TLM on EWTN

[amsjj]

It was such a pleasant surprise after coming home from work. Very lovely and inspiring for me.

---

Looks like it’ll be available on DVD in a bit:
ewtnreligiouscatalogue.com/SOLEMN+HIGH+MASS+SEPTEMBER+14+2009/cid=273/page_no=2/edp_no=19370/shop.axd/ProductDetails

 

[Malkin71]

A year or two ago, I participated in a text review of the old Catholic Encyclopedia that is available as a resource in the menu above. One of the documents I reviewed was on the Mass.

All forms of the Mass derive from the Mass that is celebrated by the Holy Father. (I didn’t previously know that.) The EWTN Mass was a solemn high Mass.

I was an altar server when the Mass was always in Latin, and I never saw the petty rituals, like hand kissing and all that. I have no idea where that comes from.

The ordinary “high” or “low” Mass was conducted by a priest with as few as two altar boys. A solemn mass with a couple priests as subdeacon and deacon were common, but not as ritualized as these Masses on EWTN.

Since the order of Subdeacon has been suppressed, I don’t know how or why they are resurrecting that “just” for Mass.

I’m critical of the Masses on EWTN from the standpoint that they are not typical of the Mass across the United States – particularly in their insistance on using Latin interspersed throughout the Mass. There is nothing superior to using Latin like they use it.

Previously, the Mass used to be introduced as the Conventual Mass – meaning that it had special parts because it was in a convent of nuns. This is all the lingering influence of Mother Angelica who micro-managed everything, without question. Everything is in a state of rigidity in deference to her. I don’t like such cult-like control of people.

OF Masses can be said in Latin. You do not need the permission of the Bishop to do that.
The EF Mass is said to the 1962 Missal. It is said in Latin. I like the way the Masses are said on EWTN. I wish it was that way in my Parish. Also Masses vary from Parish to Parish. EWTN Masses are very reverent.

Mother Angelica is not popular with the Liberals, Modernists amnd Progressives. She had heated confrontations with the Bishop in Alabama, and Cardinal Mahoney. I reccomend reading the book that Raymond Arroyyo help write about her life. You will learn a lot. It shows how Faith in God can perform wonders. In it you will why she went away from the “Spirit of VII” to Traditional Conservative.

 

[Malkin71]

This one was very special, because it was Caon Apple’s first mass. No I’m not joking. His name is Apple.

It was interesting to observe that the friars helped distribute communion, but sat in the back. This was the decision of the Roman Council of Franciscan General Superiors. The frars would not celebrate the EF unless they are asked to do so by a bishop in a diocesan church.

I’m not sure why the Institute chose the shrine for a first mass. I was trying to figure out if the young man is from the area or somehow connected to the nuns there. First masses are usually in your home parish.

Does anyone know why they used the shrine for the first mass?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I do believe when EWTN celebrates The EF, they use the Shrine. The Shrine is built like a Traditional Church. I have not been there. I would like to go. I know a Priest who was there and has celebrated Mass on EWTN he said it is beautiful and the statues, Tabernacle are expensive. He told me because he gets the catalog where they bought it from and the price is avaliable upon calling.

Also, aparently three people help donate money to build the Shrine. Mother Angelica knows who they are and when they are at Mass. They are to remain a secret. They did this because she has helped them with their faith. This is from what I was told from the Priest who said Mass there.

 

[JReducation]

OF Masses can be said in Latin. You do not need the permission of the Bishop to do that.
The EF Mass is said to the 1962 Missal. It is said in Latin. I like the way the Masses are said on EWTN. I wish it was that way in my Parish. Also Masses vary from Parish to Parish. EWTN Masses are very reverent.

Mother Angelica is not popular with the Liberals, Modernists amnd Progressives. She had heated confrontations with the Bishop in Alabama, and Cardinal Mahoney. I reccomend reading the book that Raymond Arroyyo help write about her life. You will learn a lot. It shows how Faith in God can perform wonders. In it you will why she went away from the “Spirit of VII” to Traditional Conservative.

The bold is mine.

This is a very sensitive topic and it is best of the laity not get involved in this discussion. There was more to this than just a conflict of perspectives between Mother and the bishops. In the end, Mother was told by the Superior General of the Friars that she had to back off or be disciplined. The issue was not whether she was right or wrong. The issue is that a Franciscan may never take on a bishop. According to the rule of St. Francis, this gives the Superior General permission to have you excommunicated from the Church. Francis himself did this to several people who challenged him or who argued with bishops. And in Br. Elias’ case, the friar who challenged Francis’ organizational skills, Francis did not give him a hearing. He had him excommunicated and dismissed from the order. Brother Elias had to recant and swear obedience to Francis so that he could return. The same thing happened with the two friars who got into an issue with a bishop. Francis had them excommunicated. They too have to renew their obedience to the bishop before they could receive the sacraments and wear the habit again.

This rule is still in effect for the entire Franciscan order. Francis forbade that it ever be deleted under pain of mortal sin. It is an order of obedience given by the founder and confirmed by Clare. So we have no choices but to dialogue with bishops, but never take them on. What happened was exactly that. Mother Angelica did enter into a dialogue and thankfully everything turned out well. I’m not sharing anything confidential here. The Franciscans made this public, because of something that Mother said on the airwaves. I remember what she said. I don’t think that she meant to offend. I sincerely believe that her response was a knee-jerk reaction to what the caller was asking. That’s why everything was resolved.

We all say things that offend, even if they are true. And when we offend, we have to apologize for the offense and try to restate what we want to say in a gentler manner. All of us also get offended, sometimes too easily. When that happens, we need to back-off and cool down too. Just as it takes two to create a conflict, it takes two to reconcile.

But I would suggest that the laity not get too involved in this, because there were things behind closed doors that only the Major Superiors of the Franciscan Order, the Sacred Congregation for Religious and the Bishops are privy to. All that is going to happen is a lot of speculation and debate about who is right and who is wrong, without anyone having all the facts and all the laws. The laws that govern religious and their relationship to bishops and to their major superiors and to their founders are very tricky and they are not made public. The Church does not allow us (religious) to make those public. Our constitutions are confidential documents, unless the Church gives permission to share them with the laity. This rarely happens. It does happen, but not very common.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Chatter163]

A year or two ago, I participated in a text review of the old Catholic Encyclopedia that is available as a resource in the menu above. One of the documents I reviewed was on the Mass.

All forms of the Mass derive from the Mass that is celebrated by the Holy Father. (I didn’t previously know that.) The EWTN Mass was a solemn high Mass.

For someone working with old texts, from the start you evidence an unfamiliarity with the rites of the Church.

I was an altar server when the Mass was always in Latin, and I never saw the petty rituals, like hand kissing and all that. I have no idea where that comes from.

“Petty”? The rituals of Holy Mass are “petty” simply because you do not understand them?

The ordinary “high” or “low” Mass was conducted by a priest with as few as two altar boys. A solemn mass with a couple priests as subdeacon and deacon were common, but not as ritualized as these Masses on EWTN.

I do not know what “ritualized” means here. The Mass was simply celebrated as the rubrics of the old rite prescribed.

Since the order of Subdeacon has been suppressed, I don’t know how or why they are resurrecting that “just” for Mass.

Again you show an unfamiliarity with matters concerning the old rites. I do not know why the word *just *was put in quotation marks, but the subdiaconate was permitted to the orders who use the old rites with permission of the Church (FSSP, ICRSS, etc.) and the old books require it at a Solemn Mass. Therefore, someone who is at least a subdeacon in a traditional community or at least a deacon anywhere else is required to serve as subdeacon at High Mass. Most of the time now, and in “the old days,” the subdeacon at Solemn Mass was a priest. This is a very common practice. Sorry if that offends you.

I’m critical of the Masses on EWTN from the standpoint that they are not typical of the Mass across the United States – particularly in their insistance on using Latin interspersed throughout the Mass.

It sounds to me that you are quite hostile to anything that smacks of the Extraordinary Form, or even Latin. Why would you be so bothered by the lawful liturgical choices of a community? Why would such choices have to be what you consider “typical”? An atttempt to include Latin in the liturgy, in accordance to the wishes of the Church, offends you?

There is nothing superior to using Latin like they use it.

I would agree with this statement, as it means that Latin is the best that the Church of Rome has to offer. This is indeed the teaching of the Church, as reflected in Blessed John XXIII’s Veterum Sapientia.

Previously, the Mass used to be introduced as the Conventual Mass – meaning that it had special parts because it was in a convent of nuns.

No, there were no “special parts,” other than perhaps occasional commemorations of Franciscan saints who are not otherwise in the general kalendar. Otherwise it was always simply the Mass of the day, as was this televised Mass, even though it was not the conventual Mass.

This is all the lingering influence of Mother Angelica who micro-managed everything, without question. Everything is in a state of rigidity in deference to her. I don’t like such cult-like control of people.

Wow, talk about throwing in off-topic jabs, including swipes at obedience and the religious life, none of which has anything, BTW, to do with the celebration of Solemn Mass.

 

[Chatter163]

BTW, here is an Enlish translation of Veterum Sapientia.

Those elements were not introduced by the Franciscan tradition. Those elements were introduced by the SSPX and were carried over by those institutes that broke off from them or trained under them, such as the FSSP, the Insittute of Christ the King, St. Philiip Neri, and the Sons of the Holy Redeemer.

Why in the world would you say that elements were introduced by the SSPX? Do you know anything about the liturgy of the Church prior to Vatican II? Oscula, or kisses of the celebrant’s hand and of objects being passed to and from him, were part of the ritual at High Mass. These are in the rubrics and in any books dealing with the liturgy (Fortescue, O’Connelll, etc.) and have nothing to do with current traditionalist orders.

I’m not sure whay the SSPX brought in all those extra gestures such as the hand kissing and the subdeaconate. There really is no subdeaconate in the Latin Church. My only other guess is that they may have an indult to ordain sub-deacons. But I have never heard of it. I can’t speak to that.

Again, what is this “brought in” stuff? There was nothing on the televised Mass, or in celebrations of the EF today, that is anything other than the norm of pre-V2 liturgical books. Read a few and see.

And, yes, the subdiaconate was granted to the FSSP (an institute of pontifical right, BTW) at the time of Ecclesia Dei in 1988, and is used by other traditional communiities when celebrating Solemn Mass, simply because that office exists in the rites of the1962 liturgical books as part of the rite of Solemn Mass. When Cardinal Ratzinger celebrated the Masses and ordinations of the FSSP, he ordained subdeacons, and priests served as subdeacons for his Masses.

http://www.fssp.org/album/VS1990W/29 ecce agnus dei.jpg

 

[AJV]

In the EF the dalmatic is used only to serve at the altar. That’s how you distinguish between the liturgy of the Word and the liturgy of the Eucharist in the EF.

No, in the EF the dalmatic is worn throughout the liturgy.

The reason he must have removed it was because in the EF, the rubrics view the sermon more along the lines of an interpolation, rather than a part, of the the Mass. Thus the maniple is removed. The chasuble isn’t, but some priests have/had the custom of doing so. The removing of the dalmatic is an analogou practice.

Perhaps you are referring to the prayer cards instead of the icons? The other major items that may be used are relics.

 

[AJV]

It’s like the other issue that the Superior General wanted the Eternal Word Friars to do when they were founded. They were asked to go by Brother, not Father. The council figured that since this was a new community, it would be easier for them to start with the title Brother. Whereas the older Franciscan communities are trying to make the change over, but people already know them as Father and they’re having a little trouble getting used to calling the guys Friar or Brother. Again, these are small things that will corect themselves over time.

The mass at EWTN remains a conventual mass, because that chapel is now part of the friary. It is not a public chapel. It is a private oratory of the Franciscan Order. They have to retain the Franciscan tradition. If you notice, there are days when the readings and prayers are different from the mass in your parish. On October 4 you will see that it’s a Sunday. But the mass of the Sunday will not be celebrated. The mass of St. Francis trumps the Sunday mass. It is the solemnity of St. Francis. The readings and prayers are taken from the Franciscan missal, not the Roman missal and lectionary.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

My understanding of the MFVA and their founding Constitutions is that their only common link with the other Franciscans is their adherence to the Rule of St. Francis and acceptance of the Roman-Franciscan liturgical books. They are not part of the Franciscan Orders - either OFM, OFM Cap or OFM Conv. Neither do they have to adhere to the decisions of the Minister Generals, whether taken individually or jointly, or decisions made by the Franciscan Orders. This is simply because the Superiors Generals’ juridiction does not extend to them. Their superior (apart from the “Community Servant”) is the Ordinary of Birmingham and then, as with all Franciscans, the Pope.

 

[AJV]

I’m not sure whay the SSPX brought in all those extra gestures such as the hand kissing and the subdeaconate. There really is no subdeaconate in the Latin Church. My only other guess is that they may have an indult to ordain sub-deacons. But I have never heard of it. I can’t speak to that.

The rubrics of the Traditional missal command the oscula, or hand kissing, by clerics at Mass. It was a matter of debate among rubricists whether lay people had to do them as well, if they were serving - that, together with contrary custom in the US, is possibly one of the reasons why the other poster never saw it growing up (or perhaps, he served after 1964, when it was removed)

 

[JReducation]

My understanding of the MFVA and their founding Constitutions is that their only common link with the other Franciscans is their adherence to the Rule of St. Francis and acceptance of the Roman-Franciscan liturgical books. They are not part of the Franciscan Orders - either OFM, OFM Cap or OFM Conv. Neither do they have to adhere to the decisions of the Minister Generals, whether taken individually or jointly, or decisions made by the Franciscan Orders. This is simply because the Superiors Generals’ juridiction does not extend to them. Their superior (apart from the “Community Servant”) is the Ordinary of Birmingham and then, as with all Franciscans, the Pope.

The MFVA are part of the Franciscan Third Order. The follow the rule of the Third Order. Therefore, they are bound by the same rules as other Third Order congregations. There is one difference betweent hem and the other congregations. I believe, this may have already taken care of itself, I believe that they are a congregation of Diocesan Right. This means that the bishop is the Superior General until they receive admission to Pontifical Right. But this does not release them from the rule.

As to the use of the tile Friar instead of Father, they were able to keep Father, because at the time, even though they were founded with the help of the Capuchins, they were not a congregation. They were a public association of Diocesan Right. Therefore, they were not bound to the Council of Ministers General. If and when they become a Pontifical Franciscan congregation, they will be bound to the council and will have to appoint a representative to the council or accept the Third Order Minister Genral as their representative as many smaller congregations do. They will be given a choice.

The reason that this was a point of discussion was because the move within the world community of Franciscan men is toward Friar, Frater or Brother. It was naturally believed that they would go in that direction in accordance to the directive of Perfectae Caritatis that required each religious order to recover the charism of the founders and their mission.

The reason that the Franciscan family have started to move back to this old form is because it was part of our original tradition for hundreds of years. Also, because it allows us to elect any friar to the office of Provincial and Minister General. It also allows us to appoint Guardians from among any of the friars without distinctions.

We have to understand the history here. These titles and customs changed because the bishops enlisted the friars to staff parishes when they ran short of secular priests. As friars moved into parishes, the laity did not know the difference between a secular priest and a friar. There was never a deliberate or even a legal attempt to change the titles of the friars or to distinguish among us. In my own community we do not make such distinctions any longer.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[AJV]

The MFVA are part of the Franciscan Third Order. The follow the rule of the Third Order. Therefore, they are bound by the same rules as other Third Order congregations. There is one difference betweent hem and the other congregations. I believe, this may have already taken care of itself, I believe that they are a congregation of Diocesan Right. This means that the bishop is the Superior General until they receive admission to Pontifical Right. But this does not release them from the rule.

They are not part of the Third Order. Their Constitutions bind them to the First Order rule.

 

[JReducation]

They are not part of the Third Order. Their Constitutions bind them to the First Order rule.

Many third order communities follow the rule of the first order. However, they are not canonically part of the first order. They are canonically part of the Third Order. The first order is only for the Friars Minor. They Missionaries of the Eternal Word do not belong to the fist order of the Franciscan family.

There are several canonical issues that are insurmountable.

1. Pope Leo XIII closed off the first order to the three obediences: OFM (also known as the Leonine Union), OFM Cov (the successors of Br. Elias) and the OFM Cap, who were originally a fraternity of OFM Observants and OFM Conventurals, eventually given their own government.
2. To be a member of the First Order, you must have direct succession from St. Francis. This is only possible if you are a fraternity that comes from one of the obediences of the first order.
3. Members of the First Order make solemn vows. The Missionaries of the Eternal Word make simple vows.
4. The First Order is a brotherhood and maintains its lay status intact. The Missionaries of the Eternal Word were founded as a clerical institute. They would have to have equality in ministry, authority and governing powers for all members of the community. In the Missionaries of the Eternal Word, non ordained friars cannot be major superiors. I’m not sure if they can be local superiors.
5. The Holy See is the only body that can expand the membership to the Friars Minor. If they were part of the First Order, their initials would be OFM + whatever their obedience is.
6. They are not part of the Council of Franciscan Ministers General. There are five Ministers General on the council: OFM, OFM Cap, OFM, Conv, TOR, and SFO. The TOR Minister General casts his vote on behalf of all religious who are not Friars Minor.

They are true friars and true Franciscans. There is no question about that. They are not part of the Friars Minor. I’ll give you an example. The Franciscans of the Renewal asked for permmission to be OFM Cap. The request was denied by the Holy See, even though their founders were all Capuchins. Thus they were established as a congregation, not as an order, hence the CFR after their name. They may not make solemn vows.

My own community came from the Secular Franciscan Order. We were founded by four Secular Franciscan brothers. Since we came from the SFO and the SFO is a canonical order, we were allowed to use be an order, hence OSF (Order of St. Francis) after our name. We were also allowed to make solemn vows. But we were not allowed to use the rule of the Friars Minor, because our roots are in the tradition of the Brothers and Sisters of Penance. Thus we use the same rule as the TORs, but with our own constitutions.

It’s up to the Holy See and the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Like and Societies of Apostolic Life to decide where you fit into the great Franciscan family. They decide this based on your origins, your history, your way of life, your mission and your internal organization.

Now, I’m not certain, but I believe that the Missioanries of the Eternal Word are not yet an Institute of Pontifical Right. If I’m correct, they are a Diocesan Institute on their way to being an Institute of Pontifical Right. When the time comes, the Sacred Congregation has the final word as to their place in the Franciscan family and the Holy Father will approve whatever the Sacred Congregation proposes. That being said, I do not believe that the Missionaries of the Eternal Word are interested in being Friars Minor. They want to live the Franciscan charism using the Rule of the Friars Minor as the guide to writing their constitution, but with some deviations according to their charism and mission. Which is fine. This does not make them less religious and less Franciscan. They just have a ways to go before they are canonically fully integrated into the Franciscan family. Until they become an Institute of Pontifical Right, they remain under the jurisdiction of the local bishop, not under the jurisdiction of the Franciscan Council of Ministers General. That does not mean that they cannot live according to the teachigns and norms that come from the Council, esepcially if they want to become a Pontifical Institute at some point. This is the normal path that most Franciscan communities follow. For some it’s faster than others. Right now, it’s faster for communities of brothers and sisters, than it is for clerical communities, because the Franciscan family is very concerned about protecting the lay brotherhood that is essential to the order and without which the order ceases to be Franciscan.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[AJV]

Many third order communities follow the rule of the first order. However, they are not canonically part of the first order. They are canonically part of the Third Order. The first order is only for the Friars Minor. They Missionaries of the Eternal Word do not belong to the fist order of the Franciscan family.

There are several canonical issues that are insurmountable.

1. Pope Leo XIII closed off the first order to the three obediences: OFM (also known as the Leonine Union), OFM Cov (the successors of Br. Elias) and the OFM Cap, who were originally a fraternity of OFM Observants and OFM Conventurals, eventually given their own government.
2. To be a member of the First Order, you must have direct succession from St. Francis. This is only possible if you are a fraternity that comes from one of the obediences of the first order.
3. Members of the First Order make solemn vows. The Missionaries of the Eternal Word make simple vows.
4. The First Order is a brotherhood and maintains its lay status intact. The Missionaries of the Eternal Word were founded as a clerical institute. They would have to have equality in ministry, authority and governing powers for all members of the community. In the Missionaries of the Eternal Word, non ordained friars cannot be major superiors. I’m not sure if they can be local superiors.
5. The Holy See is the only body that can expand the membership to the Friars Minor. If they were part of the First Order, their initials would be OFM + whatever their obedience is.
6. They are not part of the Council of Franciscan Ministers General. There are five Ministers General on the council: OFM, OFM Cap, OFM, Conv, TOR, and SFO. The TOR Minister General casts his vote on behalf of all religious who are not Friars Minor.

They are true friars and true Franciscans. There is no question about that. They are not part of the Friars Minor. I’ll give you an example. The Franciscans of the Renewal asked for permmission to be OFM Cap. The request was denied by the Holy See, even though their founders were all Capuchins. Thus they were established as a congregation, not as an order, hence the CFR after their name. They may not make solemn vows.

I do understand this - this was what I was trying to say in my first post. Which is why I also say, that since they are of diocesan right, their Superiors, after their community servant, are the Bishop and not the Ministers or Superiors General

 

[Pani_Rose]

I no longer get EWTN, but I saw a TLM they celebrated last fall (or something like that) and it was…:heaven:

You can get the live feed online.

 

[JReducation]

I do understand this - this was what I was trying to say in my first post. Which is why I also say, that since they are of diocesan right, their Superiors, after their community servant, are the Bishop and not the Ministers or Superiors General

That can be either a transitional state or a permanent one. It depends on the general chapter of the community. A community can petition to become an Institute of Pontifical Right. If they do, to be approved, they must fit into the family to which they want to belong, in this case, the Franciscan Order.

On the other hand, if the expectations of the Franciscans are not consistent with their mission and their way of life, they can choose to remain a diocesan congregation. They are still considered Third Order, whether you’re diocesan or pontifical. Because if you are Franciscan, you have to belong to one of the four obediences. That’s a requirement of theSacred Congregation for Religious Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life. The Third Order of the Franciscan family encompasses all congregations of Franciscans, all orders of Franciscans that are not Friars Minor and the Secular Franciscan Order. All of them come under the jurisdiction of the Sacred Congregation, even if they are diocesan congregations.

Once the bishop has been granted permission to establish the congregation, he cannot suppress it without the permission of the Holy See. The congregation is inscribed in one of the existing religioius families, if there is already one with the same charism and rule. If there is none other, they are inscribed independently.

Their status is different in terms of governance, becaues the local bishop remains the Superior General. However, the local bishop cannot trump the Council of the Order. Once he sends his request to the Sacred Congregation for a Franciscan congregation, he must abide by the rules of the Franciscan family and its traditions.

This was first tested in the 1880s when Bishop John Carroll asked Elizabeth Ann Seton to found the Sisters of Charity and gave her the constitutions and statutes of St. Vincent de Paul. When the Daughters of Charity arrived they Sisters of Charity refused to be absorbed into the Daughters. Rome’s response was that they had to be incorporated into the Daughters, because they were using their constitutions and their statutes. Those communities who did not want to be incorporated had to find bishops who would accept them as diocesan congregations and they had to rewrite their statutes so as to prove that they were not of the same family as the rest of the Daughters of Charity. They could claim St. Vincent as their inspiration, but not as their father.

The Missionaries claim St. Francis as their Father. They have a right to do so, because they have Franciscan succession. They were founded by a Poor Clare who is a canonical successor to St. Francis and St. Clare. But if you claim St. Fancis as your Father, then you must abide by the consensus of the Franciscan family, unless there is a pastoral reason or a conflict in charism. In that case, your first duty is to demonstrate the reason. Once it is acknowledged by the proper authorities, you can do what is best for your community.

But all that the bishop does in the case of a diocesan congregation is to ensure that they live according to the charism that they profess and that they serve the Church in the manner that they propose in their mission statement. He cannot change the charism. However, he is a little loophole in the law. The bishop can change their mission statement. Since he is not a member of the congregation, he is not bound to obey their general chapter. In fact, the deliberations of their general chapter have to be approved by him. That is not the case in communities of Pontifical Right. In these communities, the Major Superior is part of the community and is bound to obey the General Chapter and implement what the General Chapter wants.

It gets very hairy when you start a community using the charism, rule and spirit of an existing religious family. Ask the Dominicans. Their constitutions have to conform to the rule of St. Augustine. They are part of that family, even though they are an autonomous order for every other purpose.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[jewells17]

Google “Father Donald Kloster Tridentine Mass Youtube” to find his four part talk he gave on the TLM. The talks are short but I found them to be powerful. Try to find it…it’s great! You might have to google “Father Kloster Latin Mass You Tube”. It is in youtube for sure.

 

[JReducation]

Google “Father Donald Kloster Tridentine Mass Youtube” to find his four part talk he gave on the TLM. The talks are short but I found them to be powerful. Try to find it…it’s great! You might have to google “Father Kloster Latin Mass You Tube”. It is in youtube for sure.

thanks for the tip

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[preV2tradcath]

Google “Father Donald Kloster Tridentine Mass Youtube” to find his four part talk he gave on the TLM. The talks are short but I found them to be powerful. Try to find it…it’s great! You might have to google “Father Kloster Latin Mass You Tube”. It is in youtube for sure.

Thank you for the information. I listened to them today and you are right. It is a great talk.

 

[thequeen]

I loved it It is my prayer that when the priest that we have now at my parish retires next year (news Ive been waiting 15 years to hear)that we will get a priest that is more othodox in his thinking and will perhaps add a latin mass

 

[JReducation]

I loved it It is my prayer that when the priest that we have now at my parish retires next year (news Ive been waiting 15 years to hear)that we will get a priest that is more othodox in his thinking and will perhaps add a latin mass

Be careful. The fact that a priest likes to celebrate mass in Latin does not mean that he is more orthodox. The Polish Catholic Church is very conservative and traditional, but they are not orthodox. They are very disobedient to the Holy Father.

Archbishop Lefebvre loved the Tridentine mass, but a bishop who disobeys a pope in a matter as serious as the ordination of bishops, is not orthodox.

Orthodox means obedient to the Church. I think what you mean may be more traditional. That is a good thing. I would love to see a Latin mass more frequently too. But not at the expense of being disobedient to the Holy Father. Obedience comes first, the Latin mass is second.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF