Priest response to TLM leaves me stunned

[rben20]

Well I just want to thank you all for your responses and private messages. I’ve read and skimmed through all of your replies. I did not think I would get much of a response! I am sorry if I came off as ‘EF or nothing else’ by saying the EF fully represents Catholic teaching and theology. I was not saying that the OF cannot do the same, but unfortunately the teachings of the Church do suffer in my diocese in large part to the abuses in Mass. How I wish we all had the Novus Ordo of Pope Benedict XVI at every parish! I just see the TLM as a great benchmark for the new Mass to be compared to as I believe Pope Benedict XVI also saw this importance in reforming the reform. Hence, the issuing of his Moto Propio.

I simply want to worship according to the old rite of the Church because I believe it brings me closer to God and is strengthens my prayer life. Keep in mind, this is not only for me, but for all the faithful who I have began to encounter already wishing the same as I. To be honest, I did not think it would be so difficult to start the EF and I can only imagine how much harder it was before the Propio. But I agree, we must keep within the parameters of the Church and listen to her. I ask though for your prayers that we may have the chance to worship God through this rich liturgy in our diocese sometime in the near future.

 

[JReducation]

Yes, we have gotten side-tracked in a major way. Suffice to say that I am hopeful that if the OP can get enough of us to commit to doing this and sustaining this, it might very well become reality. But, I cannot stress to the OP and anyone else in the same situation that we need to follow the Church’s parameters and work within her limits and requirements. We cannot choose alternative courses that will jeaopordize the very act we are trying to accomplish. We need to do this in communion with Peter.

I agree 100%. We need to do these things within the parameters given to us. If we’re patient and consistent in our efforst, things do happen. Again, I propose the example of the FSSP and other groups who do have the EF. They did not explode over night. But they are growing and they are serving where they can. Most importantly, they are serving with the parameters allowed by the Vatican and the local bishops.

The FSSP and the Franciscans the Immaculate are huge and they are very welcome by many bishops. The concern that many people have is to get the EF. That’s a legitimate concern. But it must be achieved by overcoming one obstacle at a time. Look at how far the FSSP and the FI have progressed. I have seen with my own eyes how well they are received and how loved they are.

Whatever you do, remember that priests do not have to celebrate the EF. The fact that they decline the invitation does not imply that they are less holy or less interested in the welfare of the faithful. They have the right to decline and we have a moral obligation to accept that right.

But you move along to the next person and see if he’ll accept the invitation.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[ConstantineTG]

retracted

sorry Jo

 

[At_Trent]

Nice try, but I like the TLM, and was just at High Mass last week. What I don’t like is mistaken impressions of what SP said, especially when, for instance as above, those errors coupled with thirdhand reports of some bishop’s policies result in calumnious remarks about the bishop as being “in open rebellion” against the Pope.

What all that gibberish has to do with my reply to a specific question is beyond me. Unless it’s bait, in which case I’ll pass.

I posted my opinion.and interpretation of what is printed in black and white.

 

[At_Trent]

Actually, the priest was ordained prior to the Second Vatican Council so he does know the EF very well. He is also from another country and speaks about seven languages fluently.

Noted. Well, if doesn’t want to pray it, he shouldn’t be pressured to imo.

 

[MarkThompson]

What all that gibberish has to do with my reply to a specific question is beyond me. Unless it’s bait, in which case I’ll pass.

I posted my opinion.and interpretation of what is printed in black and white.

Hardly. You posted an opinion on a strawman position that no one holds (whether a bishop “can have the final word period, no matter what”), and then accused everyone who might disagree with extending your frankly superficial evaluations to all situations of being people who “don’t want to attend the EF, don’t want to see it prayed, or non-Roman Catholics butting in where they have no right to.”

As I mentioned on the “Negative attitude to SSPX” thread, I don’t think very highly of the argument tactic that goes, “Here’s my view. If you don’t agree, it must be because you’re dishonestly trying to promote your own agenda to advance your personal goals.” Sometimes people share your goals, but disagree with you because you are wrong.

 

[At_Trent]

Hardly. You posted an opinion on a strawman position that no one holds (whether a bishop “can have the final word period, no matter what”), and then accused everyone who might disagree with extending your frankly superficial evaluations to all situations of being people who “don’t want to attend the EF, don’t want to see it prayed, or non-Roman Catholics butting in where they have no right to.”

As I mentioned on the “Negative attitude to SSPX” thread, I don’t think very highly of the argument tactic that goes, “Here’s my view. If you don’t agree, it must be because you’re dishonestly trying to promote your own agenda to advance your personal goals.” Sometimes people share your goals, but disagree with you because you are wrong.

So why don’t you just say you disagree and spare me the inserting of topics that have nothing to do with my view or my post ? Didn’t the mod just ask to stay on topic, specifically mentioning of the SSPX ? Or did you miss that in your anger ?

Internet rambos are a dime a dozen buddy.

 

[At_Trent]

Did you get any sleep at all Mark, or have you been lurking here waiting for my reply. Sure didn’t take you long

lol, 5 minutes

 

[jbuck919]

Latin wasn’t a problem for thousands of years.

Forgive me for being new to a thread and not examining the many responses to determine if my thoughts on the matter have already been stated by others.

What I have quoted from the OP represents a common misapprehension that IMO may be at the root of the seeming incomprehensibility of even very senior members of the clergy and hierarchy being vehemently resistant to re-introducing the traditional Latin Mass, even optionally. Many of us who know only a post-Paul VI church assume that the situation is well represented by the notion that something venerable and beautiful that was reverently celebrated to the universal uplifting of souls was replaced by, well, what we have now with all its apparent shortcomings. In very local contexts, this may have been true, but in large swaths of the church, very many priests at the time the liturgical changes were happening were disgusted with a generations-old tradition of celebrating Mass by rote. Many if not most priests in the US, far from having no problem with Latin, never learned much better than to get through a Mass by strict observance of rubrics and approximately correct phonetics, typically spoken as fast as possible in order to get it over with. Though I do not question the motives of those who seek beauty and high spirituality in the older order, the newer order should not be measured against a worthy celebration of the old, but against many generations of prevailing mediocrity, insouciance, and laxity, a veritable “low Mass mentality,” in fact, which presents its own horror story hidden from public awareness at the time only because the Mass itself was said, in effect, in private.

 

[At_Trent]

Forgive me for being new to a thread and not examining the many responses to determine if my thoughts on the matter have already been stated by others.

What I have quoted from the OP represents a common misapprehension that IMO may be at the root of the seeming incomprehensibility of even very senior members of the clergy and hierarchy being vehemently resistant to re-introducing the traditional Latin Mass, even optionally. Many of us who know only a post-Paul VI church assume that the situation is well represented by the notion that something venerable and beautiful that was reverently celebrated to the universal uplifting of souls was replaced by, well, what we have now with all its apparent shortcomings. In very local contexts, this may have been true, but in large swaths of the church, very many priests at the time the liturgical changes were happening were disgusted with a generations-old tradition of celebrating Mass by rote. Many if not most priests in the US, far from having no problem with Latin, never learned much better than to get through a Mass by strict observance of rubrics and approximately correct phonetics, typically spoken as fast as possible in order to get it over with. Though I do not question the motives of those who seek beauty and high spirituality in the older order, the newer order should not be measured against a worthy celebration of the old, but against many generations of prevailing mediocrity, insouciance, and laxity, a veritable “low Mass mentality,” in fact, which presents its own horror story hidden from public awareness at the time only because the Mass itself was said, in effect, in private.

Good observance, but men do know going in, that Latin is the language of the Church.

Are you saying the EF’s inaudible prayers by the priest make it seem private ?

 

[JReducation]

Noted. Well, if doesn’t want to pray it, he shouldn’t be pressured to imo.

You’re right. No diocesan priest can be forced to celebrate the EF. Only those priests who belong to religious orders, where the superior has been granted the authority by the founder or by the governed to enforce it on his priests, have to celebrate the EF. If such authority is not there, then it cannot be done.

It all boils down to finding a priest who wants to celebrate it and at the same time not holding hard feelings against those priests who do not want to celebrate it or are not allowed to do so. Many holy men just don’t want to do it or are not allowed to do it. The EF does not fill their spiritual needs.

Then there are many holy men who find a lot of spiritual food in the EF and they want to celebrate it. One has to find them.

Also, remember what I said before. Pope Benedict released the Tridentine Form, but did not change the rules for administering diocese and parishes. He never mentioned them. Some people have said that he did not mention them, because it was an oversight. Others believe that it was deliberate, because he does mention the religious orders in the Motu Proprio and in the letter to the bishops. It raised the quesion why mention the autority of the religious and not the authority of the bishops? The answer that people conclude is that the authority of the bishops is spelled out in canon law, but the authority of religious superiors over the mass itself is not in canon law. It’s in the constitutions of each institute and the Holy Father wanted to make it clear that he was not overwriting those documents. Where the constitutions speak about how the mass must be celebrated, it must be observed by the religious and the laity that attend their parish. One walks away with the feeling that he did not want to change the laws, but simply to release the Tridentine Form.

When trying to find a priest to celebrate the EF one must coordinate between the desire of the priest to celebrate it, the rules of the diocese and the rules of the religious order, if it involves a consecrated religious. None of this is impossible, if you’re patient and polite about it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Milesius]

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.

But the Pope says that this does not pertain to a Bishop, that every priest of the Latin rite has the right to use the latin rite in either EF or OF.

A Bishop can forbid a priest from saying mass, but even then he has to be able to show a valid reason in a canon law court, he cannot tell him which form to use.

Bishops are not dictators, the Chruch has laws to protect priests from Bishops when they try to become such, and priests have the right to say Mass in the EF as a result of their ordination.

 

[Emmit_Fitzhume]

I’m sorry, but I have strep throat right now and that is why I am on the forum a limited amount, but when I read this statement, I started laughing hard, which led to my coughing, which led to pain; but it was a good pain. Thanks for the pick me up!!! I have never heard that before, but I like it and hope you won’t mind if I use it in the future.

Internet rambos are a dime a dozen buddy.

 

[JReducation]

Good observance, but men do know going in, that Latin is the language of the Church.

Are you saying the EF’s inaudible prayers by the priest make it seem private ?

There is technicality here. Only 60% of priests today are diocesan. The other 40% are regular. Regular priests go through different formation programs according to the mind of their founders and the constitutions of their community. Many communities do not use Latin. Some abandoned it a long time ago. Others never had it. Latin was never required for the consecrated religious. It was always an option, from the the Middle Ages forward.

We used Latin in liturgy, because the missals and breviaries were written in Latin. When translations became possible, the Latin books were dropped. In many communities you learned to read the missal and the breviary. You decoded, but you did not have to process. You did not know what you were saying, because it was not a requirement for regulars, unless you were going to be a theologian or a philosopher. For example, I spent six-years studying Latin, because it was my superior’s wish that I study theology. Many of my confreres did not study it, because they were not going beyond a four-year M.Div. You don’t need Latin for that level of theology. The M.Div is not a research degree. Since it does not involve research, it does not require ancient languages. The STL, which the eclesial master’s, does require research and so does the STD.

Let’s not make assumptions that are not sustainable. Latin was never as well known as we believe. Everyone prayed in Latin. Not everyone understood it. It was not a requirement, even for religious or clergy. Today, the requirement is that if you’re going to celebrate the EF, you must actually understand the language. That’s new requirement instituted by Pope John Paul II. From the Middle Ages to the 20the century comprehension was not reqired, only decoding was required. Comprehension was only for theology and philosophy students.

Most deacons and priests are not theologians or philosophers… Only bishops have to be theologians or philosophers.

That’s why many priests and deacons don’t study Latin and shy away from the EF. They can read it, but not speak it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[jbuck919]

Good observance, but men do know going in, that Latin is the language of the Church.

Are you saying the EF’s inaudible prayers by the priest make it seem private ?

I am saying that a priest could hide as much as he cared to with only pre-adolescent altar boys nearby to hear (some of) the words. However, I don’t wish to give the impression that I consider the rite itself flawed, or that I don’t realize that there were many priests who celebrated it in a worthy fashion. My comments should be taken as pointing to a history, gradually being forgotten, of the Novus Ordo having originally been its own way of dealing with what was perceived by educated men, fine priests and bishops, to have been its own kind of abuse. That’s not the whole story, but IMO it does help explain why so many bishops over the years have said, “Never in my diocese.”

 

[At_Trent]

You’re right. No diocesan priest can be forced to celebrate the EF. Only those priests who belong to religious orders, where the superior has been granted the authority by the founder or by the governed to enforce it on his priests, have to celebrate the EF. If such authority is not there, then it cannot be done.

It all boils down to finding a priest who wants to celebrate it and at the same time not holding hard feelings against those priests who do not want to celebrate it or are not allowed to do so. Many holy men just don’t want to do it or are not allowed to do it. The EF does not fill their spiritual needs.

Then there are many holy men who find a lot of spiritual food in the EF and they want to celebrate it. One has to find them.

Also, remember what I said before. Pope Benedict released the Tridentine Form, but did not change the rules for administering diocese and parishes. He never mentioned them. Some people have said that he did not mention them, because it was an oversight. Others believe that it was deliberate, because he does mention the religious orders in the Motu Proprio and in the letter to the bishops. It raised the quesion why mention the autority of the religious and not the authority of the bishops? The answer that people conclude is that the authority of the bishops is spelled out in canon law, but the authority of religious superiors over the mass itself is not in canon law. It’s in the constitutions of each institute and the Holy Father wanted to make it clear that he was not overwriting those documents. Where the constitutions speak about how the mass must be celebrated, it must be observed by the religious and the laity that attend their parish. One walks away with the feeling that he did not want to change the laws, but simply to release the Tridentine Form.

When trying to find a priest to celebrate the EF one must coordinate between the desire of the priest to celebrate it, the rules of the diocese and the rules of the religious order, if it involves a consecrated religious. None of this is impossible, if you’re patient and polite about it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Well said Br JR. I can’t find a single point to disagree with

 

[At_Trent]

I’m sorry, but I have strep throat right now and that is why I am on the forum a limited amount, but when I read this statement, I started laughing hard, which led to my coughing, which led to pain; but it was a good pain. Thanks for the pick me up!!! I have never heard that before, but I like it and hope you won’t mind if I use it in the future.

Feel free to use it - And a prayer your way for a speedy recovery

 

[Emmit_Fitzhume]

Thank you and on that note, I am going to bed, feeling safe and secure in the arms of God. God Bless to all

Feel free to use it - And a prayer your way for a speedy recovery

 

[PacoG]

The nearest EF Mass is in San Antonio, Texas, about a two and a half hour, 150-mile drive from us.

Actually, the nearest EF Mass to Laredo is in Pharr at St. Jude Thaddeus Catholic Church. Pharr is 145 miles from Laredo.

That Mass is said by the Oratorian Fathers who staff St. Jude Thaddeus.

The Bishop of Brownsville–the Most Rev. Daniel Flores–spoke well about the EF Mass in an article in the most recent issue of the Diocesan newspaper. Who knows…if he promotes it, there might be one closer to you in either Roma or Rio Grande City soon.

 

[rben20]

Actually, the nearest EF Mass to Laredo is in Pharr at St. Jude Thaddeus Catholic Church. Pharr is 145 miles from Laredo.

That Mass is said by the Oratorian Fathers who staff St. Jude Thaddeus.

The Bishop of Brownsville–the Most Rev. Daniel Flores–spoke well about the EF Mass in an article in the most recent issue of the Diocesan newspaper. Who knows…if he promotes it, there might be one closer to you in either Roma or Rio Grande City soon.

Would you happen to have a link to this article? Just curious.