Is having the TLM enough? What about other sacraments?

[ConstantineTG]

It does validate your point.

However, if all I attend is the EF and follow the 1962 missal and say all the old prayers and try to follow some of the pre-Vatican rules (this is not to say there is anything wrong with not doing that), then of course it would be nice to have my sacraments in the old way.

And it would be nice to be taught by someone with a similar outlook.

I’m always of the opinion that the “old rite” will be better received by the people today if its made available in the vernacular. That is why I said that the Sacramental Rites should be of the “old rite” but with the vernacular as option. There’ll be no resistance from both groups. Consider yourself “traditional”, then have it in Latin. I don’t think any of the “OF crowd” today will object to the “old rite” if delivered in the vernacular.

 

[rben20]

The problem is in the Byzantine Rite, there is only one way to do the Sacraments. There are two Liturgies which we use for all, its either St. John’s or St. Basil’s Liturgy on a specific day. There is no St. John’s only group and a St. Basil’s only group. Everyone gets a taste of both, assuming they go to church on the 10 days St. Basil’s is used. Now you go to other rites, its the same thing.

You are right though, more and more they are becoming, at least on the surface, like two different rites. Because a group who prefers one never gets exposed to the other. Either make the boundaries more prominent that there is a logical division of traditions, or mingle both for all.

I agree Constantine. I really admire our Eastern brothers. The Roman Church has changed and KEEPS changing.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I agree Constantine. I really admire our Eastern brothers. The Roman Church has changed and KEEPS changing.

Change isn’t necessarily bad. In the Byzantine Rite there are many little traditions of each particular Church. The Ukrainians do something that the Melkites dont, and vice versa. But the lines are clear, we’re Ukrainians, they’re Melkites. In the Latin Rite, whether you’re OF-only or EF-only, you’re all Latin Rite. So its fuzzy. And it creates problems like this thread, where one desires something that is not readily available to them in a Latin Rite parish. If I go to a Ukrainian parish, I get the Ukrainian rite. If I go to a Chaldean parish, I get the Chaldean rite. But if I go to a Latin parish, I can get one or the other? I’m just pointing that out, its a bit odd.

 

[prettiefly]

People need to stop pitting the OF against the EF just because someone asks something about the TLM. The poster is simply implying they would like all the sacraments done according to the old rite, not just the Mass. Wouldn’t that be ideal?

Thank you for that comment, being new here I was beginning to wonder about some of the answers people were getting to honest questions. And I have to say, as someone who has had the blessing of the Sacraments done according to the old rite, there is a world of difference - the op’s question is a very valid one.
…
For stories of prayers answered through the intersession of St. Anthony, visit:
saintanthonylostandfound.blogspot.com/

 

[Hesychios]

And it would be nice to be taught by someone with a similar outlook.

It is strange that there can be more than one outlook.

 

[rben20]

Thank you for that comment, being new here I was beginning to wonder about some of the answers people were getting to honest questions. And I have to say, as someone who has had the blessing of the Sacraments done according to the old rite, there is a world of difference - the op’s question is a very valid one.
…
For stories of prayers answered through the intersession of St. Anthony, visit:
saintanthonylostandfound.blogspot.com/

I find lots of things on this forum strange but probably nothing compares to some people’s conclusions or judgments when it comes to those who simply have an interest, love, or preference for the TLM. Almost like hawks on mice!

 

[rben20]

ConstantineTG;8112461....:

If I go to a Ukrainian parish, I get the Ukrainian rite. If I go to a Chaldean parish, I get the Chaldean rite. But if I go to a Latin parish, I can get one or the other? I’m just pointing that out, its a bit odd.

Yes, if you go to a Roman Catholic Church you get…it depends on the social views of the priest, whether it’s a catholic community center or parish, 70s folk music or Gregorian Chant, tabernacles on the side or in the middle, a spanish/english/korean/polish or latin Mass etc. O yea and either a OF or EF Mass. It gets pretty complicated. I miss the days when it wasn’t.

 

[Zacdecat]

Its not the language (Latin) that I’m referring to, although it would be nice if it was all in Latin. I’m referring to the changes that were made in the administration of the other sacraments (and yes, changes were made other than just the language).

I suppose if a person wanted to be fully Traditional, they could only be involved with the FSSP or SSPX chapels?

This has been my experience…I see you are relatively new to Catholicism (am I right, or have I been confused?) If so please be aware this is an area which someone like myself basically paints a target on my chest for those who are bitterly antagonistic to the pre Vatican church. I attend Mass, go to weekly confession and receive spiritual direction fro my confessor and attend funerals,baptism and marriages, first communion and confirmation of those who attend the church.

 

[Batfink]

I don’t understand why you can’t get these sacraments in the Old Rite? I’m not commenting on whether or not it is advisable to demand them, but if you want them they’re surely there, aren’t they?

My parish habitually celebrates one Mass per weekend in the EF and everything else in the OF, but the priest who offers EF would happily use it for other sacraments if requested. We very occasionally get EF funerals, weddings or confirmations where the person/people involved have requested it. I can see why a parish wouldn’t want to offer confirmation in two forms for separate groups of people (I’ve only seen it done when an individual is being received into the Church, not for standard teenage confirmations), but surely any parish which offers EF Masses would be happy to accommodate EF weddings and funerals. Has your priest actually refused this or do you just think it wouldn’t go down well?

The bit I don’t agree with is receving instruction from a priest with a ‘similar outlook’. I don’t get why you’d want that at all, doesn’t it negate the universality of Catholicism?

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t understand why you can’t get these sacraments in the Old Rite? I’m not commenting on whether or not it is advisable to demand them, but if you want them they’re surely there, aren’t they?

My parish habitually celebrates one Mass per weekend in the EF and everything else in the OF, but the priest who offers EF would happily use it for other sacraments if requested. We very occasionally get EF funerals, weddings or confirmations where the person/people involved have requested it. I can see why a parish wouldn’t want to offer confirmation in two forms for separate groups of people (I’ve only seen it done when an individual is being received into the Church, not for standard teenage confirmations), but surely any parish which offers EF Masses would be happy to accommodate EF weddings and funerals. Has your priest actually refused this or do you just think it wouldn’t go down well?

The bit I don’t agree with is receiving instruction from a priest with a ‘similar outlook’. I don’t get why you’d want that at all, doesn’t it negate the universality of Catholicism?

Well let me give you a couple of examples. I am not saying that is what the priest believes, but areas where I wouldn’t feel that comfortable.

Now I’m not sure if this kind of stuff is covered by RCIA, but let’s say the priest says,

• Altar girls are fine. I wish people would stop talking about them. All I could do at that point is nod, because although I know they are allowed, it’s not my spirituality.
• Or he might say, I know the EF wants the readings first in Latin, but when I do the EF, I read them in English because people should understand the readings.

I guess I am referring to disciplines. It would be good to learn from someone with a traditional viewpoint of disciplines if I had a choice.

 

[Batfink]

Well let me give you a couple of examples. I am not saying that is what the priest believes, but areas where I wouldn’t feel that comfortable.

Now I’m not sure if this kind of stuff is covered by RCIA, but let’s say the priest says,

• Altar girls are fine. I wish people would stop talking about them. All I could do at that point is nod, because although I know they are allowed, it’s not my spirituality.
• Or he might say, I know the EF wants the readings first in Latin, but when I do the EF, I read them in English because people should understand the readings.

I guess I am referring to disciplines. It would be good to learn from someone with a traditional viewpoint of disciplines if I had a choice.

But this is where I would think it would be better to have a different viewpoint, so a new Catholic got to experience true, faithful Catholic teaching which expanded their horizons. I’m not directing this personally at you, but a lot of new Catholics come with a fixed idea of what Catholicism is and it’s only one particular spirituality within the Church. I teach RCIA with my parish priest, who offers Mass in both forms. When someone brings up altar girls (we wouldn’t specifically cover it as a topic, but it might come up in conversation), he would talk about why they’re allowed and why he believes it to be a good idea, he would also encourage the person to discuss why they don’t feel comfortable with it. Then, in praxis, he uses altar girls in the OF but not in the EF, so he is faithful to the rules.

If he says your other example, then he’s going against the rubrics and in that case you have the right to bring him up on it. I agree that you don’t want to be taught by a priest who openly says things like “I know the Church says x, but I think y is better for my congregation, whom I understand so much better than Rome ever could.” My line was more aimed at priests who are faithful, just don’t necessarily agree with you on points of legitimate dissention.

As an example, maybe a less traditional priest doesn’t have a particular devotion to the Rosary but you do. He could still teach you about Marian devotion, how the Rosary is a powerful force in many people’s prayer lives, the practicalities of praying it etc without being especially attuned to it himself, this is a good priest. On the other hand, there may be a priest who disparages the Rosary, says to the RCIA class that it’s a load of old stifling tradition not relevant to educated people and extempore prayer is the way forward. You may meet a priest like this (I can’t say I have recently, but he’ll probably exist somewhere); he would not be a good one to go to for religious instruction.

My point is that there are some things which are mandated to believe, do etc. and any priest who offers both forms of the Mass should be following them for both forms. Outside of that, the Church is made up of a huge variety of legitimate differences and I think it’s healthy to engage with people who challenge us to widen our thinking.

 

[Zhenia]

This has been my experience…I see you are relatively new to Catholicism (am I right, or have I been confused?) If so please be aware this is an area which someone like myself basically paints a target on my chest for those who are bitterly antagonistic to the pre Vatican church. I attend Mass, go to weekly confession and receive spiritual direction fro my confessor and attend funerals,baptism and marriages, first communion and confirmation of those who attend the church.

I first became Catholic in the mid 1970s via the Traditional RC movement in existence at the time (a group that preceded the SSPX, believe it or not!)

BTW I keep seeing ppl mention “RCIA”, what does that stand for?

 

[GloriousOrder]

I’m always of the opinion that the “old rite” will be better received by the people today if its made available in the vernacular. That is why I said that the Sacramental Rites should be of the “old rite” but with the vernacular as option. There’ll be no resistance from both groups. Consider yourself “traditional”, then have it in Latin. I don’t think any of the “OF crowd” today will object to the “old rite” if delivered in the vernacular.

This Monday past, I was speaking with a Greek Orthodox seminarian on the way to the Diaconate. He was quite adamant that those who want the Divine Liturgy in Greek should have it in Greek, those who want it in Church Slavonic should have it in Church Slavonic, and those who want it in vernacular should have it in vernacular. As a priest, he said he really wants to celebrate the Liturgy in both modes, depending on the community of his assignment. Nothing is more important, to him, than bringing Christ to all and leading all to Christ; if vernacular is the best way, then fiat, and if the official language is the best way, then fiat.

I really like your post, Constantine! I’ve always wondered: why not just translate the very beautiful, clear, strong, undiluted sacramental prayers and actions of the E.F. into a sort of old-fashioned English? Imagine the E.F. sacraments performed with all the pomp and appearance traditionalists want, but optionally in English or Latin depending on the person. The New Translation of the Missal would be a good precedent, and it would allow us one, common Form in either language, the same way Greeks might have their Liturgy in either language.

I first became Catholic in the mid 1970s via the Traditional RC movement in existence at the time (a group that preceded the SSPX, believe it or not!)

BTW I keep seeing ppl mention “RCIA”, what does that stand for?

R.C.I.A. stands for “Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults”. It’s the watered-down, communal (as opposed to 1-on-1, priest-with-convert) way of converting people to the faith. I had to go through with it to enter, and I’m not sure about a lot of things in the Church because of its lackluster handling. You’d think the Cathedral of the Archdiocese would bother to put more into it, but R.C.I.A. was handled deplorably. At least a priest was with us, and not some 20-something “catechist” fresh out of Sociology 101!

 

[ConstantineTG]

Yes, if you go to a Roman Catholic Church you get…it depends on the social views of the priest, whether it’s a catholic community center or parish, 70s folk music or Gregorian Chant, tabernacles on the side or in the middle, a spanish/english/korean/polish or latin Mass etc. O yea and either a OF or EF Mass. It gets pretty complicated. I miss the days when it wasn’t.

Well, I’m not totally against new music as long as its theologically sound. Its part of how we keep the faith and the liturgy relevant to today’s context. I just think we let too much Protestant-themed music into the Mass. For example in the Philippines where its a Roman Catholic majority, we have contemporary music composed with a guitar (since we’re Spanish-influenced, its our main instrument of choice for anything) thats theologically sound and Mass worthy. But even that is slowly being replaced by more Protestant-hymns as more and more of the composers today are “Born Again” Christians.

As for tabernacles, I never really had an issue where the tabernacle was. In the Ukrainian Church, the tabernacle is on the altar but its normally empty. The properties of leavened bread make it expire a lot sooner than unleavened bread. So its not customary to keep the Eucharist beyond the Divine Liturgy. So even if the tabernacle is front and center, there’s nothing in there. In the Latin Church where Eucharistic adoration is common, it makes sense to have the tabernacle off to a side chapel where people can come to pray by the tabernacle at any other time of the day outside Mass even when the Blessed Sacrament is not exposed. I’ve seen parishes use this effectively.

This Monday past, I was speaking with a Greek Orthodox seminarian on the way to the Diaconate. He was quite adamant that those who want the Divine Liturgy in Greek should have it in Greek, those who want it in Church Slavonic should have it in Church Slavonic, and those who want it in vernacular should have it in vernacular. As a priest, he said he really wants to celebrate the Liturgy in both modes, depending on the community of his assignment. Nothing is more important, to him, than bringing Christ to all and leading all to Christ; if vernacular is the best way, then fiat, and if the official language is the best way, then fiat.

I really like your post, Constantine! I’ve always wondered: why not just translate the very beautiful, clear, strong, undiluted sacramental prayers and actions of the E.F. into a sort of old-fashioned English? Imagine the E.F. sacraments performed with all the pomp and appearance traditionalists want, but optionally in English or Latin depending on the person. The New Translation of the Missal would be a good precedent, and it would allow us one, common Form in either language, the same way Greeks might have their Liturgy in either language.

Although some people here are of the opinion that they’d rather have an all-Latin OF then a vernacular Tridentine Mass. But I think with regards to the Sacramental Rites, I think it would work in the vernacular. I could be wrong, all this is theoretical. I can understand different expressions of the Liturgy, some Eastern Rites even use 3 or 4 at different times of the year. But the Sacraments should be expressed the same way in the tradition of the particular Church.

 

[ProVobis]

I’ve always wondered: why not just translate the very beautiful, clear, strong, undiluted sacramental prayers and actions of the E.F. into a sort of old-fashioned English?

Because they’ve been only trying to do that for well over 400 years. Still no agreement on the right translation and after studying some Latin I even dislike the one in my handmissal. I tend to get overcritical of English translations and now find them distracting.

But why not just go to an English OF? They should have more old-fashioned English there soon. I can’t see them going through the same translation process and many different vernaculars with the TLM. Personally I wouldn’t drive over 10 minutes for anything in English when I can walk to one just as easily. The Mass is the Mass.

 

[Zhenia]

This Monday past, I was speaking with a Greek Orthodox seminarian on the way to the Diaconate. He was quite adamant that those who want the Divine Liturgy in Greek should have it in Greek, those who want it in Church Slavonic should have it in Church Slavonic, and those who want it in vernacular should have it in vernacular. As a priest, he said he really wants to celebrate the Liturgy in both modes, depending on the community of his assignment. Nothing is more important, to him, than bringing Christ to all and leading all to Christ; if vernacular is the best way, then fiat, and if the official language is the best way, then fiat.

I really like your post, Constantine! I’ve always wondered: why not just translate the very beautiful, clear, strong, undiluted sacramental prayers and actions of the E.F. into a sort of old-fashioned English? Imagine the E.F. sacraments performed with all the pomp and appearance traditionalists want, but optionally in English or Latin depending on the person. The New Translation of the Missal would be a good precedent, and it would allow us one, common Form in either language, the same way Greeks might have their Liturgy in either language.

R.C.I.A. stands for “Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults”. It’s the watered-down, communal (as opposed to 1-on-1, priest-with-convert) way of converting people to the faith. I had to go through with it to enter, and I’m not sure about a lot of things in the Church because of its lackluster handling. You’d think the Cathedral of the Archdiocese would bother to put more into it, but R.C.I.A. was handled deplorably. At least a priest was with us, and not some 20-something “catechist” fresh out of Sociology 101!

Oh, OK, I didn’t know; back in the 70s when I became a Catholic, I was fortunate in that I had a one on one with a priest (who was very traditional). I left that parish shortly thereafter for the Traditional Mass.

If you think you have gaps in what you know, the best way to fix that is to get a copy of the Baltimore Catechism; there are several of them, different levels…TAN Publishers would have them all.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The best part here is we’re getting the Anglican Use as a third usage of the Roman Rite.

I think at some point the Roman Church needs to adopt the Byzantine model and just have three sui juris Churches under the Latin Rite and even under a single Patriarchate under the Pope. Have a “Trent Church”, “Vatican Church” and “England Church” under the Latin Rite.

 

[ProVobis]

The best part here is we’re getting the Anglican Use as a third usage of the Roman Rite.

I think at some point the Roman Church needs to adopt the Byzantine model and just have three sui juris Churches under the Latin Rite and even under a single Patriarchate under the Pope. Have a “Trent Church”, “Vatican Church” and “England Church” under the Latin Rite.

Sounds as if you’re rejecting both the OF and the EF, at least in principle. Not to mention wishing to divide the Latin Rite even further.

 

[TrueLight]

Sounds as if you’re rejecting both the OF and the EF, at least in principle. Not to mention wishing to divide the Latin Rite even further.

Unless he means the Trent Church is the EF, the Vatican Church is the OF and the English church is the Anglican Use.

But Patriarchates?

 

[TrueLight]

The best part here is we’re getting the Anglican Use as a third usage of the Roman Rite.

I think at some point the Roman Church needs to adopt the Byzantine model and just have three sui juris Churches under the Latin Rite and even under a single Patriarchate under the Pope. Have a “Trent Church”, “Vatican Church” and “England Church” under the Latin Rite.

The Anglican Use is awesome! Plus they sing hymns!