Priest response to TLM leaves me stunned

  • Thread starter Thread starter rben20
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rben20

Guest
Hello my Catholic brethren,

I am doing my best to start up a TLM in my city. I’ve done enough searching as far as a proper church, music department, but I just officially started to ask the priests on my list the possibility of them holding the Mass. I scoped out possible priests to say the Mass (those who I know are familiar or know Latin) and the first priest I chose to ask was my new pastoral priest at my local church. When I asked Father about the possibility of having a TLM, he answered “do you know Latin?” to which I simply said, “no but I am learning.” He basically told me why would I want a TLM if I have a Mass in the vernacular. He also brushed it off by saying that he needed the mandate of a bishop (I thought we didn’t need that anymore according to Pope Benedict XVI?) and killed it just like that. I feel really discouraged as this is coming from a PRIEST let alone it is the first one I ask. I am afraid everyone else thinks like him…that it is simply a language issue when really this is about Catholic teaching and theology expressed fully in the TLM…IMHO. Besides, Latin wasn’t a problem for thousands of years, so why would it be all of the sudden…it is still the official language of the Church last time I checked??? I didn’t tell him any of that of course as I was too disheartened and felt I would alienate him even more than he already felt about it. Why is it that priests just aren’t taking advantage of the Moto Propio? If you asked a priest about having a TLM at your parish, did you ever get a similar response? Seems like the first Latin priest is off my list.
 
I grew up with the Latin Mass and still have my Missal with Latin one page and English the facing page. You might be able to find a similar Missal which would facilitate Mass in Latin for you.

I wonder if people consider the fact that the early Masses were in the vernacular, and that Jesus celebrated the First Mass, the Last Supper, in the vernacular, and that He spoke Aramaic. I think that fits in somewhere in the question of sacred liturgical language. Personally, I’d like to partake in an Aramaic Mass at least once in a lifetime!

However I’m sorry you are feeling bayoneted. I hope you find a satisfactory solution.

God bless you abundantly for your devout faith
 
When I mentioned the possibility of having an EF Mass in our parish all I got was a smirk. The two possible celebrants were both ordained after Vatican II and AFAIK have never celebrated the EF. One was all of 12 when it disappeared.
 
Trishie said:
Personally, I’d like to partake in an Aramaic Mass at least once in a lifetime!
Click to expand...
Look for a Chaldean or Maronite Church. Also, they both are celebrated in different Rites, the Maronite using Byzantine while Chaldean uses the Eastern Assyrian/Chaldean Rite.
 
rben20 said:
He also brushed it off by saying that he needed the mandate of a bishop (I thought we didn’t need that anymore according to Pope Benedict XVI?) and killed it just like that.
Click to expand...
He is right. A priest has to be approved for celebrating in the EF before he can.
 
ConstantineTG said:
He is right. A priest has to be approved for celebrating in the EF before he can.
Click to expand...
Not so…any priest is free to celebrate the TLM without the permission of his bishop, Pope Benedict abolished the bishop approval requirement…see Summorum Pontificum.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike
 
Adeodatus said:
False. By the authority of the Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, a diocesan priest needs no such permission.
Click to expand...
This is a bit of a tricky situation. While no permission is needed, if the Bishop has forbidden it, the priest is in the precarious position of facing disobedience. Our Archbishop stated that no parish will be allowed to offer the EF Mass, other than those where the indult was given pre-MP, without his express permission. That put all the priests in our diocese in a bind even if they want to offer the EF Mass.

I don’t know for sure, but it may not be the priest as much as his environment.
 
Corki said:
This is a bit of a tricky situation. While no permission is needed, if the Bishop has forbidden it, the priest is in the precarious position of facing disobedience. Our Archbishop stated that no parish will be allowed to offer the EF Mass, other than those where the indult was given pre-MP, without his express permission. That put all the priests in our diocese in a bind even if they want to offer the EF Mass.

I don’t know for sure, but it may not be the priest as much as his environment.
Click to expand...
It sounds like your bishop is in open rebellion against Pope Benedict XVI. That’s very sad.
 
Is your bishop supportive of the Extraordinary Form (EF) mass? If so, you might want to ask him who in your diocese might be willing to do the mass; he probably knows. I assume you’ve checked the Ecclesia Dei directory to find the nearest EF mass to you, right? Maybe you could contact the priest of the nearest one and ask him if he knows anyone.
 
Adeodatus said:
It sounds like your bishop is in open rebellion against Pope Benedict XVI. That’s very sad.
Click to expand...
Actually, no; what Corki describes seems like a somewhat hardline but entirely plausible understanding of SP, specifically Article 5 § 1:
In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord and favouring the unity of the whole Church.
Note that the language you paraphrased previously, indicating that “the priest has no need for permission from the Apostolic See or from his Ordinary” to celebrate the TLM, applies only to “Masses celebrated without the people,” not to scheduled parish Masses.

At best, this is matter for a dubium; there’s really not a whiff of “open rebellion” in what Corki has recounted. If the bishop, guiding his pastors, accounts for the needs of stable groups of TLM adherents, that’s what the motu proprio requires.
 
Well as far as the bishop of our diocese is concerned, I am not all too sure about his views on the TLM. I would like for him to be the last person I talk to as I feel exhausting all the possible priests is the best option as we do not need permission from a bishop to have a TLM. That is whole reason behind the Moto Propio of Pope Benedict XVI I believe. It also doesn’t help he is a bit scandalous as far as the removal of a very orthodox priest who is now a member of the SSPX. I still do not know how I feel about SSPX being a resort to having the Mass in my city as I know they have had bishops excommunicated, but they have been lifted. I’ve heard it go both ways here on CAF 🤷 As far as SSPX, I just personally don’t see the problem with people wishing to worship according to the old rite of the Church but I will leave it at that.
 
Iowa_Mike said:
Not so…any priest is free to celebrate the TLM without the permission of his bishop, Pope Benedict abolished the bishop approval requirement…see Summorum Pontificum.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike
Click to expand...
As Mark has pointed out, I’m right.

A priest cannot just do anything within a diocese. A bishop controls the diocese. Not even the Pope can supersede a Bishop in matters that pertains to the Bishop. One of these are the matters that pertain to public celebrations of Mass.
 
Adeodatus said:
False. By the authority of the Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, a diocesan priest needs no such permission.
Click to expand...
True, your false.

Sorry, but the Bishop has control of his diocese including when and where Mass is celebrated publicly.
 
I got the same questions when I mentioned it, “do you know latin”?
Someitmes you feel like a fool asking for what many people consider and dead for of worship, not to mention many priest who see that POV. I honestly feel that priest who are against the TLM are afraid that they will loose parishoners to the TLM even if it is part of that pirsh 🤷
 
archangel04 said:
I got the same questions when I mentioned it, “do you know latin”?
Someitmes you feel like a fool asking for what many people consider and dead for of worship, not to mention many priest who see that POV. I honestly feel that priest who are against the TLM are afraid that they will loose parishoners to the TLM even if it is part of that pirsh 🤷
Click to expand...
No
Because you see petty arguments like, “OF is better” or “EF is better” only belongs to the laity. To the priest, he sees both as equal. He celebrates the same Mass and consecrates the same Eucharist.

Sometimes people are just reading too much into the words just because they cannot get what they want. Then makes up a conspiracy theory. I mean, can you tell me of something today that doesn’t have any conspiracy theory behind it? And I mean anything, not just Church affairs. There must always be a deeper meaning behind something and we can’t just accept something at face value.
 
To answer the question of the original post one has to look at several pieces.

Summorum Pontificum released the Tridentine or Extraordinary Form so that ANY secular priest who belongs to a diocese can celebrate it. If a priest is a diocesan priest, then he is a secular priest. He does not need the permission of the bishop to celebrate the EF. But he must comply with any requirements that his bishop may have for the celebration. For example, if the bishop says that there must be a certain number of people, the priest must comply with that. That is not part of the Motu Propio… That is a diocesan decision. If he has to bump a regular mass from the schedule, he must check that out with the chancery. Mass schedules are usually under the jurisdiction of the local pastor. But the faithful can complain to the chancery if they are bumped, for the EF, precisely because Pope Benedict left that caveat in when he officially named it “extraordinary”. A principle of law is that whatever is extraordinary cannot replace the ordinary unless there is just cause. If you bump 500 people to put in a mass for 100 people, you have a problem and the bishop may not be too happy about it.

Another valid concern that does arise is the number of masses that a priest may say in one day. Normally, the priest should celebrate only one mass. Given the shortage, many priests celebrate two. Three requires permission of the bishop or the major superior, if the priest is a consecrated religious. If the priest is going to add a mass to the parish schedule, he has to ensure that the celebrant does not go over the allowed number of masses that he can celebrate in one day. He has to give preference to that which is ordinary, in this case the OF.

Once the hurdles of schedules and permissions are clear, the next hurdle is the most difficult. Summorum Pontificum gave secular priests permission to celebrate the EF, with specific directives, but it does not mandate it. A priest does not have to accept the request, even if 1,000 people show up at his front door. The law would dictate that he not be looked at as a bad guy because he does not want to celebrate the EF. It is his right to decline the invitation to do so. We’re not talking here about what is or is not more or less spiritual. That gets very subjective. We’re talking here about what is the right of the priest. Only a priest who is a member of a religious order can be mandated to celebrate either form. This is what Summorum Pontificum is referring to when it says “according to common law.”

If the priests in your parish belong to a religious or secular institute, they work in the diocese under a contract. They are not part of the diocese. You are, but they are not. What the bishop can demand of them depends on the contract between the diocese and the community. Regardless of what the bishop may want, once the contract is signed and the religious community is established in the diocese, the contract binds the bishop in perpetuity. He cannot change it unilaterally. That is called suppression. No bishop may suppress a religious once the authority has been granted and the conditions have been agreed upon. There has to be a mutual agreement between the bishop and the religious superior. There is rarely a religious superior who will deny permission to celebrate the EF, especially for the laity. But good manners require that the superior be consulted, even if we know that he’s going to give permission.

I don’t know if your parish priest is a religious, a society priest or a diocesan priest. If he is a diocesan priest, he can celebrate the mass, provided that he clear the hurdles that I mentioned above. If the celebration of the EF disturbs the routine and life of the parish, then he is going to face some difficulties.

Some pastors and religious superiors do allow a priest to come from another place to celebrate mass for a special population. This happens a lot when you have people of another language group or another rite. There is a regular visiting priest who comes every Sunday at a certain time for that population. This may be another avenue that you can pursue. Nevertheless, you have to make sure that you have the numbers before you make that request and you have the money to pay for this service. This may mean paying the priest a stipend and paying a little for AC/heating and so forth. It’s usually very little, just enough to cover the expense.

I would not use the argument of better theology at the EF. The fact is that the Holy Father himself does not believe this. This is an argument made by many people, but not supported by either the Holy Father or by the Vatican Curia. While everyone agrees that the EF is very rich, there is a general agreement that the poor theology of the OF is not because of the form, but because of the incorrect way in which the form is celebrated. This has validity. If you watch the EF on EWTN, at the National Shrine, at certain religious houses, certain parishes or even the Vatican, it is done in a manner that is theologically sound and faithful to the on-going theology of the mass. The richness of the EF is in its externals, not in the essential. The essential is not different between the two forms when done correctly.

The bishop does have control over the masses celebrated in his parishes. Summorum Pontificum gives secular priests permission to celebrat the EF without having to ask for permission. It does not give them permission to change diocesan or parish practices. Canon law must be followed. The bishop as the pastor of his diocese.

If you have enough people who want the EF and no priest in the parish can celebrate it or will celebrate it, you may want to ask the pastor if you can scout around for a priest to come over and do so. But keep in mind the rules. I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Corki said:
This is a bit of a tricky situation. While no permission is needed, if the Bishop has forbidden it, the priest is in the precarious position of facing disobedience. Our Archbishop stated that no parish will be allowed to offer the EF Mass, other than those where the indult was given pre-MP, without his express permission. That put all the priests in our diocese in a bind even if they want to offer the EF Mass.

I don’t know for sure, but it may not be the priest as much as his environment.
Click to expand...
How can a Bishop forbid the EF Mass if the Pope has said it is to be allowed? :hmmm::hmmm:
 
elts1956 said:
How can a Bishop forbid the EF Mass if the Pope has said it is to be allowed? :hmmm::hmmm:
Click to expand...
Read my post above. Summorum Pontificum gives secular priests (only) freedom to celebrate the Extraordinary Form. But it does not change the canons regarding the rights of bishops over their parishes.

A good example is this. Father X wants to celebrate mass in the EF. He does not need permission to do so, if he’s a secular priest. Father wants to celebrate it at St. Mary’s Catholic Church. St. Mary’s is not his property. It belongs to the diocese. The diocese cannot stop Father from celebrating the EF of the mass. But it can say that it may not be done at St. Mary’s.

The Holy Father deliberately left that part out of the letter so as not to undermine the authority of the diocesan bishop over his jurisdiction. It was the intention of the Holy Father to clarify that the Tridentine Form can be celebrated by secular priests [and by religious priests if they have permission from their community]. It was not the intention of the Holy Father to change the laws on how dioceses are run and who has what authority over the parishes.

To avoid that conflict, he does not touch on authority over parishes in the letter. He deals only with the right of the priest to celebrate the form. Therefore, all the canons regarding the rights of pastors remain in place. The bishop is the pastor of the diocese. There has to be some coordination between the bishop and the priest who wants to celebrate the EF.

The Holy Father is not a canon lawyer himself, but one of the best canon lawyers in the world is his secretary and personal advisor. I’m sure that Don Girogio gets consulted before these documents hit the public. He was always consulted when he was Cardinal Ratzinger’s right hand man at the Curia. You liberate the Tridentine Form, but you leave the authority of the bishop over the parish and the faithful intact, if you are careful with the wording. I cannot imagine another way of doing this without being that cautious.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
elts1956 said:
How can a Bishop forbid the EF Mass if the Pope has said it is to be allowed? :hmmm::hmmm:
Click to expand...
In addition to Brother JR’s excellent explanation, this was also covered in my previous post on page 1 of this thread. According to the motu proprio, a priest can say the TLM whenever he wants with no permission necessary at a Mass where the people are not present. The motu proprio does not, however, give any such broad permission with respect to the celebration of parish Masses: instead, it reaffirms the roles of the pastor and bishop in promoting harmony and unity in the celebration of the Mass, as well as caring for the needs of different groups of people. So, for instance, a parish’s associate priest cannot just decide on the fly one morning that he’s going to make the 11:00 Mass a TLM, and then reject the inevitable flood of complaints because “I don’t need anybody’s permission to say the TLM.” It doesn’t work that way at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top