K
KyrieEleison
Guest
Do you think the TLM should be more available? How much more?
- Status
N
Nekic
Guest
As much as the hoped universal indult brings.
K
Kielbasi
Guest
The Tridentine rite is already available in hundreds of locations , within a day’s drive of virtually every American.
Anyone in this country who wants to hear the historic rite of the church has ample opportunity to make it there on an occasional basis.
I guess that the Church could schedule the same number of Latin masses in even more locations. Here in Pittsburgh , TLM is said in one location, perhaps a hundred times a year. Would it be better to spread them out through the Pittsburgh diocese instead, maybe saying the 100 masses at a 100 different churches and covering each of the diocese 200 or so parishes over a 2 year period?
I don’t know if it would or not, the US is a pretty mobile society, people can generally get around fairly well and it would be an effort for the priests trained in Latin to haul their equipment, vestments and materials to so many different venues.
Anyone in this country who wants to hear the historic rite of the church has ample opportunity to make it there on an occasional basis.
I guess that the Church could schedule the same number of Latin masses in even more locations. Here in Pittsburgh , TLM is said in one location, perhaps a hundred times a year. Would it be better to spread them out through the Pittsburgh diocese instead, maybe saying the 100 masses at a 100 different churches and covering each of the diocese 200 or so parishes over a 2 year period?
I don’t know if it would or not, the US is a pretty mobile society, people can generally get around fairly well and it would be an effort for the priests trained in Latin to haul their equipment, vestments and materials to so many different venues.
A
AlexV
Guest
“Anyone in this country who wants to hear the historic rite of the church has ample opportunity to make it there on an occasional basis.”
Highly debatable.
There are many dioceses where…despite large numbers of petitioners…the local bishop simply refuses to authorize a Mass.
This creates a situation where such people must travel to a neighboring diocese (in one case, the closest Mass is almost 200 miles away). I guess if “occasional” is the key word, sure, it’s possible…but it’s hardly “ample opportunity”.
Highly debatable.
There are many dioceses where…despite large numbers of petitioners…the local bishop simply refuses to authorize a Mass.
This creates a situation where such people must travel to a neighboring diocese (in one case, the closest Mass is almost 200 miles away). I guess if “occasional” is the key word, sure, it’s possible…but it’s hardly “ample opportunity”.
O
OutinChgoburbs
Guest
ALL forms and rites of legitimate (loyal to the Pope) Eucharistic Liturgy that are not supressed should be available as much as possible, insofar as there are people to attend in every sense of the word attend, and there are priests who can render such Eucharistic Liturgy. In the case of the TLM, I think it meets those qualifiers much more than the general populace realizes. And I am not a big fan of the TLM.
K
Kielbasi
Guest
200 miles is about 3 hours, not that far of a drive to take occasionally although much more than most people would like to take on a daily or weekly basis.
But if travel is a problem, do you think it would be better to have Latin mass said at 365 different churches during a course of a year instead of daily at a single centralized location that might be 200 miles away from some Catholics?
A
AlexV
Guest
A three hour one-way daily drive would be ludicrous.
Weekly, especially when you consider not all Mass-goers drive or can get rides, is also rather unrealistic.
It doesn’t need to be 1 or 365 different locations. There’s something called a happy medium…something some bishops simply haven’t provided, because, in all too many dioceses, the one thing you’ll never see supported or encouraged without ecclesiastical warfare is the Tridentine Mass.
When you have a bishop say “Over my dead body” to the idea of the celebration of the Mass in a form used for over a thousand years…and yes, I’ve heard a bishop use those words to describe his response to a Tridentine Mass Indult…you have a serious problem.
Weekly, especially when you consider not all Mass-goers drive or can get rides, is also rather unrealistic.
It doesn’t need to be 1 or 365 different locations. There’s something called a happy medium…something some bishops simply haven’t provided, because, in all too many dioceses, the one thing you’ll never see supported or encouraged without ecclesiastical warfare is the Tridentine Mass.
When you have a bishop say “Over my dead body” to the idea of the celebration of the Mass in a form used for over a thousand years…and yes, I’ve heard a bishop use those words to describe his response to a Tridentine Mass Indult…you have a serious problem.
B
Brendan
Guest
Every parish should have at least one Sunday Latin Mass, either the TLM or the Pauline Missal.
K
Kielbasi
Guest
Absolutely true, but there is no real reason that anyone has to hear the Tridentine mass each and every week. The obligation is to hear mass, not to hear Latin mass each Sunday.
I
Isidore_AK
Guest
Well, the nearest TLM for me is about 400 miles away…usually about a 7-8 hour drive. Theres not exactly an Interstate Highway system up here…
…and our Archbishop is one of those that flatly refuses to allow a TLM- even though we now have an SSPX chapel in response to his refusal. Its sad when the biggest city in the state (about 300,000 people) can’t get a TLM, even after petitioning for it…
…and our Archbishop is one of those that flatly refuses to allow a TLM- even though we now have an SSPX chapel in response to his refusal. Its sad when the biggest city in the state (about 300,000 people) can’t get a TLM, even after petitioning for it…
A
AlexV
Guest
“No real reason” for the Tridentine Mass every week, says Kielbasi.
Yeah…no real reason indeed. We’re all just whiny elitists who want to have our way with our Tridentine Mass.
If one church within five hundred miles has a Sunday Mass, then the “rightful aspirations” of those who “attached to certain preceding forms of the Latin liturgical tradition” have been “respected”.
If someone can’t get to that one Mass…well no worry. There’s “no real reason” they need to.
Minimalist Catholicism at its best. As long as there’s a Mass, any valid one will do, shut up, I guess.
Yeah…no real reason indeed. We’re all just whiny elitists who want to have our way with our Tridentine Mass.
If one church within five hundred miles has a Sunday Mass, then the “rightful aspirations” of those who “attached to certain preceding forms of the Latin liturgical tradition” have been “respected”.
If someone can’t get to that one Mass…well no worry. There’s “no real reason” they need to.
Minimalist Catholicism at its best. As long as there’s a Mass, any valid one will do, shut up, I guess.
P
proud2bcatholic
Guest
Definitely alot more.
Kielbasi’s statements are ridiculous.
Kielbasi’s statements are ridiculous.
T
tradcathconvert
Guest
I hope the rumors of the universal indult for the Traditional Latin Mass are true. It is the Mass I have been attending since September of 1997. Now I am in charge of the altar boys for our indult TLM.
B
Brendan
Guest
In which case, there would likewise be no real reason that a vernacular has to be offered each week. The obligation is to hear mass, not to hear Mass in one’s native language.
J
jmm08
Guest
I think the traditional Latin Mass should be available to this degree:
Ideally (if enough Priests are available), each Roman Catholic Church should have at least one local-language Mass, at least one traditional Latin Mass, at least one Tridentine Latin Mass each Sunday and each Holy Day of Obligation. And at least one Latin Mass on some weekday during the week. And that the absolute ratio of availability of mass (by language) could be left up to the Bishop or at the Bishop’s discretion left up to the Church pastor.
It should not be the case (as is typical today) that a Roman Catholic Church would never have a Latin Mass at any time in a whole year.
However, keep in mind that many parish churches have masses in more than one language (aside from Latin). So adding a Latin Mass at times could be difficult. My church has many Spanish-speaking Catholics as well as English-speaking. And I am aware of parishes that have Mass in English and Italian. Even so, I am uncomfortable with the idea that Mass would never be in Latin.
There may be parishes where a vast majority of parishioners would not attend a Latin mass. So it can be a waste of limited resources to require too many Latin Masses. In some circumstances, parishes have very limited resources and should not be overburdened with requirements. What if the local pastor in untrained in the Latin Mass? Circumstances can vary quite a bit from one country to another throughout the world. I trust that our Pope will consider many things before releasing his document. The Washington Post recently had an article that a document exists, that it is in a third draft and it is currently in review. So I will be glad when it is released.
Ideally (if enough Priests are available), each Roman Catholic Church should have at least one local-language Mass, at least one traditional Latin Mass, at least one Tridentine Latin Mass each Sunday and each Holy Day of Obligation. And at least one Latin Mass on some weekday during the week. And that the absolute ratio of availability of mass (by language) could be left up to the Bishop or at the Bishop’s discretion left up to the Church pastor.
It should not be the case (as is typical today) that a Roman Catholic Church would never have a Latin Mass at any time in a whole year.
However, keep in mind that many parish churches have masses in more than one language (aside from Latin). So adding a Latin Mass at times could be difficult. My church has many Spanish-speaking Catholics as well as English-speaking. And I am aware of parishes that have Mass in English and Italian. Even so, I am uncomfortable with the idea that Mass would never be in Latin.
There may be parishes where a vast majority of parishioners would not attend a Latin mass. So it can be a waste of limited resources to require too many Latin Masses. In some circumstances, parishes have very limited resources and should not be overburdened with requirements. What if the local pastor in untrained in the Latin Mass? Circumstances can vary quite a bit from one country to another throughout the world. I trust that our Pope will consider many things before releasing his document. The Washington Post recently had an article that a document exists, that it is in a third draft and it is currently in review. So I will be glad when it is released.
A
AJV
Guest
What does the last option mean?
L
LilyM
Guest
Absolutely you are whinging! You should live with my parents - they have to travel an hour and a half each way each Sunday to get a Mass of any sort.
And they’re relatively well off - there’d be plenty more in their area who’d be going over two hours to get to a Mass, which isn’t unusual in a lot of parts of this fine but sparsely populated land.
Even 150 years ago or so we had ONE Catholic Bishop for the WHOLE of Australia - imagine how rarely Catholics got to see priests of any description back then!
Now if our situations were reversed and I had only the TLM available to go to I probably wouldn’t like it. I’ve seen a number of films of TLMs now, though I’ve not had the opportunity to go in person. I gave them a fair look and kept an open mind, but I just can’t see myself finding the TLM conducive to the worship of God at all.
But you can bet if the only way to fulfil my Sunday obligation was to attend a TLM for lack of anything else I wouldn’t be complaining like a child in a supermarket about it.
I feel for anyone who has to suffer through a liturgy that they dislike. If you do, I suggest you offer it up for all those Catholics who for centuries had no other option open to them but the TLM and found as much wrong with it as you do with the NO.
R
Rabbititus
Guest
It should definately be a lot more widely available. Anyone should be able to see it without much effort, if only because it is such a major part of Catholic history, tradition, and culture.
S
steve_green_2
Guest
from a poster on another forum:
I think the practical considerations expressed above really speak to the necessity of our having our own parishes. A Universal Indult – or recognition of every Latin priest’s right to offer TLM – is great news but our particular spiritual/liturgical needs can really only be fully addressed in traditional parishes.
I’m all in favor of Monsingnor B at the huge NO parish downtown adding a Latin Mass to his Sunday lineup but how many of you are really prepared to hear Mass in a banner-ridden, stripped down church that was used for the local Council of Churches ecumenical service the night before? Rather than maintain our status as the red-headed step children of Rome in a parish structure that will only view us as second class Catholics, I prefer to retain a separate identity within the Latin Church.
That said, and this will really get me into trouble, we have to give some thought to what happens when we emerge from the catacombs. Whether the SSPX opens a chapel in your city or the bishop hands over a failing parish, at least a portion of the local NO population is going to be curious. How we greet them is going to be crucial to our success.
If they encounter sour, angry, and suspicous people they’re not going to come back. It’s understandable that our current position would make us a little weary but there seems to be a neo-puritanism creeping into our ranks - most notable among converts. I was born well after the Council but the zealous converts who look down their noses at, say, alcohol or sports really concern me. In my grandparents day, parish picnics included beer and a ballgame; the Knights of Coulmbus hall had a bar, etc. Pre-V2 Catholicism wasn’t a socially rigid Puritanism.
I don’t mean to offend anyone by what I’ve written above. (Especially converts who have, in many ways, spearheaded this movement to great success) but we have to start thinking in terms of parish – not just a chapel or enclave. When new people visit, they should be welcomed with Christian hospitality and a big helping of patience.
As I’ve probably already irritated many with my comments, I’ll risk adding that the Orthodox seem to provide a good model. In modern, non-ethnic parishes they retain a solemn, transcendent liturgy and sacramental life but after Divine Liturgy they gather for cake and coffee and welcome newcomers with a hospitality that I’ve rarely experienced in traditional Catholic communities.
I think the practical considerations expressed above really speak to the necessity of our having our own parishes. A Universal Indult – or recognition of every Latin priest’s right to offer TLM – is great news but our particular spiritual/liturgical needs can really only be fully addressed in traditional parishes.
I’m all in favor of Monsingnor B at the huge NO parish downtown adding a Latin Mass to his Sunday lineup but how many of you are really prepared to hear Mass in a banner-ridden, stripped down church that was used for the local Council of Churches ecumenical service the night before? Rather than maintain our status as the red-headed step children of Rome in a parish structure that will only view us as second class Catholics, I prefer to retain a separate identity within the Latin Church.
That said, and this will really get me into trouble, we have to give some thought to what happens when we emerge from the catacombs. Whether the SSPX opens a chapel in your city or the bishop hands over a failing parish, at least a portion of the local NO population is going to be curious. How we greet them is going to be crucial to our success.
If they encounter sour, angry, and suspicous people they’re not going to come back. It’s understandable that our current position would make us a little weary but there seems to be a neo-puritanism creeping into our ranks - most notable among converts. I was born well after the Council but the zealous converts who look down their noses at, say, alcohol or sports really concern me. In my grandparents day, parish picnics included beer and a ballgame; the Knights of Coulmbus hall had a bar, etc. Pre-V2 Catholicism wasn’t a socially rigid Puritanism.
I don’t mean to offend anyone by what I’ve written above. (Especially converts who have, in many ways, spearheaded this movement to great success) but we have to start thinking in terms of parish – not just a chapel or enclave. When new people visit, they should be welcomed with Christian hospitality and a big helping of patience.
As I’ve probably already irritated many with my comments, I’ll risk adding that the Orthodox seem to provide a good model. In modern, non-ethnic parishes they retain a solemn, transcendent liturgy and sacramental life but after Divine Liturgy they gather for cake and coffee and welcome newcomers with a hospitality that I’ve rarely experienced in traditional Catholic communities.
L
LilyM
Guest
So are the torture chambers of the Spanish Inquisition - old doesn’t mean good.
- Status