A
Augustinian
Guest
There was chaos in the church during Bosco’s day as well as in generations previous to him. Basically, he was predicting no change.
- Status
C
commenter
Guest
With this kind of quote, certainly not in common public knowledge, a citation is needed.otjm:
It reminds me of what St. John Bosco said during his time, “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church.”
B
BayCityRickL
Guest
I was an adolescent at the time of the council and I had high expectations of it. The council had more media coverage than any other council in church history, certainly. Personally, I was tremendously let down by the aftermath. I learned that the council had produced what turned out to be a thick paperback book of DOCUMENTS.
Documents? I thought the council was going to DO something. I became cynical about all the Roman holidays the prelates had taken. I couldn’t tell that our local bishop had participated at all and he didn’t have what today we would call informational meetings about what the council had accomplished. My cynicism inclined me to think that nothing had been accomplished.
One example of my disappointment, after absorbing the fact that the MASS was going to be recited in English, is that a flourishing of Mass music did not occur. There may have been a handful or two of artists cranking out theologically shallow jingles but I was not impressed, and especially not impressed by the way the piano has taken over the organ as the principle music instrument.
Another observation about the statistics in the article is that the religious declines seemed to have occurred at the time that television and popular culture was overwhelming the US with new trends, leading to intellectual and spiritual lethargy, and flooding the country with secularizing influences.
Fast forward to today, when most priests are telling jokes at Mass, to break the monotony and boredom. I’m serious about this, and its result that people are talking so much in church now, and loudly so – like praying and being serious is just an act to cover up how we really feel and what we’d really rather be doing.
AND, the priests are using the shortest Eucharistic prayer, resulting in the impression that the Holy Spirit comes upon us all “like the dewfall.” Dewfall is apparently the newest sacrament in the church.
We now have retrospectives that, the secret documents having been declassified, that four presidents lied to us about a war in Asia. And, we’re now roasting in the crucible fueled by the flames of priests and bishops involved in sexual abuse - more intimate lying to us,lying about what really matters to us. And, in the same time frame as the study, more Americans have achieved higher levels of education and have become disappointed ,looking for substance and sustenance but not finding it.
Documents? I thought the council was going to DO something. I became cynical about all the Roman holidays the prelates had taken. I couldn’t tell that our local bishop had participated at all and he didn’t have what today we would call informational meetings about what the council had accomplished. My cynicism inclined me to think that nothing had been accomplished.
One example of my disappointment, after absorbing the fact that the MASS was going to be recited in English, is that a flourishing of Mass music did not occur. There may have been a handful or two of artists cranking out theologically shallow jingles but I was not impressed, and especially not impressed by the way the piano has taken over the organ as the principle music instrument.
Another observation about the statistics in the article is that the religious declines seemed to have occurred at the time that television and popular culture was overwhelming the US with new trends, leading to intellectual and spiritual lethargy, and flooding the country with secularizing influences.
Fast forward to today, when most priests are telling jokes at Mass, to break the monotony and boredom. I’m serious about this, and its result that people are talking so much in church now, and loudly so – like praying and being serious is just an act to cover up how we really feel and what we’d really rather be doing.
AND, the priests are using the shortest Eucharistic prayer, resulting in the impression that the Holy Spirit comes upon us all “like the dewfall.” Dewfall is apparently the newest sacrament in the church.
We now have retrospectives that, the secret documents having been declassified, that four presidents lied to us about a war in Asia. And, we’re now roasting in the crucible fueled by the flames of priests and bishops involved in sexual abuse - more intimate lying to us,lying about what really matters to us. And, in the same time frame as the study, more Americans have achieved higher levels of education and have become disappointed ,looking for substance and sustenance but not finding it.
Last edited:
C
commenter
Guest
Do you (or anyone else) have stats on SSPX clergy, seminarians, religious? I am making conclusions based on some observations, and assumptions.commenter:
Do you have any stats on the SSPX faithful- how many in 2018 were raised in SSPX chapels or converted from non-catholic faiths— as opposed to how many were raised in the Catholic Church?
I would assume that typical SSPX priests retiring this year likely had training in the Church, itself; likely belonged to a diocese as a layman, seminarian, and for awhile, as a priest, and worked in some ministry in the Church, itself, prior to switching over to SSPX.
They likely had superiors who were mostly trained and experienced in the Church, especially during their earlier years in SSPX. In their early SSPX years, they likely had many acquaintances among diocesan clergy.
I assume some new SSPX priests likely grew up in a SSPX chapel, some in a parish. They were mostly trained by priests who themselves had trained and worked almost exclusively in the SSPX. Their superiors will likely have very little experience themselves ever working in the Church, and never being part of a diocese, as a priest.
So you can see the SSPX clergy of the 1970s, and the 2010’s are really 2 different populations, in reference to the Catholic Church. The Study does not take that into account.
Last edited:
O
otjm
Guest
Statistically, Mass attendance started to decline in the mid to late 1950’s, while Pope Pius 12th was pope.
And the “sexual revolution” was starting, not something that the Church had anything to do with.
And the “sexual revolution” was starting, not something that the Church had anything to do with.
O
otjm
Guest
There seems to be an assumption among some that the Council was intending to, or did write documents (such as the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy) which were intended to specify exactly what changes they wanted, and thus would have been limiting.
When one sits down and reads the actual documents, it becomes clear, if one reads without that supposition as an overlay, that all of the documents were intended not as limiting, but as a general sketch out of what changes they wanted to see.
Liturgical research and scholarship started under Pope Pius 10th, and by the time of the council, there was a great amount of research that had occurred, particularly among and under the Benedictines.
Latin is still the official language of the Church, and documents come out in Latin. The use of Latin and Greek is certainly debatable in the Mass, and the issue is one which boots back to the bishop of each diocese; it is up to them as to the implementation of it. I have never seen a survey done researching how many parishes out of the 17,290+/- in the US have one or more Masses on a Sunday which use Latin and Greek It would not surprise me if CARA had done so, but they do not generally publish their studies, and most of the studies appear to be at the request of groups such as the USCCB. It is, however, unquestionable that the vernacular has taken over like wildfire. I attended a Hispanic Mass several weeks ago, and although my Latin might not even qualify anymore as rusty, I heard nothing in the Mass which was done in Latin.
As to Gregorian Chant, it had been falling out of favor for decades, if not several centuries before Vatican 2; OraLabora is a better source than I am. Having had experience in Gregorian Chant (although nowhere near as much as he) I can say it is by no means at all simple. Neither is 4 or more part harmony such as is required by Palestrina, who also wrote Masses centuries ago, and which music is in limited use today.
When one sits down and reads the actual documents, it becomes clear, if one reads without that supposition as an overlay, that all of the documents were intended not as limiting, but as a general sketch out of what changes they wanted to see.
Liturgical research and scholarship started under Pope Pius 10th, and by the time of the council, there was a great amount of research that had occurred, particularly among and under the Benedictines.
Latin is still the official language of the Church, and documents come out in Latin. The use of Latin and Greek is certainly debatable in the Mass, and the issue is one which boots back to the bishop of each diocese; it is up to them as to the implementation of it. I have never seen a survey done researching how many parishes out of the 17,290+/- in the US have one or more Masses on a Sunday which use Latin and Greek It would not surprise me if CARA had done so, but they do not generally publish their studies, and most of the studies appear to be at the request of groups such as the USCCB. It is, however, unquestionable that the vernacular has taken over like wildfire. I attended a Hispanic Mass several weeks ago, and although my Latin might not even qualify anymore as rusty, I heard nothing in the Mass which was done in Latin.
As to Gregorian Chant, it had been falling out of favor for decades, if not several centuries before Vatican 2; OraLabora is a better source than I am. Having had experience in Gregorian Chant (although nowhere near as much as he) I can say it is by no means at all simple. Neither is 4 or more part harmony such as is required by Palestrina, who also wrote Masses centuries ago, and which music is in limited use today.
C
commenter
Guest
Some of the graphs are interesting, showing differences among religious orders in growth/decline. Given the POV of the authors I can’t help but wonder if they felt some guilty satisfaction in going out of their way to graph the “extinction” of the Jesuits.
In 1981 the General of the Jesuits was paralyzed by a stroke, and St. JP II appointed his own administrator, though in 1983 he relinquished this and allowed them to choose their own. I think this was the biggest mistake of his papacy.
I wonder what if he had held on, for say 15 or 20 years. That would have allowed his influence to ensure all provincial superiors, and formation directors, were supporters of orthodoxy. Some who disagreed would have joined other orders, left the priesthood, or remained but with less power.
The Jesuits might have recruited far more orthodox young men, and encouraged more young men towards orthodoxy. At present, the losses in Europe and North America far outweigh the gains in Africa and India. Perhaps Jesuits from those lands will someday help restore St. Ignatius’ vision to the whole order. In the meantime, it is heavy retrenchment time in the US.
In 1981 the General of the Jesuits was paralyzed by a stroke, and St. JP II appointed his own administrator, though in 1983 he relinquished this and allowed them to choose their own. I think this was the biggest mistake of his papacy.
I wonder what if he had held on, for say 15 or 20 years. That would have allowed his influence to ensure all provincial superiors, and formation directors, were supporters of orthodoxy. Some who disagreed would have joined other orders, left the priesthood, or remained but with less power.
The Jesuits might have recruited far more orthodox young men, and encouraged more young men towards orthodoxy. At present, the losses in Europe and North America far outweigh the gains in Africa and India. Perhaps Jesuits from those lands will someday help restore St. Ignatius’ vision to the whole order. In the meantime, it is heavy retrenchment time in the US.
O
OraLabora
Guest
This is true, chant had become denatured by the 19th century, and hardly recognizable. The monks of Solesmes in France worked hard to get chant back on track by going back to ancient manuscripts and under the patronage to Pius X, Gregorian chant was standardized with the release of the Graduale Romanum, Vatican Edition, in 1908.
What we hear as Gregorian chant today is a 19th century interpretation of what we think chant sounded like in the 10th century. Nobody knows for sure and the ancient neumes have no staff and are very difficult to interpret.
In essence, Gregorian chant as we hear it today is about 120-150 years old. But it is standardized, although each choir has its own “voice” or sound. But they are all reading the same music. It’s also a dynamic field of study and in recent years, there has been much development, though all for the Divine Office both monastic and Roman. No changes for the Mass since the 1974 edition of the Graduale Romanum.
As for its performance you are correct, it isn’t easy. Some simple settings of the Ordinary are quite easy but the Propers, and the more complex settings of the ordinary, require some work. Our own schola is 20 years old now (I’ve been a part of it for 15 of those 20 years) and there’s still plenty of material we simply won’t touch, as it is too difficult.
As you point out, the documents of the Council are high-level. For the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium laid out the general guidelines; the only immediate liturgical act in SC was the suppression of the office of Prime with immediate effect.
We know the the use of the vernacular took off like a wildfire. The context in which SC was written was one where Latin was still taught in schools. For the most part it no longer is. The bishops are working in 2018 realities, not those of 1962.
We also know that SC recommended that Gregorian chant have “pride of place”. But it did not say “in all places at all times” and SC allowed for other forms of sacred music. To have it take pride of place in any given parish would require that there be enough people interested in investing in the required skills; parishioners will soon tire of poorly done Gregorian chant, so it will take effort. Parishioners simply wishing for it won’t make it happen. Fortunately there are places where it has “pride of place”: monasteries, other orders/congregations, and scholas like ours who take an active interest (we’re not tied to one parish but rotate around the small city we’re based in).
G
godisgood77
Guest
And? Your point??
C
commenter
Guest
Your expertise, on a subject I know so little about, is appreciated.
J
jas84173
Guest
Most give an estimate that worldwide there’s about 1,000,000 laity who attend SSPX services. I respect the SSPX for staying loyal to their concerns, which by the way are legit concerns. A book I recommend is "Catechism of the Crisis of the Catholic Church ". The ICKSP or PFSP, also are great organizations in full communion with the Holy See. See, I have no issue with the Church. I love the Church. I love the Pope. I don’t always agree with him but he’s the Pope. With that said, in the past there have been errors which the Church corrected.
I am of a school of thought which is growing among youth who want more reverent Mass that there should be a “reform of the reform”. There are many wonderful fruits in both forms of the Liturgy which I think should be incorporated more with each other. Some wonder why so many young people are attracted to the EF of Mass when we didn’t even grow up with it. It is precisely because there are fruits in it which the new Mass does not possess in my opinion.
I am of a school of thought which is growing among youth who want more reverent Mass that there should be a “reform of the reform”. There are many wonderful fruits in both forms of the Liturgy which I think should be incorporated more with each other. Some wonder why so many young people are attracted to the EF of Mass when we didn’t even grow up with it. It is precisely because there are fruits in it which the new Mass does not possess in my opinion.
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
Which is wonderful for women who prefer to wear pantsuits.
As my late mother said about the rise of pantsuits…“the change should have happened a long time before it did.”
Last edited:
O
otjm
Guest
According to the report of the two Brits, (see chart 17) there are about 575 SSPX priests. With 1,000,000 adherents, that would put an average of 1,740 people per church at Mass. and likely fewer than that, as it is likely that not every single SSPX priest has a “parish”; some are likely teaching in their seminary.
I only have experience of one of their churches, and that would mean, for them to be average in attendance, they would have to have 4 to 5 Masses per Sunday.
I can’t speak to anywhere else, and they are spread out over a significant part of the world.
But those numbers don’t seem to make sense, from what I have observed and read. and it is not that I make a point of reading up on them; but seriously? Or is this just one person after another making wishful comments?
I only have experience of one of their churches, and that would mean, for them to be average in attendance, they would have to have 4 to 5 Masses per Sunday.
I can’t speak to anywhere else, and they are spread out over a significant part of the world.
But those numbers don’t seem to make sense, from what I have observed and read. and it is not that I make a point of reading up on them; but seriously? Or is this just one person after another making wishful comments?
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
It becomes even more interesting @otjm when you calculate it by the number of chapels and then begin excluding because of impossible logistics. For example, one chapel is in Osaka, Japan on the fourth floor of an apartment building. The chapel in Seoul, South Korea is on the fifth floor of an office building. Clearly, these chapels are not seeing Mass attendance of almost 2000 people per chapel as the structure could not handle such volume…but that number is what one calculates at a ratio per chapel of 1.000.000 people.
This is true with various districts outside Asia, so to reach 1.000.000, you have to have some chapels holding many thousands.
J
jas84173
Guest
Sorry 600,000.
C
commenter
Guest
By the way, I also appreciate the Latin Mass, and attend the diocesan TLM on occasion.
The number of laity attending SSPX is important, but my earlier post was about the Study cited in the OP, which compared SSPX clergy over time to Catholic religious orders. In the 1970s, SSPX clergy had much more training and experience in the Church, and in a diocese, than the SSPX clergy today. So what was sort of comparable in the 1970s to in-Church religious orders would not be comparable now (that is, comparing 2018 SSPX to in-Church religious orders). Not saying SSPX is bad, just saying it is getting a little more separate each year, due to retirements of their clergy who did have some in-Church work background.
Last edited:
M
misstherese
Guest
I know many discerning a vocation expressively look for communities who wear habits (me too). There’s something about wearing your religion as many saints also did, that make it appealing. No temptation to vanity, no possibility of immodesty. Those who seek it are those who choose (what society would consider to be) a radical way of life and want to be set apart as a consecrated religious, married to God, not a lay person. Those who see a nun in a habit out and about also know they can ask questions, which could lead souls back to the Church.
R
R_H_Benson
Guest
Yes. The “pantsuit” orders are dying out, and there is currently a resurgence of the prevalence of traditional habits thanks to the interest of the younger generation.
Can you picture Saint Theresa of Avila in a pantsuit? Lol!
Can you picture Saint Theresa of Avila in a pantsuit? Lol!
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
People should look for a vocation based on the charism of the order or Congregation, not on their attire or form of Mass they celebrate. A religious community doesn’t just accept any candidate walking through the door. They will also check you out, and if you’re not there to share the charism of the founder, you will be found out and either wash out of the noviciate, or not even get that far. Every member of the community gets to vote on accepting you. You enter a Benedictine monastery to become a Benedictine nun, not because you want to wear a habit.
That said, I’m pretty sure you’ve never seen a nun not wearing a habit. Nuns are by definition cloistered sisters, and cloistered women, and men, all wear habits. That goes for Benedictines, Trappistines, Carmelites, etc. This did not change with the Council.
Moreover, non-cloistered sisters who never wore habits existed before the Council, for practical reasons: they were involved in active apostolates like nursing, soup kitchens, working with the poor, etc.
The « habit » issue is in fact a tired old traditionalist canard, as a bit of serious study will show.
O
OraLabora
Guest
There is no such thing as a « pantsuit » order, and nuns of St. Therese of Avila’s order still wear habits. She was a Carmelite, Carmelites are cloistered, and they still wear habits. If she joined the Carmelites today, she’d wear a habit.
So you can stop fretting, and get the image of St Therese of Avila in a pantsuit out of your mind. She wasn’t in a pantsuit then, nor would she be in one today.
- Status