|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 5, 2023 4:52:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Jan 5, 2023 9:30:20 GMT
Pope Benedict can do more to help preserve the TLM from where he probably is now than he could as a frail old Pope Emeritus sitting on earth.
I'm sure many will be invoking his intercession in that regard.
From the article:
I was born during the Council, am not young, and I've never understood the whole fuss about it either.
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 5, 2023 14:04:50 GMT
Pope Benedict can do more to help preserve the TLM from where he probably is now than he could as a frail old Pope Emeritus sitting on earth. I'm sure many will be invoking his intercession in that regard. From the article: I was born during the Council, am not young, and I've never understood the whole fuss about it either. I have had to wonder recently, in reflecting on why the Mass was revised as extensively as it was, whether there was a perception that, if the Tridentine Mass were translated straight, word-for-word, into the vernacular, it would be disturbing to those (such as Protestants) who are uncomfortable with the concept of the priest offering a victim (the Host) as sacrifice. Translated into the vernacular, it is clearly understood, and flies in the face of those who don't agree with the concept. Please note that I am not saying it is a bad thing to wish not to antagonize Protestants --- the Church did likewise when removing the word perfidis from the prayers for the Jews on Good Friday. That, too, would have been more jarring in the vernacular. Even a more benign interpretation of the word as simply meaning "faithless" throws a certain amount of shade. You do correctly note that, in all pious hope, we now likely have a new and powerful intercessor in the heavenly courts. |
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Jan 5, 2023 16:51:39 GMT
Pope Benedict can do more to help preserve the TLM from where he probably is now than he could as a frail old Pope Emeritus sitting on earth. I'm sure many will be invoking his intercession in that regard. From the article: I was born during the Council, am not young, and I've never understood the whole fuss about it either. I have had to wonder recently, in reflecting on why the Mass was revised as extensively as it was, whether there was a perception that, if the Tridentine Mass were translated straight, word-for-word, into the vernacular, it would be disturbing to those (such as Protestants) who are uncomfortable with the concept of the priest offering a victim (the Host) as sacrifice. Translated into the vernacular, it is clearly understood, and flies in the face of those who don't agree with the concept. Please note that I am not saying it is a bad thing to wish not to antagonize Protestants --- the Church did likewise when removing the word perfidis from the prayers for the Jews on Good Friday. That, too, would have been more jarring in the vernacular. Even a more benign interpretation of the word as simply meaning "faithless" throws a certain amount of shade. You do correctly note that, in all pious hope, we now likely have a new and powerful intercessor in the heavenly courts. I don't even think the conflict going on right now is about what the faithful actually say and do in the EF vs the OF. It's some perception of ideological baggage attached to persons who wish to use an older/ different form of Mass. When actually, those who attend any form of Mass are going to be all over the map in their ideology. Sure, the TLM has some people who are sedes or who don't think the OF is valid or whatever...also has a lot of people who just prefer the form from a reverence or prayer-style or historical standpoint, or who at least like to go sometimes, maybe not every single Mass or every single week. Just like the OF has some people who are very reverent and trying to follow the Church teachings and live a good life, and other people who are pushing for the Church to endorse contraception, abortion, gay marriage, transgender, etc. Somehow the OF Mass never gets blamed for having those folks at it, but the TLM gets blamed for having sedes at it. Go figure. |
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 5, 2023 18:26:28 GMT
I have had to wonder recently, in reflecting on why the Mass was revised as extensively as it was, whether there was a perception that, if the Tridentine Mass were translated straight, word-for-word, into the vernacular, it would be disturbing to those (such as Protestants) who are uncomfortable with the concept of the priest offering a victim (the Host) as sacrifice. Translated into the vernacular, it is clearly understood, and flies in the face of those who don't agree with the concept. Please note that I am not saying it is a bad thing to wish not to antagonize Protestants --- the Church did likewise when removing the word perfidis from the prayers for the Jews on Good Friday. That, too, would have been more jarring in the vernacular. Even a more benign interpretation of the word as simply meaning "faithless" throws a certain amount of shade. You do correctly note that, in all pious hope, we now likely have a new and powerful intercessor in the heavenly courts. I don't even think the conflict going on right now is about what the faithful actually say and do in the EF vs the OF. It's some perception of ideological baggage attached to persons who wish to use an older/ different form of Mass. When actually, those who attend any form of Mass are going to be all over the map in their ideology. Sure, the TLM has some people who are sedes or who don't think the OF is valid or whatever...also has a lot of people who just prefer the form from a reverence or prayer-style or historical standpoint, or who at least like to go sometimes, maybe not every single Mass or every single week. Just like the OF has some people who are very reverent and trying to follow the Church teachings and live a good life, and other people who are pushing for the Church to endorse contraception, abortion, gay marriage, transgender, etc. Somehow the OF Mass never gets blamed for having those folks at it, but the TLM gets blamed for having sedes at it. Go figure. My thoughts exactly. But the key difference may be that the OF is the "default" Mass, and people who embrace the errors you cite are not lobbying for, working for, or even simply making their preference for the OF known --- because they don't have to. In a parallel universe where the EF were the "default" Mass, and if the OF had been permitted ad experimentum for a time and were only allowed by indult, or were being arranged for under schismatic and quasi-schismatic auspices (try to imagine an irregular Paulist Fathers, with their own illicit bishops, in place of the SSPX), then the Church might well try to suppress the OF instead, banning it in parish churches and otherwise being parsimonious in where and how often it were celebrated. |
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Jan 5, 2023 18:53:50 GMT
So let's say the Vatican and bishops manage to ban the TLM many or even most places. We're a long way from that, but let's just say they did.
TLM adherents would either join SSPX or some other breakaway group or go underground, or some combination of the above.
Given that these people tend to be among the most zealous in practicing the faith, they continue going to Mass, having large family, getting clergy by hook or by crook.
Meanwhile the main Church using the OF continues to dwindle in numbers in many places.
At some point the number of OF attendees will start dropping so low that the Vatican and the bishops will be looking into mending fences with the TLM people and then back comes the TLM into the churches again. Making the whole business of trying to suppress it in the first place just pointless.
Suppression might have worked in the era BEFORE Vatican II when laity were generally told they didn't have any say in these sorts of affairs and just step in line or else.
But Vatican II gave all this power to the laity and you still have stuff like the Synod on Synodality giving laypeople the idea they can change all sorts of Church teachings.
Having a Tridentine Mass that was allowed by Pope Benedict who is, let's face it, probably on a track to canonization, is hardly "changing Church teaching".
The people who love the TLM aren't going to just roll over and give it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jan 5, 2023 21:38:23 GMT
So let's say the Vatican and bishops manage to ban the TLM many or even most places. We're a long way from that, but let's just say they did. TLM adherents would either join SSPX or some other breakaway group or go underground, or some combination of the above. Given that these people tend to be among the most zealous in practicing the faith, they continue going to Mass, having large family, getting clergy by hook or by crook. Meanwhile the main Church using the OF continues to dwindle in numbers in many places. At some point the number of OF attendees will start dropping so low that the Vatican and the bishops will be looking into mending fences with the TLM people and then back comes the TLM into the churches again. Making the whole business of trying to suppress it in the first place just pointless. Suppression might have worked in the era BEFORE Vatican II when laity were generally told they didn't have any say in these sorts of affairs and just step in line or else. But Vatican II gave all this power to the laity and you still have stuff like the Synod on Synodality giving laypeople the idea they can change all sorts of Church teachings. Having a Tridentine Mass that was allowed by Pope Benedict who is, let's face it, probably on a track to canonization, is hardly "changing Church teaching". The people who love the TLM aren't going to just roll over and give it up. I really want to believe that Pope Francis has the good sense not to trigger a schism that would then take a century or longer to repair, because if you take the "long view", that's precisely what would happen. In that I do not reject a reverent celebration of the Novus Ordo, whether in Latin or in the vernacular --- and I have access to both --- if the TLM were totally banned, my "nuclear option" is to assist at such a celebration most Sundays, and get to the SSPX (over two hours away) when I could, which in my circumstances would be once a month of so, as I did when the nearest diocesan TLM was a similar distance from me. Many traditionalists take a far harder line than that. |
|
