Rorate Caeli

Why have "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter"
when you are able to eat REAL BUTTER?

A report on the decline of the New Mass in Latin in the United States,
by Peter Karl T. Perkins:

Since 2005, the number of every-Sunday New Masses in Latin in the U.S.A. has fallen from 58 to 39. The number of dioceses in the U.S.A. offering this Mass every Sunday has fallen from 36 to 28.

At present, the ratio of T.L.M.s to N.O.M.s in Latin is 9:1. The ratio of dioceses offering the two Masses is 5:1. My conclusion is that the N.O.M. in Latin is a dead duck. It is dying fast (but quietly). Bad news for the Adoremus movement, Frs. Harrison and Fessio, and the Hitchcocks. They hitched themselves to the wrong waggon. Fessio displeased the Pizza king in Florida (Ave Maria U.) and is now more or less nowhere. Harrison has been busy trying to square the circle by explaning how Dignitatis Humanæ is compatible with Quanta Cura and the Syllabus of Errors of 1864. Good luck to him on that. I'm planning on climbing Mt. Everest next year.

If we examine more closely where the Latin N.O.M. is offered, we can see that this fake substitute that has no place in the ancient patrimoney of Holy Church was and is being used to 'shut out' the real thing. For example, Cardinal Baloney of Los Angeles tried to arrange Latin N.O.s to lure people away from the real thing. But while some of these persist, there are now more T.L.M.s in his Archdiocese than N.O.M.s in Latin. Come February of next year, this bad man will be gone (and preferably in prison). He has failed in his endeavour to stamp out tradition, just as he's failed to stamp out truth.

Another place where Latin N.O.s abound is the Archdiocese of Detroit. The former Archbishop, Adam Cardinal Maida, pulled out all the stops in the 1990s to prevent celebration of the T.L.M. One method was to offer the N.O.M. in Latin as a sung Mass with beautiful music and a traditional setting. It didn't work. Local traditionalists drove to the Diocese of Lansing to refuse him, some went to the many Eastern Divine Liturgies in Detroit, and some crossed the Canadian border, where a traditionalist priest of the Diocese of London put a Sunday T.L.M. right on the other side of the bridge in Windsor! Of course, there were those who were fooled by Maida. Happily, he has now passed the age of 80 and will therefore not be able to poison the next conclave. Meanwhile, his every-Sunday Latin N.O. Masses are now down to 3. Meanwhile, the T.L.M. has arrived in force under the new Archbishop. Under Maida, there were 0 and finally 1 of these every Sunday. Now there are five.

The problem persists in Las Vegas, where Bishop Pepe uses every trick in the book to keep our Mass out of his diocese, at least on Sundays. But he has THREE every-Sunday N.O.M.s in Latin. This is a man who cannot see the writing on the wall, or who just doesn't care what it says. No one can force him to read it.

There were once many N.O.s in Latin in the A. of San Francisco. Now there is only one, and the T.L.M. is also available every Sunday--now that Levada is gone. Levada was not so bad in terms of his views. The problem was that he was too chicken to stand up to the apparatchiks in his diocesan curia.

There were once numerous every-Sunday T.L.M.s in the Diocese of Arlington, in Virginia, under that Bishop who died of a heart attack while waiting to see the Pope in Rome (forgotten his name now). Under his successor we see a reversal: the Latin N.O.M.s are down to one per Sunday and the T.L.M.s have essentially replaced their rivals. It's all over.

The present Bishop of Orange continues to have two every-Sunday N.O.M.s in Latin but has not forbidden our Mass and we now have four of them every Sunday--twice as many.

The A. of St. Paul & Minneapolis still has two every-Su. N.O.M.s in Latin, a hold-over from the endless years in which the State fo Minnesota was a black hole for tradition.

Las Vegas is the only Diocese in the U.S.A. that has the Latin N.O.M. every Sunday but not one T.L.M. approved by the diocese. The S.S.P.X is present there; so is an independent priest. Las Vegas also has the distinction of being BY FAR the most populous U.S. see not having our Mass on the every-Sunday basis. Really, someone from Rome needs to have a little talk with Bishop Pepe.

100 comments:

  1. Joe B9:25 PM

    Hard to imagine how they do this. Almost no priests know Latin anymore, and even many offering the TLM don't understand Latin. So there are priests who know Latin but hate the TLM and yet they offer a mass they have to learn for the sake of appealing to a handful of the type of faithful they despise?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting article.

    I have heard the NO offered in Latin, and thought it a vast improvement over the vernacular, and my Latin is poor.

    This goes right to the power and majesty of TLM...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous9:50 PM

    I must mention the Diocese of Bishop William Skylstad, former President of the USCCB who led the Spokane Diocese into bankruptcy. In Spokane, Latin is truly a dead language, never mentioned in the Diocesan newspaper. There is one NOM in Latin every Sunday, and one TLM, the time of which never appeared in the church bulletin.

    In September, Bishop Blase Joseph Cupich of Rapid City, SD will succeed Bishop Skylstad. It will be interesting to see if any more TLM's surface. Bishop Skylstad refused to let a FSSP priest say a single Mass in Spokane.

    The Spokane area has the FSSP in Coeur d'Alene, ID, SPPX in nearby Post Falls, ID, and Mt. St. Michael, and Our Lady of Guadalupe in Spokane for those who do not mind not being in communion with Bishop Skylstad.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Until recently we had a Pauline Latin Mass in the vicinity, but the priest who offered it was transferred to some much more a distant parishes. I don't know if he's planning to celebrate it in his new parishes, or if anyone is now celebrating it in his old parish, but I do know that he's been training to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass -- the biggest obstacle for him is some serious knee troubles that prevented him from genuflecting right at the time when he was doing his training.

    And just to clarify, his transfer was not punishment for celebrating Mass in Latin -- there were just some parishes in need of a priest. In fact, the bishop himself had asked him to celebrate a Latin "Novus Ordo," and at the same time invited another priest to celebrate the traditional Mass at a nearby parish. Since the priest's transfer, I've noticed a few people and families at the traditional Mass who used to go to the Pauline Latin Mass (where I also would sometimes assist).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Arlington Bishop John Keating died in Rome of a heart attack, two days after an audience with JPII.

    http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-638763.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous10:18 PM

    Would Professor Perkins please email me at jj.ashley at eastlink.ca so that I can update him on the TLM in the diocese of Moncton.
    John Ashley

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous10:25 PM

    Dear Tom:

    Thank you. Yes, I meant Bishop Keating, except that I was told he died while actually in the waiting room waiting to see John Paul II. Was this a dramatic exaggeration?

    Bishop Keating was a strong 'conservative' but completely against the T.L.M. I remind people of this: some conservative bishops are against us, while some liberal bishops are tolerant of us. A conservative is emphatically NOT a traditionalist. We and the conservatives are two very different camps in the Church. In some ways, liberal bishops are more friendly to us than are conservatives. It may be because they don't see us as a threat. Conservatives dislike us because they fear our views might be ascribed to them. They want to position themselves as the 'moderates' of a new pontificate.

    Conservative organisations in the Church have also been against traditionalists on the whole. Good examples are Opus Dei and the Legionaries of Christ. As for the first, I regard them as creepy compromisers and don't want anything to do with them. As for the second, well, who wants to be connected to *them* after the Marciel Marsupial incident?


    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous10:32 PM

    Dear Mr Ashley:

    That e-mail didn't work. Try reaching me at

    pkperkins@telus.net

    I do have e-mails from you in the past but they don't seem to be in the right folder.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bill M11:09 PM

    There are two Latin NO Masses in Portland, OR. One is at St. Stephen's in SE Portland on Saturday evening. The other is on Sunday at Holy Rosary (the Dominican parish) Both Masses are sung by Cantores in Ecclesia.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous11:19 PM

    What a laugh this N.O.M. in latin is!! One of the most insisted upon reasons why we just HAD TO HAVE a new rite of mass was, "no one understands Latin!". Now, in an effort to lend this mess some semblance of dignity, these destroyers have resorted to the use of the Latin. It won't work. It will just be the NOM in Latin. It will never be the Mass of all time.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Does Peter Perkins mean to assert that the Ordinary Form celebrated in Latin is not a real mass?

    Fie!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous11:53 PM

    The tone of the article is unfortunately ripe with pride and disdain. Very condescending to the so called neo-conservative movement, when those attached to the EF owe them so much. To say the the Normative Mass of the Roman Rite in its normative liturgical language is "fake" is inane - the Council Fathers certainly wouldn't agree and neither would the Pope. The writer seemingly puts down the late Bishop Keating and praises Bishop Loverde.. Bishop Loverde is certainly no supporter of the EF, but he know he is but one man against a majority of priests in his diocese who are...and therefore intelligently submits. Bishop Loverde also reversed Bishop Keating's ban on female servers... so now only Lincoln, NE bans them. I personally prefer the OF in Latin while being a fully supportive admirer of the EF as well - I would caution traditionalists to not be ungrateful and boastful because of the last three years.. a new conclave and a new pontificate cannot be that far off and all of this pontificate's hard and unfisnished work could easily be undone. The EF should be free to flourish and co-exist, but do not go down the same road of imposition as in 1970. To think that the EF will supplant the OF in a universal Church of 1 Billion souls is a fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous12:12 AM

    Dear Friends,
    I have have several observations to make about this post. First off, I am discouraged by the cultural poverty of the margarine image: it is bad enough that our memories are stuck with this sort of thing, but it jars to see the lard bucket next to the edifying image of the Holiness of our Lord the Pope as he prays for his people. Next, I point out that as of now the Pauline Mass in Latin is what he celebrates in the presence of the faithful, and so to carry a post in which this rite is said to be a fake copy of the real thing hardly expresses the grateful reverence we ought to feel to our great benefactor, without whom the author of this post would not be able to gloat so earnestly. Next, I point out that, given the superiority of the ancient rite of the Mass, it is still true that not all of those attached to it appreciate the spirit of the liturgy as taught by the church, nor to all of its celebrations bring out its superiority For example, one of the Pauline celebrations in the Orange. Diocese the author of the post refers to is at St Michael's Abbey of the Norbertine Fathers, (whose abbey provides all of the Latin Masses, new and ancient, in that diocese, not one of them being celebrated by a diocesan priest) there the faithful sing the ordinary of the Mass and the whole proper is sung and there is fine orthodox preaching. I would point out that the "traditionalist" who loathes congregational participation, and who wants only a low Mass all the time without the full gregorian proper, is out of line with the teaching of the church. (St Pius X even went so far as to say that those who asserted that the people should never sing the proper were dead wrong) The missal used is not the only criterion for a correct liturgical spirit. Anything can be boulderized. Some Pauline celebrations may be more traditional than some Pian ones. Before reacting irrationally to this "heresy", please note that the proposition is a particular affirmative: not that souls blind to the good of the church are interested in logic whether they are"orthodox" or modernist. The scholastic adage "Qui nimis probat nihil probat" applies to a lot of the false argumentation that one finds in our traditionalist camp.

    The author of this post--as well as the priestly author of this comment--should give some more time to mental prayer and meditation on the mysteries of faith. It is typical of many in the camp of tradition to go out into the battle field and shoot their own wounded brethren, and then tell themselves for the remains of the day that they have fought well, when they have only attacked their more humble and prudent and patient and prayerful benefactors, one of whom may be none other than Benedict XVI and the priests who imitate him, even at the expense of incurring the idle sarcasm of some of the partisans of what passes for tradition.

    Caritas omnia credit, omnia sperat.

    Sacerdos sine nomine

    ReplyDelete
  14. The report is Mr. Perkins's, and he will defend it, I am sure.

    I do not wish to argue with the Nameless Priest, but would only remark that the image of the Holy Father on the right side is permanent, and that of the very nutritious butter-substitute will go down as future texts are posted.

    Another commentator, which I accidentally rejected, responded, as an answer to the title, that the butter-substitute is "better for the heart". That is the kind of good-humored remark I expected, and there is no reason to be too intensely involved with what is clearly a humorous point.

    Both products are spreads, both are similar, and the substitute could actually be better for the heart: why cannot both sides feel good about the comparison?

    NC

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous12:37 AM

    "To think that the EF will supplant the OF in a universal Church of 1 Billion souls is a fantasy."

    I would very much agree with this statement. I think the overall tone of this posting does a disservice to great priests such as Monsignor Schuler + (RIP) of St Agnes in St Paul USA and many others who laboured under very difficult circumstances to be an Oasis of sanity in a sea of chaos since the introduction of the NOM. What traditionalist would not want to see the NOM celebrated with such dignity, devotion, reverence and piety as it is celebrated at St Agnes or at St Joseph in Detroit, St Peter in Munich etc? I pray daily for a return of the traditional Mass to every parish but at the same time I pray for an authentic liturgical renewal in the mind of Fathers of the Council and even though I believe personally that the NOM in Latin is NOT what the Council Fathers envisioned with Sacrosanctum Concilium, I must say that were it the Norm to offer Holy Mass as it is in those places mentioned above it would be much easier for there to be a transition back to the traditional Mass. Haughtiness has no place in this discussion. Holy priests like MSGR Schuler are responsible for many souls not losing their faith and for many holy vocations.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sancta Missa latine et in forma Tridentina celebrari semper debet. Domini diebus atque cum assistimus uxor egoque omnes Missas Tridentinas, missale legere conor in columnis latinis quia mihi videtur esse melius gustare illam Missam sicut Patres Ecclesiae destinabant et prius et intra Concilium, priusquam fides Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae afflicta est hominibus impulsis a Malo.

    Deo gratias pro Pontifice Nostro Benedicto, et omnibus episcopis non stantibus obvia traditionae Dominique, spero, voluntati.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mickey12:49 AM

    I see the decline of the N.O. in Latin as a bad thing for the TLM at present. I really think that the N.O. in Latin would prepare the Common parishioner to love and see the TLM in all its grandeur. I see it more as a necessary stepping stone (N.O.) to bring back the TLM in the Common front if celebrated more regularly. It was through the Latin N.O. that I was able to make the transition to preferring the TLM with much ease and familiarity. I believe that the decline of the N.O in Latin would either keep the common faithful from discovering the fullness of liturgical worship in the TLM, or completely keep them insensible and indisposed to the right faith and understanding of true worship in the current situation.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous12:52 AM

    Perhaps I am mistaken but I think I read somewhere that P. K. T. P. writes to us all from Victoria, BC.

    I wonder if he could comment on the role that the Latin N.O.M played in the development of the FSSP parish in P. K. T. P.'s neighboring diocese of Vancouver, BC. Vancouver has one of the two Personal FSSP parishes in the country.

    Perhaps the Latin N.OM. is dying now. So be it. However, in Vancouver, I doubt if one could be so bold as to say that it did not play a significant role in preserving the faithful until such time that the Tridentine Mass was able to secure a stronger hold within the Diocese.

    At the same homily where the Archbishop's letter granting the personal parish was read, the FSSP priest publicly thanked a certain diocesan priest (who died a Monseigneur -- 4 years before SP) for his efforts. This acknowledgment was clearly warranted since the majority of the faithful in the pews attended this Latin N.O.M. for many years (including most, if not all, of the schola).

    Again, the Latin N.O.M. seems to have little place in our current situation -- but, for some, during the 80's and 90's it was very welcome. Some priests who offered the Latin N.O.M. did so for all the right reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous1:28 AM

    The comments Sacerdos sine nomine put me in the mind of the final chapter of Aristotle's Poetics, wherein the same point is made regarding the comparisons of Epic to Tragic poetry, and I think both Aristotle and this priest are spot on correct.

    On another note, the decline of Latin OF is an interesting phenomena, and may be accelerated by the new English translations.

    Whether the waning of the Latin OF entails the waxing of the Latin EF is another question.

    Personally, I don't see Latin coming back to the mainstream, in either form, short of a Papal Mandate. I would expect blanket permission for the EF in the vernacular before I would expect every a mandate for every OF mass to be once again in Latin.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous1:30 AM

    Ah!, how those who prefer the so-called 'O.F.' are now coming forth out of their shells. So we have this:

    "To think that the EF will supplant the OF in a universal Church of 1 Billion [meaning 1,000 million] souls is a fantasy."

    Really? And yet, let me see, was it not NewMass that supplanted the Traditional Latin Mass in a universal Church of 1,000 million souls? And, to achieve this, they alienated most of the faithful and lost at least a third of them.

    If Bugnini and his infernal master could do such a large bad thing, why cannot God do an equally large good thing?

    I do agree, however, that, in human terms, NewMass will not replace TrueMass in the foreseeable future. It's not that the fake new product is preferred by the people, only that those who implemented the change will never admit to their mistake, despite the overwhelming evidence of disaster that followed the change. Pride is indeed the problem here but not in commentators: pride in the reformers is the problem. And those reformers are still around and about, although they are finally retiring one by one. Most of the people don't know what they'd prefer. Most of them don't even know that the real thing is back.

    Some of us realise that the Traditional Latin Mass is the ultimate expression of the eternal Sacrifice in the Latin Church and that it forever unites the Church Militant of every age to the Church Triumphant and the Church Suffering. It is unprecedented and unthinkable that anyone should attemtpt to replace the Work of the Holy Ghost through the fathers with a concocted product of a Modernist committee having the assistance of a coven of heretic theologians. Legitimate liturgy is not made in committee; it is not the work of the "human hands" mentioned in that appalling new Offertory. Pope St. Pius V would have burnt these reformers at the stake. To him, even to think of touching something so venerable was beyond the pale. Was he wrong? Not.

    The Mass of All Times will prevail in the end. No need forever to try to fix a bad thing when you have the right thing eternally good and available. The brand new toy truck that is broken is cast aside by the child; he prefers the faded old truck that works perfectly. No need for a Protestant Lord's Supper in outward figure when the propitiatory Sacrifice is all too apparent in the real thing. No need for 'Blessed are You [sic] Lord God of all creation" when "Receive, O Heavenly Father, this spotless Host" is a right of every priest. No need for four alternate Eucharistic Prayers, one of them with no mention of the divine Victim OR sacrifice, when the unadultered Roman Canon is back.

    No need for injustice. Before he died, Cardinal Stickler revealed that fifteen to twenty priests had been removed from service by the bishops for refusing the Clown Mass. Every single one of them won on appeal to the Apostolic Signatura. Where is the JUSTICE to compensate those priests who were persecuted for offering a Mass they had every right to celebrate all along? Justice will out!

    In the mean time, I argue this: if a New Mass in Latin is available and the real thing is not, look around. If an Eastern Divine Liturgy is about, that is better than NewMass in any form because the Eastern Divine Liturgies are part of organic tradition of Holy Church. If the choice is between NewMass in Latin with all the chant and smells and bells, one the one hand, and the Italo-Albanian Divine Liturgy, I'll take the latter every single time.

    To quote Mel Gibson in that film, Brave something-or-other: FREEEDOM!! They have tried every trick in the book to keep us from our Mass. No more! What does S.P. say in Article One (never mind No. 5): the T.L.M. "MUST be honoured for its ancient and venerable usage". Not in Las Vegas, apparently. Mind you, that exception is appropriate in certain ways, no?

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous1:39 AM

    Jack asks:

    Does Peter Perkins mean to assert that the Ordinary Form celebrated in Latin is not a real mass?"

    No, Jack. Those who are recent to this blog know that I am not asserting that. It is valid but then, so is an Anglican Communion Service when offered by a validly-ordained priest having an intention to do what the Church does. Even a Black Mass is a valid Mass. Validity is not enough.

    This article was designed to raise some hackles, and I used hyperbole to rile people up. I hold that the New Mass is not only valid but also fulfils the four ends of prayer. However, the Mass is also the principal catechism of Holy Church and, in that rôle, the New Mass is woefully inadequate.

    I predict that Benedict XVI will attempt to reform NewMass to turn it into an unambiguously Catholic Rite of Mass. I pray that he has the time to do this because the present situation is a scandal.

    But I am not as opposed to NewMass as some are in the S.S.P.X. I will attend NewMass to fulfil the Sunday obligation if I have no other choice. For example, if I can't get to a T.L.M. or Eastern Divine Liturgy, I'll go to the least offensive NewMass I can find. Around here, that usually means the 8.00 a.m. in the Cathedral, served by a friar and with no ladies in the sanctuary and no aliturgiical noise coming from pianos.

    P.K.T.P.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous1:46 AM

    On the situation in Vancouver, mentioned by someone here:

    I have limited knowledge about this. They have had a T.L.M. every Sunday in Vancouver since 1988 or 1989 to my recollection. It came shortly after publication of John Paul II's m.p. I don't know about a N.O. in Latin but this may be the case. Originally, the T.L.M. in Vancovuer was at Holy Spirit Church, one of the ugliest buildings I've ever had the displeasure to look upon.

    Vancouver has Ukrainain and Maronite Masses, so real trads would have gone there before 1988, preferably to the former, since the Maronites have also been tainted seriously by the Age of Aquarius and even have Masses versus populum. I'm not judging anyone who went to a Latin N.O. before 1990. Objectively, however, the Ukr. Rite would be better.

    The Victoria T.L.M. is much older than the one in Vancouver but was suspended for over ten years after 1993. But the Victoria one, on the Island, was started every Sunday in October of 1984, immediately after issuance of Quattuor Ahbinc Annos. The Victoria and Ottawa T.L.M.s (and the one in San Diego, U.S.A.) are the very oldest in the Western Hemisphere.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous1:51 AM

    Mickey's points puzzle me a bit. I don't see any need to use a Latin N.O. to make a transition from N.O.M. in the vernacular to T.L.M. I went straight from N.O.M in the vernacular to T.L.M. The effect was electrifying, esp. since my old N.O. parish was about as liberal as you could get. They had silly socialists sittiing circles and weeping as they walied, Koom bye ah, m'lord. They had pumpkins on the Altar at Hallowe'en. They had invalid matter for the Eucharist (occasionally) and we once had a Franciscan visiting priest come and he would compose his own Eucharistic Prayer on the spot and as the spirit moved him. There was even a pink felt banner 'challenging' us to "be untraditional". It was just loverly. Far more liberal Protestant in spirit than the local United Church.
    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "As for the first, I regard them as creepy compromisers and don't want anything to do with them."

    I guess you're free to state this, but it's more an expression of prejudice and ignorant contempt than anything else.

    The anonymous priest got it right; rereading your article in light of the above comment makes me understand those "conservatives" who don't have any time for Traditionalists.

    Vide the Pope's letter on why he lifted the excommunications.

    Will we just tear each other apart? Is that really what Our Lord wants?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I myself was brought to the traditional Mass through a reverent latin NOM, so I don't wish to disparage the latin NOM as such.

    But anyone who knows both and still prefers the latin NOM has a problem.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ponte2:23 AM

    Mr. Perkins,
    You are a great writer. You held my attention, mad your point perfectly and all in an engaging, enjoyable style. So satiracle! Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Does Peter Perkins mean to assert that the Ordinary Form celebrated in Latin is not a real mass?

    It may be real, but it's orientation is horizontal and communal rather than vertical and Sacrificial. Therefore, after this "banal, on the spot...mass by committee,"--to use the words of our Pope--was imposed on the Faithful, you saw a free-fall in the belief in the Real Presence.

    Here is what Msgr. Gherardini (in a book that our Pope, by all accounts, has taken a keen interest in) has said about the affair:

    "And if someone passed through that door to introduce into the Church a Liturgy subversive to the very nature and primary end of the Sacred Liturgy...the responsibility for this, in the final analysis, is none other than the conciliar text itself."

    ReplyDelete
  28. "There were once numerous every-Sunday T.L.M.s in the Diocese of Arlington, in Virginia ..."

    Leaving aside Mr Perkins' assessment of whether the drop of interest in the OF Latin Mass is accurate (I simply don't know) ...

    I think he meant to say that there were numerous celebrations of the OF in Latin (as opposed to the EF) in the Arlington Diocese, and there were under Bishop Keating. Most (not all) have been replaced by the TLM. At St John's in McLean, the Ordinary Form in Latin with the altar versus orientem, is celebrated for the Triduum, as it extends to the whole parish. As one intimately involved in the planning, the adjustment is minimal.

    And for the record, either form of the Roman Mass is the real thing.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous3:23 AM

    I'll defend PKTP here, and suggest to the brethren on this blog to permit some artistic personality to our dear friend.

    A priest in my diocese in Toronto who has been severely persecuted for teaching the true faith, would and still does occasionally offer the Latin NO as a means to instill some love of Latin in those craving it. He does so offering the sacrifice ad orientem by the way, and I have been privileged to assist on occasion.

    Having said that, as much of a boon it is over the vernacular, and as beautiful as seeing him ad orientem is compared to the closed inner circle of typical NO, the sadness of how much it lacks in comparison to the TLM never fails to escape me, and I often get tearful at the end of it.

    So, to bridge the gap between some of our blogger friends and PKTP, both have valid points. The Latin NO certainly provided a glimpse, even if a dimmed one, of our glorious liturgical patrimony, in an age of irreverent and vernacular madness. However, it remained a far cry from the Mass of the Apostles and Pope Gregory.

    Sincerely, MKT

    ReplyDelete
  30. Your numbers are suspect. And you make references to non-existent events (and as much you may dislike him it is offensive to call His Eminence Baloney...it is still +Mahony)...for the record he never encouraged Latin NO's. What he did was order several places to have the TLM once a month and cycled the locations.

    I personally now a couple of dozen Latin Novus Ordos...heck 3 of them in the same location every Sunday. Only 39 my arse. Heck I can name a dozen in LA archdiocese alone, and several in the Bay area.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous4:04 AM

    Mr. Perkins, just a few things about Bishop John Keating, whose memory is much revered in the Diocese of Arlington. He was the 2nd bishop of that diocese, and it flourished under him, and he himself brought in and ordained many of those self-same priests who now offer the EF. Almost all of the pictures that he, or somebody else, had selected for his funeral were of his ordination and of him saying the EF.

    He died on his ad limina visit to Rome after his visit with the Pope, in which he was held up as an episcopal example to his brother bishops. He later participated in the ordination of three other bishops. That night, he went to his room early. He was slated to celebrate the principle Mass at the NAC, but never arrived. All indications are that he went to his room, prayed Compline, and died of a massive heart attack while preparing to sleep.

    A funeral Mass was celebrated for him in Rome before his body was brought back to Arlington for burial.

    You may not care for his approach to some things, but he was in many respects a praiseworthy and good bishop.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous4:20 AM

    "To think that the EF will supplant the OF in a universal Church of 1 Billion souls is a fantasy."

    In forty years most of those souls will be dead. The OF will absolutely die. For the same reason all protestant ecclesial communities are destined to self destruct.

    It is a creation of man. It reinvents itself as the wind blows. It exists in a million different forms, all claiming legitimacy. It is, therefore, a mirror of protestantism.

    Modern man, puffed up with himself, dared to reinvent in his own image and 'perfect' that which was given to him by God through the Holy Ghost.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anonymous4:49 AM

    "To think that the EF will supplant the OF in a universal Church of 1 Billion souls is a fantasy."

    What is a fantasy is assuming that the over one billion baptized Catholics actually care enough to attend Mass. Only a small fraction of that total are initially important to the growth of the Traditional Mass - priests/seminarians and regular Mass attendees committed to raising large families. The rest of the world's Catholics are, for all practical purposes, mission territory for the Church.

    ReplyDelete
  34. A couple observations:

    1) "Fessio displeased the Pizza king in Florida (Ave Maria U.) and is now more or less nowhere." Well, Fr. Fessio's day job was (arguably) really Ignatius Press all along. And in justice to him, despite his vow that he would never celebrate the TLM on campus, once the motu proprio came down he set about diligently re-mastering the traditional liturgy and offering it on campus. That is Jesuit obedience.

    Would that there were more of it.

    2. I honestly don't think it is fair to suggest that most of the Latin N.O.'s on offer have been a naked ploy to steal SSPX thunder. Some are/were, no doubt. But many of those I have known in what I would call the "Adoremus" camp are at least sincere in their belief that this was the best way to reconcile the Council and tradition; and a few made do because it was the most traditional option they could get away with. I think of Our Lady of Good Counsel in Kansas City, where Msgr. Blacet rebuilt a dying urban parish in a vibrant parish with so many of the hallmarks of traditional parish through his Latinized N.O. - large families coming in from great distances, a vibrant schola, traditional devotions, many young men and boy servers (and vocations).

    But I do agree that the advent of Summorum Pontificum seems to spelling the demise, not the expansion, of the Latin N.O. So many of the traditionally oriented have ended up going over to TLM parishes and masses.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anonymous5:17 AM

    I think the author is being unfair to Father Harrison. He offers the TLM every morning. When he offers the NLM in Latin eastward facing with chant on Sundays he is trying to reform and change the way the typical New Mass is celebrated.
    As for his interest in stressing continuity between the doctrine before Vat II and after he is attempting again to change the way in which Vat II is incorrectly interpreted.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous7:47 AM

    To those who believe that the Ordinary Form will not be overcome by the Tridentine in a world of one billion Catholics:

    Did you believe that the Tridentine Mass was forbidden when some of us insisted it never was?

    Do you believe that the majority of Catholics practice their faith in any way?

    Do you know any Catholics who consider themselves Traditional but do not practice their faith in varios ways?

    Do you believe that the growth rate of traditional vocations will never overtake the stagnant rate of standard vocations?

    Have you ever pondered the impact of the Holy Father offering the Traditional Mass? It is inevitable.

    Did you believe at any time that the SSPX was not in the Catholic Church?

    Have you ever thought of the impact the regulurization of the SSPX SSPX (free of control from NO Bishops) would have on Tradition?

    Do you believe that when the Holy Father does consumate the requests of Our Lady of Fatima Traditional Catholicism will not benefit immensely?

    I don't expect you to agree with me but I don't think I'm living in a fantasy world either.

    A.M. LaPietra

    ReplyDelete
  37. "What is a fantasy is assuming that the over one billion baptized Catholics actually care enough to attend Mass. Only a small fraction of that total are initially important to the growth of the Traditional Mass - priests/seminarians and regular Mass attendees committed to raising large families. The rest of the world's Catholics are, for all practical purposes, mission territory for the Church."

    This is a very pertinent point. Unfortunately, most of those 1.5 billion souls could not care less.

    The commonly mentioned data regarding the number of "regular" and Traditional-minded seminarians in France shows that change sometimes comes not through a "spectacular" growth of Traditionalists, but through a continuing and incessant decline of other Catholics. (I am not extrapolating this to the entire world, it is just a note.)

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anonymous11:24 AM

    Beautiful article and it does good to one's heart to read that - in the United States at least - things are improving rather rapidly.

    But I do have a question: why does the author talk of bishops "not forbidding our Mass"? No Bishop can forbid the celebration of Tridentine Masses in his diocese following "Summorum Pontificum", surely?

    ReplyDelete
  39. PTKP said:

    "...quote Mel Gibson in that film, Brave something-or-other: FREEEDOM!! They have tried every trick in the book to keep us from our Mass. No more!"

    Since 1999 the SSPX has held a Pilgrimage to the Shrine of Our Lady of Sorrows and the Jefferson Diocese in Mid-Missouri will not allow the hundreds of Pilgrims to have the Holy Mass inside the Church or even go in and make a visit before the Blessed Sacrament - any other faith or sect or atheist can go into their Church daily but they LOCK us out one day a year so...

    STARKENBURG

    The Holy Mass, that cannot die
    Was said amidst the oaks
    While pin-oak leaves came floating down
    Around the simple folks

    Who knelt upon the acorn floor
    All dotted nutty brown
    The acorns cracked and old knees snapped
    Yet still there was no sound...

    But the tinkling of the golden bells
    As the White Host Son rose high
    On priestly limbs like mighty oaks
    They branched up to the sky.

    And in that wood I laughed with joy
    Amongst the souls bowed down
    For the mighty oak was once a nut
    That merely held it's ground.

    So Christian souls like acorn nuts
    Must burrow all around
    And be the seed that sprouts new oaks
    On consecrated ground...

    Where the Holy Mass that cannot die
    Is said around the oaks
    While pin-oak leaves come floating down
    Amidst a mighty folk!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous11:38 AM

    "To think that the EF will supplant the OF in a universal Church of 1 Billion souls is a fantasy."

    The Church is not a democracy and the NO will well and truly die when it is put into the attic - and left there - by one of the next Popes. The sooner, the better.

    Even if not "discontinued" (which I think the more probable solution) The Novus Ordo will die when the generation of liberals who have introduced it will be six feet under (let us not forget: we still have a Pope with a heavy emotional investment in V II, but he is the last one!) and the following generations will cover their heads in shame at what has been done through and (much worse) after V II.

    One doesn't need to know Latin to understand the deep differences in reverence and sacredness, the authentic Catholicism the Tridentine offers. Sincere seekers not blinded by ideological "false ecumenical" ideas will soon see the difference when they get in contact with the Tridentine.

    The fantasy is to believe that the faithful can be offered a sumptuous meal and continue to prefer McDonald's.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anonymous12:00 PM

    In one of the OF parishes in Rochester, NY, latin has been added to the mass although I do not think it would be considered a latin NO mass by your definition. The gloria, our father and agnus are all sung in latin. Of course the parish priest who made these changes also said the EF of mass for 15 years for the local indult community. He also brilliantly used the swine flu pandemic as an oppurtunity to eliminate the sign of peace.

    I'm sure this situation is atypical but I'm not sure they were considered in PKTP's numbers.

    PJL

    ReplyDelete
  42. Surely in a hundred years, if not sooner, the Pauline Mass will be a museum piece. One that's rarely if ever put on exhibit.

    Ever since Summorum Pontificum, on the rare occasions when I must endure a vernacular Novus Ordo Mass I pretend to be a visitor from the future enjoying an historical curiosity. It takes the edge off.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Gideon Ertner12:44 PM

    "rereading your article in light of the above comment makes me understand those "conservatives" who don't have any time for Traditionalists.

    Liberals have no time for Traditionalists either, but we don't tone down our criticism of Liberal Catholicism to placate them - on this site at least.

    Look, Conservative and Traditionalist Catholics are in opposition. Conservative Catholics generally believe in absolute religious liberty, freedom of expression, and in ecumenism; they believe that the state has no obligation to ensure that the basic needs of the poor are met, that it is wrong to impose restrictions on financial markets, that it is morally licit for a state to possess nuclear weapons, and that natural contraceptive methods are licit for any reason at all.

    There may be a difference concerning opposition between Traditionalists and Conservatives on one hand and Liberals on the other, but it is one of degree.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Gideon Ertner1:01 PM

    Every time I have been to an NO Mass celebrated entirely in Latin I have found it stilted and artificial. It is good to hear the familiar Gregorian tones, but there is the same aimless moving about and general lack of purpose as normally in the NO.

    It is a problem that there is so much more of the text in the new missal that is spoken out loud (as opposed to the old, where most was sung or said sotto voce. Few priests are proficient enough in Latin to pull that off. It gets even worse when the entire body of the faithful have to pray along on the suscipiat Dominus sacrificium, mortem tuam annuntiamus and quia tuum es regnum.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Mr. Crouchback,

    You asked on an earlier thread which parish I attend in Houston. I am a member of Our Lady of Walsingham parish, currently in the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston as we await the institution of the Anglican Usage Ordinariate for the US (maybe this year, in the Fall, if you believe the optimists), to which we will adhere when it is formed. For the moment we are in what I think is very good standing with the Archdiocese; inter alia, we meet our DSF goal every year (which only about 20% of the parishes do).

    Since the AU Divine Liturgy is almost a TLM in English, we do not have a TLM on Sundays at the parish, but do use the Latin propers at the 8:15 a.m. low mass, including sung Credo in Latin, with genuflection.

    With respect to this particular thread, I understand that at least two NOMs in Latin are offered in the archdiocese each Sunday, one at Annunciation at 11:00 a.m. and the other at Holy Rosary at 9:30 a.m. Both are the high masses for their parishes. Annunication I think still offers the only Sunday TLM, at 8:00 a.m. I understand that Cardinal DiNardo told the FSSP that they are welcome here but that they need to found their own parish rather than take over an existing one, so I have not heard of any progress on that front, not that I am that close to the FSSP friends here to be up to date on that kind of thing(I like them, but just don't have the time).

    ReplyDelete
  46. Anonymous1:18 PM

    "I would point out that the "traditionalist" who loathes congregational participation, and who wants only a low Mass all the time without the full gregorian proper, is out of line with the teaching of the church. (St Pius X even went so far as to say that those who asserted that the people should never sing the proper were dead wrong)"

    Amen, dear Father, Amen. We drive to the EF in another diocese to be able to be part of a congregation that loves to sing the Mass, as St. Pius X (and Sacrosanctum Concilium #54!) both called for.

    My experience with people has been that if you actually teach them to sing the gregorian responses (as the Popes asked for), they approach the Mass with greater enthusiasm and continue to want to come back.

    Apropos the 'Traditionalists,' the European (especailly French) traditionalists know this, as can be seen from the tremendously beautiful videos on youtube of the seven part Mass from one of the Sindays of Pentecost.

    Thank you Father for saying something so rarely heard today, yet so necessary!

    Rob C

    ReplyDelete
  47. Anonymous1:48 PM

    I always enjoy Mr. Perkins' humorous, informed, and indefatigable writings

    Although, in this case, I find it ironic that he is so focussed on opposition to the NOM in Latin. What's the alternative? In 99.9% of the cases, the NOM in the vernacular is the alternative. I can't imagine he prefers that! And if he thinks the TLM is going to rise up and replace the NOM - in Latin and/or the vernacular - then he's just crazy. And, I think, he IS crazy. If he wants more traditional liturgy in the Catholic Church, then NOM in Latin with Tridentine accoutrements bolted on is the only way to go. He's apparently against that. Totally self-defeating.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Anonymous1:59 PM

    Let's stick (no pun intended) to the butter analogy. After presenting an unnatural substitute for the real thing and finding it lacking, covering it with the "whipped cream" of latin does not change anything. It is still and always will be a "banal, on the spot production. A fabricated liturgy..." as Cardinal Ratzinger described it.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Henry2:06 PM

    Mr. LaPietra: You deserve at least one answer. From one who surely has devoted as much “talent, time, and treasure” to the TLM (and with some tangible success) as anyone commenting so far. For instance, were it not for my personal efforts, those who attend daily and Sunday TLM with me could not do so.

    To those who believe that the Ordinary Form will not be overcome by the Tridentine in a world of one billion Catholics:

    Objectively, starting with 0.4% of Catholics attending the TLM now, and their fraction increasing by 5% annually, it will be 99 years until its half and half between TLM and Novus Ordo attendance.

    Did you believe that the Tridentine Mass was forbidden when some of us insisted it never was?

    For 20 years it was certainly forbidden everywhere within hundreds of miles of where I was.

    Do you believe that the majority of Catholics practice their faith in any way?

    Not in any significant way. Most of those identified as Catholics now are not Catholic in any literal sense.

    Do you know any Catholics who consider themselves Traditional but do not practice their faith in varios ways?

    Every traditional Catholic I know is a real practicing Catholic.

    Do you believe that the growth rate of traditional vocations will never overtake the stagnant rate of standard vocations?

    The growth rate of traditional vocations already greatly exceeds that of standard vocations. Moreover, most of the seminarians I know of in standard seminaries plan to celebrate the TLM also.

    Have you ever pondered the impact of the Holy Father offering the Traditional Mass? It is inevitable.

    I am sorry to say that, having seen my seventh decade, I never expect to see a papal TLM. However, hope still springs eternal.

    Did you believe at any time that the SSPX was not in the Catholic Church?

    No, and had it not been for Ab. Lefebvre (a future saint, by the grace of God) Summorum Pontificum and its bountiful fruit would never happened.

    Have you ever thought of the impact the regulurization of the SSPX SSPX (free of control from NO Bishops) would have on Tradition?

    I can think of nothing better for Tradition and for the whole Church.

    Do you believe that when the Holy Father does consumate the requests of Our Lady of Fatima Traditional Catholicism will not benefit immensely?

    Personally, I’d prefer him to celebrate the TLM in St. Peter’s Basilica every Sunday.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Anonymous2:54 PM

    Those who are recent to this blog know that I am not asserting that [the Ordinary Form celebrated in Latin is not a real mass].

    Then it would be better Mr. Perkins, if you did not set at opposition the terms "New Mass" and "True Mass". It would be better if you did not use phrases like "the real thing is back", as if the real thing had previously been absent.

    Mr Perkins declares elsewhere that the NOM, notwithstanding its shortcomings, is a valid liturgy.

    So which is it, Mr. Perkins? And before you respond, kindly consider how intemperate and ill-considered speech has enabled the liberal characterization of traditionalists as schismatic, which has been so damaging to the cause you supposedly promote.

    Romulus

    ReplyDelete
  51. "If he wants more traditional liturgy in the Catholic Church, then NOM in Latin with Tridentine accoutrements bolted on is the only way to go."

    Well, maybe not the ONLY way, but in some cases the path of least resistance. A parish can engage a program of recovering a sense of the sacred at the Masses, and eventually work the Latin text into the plan. Of course, writing about these things tends to be easier than actually doing them. (I've done both, and therefore have a basis for comparison.) Priests who are handling two or three parishes are less likely than some of their confreres, to make the time to learn to say Mass a different way. The Pauline Missal in Latin then becomes a viable option.

    It is possible to celebrate the Ordinary Form in Latin, in such a way that many parts of it are virtually indistinguishable from the TLM, especially to the congregation. I have seen this with my own eyes, and have served for such occasions.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anonymous3:43 PM

    what about St. John cantus chicago

    ReplyDelete
  53. Gulielmus3:44 PM

    Much comment has been made about the Dioces of Arlington, but there's been no mention of the Archdiocese of Washington, which, unfortunately, does not support Mr Perkins' thesis. There was never a time in the Archdiocese when a Latin Mass was not offered-- the transition from EF to OF happening in the 70s. Once the indult was possible, a TLM was scheduled at a downtown parish (ST Mary's) and under the much-maligned Cardinal McCarrick, that was incresed to three-- one downtown, one in the near suburbs, one in the far suburbs. In all those years, the Latin OF Mass outdrew the other three put together.

    Now, after SP, there's a fourth TLM scheduled every Sunday and several parishes have it monthly. Both Georgetown University and Catholic University have a TLM on campus as well (CU's a weekday Mass at the basilica).

    But you could gather every attendee at every EF Mass in the Washington AD (I've been to all of them more than once) and the number would be dwarfed by those who go to St Matthew's for the weekly OF Latin Mass. Why? Perhaps it's the music, or perhaps the setting. Perhaps it's the "extraordinary" participation by the congragation, where the ordinary is chanted by nearly all, many of whom need not look at the texts provided.

    There is an EF Mass three Metro stops away, but a significant majority of those who attend Latin Mass in Washington choose the OF. My sense is that this is an intelligent, committed, congregation who know the difference and choose the Novus Ordo.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anonymous4:02 PM

    Regarding the comments on this posting. It seems that all those who are speaking in favor of a Latin N.O.M. are doing so because they have experienced them to the profit of their soul; while those who oppose the idea would not dare attend them.

    The posting's interesting statistics are not helped by the accompanying vitriol. Why such unmoderated invective against the Latin N.O.M. that you would never, or have never, attended?

    "If something uncharitable is said in your presence, either speak in favor of the absent, or withdraw, or if possible, stop the conversation". St. Jean Vianney

    Some Traditionalists appear to hold fast to everything accept the acquisition of virtues.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous4:08 PM

    I both agree and disagree with PKTP.

    On the one hand, where the L.NO was installed as a substitute to traditionalists to mollify them, it is not surprising that they largely reject that which was used as an attempt to silence them. With the release of SP, it would make sense that many of the faithful L.NO people who had come there begrudgingly would depart from their perceived diocesan shackles.
    I wish them well.

    PKTP may be prophetic in saying this will be the end of the L.NO. For this group, I certainly hope so.

    But there is another group out there. The group to which some comments have alluded - the ones who desire the NO to be said reverently, and as a consequence prefer it to be done in Latin. They are attached to the NO, for various reasons - being the mass they grew up in, the mass of their families and friends, or the mass that was a fruit of the council that they need to reconcile with tradition.
    While you may see the L.NO as a substitute, this group sees it as the via Media. Where one can have both solemnity and approachability.

    Maybe for this latter group the L.NO is simply a propaedeutic that the Lord is using to come to the TLM. I would guess that for some this would not be the case. And for them, I wish that they continue to find a Mass where they can worship the Lord reverently.

    So, in short. Stop following Voltaire. The perfect is NOT the enemy of the good.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Anonymous4:16 PM

    I'll throw out a thought that has crossed my mind as the debate about what the long term future will hold.

    A favorite thought on this blog is that the NO will be wiped off the map altogether as were several liturgies less than 200 years old when the Ancient Mass was locked down at Trent.

    Others, affacionados of some aspects of the NO, dream that the EF will continue to be a rare celebration co-existing with the OF.

    Considering the pendulum of human fads, the OF crowd need to realize that the NO as they know it today will certainly expire. The writing has been on the wall for at least 20 years, with declining Mass attendance, and so many flavors and variations and abuses.

    On the other hand, getting the conservative and knowing-no-better Catholics who are serious about their faith to sit down and assist/listen to a Mass prayed largely sotto voce in a language they don't understand, albeit attribute great intellectual respect to because of their faith, will simply not be an easy task even for the most saintly Popes and bishops.

    And we do have the Roman tendency to simplify prayers which was in some small way part of the development of the Ancient Mass as well. Part of the NO represented a stripping down of some of the repetitious aspect of the Old Mass, and there is no question that the NO is a simpler variety, distasteful as much of it may be.

    The Holy Father has already been preaching a reform of the reform for so long. Many priests and bishops even those who are closet believers are still attached to that simpler form. The Pope is not a man of revolution and likes to change things ever so slowly and gently.

    As such, it is entirely possible that a reform of the reform may take the following shape:

    An OF that is an accurate and true vernacular translation of the EF Eucharistic prayer and calendar - one common calendar and Eucharistic prayer, none of this "bread made by human hands" etc. In this regard, the two forms would be identical, where perhaps some freedom to allow the OF to be said in an accurate vernacular or Latin or a mixture thereof. Identical form between the two with some leniency on the language front.

    Maintain a few "simplifications" that strip out the "Introite ad altare Dei" and reduce the Confiteors, and the names of saints as is currently done in the NO

    The silent priestly prayers still said in Latin

    The responsory of the laity restricted to the Amens, Cum Spirito Tuos, Pater, Sanctus-Sanctus-Sanctus - all in Latin

    Other practices such as the peace, communion in the hand and standing eliminated to ensure common practice in both forms (and to mitigate any chance of sacrilege and scandal)

    a return to tabernacles front and the centre of the altar, ad orientem offering of the sacrifice, communion rails.

    The Mass, regardless of what country it is celebrated would always end in Latin with "Ite Missa Est".

    This would be a shorter to mid term homogenizing of the reform of the reform, which may eventually *develop* or *morph* over the longer term into something much closer to an Old Mass just as Anglican Use will do once the deal with the Trad Anglos is sealed.

    In such a situation as the one described above, the OF and EF would then truly be two slightly different forms of the Mass and would assist the laity and priests to become attached to the Older Mass and learn it more and more. It would contribute more towards a common universal or global experience of the Mass as well.

    For myself, I do hope for a complete return to the Old Mass with none of the compromise postulated above. But something like the above could unfold, and would be a most welcome change towards a full restoration than what bleakly is seen on today's horizon.

    ReplyDelete
  57. M. A.4:17 PM

    The thing about conservatives in general is that while they accuse Traditionalists of pride, they
    themselves can be, oh, so condescending, so sure that their "middle way" is most pleasing
    to God - in other words, prideful themselves! Let's admit that all of us are to some degree, tainted with that deadly vice, then move on to the facts.

    First of all, if an accusation of pride is to be hurled, why not at the presumptuous pope who dared to impose the man-made "novelty" (as Paul VI himself called it) of a New Mass - be it in Latin or the vernacular - to upstage and supplant the 1,500 year work of the Holy Ghost, whereby it has left in its trail, confusion, loss of Faith, ecumenism, indifference, etc. As vicar of Christ, a pope's charisma is intended for the safeguarding of the deposit of the Faith and of the Church's liturgical traditions to which right Faith in intricately bound.

    I cannot believe that anyone who has eyes to see, and who has surveyed the liturgical destruction over the last 40+ years can take issue with what Peter has written. To support the work of the "Reformers" in the Church is only to abet the liturgical revolution, perhaps with a gentler
    touch, but nonetheless, the reformers-of-the-reform are still instrumental in continuing that revolution born of pride.

    The Reformer types, unwittingly, cast aspersions on their own parents and grandparents. They are advocating a "high church" Protestant-type of liturgy which their own Catholic forefathers would have abhorred.

    A Traditionalist now is nothing more than what Catholics were previous to VII. To preach that, to teach it is not pride. If Traditionalists weren't saying it, the very rocks themselves would be proclaiming it.

    I repeat a little louder: A TRADITIONALIST NOW IS NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT CATHOLICS WERE BEFORE VII!

    Yes, the N.O. will eventually become an extinct species; have no doubt of that. I am sure our Lady of Fatima will have something to do with its demise. What is not of God, is inevitably bound to fail.

    By the way, man-made food (margarine,in this case) has to be toxic, too.

    Carry on, Mr. Perkins! You are a talented writer. And a Catholic to boot!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anonymous4:20 PM

    "Did you believe at any time that the SSPX was not in the Catholic Church?"

    From 1988 until 2009 Bishop Fellay and the other three Bishops were acting apart from the Holy Father. Their own actions during that time period are actions of excommunicated bishops. Ecclesia Dei Adflicta is an unambiguous document by a legitimate Pope.

    It was revealed that the TLM was never abrogated; however, it was not revealed that the excommunication was never in effect. The last statement on the excommunication was its lifting.

    Your question was answered by the Pope in 1988 and again in 2009. At present, there is no Papal document in existence that will support the notion that the SSPX were not excommunicated between 1988 and 2009. Canon Lawyers can argue day after day; but as of today your question is answered with a YES.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Henry4:28 PM

    David: “It is possible to celebrate the Ordinary Form in Latin, in such a way that many parts of it are virtually indistinguishable from the TLM, especially to the congregation.

    As have I. Though due to promoting the TLM meaningfully and supporting priests tangibly—rather than just bloviating on distant blogs—I now am able to assist at TLM both daily and Sundays.

    But I know that is possible for the Novus Ordo Mass, celebrated ad orientem in Latin with traditional ars celebrandi and Gregorian chanted ordinary and propers to be wonderfully beautiful and glorious in the sight of both God and man. And that, when so celebrated, it neither looks nor is any less the true Holy Sacrifice (nor any more a mere communal meal) than is the Tridentine Mass.

    The problem is not with the newer rite but with the irreverence if not heresy with which it too often celebrated. If the TLM were the “normative Mass” of the Church at the present time, you may be certain that it also would be celebrated all too often in much the same way by the same irreverent if not heretical priests. (Some of us saw plenty of this even before the Novus Ordo was introduced.) Let us thank God that the Mass of the Ages is not yet widely subject to this abuse (although we’re beginning to hear talk of altar girls and communion on the hands at isolated TLM’s). Indeed, perhaps we ought to thank God that the Novus Ordo is so readily available for this purpose! At any rate, the real problem is not with either form of the Mass but with those who abuse it, naturally (and thankfully) concentrated in the form that is “normative”.

    In my opinion, anyone who spouts stuff like “New Mass versus True Mass” regarding the Mass of the Church -- as typically celebrated by our Supreme Pontiff in St. Peter’s Basilica, for instance -- does neither pope nor Church nor the Mass any good. Indeed, anyone who denies either the validity or the efficacy of either properly celebrated form of the Roman rite – as opposed to abhorring abuse of Christ in either form (as we all should) – is too close for comfort to sacrilege if not heresy.

    ReplyDelete
  60. \\It will just be the NOM in Latin. It will never be the Mass of all time.\\

    The Latin Rite in any form has NEVER been the "Mass of all time" for the simple reason that there was a TIME when it never existed.

    And what are you saying about the Eastern Liturgies, which are OLDER than anything in the West--that they are nothing but chopped liver?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Anonymous4:36 PM

    When I've asked for a TLM in my archdiocese, the first answer I received was that we could use latin in the N.O.M., so why a TLM? After all, that's the mass, the same mass, they've said...

    It seems to me that many here couldn't get the point. The difference between the TLM and the NOM is theological.

    No matter how much incense or beautiful chasubles are used, that is still the NOM with another "makeup".

    Those who advocate for the real intention of the council fathers should first take a look in the pictures of papal masses right after the reform.

    In fact, those are nice examples of what shouldn't have been done. At least... as far as I know, they were not in the spirit of the so-called new liturgical movement of today. I hope I'm wrong. And if I am, please give me some help. Maybe those pictures available on the internet are not a good example. That is possible. I don't have other sources.

    Ah, there is no TLM nor any NOM in latin in my archdiocese. Thank's God there is a Divine Liturgy twice a month.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Anonymous4:43 PM

    FYI: "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter" and the "butter" you find in the grocery store are both grossly deficient.

    The TLM should be likened to real raw (i.e. unpasteurized) butter made from pasture fed cows (organic or biodynamic). Unfortunately, getting real butter is harder than finding a TLM in North America since it is illegal to sell unpasteurized milk products in most states. If you research into the current food and agriculture industry, you will find that modernism is ruining everything (and with very similar techniques).

    When the TLM supplants the OF, I hope that all of the modernist disorientations will be overcome.

    Rogation Days will mean that much more when the traditional Catholic can find real food again and farmers are free to hand on what was handed to them.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anonymous5:00 PM

    I have attended the NO Latin Mass at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC. It is as pathetic and deficient in Latin as it is in English. We all know that the problem with the NO Mass is not the language but the theology (or lack thereof) that created it out of thin air and the objective behind its creation which was the destruction of Traditional Catholic belief and practice (which it has accomplished).

    The butter substitute may be a valid spread, but it is still a deficient substitute for the real thing. Don't give the faithful a stone when they need bread. Don't give them a banal concoction in Latin when they need the immemorial Mass of the ages.

    ATW

    ReplyDelete
  64. \\Around here, that usually means the 8.00 a.m. in the Cathedral, served by a friar and with no ladies in the sanctuary and no aliturgiical noise coming from pianos.

    P.K.T.P.\\

    What one organist called "mumbling at the organ" becomes no more liturgical because it's played on a 2 manual radio.

    I have degrees in piano and organ.

    Speaking as one who has played both since age 9 (and I'll be 60 soon). I'd rather have a good, well-tuned piano than the toy spinet organs too many parishes use, and used even before Vatican II.

    And I'd rather hear one in church, as well.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Hello Gulielmus,

    As someone living in D.C. and regularly attending one of the TLM's on offer in the archdiocese, what you've said reflects my sense of things as well. I have some thoughts as to why this is:

    First, I am beginning to think there simply are not as many young Catholics - engaged ones, at any rate - in DC as I had been led to believe, and this is not just my sense, but that of others as well. One thing that strikes me about St. Mary's and old St. John's (where TLM's are on offer on Sunday) is how old they skew. Everywhere I have attended the TLM elsewhere has had a pretty young cross-section - lots of young families, which is what a traditional community really needs to take off. DC/MD is a quite liberal area, obviously, and very few of those migrating in seem to be religious or conservative. At least that's my theory.

    Secondly, neither St. Mary's or old St. John's is a personal parish. They simply borrow time at their respective churches - Sunday only (and most high feast days), and at non-prime (8 and 9am) early hours. Moreover because they share the same schola, each can only do a missa cantata half the time; neither does a high mass with any regularity. That does not help; and at any event old St. John's is so small anyway that the nave could not accommodate many more. In these respects. St. Matthews has certain advantages. It has also an aggressive young adult outreach as well.

    I think it would be interesting to see what happened if Washington gave over one of its nicer older urban churches (preferably in a reasonably safe neighborhood) to the FSSP or ICK as a full personal parish. Until then, I do not expect much change.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Anonymous6:07 PM

    I'm very sad Rorate put this up unadulterated like this. As regretable as certain members of the hierarchy are, they still deserve respect. Same thing with priests, especially good orthodox priests. Instead, this serves up snarkiness on a silver platter. I expect more from your excellent blog

    ReplyDelete
  67. Fr. Fessio has sincerely rethought his opinion on the liturgical reform and now celebrates the old Mass almost exclusively.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anonymous6:45 PM

    Mr. Ortiz:

    On Opus Dei, it has for a long time now forbidden the T.L.M. 'with extreme prejudice'. Why so? Why has it done this? The answer is simple: it wants power. You can't have power in the Church unless you 'play ball'l with the local bishops. So Opus Dei gave up the most important thing of all in order to preserve lesser things, for the T.L.M. cannot be separated from the Faith that is enshrined and celebrated in it. They gave up the Mass for the order and vestments and music that accompany the Traditional Mass. They threw out the baby and kept the bathwater.

    I've heard stories from the past about how severely punished were those among their priests who dared to offer the T.L.M. Opus Dei will do what it takes to gain power and advance its 'conservative' agenda. But conservatives are not traditionalists; conservatives are only liberals in slow motion, just as fascists and communists are both condemned by God, for both are socialists.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Anonymous6:46 PM

    "The Latin Rite in any form has NEVER been the "Mass of all time" for the simple reason that there was a TIME when it never existed."

    The Mass is the Eternal Sacrifice of Calvary.

    Cruise the Groove.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Anonymous6:52 PM

    Mr. Alexander writes:

    And for the record, either form of the Roman Mass is the real thing.


    If he takes my words literally and then refers specifically to validity then, yes, the New Mass is a real Mass. So is an Anglilcan Communion Service when said by a real priest with the right intention.

    But the New Mass is not the 'real thing' in the sense of being a Mass proper to the Roman Rite--or to any Rite. It is not the real thing because it was concocted in committee; it is not the product of organic development; it was not written on the hearts of the fathers by the Holy Ghost. The fact that the composers of NewMass were Modernists assisted by heretics makes the case even worse. The fact that some Anglican services are actually more Catholic in form than is NewMass is a profound scandal. Mr. Alexander needs to step back and do a little thinking. Keep in mind that the Anglican Missal of 1921 is far more Catholic than his precious NewMass, and yet the former is the product of heretics.

    Mr. Alexander clearly does not have the sensus catholicus of Pope St. Pius V or Pope St. Pius X. Read 'Quo Primum Tempore' carefully and attend especially to its TONE as well as its content. That Pope would have regarded the entire enterprise of Bugnini to be a shocking blasphemy. Catholics don't 'compose' the Mass. Catholics are too humble even to consider it. It doesn't even cross their minds.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  71. "The thing about conservatives in general is that while they accuse Traditionalists of pride, they themselves can be, oh, so condescending ..."

    And speaking of condescending:

    "I would point out that the 'traditionalist' who loathes congregational participation, and who wants only a low Mass all the time without the full gregorian proper, is out of line ..."

    This is true, and this bone of contention is one of the dirty little secrets within the traditionalist movement. In fact, responses from the congregation, as well as the faithful singing the ordinary of the Mass (as distinguished from the propers, which are normally sung by the schola alone), were promoted by all three Popes Pius of the 20th century. (I've got quotations in old books at home and everything, from back before internet chat rooms were the font of wisdom.) Come this Sunday, I'll be attending at Old St Mary's (so I can be in the parade afterwords), where they definitely didn't get the memo. I suppose if everyone is content with that it may be all well and good. But can you imagine being shushed by some twit who wasn't even born in 1962, when you were there and you know better?

    I'll try to behave. (I have to; I'll be in Scout uniform for the parade.) Please don't hurt me.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Anonymous6:58 PM

    To add to N.C.'s point:

    A poll was done some time ago down there is the Excited States of America to the south of me. It found that a large per centage of American Catholics would actually prefer a complete restoration and return of the T.L.M. Many others said that they would attend the T.L.M. Only about 25% attend the N.O.M., down from about 75% before the Council. And America has more of a religious sense than do most countries. In Quebec, only about 5% attend Mass on Sunday; in France, it is said to be about 8% now. So I don't worry too much about how many would prefer TrueMass over NewMass. Among those who actually attend Mass at all, most would follow legitimate authority.

    Oh, and in another U.S. poll, only 18% accept transubstantiation. Of those who do not believe in this, a goodly proportion had no idea what it signified and were shocked when they learned what they were supposed to believe. So much for NewMass as the primary catechism of Holy Church.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Mr. Perkins, it sounds like we attended the same parish at one time!

    I grew up in a Hispanic Ministry parish and eventually began to take notice of the irreverence for Our Lord on the Altar. (A clown Mass would have been an upgrade.) When I found the Ef of the Mass, I was hooked for life! I was fortunate afterwards to also see the OF in Latin, and ad orientium but recognized the vast difference. The priest role was different, the prayers were different and I left feeling like someone showed me a movie with 1000 edits.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Anonymous7:13 PM

    Dear Joshua:

    Yes, my numbers are inaccurate. The truth is that the number of EVERY-SUNDAY T.L.M.S (which is the clear standard I've mentioned) is actually lower than 39, not higher. It takes the L.L.A a long time to delist cancelled Masses, so my numbers are actually inflated, not deflated. They are even now listing Masses that have been cancelled for years (e.g. the one in Delaware).

    I do not count 'hybrid' Masses. Remember, I am writing about the N.O.M. entirely in Latin. I'll count the Mass if the lections are in the vernacular because that is now licit even without Latin and even for the T.L.M. (under S.P.). But I don't count Masses in which some of the rest of the Ordinary is in the vernacular. A Latin Mass means a Mass in Latin, not a bilingual Mass.

    Also, I am fully aware--and in detail--about what Cardinal Baloney did. For years, he had the T.L.M.s in rotation at different sites but always forbade any one site from having them on one particular Sunday (3rd Sundays, to my recollection). The intent was to prevent anyone from avoiding the N.O. altogether. We must drink deep from the fount of wisdom delivered by Bugnini and his infernal master. It didn't really work because the determined simply drove into the Diocese of Orange or San Bernardino, or that repaired to an Eastern Divine Liturgy on that Sunday. Eventually, he allowed every Sunday to be covered in rotation and then, finally, one or two every-Sunday Masses at single locations for his, what?, four million subjects? He's a bastard.

    However, you fail to realise that one strategy does not preclude another here. He ALSO encouraged the N.O. in Latin in order to lure people away from the T.L.M., as did Maida in Detroit. If you are wondering if I have a tape recording of his secret order in this regard, no, I do not. But any fool can see what he was up to. He deserves to be called 'Cardinal Baloney'. He does not deserve to serve, except in the sense of 'serving time'. But perhaps we shall get to see what he looks like behind bars. Hope springs eternal. His victims are now on his tail and they have good lawyers.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Anonymous7:20 PM

    Athelstane writes:

    1. "I honestly don't think it is fair to suggest that most of the Latin N.O.'s on offer have been a naked ploy to steal SSPX thunder."

    I never wrote to the contrary. What I alleged is that bishops used the Latin N.O.M. to lure people away from *approved* T.L.M.s.

    2. I would be careful in alleging that Fr. Fession has obeyed' his superiors. I'll say no more about that here.

    3. If Fr. Fessio "made a vow" never to offer the T.L.M. on campus, why didn't he keep it?

    Anyway, I'm not out to 'get' Frs. Fessio or Harrison. I merely allege that they made a mistake, along with the Hitchcock family, in trying to advance a 'via media'. Their idea was and still is to 'prefer' a hybrid between N.O.M. and T.L.M. This is also the Pope's preference. We know, for instance, that he would like to marry the N.O. lectionary, which he loves, with the T.L.M. Ordinary, and to add in some N.O. prefaces. That Perl of low price was also one of the proponents of a compromise 'classical' liturgy.

    What these compromisers are finding, however, is that the people prefer the T.L.M. untouched. After 40 years of revolution, people need the stability of a Mass that was hardly changed at all since 1474.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Anonymous7:23 PM

    I have assisted to two "latinised" Novus Ordo Masses (rather amazingly, with every priest apparently deciding which parts to celebrate in Latin and which ones in Vernacular) and whilst both have been rather disappointing, the impression I had was that the relevant priests were trying to "ferry" their sheep to the Tridentine through a middle way *meant not to upset the bishop* (SP or no SP, in England the bishop *will* be easily upset if a priests celebrates the EF).

    I might be wrong, but one sees from the whole demeanour of the priests how he would rather have the entire exercise and if the priest also wears a cassock, then one has even less doubts....

    An entirely different Mass is the excellent 11am Sung Mass at the Brompton Oratory. This is the *very first version of the NO Mass to have been approved*. Basically, it is a Tridentine with some slight changes (the readings, say, or the the bidding prayers). The faithful follow it with a Tridentine booklet without any problem. Truly beautiful. Poliphonic music.

    If one of the next Popes decides (hopefully) to kill the NO, this might be the way to go: through the return to the *first approved version of the NO* (never abrogated), to be celebrated more and more in Latin as the number of fitting priests increases. In time, the transition to the Tridentine will result natural and easy.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Anonymous7:30 PM

    To the defender of Bishop Keating:

    I never said that he was a bad man. But I am being vigorously honest here. He was a man who rightly forbade 'serverettes' and assured that the liturgical standard in his Diocese was high. Nevetheless, he was an enemy of the T.L.M. Perhaps his intentions were entirely good and he truly believed that a compromise was needed in order to move forward. I'm sure that the intentions of the Adoremus people are also good. But, objectively speaking, they are dead wrong and they are enemies of the T.L.M. They have used their authority and their influence to obstruct a Mass to which the faithful have a right, or else, in the case of some Adoremus people, they try to bring people to a compromise to avoid crossing the liberals. But the liberals must be crossed. They must be faced, fought, and defeated. Our Faith is on the line here.

    Our heroes are not they; our heroes are those brave priests who have suffered much to keep the Mass of All Times alive. As Cardinal Stickler said, fifteen to twenty of these, who were removed from their parishes, appealed to the Apostolic Signatura and every single one of them won on appeal--and yet the Church managed to keep these victories silent for all those years. How so? Did they threaten those brave men (one of them was the priest of St. Willibrordus in the Netherlands; another, who suffered much, a priest in Sydney, Australia) with something else, like the abrogation in law of the T.L.M.? We may never know. But they are the true heroes. And so are the priests of the Society of St. Pius X. I write this as one who is not a Society supporter and believe its refusal of a structure is no longer right.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Anonymous7:44 PM

    Mundabor asks why I refer to bishops forbidding our Mass. I have a very extensive list of contacts now, both among priests and laity. I must be careful not to reveal names. But law can be theory because bishops have many other powers in law. Here are some cases:

    1. A priest tells me that his bishop uses transfers of priests in order to limit celebration of the T.L.M. In this Diocese, there are some T.L.M.s but not every Sunday. Father tells me that, every time he endeavours to offer it every Sunday, the bishop has a scheme to prevent this. He's still trying.

    2. A very nasty Bishop states directly that he will not tolerate the T.L.M. under any circumstances in his see. God help any priest who triest it, he says quite directly. So one priest does try it. He tells him to stop or he'll use Canon 905 to take away his right to binate and trinate. Since this parish priest has to say the N.O. at least once per Sunday, this would effectively stop him. Undeterred, the priest invites a certain traditionalist society to cross the border to offer the T.L.M. Then the bishop points out that such societies cannot say Mass in a diocese without the local bishop's permission.

    3. In another diocese, a retired priest realises that, under S.P., he can offer the T.L.M. privately for a group of invited guests, with the doors left open, and that he has a right of access to sacred places to do this. So the bishop cuts off his diocesan pension until he relents.

    4. A priest defies his bishop and offers the T.L.M. When his term expires as parish priest, the Bishop makes him a hospice chaplain for comastose patients. I'm not making this up. Another priest is told that he can offer the T.L.M. in his new capacity as prison chaplain.

    5. In one Diocese in the U.S. Old South, a lady is a wild supporter fo a priest who insists on saying our Mass only one Sunday per month. She fears that, should other priests offer this Mass every Sunday, it will take business 'away from Father'. So she organises campaigns against any other priests who try and has the support of her Bishop.


    Point made? So much for the right encoded in S.P. That is why the S.S.P.X fears regularisation. It can not be put under the local bishops.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  79. This article falls far short of the usual high standards I've come to expect of Rorate for three reasons.

    1st) Surely a Latin N.O (properly said) is better than a vernacular N.O with all the abuses that tend to creep in? I prefer the TLM but recognize that the N.O is here to stay for the forseeable future and when unable to attend the TLM (most of the time) I will go to the local ordinary form Mass.

    2nd) Fr. Harrison (for whom I have great respect in countering the errors of sedevacantism) should be commended not mocked for trying to reconcile the abiguious langauge of Dignitias Hummane (which itself states that it does not change Catholic teaching) with eariler papal teachings. Mr. Perkins article also belittles Father Fessio in a manner not fitting of a Catholic; I agree that bad (by which I mean imoral and hetrodox) priests and bishops should be called out on it but to my knowledge both Fathers Fessio and Harrison are Orthodox sons of the Church.

    3rd) The Title of the article assumes that the TLM is INSTRINSLY superior to the N.O; I happen to agree with Fr. Chad Ripperger FSSP that whilst there are several reasons to think that the EXTRINSIC merit of the TLM can be greater that your average N.O they are still the same Mass(this may make me unpopular amongst SSPX'ers). A retired diocesan preist by the name of Fr. Edwin Gordon also defends the propsition that the TLM and the N.O are the same Mass in his article (homiletic and pastoral review) "The Mass is more important than the Rite".

    ReplyDelete
  80. Anonymous7:55 PM

    Anon. 13.48 writes:

    "Although, in this case, I find it ironic that he is so focussed on opposition to the NOM in Latin. What's the alternative? In 99.9% of the cases, the NOM in the vernacular is the alternative. I can't imagine he prefers that! And if he thinks the TLM is going to rise up and replace the NOM - in Latin and/or the vernacular - then he's just crazy. And, I think, he IS crazy. If he wants more traditional liturgy in the Catholic Church, then NOM in Latin with Tridentine accoutrements bolted on is the only way to go. He's apparently against that. Totally self-defeating."


    First of all, the Latin N.O. is not usually an alternative to anything. 149 American sees have the T.L.M. every Sunday; only 28 have the Latin N.O.M. every Sunday. In fact, Las Vegas is the only Diocese in the entire U.S.A. that has Latin N.O.s every Sunday but no every-Su. T.L.M.

    In most places that are well-populated, there are Eastern Divine Liturgies every Sunday as well. A Latin N.O. may have been the only alternative in many places in, say, 1990, but that is no longer the case. The Latin N.O. is a dead duck and Adoremus, Frs. Harrison & Fessio, and the Hitchcocks have hitched their waggon to the wrong star.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Anonymous8:06 PM

    Ah, Romulus is back. His return is like a pleasant shower after a long day in the heat 'o the sun. He worries about my intemperate wording. I worry that traditionalists will underrate the malice of their opponents, which is why I want to keep everyone awake. Our opponents are not just the liberals but also the neo-conservatives and semi-traditionaliss who would compromise the priceless treasure that is our Traditional Latin Mass.

    But go beyond the hyperbole, Romulus of past error, and note what I favour and disfavour. I am not saying that a reform of the reform is a bad thing. I am not saying that the Pope should cease and desist from reforming NewMass. I am only cautioning that we keep our eye on the ball. Our long-term goal is to restore the Mass of All Time as the normative liturgy of the Latin Church. This we cannot do by our own effort alone; it is a real opus Dei.

    It may be a good thing and a necessary thing for H.H. to improve the margarine and make it creamier. But we must be men who stand fast and prefer butter. By holding fast in prayer and work and refusing the Adoremus road, we have attained S.P. and we have increased the number of T.L.M. dioceses (every Sunday) from 105 in the U.S.A. in 2007 to 149 today. Meanwhile, the N.O.M. in Latin is disappearing. Not bad work.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Anonymous8:23 PM

    Gulielmus:

    Mutatis mutandis, traditionalists will always prefer the T.L.M. to the N.O.M. in Latin. Knowing this, some bishops tried to arrange that the N.O.M. have the Chant and the well-appointed setting, while they consigned the T.L.M. to an ugly Modernist church in a dangerous neighbourhood and made it a recited Mass. Yes, some go for the music first and the prayers second. That is their loss but we should not support their error.

    A real traditionalist will prefer an Eastern Divine Liturgy to the N.O. in Latin. We don't need the Novus Ordo impoverished Offertory and numerous Protestantising 'options'. Those who accept such conditions do not help the cause; rather, they convince the bishops that they can shove the N.O. down our throats by saying it in Latin.

    The Traditional Latin Mass is a priceless treasure to be protected and cherished and celebrated. By refusing the N.O.M. in Latin and preferring an Eastern Divine Liturgy, we say to the bishops that we shall accept nothing less than 'the real thing'. That is the message they need to hear.

    Of course, there were once cases in which the only optios were bad black bread 'with' and 'without' butter. But even in Las Vegas today, one can escape the Latin N.O. by going Eastern. Let us refuse their fake substitutes until and insist upon our rights under "Summorum Pontificum".

    In Ottawa, an early T.L.M. under the 1968 indult for international communites was changed to the N.O.M. in Latin in 1974 (althuogh the real thing was sometimes said quietly and in defiance of the bishop when the doors were locked and nobody was looking). The very instant Quod Abhinc Annos arrived, the real thing was restored. Deo gratias! the rest is history.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Because Las Vegas is what it is, we need the TLM even more so!! There is ONE TLM, which I think is a low Mass, on the first friday of every month at St Bridgets in Las Vegas. This Mass conflicts with everyone else's first friday vespers services, and its very tough for families of young children (like MINE) to get there at that hour of the evening when it cuts right into the kids bedtimes.

    I don't know where the other 2 N.O. Latin Masses are here in Vegas, I only know of the one on Sundays at St Brigets.

    Between the N.O. Latin and the first friday TLM, this is supposed basically shut everyone up about it.

    And sadly, I am pretty sure that it has worked.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Anonymous8:32 PM

    Some here write of the need among most faithful today for a Mass in the vernacular tongues. I suggest that, if the conservative reformers reform NewMass again and again until they make it perfect, they shall have re-invented our T.L.M., except in the vernacualar.

    The problem then becomes a translation in desacralised English. There's no reverence in that. But few will accept sacral wording. The Irish think it to be Anglican, and everyone else things it (wrongly) to be 'archaic'. So from thence, it's back to Latin.

    That's what conservatives are really good for: wasting endless amounts of time to reform a bad thing until they arrive back where the liberals began.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Anonymous8:38 PM

    Anon. Whoever writes:

    "But there is another group out there. The group to which some comments have alluded - the ones who desire the NO to be said reverently, and as a consequence prefer it to be done in Latin."

    There is a problem here: anyone who prefers a Mass in Latin prefers a Traditional Latin Mass. But not everyone who prefers Mass in the vernacular prefers the N.O.M. Had the Council fathers merely rendered the ancient Mass in good translations and then allowed one or two in Latin per diocese, this entire disaster might have been largely avoided. The problem with that, however, is avoiding an unsacral translation. Take away the reverence by using conversational wording and you 'break the spell' and smash the priceless vase (pronounced to rhyme with 'cause' of course). No, it can't be done without calling God 'Thou' in Engliah. That will attract some opposition but, what the hell, the Church is not a democracy. If she were, she could never have survived all these centuries.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Thanks to all who took part in this interesting debate.

    NC

    ReplyDelete
  87. Anonymous8:46 PM

    Henry writes:

    "And that, when so celebrated, it neither looks nor is any less the true Holy Sacrifice (nor any more a mere communal meal) than is the Tridentine Mass."

    Nobody who has considered the N.O. Offertory carefully could come to this absurd conclusion. The New Mass is the Liturgy of Rupture. It removes ancient prayers and supplants them, sometimes with prayers more conducive to a Lord's Supper. That is not acceptable. It is the attempt of man to replace the work of God Himself.

    P.K.T.P.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Anonymous4:54 PM

    Its about time that the word on Las Vegas is out!!

    Beyond the glitz and sin that LV is known for, the Church is vibrant and diverse. Several Eastern rites are present along with various ethnic communities.

    The SSPX chapel enjoys a steady and faithful crowd.

    The EF approved by the diocese is only offered every first friday.

    May God move the heart of Bishop Pepe (and other priests) to promote,offer and make it easier for the faithful to assist at the TLM.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Anonymous6:22 PM

    I do not find this post contoversial or gloating in any way. Only if you wish to use that lens to view with. Mr Perkins offers a report on progress of the TLM and at the same time recognizes some facts. That the Latin NO is declining in numbers. I for one appreciated the report. Some of the polemics afterwards that were not part of the article seemed to inflame or excite the feelings of a few. But I understand the point of the article. It was written with hope, love and and perhaps some anguish of having to write it in the first place, having the TLM displaced the way it was. Just because we are glad for these developments do not mistake that with pride. It may not be. Someone does have to post this, Someone does have to write about it. Someone does have to keep the rest of us in the loop. It seems the growth of the Tridentine Mass is what is the issue and some chose that to introduce a harmful backlash. As for Rorate, thank you for posting it. From a commentator many of us know from here, with a great knowledge of the goings on behind the scenes which most of us are not privy to, I am happy to see this topic for discussion. Shying away from articles of growth because they may stir the liberal or progressive side would not be fair to the TLM itself. We all deserve to hear things are going well, and if some people desire a full out restoration then why not report on something that gives them hope, as long as the info is not false. Those who wish it, the TLM to dry up are out there as well and have no qualms about expressing it. Good job Rorate and Mr. Perkins.
    Mitchell in NY

    ReplyDelete
  90. Anonymous1:54 AM

    Mitchell in N.Y., You certainly speak for me and I could not have expressed it better than you have. Thank you Mr. Perkins, Mitchell, and RORATE CAELI for this heartening news. God bless us all! Fight on!

    ReplyDelete
  91. Anonymous1:21 PM

    P.K.T.P.: Nobody who has considered the N.O. Offertory carefully could come to this absurd conclusion.

    Well, I can only say how carefully how I myself have considered it. Carefully enough that I have copied the TLM offertory prayers – the Suscipe, sancte Pater, the Deus, qui humanae, the Offerimus tibi, the In spiritu humilitatis, the Veni, sanctificator, and the Suscipe, sancta Trinitas -- onto a couple of cards that I carry with me to pray privately at the offertory whenever I must attend a Novus Ordo Mass. These are private prayers of the celebrant – historically and liturgically – and, indeed, I know priests who do the Novus Ordo “preparatory rite” silently and say these same traditional private offertory prayers in Latin quietly as they do it. As does Pope Benedict, according to a priest I know in Rome who has been in close proximity at papal Masses.

    At any rate, if you think that these offertory prayers prior to the Roman Canon are necessary for re-presentation of the Sacrifice of the Cross, then you know less about the sacrificial character of the Mass than me or Pope Benedict, who has written definitively on this very issue. (Though, obviously from my own behavior, I think these prayers should be reinserted in the Novus Ordo, as I expect they will be, to make this essential aspect inescapable to people who need the reminder.)

    Of course, all this is a digression from the main point, which is that your Latin Novus Ordo “report” is wrong (and wrong-headed) on at least two counts.

    (1) Many Latin Novus Ordo Masses are celebrated that you have no clue about – I myself have attended (and know of others) a weekly almost all Latin (including the Roman Canon) Novus Ordo Mass that has never showed up in any documentary record anywhere, ad orientem Latin Novus Ordo requiem Masses in black Roman vestments that never showed up anywhere on paper, etc. (Many priests celebrating Latin Masses in either form have reason not to advertise them.)

    But the larger point is that thousands of Novus Ordo Masses in this country now include at least the Kyrie in Greek and the Sanctus and Agnus Dei in Latin – with many of them headed toward the Gloria and Credo also in Latin – whereas this was quite rare pre Benedict. (My estimate of “thousands” is based on the fact that 5% would be about a thousand Novus Ordo Masses, and my experience indicates the actual percentage must be greater than 5%.) So the fact is that the use of Latin in the Novus Ordo is not decreasing, but is increasing exponentially.

    (2) If the Latin Novus Ordo were decreasing in practice, then this would be bad news for the TLM, not good, as you seem to think. Without belaboring the reasoning, it ought to be obvious that a rising Latin tide raises all Latin boats. More specifically, once a serious (and seriously deprived) Catholic sees it better, he wants it best. And so for him the Latin Novus Ordo is not a final destination, but a half-way step to the TLM.

    Finally, while getting a more accurate statistical picture is important, as one who has actually worked in this vineyard with tangible results (rather than mere talk and discussion), I think the “sky is falling approach” is not only a disconnect with a rapidly improving situation, but marginally counter-productive. Only “marginally” because few are influenced by this kind of negative stuff, and because the momentum of the pendulum swinging in the positive direction is to great for much harm to be done by the “bitter trad talk” that in the past has been more damaging.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Anonymous2:21 PM

    Peter, you are right. Stay the course.

    The new Mass will one day cease to exist, in God's good time, but we have to first undergo the punishments Our Lady warned us about at Fatima.

    I find it strange that any Catholic could think that the new Mass is on par with the old, whether in Latin or otherwise. The new Mass drops numerous references to the Blessed Virgin that constantly appear in the old Mass. How can any Catholic abide such a thing?

    There are some new Masses where She gets mentioned twice at most. Such is not the case with the old Mass.

    Our Lady came to Fatima to announce that God wanted to establish devotion to Her Immaculate Heart. It is difficult to see how dropping many of the references to the Blessed Virgin in the central part of Catholic worship would help accomplish such a feat. It most assuredly does not evince a Catholic mindset, regardless of who advocates it.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Anonymous6:43 PM

    NO to the NO!

    ReplyDelete
  94. Anonymous7:36 PM

    Attn: P.K.T.P.

    I don't always agree with you but usually do and believe you are spot on in this case.

    One would think that Fr. Cekada might have some strong comments on this issue even though we disagree on the current papacy.

    I would bet that unlisted Tridentine Masses far outnumber Latin N.O Masses because the threat of reprisal still exists in many places.

    A.M. LaPietra

    ReplyDelete
  95. "So the fact is that the use of Latin in the Novus Ordo is not decreasing, but is increasing exponentially."

    This is not only very true, but more likely to be continued officially. The recently-approved English re-translation of the reformed Roman Missal contains Latin and Greek texts. Not just in some insignificant appendix in the back, but in the main body of the missal itself.

    ReplyDelete
  96. "...The recently-approved English re-translation of the reformed Roman Missal contains Latin and Greek texts. Not just in some insignificant appendix in the back, but in the main body of the missal itself."
    _________________

    But..but...but, David, we've been told over and over that priests just can't offer the Old Latin Mass because they don't know Latin!!! How in the world are Latin NO's going to increase if our clergy are so linguistically impaired??? :D

    By the way, I've been enjoying this debate. I don't consider the discussion to be full of "trad bitterness". Not at all. Peter's sense of humour shines throughout. That's one reason his writing is so enjoyable.

    ReplyDelete
  97. The danger now is that all the "Classical" liturgists' energies will be rhythmically focused like a drumbeat arguing for changing the TLM. We hear already of their tactics (errors):

    1) Liturgy can't be "frozen in time". Therefore, arbitrary, "harmless" changes must be made unilaterally to prove that the TLM is not frozen. The changes proposed would, of course, be harmful, and oriented towards paving the way to much larger changes in the future. Those who resist the changes should be suspended and excommunicated.

    2) Sacrosanctum Concilium is either presently binding on the TLM, or needs to be applied to the TLM.

    3) "Mutual enrichment" means importing Novus Ordo practices into the TLM.

    4) The two Forms will need to be merged at some point.

    5) Low Mass is an abuse.

    6) The 1983 Code of Canon Law allows the use of women in all functions of the TLM except priest and deacon.

    7) The rubrics of the 1962 Missal are sacrosanct and idiotic modernisms that crept in during the 1950's like the role of commentator cannot be protested against because they are "allowed". Anyone who says the Confiteor before Communion, for example, is a schismatic.

    8) Liturgical law issued after 1962 and before the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae is actually binding on the TLM and supersedes the rubrics of the 1962 Missal.

    9) Redemptionis Sacramentum and other liturgical laws are binding on all Forms of the Roman Rite equally.

    10) There is only one possible positive outcome of the doctrinal discussions between Rome and Econe: the total and unilateral submission of the SSPX to the superdogma of Vatican II.

    11) It is necessary to go back and forth between both Forms of the Roman Rite. Priests who only celebrate the TLM should be viewed with suspicion as probable deniers of the hermeneutic of continuity.

    12) It is height of charity to be dogmatic about all of the above propositions. Anyone who disagrees with these propositions is making unspecified grave errors about canon law or ecclesiology.

    13) The fact that some people with money and clout and some clerics, including high-ranking prelates, are friendly to some or all the above propositions, proves that they are the mind of the Church.

    ReplyDelete
  98. M. A.4:29 AM

    RE: Pride

    (I like to quote intelligent people because they can often articulate much better than I. : )

    “This bold destruction of centuries of Catholic liturgy, of the gentle accumulation of layers of contributions added by men of all ages, by a committee of scholarly bureaucrats of the 20th century, who believed they were somehow "outside" History, that they could sit in judgment of their forefathers in the Faith and pick and choose what was "historical" and what was not, what was the "true tradition" and what was a distortion of it - this still strikes any observer as the epitome of arrogance and carelessness, of hatred for the magnificent edifice of Western liturgy.”

    - From a Rorate Caeli post by New Catholic, Saturday, June 14, 2008

    I accidentally found the above quote while searching for a book by the revolutionary Benedictine liturgist, Bernard Botte entitled, FROM SILENCE TO PARTICIPATION. It sounds like a book which advocates of dialogue Masses might like.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Anonymous2:50 PM

    I'm in the archdiocese of Los Angeles, and as much as I disagree with the Cardinal, I do call him by his name because I do not believe in going lower than what has been done to the Faith in Los Angeles.

    1. The NO in Latin, offered with the mind of the Church is transcendent, and conveys the same Catholic Faith (i.e. not with man made hymns, but with the introit, gradual, offertory, communion, etc) as the TLM, because it is Christ Himself in the person of the priest who offers the Mass

    2. Indeed I agree with the person who said low Mass is an abuse, the missa normativa is the sung Mass. Good thing in the Eastern Church there's no such a thing as low Mass, we should copy them in this regard.

    3. Latin in the NO is definately increasing. 6 years ago, Latin in the NO would have been laughed at. There are many parishes, including my own integrating the parts of the Mass that pertain to them in Latin, this is great, and I would love to see i increase continuously

    4. The English world has experienced a so called translation of the Missal (I call it a joke). i have to do my best not to laugh at the English Missal because of the pathetic translation. The Translation of the 2002 Roman Missal with the sacrificial language is going to help the Faithful and the Faith as a whole. We are NOT getting the translation of the 70 Missal thanks be to God)

    5. Sacradorte sine nomine, wrote my initial thoughts upon reading this for me. I can only humbly add look before you shoot, the Norbertines, St Michael's Abbey are the insturments of the glue that holds that diocese together.

    6. We all saw how well wholesale destruction worked last time, do we really want a repeat of that? I love our Holy Father and the course he's taking on the Liturgy. The ship is more like an aircraft carrier, it's going to take time to trun, but once it gathers momentum it's not being stopped.

    In charity

    J of ST

    ReplyDelete
  100. @J of ST: Indeed I agree with the person who said low Mass is an abuse

    To be blunt, I don't think you can hold that position and be a Roman Catholic:

    "If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema." --Council of Trent

    ReplyDelete

Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.

_______
NOTES

(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!