Vatican Survey on Summorum Pontificum Sent to the Bishops of the World

  • Thread starter Thread starter ioannes_pius
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rorate calls him the “most famous liberal liturgist” in Italy, if that helps, and I’m not sure it does. Basically, he is a ‘somebody’ in the liturgical world, I think.
 
What that guys says is pretty rich. If anything, it can be more credibly argued that the imposition of the Novus Ordo was liturgically divisive, since it divided Latin Catholics from their liturgical tradition. There wouldn’t be a diversity in rites without a new rite being introduced. In the long history of the Church, the new rite is the “liturgical exception” that stands out. In fact, given its myriad of options and local variations–not to mention the endless abuses that have accompanied it–it can more be argued to “fragment, privatize, distort the worship of the Church” than the traditional Mass ever has. The traditional Mass did the opposite for centuries until the new Mass was imposed.

Of all the divisiveness coming from all sorts of corners in the Church today threatening the actual unity of faith sound morals, and real sacramental and liturgical integrity, not to mention the various moral, spiritual, and temporal crises in the world, the attachment of some to the traditional Mass should be the absolute least of anyone’s worries in the Church.
 
Last edited:
OraLabora said:
I think it is too soon to judge whether the impact has been positive or negative.
Click to expand...
How could the EF be negative? In my mind negative means leading people away from God, either by false preaching or causing them to leave the Church. From my (unfortunately limited) experience with the EF, it draws people to the Church by providing an alternative to the OF.
 
It seems to be drawing more younger people here. The OF draws more older folk from what I’ve seen.
 
This all seems like an overreaction. The Pope would like to see some data on how things are going. That makes sense to me. I hear all the time on this forum (but not in RL), that lots of people want the EF, that young people prefer it, etc. Let’s see if that is true. Are there parishes that want EF but can’t get it? Are there parishes where it is available that do not have it? Why wouldn’t we want to know the answers to questions like that?
 
That’s a good point. I think it just alarms us because of the seeming disregard Pope Francis has shown for traditionalists.
 
MikeInVA said:
How could the EF be negative? In my mind negative means leading people away from God, either by false preaching or causing them to leave the Church. From my (unfortunately limited) experience with the EF, it draws people to the Church by providing an alternative to the OF.
Click to expand...
From what I’ve seen here on CAF, the EF vs OF debate has caused some deep divisions that have lead to uncharitable behaviour on both sides. I fail to see how dividing the Church is leading people towards God.

The question then, is this a microcosm particular to CAF or has it become a wider problem in the Church?

That’s what I think is too early to tell, and what I think (hope) the survey might reveal.
 
From a practical perspective, I see the EF as another option to the faithful, and is similar in its effectiveness as where people select which Mass to attend each weekend based on which priest is celebrating. I think that people’s opinions become amplified here on CAF and aren’t a 100% indicator of how the posters act in the real world.
 
OraLabora said:
The question then, is this a microcosm particular to CAF or has it become a wider problem in the Church?
Click to expand...
Its not unique to CAF, but its not an issue in the wider Church. In my opinion, its mostly an internet phenomena, with a few pockets of people with issues here and there. Most Catholics have no idea that this “problem” exists.
 
TMC said:
40.png
OraLabora:
The question then, is this a microcosm particular to CAF or has it become a wider problem in the Church?
Click to expand...
Its not unique to CAF, but its not an issue in the wider Church. In my opinion, its mostly an internet phenomena, with a few pockets of people with issues here and there. Most Catholics have no idea that this “problem” exists.
Click to expand...
I agree. CAF is in no way reflective of the state of the Church IRL.
 
Feanor2 said:
Why? The percentage of people who would want a kind of tridentinesque mass is very small. Maybe less than 1%.
Click to expand...
Indeed, it would be imposing the will of a small minority onto the majority, not a formula that is likely to grow the Church.
 
“imposing the will of a small minority onto the majority, not a formula that is likely to grow the Church.”

Oh, the irony!
 
I don’t think it is clear that Vatican II was imposing the will of the minority on the majority. In my part of the world, people took to the vernacular Mass like ducks to water.

As for the rest, yeah, the Church is not a democracy, but she would ignore the sensus fidelium at her peril at least on non-doctrinal or non-dogmatic matters.

The sensus fidelium is in fact why wider access to the EF Mass was granted. Enforcing it Church-wide today though, would be the very opposite.
 
IanM said:
and many continued to waddle to the exit and were last seen heading to other climes.
Click to expand...
Not where I live. There’s no appetite for the TLM and they are few and far between. There is an appetite for more referent OF Masses though, which is why our abbey (Gregorian chant) is filled to capacity every Sunday (at least pre-pandemic).
 
IanM said:
The ducks I refer to simply abandoned the faith and went shopping or something.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget there were huge societal shifts at the same time. You can’t blame everything on the Mass, any more than you could blame it on the moon landing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top