The “2013 Survey of U.S. Priests on the New Roman Missal” was conducted under the auspices of the Godfrey Diekmann, OSB Center for Patristics and Liturgical Studies at Saint John’s University School of Theology•Seminary in Collegeville, Minnesota. The objective of the survey was to determine as accurately as possible the views of U.S. Catholic priests about the new translation of the English Missal which was introduced on the First Sunday of Advent (November 26-27), 2011.
All 178 Roman Catholic Latin rite dioceses in the U.S. were invited to take part in this study; 32 dioceses participated. The 32 participating dioceses are from all parts of the country and 12 of 14 Latin rite ecclesiastical regions of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. States represented by participating dioceses are: CA, CO, FL, GA, IA, IL, KS, LA, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NJ, NY, OH, TN, TX, WA, WI.
In the period February 21 – May 6, 2013, priests in participating dioceses were invited to participate in the online survey via an email to all priests on the diocesan distribution list. (Note that diocesan clergy distribution lists typically include diocesan priests as well as religious priests who are in pastoral ministry in a given diocese. For this reason, and in order to avoid religious order priests being polled more than once, religious orders were not contacted for distribution lists of religious priests.) A total of 1,536 priests responded, with a response rate of 42.5%. (By comparison, the study “Same Call, Different Men: The Evolution of the Priesthood since Vatican II” carried out by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate [CARA], had a response rate of 30% [Same Call, Different Men, Liturgical Press, 2012, page xii].)
This survey shows fairly widespread skepticism about the new Missal by U.S. Catholic priests, with strong differences in opinion between the majority of priests who do not like the Missal and the minority who do. Among the principal findings of this survey:
- By a 3 to 2 margin, priests do not like the new text – 59% do not like it, compared to 39% who do.
- By a similar margin, 57% to 36%, priests do not like the more formal style of language, with over one-third (35%) strongly disliking the new language.
- Similarly, only 35% of priests think that the new translation is an improvement on the old one, against 56% who do not think it is an improvement. Over one- third of priests (34%) strongly disagree that the new Missal is an improvement.
- Priests overwhelmingly think that some of the language is awkward and distracting – 80% agree with this statement, with nearly three out of five (59%) agreeing strongly with this negative appraisal.
- More than three in five priests (61%) think that the new translation urgently needs to be revised, with 43% strongly agreeing that it urgently needs revision. Only 29% disagree that the new Missal needs revision.
- Similarly, more than three in five priests (61%) do not think work should go forward translating the Liturgy of the Hours and other sacraments in the same style as the new Missal, with 43% strongly disagreeing with this work continuing. Only slightly more than three in ten priests (32%) would like to see translation work continue in the same style.
- Most priests (55%) are not confident that priests’ translation views will be taken seriously, with less than one-quarter of priests (24%) confident their views will be taken seriously.
- Nearly half of all priests (49%) do not approve of the Holy See’s leadership in bringing about the new Missal, with nearly three in ten priests (29%) strongly disapproving of the Holy See’s role. Less than two out of five priests (39%) approve of the Holy See’s leadership on the new Missal.
To read the entire story, click here.
This poll shows that disobedient priests are emboldened by the changes in leadership.
I was so glad when for a few weeks my parish priest led the Confiteor or I Confess. That is in the past now for it was quickly dropped. To remain a Catholic is a constant trial. Why these Vatican II priests are so keen in destroying our faith I will never understand. Probably Social Change and Obama and The Illegal Poor are their their main concerns. They should worry more about transmitting the Faith as it was received. We face difficult times ahead.
What about the illegal poor? Something about the holy family escaping to Egypt rub you the wrong way???
dan, before you become sarcastic, maybe you should ask some honest questions. How long did the Holy Family stay in Egypt? Did they go there to escape poverty? Did they go there to improve their standard of living? Did millions of their countrymen join them in Egypt in order to improve their standard of living? Why did the Holy Family return to Nazareth?
Tracy what’s your point???
dan, the illegals vote for obama, the abortion king, and champion of sodomites. But you liken them to the Holy Family?
Skai, illegals aren’t citizens and therefore cannot vote. Try again please.
Skai your way behind the “race” if u don’t see the holy family in families…
Hm! “St. John’s University, MN” isn’t that one of the so called Catholic Universities that have honored so many dissenters?
178 Diocese in the U.S. and only 32 participated. Anyone care to guess which Diocese they were?
Since when is the Catholic Church’s teachings and liturgies up to a popularity poll. I seem to remember such a poll taken when Our Lord Himself told them that they must “eat of my flesh, and drink of my blood”. He lost that poll, did he subsequently change that wonderful Dogma!
This is why Our Blessed Mother has taught us, most recently at Akita, Japan, “to keep the Faith, stay with Tradition”!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
The sin of obstinacy is rampant throughout the Church!
I remember when the Progressive priests were tripping all over themselves altering the altars when Montini gave them the green light for the new Nervous Odor. Different story this time around! It is hard to break loose from clown “masses”
and liturgical dancers.
The survey results are not surprising at all. A priest that says Mass regularly at my parish refuses to say “For many” at the consecration of Christ’s Blood and continues to say “For all”. Again, the problem when the Mass was changed is that the priests whims are the focal point instead of Christ. The priest must decrease so the Lord may increase. Sadly, many post Vatican II era priests think Holy Mass is their time to tell jokes, ad lib, clap, give shout outs, etc. The sooner the Tridentine Mass is restored as the Ordinary Form of the Latin Rite, the better. Furthermore, that the survey was conducted by St. John’s University in Collegeville, MN is very telling. Anyone who reads the Eponymous Flower blog is well aware of the heretical, modernist and homosexual antics up there.
Seems to that the origin of the whole confusion rests with the early quick adaptations after Vat II, which nobody cared to approach with the same skeptical mind. Now the corrections of the corrections will not stop. And the distaste for authority shines through.
The survey does not take into account the background of the participating priests.
And then: why do we need surveys anyway? What are we going to do with them?
Otto
Why worry about obeying bishops or priests, when all we need do is go to Mass and engage with other sacraments? No need to mention that in doing these things, one has to do them fully in mind, heart, soul and with all one’s strength. So, what is the point of a priest or bishop even opening his mouth other than in administering the sacraments? Would it be to deliver “every word that proceeds from the mouth of God”? Do they? Or do they shirk it by saying, “we are only men, and speaking every word that comes from God is for somebody else, not for us”? Or do they escape by saying, “God didn’t give me much to say, and so I have time to say all sorts of other things”?
That is so disgraceful! No wonder the flock, for whom they are responsible to God, is perishing.
Why did this Seminary even produce this survey since it is not up to Priests to make these decisions? Does this seminary want so-called “theologians” (themselves) to have the control and power within the Church?
The last bullet in the survey says it all – teaching lack of respect and lack of understanding for the role of the Holy See (Vatican and Pope) within the Catholic Church.
This Seminary does not use the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” or “Code of Canon Law” as two of their REQUIRED texts for all students.
So when they graduate they are ignorant in some important areas, and us ‘non-theologian’ Catholics who have read both, know more about the requirements of the Faith than their graduates.
(Important Note: there is more than one St. John’s Seminary in the USA. The one who conducted this so-called survey is located in MN.)
That thought had occurred to me, as well. The Church is not a democracy and was never intended to be a democracy. We see the turmoil from within. This seminary stirred up more dissent with their survey. It will take a long time to undo the wounds/damages/scandals that resulted from the overall results of Vat. 2, as it is riddled with ambiguities, omissions, etc…….. Overall, there is so much misunderstanding of the nature of the awesome beauty and reverence of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is what attracts people to the Catholic Church, too.
Linda, if the Church is not a democracy, then what is it?
It’s a monarchy.
Amen! with Christ as King. King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Halleluia! Halleluia! Forever and ever.
It’s a communion.
Excellent way to present the CCC, instead of the “we all have to adhere to the CCC”. You have to adhere to the law, but that is not the point of Christianity. So many bloggers display such a feeble understanding of Catholicism that it is bizarre to contemplate why they do so … could it be that they were all taught how to find loopholes in the laws of Christ? Jesus made it clear that obeying the law is a given, but that the route to Heaven is picking up one’s cross and following Him. I think even the Baltimore Catechism explains this difference.
Skai you nailed it when you said that “could it be that they were all taught how to find loopholes in the laws of Christ? ” sin made them do it, look for loopholes. Great way to convey! Thanks Skai!
It’s from St. John’s Collegeville. I have little trust in it for that reason — my guess is that the participants were heavily skewed towards “liberal” priests. In surveys like this with a select group of people, you need to get just about everyone involved for the most accurate picture.
St John’s Collegeville is the group who kidnapped the late Fr Paul Marx and hid him away in a dungeon, never to be seen again by the thousands who thought highly of him. You get old and the organization you obeyed throws you in the slammer when you’re too weak to defend yourself.
I personally am very enthusiastic and pleased with the new translations, and I believe most of the people share the same view. I know that most of the liberals detest the new translations, and this was quite evident when I had to attend diocesean workshops. The majority of the priests were complaining bitterly about the new translations , while the bishop remained neutral. If one has a pre-Vatican II missal, one will discover that the new translations are quite similar to those in these missals. The problem is that the majority of priests do not understand the beauty and the sacredness of the Mass, and profess that it must be man centered and not God-centered. Fortunately the new priests that are being ordained have an appreciation for what the Vatican has mandated What the council asked for was not the liturgical disaster which became a reality. Of course, if the Mass was just left untouched, none of these problems would exist today. How we pray is what we believe..
I wish Fr. Karl were at a parish on the north Peninsula. With only a couple of exceptions, the priests near SFO are dealing with the new translation by simply ignoring it. They either use the second form for most of the prayers that they have always recited from memory, or they use forms of their own devising. I keep driving farther and farther out, looking for a really Catholic priest, without success. This week I shall probably go to Star of the Sea in the City for their new 11AM celebration of the Extraordinary Form. But that’s a long, long drive, the entire length of 19th Avenue. Oh, well. Nineteenth Avenue must be good for a little time off Purgatory, I hope.
Gil, search for the TLM and you’ll find excellent priests in driving range. There is one who is a Discalced Carmelite in northern Calif around the Bay Area, who says TLM in several parishes. Don’t you have a list of Latin Masses?
This study is statistically flawed and meaningless.
First, only 32 of 178 Dioceses participated – that’s only 17.9% of all Dioceses (32/178).
Second, with only 42.5% of priests responding, that means only 7.6% of all priests participated (42.5% x 17.9%).
That’s about right – 7.6% of priests have little to no respect for Rome.
Juergensen thank you for pointing that out. It makes me feel better. Then if what you say is truth, you are correct this study is plain meaningless but it can also mean that we still need to keep improving, to keep growing.
Abeca,
I have not done the math as has Juergensen, thanks for that, but as a retired Engineer, a cursory view tells me it is about right. Math does not lie!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Mr. Fisher, as an engineer, you should understand statistical sampling. It is not correct to assume that they cherry picked certain diocese to skew the data. It really doesn’t matter whether priests like it or not, its the prayer we use. We obey. Priests don’t like it-tough beans.
When only 7.6% of all priests responded, and only 50% of those – that is, 3.8% of all priests – said they dislike the new translation, it is fair to conclude that this “poll” measures the views of a very tiny minority of priests.
Wow, 3.8% of all priests say they don’t like the new translation and the “Spirit of Vatican II” crowd is euphoric!
Not necessarily so. Cf. my comment on Fr. Karl’s posting, supra.
Your comment to Fr. Karl had nothing to do with my statistical breakdown.
Anonymous, to repeat, Jesus told his followers to follow the laws given out by the priests but not to do as they did, since they were hypocrites. Pope Francis called the bishops in general hypocrites because they are not practicing what they preach. Now, since there are disputes among bishops, the obedience factor today in the Church is effectively null. This is sad because the Church requires “every word that comes from the mouth of God”, and what we get is exemplified by the devil’s third temptation of Christ, ie a mix of truth and deception. So, this puts us all between a rock and a hard place. But guess what? Jesus provides us with Himself in the Holy Eucharist, which trumps the CCC, the Bible, and all the other inanimate books and objects that we find helpful. Can your books unite you with God? Not even the protestants believe that the Bible can unite them with God. So, explain how it is that you can gain more from books than from sacraments.
juergensen, it measured the views of a minority of priests. That is how all surveys work. Unless you count the US census. A representative sample means that they asked a mixed group geographically with no bias. Hypothetically, all those not asked could love the new translation. Or they could all hate it. Another survey was done and is compared to this one in the report. The most interesting (appalling) result is that 64 priests have issues with the theological content of the Mass.
Anonymous, statistical sampling is used differently in social sciences than in hard sciences … how can you not know this?
Skai, I’m sure you are just trying to be provocative. You know full well that Pope Francis did not call the bishops hypocrites.
He won’t Anony…..
but how could be ever know…we don’t know
Hi Juergensen,
The study has a misleading statement when it says “A total of 1,536 priests responded, with a response rate of 42.5%.” Since there are 38,964 priests in the US (CARA, 2012) the survey represents only 3.9% of all priests. I don’t know what 42% they are referring to…unless they only sent the survey to 3,614 priests. The result also excludes the input of 82% of the dioceses!
The more I read this article, the less I believe it was worth the web space to publish it here. I supposed awareness is valuable…but it is discouraging to see this kind of propaganda be offered by and for the Church.
Karin, it’s called the magic of numbers. Who is it said, “Lies, Damn Lies, and statistics”? The lie is believing churchmen use statistics to determine what is true.
Karin, uneducated people and people who cannot identify fact and then reason with it, will always be manipulated by others. This is one more reason the Popes are calling the clergy to become holy.
I doubt whether many parishioners prefer the new liturgy as well. The language should come from the heart and when words are used that the average person can’t even pronounce that to me is a problem. Very distracting. In my view the change was not an improvement. During the Mass heaven and earth unite. There should be NO distractions…
It is another problem all together that the high school graduates (presumably) in this country complain that they can’t pronounce “consubstantial” nor do they know what is means. Seriously, this is an argument in their favor ?
We have ALWAYS said “consubstancial con el padre” in our Spanish Masses, so one would hope that English speakers could manage this new word. If not, they need to buy a dictionary!
In the creed we say, “on the third day He rose again”. Ever tried to figure out what “again” is doing in this formulation? Took me years to find out, because in common parlance it means He rose more than once: it is an archaic and extremely rare use of the concept of emphasis, sort of like “indeed”. The Orthodox on Easter say, “He is risen indeed”. Would you say, “He is risen again”? My point is that words are not always what they seem; you have to research them, sometimes even simple words. I asked “so called respect life” to explain their use of the word, “heart”. The range of meanings for this word is so large that without qualifying text, these kinds of sloppy blogs boil down to being meaningless. Using spoken language in a written format does not work unless the context of the speaker is clarified. This is why stories contain both narration and dialog, and description.
Skai: TYI – “on the third day he rose again” is a direct translation of the Latin original “resurrexit tertia die” (he rose on the third day). The “again” is redundant and perhaps an English adaptation. Some other European languages do not use the word “again”. But this is linguistic nit-picking if you ask me. The meaning is self-evident.
Anton, many intelligent people do not immediately fall for things that do not make sense. Assumption in religion is one thing; assumption in thinking is not always so good.
Further, Anton, I looked up the phrase in a variety of languages. It took a lot of work to find out the answer to the enigma. You can assume what things mean, or you can study them to find out what they actually say … your choice whether the plane crashes or flies.
I agree that there should be “no distractions”. Stop forcing us to shake hands and pay attention to each other rather than God.
If you are a literate American only one vocabulary word would have been difficult for those with average IQ’s.
You can not have every Priest do their own thing in saying the Mass. We’d never be able to recognize any of it every time we went to Mass. – Talk about distractions – what a zoo.
so called respect life,
I doubt you are even close to correct, at least amongst true devout Catholics, I know you are DEAD WRONG!
If they can’t understand the words, they definitely should go back to remedial education!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
so called respect life, what do you understand by the word, “heart”, as you use it in your post?
This study is merely fodder for liberal clergy to continue to defy the Vatican, and the true Tradition of the Church. The “original translation” was hardly that, instead substituting the kind of clerical political correctness that has devastated the liturgy the past 50 years or so. The N.O. Mass continues to be a mess and should be abandoned: it is nothing but a pro-Protestant, ecumenical-enhancing, mishmash of something here, something there, that was put together to “get away” from the Medieval Church, from how things had been done. The new translation at least attempts to make the N.O. more in keeping with the “Traditional” mass language, if not the rubrics. How can anyone argue with translating “pro multis” as “for many” which it has always been, and which is expressly based on what Christ said. Nope, not good enough for the goofy theology of many post-Vatican II bishops (B. Trautman, anyone?) who says that Christ’s own words cannot be used because they suggest that some will be rejected by God. OK. Surveys of priests taught by these same men certainly cannot be trusted, as they will always revert to the mean of the liberal N.O. language that was taught to them and that they used. If you are going to change Church approach, again, due to a poll, then why not have women priests, married priests, homosexual marriages, and all that which polls say most Catholics believe in (although not all church-going Catholics). The Missal, as revised, has some more of the grandeur and majesty of language that one would expect in worshiping God. The best approach is to simply junk the N.O., which varies so much from diocese to diocese, in favor of a uniform Latin based mass, said Ad Orientum, with communion given in only one manner, on the knee and on the tongue. Think of that, worshiping like all our ancestors, like all the saints. What a concept!
For what it’s worth it’s “Ordinary Form of the Mass” and “Extraordinary Form of the Mass.” Your comments are incendiary and designed to offend.
I wonder how many here realize that the Novus Ordo (too bad Rodda) was formulated by six men who at best were technically heretics. That’s right, in the pre VII Church we were taught that even though probably through no fault of their own, Protestants were heretics. So why were six such men entrusted with Our Lord’s Sacred Liturgy? Good question isn’t it!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Kenneth M. Fisher, where did you ever hear that? Stick with Tradition and that doesn’t mean schismatics who declare themselves to be the True Catholic Church. It means obey those who God has placed in authority, the successor of Peter and the successors of the Apostles. You can trust them. I beg the Eternal Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in the Holy Name of Jesus, our Savior and through the intercession of Our Lady, Help of Christians, St.Joseph, St. Michael, St. John Bosco and St. Athansius, to free you from all errors and deceits which the Enemy of the Church and of God has instilled in you through the speech and writings of schismatics and heretics.
Dear readers, I have four questions/points:
1. Did I misread or did the study imply 1,536 “responding” priests represent 46% of the ordained population with only 32 of 178 dioceses (18%) located in only 20 of 50 (22%) of these United States.
2. What benefit is a survey that calls into question the Magisterium (e.g., “disapproving the Holy See’s role”)?
3. What was the demographic breakdown of the participation and the responses? (Vatican II, JPII, or Millennial era vocations? Regular spiritual practices (daily, weekly, on occassion, or I don’t think it defines me as a priest: Breviary, Rosary, spiritual advisor, etc.)?
4. Does this seminary represent an agenda of relativism in their statement “This survey shows fairly widespread skepticism about the new Missal by U.S. Catholic priests, with strong differences in opinion between the majority of priests who do not like the Missal and the minority who do.”
The study authors state the wish this study to “to determine as accurately as possible…[and from the website full article]… offered by the Diekmann Center as a service to the U.S. Roman Catholic Church, to give the best possible information to Church leaders charged with making important decisions about the liturgical life of the Church.”
Without the answers to the above questions, in my opinion, this survey presents poor scholarship and potentially misleading information. Shame on St. John’s School of Theology for not at least recognizing the weakness of their results!
Karin H – thank you for taking the time to point out the serious problems with this so-called survey.
It has appeared to me from the beginning of this change that it was change for the sake of change with uniformity across languages as the goal. If the change was related to making the language of the Mass and prayers identical in every language on earth, that is in itself an impossibility. The new interpretation of the prayers and responses does not contain the same level of beauty and poetry that was clearly there before the changes were made. We gave it a good try, but I am wholeheartedly in favor of going back to the prayers and responses we had before the change.
I consider the new translation to be an improvement over all. While at the same time considering it to be yet more tinkering with a liturgy that was whole and complete as St John Chrysostom wrote it. I think for the Latin rite it would have made more sense to do at least a straight translation in total of the Tridentine liturgy – matching the translations of other latin rite languages. Instead in the new English version we have more tinkering and more conformity without total conformity which I think is partly the cause for on going complaints.
I’m an average person. I can pronounce all the words and they are beautiful. After reading this article, I am so thankful for the priests in my parish, St. Joseph, Lincoln, California. Our parish began using the new Roman Missal as soon as we were supposed to. No one is complaining.
The reason they don’t like it is because they are more interested in improvising and getting cozy with the crowd rather than following the rubrics of the Holy Mass. They are more interested in creating a festive party banquet atmosphere than presenting the Mass for what it is, a living sacrifice; an act of worship. They are more interested in keeping the crowd entertained and the coffers full rather that focusing on the worship of God. The new translation forces them to do all they don’t want to do because they think they know better than does Holy Mother Church.
And that’s it in a nutshell.
Yup…spot on…in a nutshell…that’s my line!…LOL!
Time for some prideful and disobedient Priest to change professions.
Perhaps start their own Church according to them.
Then they can do whatever they want to do, and we won’t have to put up with their dissident behavior.
I agree Paula. It is very sad because it is not just one or two priests but they are many. It is also a few of their bishops as well. I remember when visiting a parish that we normally don’t visit for Mass, at the end of the Mass, their pastor was outside saying bye to the parishioners as they were leaving, I greeting him and thanked him for the beautiful Latin song that they played…he didn’t look happy and said something like what’s the use if they don’t understand the words, I don’t really like the new changes. I was caught off guard with his comment and the line was moving for the next family to greet him, that I didn’t get to say anything.
It’s sad that he felt the need to say something negative. I was only visiting. I never returned to his parish ever since.
Abeca,
That priest showed that you should avoid him if at all possible. Such a rude remark in response to a compliment. He showed NO class.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
I agree Mr. Fisher that is why I haven’t visited there since that time….God bless you Mr. Fisher for your faithfulness. : ) I appreciate your comments and input.
Of course they don’t like it…it’s too “traditional” for their Catholic sensibility…many of these ordained clergy have been infected with modernism…and they are “modernist’s”!
Nobody polled me. I like the translation because it richly expresses the prayer of the church from the Latin. Being bilingual and celebrating Sunday Mass in Spanish, I often read the old prayers in English and said, this is NOT what the Latin says. The prayers often were vapid, empty of the full rich language of God and the Church.
Latin is hardly “the full rich language of God.”
Rodda,
Had they done what was supposed to have been done and merely translated the Tridentine Mass into English, leaving in place the Latin Tridentine to guarantee authentic translation, there probably would not have been the turmoil that resulted.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Father Perozich,
Praise God, you are most probably on their list of CATHOLIC priest that they definitely want to avoid!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Mr Fisher I visit Father Perozich perish at least one a month or two, I am not from his area but we visit as a little road trip with our kids. Father Perozich is so faithful, he is a very Holy Priest, his homilies are so devout and faithful….my kids really get blessed and so does my hubby and I. It’s too bad we don’t live near by or else we would make his parish our own.
Correction i meant Parish, not perish, we visit his parish….
Mr Fisher I agree with your comments on the translation…I often wished they would have. You are spot on!
I agree too. They could have modernized some of the “thees” and “thous” for younger people, but the Traditional translation was and is beautiful. I cannot believe that Americans who have graduated from even high school do not know what words such “consubstantial” mean or cannot find out. Good grief! Now I know our educational system has failed the last few decades. The old Mass had words such as omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient, and most everyone knew what they meant if they had even gotten out of high school. Gheesh! Has anyone heard of a dictionary, and with computers one can just put the word in ones search bar and get many websites with the definition.
Or even just ask someone the definition.
And that is about the longest word there is in the newer translation. I really have not seen any others.
If one knows the last translation, one should be able to figure out that “consubstantial” means “one in being with the father” from its constext. I would think most people who are not familiar with the word would only have a problem with the pronunciation. Oh, ghee! perhaps I should not even use the word “pronunciation” since it might be too long.
One young Vietnamese American, or one who came over here as a child, told me she hated her English teacher in high school because she was so strict, but when she got to college she then realized how much the woman had helped prepare her for the college curriculum and then was grateful for her strictness. I know it is hard for people coming over here to learn English, but we do them and those already here no favor when we “dumb down” things too much. My own vocabulary and grammar are probably not as good as they used to be in certain cases, but I keep working on it.
God bless you Father Perozich….we appreciate your comments and input. Thank you so much!
I’d be interested to hear of a similar study related to how well the laity like the new translations. I suspect they’d be very different than the priests.
Without access to a TLM, I certainly like the new translations to the NO.
What is more important is an orhtodox and reverent Mass that aheres loyally to the GIRM. No funny business or extemporaneous nonsense so common in the parishes these days.
Survey data is not a surprise. During a time of great financial upheaval and systemic scandal, the focus on tweaking a few words in some of the laity’s Mass responses speaks volumes about our Church’s current problems. These changes just weren’t necessary, and were implemented by Pope Benedict whose entire pontificate was based on esoteric philosophical and theological debates on issues like these wording changes while the Church’s reputation, leadership ability, image, finances, and future were literally in freefall due to an abhorrent international scandal. Priests who dislike the changes have plenty of company, both in the clergy and the laity.
Let’s pray Pope Francis keeps his eyes of the prize of cleaning up the Vatican bureaucracy and focusing on getting the Church back more firm footing. His Holiness can start that process by sending a message to disgraced Cardinal Roger Mahoney to stop defying his bishop and cease all public ministry. Keeping the Church criminals on a leash is job #1.
He’s not defying his bishop senor…Gomez allows Mahony to perform the confirmation’s…he chooses to let him proceed on…at this point blame Gomez!
So called “good cause”, once again I implore you to tell us just what really is your good cause!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
I read the article. Then I read the comments. I couldn’t see how some folks came to the conclusions that they wrote about. So, I read the article again. The number of diocese that participated, as long as they were spread across the country, was large enough for a valid survey. The number of Priests who participated 42% was very large for survey techniques. The survey consisted of statements that the Priest could agree with or disagree with. No matter their answer, none showed any disrespect for Rome, refusal to use the new translation, etc. They simply indicated their dislike/frustration/opinion, etc. about how they felt. How the parish Priests feel about a subject is very important. They are where the rubber meets the road. For the most part, they were not consulted in any way before the new missal was printed. How would any of us feel if major decisions about how we perform our jobs were changed without asking for our opinion? I know church is not work, but…. I believe that we need to increase the participation of Priests in the day to day running of the Church. Church is not a democracy, we know that, but good leadership implies seeking out opinions, testing new ideas before full implimentation, etc. Priest are well educated people; more so than most of us. Why not ask their opinion?
Hi Bob One,
You think 1536 are 42% of all the priests in the US? Please read my post which discusses the shortcomings of the exercise. Karin H
It was 42% of the priests who were e-mailed the questionaire. When you do a survey, you arrange a sample that you feel will be representative of the whole. You don’t poll everyone. If you click the link, you will see the methodology.
42% of almost 40,000 priests is about 16,000 priests. At a cost of about one buckeroo per round trip mailing, this survey cost somebody about $16,000. And for what?! The answer being nonsense and a total waste of people’s money and time. Get rid of Church bureaucracies, because they are not far from demonic.
Oh, I forgot, it’s the business meisters who come out of Catholic colleges who fund these studies … instead of using the money to increase the wages of their employees. Or, wait, the Church bureaucracies must evidently be the employees of the Catholic college business meisters. Wow, what a revelation. Since these whiz kids are also our elected abortionist officials, then no wonder that visions of the great handbasket to Hell is becoming less and less nebulous.
You didn’t click the link, did you?
Hey Bob one no one discussed with the local parish priests when the Novus Ordo mass was imposed on us, I noticed liberalism do not like when their tactics are used against them….
Yep Bob One, Our Lord himself polled all of those present when he proclaimed his Dogma on eating His Flesh, and drinking His Blood, NOT!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
A pointless study, non-scientific, and of no use. Opinions of priest do not dictate the decisions regarding any changes in liturgy, thank heavens!
What a total waste of time and money…it could have been spent on buying copies of the CCC for all the seminarians who unfortunately attend this institution. Everyone knows that complainers are the first in line to fill out a survey!
The first thing they should be taught and tested on is obedience to their Bishops, the Holy Father and the Magisterium.
As someone who grew-up pre VII I can tell you that the changes actually feel more like coming back home to more familiar and reverent wording. I am equally comfortable w/Latin, but also remember the mix used prior to the really poor changes that took place later. I never liked the wording that sounded like slang to me, but never questioned the authority of the Holy See to make the decision. I do not question that today. I thank God for His Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit.
Great post, Alice. I agree with you on the foolishness of sending out most of these surveys. I get so many of them that it is impossible to fill all of them out or send money for the process. I do send out some for state and federal legislation, though, but most often I can send no money for most of them to help process them.
Hopefully the priests will pray the Mass prayers before Mass begins. When I was a boy, I had difficulty at first reading the beautifully crafted words of Shakespeare. By grappling with the words and their meaning and the flow I came to love his work. Later I was patient and encouraging of my students as they did the work in their generation. I now encourage my fellow priests to read and pray over the prayers before Mass. Then gently and unhurriedly pray the Mass, finding encouragement from the congregation’s gratitude at the end of Mass
Fr. Dave,
Whenever I attend a Novus Ordo Mass, I try to recite to myself the beautiful prayers at the foot of the altar as well as many other Tridentine Prayers, especially the original Confiteor!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
I read almost all of Shakespeare’s works, never liked it much, then a few years ago began to read studies that show he was a homosexual. Now I see how his works reflect that depravity. Reading the Holy Bible in any era of English language tops Shakespeare like Heaven tops Hell.
The pastor at my home parish pretty much outlawed the use of the Nicene Creed when the new translation was implemented. He did not like the new wording or the pectoral touching so he only uses the Apostle’s Creed and has directed our parochial vicar to do the same. Every once in a while a visiting priest or a retired priest will use the Nicene Creed and it’s gorgeous to hear.
This pastor’s actions are the very sort of thing that ferment anger and disgust in the laity.
Rodda,
At least you got that right. Your priest is in direct disobedience. Unless he repents, he will see the Fires of Hell!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
The Church canonizes, but it does not damn…Do not judge lest you yourself be judged.
God damns, and those in union with God share in this divine act. Again, it is protestantism that the Roddas and Davids of the Church adhere to in their underlying belief that God is distant from man, and only a memory or wishful thought. They probably are afraid of God, and like Cain want to keep a distance from Him. This would explain Rodda’s craving for the gaudy trappings of the glass wonder now called a cathedral, because it keeps one from communing with God during Mass.
You are called to be holy.
Stop trying to play God by judging others. That’s hideous behavior that might well prove to be a negative at your own day of judgement.
Rodda you do that a lot here…play
Well, Mr. Fisher, from what you have said, you attend a parish where the pastor is in dissent from the Bishop. Have you used that kind of rhetoric with your pastor, telling him to be obedient to the Bishop of Orange?
Also, Mr. Fisher, does your pastor use the new translations in his Masses?
PA I caught you…I hate hypocrisy!
Wow, talk about disobedience this pastor has real nerve
As a newer priest I never celebrated the Mass according to the old translation, but of course I grew up with it. I for one love the new translation. I would have liked to see this poll broken down by age. I’d bet that younger and more recently ordained priests are much more in favor of the new translation than the old.
It’s many of the younger priest’s who are clamoring for more a more traditional liturgical experience… most of the priest’s ordained in the 70’s have been the modernist’s who love the “clown masses” and the revolting liturgical dance, which looks pagan in presentation…the newer priest’s will be the one’s who seek the “traditional”…glad Cali Priest is on board
Malacologist,
They don’t just look pagan, they are pagan! Read “Innaestabile Donum”; in it, the Magisterium actually describes it as “pagan influence”!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Fr. Rich’s evalutation is correct. The current liturgy is more authentic and reverent. We attend Mass to worship the Lord God.
In your opinion, james. I respect you for your opinion but it is just that, your opinion. Not dogma. As long as we can keep that perspective, then I can respect your opinion.
YFC writes, ” james. I respect you for your opinion but it is just that, your opinion.Not dogma. As long as we can keep that perspective, then I can respect your opinion.”
YFC, Sacred Scripture’s passages on the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is just an opinion to you also. That is not a surprising perspective coming from someone who still chooses to view absolutely EVERY perspective through the mixed up distorted kaleidoscope of lavender color lenses. Put down that kaleidoscope that serves your own reflection much more than it chooses to serve God.
YFC, why do you respect the opinion of james, but not james himself?
By all the Catholics in the USA who have left the Faith, and those in the pews getting more and more gray – we can see the effect of the Mass rubrics of the Ordinary Form of the Mass PRIOR to 2011.
With the exception of Holy Communion, we can get more out of a Protestant service.
Talking loudly in Church prior to Mass;
holding hands and raising them during the Lord’s Prayer;
shaking hands and telling everyone up and down the isles “peace be with you” rather than concentrating on worshiping God;
standing rather than kneeling to receive the Lord (Phil 2:9-11); etc. Makes it difficult to honor God in the manner that only He deserves.
Young seminaries need to be taught: Both forms of the Mass, not just one.
And the contents of the CCC.
It is up to the Pastor and the parish priests to stop ALL abuses at Mass by notices in the Church bulletin, announcements prior to Mass, and on the Parish web site, and observing GIRM themselves.
When he does not do his job it must be reported to the Diocese Bishop.
Several of us complained in my Parish about the wishy washy observance of GIRM, now we have a reverent Novus Ordo Mass. “
Has absolutely nothing to do with the OF rubrics. Has much to do with individual celebrants ignoring said rubrics.
Rodda, why do you think so many people keep telling others that they have an obligation to contact the diocese Bishop when a priest keeps doing his own thing rather than – – – adhereing to GIRM rubrics ? ? ?
This has everything to do with having reverent Masses.
NO Priest is permitted to do his “own thing”, or be “creative” with the Mass.
Mass – Ordinary Form / Novus Ordo / Vernacular language
All Bishops, Priests and Laity are REQUIRED to adhere to GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) for Mass rubrics.
GIRM can be found on the internet on the Vatican web site and the USCCB web site. Anything else is an abuse and should be reported to the Diocese Bishop or the US Papal Nuncio as appropriate. End of Subject.
Mass – Extraordinary Form / Traditional / Latin language
Everyone must adhere to the 1962 Missal.
Anything else is an abuse and should be reported to the Diocese Bishop or the US Papal Nuncio as appropriate. End of Subject.
Both Forms of the Mass are Holy. To better save the Souls of each individual, it would be best if all Priests (especially the younger ones) learned both forms of the Mass. Every Parish should have Masses in both forms to serve everyone.
* * * * If there is interest in your Parish (more than 40 people) in the Latin Mass, ask your Pastor to learn the Latin Mass. Have him contact the FSSP (Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter) and they will send a Priest to teach him.
CCC: ” . . . SCHISM is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
You book worshipers, MIKE, need to find out what Catholicism actually is. It is not adherence to some ever changing text out of some set of books. You put these books above the Pope. Jesus placed the popes in charge, not the books. For example, you write, ” To better save the Souls of each individual, it would be best if all Priests …”; however, this is not what the popes have been saying about how better to save souls. So, why don’t you listen to the popes instead of papalizing yourself while standing on your bookshelf?
This is a faithful Catholic website. Your Protestantism is not appropriate.
You’re the book worshiper, Anonymous, not me. I worship Jesus and accept the Holy Eucharist first over any book. There is a reason for only a priest or deacon being permitted to give the sermon … “man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” … your faulty theology would have anyone providing the word of God. Jesus put the pope in charge of saying who can exercise this critical function, and the pope has said it is priests and deacons. One of the problems today is that they don’t live up to this charge. If a Catholic finds his or her view at variance with that of what a pope says it should be, then there needs to be a correction … Yes, popes write books, but ultimately it comes down to the popes saying directly what the word of God is on a particular point. All you or I can do is guess. Even if you or I are inspired divinely by the Holy Spirit, there is a process that goes up the hierarchy until a pope pronounces on it. All your real motive here is, Anonymous, is to silence the views that you cannot deal with. So far, you have failed abjectly in engaging any of my arguments … because you can’t due to the obvious fact that you have no idea what an argument is nor how to go about making one. Most liberals are like that, they cannot evaluate what others say, and so they try to silence them.
OK now this book-worshiping thing is your new fixation. Nobody here worships a book. There are a lot of people here who know the Catholic Faith. MIKE is a good one. Your comment to him was beyond offensive. For some reason, you are being a jerk to him. Leave people alone. You obviously have a need to put people down.
Skai telling someone they don’t know how to argue is sort of like Jeffrey Dahmer telling someone they lack morals and ethics.
Anonymous or k, which ever is the case…..stop your attacks on Skai….we already discovered who is the real one in error . Those who advocate gay agenda’s should be reminded that this is a Catholic website…
So Anony speak for yourself…..Skai is a good Catholic gentleman! God bless him!
OK I see this post too. I don’t know why this is here either. I can’t figure you people out.
Can I go on vacation without you guys writing weird stuff about me?
Hi k/anonymous
Google ‘Irritating & Annoying’ ChurchMilitantTV· k, You have consistently enabled many of the homosexual activists with your false charity. Listen to Pope Francis’s latest words that address your lack of zeal in defending “all” Church teaching. You are playing both sides. You are now trying to correct Skaii when you earlier defended and enabled homosexual activists posting on anti-Catholic websites. k, Do you support Father Perozich’s recent courageous actions of pulling parish support for the Boy Scouts? It sounds like Father Perozich’s actions irritated you. Listen to what Pope Francis’s words on “Irritating and Annoying” and please let us know if you completely support Father Perozich’s actions of pulling parish support.
OK I see this post. Why is it here? We just talked on that article. Father Perozich’s actions did not irritate me. Why would it? He’s the pastor. Why are you even asking me this?
Before posting about the Masses, on the VATICAN web site everyone should read:
1) “Instruction on the application of THE APOSTOLIC LETTER “SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM” of HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI given MOTU PROPRIO”.
It includes but is not limited to:
” 13. Diocesan Bishops, according to Canon Law, are to monitor liturgical matters in order to guarantee the common good and to ensure that everything is proceeding in peace and serenity in their Dioceses, always in agreement with the mens of the Holy Father clearly expressed by the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. In cases of controversy or well-founded doubt about the celebration in the forma extraordinaria, the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei will adjudicate.
14. It is the task of the Diocesan Bishop to undertake all necessary measures to ensure respect for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, according to the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.”
2) GENERAL INSTRUCTION of the ROMAN MISSAL on the Vatican web site (including Adaptations for the Dioceses of the United States of America),
and on the USCCB web site.
When talking or writing to a Bishop, Priest, or the Vatican – I have always had the best success using the CCC, or other Church Documents that can be found on the Vatican web site.
This takes the subject matter out of the realm of personal opinions, and into those things REQUIRED by the Church.
MIKE, personal opinions matter, because they reflect the holiness of the bishop. If personal opinions are stupid, then guess who they reflect? So, all you’re doing by sending CCC quotes to bishops is flattering their vanities.
Sorry to disappoint you SKAI, but apparently you purposely hate the CCC and hate the Code of Canon Law – that our POPES have not only APPROVED and have been promoting by PROMULGATING them using their APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.
Everyone can find the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”
and its Apostolic promulgation on the Vatican web site. (This is also found in the front of each CCC).
Everyone can find the “Code of Canon Law” and its’ Apostolic promulgation
“SACRAE DISCIPLINAE LEGES” on the Vatican web site.
By discouraging people from reading and knowing the truth you are disobeying the last 3 Popes who are using their full Apostolic authority.
No one worships any books, but those who encourage reading – are following the APOSTOLIC teaching of our POPES.
Unlike you, some want people to know the TRUTH – this is called accuracy. (Not the Faith according to Skai or some other individual.)
Mt 16 18-19.
Skai, you need to go to confession, if you are really Catholic because our last 3 Popes have encouraged study and read of these documents. And to be forgiven publically state that – our last 3 Popes encourage reading of the Bible, the CCC, and the Code of Canon Law – for all the damage you may perpetrated.
Since you think you know more than Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and now Pope Francis – you have some real problems.
“In this Year of Faith let us ask ourselves if we have actually taken a few steps to get to know Christ and the truths of faith more, by reading and meditating on the Scriptures, studying the Catechism, steadily approaching the Sacraments.” – Pope Francis, May 15, 2013.
My post of May 26, 6:12 pm – was in response to SKAI’s post of May 26, at 10:48 am – in which he tries to discourage people from reading and adhering to those documents promulgated by our Popes using their Apostolic Authority – so we will all accurately know the TRUTH of our Faith.
He is in direct opposition to Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict and Pope Francis.
False, MAC: Show me where I discourage anyone from reading the documents/books in question. You’re making this up, because you prefer to worship books instead of God.
The book worshipping fallacy again.
MAC no that is not it….it is much deeper …..why am I the only one who understands skai? No it’s not up for debate either. Ask for clarity but don’t discredit his faithfulness.
Skai just let it go….sometimes we must just learn to pick and choose our battles….I like today’s new article on the faith inspectors….pretty neat, we must discern that our Pope is not discouraging the message on being our brothers keeper but actually goes in deeper in a humble and simple way.
Skai maybe something will click with those who throw the CCC on many….I understand them too that they use the CCC as a tool (as the church encourages when done in truth) and I feel that you may neglect that understanding but being the rebel that you are, and I mean that in a good way, you want them to convey deeper….but some people take baby steps and perhaps the CCC and the bible and may be their foot in the door and I know you know this too. But to your credit, I just wanted to convey and to let you know that I get you but I wanted to help you get them….that is their tool for now….baby steps remember….maybe I’m not understood either…sorry I am trying. God bless you Skai!
Never, MAC, have I said or implied that I hate the CCC whatever edition nor any other Church doctrinal document or dogma. Your either/or scheme of interpretation needs some upgrading.
Skai, your personal opinion and mine and other individuals – do not matter regarding those things approved by our Popes. Even Bishops must adhere to them when the Pope uses his Apostolic Authority to promulgate a document.
Mike is correct. You will get further ACCURATELY speaking the TRUTH on Church teaching rather than yakking about your own personal opinions to a Bishop or Priest.
Our Popes personally have approved using their APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY:
1) “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”;
2) Code of Canon Law;
3) GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal).
All these can be found on the VATICAN web site.
No one should believe any individual who tries to discourage people from reading, studying, learning those things promulgated by our Popes using their official Apostolic Authority,
and then teaching others the TRUTHS of our FAITH.
A person who tries to discourage us like that has ulterior motives and is dangerous – ‘pretending’ to be a good Catholic.
“In this Year of Faith let us ask ourselves if we have actually taken a few steps to get to know Christ and the truths of faith more, by reading and meditating on the Scriptures, studying the Catechism, steadily approaching the Sacraments.” – Pope Francis, May 15, 2013.
According to the late Bl John Paul II in his life’s works on the human person, in conjunction with all that we find in Holy Scripture, and including the words of Jesus in the Book of Revelation, individual personality is critical. Thus one’s individual opinion is critical … we are not scientologists. People seem to think that an opinion cannot be true. But many differing opinions on the same point of truth may well all be true. Having a true opinion does not imply having an omniscient opinion.
LOL, so many of the priests don’t like change. How unsurprising. I’m sure the current priests don’t like change just as much as the priests 50 years ago didn’t like change.
To me, I’m not really up in arms about the new mass—I don’t much care either way. Some of the phrasings seemed awkward to me at first. However, I have always believed that its the attitude of devotion to God that we bring to mass that’s more important than any of words spoken during mass.
I highly doubt that saying “consubstantial” or not is going to either make or prevent someone from becoming a serial killer. I do find all the preening and posing going on in this forum over the changes rather amusing. Many here LOVE the changes simply because they feel their criticisms of the post Vatican II changes has been validated by the Magisterium. Heck, many of you would have liked the changes even if they included wearing rainbow-colored beanies with propellers and twirling them in the middle of the mass as long as the changes validated traditionalist positions.
Abortion promoting priests are serial killers, JonJ, doncha know.
And saying “consubstantiated” during the mass isn’t going to change anyone’s behavior.
JonJ, you’re professing to know how God communicates to individuals. Maybe you’d best fly to Rome and take over.
Skai, project much?
skai you do have an artsy way to convey…pretty neat…I especially loved your creativity of truth from your post of May 26, 2013 at 10:41 am.
Solution: triple the size of the Vatican bureaucracy, and double the size of every diocesan bureaucracy. This will help the global unemployment problem by taking people off the street corners and putting them to work for the Church.
Just a couple of suggestions to lend support to the beautiful, dignified language that we now pray with at Mass: First, mention to your pastor and other priests in your parish how wonderful and refreshing the changes have been. My second suggestion is to priests: As you celebrate the Mass, slow down the delivery and savor the words. You can’t just breeze through Collects so packed with meaning. In your homilies, call parishioners’ attention to the gems hidden in the Collect of the day.
Roberta, what great ideas!
So often our priests get crabby comments, and your suggestion to promote the new translation is very helpful — both for the people in the pews, and for the priests (to slow down and be reverent — and include some catechesis from time to time in the homily).
Our priest does this, and it’s wonderful.
I agree Michael, Roberta is truly charitable and kind words of encouragement!
The modernist’s who have been running amok since the close of Vatican II are witnessing a slow, inexorable change taking place…for hundreds of years, since close of the Council of Trent, Catholics said mass the same, the world-over…and worshiped the same…it was reverent, consistent and always edifying…PBXVI, was a wonderful Pontiff, and his changes should continue to be implemented…the liturgical changes in the mass, and the new missals were a wonderful beginning…more changes for the better, hopefully are on the way…modernism is heresy…liberation theology is heresy…Praised be Jesus Christ
Imagine, if you will, that Pope Benedict had mandated the reintroduction of the Latin mass. If these priests object to the correction of the novus ordo by inserting a few words, they would erupt in open rebellion if they had to apply the mental discipline to learn Latin! Most priests alive today never even experienced a true holy mass and were completely spoiled by the pablum dished out in the novus ordo, Even today, I hear different priests deviate from even the bare bones new mass texts and drift off into free-styling it. Our Sunday masses, even done correctly, resemble a protestant prayer meeting.
Report all “free-styling” of the Mass to the appropriate Diocese Bishop.
No Priest is permitted to deviate from GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) which can be found on the Vatican and USCCB web sites.
If you want a reverent Ordinary Form of the Mass, and if you are aware of any Priest who deviates, it is your responsibility to inform the appropriate Bishop.
_____________
Roberta Genini’s post of May 25, at 10:27 am is very good.
When a Priest does a holy and reverent Mass, let him know how much you appreciate it. (Priests are human beings too and need reinforcement from time to time.)
One talks about deviation from the novus ordo but almost never from the Traditional Latin Mass.
Yes indeed…that’s it in a nutshell my friend…
The heretical and schismatic “National Catholic REPORTER” always promotes, and advertises controversial Catholic dissidents.
This includes dissident Priests and the LCWR, and NETWORK (nuns on the bus and nun supporters of Obamacare), fake Catholic groups who support Obama, Sebelius, Pelosi, Biden, J. Kerry, etc.
I wish the REPORTER would obey their Bishop and remove the name “Catholic” from their title. They commit fraud by advertising themselves as something they are not.
In the meantime we will must let everyone know that the “NC Reporter” is NOT a ‘CATHOLIC’ publication.
Do not use their web site – which will give them the reader counts needed for money from advertisers.
The “NC Reporter” will not allow anything related to the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” to be printed in any meaningful way.
They do not want anyone to accurately know what the Church requires of each of us.
Here is a good explanation why this poll – which was not random but based on “self-selecting” respondents – is statistically meaningless:
bit[PLACE DOT HERE]ly/129TzPf
Thank you for this.
Skai, I believe the Carmelite priest you referred to who offers the Traditional Mass is Fr. Mark Kristy O.C.D and he lives in Oakville. God Bless him.
Yep, that’d be him, Ed. Doesn’t he say Mass in several different parishes?
Happy Memorial day!
Skai, My dad notified me regarding your inquiry. Yes, I say the traditional Mass Monday-Friday at the Carmelite Monastery in Oakville at 9:00 a.m.. And I say a Sunday Mass in Petaluma at Herman and Sons Hall on Sunday at 9:OO a.m.. If anyone wants to attend you can receive the latest updates at oakvillecarmeites.org
Oops I misspelled the website address. It is oakvillecarmelites.org
” The objective of the survey was to determine as accurately as possible the views of U.S. Catholic priests about the new translation of the English Missal which was introduced on the First Sunday of Advent (November 26-27), 2011.” – This is absolutely DISHONEST.
It does not matter what individual Priests think, further there are approx. 200,000 Priests in the USA, most of whom are Diocese Priests.
Who would spend money for the cost of a survey with a total of 1,536 priests responding, and only 59% of the 1,536 (ONLY 904) Priests did not like the new translation.
These types of meaningless surveys – do have a meaning – to bring together dissidents within the Church, and give them power IF we let them.
Btw – it is called the “Third Edition of the “ROMAN Missal” – not the ENGLISH Missal.
You can check this out on the USCCB web site. So they didn’t even get that right. So much for the education at some colleges and universities.