TLM and Ordinary Form

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sugnaflow
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sugnaflow

Guest
Some TLM proponents argue that the transition to the OF coincided with confusion and ultimately decline in the Church. Some argue that if we brought back the TLM in full force, the Church would experience a renewal.

How does this square with the idea that other Catholic Rites never adopted a new form of liturgy, and yet have experienced their own declines in church attendence and vigor. Could the same be said for the Orthodox?

p.s. I’m a big fan of BOTH the TLM and the OF, and I don’t necessarily prefer either.
 
Sugnaflow said:
Some TLM proponents argue that the transition to the OF coincided with confusion and ultimately decline in the Church. Some argue that if we brought back the TLM in full force, the Church would experience a renewal.

How does this square with the idea that other Catholic Rites never adopted a new form of liturgy, and yet have experienced their own declines in church attendence and vigor. Could the same be said for the Orthodox?

p.s. I’m a big fan of BOTH the TLM and the OF, and I don’t necessarily prefer either.
Click to expand...
The people whom I have spoken with from the Catholic Rites which did not adopt a new form of liturgy have given me no indication that their attendance dropped anywhere near the percentage drop that hit the Latin Rite after the Novus Ordo was implemented.

I do think that if the TLM were brought back in “full force”, the Church would indeed experience a renewal, if some other factors also came into play. For example; stronger disciplinarians occupying the throne of Peter. Popes who would not hesitate to take a “red hat” away, or depose a bishop from his see for the good of the Holy Church. Strong, clear worded, direct teachings, teachings without ambiguity, so the faithful know where they stand. Compare the wording of the documents of the Council of Trent to that of Vatican II. Laypeople and clerics knew much more accurately where they stood after Trent than they did after VII.

Renewal won’t come just because of wider TLM usage, but wider TLM usage will help tremendously.
 
Gregorianman said:
Popes who would not hesitate to take a “red hat” away, or depose a bishop from his see for the good of the Holy Church.
Click to expand...
Can a pope arbitrarily take a “red hat” away? :confused:

I suppose the powers, rights and privileges of office could be lost through penal process, but the man would need be guilty of a crime at least.

tee
 
Nearly all the other rites have been growing so your premise does not seem to be correct.

The Armenian Catholic Church +224248
The Coptic Catholic Church +100206
The Ethiopian/Eritrean Catholic Church +106674
The Syro-Malankara Catholic Church +120834
The Maronite Catholic Church +931192
The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church +812092
The Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church +328924
 
Anecdotal info; when I fell away from the Church there was only the TLM; when I attempted to return there was only the OF in my geographical area, the result was that I didn’t recognize the Liturgy I was witnessing. It took many years of agonizing over the state of the Liturgy before I finally came back.

Specifically; when I left it was all Organ and Gregorian Chant; when I attempted to return it was all guitars and other folk music instruments, the “hymns” strongly resembled Kumbaya and such. There was a very obvious lack of reverence within the congregations I visited both in action and dress and the clergy and religious had adopted civilian attire more suited for a day at the ball park. There was a huge decline in religious orders, no where near enough Nuns to teach at Catholics schools or staff hospitals.

What I witnessed I now know was a misinterpretation of the VII directives, deliberate or otherwise, not my judgment to make. The fact that seems obvious to me though is that there has been a decline both in membership and behavior within the Catholic church since VII. I’m not sure what it will take to recover our loses but I doubt a total return to the TLM will be sufficient, it’s hard to rein in excesses once released.
 
Bob_Aliano said:
Anecdotal info; when I fell away from the Church there was only the TLM; when I attempted to return there was only the OF in my geographical area, the result was that I didn’t recognize the Liturgy I was witnessing. It took many years of agonizing over the state of the Liturgy before I finally came back.

Specifically; when I left it was all Organ and Gregorian Chant; when I attempted to return it was all guitars and other folk music instruments, the “hymns” strongly resembled Kumbaya and such. There was a very obvious lack of reverence within the congregations I visited both in action and dress and the clergy and religious had adopted civilian attire more suited for a day at the ball park. There was a huge decline in religious orders, no where near enough Nuns to teach at Catholics schools or staff hospitals.

What I witnessed I now know was a misinterpretation of the VII directives, deliberate or otherwise, not my judgment to make. The fact that seems obvious to me though is that there has been a decline both in membership and behavior within the Catholic church since VII. I’m not sure what it will take to recover our loses but I doubt a total return to the TLM will be sufficient, it’s hard to rein in excesses once released.
Click to expand...
Well you nailed it without maybe realising it, what happened was a loss of discipline and what is needed is restoration of discipline, which is also by the way to blame for the sex abuse scandals.
 
No, those churches are located overseas.

If we want to zero in on the American church, my facts are totally correct.

It seems to me that the TLM fanatics wildy overstate their claims.

When I saw TLM fanatics, I mean those folks that are dismissive of the N.O. (i.e. the liturgy that the Holy Father celebrates).
 
Also, bad hymns are not inherent in the N.O. Good hymns aren’t inherent in the TLM.

It just happens to be the case that TLM folks often have better taste.

Imagine this for a moment.

In a typical diocese there were 1,000 TLM’s celebrated every week, and just one N.O.

We would probably have a reversal in cirmcumstance. The TLM’s would be dry in their celebration, while that single N.O. would be beautiful and reverently celebrated beause it would have a dedicated community and following.

I’ll say it again: the TLM is not inherently more reverent than the N.O. It’s only incidentally so because of the way that it is typically celebrated, which I would argue is largely due to the concentration of support in a TLM community.
 
Sugnaflow said:
No, those churches are located overseas.
Click to expand...
You never said we were just talking about the USA, however I will point out to you that the OF is also practised overseas and to the same effect, it does not seem to be the same with the other rites.

And they are not all overseas

The Armenian Catholic Church Apostolic Exarchate for United States and Canada +1700
The Syrian Catholic Church Our Lady of Deliverance of Newark, New Jersey +1360
The Maronite Catholic Church Eparchy of Our Lady of Lebanon of Los Angeles, USA +3392
The Chaldean Catholic Church Eparchy of Saint Thomas the Apostle of Detroit, USA +27000
The Melkite Greek Catholic Church Eparchy of Newton, USA +3074

But restricting yourself to the Eastern Catholic rites as they are in the USA is not helpful anyway as many of those who practice the Eastern Rites in the USA are foreign refugees who return to their home country once situations have improved or who for various reasons move away from the limited places that these rite is available and so end up changing which location they come under simply because they have gone back to their home country or moved to a town where their former rite is not available.

The only way the figures are worth anything is if you stick to comparing everyone who practices a certain rite wherever they are in the world after all we are talking about the effects of the rite here not the effects of the country they are in are we not, in which case country is irrelevant.
 
I think there’s more to decline in attendance than TLM vs OF.

My wife is Anglican. In Canada at least they also have their own version of tradition vs modern, with the Book of Common Prayer (Tradition) and Book of Alternative Services (modern) version of their “mass”.

They have known a precipitous decline in attendance and vocations as well, whether on the traditionalist or modernist side (an aside, anyone that tells you that married or women priests will magically cure the shortage of vocations… point out the Anglicans and their similar decline in spite of having married and women clergy).

So too have most mainline Christian Churches.

Look towards the general secularization of our society for the real answer.

Yes in Canada Catholic Church membership is growing, but it is almost entirely through immigration.

The issues are far more complex than the Mass form, but surely the decline in liturgy doesn’t help.
 
Negetive, tee_eff_em, the pope can take away a red hat virtually at his whim, and the cardinal need not be guilty of a crime, nor even accused of a crime. Much respect is shown to the office of Cardinal, but it is still merely an administrative office, and all cardinals serve completely at the pope’s pleasure.
 
Sugnaflow said:
Also, bad hymns are not inherent in the N.O. Good hymns aren’t inherent in the TLM.

It just happens to be the case that TLM folks often have better taste.

Imagine this for a moment.

In a typical diocese there were 1,000 TLM’s celebrated every week, and just one N.O.

We would probably have a reversal in cirmcumstance. The TLM’s would be dry in their celebration, while that single N.O. would be beautiful and reverently celebrated beause it would have a dedicated community and following.

I’ll say it again: the TLM is not inherently more reverent than the N.O. It’s only incidentally so because of the way that it is typically celebrated, which I would argue is largely due to the concentration of support in a TLM community.
Click to expand...
I completely reject (respectfully, of course), your entire post. Bad hymns are inherent in the NO, and good hymns are inherent in the TLM. I reject your premise that 1000 TLM’s would be dry, while the NO would be beautiful and reverently celebrated. The TLM is inherently more reverent than the NO, whether supported by a TLM community, or not.
You say you are a big fan of both forms, but you seem to betray a serious bias (even a bigotry) against the TLM.
 
Gregorianman said:
I completely reject (respectfully, of course), your entire post. Bad hymns are inherent in the NO, and good hymns are inherent in the TLM. I reject your premise that 1000 TLM’s would be dry, while the NO would be beautiful and reverently celebrated. The TLM is inherently more reverent than the NO, whether supported by a TLM community, or not.
You say you are a big fan of both forms, but you seem to betray a serious bias (even a bigotry) against the TLM.
Click to expand...
I don’t overall agree with the post you responded to; however, I don’t agree with you either. Hymns are not “inherent” in either form of Mass because hymns are not a part of the Mass; they are permitted to be used at certain times alongside or (in the OF) in place of some of the propers. The fact that bad hymns tend to go with the Ordinary Form does not make them “inherent.”

I would say that the EF has more of a rubrical requirement to be outwardly reverent than the OF does, in that it has more precise rubrics and more reverent gestures written in. But that doesn’t prevent an OF from being celebrated just as outwardly reverently as an EF. Rubrics also don’t guarantee an inwardly reverent attitude, although they can help to encourage it.
 
Gregorianman said:
Negetive, tee_eff_em, the pope can take away a red hat virtually at his whim, and the cardinal need not be guilty of a crime, nor even accused of a crime. Much respect is shown to the office of Cardinal, but it is still merely an administrative office, and all cardinals serve completely at the pope’s pleasure.
Click to expand...
So I understand you to assert. It would be helpful if an authoritative source did so as well.

tee
 
Sugnaflow said:
Some TLM proponents argue that the transition to the OF coincided with confusion and ultimately decline in the Church. Some argue that if we brought back the TLM in full force, the Church would experience a renewal.

How does this square with the idea that other Catholic Rites never adopted a new form of liturgy, and yet have experienced their own declines in church attendence and vigor. Could the same be said for the Orthodox?

p.s. I’m a big fan of BOTH the TLM and the OF, and I don’t necessarily prefer either.
Click to expand...
The supposed decline of membership in the church is vastly over stated.
From Wikipedia
Church membership in 2007 was 1.147 billion people,[237] increasing from the 1950 figure of 437 million[239] and the 1970 figure of 654 million.[240] **On 31 December 2008, membership was 1.166 billion, an increase of 11.54% over the same date in 2000, **only slightly greater than the rate of increase of the world population (10.77%). The increase was 33.02% in Africa, but only 1.17% in Europe. It was 15,91% in Asia, 11.39% in Oceania, and 10.93% in America. As a result, Catholics were 17.77% of the total population in Africa, 63.10% in America, 3.05% in Asia, 39.97% in Europe, 26.21% in Oceania, and 17.40% of the world population. Of the world’s Catholics, the proportion living in Africa grew from 12.44% in 2000 to 14.84% in 2008, while those living in Europe fell from 26.81% to 24.31%
Click to expand...
The Church around the world is growing including America, except for Europe, and that issue has nothing to do with the mass but an embrace of secularism.

Peace,
FAB
 
I have to say at the outset that I am sure there might be an isolated defender of the Ordinary Form that does not fit the description I give below. But I honestly don’t know anyone who is familiar with the reasons why I avoid the Ordinary Form, who prefers the Novus Ordo to the Traditional Mass. I agree that the Novus Ordo is valid, but so is a Protestant baptism. Mere validity doesn’t protect against the effects of serving Catholicism “Lite” to faithful who are still dying for lack of spiritual calories.

I object to the terms “fan” or “fanatic” in relation to my choice of liturgy. The way I became an Oakland Raiders fan is based on an impulsive experience with football cards and geography. I never thought it necessary to apply any rigorous application of logic or study to my adherence to a particular team, nor did I think friends who might be for the Chiefs or Packers needed in any way to explain themselves to me. The implications of being a fanatic involves irrational, unreflective, emotional responses that should be confined strictly to choices of moral insignificance.

That anyone would claim or admit to to being a mere “fan” of something as vitally important as a question of the Eucharistic liturgy seems to diminish the importance of reflection and study. I suspect one of the problems with what we now call the Ordinary Form is that those who like it do so for reasons that aren’t much different than why I like the Raiders.

Fans of the Novus Ordo aren’t refuting Michael Davies’ brilliant expose’ showing how the New Mass systematically excises much of the theology of the Council of Trent. They aren’t studying how the Novus Ordo was cobbled together by committee in departure from the ordinary organic development of liturgical innovation. They haven’t even heard of the Novus Ordo precursor, Thomas Cranmer’s abominable 1552 prayer book in England which was studiously put together in the same way with what seems like a similar agenda. Admittedly, as an adherent to the Traditional Mass, I haven’t read any books explaining why the Novus Ordo has been an inspiring upgrade to the Old Mass for Catholics. Fans of the Ordinary Form don’t seem to recommend books. Cardinal Ratzinger called the Novus Ordo banal in one of his books. Banal! Its licit. Its valid. And that’s all it has going for it from what I can see.

Fans refute arguments of eternal significance with shallow preferences. They know what they like. They like one liturgy or another the same way they prefer Burger King. There should be no interest in what “fans” have to say about the liturgy. Fans get to vote on who gets to be on the All-Star team. Why? Because it doesn’t matter. If we’re not going to study and reflect upon the pertinent materials that are available regarding this most significant question at the heart of the crisis in the Church today, our “vote” shouldn’t count.

In the end, few fans are willing to die for their team. Their love isn’t deep. In the history of the Church, there are thousands of martyr’s graves round the world, with heavy concentrations in France, Ireland, and England testifying to a profound and lively identification of priest and people to the power and beauty of the ancient liturgy. I wonder who, if the Novus Ordo were ever persecuted and suppressed, would be willing to die for that invention? Unstudied fans who have no appreciation for the reasons behind a universal ecclesiastical tongue? I doubt it.

You Novus Ordo fans, who prefer the Ordinary Form, tell me what to read, or who to read that analyzes and refutes the sources that convince Traditionalists that the Novus Ordo is an unparalleled liturgical disaster. I will read it. I would love to believe that everything is great and can go on like this for another 2,000 years with Roman Rite forms that are both Ordinary and Extraordinary. I am not being smug or sarcastic either. I would love to somehow convince myself that the Ordinary Form is beautiful and fully reflects the Catholic theology of the Mass just as much as the Mass of the Ages.

Sincerely,

Rory
 
A return to the TLM won’t be enough to right all the wrongs in the Church overnight, but it is the first and most necessary step nonetheless in Church reform, because we need to reform how we pray if we want to reform how we live.
 
Bbigam said:
I don’t overall agree with the post you responded to; however, I don’t agree with you either. Hymns are not “inherent” in either form of Mass because hymns are not a part of the Mass; they are permitted to be used at certain times alongside or (in the OF) in place of some of the propers. The fact that bad hymns tend to go with the Ordinary Form does not make them “inherent.”

I would say that the EF has more of a rubrical requirement to be outwardly reverent than the OF does, in that it has more precise rubrics and more reverent gestures written in. But that doesn’t prevent an OF from being celebrated just as outwardly reverently as an EF. Rubrics also don’t guarantee an inwardly reverent attitude, although they can help to encourage it.
Click to expand...
I think I can concede your point regarding the hymns. As far as the level of reverence between the two, In my experience attending both forms, the OF has not come close to the EF in producing an atmosphere of reverence, even though some of the OF priests were very reverent. The OF just does not stack up to the EF in the reverential realm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top