This is why trads are "angry"

[Genesis315]

TNT:

I don’t mean to appear selfish, BUT, I’m glad the TLM is not universal because:

1. The Liberals would take many out of the church.
2. I fear for the condition of the TLM after the likes of Mahoney, Weakland, et al, got a hold of if under the cover of “collegiality”.
3. I like to experience inconvenience and difficulty when I must travel so fa to worship as my ancestors. (to say nothing of the cost to get there in a 4-X SUV.) It gets you ready for what is to come.

That’s an interesting position. I get the feeling most anti-NOM posters blame the liberalism and abuse on the NOM itself. I think that the liberals would have infiltrated anyway and done to the TLM what they do to the NOM. I think they would obey the TLM norms about as much as they obey the current GIRM. Would you agree?

 

[bear06]

TNT:

Gotta love N. California and the Bay. If only they had a TLM for homosexuals.

I object to your location and experience being a universal condition. (You didn’t say that, but…I still object on general principles.)
If you you don’t arrive 15min early here, figure on standing room only in a TLM…in the vestibule… both 9:30 High and 11:30 low.
And, the line for confessions before each is even worse.
Dallas,TX

It may not be universal but why should my bishop be told to offer a Tridentine to anyone that wants one when there are so few here?

 

[Fogny]

TNT:

Gotta love N. California and the Bay. If only they had a TLM for homosexuals.

I object to your location and experience being a universal condition. (You didn’t say that, but…I still object on general principles.)
If you you don’t arrive 15min early here, figure on standing room only in a TLM…in the vestibule… both 9:30 High and 11:30 low.
And, the line for confessions before each is even worse.
Dallas,TX

Ah! that is another subject S.F. and the Bay Area. I visit the city on occasion and I was in north beach which has some beautiful churches, anyway walked in to attend mass and it was in the vernacular (chinese). I stayed for about 5 minutes and left,could not understand a thing. Being in the year 2005 that’s the way it is,in 1960 I could go anywhere in the world and participate.
The mass was in latin remember the universal language of the Church. Of course most Catholics were said at the time to suffer from attention deficit disorder not being able to follow latin. Try chinese my friend, but all kidding aside in large multi cultural american cities this has got to create some frustration.

Fogny

P.S. problems with the vernacular how about personal interpretation of GIRM Oh My, that’s why when I travel I look for a TLM atleast I know I can recoginize it as Catholic.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Sean O L:

Swiss Guard wrote:

There is much that you have written with which I agree.

1. Technically, there is no such Mass as a “Tridentine Mass.”

Technically, you are correct. There is no such thing as the Tridentine Mass just as there is no such thing as the Novus Ordo Mass. I call it the Tridentine Mass because it’s the name the majority of posters on this forum call it. You can nit-pick if you want to, I have better things to do.
Sean O L:

1. Pope John-Paul II gave a permission to some of the faithful - not all.

Here is what John Paul II said in Ecclesia Dei:

---

To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms of the Latin tradition, I wish to manifest my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations. In this matter I ask for the support of the bishops and of all those engaged in the pastoral ministry in the church. (emphasis mine)

---

He says all the Catholic faithful, not some, who feel attached to the Tridentine Mass should have the respect for their rightful aspirations guaranteed. He doesn’t say all Catholics must attend the Tridentine Mass, he says those who want to have a rightful aspiration.
Sean O L:

1. The pope gave the bishops of the world permission to allow the 1962 liturgy to “requesters”.
2. The bishops were NOT obligated to oblige.

I will quote more from Ecclesia Dei in addition to what I posted above:

---

Moreover, respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962. (emphasis mine)

---

A lack of priests to offer the Mass is a reason to deny the Tridentine Mass. However, if there are priests to offer the Mass, then the bishops are to grant the faithful their rightful apsirations to worship at the Tridentine Mass.
Sean O L:

1. A permission (even a “right”) to request is NOT a “right” to receive.

I wish it was not so - but, that is how it is.

I would suggest you click the link below and read Ecclesia Dei again. This is not a “right to request” but a “right to receive” unless the bishop can demonstrate a pastoral reason not to allow the Mass in his diocese. A bishop is a shepherd of souls. Saving souls is his vocation. Yet, how many bishops deny the Tridentine Mass in their dioceses but allow, and in some cases encourage, liturgical abuses in the Novus Ordo Mass. The bishop of Rochester, NY refuses to allow the Tridentine Mass to be offered in any church in his diocese but allows Hillary Clinton to speak at the ambo in one of his churches after Sunday Mass. The only Apostle he imitates is Judas Iscariot.

---

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/ECCLESIA.HTM

 

[Swiss_Guard]

katolik:

Now, if you want a Indult Mass in your area, invite the SSPX and then the bishop will allow you to have the Indult TLM.

This is exactly how the Archdiocese of Chicago under the most modernist bishop in America, the late Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, got not one, but two, Indult Masses.

---

The Society of St. Pius X was able to acquire a church in suburban Oak Park (about a 15-20 minute drive from the Loop) which drew people away from the archdiocesean churches. Bernardin didn’t really care because he thought it was just a fad that would go away when all the “old people” who attend the Tridentine Mass die off. When he realized young people attend the SSPX Mass, he had to do something to get people back into the archdiocese and therefore put their money in his collection baskets rather than SSPX’s baskets.

---

Bernardin allowed the first Indult Mass at St. John Cantius Church located in Chicago, just west of the Loop. It is right off the Kennedy Expressway and not far from the Eisenhower Expressway, so it’s easy to get to if you come from the north, south or west (nobody comes from the east because they would be living in Lake Michigan). The first Indult Mass was in 1990 and it continued to grow. The now former pastor of St. Thomas More Church on the south side of Chicago next requested and got the Mass, which also drew people from Indiana as there is only one Indult Mass in northwest Indiana and it’s an anticipated Mass on Saturday evening.

---

Bernardin also got an Indult Mass in north suburban Antioch, which is on the Wisconsin-Illinois border. That Mass has since moved to Volo, which is just a little south of Antioch.

---

It would have been near impossible to get an Indult Mass from Bernardin if SSPX had not been in the Archdiocese of Chicago.