My Statement

[cecilia97]

You are absolutely correct my friend. There is NO reason why HMC cannot support two rites. I am a member of a cathedral choir. We routinely sing chant and Latin motets. The parish understands these. We have a priest who was ordained before Vatican II and is perfectly capable of celebrating a sung Solemn High Mass. We have men who are perfectly capable of assisting at a Solemn High Mass (myself included).

So what is the problem? Our bishop who merely “acknowledged” the MP. Followed by the Chancellor of the diocese who published an op-ed in the diocesan newspaper which said “no one wants the MP”. As a human resources professional, this is called the “chilling effect”.

What harm would there be in a once a month Solemn High Mass with choir in my cathedral parish? Should I forget my ancestors in Ireland, Scotland, and England who suffered for their faith…for being Catholic? Things are OK now but they weren’t way back when. Do we forget the sacrifices our ancestors made?

I’m curious, and please forgive me if you’ve discussed this in another thread, but has your cathedral parish gotten a group together to petition the diocese? To show there is indeed and stable group of the faithful asking for the EF there?

On the one hand I hope so, on the other I hope not…if your bishop’s response was to such a petition!

There are three or four parishes in our diocese who have asked the Cardinal for permission to offer the EF. I think we’re getting a positive response, but the parishes have also been asked to start a list of names of people who would support the EF at those parishes. I’m on the list at mine.

Your bishop is clearly wrong that there’s no interest…because here you are! Does he know about you?

 

[lak611]

Then there’s a lot of people where I attend the Latin Mass.

I LOVE IT! :extrahappy:

Well, not total silence. There IS the beautiful choir at High Mass. And …

I LOVE IT! :extrahappy:

The readings are given in both Latin and English where I attend the Latin Mass.

Yeah, it would be nice if there were more convenient parking available. It would also be nice to see the Latin Mass become more widespread, so that we wouldn’t be keeping it to ourselves, but rather sharing it with as many people possible. In any case, the good news is that the Latin Mass IS spreading to more and more locations, as you can see by visiting the following website:

web2.airmail.net/carlsch/MaterDei/churches.htm

Stay tuned … this website updates every several weeks or so to give you the most current NEW LOCATIONS for where the Latin Mass is offered.


~~ the phoenix

Unfortunately, there are no plans for additional locations in Cleveland. I sent an e-mail to the Diocese of Cleveland. They responded with the schedule at Immaculate Conception and the parish in Akron. Both of those offered the TLM when it was by indult. Since the MP, there have been no additional Masses, and the e-mail I received said none were forthcoming.

 

[the_phoenix]

I am happy to see additional locations anywhere and rejoice whenever I see new locations listed on the Mater Dei website, whether they are in Ohio or not. The more souls who are given the opportunity to attend a Latin Mass, the better. And who knows, I may wind up taking vacation in some city where one of the new TLMs is offered.



~~ the phoenix

 

[marymonde]

, it’s a lie to call it Protestant,

Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass.” (Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, The Problems with the New Mass, p. 24.)

“to strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is, for the Protestants.” (Fr. Annibale Bugnini~L’Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965).

Protestant Minister Thurian (co-consulter for the ‘New Mass’ project) said that a fruit of the New mass “will perhaps be that the non-Catholic communities will be ale to celebrate the Lord’s Supper using the same prayers as the Catholic Church.” (La Croix 4/30/69)

Protestants themselves have said “the new Catholic Eucharistic prayers have abandoned the false (sic) perspective of sacrifice offered to God.” (La Croix 12/10/69)

the New Mass was made in accordance with the Protestant definition of the Mass: “The Lord’s Supper or Mass is a sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God which gathers together under the presidence of the priest to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.” (Par. 7 Intro. to the New Missal, defining the New Mass, 4/6/69)

“It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.” – Max Thurian, Protestant theologian, on the New Mass, 1969

“We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace. . . .” – Dom Prosper Gueranger, Liturgical Institutions, 1840

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

I fail to see how the unusuallness of my situation is relevant to the discussion. (And I have pointed out that it wasn’t unique; I know a good number of people my own age (& younger) from my own parish and from other parishes who had similar experiences.)

I also fail to see why the Church cannot support more than one form of the Roman Rite. It has supported multiple Eastern Rites for at least a thousand years.

It is possible within the same Faith for there to be different cultures and optics all of which are valuable. Witness the co-existence of religious orders; each has its own culture and practices, but none feels it necessary to insist that they have the one true way of doing things.

I still would consider the experience of you and your friends rather unusual (at least in my neck of the woods). I consider it relevant because if you had experienced the NO the way it is usually celebrated (along with the homilies which teach next to nothing about Catholicism) and had parents who weren’t trying to hand on the Faith (and were perhaps just assuming the local church or Catholic school was doing it), your situation may have turned out much differently (as it has, unfortunately, for many others). But thank God you didn’t have to go through that growing up.

Of course the Church can, and has, supported multiple rites. Even Pope St. Pius V, when he codified the TLM, allowed any rite which was older than 200 years to continue. And yes each Order has its own culture, spirituality, and practices where there is a great variety. I would liken it to how there are different church architectural styles such as Gothic, Baroque, neo-Classical, etc. All are different and yet all stay within the framework that identifies them as Catholic churches and allows them to be “catechisms in stone”. However, when a church like the Los Angeles Cathedral comes along, then a concern is raised because it seems (and Catholic architects have said this) that it is not staying within the parameters of traditional Catholic architectural principles which are important because they help instruct the faithful and lift their hearts and minds to God.

I would apply the same principle to the NO. Just because a rite has been approved by the Church, and is valid, (particularly one concocted in a committee in the 1960’s), does not mean that it is going to convey the faith as strongly as rites which have been organically developed for hundreds of years (like the TLM, or the Eastern rites).

 

[I_Believe]

I still would consider the experience of you and your friends rather unusual (at least in my neck of the woods). I consider it relevant because if you had experienced the NO the way it is usually celebrated (along with the homilies which teach next to nothing about Catholicism) and had parents who weren’t trying to hand on the Faith (and were perhaps just assuming the local church or Catholic school was doing it), your situation may have turned out much differently (as it has, unfortunately, for many others). But thank God you didn’t have to go through that growing up.

Of course the Church can, and has, supported multiple rites. Even Pope St. Pius V, when he codified the TLM, allowed any rite which was older than 200 years to continue. And yes each Order has its own culture, spirituality, and practices where there is a great variety. I would liken it to how there are different church architectural styles such as Gothic, Baroque, neo-Classical, etc. All are different and yet all stay within the framework that identifies them as Catholic churches and allows them to be “catechisms in stone”. However, when a church like the Los Angeles Cathedral comes along, then a concern is raised because it seems (and Catholic architects have said this) that it is not staying within the parameters of traditional Catholic architectural principles which are important because they help instruct the faithful and lift their hearts and minds to God.

I would apply the same principle to the NO. Just because a rite has been approved by the Church, and is valid, (particularly one concocted in a committee in the 1960’s), does not mean that it is going to convey the faith as strongly as rites which have been organically developed for hundreds of years (like the TLM, or the Eastern rites).

Not only convey the faith but build it.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I’m curious, and please forgive me if you’ve discussed this in another thread, but has your cathedral parish gotten a group together to petition the diocese? To show there is indeed and stable group of the faithful asking for the EF there?

On the one hand I hope so, on the other I hope not…if your bishop’s response was to such a petition!

There are three or four parishes in our diocese who have asked the Cardinal for permission to offer the EF. I think we’re getting a positive response, but the parishes have also been asked to start a list of names of people who would support the EF at those parishes. I’m on the list at mine.

Your bishop is clearly wrong that there’s no interest…because here you are! Does he know about you?

Father has asked several choir members if they would be willing to sing in a schola. To which I said yes and said that I would also be willing to serve as well. He had found someone to lead the schola but that person got a job elsewhere. Fr. said to “hang in there” and give him time. The parish next to us has an indult Low Mass but no choir. We can assemble a choir/schola quickly since we have been singing chant and motets for over 15 years. It would be nice to have a Solemn High Mass once a month.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass.” (Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, The Problems with the New Mass, p. 24.)

“to strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is, for the Protestants.” (Fr. Annibale Bugnini~L’Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965).

Protestant Minister Thurian (co-consulter for the ‘New Mass’ project) said that a fruit of the New mass “will perhaps be that the non-Catholic communities will be ale to celebrate the Lord’s Supper using the same prayers as the Catholic Church.” (La Croix 4/30/69)

Protestants themselves have said “the new Catholic Eucharistic prayers have abandoned the false (sic) perspective of sacrifice offered to God.” (La Croix 12/10/69)

the New Mass was made in accordance with the Protestant definition of the Mass: “The Lord’s Supper or Mass is a sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God which gathers together under the presidence of the priest to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.” (Par. 7 Intro. to the New Missal, defining the New Mass, 4/6/69)

“It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.” – Max Thurian, Protestant theologian, on the New Mass, 1969

“We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace. . . .” – Dom Prosper Gueranger, Liturgical Institutions, 1840

I was speaking very specifically of the Sign of Peace as it is unfortunately offered in many parishes. I have no idea whether or not you were raised Protestant, but I was. I was raised Baptist and I’ve attended services in most of the main communities in the Anabaptist tradition (Church of Christ, Assembly of God, etc), the Calvinist tradition (Presbyterian), and the Anglican tradition (Episcopal, Methodist, etc. I spent five years as an Episcopalian). I can’t speak for the Lutherans, as I’ve never set foot in one of their churches. I can tell you that the Sign of Peace NEVER featured in any of the worship services that I attended growing up, until I became an Episcopalian. What was on offer there as the Sign of Peace (quiet and dignified) was an entirely different species than was on offer in the Catholic Church. I’ve attended Catholic Mass where I was urged, by the priest, from the Altar, to “ask the Jones about that new baby,” a notion that would have filled the Episcopal ministers I knew with horror. This has probably changed due to the extreme casualness that has invaded our society as a whole, but I can’t say first hand, as I haven’t set foot in an Anglican service since I became a Catholic nearly twenty years ago. The point is, when I was growing up, in the post Vatican II era, as a Protestant child, teenager and young adult, the Sign of Peace was not practiced by the majority of Protestants and if you asked them what it was, they would have been puzzled (we greeted each other BEFORE worship began, indeed, we did not keep silent in assembly before the service began, we visited with those around us). It’s the same with the reception of Holy Communion while standing. Many “traditionalists” charge that standing for reception is a Protestant innovation. When I was growing up, no Protestants of any of the traditions I mentioned received the elements of the Lord’s Supper standing, not a single one. Those in the Anabaptist and Calvinist tradition received SITTING IN THE PEWS and they still do, the elements being passed to them in trays. The Anglicans and Methodists actually received KNEELING AT A COMMUNION RAIL. The only times I received Holy Commuinon standing were at the two diocesan conventions I attended, where numbers and the fact that one was held in a large Baptist church without kneelers OR a rail prohibited it being offered in any other way. Any assertion at that time by a liberal Catholic to a Protestant of “but we receive Holy Communion like YOU do, standing!” would have been met with more perplexity. In my experience, at least as an Episcopalian, the Protestant liturgy (as if there were only one and evangelical/fundamentalists would have recoiled at the idea of a liturgy anyway) has FOLLOWED the Catholic church into “Spirit of Vatican II” rather than lead the way. That’s why when some “traditionalists” go off on “this is Protestant” or “that’s Protestant,” I take it with a large grain of salt. If the liturgical reformers of the 60’s were trying to make the Mass more Protestant, then they didn’t understand Protestant worship as it was then practiced. I

 

[CradleCath]

Many of your posts seem antagonistic towards anything not modern, just curious if your theology went that way. Does your refusal to answer mean you don’t hold the teachings of the Church? (Note: I say “teachings” and not “disciplines”)

You must realize that there are some here just for entertainment purposes. They like to play games, twist & turn & bait. Trying to make ANY KIND of sense of their posts is often fruitless. However, they will report anyone who comes to close to this fact.

BTW. these types usually ask questions, but seldom answer them.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I am a product of a mixed marriage. My father was Protestant. The very first protestant service I attended was a memorial service for my grandmother who died in 67. We had to get permission from our priest to attend. It was an independant evangelical German church which has since joined, I believe, the Church of Christ. With the exception of the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the service would be recognizable to all today.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I am a product of a mixed marriage. My father was Protestant. The very first protestant service I attended was a memorial service for my grandmother who died in 67. We had to get permission from our priest to attend. It was an independant evangelical German church which has since joined, I believe, the Church of Christ. With the exception of the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the service would be recognizable to all today.

That’s because they didn’t ditch absolutely everything when they departed from Holy Mother Church. They draw on our traditions. The Episcopal services, reformed over time, still have elements in common with the old Latin Mass. Why? Same antecedents.

 

[brotherhrolf]

So true brother James so true. One of our choir members married an Episcopalian and we sang for his wedding. There were some word differences (glaring word differences for which we were not prepared) but other than that…

 

[JKirkLVNV]

So true brother James so true. One of our choir members married an Episcopalian and we sang for his wedding. There were some word differences (glaring word differences for which we were not prepared) but other than that…

Examine the in’s and out’s of the history of the Anglican service for an explanation of that.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass.” (Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, The Problems with the New Mass, p. 24.)

I was speaking very specifically of the Sign of Peace as it is unfortunately offered in many parishes. I have no idea whether or not you were raised Protestant, but I was. I was raised Baptist and I’ve attended services in most of the main communities in the Anabaptist tradition (Church of Christ, Assembly of God, etc), the Calvinist tradition (Presbyterian), and the Anglican tradition (Episcopal, Methodist, etc. I spent five years as an Episcopalian). I can’t speak for the Lutherans, as I’ve never set foot in one of their churches. I can tell you that the Sign of Peace NEVER featured in any of the worship services that I attended growing up, until I became an Episcopalian. What was on offer there as the Sign of Peace (quiet and dignified) was an entirely different species than was on offer in the Catholic Church. I’ve attended Catholic Mass where I was urged, by the priest, from the Altar, to “ask the Jones about that new baby,” a notion that would have filled the Episcopal ministers I knew with horror. This has probably changed due to the extreme casualness that has invaded our society as a whole, but I can’t say first hand, as I haven’t set foot in an Anglican service since I became a Catholic nearly twenty years ago. The point is, when I was growing up, in the post Vatican II era, as a Protestant child, teenager and young adult, the Sign of Peace was not practiced by the majority of Protestants and if you asked them what it was, they would have been puzzled (we greeted each other BEFORE worship began, indeed, we did not keep silent in assembly before the service began, we visited with those around us). It’s the same with the reception of Holy Communion while standing. Many “traditionalists” charge that standing for reception is a Protestant innovation. When I was growing up, no Protestants of any of the traditions I mentioned received the elements of the Lord’s Supper standing, not a single one. Those in the Anabaptist and Calvinist tradition received SITTING IN THE PEWS and they still do, the elements being passed to them in trays. The Anglicans and Methodists actually received KNEELING AT A COMMUNION RAIL. The only times I received Holy Commuinon standing were at the two diocesan conventions I attended, where numbers and the fact that one was held in a large Baptist church without kneelers OR a rail prohibited it being offered in any other way. Any assertion at that time by a liberal Catholic to a Protestant of “but we receive Holy Communion like YOU do, standing!” would have been met with more perplexity. In my experience, at least as an Episcopalian, the Protestant liturgy (as if there were only one and evangelical/fundamentalists would have recoiled at the idea of a liturgy anyway) has FOLLOWED the Catholic church into “Spirit of Vatican II” rather than lead the way. That’s why when some “traditionalists” go off on “this is Protestant” or “that’s Protestant,” I take it with a large grain of salt. If the liturgical reformers of the 60’s were trying to make the Mass more Protestant, then they didn’t understand Protestant worship as it was then practiced. I

I think the quote from Jean Guitton refers specifically to the altering of the prayers of the Mass by Archbishop Bugnini’s committee and approved by Pope Paul VI. I think standing for Holy Communion just came in as a natural consequence of tearing out the altar rails

I used to go to a large Foursquare church when I was a Protestant and I do remember being told to “greet your neighbor” in the middle of every service. I guess that’s the closest thing I had experienced to the Sign of Peace prior to becoming Catholic.

 

[marymonde]

I was speaking very specifically of the Sign of Peace as it is unfortunately offered in many parishes. I have no idea whether or not you were raised Protestant, but I was… The Anglicans and Methodists actually received KNEELING AT A COMMUNION RAIL

Thank you for clarifying. I didn’t get that initially from the original post.

I was raised a Catholic, but left the Church for a Church of Christ, Baptist, and a Non-denominational assembly. The Church of Christ liturgy was “close” to a Novus Ordo mass, but to be quite honest it’s been so long ago, I couldn’t tell you if there was any hand shaking or not. Baptist…I recall just fire and brimstone sermons. Non-denominational, there was hand shaking, BUT, it really didn’t possess any type of “liturgy”. It was all the preacher and a good feeling type of service, and spontaneous various emotions would break out, including shaking hands. My aunt and uncle, were in the Mo Lutheran Synod. Strangely it was very similar to the Novus Ordo mass, BUT, the minister faced the table and the congregation received “communion” at the communion rail. Again, I don’t recall any hand shaking.

 

[AJV]

Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass.” (Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, The Problems with the New Mass, p. 24.)

It would be really interesting to know WHAT Calvinist service he speaks of. A lot don’t really resemble.

“to strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is, for the Protestants.” (Fr. Annibale Bugnini~L’Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965).

Which quote has been shown to be inaccurate.

Protestants themselves have said “the new Catholic Eucharistic prayers have abandoned the false (sic) perspective of sacrifice offered to God.” (La Croix 12/10/69)

This quote really must have something altered or Protestants can’t read if they thought tht all the Eucharistic Prayers abandoned that notion. Take good old EP IV “we offer you his Body and Blood”.

Protestant Minister Thurian (co-consulter for the ‘New Mass’ project) said that a fruit of the New mass “will perhaps be that the non-Catholic communities will be ale to celebrate the Lord’s Supper using the same prayers as the Catholic Church.” (La Croix 4/30/69)

“It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.” – Max Thurian, Protestant theologian, on the New Mass, 1969

Really? I can think of quite a few Propers and several things in the Ordinary that I would have thought at odds with Protestantism - of course that depends as much on the variety of Protestantism. I’m trying to think of Protestants who will be happy to say The Orate Fratres, Prayer over the Gifts, make commemoration of the dead in the Eucharist prayers, say the pre-communion, hold up a Host and say “Ecce Agnus Dei”. Stuff like that.

the New Mass was made in accordance with the Protestant definition of the Mass: “The Lord’s Supper or Mass is a sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God which gathers together under the presidence of the priest to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.” (Par. 7 Intro. to the New Missal, defining the New Mass, 4/6/69)

Number 2’s “Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood” sounds very un-Protestant to me. Now granted, the dinky “pastoral” explanations in other parts of the GIRM don’t excuse anything. But shouldn’t attributions be made in the light of the whole that in a part?

 

[Derbingo]

Unfortunately, there are no plans for additional locations in Cleveland. I sent an e-mail to the Diocese of Cleveland. They responded with the schedule at Immaculate Conception and the parish in Akron. Both of those offered the TLM when it was by indult. Since the MP, there have been no additional Masses, and the e-mail I received said none were forthcoming.

The largest Diocese in the U.S. is the Archdiocese of Los Angeles with in excess of 5 million Catholics.

There are TWO TLM masses weekly in the Archdiocese. There is a third which moves around different sites every Sunday.

So, in the heart of Catholicism, the TLM is said in 3 places. Now those of you who keep telling us how wonderful this Mass is, it it hardly present. The TLM had its time, but it ended 40 years ago.

So the information for Los Angeles provided in another post is incorrect.

Check out the site for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for times and locations.

la-archdiocese.org/directories/parishes/indult.html

 

[JRKH]

The largest Diocese in the U.S. is the Archdiocese of Los Angeles with in excess of 5 million Catholics.

Your numbers don’t jive with the diocese own website which places the number at a little over 4.3 million. Perhaps you should recheck your sources.

There are TWO TLM masses weekly in the Archdiocese. There is a third which moves around different sites every Sunday.

So, in the heart of Catholicism, the TLM is said in 3 places. Now those of you who keep telling us how wonderful this Mass is, it it hardly present. The TLM had its time, but it ended 40 years ago.

Somehow I have a hard time seeing Los Angeles as being " the heart of catholicism". In fact I find it somehat humorous to think of LA in any such way. Size has nothing to do with dedication, reverence, or other factors that determine the strength of a religious community. Besides, if size is related to bodily organs, the bowel is much larger than the heart.

The number of EF’s said in the diocese does not change two things about the EF. First is the fact that it is a valid and permitted form of liturgy. Second, that it is a beautiful and profoundly contemplative for of worship.
Now, if there is no interest in the EF in the area, fine. But that means nothing. In our area here, much smaller that the LA area, we have EF’s in Cincinnati OH, Dayton OH, Covington KY, and Brookville IN. These are all weekly or more. Sounds to me tlike the TLM is alive and well - outside of LA that is.
Perhaps LA has less heart than you think.

So the information for Los Angeles provided in another post is incorrect.

Check out the site for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for times and locations.

la-archdiocese.org/directories/parishes/indult.html

I’ll let you check it out to get your stats straight.

Peace
James

 

[HOPEFUL_IN_UK]

There’s a TLM in Brookville? How wonderful!

When I left Cincinnati, I think they were just starting to have them in Covington.

I wonder if there will be any more in Cincinnati… I wouldn’t be surprised in the people at Old Saint Mary’s would love it, but there might not be room in the schedule for it.

 

[JRKH]

There’s a TLM in Brookville? How wonderful!

When I left Cincinnati, I think they were just starting to have them in Covington.

I wonder if there will be any more in Cincinnati… I wouldn’t be surprised in the people at Old Saint Mary’s would love it, but there might not be room in the schedule for it.

Hopeful -
How long did you live in the Cinci area? I was born and bred in the Sharonville area just north of town.

Yes, as a matter of fact, the church in Brookville is an FSSP parish and I believe the priests there service the Cincinnati location (At least father has an Indiana plate on his car). The current mass in town is at the Old Sacred Heart parish just south of Hopple Street.

I believe that the FSSP are in talks with the archdiocese to expand their presence here. So we are also Hopeful-In-Cinci.

Peace
James