Pope, in interview, laments 'rigidity' of youth who prefer Latin Mass [CWN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here is an example of rigidity:

I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
 
Here is an example of rigidity:

I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
Why do you see that as rigidity? If they have such a love for the mass (in any form) to go daily and with their teenage children I have a hard time understanding why that’s a bad thing.

Utah Rose mentioned that the Latin Mass she a tends has few young people. The parish staffed by the FSSP that my wife frequents is litterally full of young people. At both high mass and sung masses they have a dozen altar servers from 8 to 18 who are attentive and seam to love serving. People gather after mass and there are probably 40 or more kids playing in the parish yard. There are teens, young adults, and familes from their early 20s to mid seventies. Many drive 40 minutes or more each way to attend. Why do they have the time? Because they make mass a priority.

So are you saying that people who put attending Mass so high on their priorities that they would spend that much time are rigid in a bad way? A number of families live in the area surrounding me and do not eschew attending the OF mass at the local parish when they have a need, but personal parishes were setup specifically for those with a preference so why should it be treated as something bad when they avail themselves of the opportunity?

I guess I am trying to understand why someone would have a problem with people where their faith is fed in the OF or EF. When we see kids in confirmation that say they haven’t been to confession in 6 years or mass for 2 years should we not applaud people that attend Mass every day with their children even if it’s not at the parish a few blocks away?

Why can’t we simply be happy that people have a love of any mass instead of seeing something potentially dark and ominous? It makes me sad that we can’t rejoice that Shepard are feeding their flocks without sidelong glances if it seems odd to us. God wires each of use differntly and if it is easier for one to hear His voice in one form or the other then that is a blessing and not a curse.

I understand what the Holy Father is saying, but can we (not the Pope) please not paint everyone with a passion for the EF as somehow an aberration? Let us rejoice in those who love the mass in its myriad forms.
 
👍

but does he mean that folk refuse to attend any other mass as then that is rigidity? and yes that does happen, here at least
I guess it depends on what you mean by refuse. If you mean they will only attend a Tridentine mass because one is available to meet their obligations then I don’t see that as problematic. On the other hand if you mean that they would refuse to attend Mass in the OF when the EF is not available then that is certainly problematic.

Since I don’t have the option to speak with the Holy Father I would lean towards the latter. I have never read anything where he has said he was rescinding Summorum Pontificum where Pope Benedict XVI spoke of how young people “felt its attraction and found in it a form of encounter with the mystery of the Eucharist particularly suited to them.” and I haven’t heard Pope Francis refute it. My impression is the Holy Father does not have the same appreciation, or perhaps interest is the better word, in the Extraordinary Form that his predecessor had, but I also do not see him as hostile to it. Perhaps he is and I’ve just not seen it. I know some older priest wish it was relegated to the rubbish bin of history so maybe he feels the same, but I don’t know.

So to the question of rigidity we can only speculate. If he means rigid adherence or the formalized form of the mass would be the key. I do question his conclusion that rigidity hides insecurity, but that is his experience even if it is not mine. Until he abrogates the 1962 missal I won’t give it much worry. I do worry if that comes to pass since I have seen great communities that have grown around a shared loved of its form. It would be a pity to scrape it when it does good for many people.
 
Spadaro had asked the pope to write an introduction, but said Francis preferred to have a conversation instead. As a result, the first fifteen pages of the book, which is over 1,000 pages long, are taken up with their exchange on July 9.
The priest, who is director of the semi-official Jesuit journal Civiltà Cattolica, asked the pope if he saw dangers in some of those calling for a “reform of the reform.”
Francis answers: “I ask myself about this. For example, I always try to understand what’s behind the people who are too young to have lived the pre-conciliar liturgy but who want it. Sometimes I’ve found myself in front of people who are too strict, who have a rigid attitude. And I wonder: How come such a rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something: insecurity, sometimes even more … Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”
cruxnow.com/vatican/2016/11/11/francis-warns-rigid-liturgy-confesses-soft-spot-old-ladies/
 
Here is an example of rigidity:

I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
And? It’s Sunday. What if ‘these kids in school’ were on the hockey team and the family drove an hour to a game (my BFF had two boys in hockey and the parents were responsible for driving to games all over the state. So it was Vermont, that is still 250 miles in length. You live in the center, you’re driving 125 miles up or down at times). And the GAMES last a couple of hours.

What if the family with teenage kids drove over an hour and then went to a mall? So what? It’s Sunday.

Maybe, just maybe, that ‘vernacular right beside them’ is peachy keen. And maybe it’s not. These things can happen. Maybe, just maybe, it’s the kids who are enthused and want to experience the EF.

I’m curious. Why would you even think of this as ‘rigidity’? If they preferred the OF and drove 45 miles because they lived in a town with only the EF, would you criticize them for not attending the Mass 'nearby?"
 
And? It’s Sunday. What if ‘these kids in school’ were on the hockey team and the family drove an hour to a game (my BFF had two boys in hockey and the parents were responsible for driving to games all over the state. So it was Vermont, that is still 250 miles in length. You live in the center, you’re driving 125 miles up or down at times). And the GAMES last a couple of hours.

What if the family with teenage kids drove over an hour and then went to a mall? So what? It’s Sunday.

Maybe, just maybe, that ‘vernacular right beside them’ is peachy keen. And maybe it’s not. These things can happen. Maybe, just maybe, it’s the kids who are enthused and want to experience the EF.

I’m curious. Why would you even think of this as ‘rigidity’? If they preferred the OF and drove 45 miles because they lived in a town with only the EF, would you criticize them for not attending the Mass 'nearby?"
But did you not read the post? You keep saying “it’s Sunday”. The poster wrote, very clearly,
I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
In my experience as a priest, this is rarely a positive occurrence but rather indicative of a very unhealthy imbalance.

And, to be clear, I would be saying the exact same thing if this family were going to a monastery with the novus ordo each and every day traveling three hours or more rather than accessing their parish – where they are properly assigned, by virtue of canonical domicile.
 
Seems quite judgmental to make such a generalization that if young people prefer the EF, they are rigid, and that the rigidity must be hiding something. I am hoping something was lost in context or translation. My goodness, the percent of the faithful who regularly attend Mass has decreased for decades. Now let’s be critical of the motives of young people who attend the EF.
 
I honestly have no idea what he’s trying to get at by saying this, but I can say that it doesn’t seem wise, because those words seem to have a clear meaning, but he said very little to qualify or explain his meaning. Thus, he leaves it up for interpretation by anyone who may listen.

Lack of clarity is frustrating, is it not?
I wonder, is it really a lack of clarity on his part, or are we just desperate to justify his statements. I think it is perfectly obvious what he is saying.
 
But did you not read the post? You keep saying “it’s Sunday”. The poster wrote, very clearly,
I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
In my experience as a priest, this is rarely a positive occurrence but rather indicative of a very unhealthy imbalance.

And, to be clear, I would be saying the exact same thing if this family were going to a monastery with the novus ordo each and every day traveling three hours or more rather than accessing their parish – where they are properly assigned, by virtue of canonical domicile.
Ah. I missed the ‘every day’. However, as I referenced above, my BFF when her boys were in hockey did not have games all over the state every Sunday only. No, they had games on any given day of the week. Also, these boys practiced every day of the week. . .and that meant on the ice at 4:30 a.m. each day in order to have 3 hours of practice before heading in to a full day of school and then usually every 2nd or 3rd day a hockey match at home or away.

It’s the same thing, Father. Some families have children who practice a musical instrument for 3 or 4 hours a day on top of doing all their regular school work and family work. (I should know, I was one of them. And a National Merit Finalist to boot I add). Some families have children who are in the theatre, or in dance, at the ages of 8, 10, 12, and who go out every day for weeks and months at a time to audition, then to rehearse, then to perform in plays. Sometimes the family drives them not just in state but out of state in order to do so.

If you think the above are unhealthy practices for families then I’d understand your feeling the same for the family mentioned, but if you think that the above are, if perhaps ‘not for everybody’ then certainly acceptable and reasonable, then I’m honestly puzzled that you would be concerned for this family. . .
 
But did you not read the post? You keep saying “it’s Sunday”. The poster wrote, very clearly,
I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
In my experience as a priest, this is rarely a positive occurrence but rather indicative of a very unhealthy imbalance.

And, to be clear, I would be saying the exact same thing if this family were going to a monastery with the novus ordo each and every day traveling three hours or more rather than accessing their parish – where they are properly assigned, by virtue of canonical domicile.
Would you say the same to a family who did not regularly assist at a parish staffed by priests of the Institute of Christ the King or the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, even if such a parish was quite literally next to their door? Why travel half an hour to Mass when there is Mass a two minute walk away?

Seeing as a Catholic is not even obliged to assist at Sunday Mass in his own parish, when there is an obligation to assist at Mass, it is rather a stretch to diagnose a spiritual malaise in a family that assists at a daily Mass out of sheer devotion.
 
Here is an example of rigidity:

I know a family with teenage kids that drive for over an hour every day to go to Latin mass rather than the vernacular right beside them. Given that the masses are 45 mins, that is a round trip of three hours every day. These kids are in school…
I know a Polish family that drives a similar distance to go to a Polish language Mass at a Polish parish. They all speak English but prefer the Polish Mass.

Is that rigidity as well?
 
I know a Polish family that drives a similar distance to go to a Polish language Mass at a Polish parish. They all speak English but prefer the Polish Mass.

Is that rigidity as well?
The Polish family does that every day?
 
Can someone tell me what “rigidity” is in this context?

Is it people who stick with the teachings of the Church, rather than watering them down to make them or others “feel good?”

Or is it people that are cynical of alternative (and perfectly valid) forms of the liturgy?

I read about this by way of Fr. Z’s blog, and had to look into it more.

By the way, I enjoy the TLM and drive half an hour each day when I have the time for Mass. Does that make me rigid, or am I simply trying to learn about the RICHNESS of my Catholic faith?
 
Ah. I missed the ‘every day’. However, as I referenced above, my BFF when her boys were in hockey did not have games all over the state every Sunday only. No, they had games on any given day of the week. Also, these boys practiced every day of the week. . .and that meant on the ice at 4:30 a.m. each day in order to have 3 hours of practice before heading in to a full day of school and then usually every 2nd or 3rd day a hockey match at home or away.

It’s the same thing, Father. Some families have children who practice a musical instrument for 3 or 4 hours a day on top of doing all their regular school work and family work. (I should know, I was one of them. And a National Merit Finalist to boot I add). Some families have children who are in the theatre, or in dance, at the ages of 8, 10, 12, and who go out every day for weeks and months at a time to audition, then to rehearse, then to perform in plays. Sometimes the family drives them not just in state but out of state in order to do so.

If you think the above are unhealthy practices for families then I’d understand your feeling the same for the family mentioned, but if you think that the above are, if perhaps ‘not for everybody’ then certainly acceptable and reasonable, then I’m honestly puzzled that you would be concerned for this family. . .
No. Frankly, I do not consider it the same thing at all. But, no less true, I also do not think what you describe is really acceptable or reasonable for an educational setting but far far less with regard to the situation for Mass attendance that the poster described.

At the stage of being retired for age and for length of years since the remote days when I was ordained, there is very little I have not seen – be it in my academic career, be it in my years of pastoral assignment, be it the years of chancery work, or the years of special assignments.

I have worked with families where the children were sent with great success to boarding schools; the children were happy and the parents were happy with the outcome. And I have worked with families where the children broke relations with their parents, once they were adults, because of being sent to a boarding school. With children who suffered very great harm from a variety of sources because of what educational choices made for them.

I had the privilege of knowing a few very talented people who thrived for the sort of gruesome environment you describe, one an Olympian…but I have known far far more who were harmed – and I would go so far as to say damaged – by the experience of those sort of experiences, such as you describe, in their childhood.

I have also worked with those trying to find, if they can, some relationship with the Church and with their being Catholic after a childhood in which the family religiosity was so unhealthy and imbalanced that they left the Church and have a very hard time in finding any place for it in their lives…even when they understand, with help of distance and an objective analysis, that their parents concepts were, actually, warped and when they can articulate the positive aspects of faith and religious practice.

Perhaps you are puzzled by my reaction because you are not a parish priest who has had to try, across the decades, to help people deal with these sorts of issues – be it parents who have to come to terms with children who have rejected them and left the Church or the children who are now adults but with a childhood behind them that has left them scarred.
 
Would you say the same to a family who did not regularly assist at a parish staffed by priests of the Institute of Christ the King or the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, even if such a parish was quite literally next to their door? Why travel half an hour to Mass when there is Mass a two minute walk away?

Seeing as a Catholic is not even obliged to assist at Sunday Mass in his own parish, when there is an obligation to assist at Mass, it is rather a stretch to diagnose a spiritual malaise in a family that assists at a daily Mass out of sheer devotion.
Where are these parishes?

A bishop should not be entrusting a territorial parish to any priest who is not going to provide Mass and the sacraments according to the novus ordo. The vetus ordo is and must be understood as a pastoral concession, where possible, to those seeking a special and extraordinary pastoral provision.

Provision of Mass and sacraments according to the vetus ordo exists as chaplaincies and as personal parishes but in territorial parishes, it should only exist accompanied by Mass and sacraments according to the novus ordo for that is, as Pope Benedict expressed it, the ordinary form. The vetus ordo is extraordinary. Those who are canonical subjects of a territorial parish should encounter the Mass and the sacraments as they are provided in the novus ordo.

In my earlier days, going back to the indult, I was more open to the provision being collocated with a territorial parish. That changed based on experience…and for the very reasons Pope Francis has articulated.

As to your final statement…yes, I have had many occasions to diagnose a malady of the spiritual life where the expression was an unhealthy one. The presence of any spiritual practice, even attendance at daily Mass, does not mean that it is spiritually healthy or appropriate, depending upon a variety of factors.
 
Why do you see that as rigidity? If they have such a love for the mass (in any form) to go daily and with their teenage children I have a hard time understanding why that’s a bad thing.

Utah Rose mentioned that the Latin Mass she a tends has few young people. The parish staffed by the FSSP that my wife frequents is litterally full of young people. At both high mass and sung masses they have a dozen altar servers from 8 to 18 who are attentive and seam to love serving. People gather after mass and there are probably 40 or more kids playing in the parish yard. There are teens, young adults, and familes from their early 20s to mid seventies. Many drive 40 minutes or more each way to attend. Why do they have the time? Because they make mass a priority.

So are you saying that people who put attending Mass so high on their priorities that they would spend that much time are rigid in a bad way? A number of families live in the area surrounding me and do not eschew attending the OF mass at the local parish when they have a need, but personal parishes were setup specifically for those with a preference so why should it be treated as something bad when they avail themselves of the opportunity?

I guess I am trying to understand why someone would have a problem with people where their faith is fed in the OF or EF. When we see kids in confirmation that say they haven’t been to confession in 6 years or mass for 2 years should we not applaud people that attend Mass every day with their children even if it’s not at the parish a few blocks away?

Why can’t we simply be happy that people have a love of any mass instead of seeing something potentially dark and ominous? It makes me sad that we can’t rejoice that Shepard are feeding their flocks without sidelong glances if it seems odd to us. God wires each of use differntly and if it is easier for one to hear His voice in one form or the other then that is a blessing and not a curse.

I understand what the Holy Father is saying, but can we (not the Pope) please not paint everyone with a passion for the EF as somehow an aberration? Let us rejoice in those who love the mass in its myriad forms.
Because there is mass five minutes from where they live and instead of spending ten minutes in the car they spend two hours, when the sacrifice is identical in both forms. A daily commute of two hours on top of work/school is unreasonable and burdensome on children.
 
I know a Polish family that drives a similar distance to go to a Polish language Mass at a Polish parish. They all speak English but prefer the Polish Mass.

Is that rigidity as well?
Poles are usually quite rigid. They’re designed to stand tall and upright. 😃

(Sorry, that’s my engineering background coming through).
 
I like the idea of the Latin mass as it is an education in itself and an inclusive connection to our Church’s history.

I am living in the Philippines atm and just about everyone speaks English but most masses are in the native languages. It would be good to share a common culture of the Latin mass, but alas,
 
Ah. I missed the ‘every day’. However, as I referenced above, my BFF when her boys were in hockey did not have games all over the state every Sunday only. No, they had games on any given day of the week. Also, these boys practiced every day of the week. . .and that meant on the ice at 4:30 a.m. each day in order to have 3 hours of practice before heading in to a full day of school and then usually every 2nd or 3rd day a hockey match at home or away.

It’s the same thing, Father. Some families have children who practice a musical instrument for 3 or 4 hours a day on top of doing all their regular school work and family work. (I should know, I was one of them. And a National Merit Finalist to boot I add). Some families have children who are in the theatre, or in dance, at the ages of 8, 10, 12, and who go out every day for weeks and months at a time to audition, then to rehearse, then to perform in plays. Sometimes the family drives them not just in state but out of state in order to do so.

If you think the above are unhealthy practices for families then I’d understand your feeling the same for the family mentioned, but if you think that the above are, if perhaps ‘not for everybody’ then certainly acceptable and reasonable, then I’m honestly puzzled that you would be concerned for this family. . .
Because there is no difference between the two types of masses in terms of what actually happens. If your sisters kids drove an hour to hockey practice and an hour back every day so that they could have lessons through Latin, that would be extreme too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top