Youth and the Extraordinary Form

[The_Curt_Jester]

This has been my experience, too.

We have had TLM in our city for 20 years now, and the young people definitely do not flock to it. In fact, people of any age do not flock to it. The TLM parish has about 400 members–that’s hardly a lot. (My very contemporary parish has 7000, and we do nine packed Masses on the weekends.)

I’m familiar with that church and the priest. The church is not that large and the priest has no help. Four hundred is not tiny. Is it a lot? No, not considering the size of the city, but you can’t fit a whole lot of people in that small church either. Also consider that the priest travels elsewhere to say Mass in another city. Conditions, like in many other areas, are not optimal for growth. Also, aside from what you can see externally, the then bishop of that diocese (not sure if he’s still there) was not really supportive of the expansion of the TLM. I know someone who was actively involved and so I’m well aware of what the situation really was like.

Also, how many parishes did they have to merge to get 7000 in yours?

I converted to Catholicism from an evangelical Protestant background, and I found the OF Masses extremely ancient and “traditional” when I first started attending. In fact, I had visited Lutheran churches before, and IMO, the OF Mass has a lot of simliarity to the older Protestant liturgies. Now before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, keep in mind that the Lutheran worship service was derived from the Catholic TLM! Martin Luther didn’t create something new back during the Reformation–he just kept doing the Mass with a few innovations. So really now, when you face facts, the OF Mass has just as much ancient history and tradition as the TLM.

At least someone admits that the OF is based on Luther’s “Mass”! Your above statement really isn’t presenting a flattering representation of the Novus Ordo.

If you think that the OF is “modern,” try visiting a non-denominational worship service sometime, or visit one of the big megachurches. I think you’ll see real quick that the OF Mass that you think is ultra-modern is actually pretty antiquated.

I’ll admit, novelties become antiquated very quickly.

I really really wish with all my heart that those of you who have to put up with liturgically-incorrect OF Masses, or other “rogue” innovations in the OF Mass, could regularly experience a reverent and correct OF Mass. No, I’m not saying that you would switch preferences from EF to OF, because like I said above, people all have their personal preferences. But I do think that if they could experience “good” OF Masses, some here who insist that the OF Mass is some kind of horrible abomination would stop thinking and saying such awful and divisive things in a public forum.

I attended the Sacred Music Colloquium last year in Salt Lake City. There were some TLMs, there were some NO there. Both of the Masses were said spot on as they should be. The NO was still lacking and felt empty, even with the beautiful vestments, music, ad orientam, incense, etc…

---

In regard to the original post, yes I do see a lot of young people at the Tridentine Mass. Are there some with mostly older people? Yes. But that’s not the norm from what I see. Most of the churches have many, many young people, and I’m not talking about unwilling teenagers being dragged to church by their older parents.

Growth varies by area, but there are a lot of factors. In many instances, we’re forced to have churches that were slated for destruction (or at least closing), churches in awful sections of town, churches in disrepair, or just tiny ones way out in the boondocks. And that’s if the diocese even chooses to let a society of traditional priests have a church of their own. There are the shared churches, many of which have pastors that don’t support the TLM. Masses are put at the most inopportune times, or the schedules are switched a lot, or there’s only one Mass a month, or it hops around from parish to parish. Shared parishes also don’t permit a real establishment, either. “Trads” will quite often be treated as outsiders at such parishes.

Despite all of the above, it’s growing. So, sure, people can say that they don’t see growth, or they don’t think there’s a real need for the TLM, but it’s certainly difficult for growth to happen when it’s hampered in such a way. And yet, again, it’s still growing and it will continue to grow. And that’s the encouraging part!

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

I have noticed this convenient expression touches a lot of nerves here but I didn’t know it was against forum rules, so thanks for pointing that out.

Perhaps we need an alternative, easily-recognized term to replace “OF parish.” I suggest: “PTDOTMBTTSOH.”

In full: “parish that doesn’t offer ‘the most beautiful thing this side of Heaven’.”

From now on whenever I type “NO parish” or “OF parish” I will self-edit that to read “PTDOTMBTTSOH.”

Of course my parish has both the OF and TLM so we could classify it as a PTOTMBTTSOH.

For those rare cases where a parish offers only the usus antiquor, I think PTOOTMBTTSOH would work. The extra “O” is for “only,” in case anyone didn’t pick up on that.

I think these simple acronyms should solve this problem for everyone.

You had me laughing out loud with this one. I think your illustrate very clearly your meaning, too. I’ve said the same thing in other manners, but really, it won’t matter what you say… people will choose to get offended.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

You should know that refering to anything other than a form of the Mass as EF or OF is against the forum rules.

Link, please? I’ve read through the rules on multiple occasions, and have never seen this one.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I haven’t seen those posts on other forums on CAF, so I can’t really comment on them. I’m not really trying to pit one form against the other. I just prefer the EF over the OF, and I have good reasons why. If those reasons are offensive to others, I am sorry.

**And BTW, I have often seen “unity” used as a euphemism for “do things my way.”/**QUOTE]

Too bad it’s what we pray for every Sunday…unity…so are you saying the Church is wrong to have that in there?

Why do you have to pit the two forms against each other? The Pope doesn’t do that. Why do you? Is it not possible to enjoy something without comparing it or degrading it to something else? The demeans both. Just think if I told my husband I found him attractive because everyone else standing around him was ugly…

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Exactly! He’s the bishop he can change that.

That is exactly what he did in his cathedral in Marquette. He said his monthly Pontifical Low Mass off of the shelf in the chaple where the tabernacle resided

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_2n_Z5xs2Xl8/TPw36R4rkyI/AAAAAAAAQVQ/YJcLUy-fsK4/s400/DSC_0796.jpg

And, if this is the correct photo of the Cathedral, there is no reason that a Mass cannot be said ad orientem on the current altar. There is no requirement in the EF that the altar must be attached to the reredos

http://maryscathedral.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/img_9489sm-1024x434.jpg

That is the correct picture…notice off to the left…the dark room…that is where the tabernacle is (again…I don’t like it like that).

It was my understanding that there had to be a back altar…no? The reason I ask is that at my daily parish, they recently did some remodeling…and someone I know thought that they might have done that to start celebrating the TLM.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

That is the correct picture…notice off to the left…the dark room…that is where the tabernacle is (again…I don’t like it like that).

It was my understanding that there had to be a back altar…no? The reason I ask is that at my daily parish, they recently did some remodeling…and someone I know thought that they might have done that to start celebrating the TLM.

It’s not necessary, but it is certainly helpful to have a high altar. Many shared parishes will just transform the free-standing altar when it is time for the TLM to be said. It’s a whole lot more effort though, and going back to the original setup is much more efficient (and looks better, too!).

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

It’s not necessary, but it is certainly helpful to have a high altar. Many shared parishes will just transform the free-standing altar when it is time for the TLM to be said. It’s a whole lot more effort though, and going back to the original setup is much more efficient (and looks better, too!).

Thanks…it is my understanding that there are parishes in Portland that do have the TLM so maybe he will say Mass there. Not sure what he will do with the cathederal…money being what it is.

That all said…I think it would be awhile…he has much bigger fish to fry when he gets here…

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Here is an example of what I am talking about: youtube.com/watch?v=oUNfbgRJOe8

 

[Moore11]

That all said…I think it would be awhile…he has much bigger fish to fry when he gets here…

Not so sure he has bigger fish to fry than that…

Lex orandi, lex credendi. Right?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Not so sure he has bigger fish to fry than that…

Lex orandi, lex credendi. Right?

i don’t know about that…our state is known for being extremly liberal. He indicates that he wants to work on the new evangalization and bringing lapsed Catholics home.

abortion, gay marriage, euthanisia, and some others on CAF have mentioned the Oregon Catholic Press, etc…

Not sure that switching around the Cathedral to have a TLM is going to be number 1 on his list…nor am I sure it should be.

 

[QuiteCatholic]

I know my brother would love to meet a devout catholic woman but there don’t seem to be many around these days. He’s 45. I suggested maybe a catholic dating site. He’s cute, takes care of himself and a wonderful artist! I told him to keep praying!

 

[Moore11]

i don’t know about that…our state is known for being extremly liberal. He indicates that he wants to work on the new evangalization and bringing lapsed Catholics home.

abortion, gay marriage, euthanisia, and some others on CAF have mentioned the Oregon Catholic Press, etc…

Not sure that switching around the Cathedral to have a TLM is going to be number 1 on his list…nor am I sure it should be.

Yep! Lex orandi, lex credendi. Does not just apply to the TLM. It applies to life and faith.

 

[2HeartsSlave]

My spiritual director is working on bringing the Extraordinary Form to his parish soon…I’m keeping my hopes up that he may need a spare server

 

[TimothyH]

I think that you are contributing to the misunderstanding. The next sentence that Fr. Z said after the words you quoted was It could be unfair to pressure a priest of the FSSP to use the Ordinary Form, because of the identity of the group to which he belongs and their particular apostolate.

That supports what I said, that it would be wrong for a bishop to tell an FSSP priest to say the OF. I posted the link to the constitution. The words “faithful observance of spiritual and liturgical traditions” obviously include celebrating the EF. It is not right for a bishop to tell a member of a society to go against that society’s constitution. While they can celebrate the OF, in the sense that they are validly ordained Roman Catholic priests, they would be going against their very reason for existence if they did so. I can pick up this lap top and throw it across the room but there is no reason to think that I would ever do such a thing.

Do you have any documentation to support your speculation about the motivation of bishops? If you do not, it would be better to avoid stating your guesses as if they were facts.

This isn’t a matter of the constitution of the FSSP. This is a matter of canon law.

FSSP priests are not exempt religious and are therefor bound by canon law. Canon law is clear. Members of Societies of Apostolic Life are subject to the society with regards to the internal life of the society but in matters of public worship, they are subject to the local bishop.

***Code of Canon Law
Book II. The People of God
Part III. Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life
Section II. Societies of Apostolic Life (Cann. 731 - 755)

Can. 738
§1. All members are subject to their proper moderators according to the norm of the constitutions in those matters which regard the internal life and discipline of the society.
§2. They are also subject to the diocesan bishop in those matters which regard public worship, the care of souls*, and other works of the apostolate, with attention to ⇒ cann. 679-683**

There is no guessing or speculation here. With regards to the Mass, members of Societies of Apostolic Life are subject to the bishop. Canon law is crystal clear.

The constitutions of Societies of Apostolic Life are approved by the Holy See. A constitution which contradicts canon law would never get approved.

“Faithful observance of spiritual and liturgical traditions” cannot mean that members of the society can refuse to say the OF because that interpretation would contradict canon 738 which says that they are “subject to the bishop in those matters which regard public worship”. Such a constitution would never be approved by the Holy See.

There is no speculation. Unless you are Benedictine, Carmelite, Dominican, Franciscan, or another religious order which is exempt from canon law, you do what the bishop says with regards to the Mass. That’s how things work in the Church.

-Tim-

 

[10thCrusader]

My spiritual director is working on bringing the Extraordinary Form to his parish soon…I’m keeping my hopes up that he may need a spare server

Most of our altar servers (about 20 of them) are around 10-12 years old. You would be amazed how quickly the young boys pick up the responses. You may start out as a server, but if you know the responses and the rubrics well, you may end up as a director of the servers.

 

[2HeartsSlave]

And that would make me a happy guy I came into the Church shortly after my 18th birthday, so I never got to serve at the altar as a little boy. Maybe, just maybe, God’s mercy will allow me to make up for lost time!

 

[floresco]

This isn’t a matter of the constitution of the FSSP. This is a matter of canon law.

FSSP priests are not exempt religious and are therefor bound by canon law. Canon law is clear. Members of Societies of Apostolic Life are subject to the society with regards to the internal life of the society but in matters of public worship, they are subject to the local bishop.
…] Unless you are Benedictine, Carmelite, Dominican, Franciscan, or another religious order which is exempt from canon law, you do what the bishop says with regards to the Mass. That’s how things work in the Church.

At no point have I claimed that FSSP members could refuse to the say the OF if ordered by their bishop. I explicitly said that I did not know about that. What I said was that it would be wrong for a bishop to ask them to say the OF because he would be asking them to violate their constitution, not to mention the reason for their existence. This is a group that was founded for the purpose of saying the EF and given papal approval for this. If a bishop told them to say the OF, they could appeal to the Ecclesia Dei Pontifical Commission. They could also leave the diocese of that bishop.

A bishop who invites the FSSP to their diocese presumably does so because he wants them there to say the EF. The hypothetical situation of a bishop ordering them to say the OF is unlikely to occur. In practice, we should expect that we are not ever going to see FSSP priests saying the OF.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

At no point have I claimed that FSSP members could refuse to the say the OF if ordered by their bishop. I explicitly said that I did not know about that. What I said was that it would be wrong for a bishop to ask them to say the OF because he would be asking them to violate their constitution, not to mention the reason for their existence. This is a group that was founded for the purpose of saying the EF and given papal approval for this. If a bishop told them to say the OF, they could appeal to the Ecclesia Dei Pontifical Commission. They could also leave the diocese of that bishop.

A bishop who invites the FSSP to their diocese presumably does so because he wants them there to say the EF. The hypothetical situation of a bishop ordering them to say the OF is unlikely to occur. In practice, we should expect that we are not ever going to see FSSP priests saying the OF.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that the bishop who ask them to say the OF exclusively or even most of the time. Because you are right to say that would negate the reason for inviting in the FSSP to begin with.

What I understand Tim to be saying is that FSSP priests should be trained to say both Masses and should graciously agree to say the OF when necessary, for example at the Chrism Mass or another special Mass offered by the diocese. Another example that I can think of might be a funeral Mass, or perhaps an instance when a priest needs a replacement an Ordinary Form Mass was already scheduled.

I don’t think there would be many or frequent instances, but simply that a priest who is under the authority of the local Ordinary should do what is requested of him by the Ordinary.

 

[Denise1957]

Tim, though you would like to see the FSSP forced to celebrate the ordinary form of the Roman Rite, I don’t know of any bishops who want to force the FSSP to do this. The bishops are generally grateful to the FSSP for being able to offer the EF. That is their charism.

 

[ProVobis]

Tim, though you would like to see the FSSP forced to celebrate the ordinary form of the Roman Rite, I don’t know of any bishops who want to force the FSSP to do this. The bishops are generally grateful to the FSSP for being able to offer the EF. That is their charism.

I would agree with you. A diocesan priest who normally says both rites (or even in multi-languages) can easily “switch gears” between the two forms. One who celebrates one form only once in a while can make things very uncomfortable for that congregation, which expects utmost fluency of that form. When one is rusty at something, you can’t expect perfection.