To the clerics that are against the TLM

[Uxor]

That’s how it is written in the NO.

I know, I agree.

 

[BobP123]

To the clerics that are against the TLM,

Maybe we should ask them what they would be doing now hadn’t it been for the Novus Ordo. Just a thought.

 

[bear06]

So? What difference does that make? I can’t recall the quote word for word… but I seem to recall The Holy Father stating something along the lines of “the Truth isn’t determined by a popularity contest”.

I also seem to recall something in Sacred Scriptures saying something along the lines of “cutting away the weeds before they kill the good fruit”.

So id Cdl Mahony (or anyone else of his mindset) decide to go into schism… let 'em. The Church has endured much worse.

It doesn’t have anything to do on whether or not to speak the truth. It has everything to do with saving the most souls when doing it. It’s hard to save them when they’re not there. I, personally, would love to see Cardinal Mahony “pruned” abruptly, yesterday in fact, but what I’d love to see isn’t always the best for the soul of others. Sometimes being sly is the way to go. Frankly, Mahony is 71. His days are numbered even if they’re not as numbered as I’d like them to be. I’m pretty sure that the Vatican will probably leave him in until retirement so that the Mahonyites don’t revolt. You might say “Fine, let them go we don’t want them anyway” but I’ve seen in my own diocese that many people who were thoroughly dedicated to our old liberal bishop are thoroughly dedicated to our new orthodox bishop. This might not have happened if the old bishop was taken out before his retirement time because, frankly, that would have made him a martyr for his cause. We still had a few that flat out revolted but most stayed on and made the changes the bishop required without question.

 

[bear06]

Didn’t I **JUST POST **that I had sent copies of the letters to both the Apostolic Nuncio and the the CDF? Yep… I sure did. [caps for emphasis]

Now I realize that a simple letter on paper may not be as high tech as a CD-rom… but it still conveys information, doesn’t it?

You are missing the point. No, letters don’t cut it. We wrote letters for years and, frankly, the Vatican doesn’t know who the heck we are and they’d have to base their decision on our word. When you present them with moving pictures, audio tape, letters in the handwriting of the abusive priest, the dissenters cannot deny that it didn’t happen because the proof is right there. That’s one of the thing that the guy from the Congregation for the Bishops pointed out. They get letters all of the time but they don’t really know who is trying to “stick it” to who. If you recall, there have been cases where liberals have told lies about conservative priests to get rid of them. Would you want the Vatican to operate on this? Thankfully they don’t. Send them irrefutable evidence not hearsay.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

"And yet you also said "The majority of people just prefer to pray in a language they understand."

I firmly believe this to be the truth. I think that a lot of people will come to the TLM on occasion, but will mainly stay with the NO for this reason.

We could solve the problem and have one united liturgy by simply translating the TLM into the vernacular. Then every parish could have the Mass in both languages.

Then why didn’t Mass attendance increase when we went from Latin to the vernacular, instead of plummeting?

Regardless, I hope and pray for a greater availability for the indult and then we can see what happens.

 

[BobP123]

Then why didn’t Mass attendance increase when we went from Latin to the vernacular, instead of plummeting?

Regardless, I hope and pray for a greater availability for the indult and then we can see what happens.

Yes, some of the bishops may have to depend on the TLM to keep the Church afloat in their dioceses, sad to say. It was announced last Sunday that attendance in the Archdiocese of Chicago is now down to 22%; and many of these in attendance are immigrants from Poland and Mexico.

And, to no surprise, the weekly TLM is fluorishing slowly but surely.

I can’t say what it’s like in other dioceses, though. The Joliet diocese outside Chicago is the 10th richest in the country. They probably have a long way to go before even one weekly TLM makes its debut.

Am I implying it’s all about money? Hey, you have to be realistic. They’re closing a lot of Catholic schools already because of lack of money. And religious vocations have dwindled to the point that they have to rely on prevailing wage help. Some parishes just can’t survive on a few people in attendance. When Michael Davies was still alive, he stated that the Novus Ordo will have died a slow death within 30 years. I think we’ve already seen that in some European dioceses.

 

[mystified]

The TLM will get full support of the hierarchy of Southern California as soon as instructions come down concerning where the dancing girls fit in.

 

[John_Higgins]

Mark my words, the excommunication (or even reassignment) of His Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop of Los Angeles will happen right after the “real killer” of Nicole Brown Simson and the true assassin of JFK are found.

He’s in at least 4 more years ('til he’s 75) maybe even more.

John

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Then why didn’t Mass attendance increase when we went from Latin to the vernacular, instead of plummeting?

Regardless, I hope and pray for a greater availability for the indult and then we can see what happens.

This has been answered ad infinitum: the switch went on when society was in a time of enourmous flux and social change, when that which was accepted before without question was now BEING questioned. And correlation does not prove causation. Mass attendance may have plummeted even if the Latin had been retained.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Yes, some of the bishops may have to depend on the TLM to keep the Church afloat in their dioceses, sad to say. It was announced last Sunday that attendance in the Archdiocese of Chicago is now down to 22%; and many of these in attendance are immigrants from Poland and Mexico.

And, to no surprise, the weekly TLM is fluorishing slowly but surely.

I can’t say what it’s like in other dioceses, though. The Joliet diocese outside Chicago is the 10th richest in the country. They probably have a long way to go before even one weekly TLM makes its debut.

Am I implying it’s all about money? Hey, you have to be realistic. They’re closing a lot of Catholic schools already because of lack of money. And religious vocations have dwindled to the point that they have to rely on prevailing wage help. Some parishes just can’t survive on a few people in attendance. When Michael Davies was still alive, he stated that the Novus Ordo will have died a slow death within 30 years. I think we’ve already seen that in some European dioceses.

I think we’ll be offering the NO for the repose of Mr. Davies soul fifty years from now.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

This has been answered ad infinitum: the switch went on when society was in a time of enourmous flux and social change, when that which was accepted before without question was now BEING questioned. And correlation does not prove causation. Mass attendance may have plummeted even if the Latin had been retained.

The correlation without causation argument only works when the proposed cause is bogus (or unrelated). So if I proprose that in the 1960’s Ford introduced 10 new cars and thus we had a drop in Mass attendance this would be an obvious case of it.

The issue is Mass attendance. The liturgy just “happened” to be completely reworked and then there was a steady plummet in Mass attendance. Therefore it is quite logical to look at the changes in liturgy as probably the primary cause (if not the only one). And saying “post hoc ergo propter hoc” at this point really does not take away that fact.

If, after the changes to the liturgy, Mass attendance had steadily increased, and people were saying, “Wow, those changes to the liturgy were really good ideas and resulted in greater Mass attendance” I doubt there’d be too many people who would be saying, “Oh, no, you can’t say that. That’s that old post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.”

It’s really the onus of those who say “post hoc ergo propter hoc” to argue why the blame goes to societal conditions exclusively and really had nothing to do with the liturgical changes.

 

[BobP123]

The correlation without causation argument only works when the proposed cause is bogus (or unrelated). So if I proprose that in the 1960’s Ford introduced 10 new cars and thus we had a drop in Mass attendance this would be an obvious case of it.

The issue is Mass attendance. The liturgy just “happened” to be completely reworked and then there was a steady plummet in Mass attendance. Therefore it is quite logical to look at the changes in liturgy as probably the primary cause (if not the only one). And saying “post hoc ergo propter hoc” at this point really does not take away that fact.

If, after the changes to the liturgy, Mass attendance had steadily increased, and people were saying, “Wow, those changes to the liturgy were really good ideas and resulted in greater Mass attendance” I doubt there’d be too many people who would be saying, “Oh, no, you can’t say that. That’s that old post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.”

It’s really the onus of those who say “post hoc ergo propter hoc” to argue why the blame goes to societal conditions exclusively and really had nothing to do with the liturgical changes.

Good points.

And who is to say the societal conditions and the convening of Vatican II weren’t related? Or the assassinations of the Kennedies and MLK weren’t related to societal conditions? Cause and effects may have remote connections (and may even seem over-stretching at times) but have connections nonetheless.

In any case, simply blaming the unwanted effects of Vatican II or the New Mass to societal connections seems to be a political tool designed to distract Catholics from accepting the real Truth behind Vatican II or the New Mass. But I don’t know what that Truth is either. The only thing I ask is WHY did we have Vatican II or the New Mass at all? And, PLEEZE, let’s not bring the Holy Spirit into this.

 

[BobP123]

By the way, my argument isn’t with you, Brennan. Actually, I agree with you.

I only mentioned the Holy Spirit because that seems to be the only argument left by some New Mass proponents and I would never blame the Holy Spirit for the bad effects of the New Mass.

 

[Rykell]

ncjohn:

It wasn’t about hating the TLM at all until people started trying to cram it down people’s throats as the only acceptable liturgy. While I personally do still hope for the indult, I know many people who are quite rabidly against it now who didn’t used to care much one way or another. In many ways those promotiing it have become their own worst enemies.

Excellent observation, NC. Who in their right minds would want to attend a liturgy with a host of irreverent red-necked bigots? I would rather take my chances in the NO where the people are at least in control of their tempers.

Notwithstanding the OP’s blog and use of crude profanity, his words in the initial post are enough to keep me from ever attending a TLM. And I note that other TLM-ers who have publicly lauded his blog in this thread [and are of the same mindset, apparently], makes me run, not walk to the nearest NO liturgy.

Caveman:

We’re absolutely sure that the overwhelming majority of Catholics will reject the Latin Mass because of it’s lack of tambourines, bongos, hand holding, feel good spirit, arm raising, shaking hands during The Sign of Grope, fast-food gingle hymns, spontaneous applause, chewing gum while taking Communion, self-worship, etc.

OK, all joking aside… if the rabid anti-Latin Mass crowd is so cock-sure that the Mass of Paul VI is where it’s at, then I challenge 'em to pony up and put their money where their mouth is.

 

[Caveman]

Mark my words, the excommunication (or even reassignment) of His Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop of Los Angeles will happen right after the “real killer” of Nicole Brown Simson and the true assassin of JFK are found.

He’s in at least 4 more years ('til he’s 75) maybe even more.

John

Sadly, I have to agree with you.

 

[Caveman]

Excellent observation, NC. Who in their right minds would want to attend a liturgy with a host of irreverent red-necked bigots? I would rather take my chances in the NO where the people are at least in control of their tempers.

Notwithstanding the OP’s blog and use of crude profanity, his words in the initial post are enough to keep me from ever attending a TLM. And I note that other TLM-ers who have publicly lauded his blog in this thread [and are of the same mindset, apparently], makes me run, not walk to the nearest NO liturgy.

Glad I could help! “irreverent red-necked bigots”, “makes me run, not walk to the nearest NO liturgy”. Interesting comments you make.

How nice to see that *ad hominem *attacks are the normative here! How refreshing!

RYKELL, if you don’t particularly care for my blog, you know what? I don’t particularly care. But that’s alright, seeing I consider you irrelevant anyways.

But not that I’m getting personal or anything… but your comments are exactly what I mean when I refer to the rabid “Spirit of Vatican II” Modernists, and how they sneer down their noses at anything and everything Traditional.

Also Rykell, you may want to reevaluate what you post in the future. You seem to generate more heat than light.

Pax Tecum

 

[Caveman]

The TLM will get full support of the hierarchy of Southern California as soon as instructions come down concerning where the dancing girls fit in.

And bongos… never forget the bongos.

 

[Caveman]

It has everything to do with saving the most souls when doing it. It’s hard to save them when they’re not there. I, personally, would love to see Cardinal Mahony “pruned” abruptly, yesterday in fact, but what I’d love to see isn’t always the best for the soul of others.

It sounds as if you are also aware of the mass abuses (no pun intended) at the Archdiocese of LA. I think this is where we differ…

You essentially state that there are only 4 more years of Cdl Mahony, let’s gut it out. (correct me if I’m wrong)

I say, there are 4 more years that souls will be led to perdition. Cdl Mahony’s got to go, or at a minimum, STRONGLY corrected by Rome. But I’m a realist enough to know that neither will happen.

 

[Caveman]

To the clerics that are against the TLM,

Maybe we should ask them what they would be doing now hadn’t it been for the Novus Ordo. Just a thought.

I THINK I KNOW!!!

1. Working for the Democratic Party.
2. Working for the UN.
3. They’d be Protestants.

 

[Caveman]

You are missing the point. No, letters don’t cut it… letters in the handwriting of the abusive priest, the dissenters cannot deny that it didn’t happen because the proof is right there… Send them irrefutable evidence not hearsay.

Bear, honestly, are you even reading my posts? Let me say this again, I’ve sent copies of the letters themselves that were **written and signed **by the abusive priests and the bishop who supported them!

That certainly doesn’t qualify as “hearsay”.