If Universal TLM Indult Comes To Your Parish - How Often Would You Go?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Asperges_Me
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JKirkLVNV said:
And yeah, let’s understand what he’s actually saying: he was able to see through what he regarded as unattractive (the form) to the Truth (the substance). I stand by what I said and my use of this citation.
Click to expand...
He saw the Truth of the Faith. What he saw in the Mass is colored by his bias. So—I still stand by what I said. This is made pretty clear in the link you posted.
 
Someday I would like to attend a NO in the language in which it was propogated: Latin. That way I would not have to deal with the problematic tranlation.

So anyone for the NOL mass?
 
Evan said:
Someday I would like to attend a NO in the language in which it was propogated: Latin. That way I would not have to deal with the problematic tranlation.

So anyone for the NOL mass?
Click to expand...
Pax tecum!

The one I normally attend on Sundays is in both English and Latin. On occasion they have one all in Latin (except for the readings and prayers of the faithful). My uncle was saying the NO in Latin once a month (he likes to say it that way), but not enough people were showing up so he had to stop, unfortunately.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Too bad…Portland is not to far from Seattle. I could go a couple times a year…if I’d only known 😦
 
I would definitely go to see what it was like.

But, I think a reverent NO is just as good from what I get out of it.

As far as the sacrifice of the mass is concerned, it is the same, whatever mass it is.

Peace and God Bless.
 
If the Novus Ordo Masses in my parish stay in the current condition: contemporary music, priest celebrating mass towards the people, hand holding during the our father, immodest dress, etc. I would most definitely go to the Tridentine Mass.

If however the Novus Ordo Mass was similar to that which is celebrated at St. Agnes (MN), St. John Cantius (IL), Assumption Grotto (MI), Holy Rosary (OR), I would go to whatever Mass was most convenient.
 
Walking_Home said:
He saw the Truth of the Faith. What he saw in the Mass is colored by his bias. So—I still stand by what I said. This is made pretty clear in the link you posted.
Click to expand...
And a sense of aesthetic IS a bias. It’s entirely possible to believe in and love our Eucharistic Lord and prefer one rite to another. Neither is objectively better (contrary to subjective opinion offered as gospel truth on these forums). The Cardinal did not go on to laud the form in which the Holy Sacrifice was “cloaked.”
 
I have been truly blessed to have a LNO at my parish. It is a very solemn, beautiful liturgy. We also have NO in the vernacular and it too, is celebrated with such solemn love by our most awesome priests! To have the TLM would not change the love of Jesus that inspires and leads us in every celebration of Mass. I love the TLM, but I love the LNO and NO. Any of these Masses, celebrated with that kind of love exhibited by our priests is one I would not want to miss. I would have to go to all as much as possible!

PS, My Parish is Assumption Grotto in Detroit MI and my pastor Fr. Perrone and the priests of the Canons Regular of the Holy Cross are awesome! Come and visit and see why it is so hard to choose!
 
JKirkLVNV said:
And a sense of aesthetic IS a bias. It’s entirely possible to believe in and love our Eucharistic Lord and prefer one rite to another. Neither is objectively better (contrary to subjective opinion offered as gospel truth on these forums). The Cardinal did not go on to laud the form in which the Holy Sacrifice was “cloaked.”
Click to expand...
Of course a person can love one form over the other—especially when one already carries a “Puritan antipathy toward splendour in religious ritual”. That is a true display of objectivity—good example.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
In your previous paragraph, you’ve shown a overtly “cafeteria” attitutude. Quo Prium couldn’t bind future popes in terms of the discipline that they might or might not impose on the sacraments. It may not have been “outlawed,” but it was definitely derrogated in terms of being the standard Mass of the Church. Any future pope would have to the power and authority to suppress the Tridentine Mass. Priests would then be legally restricted from saying it. They HAD the right to celebrate the Tridientine Mass in perpetuity…right up to the point where they no longer had the right. To deny this is to willfully disregard not only canon law, but dogmatic teaching on the need for obedience to the Supreme Pontiff.
Click to expand...
St. Pio of Pietrelcina and St. Josemaria Escriva never offered the Mass of Paul VI. There were priests who were given permission to say the Mass of St. Pius V exclusively.

Maybe it’s just me, but I read Quo Primum as forbidding the abrogation of the Mass of St. Pius V. Priests have always been able to offer the Mass of St. Pius V privately, even after Paul VI promulgated his Missal.

Can the pope promulgate a new Missal? Absolutely. While I have problems with the prayers and rubrics of the Mass of Paul VI, it is a valid and licit Mass promulgated by a pope. Popes have the authority to change disciplines by virtue of their office.

What I don’t understand is how a priest can offer a Mass in perpetuity up to a point? Perpetual means forever. So, how can a priest can say a Mass in perpetuity if it has an end?

Priests offering the Mass of St. Pius V privately suffices the in perpetuity of Quo Primum. But that’s just my opinion.
 
proud2bcatholic said:
If the Novus Ordo Masses in my parish stay in the current condition: contemporary music, priest celebrating mass towards the people, hand holding during the our father, immodest dress, etc. I would most definitely go to the Tridentine Mass.

If however the Novus Ordo Mass was similar to that which is celebrated at St. Agnes (MN), St. John Cantius (IL), Assumption Grotto (MI), Holy Rosary (OR), I would go to whatever Mass was most convenient.
Click to expand...
What about the Miles Jesu Mass (AZ)? 😉
 
Walking_Home said:
Of course a person can love one form over the other—especially when one already carries a “Puritan antipathy toward splendour in religious ritual”. That is a true display of objectivity—good example.
Click to expand...
And no one who thinks that no right-thinking person could possibly find the Pauline preferable to the Tridentine has explained all the faithful Catholics who grew up with the Tridentine yet prefer the Pauline. Further, splendor is in the eye of the beholder: I happen to think that the insistence that the altar server ever so daintily lift the hem of the celebrant’s chasuble when he elevates either the Most Sacred Body or the Most Precious Blood to be not splendid, but affected and I’m glad that stuff HAS fallen by the wayside in favor of a noble simplicity.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
"Was involved with, “was associated with,” “followed for a time…” take your pick.

Oddly, my reaction to posts in which form is confused with substance and terms like modernism are wildly and inappropriately used is not one of laughter, but rather bemusement that an adult (for example, someone old enough to be a “daddy”) can be so willfully incorrect, so willing to pass on those mistaken “facts” as being Catholic truth, and so smugly superior (esp. when that “superiority” would be inappropriate even if it were founded on innocent ignorance) in how they address their fellow Christians.
Click to expand...
In the future, I’ll try to be more humle like you JK. I’m glad you know how to put things in a way that doesn’t make you sound smug and superior. … got it!👍
 
Swiss_Guard said:
St. Pio of Pietrelcina and St. Josemaria Escriva never offered the Mass of Paul VI. There were priests who were given permission to say the Mass of St. Pius V exclusively. **Yet, had permission not been given, we can probably bet St. Pio and St. Josemaria would have obeyed, and without a lot of whining (since saints of God typically do not whine). St. Pio instructed his sister to submit and obey even though she did not care for the changes. **

Maybe it’s just me, but I read Quo Primum as forbidding the abrogation of the Mass of St. Pius V. Priests have always been able to offer the Mass of St. Pius V privately, even after Paul VI promulgated his Missal. **The pope is the Supreme Legislator of the Church. Canon law is canon law because HE promulgates it. *Quo Primum ***could not bind any future pope from changing the form of the Mass or from supressing it in favor of a new rite. As I said, priests certainly have the right to say the Mass of St. Pius V…right up until the point that the Pope says that they don’t.

Can the pope promulgate a new Missal? Absolutely. While I have problems with the prayers and rubrics of the Mass of Paul VI, it is a valid and licit Mass promulgated by a pope. Popes have the authority to change disciplines by virtue of their office.

What I don’t understand is how a priest can offer a Mass in perpetuity up to a point? Perpetual means forever. So, how can a priest can say a Mass in perpetuity if it has an end? “Popes have the authority to change disciplines by virtue of their office.”** That’s correct and it puts paid to the perpetuity of Quo Primum**. Popes can bind on matters of faith and morals, but not on matters of discipline. Whatever discipline is legitimately promulated by the proper authority of the Pontiff is infallible insofar as it cannot lead the faithful into impiety, but that doesn’t mean it’s immutable.

Priests offering the Mass of St. Pius V privately suffices the in perpetuity of Quo Primum. But that’s just my opinion.
Click to expand...
**If the Holy Father chose to not allow even the private celebration of the Tridentine, he’s within his rights and within his authority, which is absolute and immediate over the entire Church. That’s not an opinion, that’s canon law. We can have all manner of private opinions, what matters is what IS. **
 
Walking_Home said:
Let give Card. Dulles credit here -JKIRKLVN—and understand what he is actually saying. He already carried an ingrained prejudicial bias when he encountered our Mass. He found Truth—and did not let his bias stop him. This throws a wrench into anyone saying ------If the Mass had not changed----I would not have joined the Church.

cardinalrating.com/cardinal_181__article_109.htm

(The Tablet, 5 July 2003)

Filled as I was with a Puritan antipathy toward splendour in religious ritual, I found myself actually repulsed by the elaborate symbolism in which the Holy Sacrifice is clothed.” Accustomed to Presbyterian worship, Dulles says that in the Masses he attended as an undergraduate “there was little external unity to be discerned. The priest, so far from telling the congregation when to sit or stand or kneel, carried out his tasks almost as though he were alone.

The congregation, for their part, were not watching with scrupulous exactitude the movements of the celebrant. Some, on the contrary, were reciting prayers on mysterious strings of beads which Catholics call rosaries. Others were thumbing through pages of prayer-books and missals, which, for all I knew, might have been totally unrelated to the Mass. Not even a hymn was sung to bring unity into this apparently dull and unconnected service.”
Click to expand...
Cardinal Dulles experienced what most converts experience with the Mass of St. Pius V: It is completely contrary to Protestant worship. Lex orandi, lex credendi applies here. Dulles prayed as a Protestant, therefore he believed as a Protestant. A believing Protestant will naturally be repulsed by the Mass of St. Pius V because it expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth.

I suspect JKirk finds it easier to worship at the Mass of Paul VI because he is a convert. It’s much easier for a convert to worship at this Mass because it’s not as big of a transition from their Protestant worship as it is with the Mass of St. Pius V.

My parish offers the Tridentine Mass every Sunday. I can also go to other parishes in the Archdiocese of Chicago and the Diocese of Rockford for Holy Days and daily Mass, although my work schedule doesn’t always allow me to attend the Tridentine Mass daily.

I hope more parishes offer the Tridentine Mass in the event of a universal indult, but this is Chicago. We’re still recovering from 14 years of Cardinal Bernardin.

The Mass as the unbloody sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is clearly expressd in the Tridentine Mass. The prayers and rubrics ensure this expression. The Novus Ordo Mass puts an emphasis on “active participation.” There is very little room for interior contemplation of the mystery happening on the altar. The Tridentine Mass is more contemplative by its very nature.

The Tridentine Mass puts the emphasis where it belongs, on Jesus offering Himself to the Father, in the Holy Spirit, through the priest. The Novus Ordo Mass, with its emphasis on “active participation,” puts that emphasis on the community.

Fr. Hardon said it takes converts longer to convert to Catholicism with their heads than with their hearts. Someone who has already converted in his heart may not have converted in his head. It takes time to completely change your way of thinking.
 
TradyDaddy said:
In the future, I’ll try to be more humle like you JK. I’m glad you know how to put things in a way that doesn’t make you sound smug and superior. … got it!👍
Click to expand...
I have lots I can tell my confessor, but I think a comparison of past posts by both of us would go a long way to demonstrating my point.
 
Getting back to Cardinal Dulles, who is “orthodox” because he associated with Fr. Feeney… another quote from the article JK cited…

"The congregation, for their part, were not watching with scrupulous exactitude the movements of the celebrant. Some, on the contrary, were reciting prayers on mysterious strings of beads which Catholics call rosaries."

So the Holy Rosary is a “mysterious strings of beads”? :hmmm:
Yeah…uh huh…sure… real orthodox…yepper!

Also from the article
"Others were thumbing through pages of prayer-books and missals, which, for all I knew, might have been totally unrelated to the Mass."

For all he knew they might have been following the Mass. At least that’s what I do at the Traditional Latin Mass.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
**If the Holy Father chose to not allow even the private celebration of the Tridentine, he’s within his rights and within his authority, which is absolute and immediate over the entire Church. That’s not an opinion, that’s canon law. We can have all manner of private opinions, what matters is what IS. **
Click to expand...
You didn’t answer my question so I’ll ask it again: What does in perpetuity up to a point mean?

If something is perpetual, it is forever. Saying something is allowed in perpetuity up to a point is like saying our eternal happiness in heaven will come to an end.

Every priest always has the right to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in any rite approved by the Holy See in private. The pope can forbid a rite, but he can’t forbid a priest to say an approved rite in private, unless he suspends his faculties, as is the case with Fr. Gruner.

If Quo Primum isn’t binding on future popes, then neither is Humanae Vitae.
 
TradyDaddy said:
Getting back to Cardinal Dulles, who is “orthodox” because he associated with Fr. Feeney… another quote from the article JK cited…

"The congregation, for their part, were not watching with scrupulous exactitude the movements of the celebrant. Some, on the contrary, were reciting prayers on mysterious strings of beads which Catholics call rosaries."

So the Holy Rosary is a “mysterious strings of beads”? :hmmm:
Yeah…uh huh…sure… real orthodox…yepper!

Also from the article
"Others were thumbing through pages of prayer-books and missals, which, for all I knew, might have been totally unrelated to the Mass."

For all he knew they might have been following the Mass. At least that’s what I do at the Traditional Latin Mass.
Click to expand...
There was a German priest at the Second Vatican Council who was associated with Hans Kung and Karl Rahner. His name? Fr. Joseph Ratzinger.

So if Cardinal Dulles is orthodox, then Pope Benedict XVI is a heretical modernist.

I love the respect Dulles gives the holy rosary. A “string of beads?” Does he realize the number of conversions St. Dominic attributed to the rosary? Does he realize that at both Lourdes and Fatima, approved apparitions by the Holy See, Our Lady told us to say our rosaries daily?

I once served Mass for Cardinal Bernardin. I guess that makes me a heretical modernist too.
 
Swiss_Guard said:
Cardinal Dulles experienced what most converts experience with the Mass of St. Pius V: It is completely contrary to Protestant worship. Lex orandi, lex credendi applies here. Dulles prayed as a Protestant, therefore he believed as a Protestant. A believing Protestant will naturally be repulsed by the Mass of St. Pius V because it expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth. Yet he wrote this as a Cardinal, a prince of the Church, a believing Catholic,not a Protestant. The Pauline Mass expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth.

I suspect JKirk finds it easier to worship at the Mass of Paul VI because he is a convert. It’s much easier for a convert to worship at this Mass because it’s not as big of a transition from their Protestant worship as it is with the Mass of St. Pius V. LOL!!! **Absolute rubbish. I grew up Southern Baptist and I’ve never been to a Catholic Mass that was remotely like a Baptist service. What an incredibly easy way to dismiss someone, “well, they’re a convert, what do you expect?” I find it easier to worship at a Pauline Mass because it’s in a language that I understand and I can hear it. I’ve never dumped on the actual words of the TLM and I’m not about to do so, because they’re beautiful. **

I hope more parishes offer the Tridentine Mass in the event of a universal indult, but this is Chicago. We’re still recovering from 14 years of Cardinal Bernardin. Shoot, you’re still recovering from Cardinal CODY!

The Mass as the unbloody sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is clearly expressd in the Tridentine Mass. The prayers and rubrics ensure this expression. The Novus Ordo Mass puts an emphasis on “active participation.” There is very little room for interior contemplation of the mystery happening on the altar. The Tridentine Mass is more contemplative by its very nature.** A Novus Ordo Mass reverently celebrated achieves precisely the same effect. You’ve elevated subjective preference to an aesthetic absolute. It ain’t. **

The Tridentine Mass puts the emphasis where it belongs, on Jesus offering Himself to the Father, in the Holy Spirit, through the priest. The Novus Ordo Mass, with its emphasis on “active participation,” puts that emphasis on the community. The Pauline Mass does the same. “Active participation” for me means making the responses. I’m not a hand-holder nor a hugger.

Fr. Hardon said it takes converts longer to convert to Catholicism with their heads than with their hearts. Someone who has already converted in his heart may not have converted in his head. It takes time to completely change your way of thinking.
Click to expand...
**And that, of course, is hardly smug. You’re taking my preference for the Pauline Mass on my part and making a leap that I’m not fully converted? You’ve completely identified the fullness of Catholic Truth in such a way that if anyone doesn’t agree with you regarding the TLM, well, they must not be fully Catholic. Garbage. You’ve elevated an outward form to the point of near idolotry, which is sad considering that the outward form is a vehicle that is supposed to lead to Christ, not the form itself. **

**You know what would probably do a lot toward promoting the Tridentine Rite? If some of her devotees took a vow of silence. In terms of getting people in, they’re their own worst enemies. Everytime I think I should be more broad-minded, I run into some sanctimonious “traditionalist” and think,“Ugh, no thanks.” **
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top