The future of traditional Catholicism?

[Megan7]

It was also the Anglicans who petitioned Pope Paul to reinstate the Latin Mass. When he read that Agatha Christie was among the petitioners, he granted the indult.

She kept things alive for the traditional movement at the very least.

Also, for what it’s worth, the mayor of London is fully supportive of Latin.

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8571662.stm

(You might have to highlight it in order to read it. Invisible ink. )

Thanks for the link PV.

 

[johnmann]

Let me expand.

First, there’s no reason to fear more options in the EF. It’s optional. Second, “they’ll never go for it,” was also once used as an argument against Latin in the OF. You keep it as an option and someone may pick it up one day and make something beautiful out of it.

Before Universae Ecclesiae in 2011, girls had served in the EF. The arguments against it are extra-liturgical. They’re arguments against altar girls in general, not just in the EF. That’s fine but if you’re going to allow it in the OF, I see no reason not to allow it in the EF.

There’s value in having everyone using the same calendar. Personally, I find the arguments in favor of retaining the EF calendar to be rather feeble. Had Vatican II only changed the calendar, there wouldn’t be much objection. There probably wouldn’t be a SSPX. Only because so much changed, did the calendar get swept up in the criticisms too. At the very least import the new saints. That would actually make the EF more appealing.

Finally, I think allowing the readings to be done in the vernacular alone even at High Mass could actually be quite popular. There’s not much to be gained from reading it twice.

 

[AndyP2010]

I have no specific changes that I would make to the EF. I do think that Benedict XVI clearly expected the EF to change by a process of mutual enrichment. He is no longer Pope and we will probably never know how he would have proceeded. I have often seen traditionalist comment that the OF doesn’t really represent what II Vatican Council called for. I think that the most sensible thing to do would be to bring the 1962 missal into conformity with “Sacrosanctum Concilium”.

 

[Lawrence178]

First, there’s no reason to fear more options in the EF. It’s optional. Second, “they’ll never go for it,” was also once used as an argument against Latin in the OF. You keep it as an option and someone may pick it up one day and make something beautiful out of it.

Before Universae Ecclesiae in 2011, girls had served in the EF. The arguments against it are extra-liturgical. They’re arguments against altar girls in general, not just in the EF. That’s fine but if you’re going to allow it in the OF, I see no reason not to allow it in the EF.

There’s value in having everyone using the same calendar. Personally, I find the arguments in favor of retaining the EF calendar to be rather feeble. Had Vatican II only changed the calendar, there wouldn’t be much objection. There probably wouldn’t be a SSPX. Only because so much changed, did the calendar get swept up in the criticisms too. At the very least import the new saints. That would actually make the EF more appealing.

Finally, I think allowing the readings to be done in the vernacular alone even at High Mass could actually be quite popular. There’s not much to be gained from reading it twice.

You can’t make something beautiful of altar girls though, as it is they should only be used in an absolute emergency in my opinion. But in the Old Mass it presents the problem of them wearing cassocks, the garb of clerics, which women cannot be.

Value in us all using the same calendar? What about the Eastern Church? They have different calendars. Should they adopt the new calendar as well if there is such value in us all having the same one?

I think the chanting of the readings is beautiful at high Masses. So there is something I gain from it.

 

[ProVobis]

There’s not much to be gained from reading it twice.

I think many educators will disagree with you there. On a one-year calendar, certain people would know immediately what the Gospel reading was for that day simply from the first line of the Latin Introit. It is remembered by making associations like that. It’s why they have side-by-side Missals. Call it subliminal or whatever, spaced repetitions or reinforcements are indeed valuable, even if presented via two different (name removed by moderator)uts.

Besides that, the EF or any Mass in Latin is designed for more universal acceptance. You can’t assume everyone in your congregation only speaks English.

First, there’s no reason to fear more options in the EF.

Hmmm. One of the features of the EF is that the Mass (texts, rubrics, etc.) is the same everywhere on that day. It’s meant to be rigid. That’s what the fathers at Trent decided. You really don’t want any more parish commissions to determine otherwise, do you?

 

[ProVobis]

There’s not much to be gained from reading it twice.

I think many educators will disagree with you there. On a one-year calendar, certain people would know immediately what the Gospel reading was for that day simply from the first line of the Latin Introit. It is remembered by making associations like that. It’s why they have side-by-side Missals. Call it subliminal or whatever, spaced repetitions or reinforcements are indeed valuable, even if presented via two different (name removed by moderator)uts.

Besides that, the EF or any Mass in Latin is designed for more universal acceptance. You can’t assume everyone in your congregation only speaks English.

First, there’s no reason to fear more options in the EF.

Hmmm. One of the features of the EF is that the Mass (texts, rubrics, etc.) is the same everywhere on that day. Except for the possible solemnity (High Mass, Low Mass), it’s meant to be rigid. That’s what the fathers at Trent decided. I don’t think you really want any more parish commissions to determine otherwise. If it doesn’t appeal to everyone, so be it. The Church provides other ways to fulfill the obligation.

 

[datritle]

Speaking as a seminarian…YES! Many of us would love to be able to institute this kind of change upon ordination as well!

 

[GangGreen]

I do wish the calendars were more in sync. It’s kind of annoying having a feast on one day in the modern calendar and then having it a month before or later in the EF calendar.

In the same way though, there are many extra feasts in the EF calendar that don’t carry over to the current calendar which should be kept in the EF.

It would take more work than just a straight copy and paste, however, it should be updated.

 

[Denise1957]

I don’t know what sort of TLM people you hang out with, but I am pretty sure that altar girls wouldn’t fly in any trad community. A girl in a cassock would make me extremely uncomfortable.

I would tend to agree. Though there isn’t necessarily anything intrinsically wrong with female altar servers, there’s strong evidence that there’s an increase in priestly vocations in those places that do not allow the use of female altar servers. Part of the problem, IMO, with the crisis in priestly vocations may be due to this issue. I found a good article which addresses it:

liturgyguy.com/tag/altar-girls/

 

[TimothyH]

I don’t want to get into an argument about female altar servers and it really is off topic but would like to offer this point of interest.

The real reason why there were no female altar servers has nothing to do with clerical garb or vocations. It has to do with Mary and and the general injunction against females in the sanctuary.

Mary was presented to the High Priest Zechariah when she was three years old. The High Priest Zechariah, who was father to John the Baptist, escorted Mary into the Holy of Holies where she danced before the Ark of God. Mary did not want to leave the temple except for death or marriage. This is recorded in the Protevangelion of James. The Western Church celebrates the Feast of the Presentation of Mary on November 21 and the Eastern Churches celebrate the Feast of the Entry of the Theotokos on the same day.

Google Feast of the Entrance of the Theotokos for references.

Mary herself became the Holy of Holies, the spouse of the Holy Spirit and tabernacle of the living God. She inaugurated the New Testament and fulfilled the prophecy whereby “the dwelling of God is with man.” The western Feast of the Presentation doesn’t do justice to the real meaning of the feast day. The Divine Liturgy in some of the Eastern Churches are much deeper and richer.

Females never entered the sanctuary out of respect for Mary who entered behind the second curtain, into the Holy of Holies. That’s the real reason.

I have always been proud that my daughters were altar servers. My youngest served for the Archbishop and my eldest had her picture on the front cover of the diocese newspaper at a Mass with eleven priests. I am still very proud of them for serving God and my youngest is now a team captain. But my understanding of the reason why females never entered the sanctuary - because of Mary - has caused me to reevaluate the issue of female servers in general. It is not a sin. It is not evil. It is an issue of respect for the Mother of God. If we are going to go off topic to argue about female altar servers then lets get it right.

Yes, you could say that I have become more “traditional” with regard to female altar servers if it makes you happy and I hope the church moves this way, but the real reason has nothing to do with dress or vocations. It has to do with the second greatest love of my life, the Mother of Jesus.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming…

-Tim-

 

[johnmann]

But in the Old Mass it presents the problem of them wearing cassocks, the garb of clerics, which women cannot be.

That same “problem” exists in the OF.

Value in us all using the same calendar? What about the Eastern Church? They have different calendars. Should they adopt the new calendar as well if there is such value in us all having the same one?

The Eastern Church is free to modify its calendar too. You want to prohibit that? At any rate, the Eastern Church has a different tradition. The OF and EF calendars share the same tradition.

I think the chanting of the readings is beautiful at high Masses. So there is something I gain from it.

The more I think about, the more I think you’re right. Currently, low Mass permits reading in the vernacular alone. I think that’s good enough. Keep the Latin in solemn Mass.

 

[johnmann]

Females never entered the sanctuary out of respect for Mary who entered behind the second curtain, into the Holy of Holies. That’s the real reason.

Sounds like an ad hoc reason. So boys can enter the sanctuary because they should disrespect Mary?

 

[Denise1957]

Apologies if I’m going off-topic here, and my memory could be a bit fuzzy, but I seem recall a priest mentioning once that in the days of old, in Judaism (such as when Our Lady would have been a child), no lay person male or female would have been allowed into the Holy of Holies (at the altar) except for the priest. And there were strong penalties against anyone who defied the rule. I think that this tradition carried over into Catholicism with the limited use of laypersons at the altar until 50 or so years ago. I hope I’m remembering this correctly.

 

[Lawrence178]

I would tend to agree. Though there isn’t necessarily anything intrinsically wrong with female altar servers, there’s strong evidence that there’s an increase in priestly vocations in those places that do not allow the use of female altar servers. Part of the problem, IMO, with the crisis in priestly vocations may be due to this issue. I found a good article which addresses it:

liturgyguy.com/tag/altar-girls/

I agree with you on the vocations thing. I’ve spoken to a lot of people that believe that the priesthood, even religion in general is for feminine men. That is an extreme deterrent for teenage boys. Using altar boys whenever possible would go a ways to reverse that image.

 

[TimothyH]

I agree with you on the vocations thing. I’ve spoken to a lot of people that believe that the priesthood, even religion in general is for feminine men. That is an extreme deterrent for teenage boys. Using altar boys whenever possible would go a ways to reverse that image.

Anyone who believes that religion or the priesthood is for feminine men has a bigger problem than can be solved by male only altar servers.

-Tim-

 

[AndyP2010]

Apologies if I’m going off-topic here, and my memory could be a bit fuzzy, but I seem recall a priest mentioning once that in the days of old, in Judaism (such as when Our Lady would have been a child), no lay person male or female would have been allowed into the Holy of Holies (at the altar) except for the priest. And there were strong penalties against anyone who defied the rule. I think that this tradition carried over into Catholicism with the limited use of laypersons at the altar until 50 or so years ago. I hope I’m remembering this correctly.

 

[datritle]

otjm;11573444:

Lawrence178;11573411:

Very small numbers?

The Archdiocese of Philadelphia has 267 parishes. It’s seminary accepted eight men to study for it this year.

The FSSP’s seminary in Nebraska draws from way fewer apostolates, about 40-50 (but I’m struggling to find the exact number), it accepted 16 men to study for it.

I’m no prophet, but with numbers like that, it seems that Fr. Z might be right.

What you’re failing to consider is that the FSSP admitted 16 first year seminarians in the US. The seminary in NE has a total of 80 - 85 seminarians. According to their website, they have a total of 153 seminarians at all their seminaries.

My understanding is there’s plans for them to open a seminary in S. America (Brazil?) in the future.

UNTRUE. St Charles borromeo is the seminary you are talking about. It may have accepted 8 philadelphians…but not 8 new men. I am one of the new men…from Harrisburg, Pa. we had about 6 new men from harrisburg alone…plus a number from arlington, lincoln, philly, trenton, etc…

 

[m134e5]

But I think there are things more traditional than chalice veils, boy altar servers and reception on the tongue. Restoration of the permanent diaconate after 1000 years of disuse is one. Restoring the order of reception of the sacraments of institution to the way it is supposed to be - baptism, then confirmation then first Eucharist and lowering the confirmation age to second grade is another. This is the way it was done in the early Church. The Bishops of Fargo ND and Phoenix AZ restored the order of the sacraments and were praised by the Pope for it.

Who says things are *supposed *to be that way? It’s fine if a bishop wants to change the order of the sacraments of initiation to an order that was used long ago, but at one time someone saw a need to change that order. Maybe at least in some places that need is no longer an issue so some bishops have seen fit to change it back.

Changing these things are fine, but I am wary of changing things because it is “the way it was done in the early Church.” From my experience, the people who cite this reason are mostly either over 50 and want to be as different as possible from the “oppressive,” “rigid” Church of their childhood or they were taught by those people and never questioned them. They do wacky, unnecessary things. Some, like installing big tubs for baptismal fonts, are just strange. Others, such as using leavened bread for the Eucharist (in a Latin-Rite church), are illicit. Still others, such as using altar bread that has honey in it, invalidate the Mass.

The subject of your post asks about the future so I don’t think that I am off topic when I suggest that any traditional practices or traditionalism movement, when accompanied by condescension, militancy, anger, fanaticism and insult cannot possibly be authentic actions of the Holy Spirit within the Church. Such a movement will die. I say good riddance.

I agree. This is why I am extremely cautious about attending the traditional Latin Mass. The traditional Latin Mass is an old way that isn’t common anymore, so it can attract conspiracy theorists and people who want to run away from the present moment. It involves lots of precisely executed rituals that people with certain mental illnesses are likely to find soothing. Also, it doesn’t allow as many opportunities to interact with others, such as the sign of peace, so people with poor social skills might feel more comfortable there. There are some- probably most- who simply love the Church, love the old liturgy, and find that they pray more effectively at the Traditional Latin Mass. Unfortunately, those who are not like that make all of them look bad.

 

[Lawrence178]

marthaferretti;11579524:

otjm;11573444:

UNTRUE. St Charles borromeo is the seminary you are talking about. It may have accepted 8 philadelphians…but not 8 new men. I am one of the new men…from Harrisburg, Pa. we had about 6 new men from harrisburg alone…plus a number from arlington, lincoln, philly, trenton, etc…

Eight men studying for Philadelphia.

 

[robert_schreder]

Catholics are tired of the novelty. we want to experience the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, not an anglican communion service. FYI the so called “extrordinary form of the mass” is actually the ordinary approved rite. the novis ordo nonsense was, according to vatican 2 an “alternative”. Question: what exactly was wrong with the Asperges,Judica Me,the last Gospel, and the prayers after ordered by Pope Leo the XIII? Ask the periti and the protestant observers!