Relatively few catholics prefer the TLM

[palmas85]

It is quite possible that the Archbishops have information that you or even FSSP does not have - fear does not have to have any part in the decisions they make.

Until I read this post I really thought you were serious in what you were talking about. This statement pretty clearly shows that your argument is based on absolutely nothing and is just an argument for arguments sake.

A pity.

 

[AlexV]

““There is no, and was never, a reason to worry about level of interest for any OF missal in Church history. We are looking at level of interest for the EF.””

This guy should work for the Belgian bishops, or the Dutch, or the American…any country where Mass attendance has plummeted. After all, no reason to worry about levels of interests in “Ordinary Form” Missals…

 

[jflare29]

First, the question above can be answered quickly by anyone with the slightest acquaintance of liturgical history. The answer would be no.

Secondly, how on earth did you reach the conclusion that too many Catholics were going through the motions and didn’t know why? Did you peer into their hearts and minds?

My impression has been that Catholics prior to Vatican II were taught their faith far better than after the Council. The Novus Ordo challenges people to learn their faith more thoroughly? How is that working out so far?

It would be interesting for you to show any evidence that anyone opposed the NO because it required them to learn their faith more deeply. Good grief and then some!

Well, in all honesty, this and many other postings in this thread demonstrate my points quite well, though rather subtlely.

Very briefly, do we truly believe that our modern world and/or the Novus Ordo have changed so dramatically much more than any other time in history?
Then we believe in ourselves in grave arrogance.

Then too, insisting that pre-Vatican II Catholics were generally well-catechized…may be partly true, but likely suffers from a degree of sentimentality.

Finally, many posts in this thread demonstrate how the faithful, lay and clergy alike, had need for dramatic change. If we notice that things haven’t gone well, at least we’re paying attention enough to notice at all.

BTW, I don’t recall ever declaring that the Traditional Mass was a threat. As I understand things, the MP aims to BOTH appeal to SSPX to “come back to Rome” AND to challenge you, me, and Joe down the street, to bring more reverence to either Mass.

John

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Well, in all honesty, this and many other postings in this thread demonstrate my points quite well, though rather subtlely.

Very briefly, do we truly believe that our modern world and/or the Novus Ordo have changed so dramatically much more than any other time in history?
Then we believe in ourselves in grave arrogance.

Then too, insisting that pre-Vatican II Catholics were generally well-catechized…may be partly true, but likely suffers from a degree of sentimentality.

Finally, many posts in this thread demonstrate how the faithful, lay and clergy alike, had need for dramatic change. If we notice that things haven’t gone well, at least we’re paying attention enough to notice at all.

BTW, I don’t recall ever declaring that the Traditional Mass was a threat. As I understand things, the MP aims to BOTH appeal to SSPX to “come back to Rome” AND to challenge you, me, and Joe down the street, to bring more reverence to either Mass.

John

jflare, thanks for the response.

I would simply say that at no other time in the Church’s history has the liturgy been so radically altered. I know of no time where the liturgy was given to be completely worked over by a committee. Most developments have accumulated gradually over time (organic development). I consider this prima facie obvious and beyond dispute since the history of the liturgy is available to us.

There is no sentimentality on my part as far as stating pre-Vatican II Catholics were generally better catechized as I was not even born when the Council started. Rather, the idea prior to Vatican II was to transmit the Faith and doctrine in a way that it would be learned. After Vatican II, it seems as if it wasn’t just bad methodology, but the attitude seemed almost as if there really was no doctrine that needed to be transmitted.

Prior to Vatican II every area of Catholic life was on the upsurge–in vocations, baptism, conversions, etc. After Vatican II every area went down (to say the least). So I don’t know how you are reaching the conclusion that prior to Vatican II the Church needed radical change as if there was a huge problem.

Should we always try to improve the spiritual state of Catholics? Absolutely. But I would state that this comes by embracing tradition more fully, not radically altering everything just so we can notice how bad things are.

I’ve never stated that you fear the TLM.

God bless.

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

I only bring up what happened with the NO in 1969 as a response to those who would consider the possibility of allowing a parish the option of having a Sunday TLM without taking a poll as “forcing” the TLM on people. I like to point out what “forcing” really is.

Problem with this tactic is that it totally leaves out that it was (and is should the HMC decide to do it again) NOT something ‘we’ need to be consulted about or have given any kind of approval for.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Problem with this tactic is that it totally leaves out that it was (and is should the HMC decide to do it again) NOT something ‘we’ need to be consulted about or have given any kind of approval for.

And how many times have I already said that the Church can change the liturgy without consulting anyone?

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

And how many times have I already said that the Church can change the liturgy without consulting anyone?

Have you noticed that you are in an EXTREME minority?

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Have you noticed that you are in an EXTREME minority?

In regards to what?

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

In regards to what?

In regards to what we have been posting about.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Have you noticed that you are in an EXTREME minority?

You could be more specific.

However, I will say that if my views on the liturgy line up with men like Cardinal Ottaviani, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Dr. William Marra, Dom Alcuin Reid, and Fr. Aidan Nichols then I am perfectly happy with that.

If they don’t line up with the majority of modern day Catholics, well, you’ve just brought up a point I could hardly care less about (though I do care about what Catholics think regarding the liturgy, it just doesn’t matter to me if my views don’t line up with theirs). Congratulations.

And also, congratulations on winning the popularity contest. You know, I think Britney Spears at one point in her career was outselling Mozart. I’m sure that makes her a better musician and she should feel good about that.

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

You could be more specific.

However, I will say that if my views on the liturgy line up with men like Cardinal Ottaviani, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Dr. William Marra, Dom Alcuin Reid, and Fr. Aidan Nichols then I am perfectly happy with that.

If they don’t line up with the majority of modern day Catholics, well, you’ve just brought up a point I could hardly care less about (though I do care about what Catholics think regarding the liturgy, it just doesn’t matter to me if my views don’t line up with theirs). Congratulations.

And also, congratulations on winning the popularity contest. You know, I think Britney Spears at one point in her career was outselling Mozart. I’m sure that makes her a better musician and she should feel good about that.

I give up – you have moved this to a different area than what we were specifically talking about.

 

[Markstorm]

You could be more specific.

However, I will say that if my views on the liturgy line up with men like Cardinal Ottaviani, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Dr. William Marra, Dom Alcuin Reid, and Fr. Aidan Nichols then I am perfectly happy with that.

If they don’t line up with the majority of modern day Catholics, well, you’ve just brought up a point I could hardly care less about (though I do care about what Catholics think regarding the liturgy, it just doesn’t matter to me if my views don’t line up with theirs). Congratulations.

And also, congratulations on winning the popularity contest. You know, I think Britney Spears at one point in her career was outselling Mozart. I’m sure that makes her a better musician and she should feel good about that.

Good response. James0235 had a great refutation on the first page also. My thanks to you gentlemen for standing up for Mother Church’s tradition charitably and, dare I say, humorously.

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

Good response. James0235 had a great refutation on the first page also. My thanks to you gentlemen for standing up for Mother Church’s tradition charitably and, dare I say, humorously.

I don’t believe it is a good response at all as it does not logically follow what we were talking about in the last few posts.

 

[stmaria]

I don’t believe it is a good response at all as it does not logically follow what we were talking about in the last few posts.

Admit it. You are really Coach! Right? I think he got banned. But now he is back as Just 1 hr a wk! Pretty clever move, Coach!!!.

 

[Markstorm]

I don’t believe it is a good response at all as it does not logically follow what we were talking about in the last few posts.

I got his point just fine. Any confusion is likely due to your response to Brennan’s request for clarification. Instead of defining what exactly you meant, you issued a clever (in the loosest sense of the word) one-liner.

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

I got his point just fine. Any confusion is likely due to your response to Brennan’s request for clarification. Instead of defining what exactly you meant, you issued a clever (in the loosest sense of the word) one-liner.

Brennan moved the comments from generalized to specifically being comments he made (which was NEVER indicated in my post) to dragging in all sort of ‘big guns’ to back him up.

While Brennan has not (to my knowledge) made the specific comment he is in the minority of those posting to boards.

I give up – there are times I swear traditional Catholics do this kind of dance back and forth to be ‘right’ at all costs no matter what has to be dragged into an exchange.

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

Admit it. You are really Coach! Right? I think he got banned. But now he is back as Just 1 hr a wk! Pretty clever move, Coach!!!.

No I am not coach.

I would appreciate it if no one else decides to proclaim that I am as I will consider it personal harassment.

 

[Markstorm]

I give up – there are times I swear traditional Catholics do this kind of dance back and forth to be ‘right’ at all costs no matter what has to be dragged into an exchange.

Sorry you feel that way.

 

[pnewton]

No I am not coach.

I would appreciate it if no one else decides to proclaim that I am as I will consider it personal harassment.

All this personal attacks and wild speculation is getting old. Gee, doesn’t the topic itself have enough controversy to talk about?

 

[jflare29]

jflare, thanks for the response.

I would simply say that at no other time in the Church’s history has the liturgy been so radically altered. I know of no time where the liturgy was given to be completely worked over by a committee. Most developments have accumulated gradually over time (organic development). I consider this prima facie obvious and beyond dispute since the history of the liturgy is available to us.

There is no sentimentality on my part as far as stating pre-Vatican II Catholics were generally better catechized as I was not even born when the Council started. Rather, the idea prior to Vatican II was to transmit the Faith and doctrine in a way that it would be learned. After Vatican II, it seems as if it wasn’t just bad methodology, but the attitude seemed almost as if there really was no doctrine that needed to be transmitted.

Prior to Vatican II every area of Catholic life was on the upsurge–in vocations, baptism, conversions, etc. After Vatican II every area went down (to say the least). So I don’t know how you are reaching the conclusion that prior to Vatican II the Church needed radical change as if there was a huge problem.

Should we always try to improve the spiritual state of Catholics? Absolutely. But I would state that this comes by embracing tradition more fully, not radically altering everything just so we can notice how bad things are.

I’ve never stated that you fear the TLM.

God bless.

This explains a great deal. I’m not precisely disagreeing with your analysis, but rather suggesting that you’re tending toward being legalistic and a historian; ie. you’re asking for documented proof.

Don’t forget, human beings don’t often document exactly what they think about life, so it’s hard for either of us to tell precisely what was on people’s minds for sure.

I’ll leave with this thought: As I understand it, most Councils have been convoked because a serious problem or group of them had developed and needed to be addressed. If you read Vatican II, you’ll see that Modernism had begun to plague the world–or at least, that’s how I remember understanding the Constitutions.

Most Councils have also required considerable time (50 years on average) to be implemented. Therefore, while the absolute numbers regarding vocations, etc… may have been good, ill winds may have been rising even so.

Shoot! Gotta run!

John