Name of Church St. Thomas the Apostle Church
Address 919 E. Indiana Ave, Coeur d’Alene ID 83814
Phone number 208-664-9259
Website https://stthomascda.org/
Mass times Saturday vigil, 5 p.m. Sunday, 8 a.m. and 10 a.m. Monday – Friday, 8 a.m.
Confessions Saturdays, 3-4 p.m. and by appointment
Names of priests Father William Crowley, pastor.
Special activities Tuesday Mother of Perpetual Help devotion, rosary before weekday Masses, Holy Hour Tuesdays 7-8 p.m. and First Fridays 8:30 a.m. – noon, Knights of Columbus, St. Vincent de Paul Society, Catholic Daughters.
Fellow parishioners Coeur d’Alene is a tourist town on a lake, so in the summer you’ll see some tourists. It is an English-speaking community; the church is surrounded by older single-family homes.
Parking Plenty around the church.
Acoustics Fine.
Additional observations St. Thomas the Apostle is a historic parish in the diocese of Boise, Idaho. It was established in 1890 to serve the miners and loggers of the area; the church building itself was completed in 1910. It is among the most beautiful churches in Idaho, with colorful stained glass windows, traditional art, archways, a high steeple and high exterior walls. It’s a short walk to the downtown resort area.
Stop, look, and listen: why celebrate this Church? Nice shell of a building, but the interior has clearly been wreckovated. And, how many TLMs do they have? Chirp, chirp, chirp. Nope, not much here, here, except for another Protestantized Catholic Church.
Close to resort areas, though. Nice.
It is beautiful. Stop being sacreligious.
How does a good Catholic know what the interior of a Protestant church looks like?
…we were sent to attend Protestant services as part of our religion class, mous, and had to write papers to prove we were there. That and reading history books.
I understand that there is a TLM somewhere in the greater Spokane area and had thought, originally, that it might be this church. But a visit to the website indicates otherwise. Sadly, I agreed with St. Christopher. What is there to celebrate about this impoverished interior?
Quick slip into a friendly pew and then to the slip on the lake with the boat. Not much more to note, I fear.
Yep great looking outside but inside as St. Christopher said totally wreckovated by Vatican II. Not a single TLM as Pope Benedict had called for. Check out St. Joan of Arc church instead in Coeur D’ Alene Idaho, it is an F.S.S.P. parish devoted to only The Mass of All Times. All the priests at St. Joan are very young and Holy as you would expect at any traditional run parish with the TLM. Check out their website http://www.stjoanarc.com this is what a parish should be. Pray for Father Gordan and Father Nolan. Deo Gratias.
Janek — St Joan of Arc has already been featured in Churches Worth Driving to: https://cal-catholic.com/?p=15666
As far as the ongoing battle between the Ancient Rite and the Novus Ordo, I think it’s much ado about nothing — a completely unnecessary argument among the Body of Christ over appearance rather than substance. Both sides need to tone it down and assist at the Mass of their choice. The Church has made provisions for all of us.
Oh, boo hoo! No Latin Mass. Maybe, just maybe those who carp so much about the lack of a Latin Mass should wise up to the FACT that the overwhelming majority of Roman Catholics don’t find the TLM prayerful, moving or desirable. You do? Great! Just don’t impose it on the rest of us, And your nasty comments about “wreckovated churches” and “protestantised Catholic churches” is too juvenile, too schoolyard silly to be taken serious.
What is juvenile is promoting the fallacy that anyone is attempting to foist the TLM on you, Timothy, that coupled with reactionary posting that does nothing to understand that there is much truth in the comment of “protestanised Catholic Churches”. A little reading outside recess would clear that right up.
That said, the overwhelming majority seem to have deep issues with regard to knowing the actual Faith. So while the pursuit for you may be about what is prayerful, moving, or desirable on one level, the pursuit for truth in practice, to include outward signs and structures, is very helpful in transmitting the Faith to many.
If only it were just a nasty comment.
Timothy, when done according to the RUBICS which is required, both forms of the Mass are Holy.
No one wants to impose anything on anyone else, except those like yourself are trying to suppress one Form or the other.
All Churches should have at least one Extraordinary Form of the Mass on Sundays and Holy Days, the others can be in the Ordinary Form if that is what the majority of parish members want.
All Seminaries should teach both forms of the Mass.
Gee, “Timothy”, it seems that these are pretty good descriptions, particularly in that they are in wide use in Catholic blog circles and accurately spell out the hardness of heart of pastors and bishops that care nothing about a Church that they did not personally create. You, and “Carol” below are not to be believed. Don’t you two ever wonder what the Catholic Church is, where it started, what it means, and how it nurtured Christ’s words and commandments throughout the centuries?
In fact, “Timothy”, Catholic Churches and seminaries and religious orders were full prior to Vatican II. Now, most are closing, with churches only occasionally full. You and “Carol” are like the crazed parents in North Carolina and California recently that openly rebelled against religious speakers invited to their kids Catholic high schools, who openly and clearly talked about Catholic sexual ethics and that contraception was immoral, as was homosexual sex and communion for divorced and remarried Catholics (those without annulments). The fury that was unleashed!! Why?
The reason is that no one has taught “Catholics” today about their Faith. Don’t you think that when they tore out altars, changed literally everything in the Church (including its calendar, the rubrics of various significant religious events, like all the sacraments, exorcisms, everything), that the loss of these items meant something?
You are being duped everytime you go into a church like this, grand once but now a testament to the greed and arrogance of the local bishop and pastor, who see the “Medieval” Church as bad, over, dead and gone. No, “Carol”, there is no “hard work” in this Church, except for those that get some sham certificate (can you say “liturgist” anyone?) and want to change everything, make it more relevant.
You’re apparently ignorant of the post World War II European Church’s implosion that lead to Vatican II. The seminaries in Europe were not full, the churches were empty and the double barreled assault of the two world wars on tthe vast majority of Catholics lead to a very weakened Church. It’s hard to take you serious when you’re so ignorant of the larger issues the Church has been facing. You have one drum, and you beat it visciously, but you only convince the equally uninformed who share your narrow, non-historical, inaccurate perspective. Pitiable.
As is the case today in many US Diocese that are losing many Catholics – religious instruction in Europe was horrible post WWII.
In addition, the Laity were not encouraged to read Sacred Scripture at HOME.
In all gets down to Bishops doing their first task of teaching ALL literate persons to read the Bible and CCC at HOME.
The CCC not only explains the Doctrine of the Faith but the reasons “why”.
People never learn to love what they do not know.
I’m so stunned by the constant griping about the Churches presented here. Has it ever occurred to you that one of the reasons traditionalists are so marginalized is because of their lousy approach to people who don’t know about the TLM? For all the complaining about the perceived inadequacy of all these parishes (which, I will point out to you again, is full of people who love them and priests who work very hard to run them) you could be writing your own blog that educates people about the beauty and richness of the TLM. But no, it’s just easier to come here and tear down the hard work of others rather than to do something productive or positive. Shame on all of you. You hurt the very cause you wish to promote with your unkindness.
Kindness on both sides is called for, Carol. Thank you. But being marginalized has a way of rendering folks less than their best. So whereas you may feel that the ‘lousy’ approach is the issue, it does go deeper, Carol. I’m sure you understand as much. So understanding again on both sides is necessary.
Ann,
I know for many years many bishops have been unfriendly to tradition (to put it politely). I totally get it. I know that this treatment by the bishops has calloused some who love the TLM and want to champion it’s cause. I know I’ve said this before, but I will say it again. I used to attend the TLM at St. John Cantius in Chicago for its mass and I can tell you being at that mass I knew I was in the presence of something very holy. But I didn’t start there. I grew up in Seattle under bishop Hunthausen, who was arguably a heretic. I had no idea what the TLM was – I had never heard of it. If you asked me what a Latin mass was, I would have guessed it was from South America. I’m not kidding. But I moved to Chicago and discovered that there was beautiful diversity in the liturgy. There are tons of Ukrainians in Chicago and I ended up at a Ukrainian Catholic mass and loved it. I went to St. John Cantius and felt I was in the presence of something holy but honestly had no idea what was going on. It took me a long time to figure out what was happening, and most importantly, WHY. You, and some of the others at this site need to realize that there is a huge group of Catholics who have no idea what you’re talking about. And it’s like you don’t hear yourselves. All you’re saying is this is terrible, what you’re doing is substandard and WRONG and you need to being doing this other thing that you’ve never heard of and don’t understand. Do you seriously not understand why this message falls flat on so many people? All you and the others are doing is cursing the darkness when we so desperately need people to bear the light for others. People like me. People who once you explain to them depth and beauty of the prayers of the TLM can learn to appreciate them the same way a child learns to read. But you don’t do that. All I see here is griping, complaining and bitterness that the NO even exists.
Carol you have an excellent post. Before I started coming to this site, I had no idea that TLM promoters were so hostile in their outlook towards others. I probably would have been open to going to one once in a while, but frankly, after 2 years on this site, I don’t want to go anywhere near a TLM mass because of CCD commentators. By their fruits you shall know them.
Thank you. I am in TLM circles and SSPX circles but I also know many people who go to a local parish that is really good. Traditionalists have a terrible reputation for their lousy approach to others who are not like minded. I try to stick up for them to the people who call them “crank trads” and say they aren’t that bad, they have some valid points and so on. I watched closely the attempt to bring the SSPX back into the Church. The division in the Church is painful to me because I know Christ wants his Church to be ‘one body’.
Thank you, Carole. I hear what you’re saying. Sometimes, however, if folks take that which is personal out of the equation, heated comments bring a person to investigate the whys.
Often the ‘why’s’ supplied by those who enforced the change (those who have no desire to change now and/or look deeper than the surface) are not going to be accurate – such as the indication that the mass was changed post VII was due to a dearth of Catholics in European Churches. If that were the only motivation, which sounds wholly noble at the outset, then why – we’re talking logically here – would a hierarchy be against the promotion of the TLM which is growing exponentially where it is allowed, explained, encouraged, and not marginalized at the outset? Catholic Church attendance in Europe is working on extinction at present – so wouldn’t that prove that the NO experiment failed there?
With regard to your metaphor about teaching a child to read, one thing is key. The child has to ‘want’ to read. Not all children want to. They do not feel the need to. So sometimes frustration at watching other’s sail through books and/or talk animatedly about things which they cannot understand, or even find offensive, is precisely the fuel needed to motivate desire. Not unkindness, no, but it is a clear communique that “I’m not understanding something and darn it, I want that to stop.”
So whereas you may think that many are turned of by all the hate, I would posit that many, not all, are intrigued by the debate. Why is it so heated? There are reasons, Carole. And while we can be nice and cozy in attempting to put forth the beauty of it all, when something requires real effort to understand – and no, I’m not talking about learning Latin – desire can be the ticket.
Ann,
I think you and I mean the same thing, but just to clarify, the WHY I was referring to was why the TLM is so rich and beautiful. There are two things that need to be parsed out. Yes, there are those in Church leadership and others who don’t want the TLM because it ultimately represents a theology they just don’t like. If we are going to be honest, I think we all need to acknowledge that. It’s heart-breaking and wrong. Many of us agree about that. But there is another group of people who don’t know about the TLM, they either haven’t heard of it or don’t know most of what goes on in that mass in comparison to a novus ordo. What I see is you and others talking to the second group as though they fall into the first category.
One final note about someone’s desire to learn about the TLM. Some people will not have the desire to learn about and attend the TLM and you and others need to understand that is ok. It’s not the greatest thing in the world but it’s ok. The novus ordo is impoverished, NOT intrinsically evil. The novus ordo is still the representation of Calvary, however impoverished, so for anyone to speak of it as though it’s evil will make people not listen to anything else you have to say. The conversation about if the novus ordro is the cause of problems we see or if it is a symptom of them is a good conversation to have but it is misplaced here. I don’t think you hear yourselves. Being so negative all these parishes defeats your purpose and hurts the very cause you wish to promote. I’m not trying to be critical but I hope to show you how your complaining comes across to so many.
Carol,
Thank you for your reply. It is very much appreciated. That said, I do agree that there are many folks who will not, no matter what, like the TLM. And not just for nefarious reasons. The fact that it is okay is not the question, at least not for me. That is why lumping groups together – even those perceived as part of the collective who seem to speak to the second group of novus ordo proponents, in your view, as if they are against the theology of the TLM – can be equally damaging on both sides.
You mention that the TLM is richer and more beautiful and that is all well and good. It is true. But your noting that the TLM speaks of a theology that many in positions of authority do not like is at the root of the problem. For while the angry posts and breaking of the faithful into factions is seemingly unproductive, and on the outset it is, the resulting conversations can actually produce some real gems like this one:
“…There are two things that need to be parsed out. Yes, there are those in Church leadership and others who don’t want the TLM because it ultimately represents a theology they just don’t like. If we are going to be honest, I think we all need to acknowledge that. It’s heart-breaking and wrong.”
What you have nailed here is the intrinsic evil of changing the theology – what Catholics believe – via the orientation of the mass. (Lex orandi, lex credendi – As we pray we believe). So, while Christ is at the center of the Mass, the manner in which we treat Him is important and the manner in which we believe Him is important.
Many gathered at the foot of the cross, but not all believed the same, Carol, that He was the Savior. Rather they came to see a spectacle. Again, this is not to negate the people at the NO, but rather to call into focus the intrinsic disorder of creating a new form of mass that, even in your estimation, embodies a theology that is so different from the TLM that the many in the Church hierarchy don’t like it.
to Carol cont:
And many ‘Catholics’ don’t like it. But what you’re saying they don’t like is straight on Catholic theology minus the novelties tacked on after VII. (Like a peach tree with a grafted on apricot branch. The people are slowly convinced that apricots are really peaches – after all, they come from the ‘peach tree’ they are told. But when given an actual peach, they gag and reject it. So the people cannot be said to be peach lovers – not at all.)
So the reality is, something very integral has changed. And if unsuspecting although well meaning Catholics are formed by such new thought, the beliefs of said Catholics will change – and they have. What to do about it? Just not bother with those who are given apricots from the peach tree?
And if loving peaches is what we need to save our souls, should we just sit idly by allowing apricots to be sold as peaches and watch as more generations slowly die? I understand that the anger and seeming negativity is overwhelming at times, but the situation is critical, Carol – for the theology – what Catholics believe – is supposed to be the fullness of the Catholic Faith. So whereas you may think the conversation is misplaced here on CCD, I would disagree entirely.
Ann, this is a reply to your second comment but for some reason there is not an option to post it there.
I think it’s misplaced in the Churches worth driving to column. It feels like/sounds like you and others are taking your personal frustration about the lack of the TLM out on these parishes, the people who attend them and the priests who run them. I’m not the only one to point this out so it’s at least worth taking into consideration when commenting on the parishes. Some people just don’t have a head for theology. They may never understand or want to understand the TLM and it’s still unkind to insult the mass they are attending. It’s also insulting to the parish priests who work hard to run this parishes. And on top of all of that it’s not effective at all in advocating for the TLM or tradition in general.
I’m not sure if you are saying if you think the NO is a valid mass or not. I know there are some who don’t. At which point we will just have to disagree. When you say it’s intrinsically evil to change the theology of the mass – the essence of the mass is the same now as when Our Lord said the first mass. I think there is a richer presentation of that theology in the TLM but the NO is still a re-presentation of Calvary so I bristle at it being referred to as evil. That can’t be what you meant.
Carol, you are the one who stated:
“Yes, there are those in Church leadership and others who don’t want the TLM because it ultimately represents a theology they just don’t like. If we are going to be honest, I think we all need to acknowledge that. It’s heart-breaking and wrong.”
And you are absolutely right. If you want to back down off of that very clear statement, you certainly may. But if, as you now say that the ‘theology’ is the same, that the TLM is just richer presentation of the theology that we all must hold to, you are still dealing with the problem of a hierarchy – for whatever reason – being opposed to teaching the fullness of the Faith. That is reason enough for folks to get heated about wanting to promote the TLM at whatever cost, most especially in this current climate of declining parishes, faithful, and knowledge of the faith itself.
You state: “…It feels like/sounds like you and others are taking your personal frustration about the lack of the TLM out on these parishes, the people who attend them and the priests who run them.”
But we’re not discussing feelings or essences, Carol. Whether you back down from your observation or not, the reality on the ground is that – something at least – of the theology has changed from one rite to the other. And you cannot deny that those who LIKE the change do not want to see the TLM return – not any bit of it.
Feelings can be deceiving, Carol, just like not wanting to be perceived as mean. But if I was a priest working my tail off to teach the faith and save souls, I wouldn’t want to back down off of looking at the TLM – it works. The theology in the mass is unmistakable and very clear. And if I didn’t ‘understand’ that, I would surely hope somebody would get me to pay attention and give Catholic theology a try.
Carol, Ann Malley does not attend the Catholic Church. She only attends the TLM of independents and SSPX (or FSSP, which is Catholic) So it is not frustration on her part. She just enjoys ripping up the Catholic Church that she doesn’t even go to.
Also, the reason that the TLM is not liked by people has nothing to do with theology. There is no difference in the theology of the EF and the OF. They are the same rite. They both are the Mass of All Ages. One of the problems is that some TLM-ers don’t believe this.
The number of heresies in Ann Melley’s post at 2:11 PM and earlier are simply astounding. For starters there is NO theological difference between the EF mass and the TLM. Indeed there cannot be, if the Lord is to be taken at his word that the Church shall be free of error. If you think there are different theologies underlying the two forms of the Latin Rite, then the entire notion of the magisterial teaching office of the Church goes right out the window. The ENTIRE notion. So for those of you who think there are different “theologies” there, then you really don’t believe what Catholics believe about the magisterium.
Ann for some reason it won’t let me directly reply to your response?
Couple of quick things:
1) The essence of the mass has never changed. What I mean by this is that the Catholic mass – all Catholic masses are a re-presentation of Calvary. When I say there are some who don’t like the TLM because they ultimately they don’t like theology it represents, I’m talking about the difference between the two missal versions. The differences in the offertory, Confiteor prayers to name examples have richer versions in the TLM. The ignorant person may not know this or understand the difference. The proud person may not want to beg very hard God for mercy. But both versions of these prayers do the job, even if one is arguably more beautiful. There is not a difference in theology between these two prayers, in the sense that in both versions of the Confiteor we are asking/ begging for God’s mercy, there’s a difference in presentation. The essence of the prayer is the same. There may be a difference in what is in the heart of the person who prefers the shorter version because he is proud vs. the person who prefers it because it what he knows and doesn’t know any different. You make a big mistake and perhaps even rash judgment to treat these two groups the same. It’s also wrong to assume the lack of the TLM is out of some sort of contempt for it when it comes to these parishes. It may be a lack of demand and/or knowledge.
cont.
2) Whatever your view of the TLM it’s still very unkind to constantly complain about this parishes if they don’t have the TLM. It’s not an effective way to advocate for that cause. I think it’s very unkind to criticize the priests and parishioners for something that again, is not intrinsically evil. Going to mass is actually a good thing. And the NO is a valid mass and people have a right to go to it without you complaining about it. This is the point I want to drive home more than a back and forth about the particulars between the two masses.
3) I’m not sure how you can gloss over taking your personal frustrations about the lack the TLM on the people and priests of these parishes. I’m not trying to have a fluffy conversation about feelings. I think it’s objectively wrong to take your frustrations out on them the same way it’s wrong to take my personal frustrations out on my kids or people I run into while I’m out and about. Don’t dismiss that idea, think about it.
4) For all the effort you’ve put into complaining I wish you could find something positive and constructive to do with your energy. (And I must confess, I’m close to the limit of energy I want to invest in this.) You possess a knowledge that is in desperate need. Why can’t you teach a class? Most parishes are in desperate need of people who solidly know the faith to teach. My husband taught catechism for years – he based his lessons on the Baltimore Catechism and I don’t think the parish ever figured it out. Maybe you’ve heard of Una Voce? They give presentations at our parish. They have a special day for kids and families at lent and advent. They are excellent. You would find that more rewarding and productive. Think about it.
Carol, you assume that those you perceive as complaining “all the time” here have no other life and have no other avenue by which to promote the TLM. That, in itself, does’t help matters as it is, again, delving into perceptions. This operating off of “seems like” and “feels like” are not the same as ‘is’ and ‘are’.
You write, “…For all the effort “you’ve” put into complaining I wish you could find something positive and constructive to do with your energy.” Did “I” complain about there being no TLM at this parish? You’re generalizing, Carol. Also, what good are you doing here? You are chastening an individual on behalf of a group, a group that you have created by your own perceptions.
With regard to your reference about parenting, I don’t think it’s fair that a parent assume that all children are to be lumped together and spoken at. I also do not think it good parenting to attempt to shut up children who, by your own words, have very valid concerns. Even if others might be getting what is ‘good enough’. That’s hardly the height of charitable.
My first comment on this thread was not to slam anyone, but to point out the truth in St. Christopher’s statement regarding ‘protestantised Catholic Churches’. The replacing of the altar with the table is protestant in origin, Carol. The remainder of ‘my time’ spent here on this thread has been spent patiently discussing your points – especially the one you have now backed off of.
Ann,
You said, “But if I was a priest working my tail off to teach the faith and save souls, I wouldn’t want to back down off of looking at the TLM – it works.”
Be the lay person who works their tail off to teach the faith and help save souls. Your complaining is so misplaced and can become destructive. The priest plays a vital role in the Church, but that doesn’t absolve lay people from getting involved. I know it’s easier to tear down the work of others you disagree with, but it would be so much better if you did something positive and constructive. Every time you assail one of these parishes I think of Acts, “Saul, why do you persecute ME?” Every one of these parishes is the Church that Christ suffered and died for – you just don’t hear yourself.
Again, Carol, you assume there are no other facets to the lives of those you would lump together under your construct of ‘complaining’ all the time. You have no notion of what I or others ‘do’ to promote the Faith, the TLM, or, for that matter, what we actively do for the sanctification of priests. All priests. You may want to check your own inclination to rash judgement.
Your insistence that it is ‘my’ complaining that is the issue is making it increasingly clear that you are operating under a manifestation of your own creation. What I read coming from you and what you fail to comprehend is it is easier – as evidenced by your chastening, then attempting to foment understanding, then back pedaling, then closed ear admonishing in line with your fear of “Why do you persecute ME” – for YOU to dismiss those who are proponents of the TLM into a handy category so you can get on with the business of your perception of nice and kind. But there does come a point where ‘kindness’ is actually cruel because it deprives folks of that which is most beneficial.
And honey these days is too often replaced by a saccharin substitute that turns everybody off. You don’t seem to comprehend that, but that’s okay.
You state, “…The priest plays a vital role in the Church, but that doesn’t absolve lay people from getting involved.” And that is why there are many here commenting on the TLM, Carol. And quite vociferously, too. Again, YOU make a judgement as to the involvement of TLM promoters.
Your insistence on ‘becoming active!’ while dismissing the reality that folks are precisely that is counterproductive. For while you do SEE the disparity of theology, you refuse to acknowledge it now out of a misplaced fear of being mean or discounting the work of others.
But Carol, pagans work hard too. They are people with feelings. So are Muslims, Jews, Hindus. And yet it is imperative to preach the Gospel, is it not? So your fixation on saying you ‘see’ but then backpedalling to the false narrative that would shut you up is disingenuous. For Carol, Christ died to give us the Truth, whole and entire, that is why ‘just good enough’ rankles so deep.
It is not that you don’t hear yourself. Rather, from what you’ve written, it seems more that you refuse to hear yourself. So go get active and promote the TLM in the way you see fit for yourself. That’s great. But don’t continually deride individuals and their contributions here, for Saul was seeking to prosecute individual Christians. And that, Carol, is what you’re doing, too.
Not to be mean but…if the level of holiness, compassion, charity, patience, honesty, faith etc of those who post here is any indication of the graces received at Mass (and I understand that many of the TLM-ers are not attending a licit Mass and are not receiving grace) it would seem that those who attend the NO are receiving much more grace than those who attend the TLM.
Ann, are you kidding me? I haven’t backed down from anything I’ve said. You are misunderstanding what I’m saying. And if you don’t think calling this parish protestant is insulting then I don’t know what to tell you. I’m here to stick up for these parishes so they know not all traditional people are going to insult the NO. Why are you here? I didn’t say you spent all your time complaining, just that all the time you spend complaining is a waste. So sad and such a shame.
Some people’s ideas of good parenting include leaving hot irons unattended in the presence of children. I would be very careful when lecturing others about good parenting if I were you.
No, Carol, I’m not kidding you. You’e kidding yourself. And yes, you backed pedaled from your strong statement. That is okay, obviously. But you are continuing to misunderstand/misrepresent my position and lumping others together for the sake of your agenda. And that is fine, too, if that is your choice. That is not necessarily fair, however, as you continue to finger-wag and then misstate my position under the convenient tags you prefer.
You say, “…I didn’t say you spent all your time complaining, just that all the time you spend complaining is a waste.”
You suggested I do something active and positive, Carol. Reread what you actually wrote to get a taste for it. And then consider that you are not going to make any progress in helping anyone – even seemingly protecting anyone – by using the tactics of insulting people that you say are such anathema to you and ‘the cause’.
As for what ‘you’ constitute a waste, you are entitled to your own opinion, nuanced as it may be with fear of appearing to have a solid POV. But the woman who knocked on the door of the judge in the bible, didn’t get a just judgement because she was nice. So, Carol, take your honeyed approach and use it where you see fit. And allow others the liberty to approach matters as they see fit.
Ann,
I have no idea what you position is and I’m not trying to misrepresent anything. Nor do I have an “agenda”. All I’ve ever tried to drive home is that you or anyone else has the right to assail these parishes month after month. I’ve asked you questions and not had them answered but there is a lot being said too. First I do not back down from acknowledging that there are those who do not like the TLM because of what it ultimately represents. Having personally had a TLM denied to be twice for my own wedding mass, I know this goes on. In addition to acknowledging that I also acknowledge that the NO is a valid mass. Do you? I’m not sure. I’m not being snarky, I really don’t know. I can simultaneously acknowledge that there are those who don’t like what the TLM represents AND that it is wrong and unfair to take out that frustration out on the hard working priests of these parishes and the people who fill them. The two are not mutually exclusive to me. But I must say, your anger says to me that this conversation is not constructive, so I’m sure you will respond but don’t expect me to respond since you seem to be just getting agitated. And I do have a solid point of view. At the center of it is Christ and his Church. I will never put one version of the mass above Christ and his Church. Christ said the gates of hell will not prevail against his Church and I believe that. And if that same Church says the NO is a valid mass I believe that too. And anytime a wonderful CATHOLIC parish is assailed, I will stand up for it.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Always be positive about both forms of the HOLY MASS.
There is nothing wrong with promoting the Form one prefers as long as it is with love and kindness.
And never bad mouths the other form.
Amen!
I attend a parish that has a Mass on Saturday evening and three on Sunday morning. Each is an NO Mass and is filled to the gills for everyone. People come from miles around to attend this parish. Why? The Mass is said in a holy manner. The choir leads the singing and are so good that it is unusual to see any of the hundreds of parishioners not singing, some louder than others of course. The Lectors are well trained and “proclaim” the Word. The homilies are very good, based on the readings for that Mass and talk to the needs of the parishioners. It is hard to keep from applauding! The welcome at the front door is genuine. Parishioners are glad to greet each other as family. Parishioners are very diverse in age, race, education level, etc. These are people who live the Catholic life. Why do some people on this site think this is a bad thing?
Both the OF and EF of the Mass when said fully according with the RUBRICS is Holy and Uplifting.
It is all the abuses that make them unappealing.
Report abuses to your Diocese Bishop.
No Priest has the authority to change anything from GIRM.
The Ordinary Form of the Mass must adhere to the: “General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM)” which is on the Vatican and USCCB web sites.
https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/girm-foreword.cfm
The Extraordinary Form of the Mass must adhere to the 1962 Roman Missal.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/ecclsdei/documents/rc_com_ecclsdei_doc_20110430_istr-universae-ecclesiae_en.html
Applauding for anything,
mimicking the Priest in raising arms during Lord’s Prayer,
holding hands, etc., are each ABUSES of GIRM perpetrated by the laity, yet not corrected by many Priests.
These gestures are distracting to say the least.
https://www.praytellblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011-Pastoral-Letter-with-Decree-Bulletin-Insert.pdf
They complain about the novus ordo mass every week. They bag on every parish profiled that doesn’t only have the Traditional Latin mass. Don’t be offended please, it’s their pet issue and they are using this column on this site to complain about it. The parish looks lovely and would love to go see it in person.
Bob One sounds like a PC inclusive community…is confession offered before mass, is sin even mentioned during the homilies, or is it all about tolerance, diversity and joy. Is the word sacrifice even mentioned, would a TLM mass be welcomed, or is that pushing inclusiveness too far…??
The homilies are about the Readings.
Glad your Parish follows the required form of GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal), as required.
Which means – no hand holding, no raising arms in the air to distract others during the Lord’s prayer, and only giving the sign of peace to the person on each side of you. And never any applause.
No Priest has the authority to change anything in the Mass.
Abuses by the Priest or People when not corrected must be reported to the Diocese Bishop as a violation.
Don’t ram your man made Novus Ordo protestant services down our throats, keep your altar girls, drums, guitars, dancing girls in leotards, hand holding kiss of peace, polyester vestmants, communion in your unclean hands, giant puppets, we will have kneeling and communion on the tongue, Latin, Gregorian chant, silence, Mozart, Palestrina, stunning vestments to please God, altar boys, modest attire, the Novus Ordo will die out with the Heretics who made it up.
Janek, take a deep breath! I’m pretty sure there are no dancing girls in leotards or giant puppets at this parish! No one wants to force you to go to a NO mass! Don’t be so dramatic! You may be the first person to present information to someone about the TLM. You could be that person who gets to tell someone about the beauty of the mass you love so much. Be someone they would want to listen to. You get more bees with honey!
So what you are saying is that the Church was wrong for 2,000 years until the Second Vatican Council??? What I am now is what you were once then!!! You changed, we who adhere to The True Mass of All Times never changed.
You are so mistaken that it’s hard to know how to respond to your assertive ignorance. Our Lord Jesys Christ never said the Sacred Mass according to the TLM. Thus the TLM cannot be the Mass of all times. The first Mass would have been in either Aramaic or Hebrew. It would have been following the rough outline of the Passover liturgy. Your emperor wears no clothes, Janek.
Janek, I believe the second eucharistic prayer, reintroduced as part of the Novus Ordo, is actually the oldest known eucharistic prayer, centuries before the Canon. And this is exactly what the second vatican council asked us to do, to reach back to the earliest Church fathers and their practices. So who authorized the Tridentine Mass in the first place, and why are subsequent followers of it trying to deceive people like you who want to pretend that the TLM was around for 2000 years?
YFC writes “And this is exactly what the second vatican council asked us to do, to reach back to the earliest Church fathers and their practices.” = You are the deceiver. You’re two year history of posts demonstrate that you don’t believe that for one second. Go ahead and reach back and read about the practices of the early church fathers since you’re posts are a two year reflection of love for a mortally sinful vice.
St. Augustine
“Those shameful acts against nature, such as were committed in Sodom, ought everywhere and always to be detested and punished. If all nations were to do such things, they would be held guilty of the same crime by the law of God, which has not made men so that they should use one another in this way” (Confessions 3:8:15 [A.D. 400]).
St. Basil of Cesarea (322-379AD)… For the cleric or monk caught making sexual advances (kissing) or sexually molesting young boys or men. The convicted offender was to be whipped in public, deprived of his tonsure (head shaven), bound in chains and imprisoned for six months, after which he was to be contained in a separate cell and ordered to undergo severe penances and prayer vigils to expedite his sins under the watchful eye of an elder spiritual brother. His diet was that of water and barley bread – the fodder of animals. Outside his cell, while engaged in manual labor and moving about the monastery, the pederast monk was to be always monitored by two fellow monks to insure that he never again had any contact with young men or boys.
St. Siricius, a contemporary of St. Basil, who ordered that “vessels of vice,” that is known sodomists, including those who had fulfilled their penance, were forbidden from seeking entrance to the clerical state.
The latin mass CANNOT be the mass of all times.
Jesus, of course, is God and cannot be in error. Jesus did not say the first mass in latin—and certainly he did not use the ceremony prescribed in the TLM.
Are you suggesting that Christ’s choice in using the local language that he spoke every day with his apostles was somehow an incorrect? Are you really going to challenge the idea that the local language can be used to give a valid mass when Christ started out that way in the very first mass?
IF you, you are hopelessly arrogant and simply looking to justify your affection for the TLM—or perhaps used your affection for the TLM as evidence of your superior devotion.
The TLM Mass is NOT 2000 years old.
There was nothing close to it prior to the 1500’s.
The rubrics of the TLM follow the 1962 Missal.
Advocating either form of the Mass is fine, but get the facts straight.
Janek, you are kidding, right:? The Catholic Church has two versions of the Mass, what is referred to as the Mass, and the Extraordinary Form. That means that both “versions” are equal. When the host and the wine are consecrated, both versions have the same result. One is no better than the other, just different. Frankly, what you suggested as significant differences are not significant at all. Frankly, we have been reading, listening, to your rants for long enough. I am a Catholic, I attend a Catholic Mass each week, and take Communion each week. I don’t go around denouncing your version of what is a “true” Catholic liturgy. Both are equal. If you don’t believe that in your heart, then you are not a practicing Roman Catholic and need to find a parish that is more to your liking, but hopefully on that is in unity with Rome.
I think you mean the Latin Rite has two masses. And actually, the hierarchy goes out of its way to say the EF is not a separate rite but the same rite in two forms.
If they are both so equal Bob One why was one suppressed for nearly 45 years, why did it take the actions of Pope Benedict (the Great) to liberate from tyrannical bishops who did everything in their power to suppress it ?? If this current Pope has his way he will do the same, but he knows there is enough resistance to challenge him
Clearly the answer to the why has a lot to do with schismatic and nearly schismatic bishops and their sycophants who wouldn’t take no for an answer.
No it had to do with BERNARDIN and cronies who cheated in getting the needed Bishops votes for special indults which even today are special indults. (He kept calling for votes even after he lost twice..)
Further, the EF – TLM should never have been banned in the USA by any Bishop. And the OF should have been permitted as well.
My personal opinion is that – everyone should be following the TLM Mass but in the vernacular language for best understanding by the majority throughout the world.
Bernardin had nothing to do with it. No Bishop in the US did. They did not have the authority to permit the EF until 1984.
The Missal was promulgated by Pope Paul VI.
Why was an exception made and the use of an old missal allowed?
Some received from the Pope an indult to use the old missal. Some used it without permission and separated themselves from the Church. When it became necessary for the good of souls, Pope John Paul II allowed use of the old Missal with many conditions which later became less restrictive. Pope Benedict XVI allowed use of the Missal by priests with less restrictions.
I do not believe that your option of the old Missal in the vernacular is an option.
Many of those who post on the Roman Rite here violate the Will of God and the Teaching of the Church:
The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.
“Timothy”, “Carol”, and “Bob One”: First, thanks for the personal attacks, Tim (but you need to get a better vocabulary, using “ignorant” every other word is, well, ignorant).
No, the NO was not “developed” to meet some fictional lack of attendance at European Churches (where did you hear this, Tim?). The literature is rich with background on the Church’s dropping of the TLM. (Start off with many things by Michael Davies.) In sum, the reasoning can be more tied to an already weakened clergy that sought to embrace modernity (exemplified by Protestants), and, more importantly, a real desire for ecumenism — that is to move toward a One Church model.
Your point about Jesus never saying the TLM is a very tired one. Jesus was a Jew and spent a good deal of time teaching in the Temple. Does this mean that we all need to be Jews? St. Paul’s confrontation with St. Peter solved that one. Remember that Christ gave authority to Peter and the Apostles to create a Church, and they did. The Church has authorized the use of the NO, so you must believe that you can find Christ in it. However, that does not make the two masses equivalent, see, e.g., “The Merit of a Mass, ” by Fr. Chad Ripperger (FSSP), in “Latin Mass” (Summer 2003).
Lastly, never believe that the Church teaches that it considers the two masses of equal dignity and value. Almost all bishops despises the TLM and actively disobey the Pope is rejecting its regular use, or even in teaching all Catholics about Tradition. It is wonderful, “Carol” that you attended the TLM for a time. However, this is increasingly difficult to do. A good bishop would have at least one TLM in each parish, and teach it with respect and reverence. This is not done in that bishops know that many, many priests would begin to favor Tradition and see the failings of the NO (which is normally said without any reverence and in a kind of folksy, chatty style in most churches; the TLM and a Traditional belief, take work and dedication).
St. C, I can tell you that I have attended Mass in several churches, in several cities and towns in several states since the 60’s, and in Europe as well. I can’t remember ever attending an NO Mass that was not dignified, reverent, and holy. The Priest said the Mass according to the Missal. When new GRIM was introduced, he said it according to the rules. When the latest English Missal was introduced, the priests used the new version. So, I don’t know where you get your information or if it is old data, but come join me and thousands of others every Sunday as we pray, praise and celebrate together the Glory of God. As an aside, I have asked several Priest why they don’t “do” the EF Mass. The answer is always the same with minor variations; I have never seen an EF Mass, I don’t know how to speak/read Latin, I already say five Masses on the weekend, I have thousands of families in the parish and none have asked for a TLM, since most don’t know what it is or that it exist, and I’m too busy learning Spanish for the many that want that language used at Mass. If we were a business, which we are not, we would say there is no market for a Latin Mass. For those who want it, there is usually one within a 50 mile radius of each parish.
Bob One, Thankfully the Church is not a business, the TLM has been suppressed by men in hierarchy who think like you do. The NO mass was the worst thing that has ever happened to the Church, IT has caused the divisions we are now experiencing. I despise what your generation has done to the Church and everyone of the so called reforms that have brought the Church to its knees..
Canisius, may I respond to your resentment of the suppression of the “TLM”. The “TLM” and the “NO” are the same rite. After the Council of Trent in the 1500’s, when the universal Church began to use the same Missal, the custom of the Church became such that when the Pope promulgated a new Missal, the old Missal is no longer used. So what was “suppressed” was the Missal. It was possible to get an indult (permission) to use the prior missal. Since you call out Bob One on his generation, I assume that you have no historical attachment to the “TLM” (It was not what you grew up with). So you could not have spent decades longing with nostalgia for the “old Mass”. So how would those decades of “suppression” even have effected you?
Also, I am sorry to get personal but…I recall a post of yours a few days ago, which I agreed wholeheartedly with, about the necessity of obedience. So I am shocked by your admission of despising a whole generation of people. By despising anyone, you are being disobedient to Jesus Christ.
You keep misrepresenting, mous, and I’ll keep doing my part to rein you back in to reality.
Canisius wrote, “I despise what your generation has done to the Church…” He didn’t say for one instance that he despised “people”. And the false fixation of love of the TLM only being borne out of nostalgia isn’t sticking either. But like the current administration, you can keep repeating, “I don’t know him. I don’t know who you’re talking about. And, we’re doing better!” but nobody is buying.
The decades of suppression has resulted in mass numbers not knowing the Faith, not practicing the Faith, and those Churches and parishes built by our forefathers being sold off to become mosques, Protestant meeting houses, or bulldozed. But if you can compartmentalize to the degree that these happenings do not effect you, perhaps you could share with us how being numb to the sufferings of others, to the extent of souls being damned, is charitable.
Anon… I will take my chances, the entire baby boom generations has left a swath of destruction in its wake and it destroyed everything it went near, the culture and the Church…
Ann Malley, you are ridiculous. How were you suffering? You didn’t even go to church for 29 years?
Canisius, it’s not a chance, it is a sure thing. Do you doubt God?
I understand why you want to make this personal, mous. But the answer to your question is as follows:
The decades of suppression has resulted in mass numbers not knowing the Faith, not practicing the Faith, and those Churches and parishes built by our forefathers being sold off to become mosques, Protestant meeting houses, or bulldozed.
If that doesn’t bother you, therein lies the disconnect between you and many others on CCD who do care.
Ann Malley,
I’ve been involved in correcting doctrine free catechesis for decades.
I suffered. Others suffered. How did you suffer? You weren’t there and you are still not there.
The only instance of a former Catholic Church becoming a mosque that I can find is one in Syracuse which will become the Mosque of Jesus Son of Mary.
You talk about people not knowing and practicing the Faith-you are one of them.
According to Catholic Tradition, your soul is going to be damned if you don’t repent. Why don’t you care about that?
I’m sorry if that is too personal.
Ann malley misstates “The decades of suppression has resulted in mass numbers not knowing the Faith, not practicing the Faith, and those Churches and parishes built by our forefathers being sold off to become mosques, Protestant meeting houses, or bulldozed.”
Your make two incredible statements and link them together without evidence except your ability to provide a verb. Because you can write the verb “resulted in” does not mean that the fact you state is a true fact.
First off “the decades of suppression”. You imply that the faithful were being oppressed during those decades. Indeed, they were being lead by the teaching office of the Church in whom faith, morals, discipline and governance are entrusted. If you felt personally suppressed, it was only because you personally refused to rendaer authority unto the Popes and Bishops who called for and promulaged the Missal of Paul VI. Shame on you for not being docile to the shephards.
Secondly, you say that mass numbers don’t know the faith. I’m not sure where you get your statistics, but I have to wonder if you even know the faith yourself given my point above? Perhaps the people who you claim don’t “know the faith”, actually know it and follow it better than you do. At least they live their lives in accordance with the discipline of the teaching office of the Church, an office which you vacated decades ago and never returned.
Mous, you need to stop with the measuring cup of ongoing comparison with regard to ‘your’ suffering. According to Catholic Tradition, I’m doing what needs must to safe guard my soul in good conscience. You refuse to understand that because it would seem you place obedience above Faith. That is your choice and you do so due to the formation you received. (I’m not sure if you’re the mous who insists that she drives hours to get to an ‘approved’ TLM. If so,that is wonderful. But it doesn’t negate the sufferings of others or lay claim to there being only one variety of suffering.)
You consider yourself to be ‘correcting’ doctrine free catechesis for years and yet you are forever corrected yourself and caught out in your own biases. But you still plug along, mous, doing your best. That is what I’m doing, despite whether you believe that or not. And in light of the years I spent rebelling, and they were many, but I was also grievously lied to and scandalized, not that that is an excuse for infidelity, but that is why I am compelled to fidelity now mous. Fidelity to the Faith and to Christ.
So if you think you’re doing good by perpetuating the myth that -I don’t care about that or haven’t suffered, albeit not up to your measure-then you’d do well to consider that with regard to your own soul.
God bless
Another mous, even a chancery representative has stated on CCD that there was/is a dearth of proper catechism in the Church for the past 40-50 years. If you do not see the connection to that and the unending novelty that has led many astray, well, you are willfully blinded.
Much like you are willfully blinded to taking ongoing ‘personal’ offense when that which is objective is pointed out to you.
You write, “If you felt personally suppressed, it was only because you personally refused to rendaer authority unto the Popes and Bishops who called for and promulaged the Missal of Paul VI. Shame on you for not being docile to the shephards.”
Again, mous, it is not ‘personal’. And being docile to that which is damaging to the soul is not the proper use of obedience. Shame on you for attempting to silence objective discussion that has its roots in the desire to promote the fullness of the Faith, not just the narrow minded version that whatever is said must be obeyed without looking to the substance of what is required.
Obedience in all but sin, mous.
No, Ann Malley, Catholic Tradition REQUIRES you to be obedient to your bishop. You are clearly disobedient and please stop trying to hide under “Catholic Tradition” because such a thing cannot exist without the Pope and the bishops in full communion with him.
If you attend an illicit Mass at a chapel that has not been established by the local ordinary, you are not keeping with Catholic Tradition.
If you attend an illicit Mass at a chapel that has not been established by the local ordinary you lack fidelity to the Catholic Church.
Your post is utterly foolish. Save your soul.
The ten commandments require us to be obedient to parents as well, mice, but that does not condone committing sin out of obedience. Discern.
It is not a sin to attend Mass. It is a sin not to.
…my obligations with regard to mass attendance are met, mous. Obedience in all but sin.
Careful of rash judgment when using the phrase ‘men who think like you’. You don’t know what’s in his heart and mind. Just because someone enjoys the NO doesn’t mean they have contempt for the TLM. And be careful about lumping people into the category of ‘what your generation has done to the Church.’ Most of us had no power or authority over any changes. We are in the same boat as you.
…good advice, Carol, advice we should all follow. Lumping people into categories and ascribing attributes to that category out of hand is a dangerous business.
Bob One, you have never seen abuses in the USA at an OF Mass ?
Really ?
Who is your wonderful Diocese Bishop and wonderful Priest ?
That means the Priest, and also the Laity follow the General Instruction of the Mass (GIRM) which is on the Vatican and USCCB web site.
Neither the Priest nor Laity have the authority to change anything, and GIRM is clear about that.
No hand holding; no distracting hokey pokey with the laity raising their arms up and down in the air;
and no giving the sign of peace except to persons on each side of them – no waving etc, etc, etc,
ROME REINS in KISS of PEACE – Aug 4, 2014 –
https://cal-catholic.com/?p=15131
Bishop’s DECREE – https://www.praytellblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011-Pastoral-Letter-with-Decree-Bulletin-Insert.pdf
I guess I would just like to point out is that those abuses are not happening at this parish.
St. Christopher, I’ve never personally attacked you. I’m simply asking that the parishes profiled here not be assailed for not having the TLM.
I used “ignorant” twice, hardly every other word…you’re being petty. If you are unaware of the crisis in Europe before Vatican II, I can hardly think of a better word for you, especially when you make expansively inaccurate descriptions of full seminaries (true in the US, not at all true of the larger Church). I’ll use another word twice: pitiable.
“Timothy”: What is your point, after all? You simply refuse to see the nearly complete destruction of the Catholic Church, fueled by the loss of Faith in its Tradition, and in its sacraments. Certainly, as noted previously, there were European countries that were already implementing — unlawfully — many of the atrocious beliefs that came to public acceptance and worldwide implementation during and after Vatican II. The failure of Vatican II implementation was to adopt these practices instead of standing up to them and rejecting them, such as was done at other Church councils.
It is a lie of major proportions, told throughout Vatican II Land, that the Council “saved” the Church. This is foolish talk and wrong. Certainly taking our own country, Vatican II has been poison: religious orders are virtually gone now, and dying (except for mostly Traditional ones). Parishes are being eviscerated before our eyes: look at the tragedy of NYC under its truly awful Cardinal Dolan. Soon there will be only a parish here and there in many, many diocese. No, Fr. Greeley was wrong when he said that it would have been much worse without Vatican II.
The Faithful in the Catholic Church live in an occupied country. Many, many of its bishops simply do not believe in the Faith, and say so openly. This is particularly the case with sexual ethics, but also in areas of the true foundations of the Faith: the reality of the divinity of Jesus Christ, His resurrection, and the role of the Church in attaining salvation. The current Mass reflects the disinclination of the Church to look seriously at the role of Man, and his duty toward his Creator. And to the reality of sin.
You are wrong to glory in the destruction of the Church, Timothy. Seek out the Faith.
…and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it…
I choose to believe my Lord Jesus Christ, and in doing so, I reject your entire message, not-St. Christopher.
If I were a non-Catholic considering joining the Catholic church, and I was confronted by some of the statements made on this thread, I’m sure I would head somewhere else. Many of the arguments, and I’m not immune either, are similar to counting the number of angels on the head of a pin. The demonstrated hate for anything that is not TLM is way out of any normal discussion of our faith. We need to ask ourselves what it means to be Catholic. Is it the rituals or is it the relationship with Christ that is important? Is it the rituals or is it the good works that we do for the less fortunate because it is the least we can do, having had our God die for our sins? Is it the ritual or is it the God given need for us to be a community of believers who are in communion with each other? There are lots more questions we could ask ourselves, but much of the angst in the thread has noting to do with being a Catholic Christian or a Protestant Christian. Let’s get back to God.
“…Many of the arguments, and I’m not immune either, are similar to counting the number of angels on the head of a pin. The demonstrated hate for anything that is not TLM is way out of any normal discussion of our faith.”
Relegating honest debate/discussion about the merits and inherent fruits or lack thereof associated with the different rites in the Church is hardly outside any ‘normal’ discussion of the Faith, Bob One. In fact, the perpetual insistence that the disparity in rites has ‘nothing to do with the crisis’ in the Church and the subsequent relegation of said discussion as tantamount to the dismissive ‘angels on the head of a pin’ discussion is a clear indicator that this discussion does, in fact, need to take place.
And not just on this forum, but at the highest levels of the Church and with a mind to examine the fruits of the two rights against what the Church actually teaches and holds to be true in the Deposit of the Faith. As for being being ‘way out of normal discussion’, I could have missed it, but I didn’t hear anything against the absurd proposals brought up a the recent synod on the ‘family’ from your quarter. Most certainly the topics brought up at that synod were ‘way out of the range of normal discussion’.
Looks like we need to get anal about what ‘normal’ means, Bob One.
Bob One,
“Let’s get back to God?” = Do you mean the Living Almighty God who resides in the Tabernacle that you want hidden wherever a bishop pleases?
“We need to ask ourselves what it means to be Catholic? ” = Have you already forgotten your earlier posts where you informed us that the best part of going to Mass was your socializing with the crowd in the pews and then heading out for more socialization and donuts?
Malachai Martin talked about a time where the “community” would become the new god.
Sorry, B.O. You might want to consider a new name if you want to be taken seriously. You have a history of posts that show disdain for even the Tradition of having the Tabernacle located in the most prominent place in the Church. And please don’t bring up the Basilica stories. Progressive bishops have slowly and deliberately removed many things that are “Catholic”. Your mocking Cardinal Burke’s lace tablecloth vestments showed your true interior disdain Mr. Bob One, no matter how “really nice” you might think that you sound.
One thing is for sure, Bob One, Whether you have witnessed it or not the NO Mass is NOT always treated with due reverence. Also If we truly believe that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a re-enactment of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross, I would think that common sense should tell a believer that if someone was playing the drums, bongos and guitars next to Our Lady as she stood at the foot of the Cross, then something is seriously wrong with that picture.
Douay-Rheims Bible
2 Thessalonians 2:15 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. ” Douay-Rheims
Did an organ accompany Mary at the foot of the cross? Did John where lacey garments with long trails at the foot of the cross? No, of course the answer is no. So what is your point Catherine? None of the things we do at Mass, with the exception of the sacrifice of the lamb bears any external relationship to what happened at the Cross. You may dislike bongos, another may dislike organs. Some may like lace, others linen. What is the point of all this harping over silly externalities?
“…What is the point of all this harping over silly externalities?”
Because we are fallen creatures, mous, and therefore need to connect the externals to the internal and supernatural. That is how we learn. Or would you advocate letting folks run around naked without restraint, doing whatever, because externals, don’t matter? That is ridiculous.
People learn via the senses, mous. And since God gave them to us, we had better pay attention to them, especially when a wanton disregard for the external has led folks down the wrong road of believing that nothing matters. Balance is key, mous. The outside should reflect the inside. And giving God our very best in public worship should very much display our reverence, love and belief that God is truly present.
If because of your fallen nature, Ann Malley, the externalities are more important to you than the substance of what is going on, then I understand and accept that you may want to surround yourself with lots of externalities, hopefully to remind you of the substance of what is going on. But for those of us who are attached to the substance already, to the core events taking place, to the lamb being sacrificed, we neither need nor want the distractions of the externalities, and would appreciate it very much if you would stop harping about one being better than the other.
Mous, that you would ascribe the TLM as incorporating distractions to the internal realities of mass is ludicrous as well as unsubstantiated. For those of you who are attached to the substance already – fantastic, that is wonderful – but it is still only focused on YOU. For there are myriad others who get caught up in the less-rich expression and are left less enriched in the current rite of mass, especially as it is left wide open to interpretation by design. So harp on about yourself, that seems to be your only point of reference.
long brocaded vestments, having folks running back and forth from one side of the altar to another, mumbling their prayers to themselves, yes these are distracting to me. The central act of the eucharist was not performed this way when Christ did it nor when his Apostles did it. They are utterly unnecessary to enact the sacrifice of the mass. They add zero to the central truth of what is going on there. These externalities bring some to the faith, but are a hindrance for others, which is exactly why Vatican II ordered the rite to be simplified so that is central essence could shine forth ever more clearly.
It is a defect in you, not in the Mass that it appears less-rich and are left less enriched.
Well, mous, you may have been told that the new mass was all about focusing on the central ‘essence’, but the fruits – empty churches and mass apostasy even by many who are in the pews – says otherwise.
As to ‘mumbling ‘their’ prayers’ to themselves, you lack understanding and seemingly the willingness to learn what goes on outside of what you think you know. But that’s okay. Others, however, who love the Church want to see Her flourish…. that said, Vatican II didn’t call for the rite to be completely restructured. Another fallacy.
“What is the point of all this harping over silly externalities?” = No one who truly believed in the “sacrifice of the lamb” would deny giving the very best to the lamb that was sacrificed. You did try to polish it up a bit didn’t you but you still sound just like the Call to Action speaker who told an entire group of Catholics…. “I want you to all know that we really do NOT even need a Tabernacle inside the church.” …… She said that we did not need those externals. She said that when Mass ended the best thing to do was not stay and pray but “GET OUT” and serve the community. This woman was speaking to naive and trusting people who did not understand the faith and Father John Hardon SJ warned us that the real target was to diminish belief in the Real Presence. Father Hardon SJ was seeing that many priests now thought that Jesus was only present symbolically. So little by little if you can remove those many “silly externals” that always pointed directly to the vertical (God) then it won’t be long before our shepherds also forget their real duties (the salvation of souls) and then only focus on the horizontal (political agendas) because they too no longer believe in the Real Presence.
For “you” anonymous there is no point but for those who DO understand and DO believe then no explanation is necessary. The faithful understand what has caused the devastation in the vineyard. There are those who choose NOT to believe because they too are plotting like Judas did and they are much more interested in ushering in another agenda (as we saw at the Family Synod) and for these modern day plotters NO explanation but their own will be sufficient.
continued….
continued from November 19, 2014 at 12:43 pm
“Externalities” in both forms of the Mass are extremely important. We are in the Presence of God. Reverence on the altar and reverence such as genuflecting before you enter or after you exit the pew and behavior such as modest dress is in keeping with good taste and propriety. These are externals but they reflect an understanding that we are now in the presence of the King of Kings and this external example of transmitting the faith is most pleasing and respectful to God and it is important to teach especially to the young children. How often do we forget what you deem as “silly externals” often outwardly show our inward lack of understanding or an inward lack of belief? As for your disdain for using beautiful vestments you come across as another Judas who also complained about the outward appearance or external action of the woman wanting to FIRST use the most precious oil on Our Lord. Inwardly this woman understood that it was Jesus who should always be FIRST in receiving our love.
A few years ago I spoke with a seminarian who had family visit him and this seminarian was privately berated by his superiors when his visiting family knelt down to receive Our Lord. Perhaps you were one of those superiors. So your words about “silly externalities” are simply another validation and reminder of the many Judases within the Church who are still afflicting the Mystical Body of Christ.
Catherine, if the externalities are more important to you than the substance of what is going on, then I understand and accept that you may want to surround yourself with lots of externalities, hopefully to remind you of the substance of what is going on. But for those of us who are attached to the substance already, to the core events taking place, to the lamb being sacrificed, we neither need nor want the distractions of the externalities, and would appreciate it very much if you would stop harping about one being better than the other.
Catherine, for the hundredth time(?) I have never said that I don’t want the Tabernacle behind the altar in the main part of the church. Never! I have simply stated church law that allows it to be placed in three different places, and that the Bishop has the right to state where it will go, or approve or disprove where a parish would like to put it. The Bishop has that authority. Can we get off this one? Catherine, I know you are sincere in your faith, but you have got to stop making up stuff or extrapolating a simple comment into disdain for your opinion. I’ll say it one moire time: I prefer the tabernacle behind the altar, but there are three alternatives allowed, I don’t hate the TLM, it is just that I prefer to go to Mass in English and I like the Ordinary form better than the Extraordinary form, but if others prefer the EF, than they should try to get more of them and Bishops should accommodate them. I don’t know how to make it any clearer.
Catherine will never stop her false witness. It is how she takes a dig at you. All those who post here see your sincerity and your faithfulness and we all know about her. Don’t take the bait.
Bob One, You have a very very long history of comments to extrapolate from. According to you, the sacrilegious new age and pagan looking liturgical dancing Masses that are held at the Religious Ed Congresses are “in compliance with the rules.”
Bob One says:
April 2, 2014 at 9:12 am
“Sandra, I just reviewed the GIRM on the Vatican website. I would say that the Mass at the REC was in full compliance with the rules. On the other hand, I’m not a canon lawyer.”
“Many of us who are pre-VII will do everything in our power to not let the church drift back to the old ways. We must **move forward** with even more zeal.” ….quote from Bob One
Taken from CCD article “The proper posture is standing”
https://calcatholic.web141.discountasp.net/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=ab483c14-1865-4b08-b6c4-2334d58af00d
Posted Wednesday, February 01, 2012 7:05 PM By Bob One
Dear Hearts, VII was two or three generations ago. This conservative, traditionalist bishop sticks to Canon Law pretty much all the time. He has a doctorate in it. The indult was given so that people can stand to receive, with the stipulation that those who wish to kneel can, it it is possible. Those who wish to receive on the tongue can do so as well. (As a extraordinary minister of communion, I can tell you that that is not something I ever want to do) Let’s keep in mind that the folks on this site represent the 0.02% of the faithful. One of the reasons we are not well heard is because so many want to go back to the old ways. That is no longer the RCatholic church. Watch the Pope when he says Mass at the Vatican. Even if it is in Latin, it is the NO, which is the ordinary format for Mass. The TLM is the extraordinary format. So, it is to be used as an exception to the norm. Many of us who are pre-VII will do everything in our power to not let the church drift back to the old ways. We must **MOVE FORWARD** with even more zeal.
continued…
Forward! New Obama Slogan Has Long Ties to Marxism, Socialism
By Victor Morton | Washington Times
May 1, 2012
The Obama campaign apparently didn’t look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, “Forward” — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.
Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name “Forward!” or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called “Forward (generic name of socialist publications).”
“The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications,” the online encyclopedia explains.
The slogan “Forward!” reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.
Notice how Bob One accuses the spotless bride of Christ of causing ruin.
Taken from CCD’s article ‘The proper posture is standing”
https://calcatholic.web141.discountasp.net/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=ab483c14-1865-4b08-b6c4-2334d58af00d
Posted Friday, February 03, 2012 12:25 PM By Bob One
Canisius, those of us who are pre-VII *saw the ruin that the church was causing* and welcomed the “open window” that has brought our people closer to Christ. We still have a long way to go, but at least it was a start.
Creepy Catherine when you pull up quotes from 2 years ago, really creepy!
Why be holy and please God when you can hold petty little grudges and offend Him?
FACTS are always CREEPY to those who have an agenda to deceive others. In a court of law FACTS and EVIDENCE expose and ultimately convict liars.
Our Lady of Fatima warned her children about Russia spreading her errors and the persecution of the Church. Pray the rosary. “IN THE END MY MY IMMACULATE HEART WILL TRIUMPH!”
Please read ‘Bitter Harvest: How Marxist “Progressives” Have Infiltrated the American Catholic Church’ – By William Mayer
https://religiousleftexposed.com/home/wp content/uploads/2013/12/mayer.pdf
See CCD’s article ‘Catholic bishops receive $65 million for alien children from feds’
https://cal-catholic.com/?p=14979
I agree that it is super creepy to track comments from two years ago. Not that there is anything with what the person said but it comes off as a bit obsessive.
Catherine, when you pull a single quote out of a conversation 2 years ago, you are literally pulling it out of context. That is a conversation that happenned 2 years ago, and whatever correction he needed then should have happenned then. None of your readers is going to go back and see what the true context of ancient comments (which are, after all, not formally though out dissertations on the faith but rather conversational in style and intent.) When you rummage through old posts, through THOUSANDS of old posts, rummaging for a single statement to pluck out from its proper context, to support your notions is unfair, unChristian (please see CCC 2478 which speaks of the obligation to take people’s words in the most favorable light), and yes, just plain stalkerish and creepy.
I agree Bob One. And it all seems pretty clear to me.
“Ann Malley” and “Catherine”: There is little more to say after your double-barreled and powerful responses to “Bob One”. It is always the same to the “Church of Nice” (as Michael Voris calls it), once you hit on a nerve or two, you are called “not Catholic” and all kinds of names. In fact, the opposite is almost always the case.
The recent Synod — remember, “Bob One” — showed a Church whose leaders are vain, company men, who almost voted with a set of “principles” that violated a number of Church doctrines and Traditions. Men, real men, like Cardinal Pell, Cardinal Burke (much hated by the likes of Cardinals Dolan, Wuerl, and Abp. Forte), and others stood up and, in a way not disrespectful of Pope Francis, told him that things were getting out of hand. But, sadly, the Synod was only a pimple compared to the disease of implementation of Vatican II.
It is interesting, “Bob One” that you talk about there being “no market” for a TLM, when in fact the collective knowledge and love of the Latin Mass was destroyed by the harsh imposition of the N.O., by Bl. Paul VI. For reasons we will never know, the Pope went along with that madman, Msgr. Bugnini and demanded that all parishes everywhere implement the new, man-made mass. Priests went along with it, and people were simply not told about the truth of the Church: you are all simply ignorant, Bob One.
But “willful ignorance” is wrong, and indefensible. Thanks to wonderful orders, and to wonderful priests like Benedict XVI, all now know of the TLM. There is no excuse to act like Cardinals Dolan and Wuerl, Abp. Cupich and others and actively oppose Tradition. That kind of behavior is non-Catholic. It is time to come home to the real Catholicism.
Cardinal Dolan said that Cardinal Burke was right.
Thank you St. Christopher!
STOP ARGUING !
AMEN!!!
In case anyone is interested in how the Abomination views Catholic Churches & Conferences, I now have the emails and legal briefs obtained in Discovery from the US-DOJ (Disciples of Judas) that refer to the annual Fall Conference of the Catholic Diocese of Boise as a “Census Event”…
– Attendance at which is a Governmentally Punishable Offense qualifying as ‘Stalking the Government’ – Unless your views are in line with the Gaystapo side of course…
Apparently, because some of the ObamAcorn political activists on the pork payroll as ‘Census Partners’ were present and saw me there (I was a member of the Diocese of Boise at the time) attending the conference – After I was no longer employed by the Census 2010 – This qualified as Politically Punishable Behavior by a Former employee.
Although I was unaware of it at the time, the Census Political Activists infiltrating the Catholic Conference spotted me there – and then followed and eavesdropped on me talking to Catholic Media; in particular talking about the deep rooted Anti-Catholic Bias that I had watched overtake the ostensibly ‘Non-Partisan’ Census.
Which, along with the takeover of the rest of the supposedly Neutral functions of Government (DOJ, Military…) by POTUS Down Low Soetoro and his Gaystapo Enforcers, were all being used like the Census as tools to attack Marriage and enforce the Pander or Perish rule of lawlessness that characterizes the ObamAcorns drunk on their unchecked power.
Please stick to the topic of the article for a change.
When you purposely leave the topic, many ignore your posts.
AMEN!!!
No, no one is interested in your made up stories McD.
Bob One, why are you not answering ALLEN’s direct questions to you dated November 19, 2014 at 12:25 pm ?
OK, I guess I have experienced some things not in the GRIM; No hand holding; no distracting hokey pokey with the laity raising their arms up and down in the air;
and no giving the sign of peace except to persons on each side of them – no waving etc, etc, etc,. On the other hand … I don’t like distracting hokey pokey either. I find, however, that offering others “The peace of Christ be with you” not distracting hokey pokey. I don’t find that saying the Lord’s Prayer joined as one family distracting. I don’t find gesturing while saying “and with your spirit” hokey pokey. I suppose that makes me guilty of attending a Mass with some irregularities. Before I chose the parish I attend, I visited several parishes for Sunday Mass. Even the most Orthodox (were not supposed to use conservative or liberal) held each other during the Lord’s Prayer, offered the Sigh of Peace to everyone within reach, and offered their prayers with hands raised. In some churches the people in the pews even sang the hymns.
We have worked and prayed a long time to do away with liturgical abuse. Some things like the handholding seem to be done by the laity. Our last pastor said since it is not forbidden in GIRM, that he would not end it.
Bob One, I want you to consider that there is a geographical parish that you belong to and that parish, in justice, are entitled to your prayers and contributions.
Bob One, thank you for your honesty.
It seems that in many areas of the USA, Priests need to teach and correct their congregations to adhere to GIRM – – so that the most Holy atmosphere will be maintained.
And that people do not distract others from thoughtful prayer\.
I could be wrong but this distracting behavior on the part of some of the Laity and when the occasional Priest does his own thing – are the main reasons many complain about the OF Mass.
It is the abuses and lack of
Rather than defending abuses we should all print out a copy of GIRM (from the USCCB or Vatican web sites).
And highlight those things that need correction at our individual Parishes so they can be corrected.
If necessary we should take it to the Diocese Bsihop.
No matter what the topic is on this blog it alway comes down to the TLM The True Mass of All Times always. Why? because it is the TRUE MASS OF ALL TIMES and you will find such hatred from the posters here but that is ok it will never go away, Vatican II tried but failed you cannot destroy what Christ himself instituted, sorry Novus Ordonarians.
We don’t hate it Janek, many of us like it and love it. What I think should stop is the constant bashing of every parish profiled here that has the NO. It’s a horrible way to advocate for the cause of the TLM.
“…It’s a horrible way to advocate for the cause of the TLM.”
You are only advocating for an external preference, Carol, that is why you do not understand the passion in Janek’s posting. It’s not just about the longer prayers in the missal. That is why your advocating rings hollow.
I’m not advocating any mass. I’m asking for kindness and for these parishes to not be assailed. Like it or not they are part of the Church Christ suffered and died for and for that they should be respected.
…yes the parishes should be respected. That is why many advocate for the parish to have access to the TLM. You seem to disassociate respect from wanting what is, in your words, richer and more beautiful for all.
While you may have your estimation about sameness, that doesn’t necessarily correlate with the respective fruits of both rites, Carol. So I do respect your attempt at helping and promoting peace as you see it, but do so without understanding or accepting that your position is not shared by all, and that that doesn’t necessarily equate to something bad or unkind, is an issue.
Also, I share Janek’s passion for the rich and beautiful liturgy of the TLM. But I also recognize that most people do not see incessant complaining as passion. They see it as incessant complaining. Hence the continued marginalization of traditionalists. So sad to me.
Again, you may share Janek’s passion for the rich and beautiful liturgy of the TLM, Carol, but as evidenced by your statements above, you do not share the same motivation for that appreciation as you seem to defer to ‘preference’ as the mutual basis for said passion instead of belief. That seems to be why you would bristle at the term protestanized. But replacing the altar with a table is precisely what Protestants did, hence the term.
You may not believe so, but the ‘marginalization’ of traditionalists and tradition itself is perpetuated by the myth that those who opt for tradition do so out of mere preference. As if it is choosing to dress for dinner out of some sense of historicity instead of wearing jeans and a t-Shirt. How quaint.
That is sad, Carol, because it is anything but factual for a vast majority. And to attempt to force those who have a keen sense of lex orandi, lex credendi into the box of having to lie and state that they prefer the TLM only due to externals is just beating up on another group.
So while you stick up for your chosen underdog, I hope you realize that there are those who will stick up for others…. and their right to speak. That said, nobody is negating the hard work of others, Carol, but pointing out the legitimacy of tradition to at the very least stand beside this creation of the Novus Ordo.
It is not wrong to go to the TLM because you prefer it. That is what you are supposed to do. If you go to the TLM because you think the NO is deficient, you are doing wrong. That is the real reason so many bishops resist it. The motivation of those who want it are sinful.
What is sinful, mous, is not looking to the fruits of the two rites, including the fruit of being more prone to abuse because of an inherent love of options that make it far easier for abuse to occur. What you point out ‘may’ be why some Bishops believe they should resist the TLM – although that is really problematic if they truly believe the rites are the same – there are those that do not want the rites to be promoted equally, side-by-side, because the disparity in what ‘is’ will be far easier to see. And/or the ‘options’ that are so beloved in juicing up the NO will have to disappear because they will become increasingly obvious for all to see.
So, “If you go to the TLM because you think the NO is deficient, you are doing wrong” – NO. But that’s a great method of attempting to stifle what those who understand the TLM to be from speaking out.
Ann Malley, you do not seem to understand the term “fruits of the Mass”.
Liturgical abuse is not a fruit of the Mass. It might be considered a “fruit” of the celebrant. I always perceive it as a sign that the celebrant needs prayers.
I am sorry that you reject Church teaching and I will pray for you.
I refer to the fruits of the Novus Ordo as a new rite that lends itself to novelty and abuse, mous, not the sacrifice itself. Sorry you cannot distinguish seemingly anything strictly beyond what you are told. You must not have any problem with liturgical abuses either. Do as you will I am sorry you reject the Spirit. Following the letter seems to be all you are about. I pray for you, too. Thanks.
Also, mous, while you are praying for the priest, pray that he finds his way into a rite of mass that doesn’t allow for the novelty of untold abuse…. for prayers are important, yes, but removing the temptation of open-door ad lib goes along way.
The greatest abuse was the ordination of bishops in direct violation of an order from the Pope, and those of you who know better than to attend mass celebrated by illicitly ordained priests of the same SSPX organization. Rejection of a Pope and an Ecumenical Council is a pretty big abuse, and if continued rejection of the authority of the Church is a fruit of the TLM, then you have a long way to go to prove your point, Ann Malley. If you were really concerned about abuse, you would leave the SSPX immediately. Otherwise, you are just hot air.
There are no posters hating the TLM.
Christi did institute it in the same way He instituted the Missal of 1970. Through His Vicar.
The posting of churches that are N.O. (which are virtually all of them) is a constant reminder of the disobedience of their bishops to Benedict XVI, who clearly directed that the EF sacraments be cherished, valued, and practiced. This direction is not possible of fulfillment if every pastor and every bishop simply ignores it.
Further, churches such as this one show the truly horrible interior destruction of pastors and bishops devoted to the N.O. A historic church, and (most likely) gifted with a stunning altar and religious art at one time, now is an advertisement for deception and duplicity. Why is that?
Aside for the brutality of throwing away all that was sacred in the Church for far longer than what the N.O. has imported to it, the manner of our prayer does matter. The phrase lex orandi, les credendi, means something. This is especially true when you see week after week a church with masses in Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Vietnamese, and who knows what, but nothing, none, in Latin.
A revolution took place, and is still taking place — just see what happened, or tried to, at the Synod — and the parade of N.O. churches shows how much the Faith has been taken from Catholics and remade over the past 50 years.
Both the OF and EF Masses are HOLY when done 100% according to the approved RUBRICS.
RUBRICS for the Priests, as well as for the Laity.
No Priest or Lay person has the authority to make changes to their own portions of the Mass. All abuses should be reported to the Diocese Bishop.
Correct Rubrics for the OF Mass are found in General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) which can be found on the USCCB and Vatican web sites.
Correct Rubrics for the EF Mass can be found in the 1962 Missal.
In addition, everyone must do their best to remain silent inside the Church before and after Mass to respect Christ in the tabernacle and others in prayer.
To stop some of the disrespect, people are starting to say the Rosary 20 minutes before each Mass.
In addition to teaching Sacred Scripture (Bible), and the Catechism of the Catholic Church –
all Seminaries should teach Latin, and both Forms of the Mass so no matter where the Priest is sent, he can best serve the congregation.
“Mike”: You are correct, but they do not. And why is that? Because almost all bishops with authority over seminaries, and the Vatican, elect not to make it so.
Increasingly, each Pope is like a Member of Congress in a leadership position, or President: simply slam down what the prior administration did and start anew. The “Deposit of Faith” is largely ignored, as are various letters, encyclicals and other directions of prior Popes.
Take a read at St. John XXIII’s “Veterum Sapientia” (1962) about requiring Latin, and some Greek, in all seminaries. How was this ignored? By Msgr. Bugnini and his cohort of Catholic Liberal academics that wanted the “vernacular” used as a way to bring people closer to the Mass. Well, how is that working?
Unlike what “Paul” said, virtually each NO is different than that said in even adjoining parishes (and dioceses are wildly different). Going to mass in the diocese of Richmond, VA is vastly different from going to church in the neighboring Arlington, VA (although that latter is also widely different within various parishes and Bishop Loverde does not like the TLM). The point is that we are talking, while bishops are forbidding this and that. and truly strange religious orders are going right ahead and doing what they want to do, regardless of controversy. Thus, the new “Christ Cathedral” has a full emersion baptismal pool, even though, under Benedict and St. JPII this type of baptism was clearly disfavored.