To the clerics that are against the TLM

[BobP123]

I would agree with you here, if the Novus Ordo Mass was the same as the Tridentine Mass. They are not the same. A better question to you is why not in Latin as it was used by so many for so long? Surely it is not because language is a barrier, for that would not hold true for most of the worlds populace, where it is the norm to read, write, and speak more than just one language (Europe, Africa, Asia, South America to name a few). Another question to you, why not a standardized language such Latin, in that way the mass is the same no matter where you are on earth? It seems to work for other religions such as Islam, which happens to be the fastest growing religion, where Arabic is the standard language. Also Hinduism, the oldest religion, enjoys Sanskrit as the official sacred language of their faith.

Respectfully and GOD+ Bless.

A worship language should be different than the vernacular. We use vernaculars to communicate with one another and we use a Catholic (universal) language to worship God. We’ve made a distinction; otherwise we may get tempted to worship one another. Other religions like the ones you mention (plus Hebrew) seem to get it and are flourshing.

Even the Latin Novus Ordo **said everywhere ** would be an improvement. Personally I could live with 50% TLM and 50% LNO without the frills.

 

[Rykell]

Bob123:

LOL. This message board wasn’t around in 1988 when they set up Lefebrve after the TLM had been officially allowed after 1984.

Rykell:

Why are the bishops against it? They probably read the T.C. forum at Catholic Answers and noted that many of the TLM-ers are waaaay too divisive to unity. As I echoed Ncjohn’s feelings previously, though you many not wish to hear it, some traditionists have become their own worst enemy.

Very true; although it was not in existence in 1988, that doesn’t preclude the fact that the TLM is presently being opposed. The very consideration holding up the pending Motu Proprio may be due to the reports reaching the Magisterium from those who read this forum. It is not a hidden secret that traditionists have deep-seated antipathy for the NO. If the Bishops perceive this as a further disunion in the Body of Christ, then this decision reverts back to traditionists themselves for having been the cause of the delay.

Liturgical abuses can be corrected in time, but disunity, bigotry, antipathy cannot. Granting the indult will only serve to feed more of the same, with TLM-ers continuing to view THEIR liturgy as the more perfect one.

The only hope I see is for them to develop a meekness born of humility and accept that the NO is a validly promulgated liturgy that is here to stay, and discontinue the attacks that are so prevalent in these threads. It is one thing to oppose abuses and work for their correction, but it is quite another to attack the very sacred liturgy itself and everyone who espouses it.

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…

The problem is, he is not joking, but attacking. These are the OP’s honest feelings, and are expressed far too often by traditionists using similar denigrations.

 

[paramedicgirl]

A worship language should be different than the vernacular. We use vernaculars to communicate with one another and we use a Catholic (universal) language to worship God. We’ve made a distinction; otherwise we may get tempted to worship one another. Other religions like the ones you mention (plus Hebrew) seem to get it and are flourshing.

Even the Latin Novus Ordo **said everywhere ** would be an improvement. Personally I could live with 50% TLM and 50% LNO without the frills.

Even 33% TLM would be good. The Latin NO and the vernacular NO could make up the other 2/3. The people who are shortchanged right now are the ones looking for a TLM or a Latin NO.

 

[BobP123]

Even 33% TLM would be good. The Latin NO and the vernacular NO could make up the other 2/3. The people who are shortchanged right now are the ones looking for a TLM or a Latin NO.

Well, be careful for what you wish. I understand the Polish NO and the Spanish NO aren’t doing too badly yet. And, from what I know, the Polish NO actually has the consecration right.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Well, be careful for what you wish. I understand the Polish NO and the Spanish NO aren’t doing too badly yet. And, from what I know, the Polish NO actually has the consecration right.

I’ve learned to be careful for what I wish. But that’s another topic. I just meant that the TLM is under represented in the rites today, and even one third would be a bonus.

 

[BobP123]

I’ve learned to be careful for what I wish. But that’s another topic. I just meant that the TLM is under represented in the rites today, and even one third would be a bonus.

Yes, I would consider 33% to be “wide and generous.”

 

[Swiss_Guard]

The reason the bishops don’t want the TLM is that it doesn’t give them the opportunity to put their “own mark” on the Mass.

When I was a novice I had another novice tell me he wanted to see my “mark” on the Mass. I told him the Mass isn’t my prayer, it’s Christ’s prayer and he gave it to His Church. It’s not for me to put my “mark” on the Mass.

Unfortunately, this is how most bishops and priests look at the Mass. It’s a chance for them to be “creative” and do things their own way. They really don’t look at the Mass as the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary.

The ones who say the NO reverently are the ones who have the correct understanding of the Mass. I have to drive 15 miles to even find a parish with a reverent NO. Fortunately, the parish I belong to also has the TLM.

There are parishes in the Archdiocese of Chicago where the TLM and NO co-exist. These are the parishes where most of the reverent NO Masses are found.

I heard this saying about 15 years ago and I find it to be as true now as when I first heard it: Lex orandi, lex credendi.

 

[Uxor]

God is raising His Church up and through the Tradtional Mass, if you don’t see it now, you will. The fruits also tell it.

 

[Caveman]

PG,

Do you think that somehow Latin is a better language in the eyes of God than English, Irish, or Italian?

John

John and ParamedicGirl,
Hope you two don’t mind me jumping in.

John, it’s not so much that Latin is a “better” language, as it is a safeguard against the possibility of error and/or abuse.

Here’s what I mean… Liturgical Latin is a “dead” languauge. What’s said is meant, and what’s meant is said. It’s simply impossible to change the meanings of the words.

English, on the other hand (as well as Spanish, Japanese, Hungarian, Zulu, Farsi, etc, etc), are “live” languages. The meanings of words in live languages constantly change and evolve. Just look at the word “gay”. What did that word mean just a short one generation ago? What does it mean now?

With that said, look at the example of when Bill Clinton was under oath, and he asked what is the meaning of “is”? And intelligent, educated people took him seriously.

“This Is My Body” – Does that mean literally… symbolically… only if YOU think it does? Do you REALLY want me to get into the non-Indo-European languages where there is NO direct translation, such as Chinese, Korean, etc.?

“Hoc Est Enim Corpus Meum” — absolutely zero wiggle room. It’s simply impossible to change the meanings of those words.

With all that said, yes… I’ve seen N.O. priests celebrate said Mass with reverence and sacredness.

But John, The Mass of Paul VI is inherently flawed because it has the absolute possibility for error already built in. And do we REALLY want to play fast and loose with the Consecration?

 

[Caveman]

The reason the bishops don’t want the TLM is that it doesn’t give them the opportunity to put their “own mark” on the Mass.

When I was a novice I had another novice tell me he wanted to see my “mark” on the Mass. I told him the Mass isn’t my prayer, it’s Christ’s prayer and he gave it to His Church. It’s not for me to put my “mark” on the Mass.

Unfortunately, this is how most bishops and priests look at the Mass. It’s a chance for them to be “creative” and do things their own way. They really don’t look at the Mass as the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary.Lex orandi, lex credendi.

EXCELLENT points. I’ve never considered that. Spot on, Swiss Guard!!

 

[Caveman]

I thought you started this thread to debate the subject??? Or was it just to post your question and see different answers?

I started this thread mainly to get other POV’s, and yes… a little debate thrown in for good measure. But the amount of deviation has been through the roof.

But on second thought, I’ll go ahead and answer your question… You stated something along the lines of some bishops automatically equating the TLM to the SSPX.

Even though I disagree wholeheartedly with the agenda of the ultra-“progressives”, I find it difficult to believe that any of them are really that blinded by hatred.

 

[Caveman]

***Quote:
Originally Posted by 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… ***

The problem is, he is not joking, but attacking. These are the OP’s honest feelings, and are expressed far too often by traditionists using similar denigrations.

Ahhhh, Rykell… the Poster Child for unsupervised kiddies on the internet. First off, all those things I gave as examples are facts. But if you choose to slam your hands to your ears are sing “On Eagles Wings” at the top of your lungs, that’s your call. God forbid you actually admit that there are massive abuses on a regular basis at the NO.

Secondly, your whining falls on deaf ears. FOR THE SECOND TIME, can you please enlighten us, one and all, to who it was that stated that **those who attend the TLM are “ignorant, bigoted rednecks”? ** You recall, don’t you Rykell? Yeah… we all do.

Lastly, there are many on this forum who I don’t agree with, but I respect, mainly because they conduct themselves as adults.

You, my child, on the other hand… need to toddle off and keep your narrow arse in the shallow end of the pool. Grown-ups are talking here.

Hugs and kisses all around,
The Caveman

 

[Rykell]

Caveman:

Ahhhh, Rykell… the Poster Child for unsupervised kiddies on the internet. First off, all those things I gave as examples are facts.

As I suspected, you were not “joking” as you wanted us to believe, but were dead serious with your litany of “facts.” However, it is your personal biased opinion, and not actually occurring in 95% or more of the NO masses celebrated universally, but only a handful. What was most offensive of all was the injection that one who attends these liturgies indulges in “self worship.” Appalling assertion, my man!

But if you choose to slam your hands to your ears are sing “On Eagles Wings” at the top of your lungs, that’s your call.

Thanks for proving my point about bigotry. There may be some who actually like the song; albeit it is not in latin, nor gregorian chant.

God forbid you actually admit that there are massive abuses on a regular basis at the NO.

I alluded to my belief that there are abuses, if you re-read my post. However, as I stated, these can be disciplined and eliminated over time, but bigotry cannot.

FOR THE SECOND TIME, can you please enlighten us, one and all, to who it was that stated that those who attend the TLM are “ignorant, bigoted rednecks”?

Not exactly. Read my words: "“Excellent observation, NC. Who in their right minds would want to attend a liturgy with a host of irreverent red-necked bigots?” I would gladly attend a TLM with sincere, humble worshippers who do not exercise every possible opportunity to demean an authentic and sacred liturgy of Holy Mother Church. There are some very beautiful christians in the TLM who do have my utmost respect.

However, to sit in the company of red-necks who cannot even sustain an adult tone without engaging in profane slurs, and exaggerating abuses as normal for NO liturgies? not a snowball’s chance. In speaking of profanity, I was referring to your blog where you do not need to modify your words. It reveals your true character. Follow?

The tone of your last response is restrained, yet sarcastic, but had you been at liberty, I’m sure your language would be highly profane. Using “arse” is a good example of “red-necked.” Again, thanks.

 

[Ham1]

I started this thread mainly to get other POV’s, and yes… a little debate thrown in for good measure. But the amount of deviation has been through the roof.

But on second thought, I’ll go ahead and answer your question… You stated something along the lines of some bishops automatically equating the TLM to the SSPX.

Even though I disagree wholeheartedly with the agenda of the ultra-“progressives”, I find it difficult to believe that any of them are really that blinded by hatred.

Just to clarify, I spoke of the bishops associating the TLM with the SSPX which gives them a tainted view of the TLM. Look at this board…the TLM doesn’t exist as a quiet little liturgy it comes complete with a tangled mess of political volatility. And the SSPX have done their fair share to burn that association into people’s heads.

The other issue that may cause bishops to shy away from urging priests to institute a TLM is that there does seem to be a common thread among MANY who attend the TLM that:

The NO is inferior.
It was a fabrication (in a negative sense).
The NO caused a decline in Mass attendance.
The NO caused a decline in vocations.
The NO caused a decline in belief in the Real Presence.
The people who will only attend a TLM and refuse to attend an NO

The bishops may reason that if these negative attitudes toward the Holy Mass are prevalent among good Catholics who attend indult Masses. They may not desire to see such attitudes spread widely across their jurisdiction. So, the vocal attitudes of many traditionalists are probably not exactly helping to gain wider access to the TLM. This I would say is a secondary reason behind the primary reason I noted before. Many bishops simply do not see a pastoral need for it. Or only see a need for one or two TLM’s within the diocese.

 

[Caveman]

Not exactly. Read my words: "“Excellent observation, NC. Who in their right minds would want to attend a liturgy with a host of irreverent red-necked bigots?” I would gladly attend a TLM with sincere, humble worshippers who do not exercise every possible opportunity to demean an authentic and sacred liturgy of Holy Mother Church. There are some very beautiful christians in the TLM who do have my utmost respect.

However, to sit in the company of red-necks who cannot even sustain an adult tone without engaging in profane slurs, and exaggerating abuses as normal for NO liturgies? not a snowball’s chance. In speaking of profanity, I was referring to your blog where you do not need to modify your words. It reveals your true character. Follow?

The tone of your last response is restrained, yet sarcastic, but had you been at liberty, I’m sure your language would be highly profane. Using “arse” is a good example of “red-necked.” Again, thanks.

LOL!!! Dissecting you is such a joy! Your verbal gymnastics are a sight to behold.

Ahhh… so now you qualify your bigoted remarks, 'eh? Sorry, sugarbritches, I know a fraud when I see one.

What examples of “profanity” are you refering to on my blog? Possibly the “priest” who was pornographic in his references to The Holy Mother and St Joseph? Or was it the Democrat candidate for president who sat on his hands while 2 of his staffers blasphemed The Holy Ghost. Baaaaaaad Caveman! How dare I point out to my fellow Catholics that there are enemies of The Church both within and without.

But you, dear Rykell… you just keep covering your ears and scream “On Eagles Wings” at the top of your lungs. Like I’ve stated before, you are typical of the “Spirit of Vatican II progressives”. You sneer down your noses at everything traditional. And you’re especially laughable now that you’re tap-dancing after I’ve exposed you for the snotty child that you are. All of a sudden, you have no problem attending a TLM, but oddly enough, only if they fit your qualifications. Interesting indeed.

And the “exaggerating abuses” I pointed out are factual. What… they stopped that silly hand-holding at your parish? Ummm, if your loooking for a **REAL **“sign of unity”, look to The Eucharist, not the individuals standing around you. No spontanious applause at your parish? Yeah, sure. No emphasis on horizontal worship and the “holiness of the gathered community”? Yeah, and I’ve got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

Try again, Rykell.

Oh, and using the word “arse” is a good example of being a redneck? I’m sorry, I can’t help but laugh at you. I’ll bet you had to look up “arse”, didn’t you? Just like you had to look up “cock-sure”.

But I better lay off you, Rykell. It’s Saturday and I’m sure you have to beat the rush to get to Confession. Or is your parish one of the vast majority where maybe a dozen even bother to show up, yet Sunday after Sunday… literally hundreds rcv Holy Communion?

I think we all know the answer to that one, don’t we, Rykell?

 

[paramedicgirl]

John and ParamedicGirl,
Hope you two don’t mind me jumping in.

John, it’s not so much that Latin is a “better” language, as it is a safeguard against the possibility of error and/or abuse.

Here’s what I mean… Liturgical Latin is a “dead” languauge. What’s said is meant, and what’s meant is said. It’s simply impossible to change the meanings of the words.

English, on the other hand (as well as Spanish, Japanese, Hungarian, Zulu, Farsi, etc, etc), are “live” languages. The meanings of words in live languages constantly change and evolve. Just look at the word “gay”. What did that word mean just a short one generation ago? What does it mean now?

With that said, look at the example of when Bill Clinton was under oath, and he asked what is the meaning of “is”? And intelligent, educated people took him seriously.

“This Is My Body” – Does that mean literally… symbolically… only if YOU think it does? Do you REALLY want me to get into the non-Indo-European languages where there is NO direct translation, such as Chinese, Korean, etc.?

“Hoc Est Enim Corpus Meum” — absolutely zero wiggle room. It’s simply impossible to change the meanings of those words.

With all that said, yes… I’ve seen N.O. priests celebrate said Mass with reverence and sacredness.

But John, The Mass of Paul VI is inherently flawed because it has the absolute possibility for error already built in. And do we REALLY want to play fast and loose with the Consecration?

Oh, I don’t mind you jumping in. Good points brought up here. Thanks!

 

[Caveman]

Just to clarify, I spoke of the bishops associating the TLM with the SSPX which gives them a tainted view of the TLM. Look at this board…the TLM doesn’t exist as a quiet little liturgy it comes complete with a tangled mess of political volatility. And the SSPX have done their fair share to burn that association into people’s heads.

The other issue that may cause bishops to shy away from urging priests to institute a TLM is that there does seem to be a common thread among MANY who attend the TLM that:

The NO is inferior.
It was a fabrication (in a negative sense).
The NO caused a decline in Mass attendance.
The NO caused a decline in vocations.
The NO caused a decline in belief in the Real Presence.
The people who will only attend a TLM and refuse to attend an NO

The bishops may reason that if these negative attitudes toward the Holy Mass are prevalent among good Catholics who attend indult Masses. They may not desire to see such attitudes spread widely across their jurisdiction. So, the vocal attitudes of many traditionalists are probably not exactly helping to gain wider access to the TLM. This I would say is a secondary reason behind the primary reason I noted before. Many bishops simply do not see a pastoral need for it. Or only see a need for one or two TLM’s within the diocese.

The examples you gave are perfect examples of what the so-called “spirit of V2” has given us. It it what the majority of the Church Fathers envisioned at the 2d Vatican Council? That’s debatable, but for the sake of discussion, I’ll say no.

Now here’s where the rubber meets the road… what was it that opened the door itself for “the spirit of V2” to cause practicing Catholics to disbelieve The Real Presence, quit going to Mass altogether, vocations to dry up, etc?

I’m of the opinion that it was the vague, generic, do-it-yourself liturgy that is The Mass of Paul VI.

And of course, you’ll disagree with me. That’s OK. But one thing I don’t think can be argues is that pre-V2, Catholicsim was a lot of black on one side… a lot of white on the other… and a very thin strip of gray in the middle. Present day we have a very thin strip of black on one side… a very thin strip of white on the other… and a huge block of gray in the middle.

After all, Lex orandi, lex credendi.

 

[Unfinished]

LOL!!! Dissecting you is such a joy! Your verbal gymnastics are a sight to behold.

Ahhh… so now you qualify your bigoted remarks, 'eh? Sorry, sugarbritches, I know a fraud when I see one.

What examples of “profanity” are you refering to on my blog? Possibly the “priest” who was pornographic in his references to The Holy Mother and St Joseph? Or was it the Democrat candidate for president who sat on his hands while 2 of his staffers blasphemed The Holy Ghost. Baaaaaaad Caveman! How dare I point out to my fellow Catholics that there are enemies of The Church both within and without.

But you, dear Rykell… you just keep covering your ears and scream “On Eagles Wings” at the top of your lungs. Like I’ve stated before, you are typical of the “Spirit of Vatican II progressives”. You sneer down your noses at everything traditional. And you’re especially laughable now that you’re tap-dancing after I’ve exposed you for the snotty child that you are. All of a sudden, you have no problem attending a TLM, but oddly enough, only if they fit your qualifications. Interesting indeed.

And the “exaggerating abuses” I pointed out are factual. What… they stopped that silly hand-holding at your parish? Ummm, if your loooking for a **REAL **“sign of unity”, look to The Eucharist, not the individuals standing around you. No spontanious applause at your parish? Yeah, sure. No emphasis on horizontal worship and the “holiness of the gathered community”? Yeah, and I’ve got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

Try again, Rykell.

Oh, and using the word “arse” is a good example of being a redneck? I’m sorry, I can’t help but laugh at you. I’ll bet you had to look up “arse”, didn’t you? Just like you had to look up “cock-sure”.

But I better lay off you, Rykell. It’s Saturday and I’m sure you have to beat the rush to get to Confession. Or is your parish one of the vast majority where maybe a dozen even bother to show up, yet Sunday after Sunday… literally hundreds rcv Holy Communion?

I think we all know the answer to that one, don’t we, Rykell?

This may be rude…

but LOL.

Caveman, honestly, I was in the Marines too and your rhetoric never fails to entertain. Witty, yet solid points every time.

Is there a popcorn emote? No way I could ever keep up in this thread.

 

[Caveman]

This may be rude…

but LOL.

Caveman, honestly, I was in the Marines too and your rhetoric never fails to entertain. Witty, yet solid points every time.

Is there a popcorn emote? No way I could ever keep up in this thread.

It’s tough for us retired Jyreens, aint it? insert evil grin here

But somehow, we manage to muddle along, don’t we? As the old saying goes, “When You’re The Finest, It’s Hard To Be Humble”.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

Yes, I would consider 33% to be “wide and generous.”

I am in agreement that any increase in the TLM would be an improvement. But, it should be much more than 33%, simply for the reason that the TLM and Novus Ordo Mass are not one and the same mass. We should not lose sight of this point. The two masses are not exactly the same without even considering the difference in language (Tridentine in Latin and Novus Ordo in the vernacular). In this case, the masses are distinctly dissimilar. For this reason should not only one mass be correct? In the same sense, there are hundreds of versions of the Bible, should there not be only one (and whichever is the correct one), so that in everyone reads the same thing the same way every where at any given time? You on your own accord can verify for yourself by reading say a NAB or NRSV and contrast it against the Holy Bible (Douay - Rheims) translated from the Latin Vulgate. Some versions are a translation of a translation of a translation of a …As we refer back to the mass, if standardized as is the TLM, you can celebrate the mass the same way any where in the world, irrespective of the vernacular. Dissect the two masses and you can only come to one conclusion they are not the same. There are in fact, in many, many ways not saying the same thing.

Respectfully and God+ Bless.