

I think ju-ju is the answer. Or graces. Or efficacy. That which we try to get or receive when we ‘do’ religion. What people are looking for when they go on pilgrimages or seek out relics.

If this is true, then we should be able to analyze all of the valid Eucharistic rites since the Christian era and determine which one has the most ju-ju, make it mandatory for every congregation the world over and we’ll have a literal heaven on earth!

 

[LilyM]

It is the same Christ, with the same infinitude of graces (‘juju’ if you will) available to all who receive Him, whether at a valid OF or a valid EF.

If there is a lack of visible outcomes such as the ones OP has mentioned, that is because of the lack of worthiness/openness/preparedness of the people who receive at one vs the other.

If the OF were done away with this very day, those same unworthy/unopen/unprepared persons who receive at it would commence to attend the EF and receive every bit as unworthily/unopenly/unpreparedly at the EF.

 

[EasterJoy]

[My emphasis.]

That makes sense.

I didn’t understand the Screwtape reference. C.S. Lewis is not the kind of authority I was looking for, nor a Liberal Bishop.

I have a sense that those who say the O.F.-plus-novelties is fine are kind-of sticking their fingers in their ears and going “La la la, it’s a sociological phenomenon” when confronted with declines in vocations, Mass attendance and good catechesis. Plus the odd increase in more participant-focused additions to the Liturgy.

[e.g. The Mass I went to yesterday had a presentation ceremony to lay-people shoe-horned into where the sermon normally occurs. A bit jarring. Is that allowed?]

It’d be funny-peculiar, and sad, if Darwinism is going to bring back rigour to the Church i.e. Liberal dioceses suffering a vocations crisis leaving those orders/dioceses which offer greater rigour/efficacy/ju-ju/x-factor still going.

Frankly, I find this harrowing. I hope the touted return to tradition bears much fruit, and fast. I’m not a fanatic (I think ). I just want at least to tick the internal box which says: “Pious Mass attended on Sunday? Check!”.

And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to want more graces/sanctity/efficacy from a Mass. The saints expelled demons and healed the sick. If they blessed you, you were blessed. If they cursed you, you could drop down dead.

If I was consecrated, I’d use it. It’s in the job description, isn’t it? Seven years in a seminary, just to become a religious social-worker-cum-Mass-presider, or something?

More ju-ju, less jaw-jaw, I think. Satan is having things too much his own way at the moment.

When you’re consecrated, “use it” as reverently and faithfully as possible, every time.

Until then, find the Mass that is the most reverent and faithful you can find, and get there every chance you get.

Don’t worry about anyone else’s ju-ju. Those who do have that in their job descriptions carry a heavy cross, and will answer accordingly. No one who has not been given that load should attempt to take it on, for God only gives grace to bear the loads He has actually ordained that the particular person in question should carry. We ought to keep our eyes, then, on the furrow we’ve been given to plow. (And yes, that furrow does include praying for the more heavily laden and sometimes raising a question with them when they give us scandal, I will grant that, but we’re going to be straw-splitting soon…)

 

[Cluny]

I think ju-ju is the answer. Or graces. Or efficacy. That which we try to get or receive when we ‘do’ religion. What people are looking for when they go on pilgrimages or seek out relics.

The helps to prayer and motivations to faith and devotion by non-sacramental and extra-liturgical acts such as pilgrimages and veneration of holy relics are NOT the same as the infinite spiritual efficacy that comes from the Mass in any form.

You’re not even comparing apples and oranges here.

You’re comparing avacados and armadillos.

 

[Cluny]

The helps to prayer and motivations to faith and devotion by non-sacramental and extra-liturgical acts such as pilgrimages and veneration of holy relics are NOT the same as the infinite spiritual efficacy that comes from the Mass in any form.

You’re not even comparing apples and oranges here.

You’re comparing avacados and armadillos.

Further thoughts:

Nowhere did Christ command us to venerate relics or go on pilgrimages. The command to “do” in regards to religion is directly related to the Eucharist.

I’ve been on pilgrimages myself, and I’m saying nothing against them.

But the Eucharistic Christ received at Lourdes is exactly the same as the Eucharistic Christ received in your local NO parish: guitars, felt banners, and all.

The Mass celebrated in one place is just as efficacious as the Mass celebrated in the other.

There isn’t “more grace/juju/efficacy” in a Mass at Lourdes or St. Peter’s than at the parish down the street.

And guess what? The abuses you complain about do not in the LEAST vitiate the efficacy of the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

It’s not for nothing that the traditional prayers of preparation and thanksgiving after Communion refer to the Mysteries as “Immaculate”.

But to answer your original question:

What are, or are there, official criteria for judging the efficacy of The Mass, or any particular Mass?

There are none.

 

[I_Believe]

What are, or are there, official criteria for judging the efficacy of The Mass, or any particular Mass?

I think that’s the nub of the N.O./O.F. versus the TLM/E.F. debate. I’ve read a lot of back-and-forth on this forum over what’s allowed, or should be allowed/disallowed, but I think the ultimate criterion is efficacy. We bang on about the rubrics but don’t address clearly what their ultimate object is.

As in:

• Conversion of sinners;
• Conversion of atheists, apostates and heretics;
• Fostering vocations;
• Conduit of graces;
• Increase in individual and congregational sanctity;
• Honouring Christ;
• Assuaging God’s wrath.

That sort of thing.

Is there an official list of criteria somewhere about this subject? I admit I’m biased. I think the TLM is much better than the N.O.-plus-novelties.

I might go to an ad-Orientem Latin N.O. in London when I return, just to compare and contrast.

I think what you are saying is, Mass should build Faith. Going by your list.

Let’s put it this way. I have never walked out of a church after a TLM upset about anything. I usually walk out humbled, and feeling as though I did my soul some good. The TLM builds Faith in me.

Can I say that about the Novus Ordo ? Only if I force myself to do the following :
-keep my eyes on the pages of my missal and pray the Mass with the priest
-keep my eyes closed, or, on the priest, Tabernacle, Crucifix, or perhaps a statue of Our Lady or Christ

If I fail to do that, I’m sure to get upset. I can’t bear watching people receive in the hand. I can’t bear to look at EMHC standing in the Sanctuary. I can’t bear to see women in the Sanctuary during Mass.

The last time I watched the priest place a Host in the hand of an EMHC, the EMHC dropped the Host. Right there in the Sanctuary in full view of anyone who was watching. Does that do the soul of a Catholic good. No. It tears it in half.

I’ve seen a EMHC hand a man sitting in a pew a Host, and after watching the man consume the Host, the EMHC handed the man a second Host. The man placed the Host in his shirt pocket and the EMHC walked away as if that was acceptable. Perhaps the man was going to take it to a home bound person. I don’t know.

I’ve seen the Precious Blood spilled a few times.

This past Ash Wednesday, the pews were packed tight. When it came time for the gift bearers to bring the gifts, nothing. At the church in question, the gifts table is placed in the center of the main isle, about 15 rows back. I was sitting up front in the 3rd pew I think it was, and the priest separated his hands from the folded prayer position and held them up as to say “please, someone”. Almost immediately, I heard a man behind me say “come on”. At that point, I knew something was wrong. Two men had to get up, and walk from the 4th row to the 15th or so, and get the gifts and bring them to the priest. Sad.

For me, the TLM is the most precious thing I have in this filthy world. But with my work schedule, Sundays are the only time I can assist an approved one. As one who has a spiritual need for daily Mass, the NO is it. I do have the option of assisting weekday TLM’s at an Independent chapel, but I stick with the diocesan NO.

Sadly, it’s become one of the hardest crosses to bear in my day to day life. Call me scrupulous, but it’s a shame I can’t comfortably assist the weekday Mass I know would do my soul the most good, for the fear of what might become of it if I do.

 

[Layman]

I can answer your “efficacy” question in one word…UNION.

Why did God make me?To know him, to love him and to serve him in this life and to be united [UNION] with him forever in eternal life.

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Calvary) is the “vehicle” that gives me the most profound, deepest and holiest UNION with Our Lord Jesus Christ …along with the entire Holy Trinity…with all the angles and all the saints in (the Lamb’s Supper/Banquet) in heaven…in this present life…by/when receiving Our Lord Jesus Christ in Holy Communion/Holy Eucharist (and with him the Trinitarian God).

Meant to say this earlier. Well done, Lancer. That I think should go to the top of the list: Union with God.

In my opinion, the additions to the N.O./O.F. seem to have one thing in common: they draw focus away from Christ (the Host, the tabernacle, the crucifix, ones inner prayer and meditation directed towards Him, Mary, the archangels and saints) and onto the participants: the priest, the unvested servers, the EMCs, the epistle readers, joining in with responses, the sign of peace, etc.

I also think, from memory, that there’s not too much time in the O.F. where you can make a quiet, prolonged, prayer: you’re obliged to make responses, or hear everything the priest is saying. It’s noisier. Coupled with simple, Protestantised hymns and folk guitars, it’s a lot less contemplative.

There are also contradictions in the liberal position:

• You must obey the Church edicts, except in doing what Paul VI and the current Pope wants in a Mass; Latin, Gregorian chant, COTT, priest ad-Orientem;
• Vat. II was a breath of fresh air, regenerating our Religion, except things have got much worse since it; why such a drastic exit from the Church after it, social factors notwithstanding?;
• Don’t fear change, except changing back to what we had before.
• The O.F. is essentially the same as the E.F., the Mass Of Ages, except it keeps changing all the time. You could have a valid Mass with zeppelins roaring overhead, a rock band, clapping and singing from half the congregation, the other half in the sanctuary, but who, seriously looking to commune with Christ, would support such a thing?
• The Mass is a sacred, mysterious, awesome rite except we’ve removed the altar rails and let the laity up in the sanctuary, often bare-headed women, occasionally in short-skirts, where they can read the epistle and occasionally give testimony of their own. We’ve let the mundane world into the Holy Of Holies; a contradiction.

And you can’t correct anyone, because, hey, Vat. II did away with all that old-fashioned stuff. Plaster the altar with kids drawings and put a Christmas tree in the back and it’s like a town hall meeting up there.

People like us who have an interest in the liturgy can make a choice about which they’ll support. What about all those folk who go to school, get badly cathecised, go to Mass from a sense of duty, live in a liberal diocese, take their religion easy and have no idea there’s an alternative?

Worse, because of a narcissistic, consumerist culture and a nannying education, they think everything should be simple and served up on a plate and focused on them: hence “I don’t understand the Latin, the priest has his back to me etc”.

I used to think I’d have liked to have been a priest. It was a vain notion; I like the idea of saying Mass and hearing confessions and exorcising the odd demon, but I’m not very charitable.

Now I know that I’d have been stuck in a liberal O.F.-or-nothing diocese and kiss your career goodbye if you cheese-off the bishop by wanting to try out the old rite. Assuming I could have survived a seminary with homosexuals not only tolerated, but maybe even preferred.

Note, I’m quite hopeful of a happy outcome, over the next fifteen years or so. That which has Christ in it will survive and prosper. I just don’t think the O.F-plus-novelties is it.

An analogy from the world of business: You have a great brand that everyone respects. It’s a luxury one, like Rolls Royce; high class. Because the vice-presidents are bored, and ostensibly to get to get more customers, you start altering it to broaden its consumer base.

In the end, you get rid of the things that made it special in the first place, and wonder why people don’t buy it any more.