How come some priests don't want to celebrate EF?

[LovedMyAlydar]

Years ago when I asked our NO parish priest to have a TLM he scoffed and said it was too hard and nobody would understand it anyway.

Funny this is the same priest who offers mass every week in Spanish, which 98% of the parish doesn’t understand, his answer to that was we needed to learn to love one another.

 

[mao_now]

No, Walking Home, we have had a very bad season of abuse of the OF. It isn’t (at least to my thinking) that the NO has been tried and found wanting, but that it’s been hardly tried, or at least properly tried. Bishops and priests mistakenly hived off and engaged in innovation. Abuse and innovation should not be confused WITH the OF, no more so than a mumbled mass or silly looking, see-through nighty-ish albs, military drill team stiffness, and the distracting doffing of birettas should be confused WITH the EF.

And of course, you made another typical error. “Correlation does not prove causation.” There is no proof that where we’ve gone is a result of the OF (though I would certainly agree that the abuse of the OF is a large part of where we are now). If you doubt that the OF is of value, you might want to re-read more carefully our Holy Father’s cover letter of the Motu Proprio to the world’s bishops. He seems to have high hopes for the OF and what he refers to as the “the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal.”

See-through nighty-ish albs?
distracting doffing of birettas?
silly?
Military drill team stiffness?

Dear Brother,
Your own words bear witness against you…
These things have been explained to you…ad nauseum.
The albs are lace…Ad majorem Dei Gloriam
The doffing of birettas…an act of Faith in the Divinity of Christ.
When the members of your former Church, dragged off the Priests of Jesus Christ, to be tortured, and martyred at Tyburn, The were wearing these same “silly” vestments.
Because they were usually caught, in the act of offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. A crime punishable by death in 16th century England.
Perhaps you find these things offensive, because you have not purged yourself of A “low church” bias…
The blood of the English martyrs, has sanctified these vestments and holy gestures, that are MANDATED by the Church.
God Bless

 

[lak611]

The pastor and associate at my parish never learned Latin at the seminary. They have no clue as to how to say a Mass in Latin, as they never were taught.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

See-through nighty-ish albs?
distracting doffing of birettas?
silly?
Military drill team stiffness?

Dear Brother,
Your own words bear witness against you…
These things have been explained to you…ad nauseum. Yes, you just haven’t convinced me.

The albs are lace…Ad majorem Dei Gloriam No, they aren’t. They have lace ON them, but they’re made of a see through material and they look ridiculous. They also are not integral in the EF. And, IN REASON, if modern chasubles can be criticized (and there is much to be criticized about them, see cwnews.com/offtherecord/offtherecord.cfm?task=singledisplay&recnum=4369), a frothy, see-through alb can be criticized. I think it’s hardly a manly garment and I think it looks silly.

The doffing of birettas…an act of Faith in the Divinity of Christ.
I bow at the name of Jesus, I know what an act of faith in the divinity of Christ is. The birettas are worn within a building, something not normally done any more by men unless they’re bishops, they seem to be worn solely for the purpose of taking them off, and it is distracting. If they aren’t worn indoors, there simply isn’t a problem. They aren’t intergral in the EF.

When the members of your former Church, dragged off the Priests of Jesus Christ, to be tortured, and martyred at Tyburn, The were wearing these same “silly” vestments.
Because they were usually caught, in the act of offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. A crime punishable by death in 16th century England.
Perhaps you find these things offensive, because you have not purged yourself of A “low church” bias…
The blood of the English martyrs, has sanctified these vestments and holy gestures, that are MANDATED by the Church.
God Bless

Try not to be melodramatic. I wasn’t raised an Episcopalian and I’m not responsible for the murders at Tyburn (my patrons are Thomas More and Thomas Becket). I’m not criticizing the alb, I’m criticizing the silly, see-through fabric it’s made of, which I rather doubt was produced in England during the time frame you mention. Not all “traditional priests” wear the silly looking fabric, but they all wear albs, see here: st-clementottawa.ca/Photos/2007%20Holy%20Thursday%20-%20Good%20Friday/images/VendSainte025_jpg.jpg

The Church does NOT mandate the biretta for priests (it is optional), the Church does NOT mandate the silly looking fabric, and neither thing is “sanctified by the blood of the English martyrs,” your histrionic assertions notwithstanding. You’ve confused the window dressing for what’s in the window.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Honestly, ry not to be melodramatic. I wasn’t raised an Episcopalian and I’m not responsible for the murders at Tyburn (my patrons are Thomas More and Thomas Becket). I’m not criticizing the alb, I’m criticizing the silly, see-through fabric it’s made of, which I rather doubt was produced in England during the time frame you mention. Not all “traditional priests” wear the silly looking fabric, but they all wear albs, see here: st-clementottawa.ca/Photos/2007%20Holy%20Thursday%20-%20Good%20Friday/images/VendSainte025_jpg.jpg

The Church does NOT mandate the biretta for priests (it is optional), the Church does NOT mandate the silly looking fabric, and neither thing is “sanctified by the blood of the English martyrs,” your histrionic assertions notwithstanding. You’ve confused the window dressing for what’s in the window.

 

[mao_now]

Try not to be melodramatic. I wasn’t raised an Episcopalian and I’m not responsible for the murders at Tyburn (my patrons are Thomas More and Thomas Becket). I’m not criticizing the alb, I’m criticizing the silly, see-through fabric it’s made of, which I rather doubt was produced in England during the time frame you mention. Not all “traditional priests” wear the silly looking fabric, but they all wear albs, see here: st-clementottawa.ca/Photos/2007%20Holy%20Thursday%20-%20Good%20Friday/images/VendSainte025_jpg.jpg

The Church does NOT mandate the biretta for priests (it is optional), the Church does NOT mandate the silly looking fabric, and neither thing is “sanctified by the blood of the English martyrs,” your histrionic assertions notwithstanding. You’ve confused the window dressing for what’s in the window.

Dear Brother,
You are in error, In the EF form the Heads of Priests MUST be covered, Whether they are celebrant, or merely present in choir.
This would be Cowls for Religious, or BIRETTAS, for the secular clergy…
I know this because A Priest,whom I have known many years, (ordained 1944) told me this…
And he is far wiser, and(smarter) than you…despite advanced age…I put this question to him years ago…because i wondered why the clergy in the EF form of the rite, had their heads covered.

And I hardly, think that, the historical FACT, of Priests being. hung until almost dead, taken down,revived, disemboweled and their organs cast onto a fire, then dismembered…all for saying mass, in 16th century England…that is FAR from melodramatic…

When the prior of the Charterhouse,had his heart ripped out (during this barbarism) he said immediately…to his tormentor “what you are holding is consecrated to God!”

But then I guess He wasnt “manly” enough!! (wearing silly vestments and all)
God bless

 

[mao_now]

As a side note, you should read professor Eamonn Duffy’s great work…“The Stripping of the Altars” if you wish to get A clear unbiased , picture of the Englis Reformation (so called)
or better yet his. “The voices of Morebath”…If you want good information on the types,styles and FABRICS of vestments from this period…

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Dear Brother,
You are in error, In the EF form the Heads of Priests MUST be covered, Whether they are celebrant, or merely present in choir.
This would be Cowls for Religious, or BIRETTAS, for the secular clergy…
I know this because A Priest,whom I have known many years, (ordained 1944) told me this…
And he is far wiser, and(smarter) than you…despite advanced age…I put this question to him years ago…because i wondered why the clergy in the EF form of the rite, had their heads covered.

Fine, but that’s not immutable. It could easily be changed without affecting the rite in any essential. AND in these fora, there have been people who mentioned the fact that their priests DIDN’T use the biretta while offering the EF and that it was optional, so I must assume that even traditionalists are not up on their rubrics.

And I hardly, think that, the historical FACT, of Priests being. hung until almost dead, taken down,revived, disemboweled and their organs cast onto a fire, then dismembered…all for saying mass, in 16th century England…that is FAR from melodramatic…

When the prior of the Charterhouse,had his heart ripped out (during this barbarism) he said immediately…to his tormentor “what you are holding is consecrated to God!”

But then I guess He wasnt “manly” enough!! (wearing silly vestments and all)
God bless

No, but it’s melodramatic and histrionic of you to attempt to connect them to the discussion at hand…and very low of you to imply some kind of connection to me (“members of your former church”). Should we assume that you look down on all converts in some way (I was Anglo-Catholic in my churchmanship, not low church as you implied)? A criticism of style lies in an opinion, which we’re entitled to have. See my above ref. to traditionalist or conservative critiquing some of the silly looking chasubles that are used today. I could as easily cry “Tyburn!,” since the martyrs wore chasubles as well. But then, that would be histrionic and melodramatic.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

As a side note, you should read professor Eamonn Duffy’s great work…“The Stripping of the Altars” if you wish to get A clear unbiased , picture of the Englis Reformation (so called)
or better yet his. “The voices of Morebath”…If you want good information on the types,styles and FABRICS of vestments from this period…

Again, it isn’t relevant to the discussion, AT ALL. Has no bearing, no point, doesn’t enter INTO IT. The Church has used a variety of fabrics throughout the centuries (go and look at the old vestments on display in the Missions of California). One FABRIC is no more sacred than another and thus, no less exempt or immune from critique than another. Be logical, for pities sake:
The discussion of birettas and fabric has no connection to Tyburn any more than a discussion on wooden poles has to the martyrdom of Saint Joan of Arc.

 

[BlyssfulDreamer]

What sticks in my mind is the comment from the lady at the Catholic store when I decided to start going to the Latin Mass and I was looking for some information about it. She asked me why I wanted to go to the Latin Mass. I told her I remember it as a kid and it was beautiful. She responded with ***“There was a reason for Vatican 2.” ***Of course, the store had nothing of any help…but the other store in town did. He had the little red missallette and I studied that…plus I asked alot of questions here.

:heart:Blyss

 

[pprimeau1976]

I would say that at individual parishes, there is not enough interest in the extraordinary form. Most of the hubub regarding the MotuProprio has been from the internet. When it comes to the people I consort with outside of cyberspace, there is a fear that the Holy Father will change things back to pre-VII.

If someone wants the EF celebrated, and they are (hypothetically speaking) in the 1% minority of parishioners who have said something to the pastor, they would have to essentially do a grassroots campaign within their parish in order to gain support.

 

[Brendan]

yea, but who’s gonna teach ME?

The same way I did. I said them each evening as part of my family prayers.

I also picked up a CD of Pope John Paul II praying the Rosary in Latin. I played it in my car going to and from work.

windowsmedia.com/MediaGuide/Templates/AlbumInfo.aspx?a_id=R%20%20%20272395

It’s not all that hard. People less educated than any of us were praying these prayers centuries ago.

If they can do it, so can we.

What really insprired me to do this was reading the Vatican II documents. Sacrosanctum Concillum stated that the faithful are to know how to say the Mass responses in Latin.

Knowing these is part of being a post-Vatican II Catholic.

 

[Brendan]

1. An additional Mass is unfortunately not possible due to time constraints of himself & the 2 associate Priests serving the large parish (we currently have 16 Masses/week), combined with the facility being used for other things like weddings, funerals, etc…

That is interesting.

We have 6 Sunday Masses, 3 Masses on Weekdays ( 6:00am, 9:00am and noon (Tuesdays have a forth, 7:00pm evening Mass, there is no noon Mass on Saturdays to allow for weddings)

We have 3 priests, a Pastor, a newly assigned Associate Pastor and a 91 year old ‘retired’ priest in residence

so that is 24 Masses each week with the same number of priests, and one of ours is 91 years old ( he gets up each morning to say the 6:00am Mass ).

And we are adding an EF Mass as soon as our parish expansion is complete (Feb '08).

PM me, I’ll have my pastor call your pastor and let him know how to work in the extra Mass

 

[otjm]

Dear Brother,
You are in error, In the EF form the Heads of Priests MUST be covered, Whether they are celebrant, or merely present in choir.
This would be Cowls for Religious, or BIRETTAS, for the secular clergy…
I know this because A Priest,whom I have known many years, (ordained 1944) told me this…
And he is far wiser, and(smarter) than you…despite advanced age…I put this question to him years ago…because i wondered why the clergy in the EF form of the rite, had their heads covered.

And I am old enough to have gone to Mass when the EF was the OF and the priest did not have his biretta on. Pleae, if you are going to state that something is a rule, be prepared to quote the rule (and if it was a rule at some time, please confirm that with the changes to the EF, that it was still in effect with the Missal that is to be used). The priest may have told you this, but as I last recall, the quoted rule is the final proof, not something some priest told you.

It may well be the rule - I wouldn’t go into deep shock to find that a priest didn’t follow all the rules then, either; but I attended Mass in more than one or two parishes back then, and they weren’t wearing the biretta. I kid you not.

And yes, you are a bit melodramatic.

 

[lak611]

just yesterday my sister’s priest said that in order to perform EF at his parish the entire altar would have to be rebuilt. (it’s a newer church building). at a tremendous cost.
how many of our newer churches are also unsuited for the EF mass??

What a crock. Tell that priest to watch this:

youtube.com/watch?v=oUNfbgRJOe8

Even the most unsuitable arrangement can be made to work if the desire is there. My goodness - holy priests offered the traditional Mass in bunkers and trenches!

My entire church would have to be rebuilt. The priest faces east when saying the NO, but the congregation faces west. If he said a TLM, he would be facing west.

 

[brigid12]

I would say that at individual parishes, there is not enough interest in the extraordinary form. Most of the hubub regarding the MotuProprio has been from the internet. When it comes to the people I consort with outside of cyberspace, there is a fear that the Holy Father will change things back to pre-VII.

This remark does coincide with the looks of aversion I’ve seen, but certainly the Bishops that I’ve heard/read express strong dislike for the EF would know that this is not necessarily the case. (Even on the USCCB website I haven’t been able to find any word about the MP - even on their news.) Are many Bishops afraid that they will lose the collegiality they’ve attained (and the power to decide the how of the liturgy in their diocese - especially since the EF doesn’t sound like it admits to very many differences and, according to the MP, a priest can celebrate an EF without his say so)? I would guess that archdiocesan liturgy committees aren’t wild about it either. Also, might this have to do with a generations idea of horizontal vs. vertical worship?

Again, please charity and acknowledgement that others are advocating worshiping as they sincerely believe to be the best manner!:hug3:

 

[brigid12]

My entire church would have to be rebuilt. The priest faces east when saying the NO, but the congregation faces west. If he said a TLM, he would be facing west.

Maybe this is all about property?

 

[Thursday1]

My entire church would have to be rebuilt. The priest faces east when saying the NO, but the congregation faces west. If he said a TLM, he would be facing west.

The EF can be said versus Populum.

And, I have always disliked that video, they are putting benches ot only on the sacred altar, but right on top of the altar relic. Versus Populum is a perfectly legitimate option for the EF, and I’m sure it is a better option than putting benches on the Sacred Altar.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

 

[Brendan]

My entire church would have to be rebuilt. The priest faces east when saying the NO, but the congregation faces west. If he said a TLM, he would be facing west.

So what, St. Peter’s in Rome faces the same direction, and the TLM was said their for centuries.

When architectural issues prevent the CHurch from being built along the correct East\West access, the priest faces ‘liturgical’ East, that is he faces the same direction as the Congregation.

 

[lak611]

Maybe this is all about property?

My church was completely rebuilt in 1969. The original church building was torn down due to eminent domain (an interstate highway goes through where the original church was located). The parish used the money given by the state from the highway project and rebuilt a new church. The new church was built so that the priest faced east when he said Mass versus populem.