Post by homeschooldad on Jan 7, 2024 3:12:43 GMT
This is an idea I've been musing recently.
I know that the Latter-day Saints sect requires their faithful to obtain an identification card, in order to enter one of their temples. It's called a "temple recommend" and is only issued after the believer has gone through a vetting process --- IOW, not just any LDS person can go into a temple and participate in their rites, you have to pass muster. For those who can't, or choose not to go through a vetting, Sunday worship and "sacrament" at their local LDS meeting-place, fine, going to the temple, not fine.
I've wondered if anyone might favor a similar process for Catholic faithful who wish to attend the TLM. Various arguments are put forth that the restoration of the TLM was not intended for the faithful at large, but just for those fulfilling certain conditions (raised with it, miss it, can't assist at the Novus Ordo for whatever reason, understand Latin, and so on). The TLM grows and thrives almost anywhere that it's introduced, and not only those for whom the indults were intended go to it, no, people from all walks of life seek it out, through having heard about it, having studied it, having compared the two forms, finding it aesthetically pleasing, finding it spiritually satisfying, and so on. To be consistent, you'd think that such people would be prohibited from assisting at the TLM, but so far as I am aware, they're not.
And as to those who question or reject the Novus Ordo and/or post-Vatican II holy orders, it's really a "self-cleansing mechanism" --- those folks wouldn't go to diocesan and other indult TLMs in the first place, in that "Novus Ordo" Hosts, from previous Masses are, more often than not, interchangeably used for the communion of the faithful, and the Mass is almost invariably offered by a priest who has received post-Vatican II ordination from bishops who were consecrated in the post-Vatican II rites. (My son's godfather, SSPX adherent, as well a friend of mine with sedevacantist leanings, both shun our local diocesan TLM for those reasons. Bizarrely, though, some sedevacantists attend una cum Masses, and somewhat less bizarrely, some sedeplenists attend non-una cum Masses.)
Actually, while I cannot honestly say that I am unable to assist at the Novus Ordo --- I do so when I don't have a TLM available --- and neither can I claim to "miss it", as I wasn't raised with it, I discovered it in young adulthood, I would have no issue with affirming, if I were called upon to do so, my acceptance of the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo, post-Vatican II holy orders, and the Council itself. I'd find it kind of patronizing, but if I had to make that kind of affirmation, I could do so.
Or, to come at the matter from another angle, using the "honor system" to restrict who can assist at the TLM isn't working --- "I really can't go to the TLM because it's not meant for people like me" --- so maybe something else is needed. I have never, ever heard of someone expressing the sentiment I just described. I suppose it's possible, but if anyone has ever exercised that kind of self-restriction, I've never heard of it. (Of course, TLM adherents aren't the most docile critters on the face of the earth, so maybe that's it.)
Thoughts from the forum?
I know that the Latter-day Saints sect requires their faithful to obtain an identification card, in order to enter one of their temples. It's called a "temple recommend" and is only issued after the believer has gone through a vetting process --- IOW, not just any LDS person can go into a temple and participate in their rites, you have to pass muster. For those who can't, or choose not to go through a vetting, Sunday worship and "sacrament" at their local LDS meeting-place, fine, going to the temple, not fine.
I've wondered if anyone might favor a similar process for Catholic faithful who wish to attend the TLM. Various arguments are put forth that the restoration of the TLM was not intended for the faithful at large, but just for those fulfilling certain conditions (raised with it, miss it, can't assist at the Novus Ordo for whatever reason, understand Latin, and so on). The TLM grows and thrives almost anywhere that it's introduced, and not only those for whom the indults were intended go to it, no, people from all walks of life seek it out, through having heard about it, having studied it, having compared the two forms, finding it aesthetically pleasing, finding it spiritually satisfying, and so on. To be consistent, you'd think that such people would be prohibited from assisting at the TLM, but so far as I am aware, they're not.
And as to those who question or reject the Novus Ordo and/or post-Vatican II holy orders, it's really a "self-cleansing mechanism" --- those folks wouldn't go to diocesan and other indult TLMs in the first place, in that "Novus Ordo" Hosts, from previous Masses are, more often than not, interchangeably used for the communion of the faithful, and the Mass is almost invariably offered by a priest who has received post-Vatican II ordination from bishops who were consecrated in the post-Vatican II rites. (My son's godfather, SSPX adherent, as well a friend of mine with sedevacantist leanings, both shun our local diocesan TLM for those reasons. Bizarrely, though, some sedevacantists attend una cum Masses, and somewhat less bizarrely, some sedeplenists attend non-una cum Masses.)
Actually, while I cannot honestly say that I am unable to assist at the Novus Ordo --- I do so when I don't have a TLM available --- and neither can I claim to "miss it", as I wasn't raised with it, I discovered it in young adulthood, I would have no issue with affirming, if I were called upon to do so, my acceptance of the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo, post-Vatican II holy orders, and the Council itself. I'd find it kind of patronizing, but if I had to make that kind of affirmation, I could do so.
Or, to come at the matter from another angle, using the "honor system" to restrict who can assist at the TLM isn't working --- "I really can't go to the TLM because it's not meant for people like me" --- so maybe something else is needed. I have never, ever heard of someone expressing the sentiment I just described. I suppose it's possible, but if anyone has ever exercised that kind of self-restriction, I've never heard of it. (Of course, TLM adherents aren't the most docile critters on the face of the earth, so maybe that's it.)
Thoughts from the forum?
