Would you like to see the TLM back?

[SnorterLuster]

The problem isn’t finding a Catholic parish to receive Mass.

The problem is a small group of people not only want things only their way - they want it convienently and on demand.

Come out to western Oklahoma, finding a Catholic parish is a problem for many.

And yea, a “…small group of people not only want things only their way - they want it convienently and on demand.”, it’s the American way.

But again, in my opinion, a parish in each quadrant of the state would not be a burden to the diocese, especially since diocesean priests are not used in the indult parishes. But even if they have to be placed in a regular parish, it would be no different than having a Mass in Spanish, Vietnamese or Cherokee each Sunday along with the English Masses.**
**

 

[Dr.Bombay]

JKirkLVNV:

That wasn’t an ad hominum attack! I think Rob’s Wife laid it out fair and square, based on reason, to use your words.

Sorry to dissappoint, Doc, I don’t hold hands during the Pater, be it in Latin or English or Sanskrit. I will buy you a bear claw afterwards, though.

Thanks, Old Man. I love bear claws.

Let’s see. Rob’s Wife said…

** However, I will say your attitude appears to be in common with others of the TLM and does turn many away from any desire to attend, much less request for their parish, a TLM.**

“…appears to be in common…” which **appears **to me to be a pretty broad brush, painting all attendees of the Traditional Roman Rite as “intolerant,” “stupid,” “rude,” “triumphalist” or whatever pejorative people who hate the TLM choose to use in order to justify that hate. But it’s much easier to dismiss people with insults, implied or otherwise, than to actually engage in conversation about the problems of the current “normative” rite. No, let’s stick our heads in the sand and deny any problems exist whatsoever. Let’s just dismiss it as a problem of “liturgical abuse” or “the spirit of Vatican II” or “poor catchesis.” It certainly can’t be the liturgy itself! Heaven forfend! After all, if you repeat, “It’s a new springtime!” or “Vatican II renewed the liturgy!” often enough and loud enough, it might actually turn out to be true. Or at least you’ll get plenty of sheeple in the pews who believe it to be true. And you can just shake your head sadly at the poor, benighted souls who lament the loss of our precious liturgical patrimony. :nope:

Unfortunately, I’m cursed with the ability to see things as they are, not as I want them to be.

And please don’t quote me the Council of Trent and others anathematizing anyone who claims the Mass is detrimental to the faith. That’s not what I’m saying and you know it. :tsktsk:

 

[Marilena]

I have asked the mods to close this post and this poll because I think it is going beyond the original intent. Please do not be angry with me, I have requested it be closed. Thank you all for your replies.

 

[arieh0310]

So far the poll results are at 72% fer the TLM, maybe the traditionalists are more numerous than once thought…

 

[James0235]

arieh0310:

So far the poll results are at 72% fer the TLM, maybe the traditionalists are more numerous than once thought…

Maybe. But the poll does not state that you want the TLM to the exclusion of the Novus Ordo. So, I have a feeling that a good number of those who are in favor of a return of the TLM in the poll actually prefer the Novus Ordo but would like the TLM to be made more available for those who would like to attend.

To all of those who have done so I would like to say Thank You. Now, if only we could find a way to make the poll results binding on some bishops somehow. lol

God bless,

James

James

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

Oklahoma. I don’t know how “reasonably close” they are, guess that depends on perspective.

---

In my county, there are 3 churches that offer a latin mass at least occsssionally (christmas, easter if nothing else). I think one of them only offers the TLM, but I could be wrong as I have never been to mass there. There’s also Clear Creek Monastary, which many Catholic families have moved to be closer to.

---

I would actually enjoy the TLM rites more than the regular mass, if they were in the common language. Just my personal preference.

Dear Rob’s Wife,

Please forgive me if all this has been cleared up since I was last here, but I do believe you are a bit mistaken about the Masses in your county. From what I can research there are exactly 3 TLM(s) in the entire state of Oklahoma, and they don’t seem to be in the same county!

I am wondering if you are confusing the plain old NO said or sung in Latin with the TLM? The former may be said by any priest anywhere, without any permission necessary. The latter may only be said by a priest who has obtained the indult from the Ordinary.

Some priests, it is true, are reluctant to say the NO in Latin, because their bishops are wedded to the “spirit of Vatican II” and frown on any of their priests using Latin. (They dont want to appear among their episcopal peers as less than cutting edge.) That is sad, but, in any case, the Novus ordo priests are not to be confused with priests that actually have the indult to say the TLM.

God bless,

Anna

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

Rob’s Wife, An afterthought: You mentioned that Catholic families are moving close to what I believe is the Clear Creek Priory. But this is located in what is referred to as the center of the Cherokee Nation. What does this mean? Are the families moving to what is legally another nation?

Even the question sounds weird, but I don’t understand.

Blessings,

Anna

 

[kleary]

Okay, now you lose me.

**40 minutes? Give me a break. People drive further than that for much less without a thought. And many people have to drive that far to find a Catholic church at all. **

I do NOT hate the TLM in the least. I just don’t think hearing it in latin is what makes the mass holy.

I do however hate your presumption that the current order of the mass makes me less Catholic or an ignorant Catholic. I’m not a “liberal” anything just because I prefer to hear the mass in english. However, I will say your attitude appears to be in common with others of the TLM and does turn many away from any desire to attend, much less request for their parish, a TLM.

Sorry. I am from an area where there are about 30 Catholic parishes within 70 miles of each other all in the Camden Diocese which is in a small part of southern New Jersey. There is a Catholic parish basically for every town here in South Jersey.

Also I am not presuming that the N.O. mass makes you less Catholic or an ignorant Catholic.

However it is the God’s honest truth that liberal Catholics, and I use that term strictly for “Liberal Catholics”, hate the TLM because of the Catholic Teaching shown more clearly in it than the Novus Ordo Mass.

Hearing the Mass in Latin does not make it “more holy”. Similarly a “Solemn Mass” is no more holier than a “Low Mass”.

For me, hearing the Mass in Latin makes the Mass sound more solemn.

Ken

 

[kleary]

SnorterLuster:

But again, in my opinion, a parish in each quadrant of the state would not be a burden to the diocese, especially since diocesean priests are not used in the indult parishes. ****

Mater Ecclesiae is an indult parish and is staffed by the Diocese of Camden. At my parish there is low mass every morning and High Mass with incense and gregorian chant every Sunday. On holy days we always have Solem Mass with priest, deacon and sub-deacon.

The seminarians and most of the priests in the diocese love it, especially with they are asked to assist as deacon or subdeacon.

And for a fact the liberal Catholics here in South Jersey hate it. When we were established by Bishop DiMarzio you should have seen the disgust on the face of the liberal priests and lay people attending that announcement.

Ken

 

[John_Higgins]

I am 54 years old. The Mass I grew up with was the 1962 Missal. As an altar server (I know it was altar BOY then, but I like that change!) I served Latin, the hybrid, and the almost totally English Mass.

I’ve attended the 10:00 PM Sunday Mass run by the campus ministry at Saint Louis University. There are 6-7 Jesuit priests, adult acolytes, and a thurifer. The music is magnificent every week. This Mass is celebrated (and I mean celebrated!) in English and is far more magestic than almost any Latin Solemn High Mass I ever attended. It can, and should, be done properly, AND in the vernacular.

John

 

[SnorterLuster]

Anna Elizabeth:

Rob’s Wife, An afterthought: You mentioned that Catholic families are moving close to what I believe is the Clear Creek Priory. But this is located in what is referred to as the center of the Cherokee Nation. What does this mean? Are the families moving to what is legally another nation?

Even the question sounds weird, but I don’t understand.

Blessings,

Anna

I am not Rob’s wife, but as a Okie and Sooner through & through, I will try to answer your question.

The Indian tribes in Oklahoma and in many states have retained their independent nation status. The boundaries of the Cherokee Nation were set by treaty, but with statehood each family was given an allotment of land. Previously the Cherokee Nation held the land in trust for their members. Anyway, most of the land in the nation passed into private ownership. As to be expected, most of the Cherokees held on to their land and passed it on to their progeny. Some though sold it to outsiders, either Indians from other tribes or to white settlers. The Cherokee Nation of course retained some land for their own use. In essence the Nations have a government that is soverign, but located only on paper. They can pass laws and administer justice only on lands that the tribes own. They can collect fees, issue license plates, perform marriages, or any thing a usual government does. What is different is that it is not a contiguous geographical area. So Clear Creek is in the middle of the Cherokee nation, but the Cherokees may only own and govern a small percentage of the land in that area. The bulk of the land is administered by the state of Oklahoma. This holds true for most of the tribes in Oklahoma except for the Osage, which are a special case.

 

[John_Higgins]

Anna Elizabeth:

Are the families moving to what is legally another nation?

Even the question sounds weird, but I don’t understand.

Many trial areas are treated legally to some degree as a separate nation. Functionally, that often means freedom from state government. The Cherokee and Choctaw in Oklahoma (at least) issue their own license plates (Oops, down there it’s “tags”), this is true of the Red Wing tribe in Minnesota as well.

The Indian Territory which made up part of Oklahoma included lands designated for Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Seminole, and Chickasaw (the so-called Five Civilized Tribes).

Rest assured the priory is within Oklahoma.

John

 

[QUICUMQUE_VULT]

kleary:

Mater Ecclesiae is an indult parish and is staffed by the Diocese of Camden. At my parish there is low mass every morning and High Mass with incense and gregorian chant every Sunday. On holy days we always have Solem Mass with priest, deacon and sub-deacon.

The seminarians and most of the priests in the diocese love it, especially with they are asked to assist as deacon or subdeacon.

And for a fact the liberal Catholics here in South Jersey hate it. When we were established by Bishop DiMarzio you should have seen the disgust on the face of the liberal priests and lay people attending that announcement.

Ken

Its sounds like you have A wonderful Parish! very much like my own. Deo Gratias!
I have seen the same reaction you speak of myself. It is always liberal clergy, religious and laity.
They are suprised that the Old Faith is capable of such A vicious fight for survival. God send you and your Parishoners,and Clergy.and all the Faithful of Mater Ecclesia parish A manifold of Blessings!

Mother of the Church,
Ora pro nobis!
Doce me Domine.vias tuas!

 

[John_Higgins]

QUICUMQUE VULT:

They are suprised that the Old Faith…

QV, there is no “Old Faith”, there is only The Faith. It is a merely a difference in the form of the liturgy. Let’s not get carried away here.

John

 

[QUICUMQUE_VULT]

John Higgins:

QV, there is no “Old Faith”, there is only The Faith. It is a merely a difference in the form of the liturgy. Let’s not get carried away here.

John

Mea culpa!
I did not mean to cause offence, To anyone. But sometimes I wonder. I think sometimes, that all I have in common with other Catholics (Of the liberal mindset) is our Holy Father, The Lord Pope Benedict, the sixteenth of that name. (God Bless Him!)

 

[John_Higgins]

Sorry, too, QV, I just get tired of those who imply (Not saying that you are one) that somehow the Mass promulgated by Paul VI is less that the so-called Mass of the Ages.

John

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

Anna Elizabeth:

Dear Rob’s Wife,

Please forgive me if all this has been cleared up since I was last here, but I do believe you are a bit mistaken about the Masses in your county. From what I can research there are exactly 3 TLM(s) in the entire state of Oklahoma, and they don’t seem to be in the same county!

Okay… Please forgive me as I sort through this. In my county, there is 1 parish devoted entirely to the TLM. There are also at least 2 parishes that have a TLM high mass for major occassions (such as chirstmas/easter - they have to borrow a priest ). Clear Creek is not in my county, but it is only about a 45 minute highway drive from anywhere in my county.

I am wondering if you are confusing the plain old NO said or sung in Latin with the TLM? The former may be said by any priest anywhere, without any permission necessary. The latter may only be said by a priest who has obtained the indult from the Ordinary.

In addition to the above, there is occassionally a Latin NO mass at various parishes.

Some priests, it is true, are reluctant to say the NO in Latin, because their bishops are wedded to the “spirit of Vatican II” and frown on any of their priests using Latin. (They dont want to appear among their episcopal peers as less than cutting edge.)
That is sad, but, in any case, the Novus ordo priests are not to be confused with priests that actually have the indult to say the TLM.

Our bishop is not among such fellows and has on occassion given a Latin NO mass at the cathedral in Tulsa himself.

I also want to point out that although there may be over a hundred catholic sites in Oklahoma, that includes missions and not just parish churches, with the possible exception of Tulsa and OKC (depends on personal perspective to some degree I think) - they are VERY spread out and every parish has to share their priest with other parishes. Many of the rural parishes may not have any weekday masses and only 1 Sunday mass because of this situation and it may be more of a drive than some city people are used to to get there. Given that situation, the small numbers of TLM parishoners, and the small number of priest able/willing to offer an indult mass - I still feel Oklahoma is actually doing very well to offer the TLM mass as frequently as it is.

---

You mentioned that Catholic families are moving close to what I believe is the Clear Creek Priory. But this is located in what is referred to as the center of the Cherokee Nation. What does this mean? Are the families moving to what is legally another nation?

Yes and no, depending on location. And that’s really all I know about that. They are still Okies and americans if that’s what you mean. Their address is still Oklahoma, USA. I’ve lived here my entire life and never really gave it much thought!

 

[kleary]

JKirkLVNV:

The Council of Trent similarly declared:
“If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments and outward signs, which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of Masses, are incentives to impiety rather than the services of piety: let him be anathema.” (Session XXII, canon 7, Denz. 954.).

To use that Canon from the Council of Trent in defense of the Novus Ordo Mass and those of us who speak out against it because of the numerous problems associated with it is totally and completely absurd!

The Council fathers of Trent witnessed Protestants do EXACTLY what we see in our Catholic Churches today! Al altar replaced by table with the celebrant facing the people in order to make it look like a meal instead of someone offering sacrifice. No more Latin, everything in the vernacular.

This is one of the best jokes ever posted in here. Attacking TLM with the council of Trent that was precisely defending it - not NOM published in … 1969!

Now can you tell me where are the “incentives to piety” promoted by the Council in say … Mahonyian charades? Besides as it is obvious for everyone, Trent is responding to the Protestant negations. Protestants were calling Mass i.e. TLM a sacrilege, an idolatry, an impiety, an invention of the devil.
Among their numerous criticisms, apart from the nodal doctrinal contestations, XVIth Protestants were condemning in principle - stress on in principle - the length and decorum of TLM, the use of incense, and especially the chasuble.

This canon is so refuting the Protestants i.e … some VERY IDEAS OF TODAY LITNIKS … : hate for ceremonies, hate of chasuble, hate for incense… and in the end, hate for TLM.

Ken

 

[dljl]

The lack of demand argument doesn’t really work for me. From what I can gather, the TLM indult masses that are offered are well attended despite the obstacle of travel distance (this isn’t even counting SSPX people who could conceivably come over), so apparantly there is demand. I also think demand would increase signficantly once people had the opportunity to attend a TLM for the first time.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

kleary:

To use that Canon from the Council of Trent in defense of the Novus Ordo Mass and those of us who speak out against it because of the numerous problems associated with it is totally and completely absurd!** Not remotely. I support a generous application of the Indult urged by HH Pope John Paul II, of happy memory, for those Catholics who manifest an attachment to the TLM. I’m simply sick to death of some of those same people running down the Mass of Paul VI in an effort to establish WHY they HAVE to have the TLM (they don’t, the normative Mass of the Church is sufficient). In constantly belittling that Mass, I believe they are in error, both against the Mass and the legitimate authority of the Church to govern the Sacraments. I’M NOT SPEAKING OF ABUSES OF THE MASS (rail against those all you want, I’ll buy you a beer to wet your whistle so you can be heard more clearly). I’m talking about the suggestion that any discipline or outward form (the Mass is essentially made up of “outward forms”) lawfully promulgated by the Church may lead the faithful to impiety. That IS condemned by Trent and it applies to any of the legitimate disciplines for the Mass or Liturgy proposed by the legitimate authority (the Pope). **

This is one of the best jokes ever posted in here. Attacking TLM with the council of Trent that was precisely defending it - not NOM published in … 1969! You really need to read more critically. I haven’t attacked the TLM at all, let alone invoked an edict of Trent in order to attack the TLM. Also, since Trent didn’t merely protect the TLM through these said edicts (Trent itself codified the TLM), Trent’s edict (the one I quoted) was intended to anathematize anyone who said that the Church could not govern the discipline of Her Sacraments and who said that whatever discipline the Church imposed could lead to impiety…“whatever discipline” surely includes the Pauline Rite, the normative Mass of the Church.

Now can you tell me where are the “incentives to piety” promoted by the Council in say … Mahonyian charades? But Mahoneyian charades are an ABUSE of the Mass. They do NOT touch on or effect the effacatiousness of the Mass Itself. The argument of many “traditionalists” on these forums is that the Mass is flawed by ITS VERY NATURE. That cannot be.
Besides as it is obvious for everyone, Trent is responding to the Protestant negations. Protestants were calling Mass i.e. TLM a sacrilege, an idolatry, an impiety, an invention of the devil.
Among their numerous criticisms, apart from the nodal doctrinal contestations, XVIth Protestants were condemning in principle - stress on in principle - the length and decorum of TLM, the use of incense, and especially the chasuble.

This canon is so refuting the Protestants i.e … some VERY IDEAS OF TODAY LITNIKS … : hate for ceremonies, hate of chasuble, hate for incense… and in the end, hate for TLM.

[/indent]Ken

I understand that Trent condemned those things. I think Trent equally condemned the notion that what the Church proposes/promulgates in terms of outward signs and disciplines for the celebration of the Mass can be, for the faithful, occasions or incentives to impiety.

I think you’re making huge leaps in asserting that people hate the TLM. Some people just prefer the Pauline Mass. I’m one. I assure you, I don’t hate the TLM. I’m sick of SOME TLMers running down the Pauline Mass…THAT’S ALL!!!