Fifteen months after the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum: has your diocese officially said a big, fat, NOTHING about it??

[CradleCath]

Thank God for Bishop Bruskewitz here in the Diocese of Lincoln. We have an oratory where regular Daily Masses are said and 2 on Sunday. Yesterday we had a Rorate Mass (absolutely beautiful). I cannot believe those of us who reside here are so fortunate. We have the FSSP seminary right outside of town and have Vespers about once a month.

Indeed you are fortunate. I’ve read some of Bishop Brusekwitz’s writings & am so impressed by this man. His diocese excells in everything from just everyday “Catholicity” to vocations. If I’m correct he’s about 73 yrs. old…still young enough to become the first Pope from the USA. However, I’m not sure that you Nebraskans will let him go. AND, I’m not sure that I would blame you if you didn’t!!! :christmastree1:

 

[CWBetts]

why are people obsessed with the TLM, when Mass in the vernacular is perfectly acceptable. In fact friends of mine have told me from their experience, the TLM makes you appreciate the vernacular that much more. Just curious, that’s all.

 

[franklinf]

why are people obsessed with the TLM, when Mass in the vernacular is perfectly acceptable. In fact friends of mine have told me from their experience, the TLM makes you appreciate the vernacular that much more. Just curious, that’s all.

Because just because something is acceptable doesn’t it make it the better option. Why settle for the minimum? The TLM, the Mass of all Time, is a most reverent, solemn, sublime, and heart lifting Mass. Is a diet of bread and water acceptable? Yes. Does that mean we should choose it over a more nourishing and nutritious diet? People are “obsessed” with the TLM because of its unadulterated Catholicness. It is the embodiment of the Faith. It is the unbloody re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary! It is the Mass of the Ages!

 

[preV2tradcath]

Because just because something is acceptable doesn’t it make it the better option. Why settle for the minimum? The TLM, the Mass of all Time, is a most reverent, solemn, sublime, and heart lifting Mass. Is a diet of bread and water acceptable? Yes. Does that mean we should choose it over a more nourishing and nutritious diet? People are “obsessed” with the TLM because of its unadulterated Catholicness. It is the embodiment of the Faith. It is the unbloody re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary! It is the Mass of the Ages!

franklinf, I agree. You said it much better then I could.

 

[CWBetts]

Because just because something is acceptable doesn’t it make it the better option. Why settle for the minimum? The TLM, the Mass of all Time, is a most reverent, solemn, sublime, and heart lifting Mass. Is a diet of bread and water acceptable? Yes. Does that mean we should choose it over a more nourishing and nutritious diet? People are “obsessed” with the TLM because of its unadulterated Catholicness. It is the embodiment of the Faith. It is the unbloody re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary! It is the Mass of the Ages!

Sorry, wrong answer. The TLM is not a “better” Mass! It is not more nourishing than the vernacular. And above all, the reason the Mass became latin in the first place is because it was the vernacular! To assume that the TLM is superior expressly because it is Latin is pompous. If anything the vernacular is superior because the laity know exactly what is being said. The vernacular encourages participation, not isolation. Your reasoning that the TLM is the “embodiment of the faith” is pure tripe. If you like it better that is fine, but do not presume to denegrate the vernacular.

 

[franklinf]

Sorry, wrong answer. The TLM is not a “better” Mass! It is not more nourishing than the vernacular. And above all, the reason the Mass became latin in the first place is because it was the vernacular! To assume that the TLM is superior expressly because it is Latin is pompous. If anything the vernacular is superior because the laity know exactly what is being said. The vernacular encourages participation, not isolation. Your reasoning that the TLM is the “embodiment of the faith” is pure tripe. If you like it better that is fine, but do not presume to denegrate the vernacular.

Wrong. Where did I assume that the TLM is superior expressly because it is Latin? The Mass was / is in Latin because it is the language of the Church! The Catholic (universal) Church united at Mass through a universal language, Latin. The laity knows what is being said at Mass. If they don’t understand Latin, there are missals. As for the vernacular being superior, consider what the Popes have said.
Pius XI - “For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time…of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”
Pope John XXIII - “Finally, the Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord. It is altogether fitting, that the language it uses be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular.”

The use of Latin doesn’t encourage isolation (nor does the vernacular encourage participation). To actively participate means to “associate your heart with the holy feelings which are contained in these words…” (Pope Pius X). Participation is uniting one’s heart and prayers with those of the priest, not vocalizing responses.

How is the TLM not the embodiment of the Faith? The Holy Mass, instituted by Christ Himself, is centered on His Sacrifice at Calvary and on the Holy Eucharist. This is not the embodiment of the Faith? Read the Roman Canon. Tell me how this is “pure tripe.”

Also, please refrain from the unnecessary jabs (pompous, tripe). It would be more constructive to replace that with a more fleshed out point.

 

[franklinf]

franklinf, I agree. You said it much better then I could.

Thank you for the kind words. Sorry for “hijacking” the thread.

 

[CWBetts]

The Latin is no more the “embodymnet of faith” than the vernacualr. Just in case you didn’t know, when the Eucharist was instituted, it was in Aramaic, NOT Latin. This being the case, then Mass shouldn’t be in Latin, it should be in Aramaic. You claim that the Latin is superior, when people I have talked to say it is more difficult for them to focus on the sacrifice when in Latin. Is this not detrimental? I do plan on attending a TLM myself, eventually. But I will approach it as being EQUIVALENT, and not superior, to the mass in the vernacular. If the TLM was superior, then why did permission need to be granted to use the Latin until just over a year ago? The Latin Mass is no more spiritual. To suggest otherwise is presumptious. I suspect the insistance of a higher level of spirituality is just so you have an excuse to look down on those of us who prefer the vernacualr. Why? Because we aren’t “Catholic enough” to appreciate the Latin Mass.

 

[franklinf]

The Latin is no more the “embodymnet of faith” than the vernacualr. Just in case you didn’t know, when the Eucharist was instituted, it was in Aramaic, NOT Latin. This being the case, then Mass shouldn’t be in Latin, it should be in Aramaic. You claim that the Latin is superior, when people I have talked to say it is more difficult for them to focus on the sacrifice when in Latin. Is this not detrimental? I do plan on attending a TLM myself, eventually. But I will approach it as being EQUIVALENT, and not superior, to the mass in the vernacular. If the TLM was superior, then why did permission need to be granted to use the Latin until just over a year ago? The Latin Mass is no more spiritual. To suggest otherwise is presumptious. I suspect the insistance of a higher level of spirituality is just so you have an excuse to look down on those of us who prefer the vernacualr. Why? Because we aren’t “Catholic enough” to appreciate the Latin Mass.

I don’t want to sidetrack the thread so this will be last comment in regards to this. Feel free to PM me or open a new thread if you would like another response.

I think you are confusing the liturgy with the language. The NO, typically celebrated in the vernacular, is a different liturgy than the Tridentine Rite (Extraordinary Form, Traditonal Latin Mass), which is celebrated exclusively in Latin. I was referring to the TLM as a whole , not just its language. The Mass should be in Latin because thats the language of the Church. Your comments on the Mass being equal / not superior to the Mass in the vernacular miss what I was referring to - my emphasis is on the liturgy not the language (although I do feel Latin should be used).

As to permission being needed to use Latin, that is not true. The EF of the Latin Rite was used for over a 1000 years prior to Vatican II. Vatican II instituted the Mass of Paul VI. The use of Latin as a language at Mass was not abrograted. In fact Vatican II stated that “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites,” and that it was important for the faithful “to be able to say or sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.” So permission was never needed to use the Latin language. The TLM was replaced by the Novus Ordo Mass after Vatican II. In 1988 an indult was granted to use the TLM (Tridentine). A year ago, SP fully liberated the TLM (not the Latin language). So again, it appears that you are confusing the liturgy with the language. The TLM is about more than just the Latin language.

 

[PKinsale]

The Latin is no more the “embodymnet of faith” than the vernacualr. Just in case you didn’t know, when the Eucharist was instituted, it was in Aramaic, NOT Latin. This being the case, then Mass shouldn’t be in Latin, it should be in Aramaic. You claim that the Latin is superior, when people I have talked to say it is more difficult for them to focus on the sacrifice when in Latin. Is this not detrimental? I do plan on attending a TLM myself, eventually. But I will approach it as being EQUIVALENT, and not superior, to the mass in the vernacular. If the TLM was superior, then why did permission need to be granted to use the Latin until just over a year ago? The Latin Mass is no more spiritual. To suggest otherwise is presumptious. I suspect the insistance of a higher level of spirituality is just so you have an excuse to look down on those of us who prefer the vernacualr. Why? Because we aren’t “Catholic enough” to appreciate the Latin Mass.

I hope you can, despite some of what you hear on this board, still approach the TLM with an open mind. In the end, it is not about the language but the whole heritage of Catholic devotion that many of us who became Catholic after V2 had stolen from us. We never knew what it was like, until we began to study it and taste it. I expect things will change for the better once we we get the new translation that our bishops have been fighting. As it stands now, the vernacular is too watered down from the prayers and readings they are supposed to be translations of. The language we use in our formal public prayer should be reverent., formal, accurate and theologically sound.

 

[CWBetts]

I hope you can, despite some of what you hear on this board, still approach the TLM with an open mind. In the end, it is not about the language but the whole heritage of Catholic devotion that many of us who became Catholic after V2 had stolen from us. We never knew what it was like, until we began to study it and taste it. I expect things will change for the better once we we get the new translation that our bishops have been fighting. As it stands now, the vernacular is too watered down from the prayers and readings they are supposed to be translations of. The language we use in our formal public prayer should be reverent., formal, accurate and theologically sound.

I am completely on board with the new translations being discussed!! Form what I gather (forgive my ignorance) very few have been completely satisfies with the translations currently in use. I agree that the English trnaslation should be as close as possible to the meaning conveyed in the Latin. My sticking point is the language itself. I should know when the Host has been consecrated because I understand what the celebrant is saying, not because a bell rings. I actually consider myself rather orthodox (note the small “o”). But I also believe that too strict of adherence for no other reason than “that’s haow it has always been” can be just as problematic as grabbing on to every innovation that comes along. In short, where my view stands is this: Keep the vernacular, but make sure it is a GOOD translation of the Latin.

 

[IrishDude45]

Here in the Diocese of Nashville we have, as far as I know, one parish that celebrates the TLM since Benedict XVI released Summorum Pontificum.

Bishop Choby has said “I’m happy that we can respond to the provisions being made by the Holy Father … to respond to individuals who, as he puts it, have a certain affection for … the Tridentine Liturgy,”

And the Bishop ordered a Norbertine priest to come in and train two priests from the Diocese of Nashville and two from the Diocese of Knoxville to celebrate the TLM. I don’t think he has yet given them permission to celebrate it but once he does I hope it will take off! Unfortunately many here don’t like the EF, but hopefully enough do to make it permanent in some churches.

Please pray that more people will come to EF and that we will have more priests to celebrate it.

 

[SenorSalsa]

I should know when the Host has been consecrated because I understand what the celebrant is saying, not because a bell rings.

Hoc est enim Corpus Meum is nt a very hard phrase to remember, not to mention all the visual clues, such as he is holding the host, he is bowing, yes, bells are rung, the host is elevated.

And as I don’t think has been pointed out, latin is the ordinary language for celebration of the OF as well, vernacular is the exception, not the rule(or at least it should be)

On topic however, my bishop, in St. Augustine, has not really said anything. We do have one mass that I plan on attending while I am home to check it out.

And to the poster from Steubenville, I don’t know where you are compared to Franciscan University, but we offer a low mass 3 Saturdays out of the month, as well as a Missa Cantata on the Sunday for which there is no Saturday one. And you would certainly not be the only outsider there. I also know that St. Peters in the city itself also offers an EF once a month. Again, if I recall, Steubenville is a geographically large diocese, so that may not be convenient

 

[Walden]

I’m originally from the Diocese of Birmingham. Currently there is one priest who celebrates the TLM. He’s from a small town where I went to college and has an irregular schedule at his home parish. However, there is great demand in north Alabama so he travels to two larger cities weekly which are one to two hours away. Oh, and he has a mission in a town nearby the home parish. Needless to say, he’s a busy man.

I’m sure you all know that EWTN is located in that diocese as well. The Franciscans sent two of their own to learn the TLM recently so maybe the Birmingham area will be better served.

I am away at school in the Archdiocese of Mobile right now. Unfortunately, there is only one indult parish in a small town about three hours from where I am (only once a month to boot). As far as I can tell, that is the only TLM in the entire archdiocese.

We need to get it together in South Alabama!

 

[CWBetts]

Hoc est enim Corpus Meum is nt a very hard phrase to remember, not to mention all the visual clues, such as he is holding the host, he is bowing, yes, bells are rung, the host is elevated.

And as I don’t think has been pointed out, latin is the ordinary language for celebration of the OF as well, vernacular is the exception, not the rule(or at least it should be)

On topic however, my bishop, in St. Augustine, has not really said anything. We do have one mass that I plan on attending while I am home to check it out.

And to the poster from Steubenville, I don’t know where you are compared to Franciscan University, but we offer a low mass 3 Saturdays out of the month, as well as a Missa Cantata on the Sunday for which there is no Saturday one. And you would certainly not be the only outsider there. I also know that St. Peters in the city itself also offers an EF once a month. Again, if I recall, Steubenville is a geographically large diocese, so that may not be convenient

again we have people who are obsessed with the laguage…

 

[CWBetts]

and to be on topic, I believe in our diocese, the Bishop wants to know about latin masses ahead of time, though I don’t know why

 

[CradleCath]

Sorry, wrong answer. The TLM is not a “better” Mass! It is not more nourishing than the vernacular. And above all, the reason the Mass became latin in the first place is because it was the vernacular! To assume that the TLM is superior expressly because it is Latin is pompous. If anything the vernacular is superior because the laity know exactly what is being said. The vernacular encourages participation, not isolation. Your reasoning that the TLM is the “embodiment of the faith” is pure tripe. If you like it better that is fine, but do not presume to denegrate the vernacular.

Judging by your attitude, the Novus Ordo isn’t doing much for you. If it were, I think you’d post with more kindness. Your comment on the TLM.
“In fact friends of mine have told me from their experience, the TLM makes you appreciate the vernacular that much more”
was combative.

Perhaps you need to attend the Mass of the Ages, it might help you not to call someone else’s opinion “tripe”.

 

[Lainey63]

CWbetts-I just would like to say that I was born after V2 and we do have the TLM here. I never knew any latin but after going for awhile I learned to follow the Mass…the translation in english is on the opposite page. But for those who have never gone this is different and I do believe that you have to go more than once or twice to decide. I attend both types of Masses-the TLM is truley a beautiful mass. So when you do go-go more than a couple of times so you can give yourself a chance to learn to pray the mass (that’s what it says to do in the book).

 

[I_Believe]

Do you consider it disobedience when laity ask for the Forma Extraordinaria and are denied it despite the Summorum Pontificum ?

Considering that this has absolutely nothing to do in comparison to the excommunications of the sspx bishops, I would say that the MP states the conditions for which the extraordinary form are to be celebrated and the local bishop is the one who decides if those conditions are met. If you do not like the decision of the bishop then you have a right of appeal to Rome. Until the bishop is overturned, his decision is right and legitimate. It is not your place to judge whether or not a bishop is disobedient.

You obviously have not read the document. The pastor is the one who is to facilitate the requests, and should do so “willingly.” The bishop is to be approached for appeals by faithful who have been rebuffed by the pastor, and the bishop is “strongly requested” (Roman for “Do it!”) to do so. If the bishop is unable to grant the appeal, he is instructed to refer to matter to the Ecclesia Dei commission. The expectation at all levels is that the request will be granted.

Thank you Chatter.

What Chatter said Tim. The SP removed the constraints of the indult of JPII.

 

[CWBetts]

Judging by your attitude, the Novus Ordo isn’t doing much for you. If it were, I think you’d post with more kindness. Your comment on the TLM.
“In fact friends of mine have told me from their experience, the TLM makes you appreciate the vernacular that much more”
was combative.

Perhaps you need to attend the Mass of the Ages, it might help you not to call someone else’s opinion “tripe”.

If you think I was being combative your skin is pretty thin. and thanks for passing judgement on me. Very Christ-like.