TLM proponents "anti-ecumenical obstructionists of an evolving church"?

[Sean_O_L]

AltarMan wrote:

Stop! Take off the rose-colored glasses and face a reality of 20/20 hindsight. I began serving “the old Mass” in 1939. I am now 73 years old, 45 years a priest, having begun my seminary studies in 1950. As a kid knowing the perfect recitation of all the Latin Mass responses, we dealt with mumbled praying of many priests. In the old days there were parishes that were known as “whiz churches”: Sunday Mass, in and out in 20 minutes.

I agree entirely!

I am age 71, Altarboy to Bishop Ryan (and others) of Sale Diocese, Australia, from c. 1944 onwards, and also encountered the “quickies” who mumbled.

In fact, I also encountered the reverse - one priest from Sydney was so beset with scruples (so intent in confecting the Eucharist and afraid that his pronunciation would invalidate!) that his rendition was:

“Hiiiiccckkkk esssttttt eeennimmm Corrpussssss meeeuuummmm” etc.

He is still an associate of the SSPX to this day!

 

[netmilsmom]

Joysong:

• “Don’t kid yourself that more would not take on this kind of “normative Pauline Mass”. If Assumption Grotto were in the burbs, she would be bursting at the seams like Ss Cyril & Methodius.”
• “Why are all of these American Catholics flocking to a Slovakian latin rite parish which is out of their geographical boundaries?”

We who see you use these overactive verbs with reference to your preferred style of mass tend to think of you as advertising and promoting something, which makes me scratch my head in wonder, because it is simply not true about the jam-packed, flocking, and bursting at the seams terminology you are accustomed to using. And not only here in this thread.

Carole, you have no clue about this.
My parish is busting at the seams and people do flock to it. We have doubled our parishioners in three years.
Sorry, that is a flock. Families drive a fair distance. Even our Children’s Choir Director drives 45 minutes every Sunday.

And as for the snide “Preening” reference, get that beam out of your eye. Every one of the posters that say, you “Aren’t Christlike if you don’t want to hold the hand of another Catholic” is doing the exact same thing.

I’ll admit it, if being proud of one’s Historically Catholic church is preening, I’m a preener. But this is one preener that would fight to get YOUR form of worship to be available as well.

 

[netmilsmom]

AltarMan:

Personally, I can’t stomach the horrid liturgical abuses that have long been committed during the celebration of the Tridentine Mass:

The Old Mass

Stop! Take off the rose-colored glasses and face a reality of 20/20 hindsight. I began serving “the old Mass” in 1939. I am now 73 years old, 45 years a priest, having begun my seminary studies in 1950. As a kid knowing the perfect recitation of all the Latin Mass responses, we dealt with mumbled praying of many priests. In the old days there were parishes that were known as “whiz churches”: Sunday Mass, in and out in 20 minutes.

adoremus.org/0704ReadersForum.html

Please, do we have to post that SAME tired article AGAIN???
One priest, one opinion.
Have you looked that the Liturgical Abuses in the NO?
I attend it as it was intended to be. No innovations, no abuses. When this NO mass is offered at ONE parish in each Vicariate, the complaining will stop.

Until then, if I looked hard enough, I could find one article that would tell me what I wanted to hear too.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

AltarMan:

Please don’t try to spin your comments once you have made them:

“For example, people in Phoenix had been asking prior to Bishop Olmstead. Soon after he was installed, they not only got their TLM, but more are coming from what I have heard and people are flocking to these Masses. In some cases, it is the only Mass they can go to free of radical abuse.”

You are doing nothing more here than attempting to suggest that the Tridentine Mass is some sorta silver bullet that frees people of “radical abuse” – that one of the most serious mistakes made by preeners…

Now you are really twisting.

I did not say “people”, I said for "some people" it is the only Mass…

Now, I should have separated that thought from Phoenix, because I was referring to the population of all TLMers. Who is to say that a percentage of those people go because they can’t find a Novus Ordo that is compliant to the GIRM? I know I have read accounts here by people that attend them for that reason. Who can judge an individual situation? Once again, that is why I say “some people” not just people.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

AltarMan:

Plainly put, you don’t know these people and your comments clearly reflect that truth. In sum, you can’t guarantee anything – at least on this issue, in my diocese.

I didn’t know I was talking about your diocese. I was talking about a specific parish in my diocese, that if it were in the burbs there would be more than the 700 families that are there now. It is in a very rough neighborhood. I’ve had many tell me they want to go but are afraid for this reason. I’ve had former parishioners tell me they had to stop going because they were afraid of the neighborhood. Some have landed at Ss Cyril & Methodius, which is currently expanding, and those expanding it are not all Slovakian, they’re American born Catholics from outside the geographical boundaries of the parish. There are a variety of things that pull them there, but first and foremost, from all the discussions I’ve had it is the tranquil, reserved, reverent liturgies, which follow the GIRM to the letter.

 

[Joysong]

Dear Net,

The word is NOT mine, as reflected in post #20, and has been used by others since then, if you read all the posts besides mine:

Me too … J, but we were talking about the preeners, your word, if I recall

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Carole, you have no clue about this.
My parish is busting at the seams and people do flock to it. We have doubled our parishioners in three years.
Sorry, that is a flock. Families drive a fair distance. Even our Children’s Choir Director drives 45 minutes every Sunday.

And as for the snide “Preening” reference, get that beam out of your eye. Every one of the posters that say, you “Aren’t Christlike if you don’t want to hold the hand of another Catholic” is doing the exact same thing.

I’ll admit it, if being proud of one’s Historically Catholic church is preening, I’m a preener. But this is one preener that would fight to get YOUR form of worship to be available as well.

I was the first to use the word “preener,” Netmil(name removed by moderator). And you know I don’t think you are one.

 

[AltarMan]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Please, do we have to post that SAME tired article AGAIN???
One priest, one opinion.
Have you looked that the Liturgical Abuses in the NO?
I attend it as it was intended to be. No innovations, no abuses. When this NO mass is offered at ONE parish in each Vicariate, the complaining will stop.

Until then, if I looked hard enough, I could find one article that would tell me what I wanted to hear too.

His comments seem to have touched a nerve. They should be read by every preener who believes that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullett to rid the Church of liturgical abuse…

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

AltarMan:

His comments seem to have touched a nerve. They should be read by every preener who believes that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullett to rid the Church of liturgical abuse…

So, do you feel that everyone who has a traditional liturgical preference is a “preener”?

While I stated that some may head to a TLM parish to find reverence and a reserved liturgy, I don’t recall saying it was a silver bullet, because it is not.

I’m of the opinion that if some could find a more traditionally celebrated Novus Ordo close by, they would take advantage of it and may not feel the need for the TLM. Once again - the key word is “some”. And, I got that from a few people here who are in communities that have no traditional Novus Ordos, but do have a TLM and that is where they go.

 

[Joysong]

Dear Netmil(name removed by moderator),

I’ll admit it, if being proud of one’s Historically Catholic church is preening, I’m a preener. But this is one preener that would fight to get YOUR form of worship to be available as well.

This is not what the posters have alluded to when the word “preen” was used. I doubt anyone would disagree with being proud of one’s parish. What was alluded to was the boasting of the superiority of one’s liturgy. For an inside look at how far it goes, read post #3: **And it may very well be the true Church **when it promotes these things … a divisive statement suggesting that the TLM people are the true church, as though people in the N.O. are not. Labels are prejudicial and inflamatory when applied to a class of people as a general statement.

This thread, in part, as been reduced to a multi-paged smoke screen to diffuse the original argument taken from the OP’s link, and cited in post #8:
OP's link:

The traditional Mass began making a comeback in 1988 when Pope John Paul II tried to gather dissidents back into the fold by calling for the “wide and generous” use of the Mass for those who want it, as long as they do not criticize the new liturgical order.

With a permanent parish, they [the Buffalo people] believe they could attract even more parishioners.
“There are ways to evangelize, and this is just another way.”

Providing the adherents to the latin mass do not attempt to subvert and lure other catholics to their fold [as seems to be the intent of the Buffalo people in the article], through public criticism of the N.O., as Pope John Paul indicated above, they would be most welcome to be proud of their liturgy and give expression to it. I rejoice with you and agree!

However, I see no reason to cause thread drift to prove my point regarding the criticisms mentioned in the quote, by pulling info from other threads. Those who engage in the practice, though subtly, know who they are and will answer for their own deeds. Enough said.

And I do recognize and applaud your statement: “this is one preener that would fight to get YOUR form of worship to be available as well.”

God’s peace be among us,
Carole

 

[Chris_in_Mich]

Joysong:

Providing the adherents to the latin mass do not attempt to subvert and lure other catholics to their fold [as seems to be the intent of the Buffalo people in the article], through public criticism of the N.O., as Pope John Paul indicated above, they would be most welcome to be proud of their liturgy and give expression to it. I rejoice with you and agree!

Subvert and lure are strong words, there is nothing wrong with Catholics being exposed to the TLM and deciding to attend on a regular basis. I did not see anything in the article that suggested these people in Buffalo were doing anything to undermine the church, I know of several converts who now attend the TLM as well as many people who once attended SSPX chapels, ought that evangelization stop? I see nothing here that says TLM attendees must not criticize the NO. Mother Teresa was a critic of communion in the hand, and Pope Benedict when he was known as Cardinal Ratzinger said regarding the new mass "We left the living process of growth and development to enter the realm of fabrication. There was no longer a desire to continue developing and maturing, as the centuries passed and so this was replaced - as if it were a technical production - with a construction, a banal on-the-spot product**."** Would these be considered criticisms?

 

[fix]

Chris in Mich:

Subvert and lure are strong words, there is nothing wrong with Catholics being exposed to the TLM and deciding to attend on a regular basis. I did not see anything in the article that suggested these people in Buffalo were doing anything to undermine the church, I know of several converts who now attend the TLM as well as many people who once attended SSPX chapels, ought that evangelization stop? I see nothing here that says TLM attendees must not criticize the NO. Mother Teresa was a critic of communion in the hand, and Pope Benedict when he was known as Cardinal Ratzinger said regarding the new mass "We left the living process of growth and development to enter the realm of fabrication. There was no longer a desire to continue developing and maturing, as the centuries passed and so this was replaced - as if it were a technical production - with a construction, a banal on-the-spot product**."** Would these be considered criticisms?

Thanks for the links.

For fostering a true consciousness in liturgical matters,* it is also important that the proscription against the form of liturgy in valid use up to 1970 should be lifted***.** Anyone who nowadays advocates the continuing existence of this liturgy or takes part in it is treated like a leper; all tolerance ends here.** There has never been anything like this in history; in doing this we are despising and proscribing the Church’s whole past. How can one trust her at present if things are that way? I must say, quite openly, that I don’t understand why so many of my episcopal brethren have to a great extent submitted to this rule of intolerance, which for no apparent reason is opposed to making the necessary inner reconciliations within the Church."

                *"God and the             World",  Joseph Ratzinger, Ignatius Press, 2002 p 416*

• *
  ​

​

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Joysong:

Dear Netmil(name removed by moderator),

This is not what the posters have alluded to when the word “preen” was used. I doubt anyone would disagree with being proud of one’s parish. What was alluded to was the boasting of the superiority of one’s liturgy. For an inside look at how far it goes, read post #3: And it may very well be the true Church when it promotes these things … a divisive statement suggesting that the TLM people are the true church, as though people in the N.O. are not. Labels are prejudicial and inflamatory when applied to a class of people as a general statement.

Good grief, Carole, there you go again. My comment in post 3 about the “true church” was in reference to what it was directly applying to - the expression of “mainstream Catholic”. Many reporters talk to people they call mainstream Catholic and if you asked how many actually went to Church every Sunday, did not believe in abortion, did not believe in ABC, did not believe in premarital sex, then I would hardly call them the “true Church”. I’ve been to many parishes where there are Catholics who attend weekly and advocate abortion, advocate birth control, support homosexual unions.

I’m sorry, but these are not the true Church.

As far as Grotto goes, I was trying to get at the fact that I have not encountered anyone there yet (not that they aren’t there) who support those things that other people do which are in direct contradiction to Catholic teaching. Yet, of all the “mainstream Catholics” I know, half support abortion, euthanasia, homosexual unions, and the like.

I don’t call this mainstream by any means.

Please go back and look at what was quoted when I talked about true Church. It was in reference to expression mainstream Catholics.

It’s truly a “minor-stream” which follows the truths of the faith on ALL that is in the deposit of faith, not just those things they find convenient.

I just happen to have found the greatest concentration of “minor-stream” Catholics at Grotto and I do have a personal belief that a higher percentage of parishioners at any traditional N.O. parish are authentically orthodox in their loyalty to the deposit of faith. I have not stats. I’ve just been in too many parishes where I had to walk on eggshells on moral issues for fear of starting a real argument on Church grounds and some are so entrenched into believing it is their right to be Catholic and pro-choice. What an oxymoron.

Providing the adherents to the latin mass do not attempt to subvert and lure other catholics to their fold [as seems to be the intent of the Buffalo people in the article], through public criticism of the N.O., as Pope John Paul indicated above, they would be most welcome to be proud of their liturgy and give expression to it. I rejoice with you and agree!

Did the pope ever say that people not brought up in the TLM should not attend a TLM? There was a movement out there trying to say this for some time. No one is to be excluded from participation so why would it bother you if people talked about and shared their excitement for this liturgy? I hear their excitement, but I still attend my N.O.

 

[netmilsmom]

Joysong:

Dear Net,

The word is NOT mine, as reflected in post #20, and has been used by others since then, if you read all the posts besides mine:

No, but you seemed to have adopted it quickly to paraphrase this quote…

That is my main objection: the proselytizing being done by many traditionalists … the incessant evangelization to attract “mainstream” catholics into their fold. Some do not miss a beat or a chance to promote their liturgy as better than, holier than, more orthodox than, more abuse-free than, the Pauline Mass which is the “new liturgical order.”

Note the “traditionalist” not Traditionalists.
We get it both ways but the innovators do it with a fine coat of sugar and sweet all over.

Funny thing, but the “mainstream Catholics” are the one’s that have made EWTN with that traditional liturgy a force to be reconciled with. Perhaps the “mainstream Catholics” are the one’s longing for that liturgy and in many places are sorely lacking.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

It’s apparent that all of us have a differnent interpretation of what “mainstream Catholic” is. That right there can be a source of hard feelings depending on how we use it, so maybe we should all clarify.

My idea of “mainstream Catholic” is the average Catholic. That is, those that show up in polls that are taken involving “mainstream Catholics”, some of whom do not go to Church every week and some who do. Some who adhere to all that is in the deposit of faith and some who do not.

Orthodox on the other hand, in my book, involves those who believe and accept, even at a great inconvenience, all that is in the deposit of faith, including that which they do not understand, which is the truest test of faith. You will not find someone dissenting from the Church’s position the most vocalized moral issues of the day. Orthodox-minded Catholics believe the conscience should be formed in light of the Magisterium, not in the absence of it in the name of “being big enough to use my own brain”.

As I said earlier, I have met plenty who prefer contemporary, vernacular worship who are orthodox and traditionals who are orthodox. But my recent experience with two traditional communities is that the traditional communities have the higher concentration of orthodox minded people. You can often tell by the large families developing because a higher percentage accept the Church’s teaching on ABC. They advocate NFP among themselves - something I’ve never been exposed to prior to Grotto.

I suspect the same could be said of TLM communities, but only they can answer as I’m not in one. This is only my perception and testimonial based on personal experience, but others may be able to add or take away from this perception.

 

[Ham1]

Some interesting and informative posts here…thank you.

I agree that more orthodox parishes seem to attract parishioners from all over.

One question I have is how many TLM preferred people are there? In my experience as a parishioner at a very orthodox and wonderful parish, I have found zero. Now granted I can only meet so many people so that statistic is of little value.

One way, I think we could gauge the popularity of the TLM is by looking at dioceses with good, faithful bishops and look at the size of the TLM communities and number of TLM Masses available. Perhaps, Denver, St. Louis, Chicago, or Lincoln??? Does anyone know how many TLM Masses are offered weekly in these dioceses? I have searched the internet but can’t seem to find any reliable statistics.

Thanks!

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Ham1:

Some interesting and informative posts here…thank you.

I agree that more orthodox parishes seem to attract parishioners from all over.

One question I have is how many TLM preferred people are there? In my experience as a parishioner at a very orthodox and wonderful parish, I have found zero. Now granted I can only meet so many people so that statistic is of little value.

One way, I think we could gauge the popularity of the TLM is by looking at dioceses with good, faithful bishops and look at the size of the TLM communities and number of TLM Masses available. Perhaps, Denver, St. Louis, Chicago, or Lincoln??? Does anyone know how many TLM Masses are offered weekly in these dioceses? I have searched the internet but can’t seem to find any reliable statistics.

Thanks!

It would be interesting to provide statistics from dioceses that are known to be led by more progressive minded prelates and bishops.

Hopefully, someone knows where to find this info as I was interested too.

The Pope asked that it be offered generously and I perceive more are offered by orthodox-minded bishops and cardinals. If that holds true, then it shows that when obedient there will be people who seek this Mass. These communities take time to grow because word does not filter around. The TLM in Detroit has been happening for how long, and I only found out about it this past summer. It was limited early on, but now it is weekly, but even in its limited form I had no idea this Mass out there and neither do most others. It can take years for it to filter out.

However, recently I did see an add in our Michigan Catholic advertising it - a few months back. I thought it was a positive step.

Some are concerned with advertising, but it is only those who feel the draw to this kind of liturgy who will follow it. Who is to say the Holy Spirit doesn’t cause this draw for those individuals?

And to look at all TLM’ers as if they are anti-N.O. is just as stereotypical as TLM’ers who would lump all N.O. masses together. Some have misconstrued me as doing the latter, which I have never done and I would like to see anyone find text in these forums where I have stated that “all” non-traditional N.O. are bad or irreverent. To the contrary I’ve even gone out of my way to say that contemporary N.O. can be orthodox and reverent.

 

[netmilsmom]

AltarMan:

His comments seem to have touched a nerve. They should be read by every preener who believes that the Tridentine Mass is some sort of silver bullett to rid the Church of liturgical abuse…

The overuse of this article is what is a hoot.
I am not a TLM person, my dear. There is no nerve to hit connected with it.

 

[bear06]

As I said earlier, I have met plenty who prefer contemporary, vernacular worship who are orthodox and traditionals who are orthodox. But my recent experience with two traditional communities is that the traditional communities have the higher concentration of orthodox minded people. You can often tell by the large families developing because a higher percentage accept the Church’s teaching on ABC. They advocate NFP among themselves - something I’ve never been exposed to prior to Grotto.

I suspect the same could be said of TLM communities, but only they can answer as I’m not in one. This is only my perception and testimonial based on personal experience, but others may be able to add or take away from this perception.

I’m just going to chime in on this one part of the topic. While I think the pastors stay away from this one in public teaching, the Latin Mass communities in my area are VERY against NFP (yes, there are a few that are not). They see it as birth control. My friends belong to an FSSP e-mail loop and they posted an announcement about an NFP class they were teaching. They were quite publically attacked. I’ve actually heard many in our local TLM community accuse Humanae Vitae of promoting birth control! So, I don’t know about your area but NFP is a big “no no” amoung traditionalists out here. What can I say? We live in California where people like to take things to the extremes.

Disclaimer: I do not have a problem with the TLM in any way shape or form.

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

bear06:

I’m just going to chime in on this one part of the topic. While I think the pastors stay away from this one in public teaching, the Latin Mass communities in my area are VERY against NFP (yes, there are a few that are not). They see it as birth control. My friends belong to an FSSP e-mail loop and they posted an announcement about an NFP class they were teaching. They were quite publically attacked. I’ve actually heard many in our local TLM community accuse Humanae Vitae of promoting birth control! So, I don’t know about your area but NFP is a big “no no” amoung traditionalists out here. What can I say? We live in California where people like to take things to the extremes.

Disclaimer: I do not have a problem with the TLM in any way shape or form.

Well, I would say they are misinformed. The CCC allows for sexual intercourse at times when the wife is not likely to conceive, if the intent is unitive. So, their position would contradict that teaching. However, they must be open to life should they concieve at a time they are not intending to.

This is one of the areas the requires pastoral discussion to make sure people understand the catechism. If they reject the Church’s teaching in favor of their own interpretation they are not much different from those who dissent in other ways. Maybe to a lesser degree because unlike ABC, they are not taking a life in order to assert their viewpoint.

Do you see large families within your TLM community?

At first I thought you were going to say they were pro-ABC (until I read the rest of your post). It would have blown my perception that traditional communities follow Church teaching more closely. However, if they are aware of Church teaching on sex within marriage and are still against NFP, then they are not fully orthodox by my definition. This would be to say something is not allowable within marriage that the Church says is.