THe boy only Altar server debate is over

[TNT]

All this about upgrading/modernizing/experimenting/piling on recent NOM novelties toward the Traditional Latin Mass is quite senseless.
Here’s why:
Words have meanings…constant meanings, not novel meanings. The word that has constant meaning here is TRADITIONAL.

** Traditional means that which was handed down from one generation to another without corruption.**

To add all sorts of innovations to the TLM would no longer make it a “Traditional Latin Mass”. The entire idea is to keep the Latin Mass TRADITIONAL. If all these funky ideas were piled on it would become the Novelty Latin Mass.

At that point the Traditional Catholic would disown it and reject it entirely.

So, no, none of the novel NOM ideas here will ever make it into the Traditional Latin Mass. It’s just wishful thinking of a liberal mindset where Tradition either has no meaning as a word or it grinds against their desire to overthrow anything that has a Traditional Catholic sense.

Once again the sig tells it all quite well:**
To destroy a Religion, you must first sever** its traditions.

 

[KathleenElsie]

You should not be imposing your innovations and novelties on the ancient rite of the Mass. I hope we never see these expectations of yours to bring the TLM in line with 2007. There are rubrics for the TLM which must be followed, and I really hope that people with your viewpoint don’t destroy the traditions of the Mass that we just had returned to us.

As much as it pains me to say this. I believe there will be some Bishops that will try to place the new order GIRM on the priests that are willing to do the TLM. Not sure how they will achieve this. But I suspect they will try.

 

[paramedicgirl]

As much as it pains me to say this. I believe there will be some Bishops that will try to place the new order GIRM on the priests that are willing to do the TLM. Not sure how they will achieve this. But I suspect they will try.

The nightmare begins?

 

[KathleenElsie]

The nightmare begins?

I believe that we will find who is friend or foe of the TLM. So we had better keep praying and praying hard.

 

[THurifer2]

I am convinced that many people here who promote the Mass of 1962 are actually just stuck in time and/or are hiding behind it to forward an agenda. .

Huh? Stuck in time? How can I be stuck in a time period that I never lived in? Have you ever been to a TLM? The reason why I promote the 62 Mass is becuase of its beauty.

 

[chicago]

Agreed!!!. Why it is called Tradition!!!.

Even the Mass of 1962 DEVELOPED over many years and centuries into the particular for outlined by that missal. If it is to remain an absolute isolated historical item only, then it loses it’s luster as something a part of the life of the Church and it’s growth.

 

[THurifer2]

Even the Mass of 1962 DEVELOPED over many years and centuries into the particular for outlined by that missal. If it is to remain an absolute isolated historical item only, then it loses it’s luster as something a part of the life of the Church and it’s growth.

Of course it developed…!!! it developed again after 1962…into somthing called the pauline Mass…SO now people have the choice of attending the isolated historical item (1962 Mass) or the one that isn’t (pauline mass)

 

[paramedicgirl]

For all those who want to bring their novelties and innovations into the TLM so that it can “get with the times,” think about this:

The Holy Father made it very clear in his Motu Proprio that the TLM and the Novus Ordo are two separate rites and are not to be mixed. It has been very clearly established that there is an ordinary form and an extraordinary form that exist as two expressions of the one Latin Rite. We are to celebrate them each in their own appropriate way. Anything else is DISOBEDIENCE.

 

[BobP123]

As much as it pains me to say this. I believe there will be some Bishops that will try to place the new order GIRM on the priests that are willing to do the TLM. Not sure how they will achieve this. But I suspect they will try.

Well, we knew a certain backlash would occur with the MP. Going forward we can’t and shouldn’t expect a perfect climate. The Pope did what would be best for the Catholic Church, however, and all we can do now is to do what we can at the local level. We know we have plenty of support from the top.

Having said that, there has to be a lot of spite and hatred coming from those that wish to put an end to the TLM once and for all. Why this is so I don’t know. It’s not like the Pope issued Quo Primum II and shut off the Novus Ordo. The faithful NO bunch will still have their beloved vulgar tongue in which they can “understand” the Mass better, distract everyone else in church as much as possible, etc. But maybe they won’t feel they can use condescending language against the traditionalists anymore, though. Maybe that’s what causes them such pain now? I don’t know.

Methinks we should make sure the Novus Ordo never goes away. If it does, these NOs will need to do something with their time like crashing the TLM Mass as much as possible.

 

[jmcrae]

And if a priest attempted to use them [female altar servers], the Motu Proprio addresses how issues are addressed, first to the bishop, and then an appeal may be made to Eccelsia Dei.

I imagine the same would hold true for lay readers and EMHC’s.

I have downloaded and read the Motu Proprio from EWTN, but I’m not seeing anything that specifically addresses the issues of altar servers, EMHCs, or lay readers. I am assuming that they remain the same as before.

It also doesn’t say anything about making any kind of changes to the Missa Normativa - I don’t think female altar servers are being forbidden in the Missa Normativa. They have never been used in the Tridentine Mass, since lay people of both sexes, other than boy altar servers (who ideally are boys who attend junior seminary, though other boys can be used if there are no junior seminarians available) are forbidden in the Sanctuary during a Tridentine Mass, in all cases, anyway - there is no such thing as a lay reader or an EMHC in the Tridentine Mass.

 

[chicago]

To add all sorts of innovations to the TLM would no longer make it a “Traditional Latin Mass”. The entire idea is to keep the Latin Mass TRADITIONAL. If all these funky ideas were piled on it would become the Novelty Latin Mass.

Is the TLM intended to be a historical piece preserved in frozen time or a living part of the contemporary Church in coversation of a continuing liturgy through future time?

At that point the Traditional Catholic would disown it and reject it entirely.

Many of the “Traditional Catholics” are young people who never grew up with it or had it “passed down” to them in a continuing way, but came to it as a sort of novelty, in and of itself, originally. For them to reject it entirely or disown it because others choose to celebrate it in a manner that could be entirely legitimate would be ironic, indeed.

 

[THurifer2]

. They have never been used in the Tridentine Mass, since lay people of both sexes, other than boy altar servers (who ideally are boys who attend junior seminary, though other boys can be used if there are no junior seminarians available) are forbidden in the Sanctuary during a Tridentine Mass, in all cases, anyway - there is no such thing as a lay reader or an EMHC in the Tridentine Mass.

I believe the 1962 has a prohibition written in it against females inside the sanctuary.

 

[chicago]

Of course it developed…!!! it developed again after 1962…into somthing called the pauline Mass…SO now people have the choice of attending the isolated historical item (1962 Mass) or the one that isn’t (pauline mass)

It would seem to me that the pope’s intent was not to reinstitute it as an “isolated historical item” but something which can continue forward in active conversation of liturgical development. It is, in this sense, meant to be an active liturgical form rather than a mere museum piece.

 

[BobP123]

I believe the 1962 has a prohibition written in it against females inside the sanctuary.

Some exceptions are allowed: Nuptial Mass and First Communions, I think.

But we all know what exceptions turn into.

 

[BobP123]

It would seem to me that the pope’s intent was not to reinstitute it as an “isolated historical item” but something which can continue forward in active conversation of liturgical development. It is, in this sense, meant to be an active liturgical form rather than a mere museum piece.

It’s inevitable but hopefully we can be a little more creative than simply infest the sanctuary with more people and/or creating more distractions for those who came to Church to pray. I think people can live with small changes from time to time, like an extra prayer during incense, etc.

 

[chicago]

It’s inevitable but hopefully we can be a little more creative than simply infest the sanctuary with more people and/or creating more distractions for those who came to Church to pray. I think people can live with small changes from time to time, like an extra prayer during incense, etc.

The key, I believe, is not a question of people adding all kinds of extraneous innovations just to do so or in promotion of other causes (though if it CAN happen it WILL happen - thus destorying the notion that the old Mass is utterly unchangable and immune from potential for innovation or abuse), but one of whether it can be sincerely celebrated in an authentic manner which may differ from an idealized sentiment which some prefer.

For example, what if your parish has no cassocks for boys to wear when serving? Is there REALLY anything wrong with the servers using albs? (In fact, some more conservative/traditional priests would well argue that albs are a more appropriate form of liturgical dress.) If a “private Mass” (let’s say it were even at the old high altar in a parish Church) were attended only by a few ladies and their daughters, would it truly be an “abuse” for a couple of the women or their girls to assist? If a private Mass were celebrated in someone’s home at a simple table unadorned, is this the end of the world and illegitimate? Should guitar be used to lead a hymn or piano employed to offer some musical accompaniment is this bad?

Or, let’s make it even more basic to things that Rome, itself, might desire. The updating of the old caldendar, for example. The proclaiming of readings in vernacular. Possibly, an eventual inclusion of the contemporary readings cycle. Would this truly destroy the traditional Mass in the way that some would claim it could?

Simply, I don’t believe that just because the 1962 Missal has been formally authorized that the traditional Mass must necessarily be celebrated as if it is forever frozen in some idealized experience and period, according to the sensibilities of some.

Instead, there is to be a healthy give and take in the renewed experience which the pope has extended. This is what makes it a good thing for the Church which ought to promote internal reconciliation. It is not about taking sides and winning. It is about opening up a conversation and extending an invitation to all so that we might cross paths and embrace each other as brethren.

 

[Brendan]

FWIW, the USCCB seems to think that it’s altar boys only for the Extraordinary Form.

On noting the differences between the two Form

Only clerics or “altar boys” perform liturgical
ministry

usccb.org/liturgy/bclnewsletterjune07.pdf

 

[BobP123]

For example, what if your parish has no cassocks for boys to wear when serving? Is there REALLY anything wrong with the servers using albs? (In fact, some more conservative/traditional priests would well argue that albs are a more appropriate form of liturgical dress.) If a “private Mass” (let’s say it were even at the old high altar in a parish Church) were attended only by a few ladies and their daughters, would it truly be an “abuse” for a couple of the women or their girls to assist?

Fr. X actually allows some older women to make the responses but from their pews. Also they ring the bells from the pews. He simply says Mass without any servers. I’m sure, however, they would rather have me volunteer to serve and once I actually did (with just a surplus, though, I couldn’t find a cassock that fit.)

I think I know where you’re going with this and I see your point. But many times such anomalies in the TLM are as a result of everyone else (especially the men) laying back and allowing the women to run the show. At least from my experience it has been.

Wish I had a better way of ending this post.

 

[ThuribleGuy45]

Well, we knew a certain backlash would occur with the MP. Going forward we can’t and shouldn’t expect a perfect climate. The Pope did what would be best for the Catholic Church, however, and all we can do now is to do what we can at the local level. We know we have plenty of support from the top.

Having said that, there has to be a lot of spite and hatred coming from those that wish to put an end to the TLM once and for all. Why this is so I don’t know. It’s not like the Pope issued Quo Primum II and shut off the Novus Ordo. The faithful NO bunch will still have their beloved vulgar tongue in which they can “understand” the Mass better, distract everyone else in church as much as possible, etc. But maybe they won’t feel they can use condescending language against the traditionalists anymore, though. Maybe that’s what causes them such pain now? I don’t know.

Methinks we should make sure the Novus Ordo never goes away. If it does, these NOs will need to do something with their time like crashing the TLM Mass as much as possible.

Quite frankly, in my much more limited experience on these boards, I have seen far more “spite and hatred” and “condescending language” expressed by TLM supporters than from those who would self-identify with the “Novus Ordo,” earlier posts in this thread notwithstanding. I have seen disparaging references to “NO sacraments” and “NO seminaries” as if they were a schismatic sect. You yourself refer to “these NOs” (a synonym for which would be, I think, “my fellow Catholics,”) and in another thread you used the phrase “NO lab,” by which you must have meant “a Catholic church.” So maybe you have some insight into where the “spite and hatred” is coming from.

I am old enought to have been an “altar boy” (as we were then called) for 8 years serving at the Tridentine Mass; I welcome its return, and I do NOT want to see it overlaid with later elements. I would be honored to stir these old bones and dust off my still-remembered Confetior to serve at a TLM. That said, I believe more temperate language is called for. You recently referred to people “infesting” the Sanctuary. Coincidentally, I was at the Holocaust Museum in Washington a few days ago, and saw displayed a piece of propaganda referring to Jews “infesting” German society . . . . . . . .bugs infest; I don’t believe people made in the image and likeness of God should be referred to in that way.

 

[chicago]

FWIW, the USCCB seems to think that it’s altar boys only for the Extraordinary Form.

On noting the differences between the two Form

usccb.org/liturgy/bclnewsletterjune07.pdf

Yet their comparisons of the Masses seemed almost aimed at promoting predjudiced, stereotypical notions in some ways. So, if their people believe it, it may not be a compliment or even an objective analysis but almost a knock.