Traditional Latin Mass Group and the Child Abuse Scandal

[KatherineS]

I was talking about Tridentine Latin Mass, ie High Mass.

Which was not commonplace before the Council.

Perhaps this can be done in a reverent way

,

Certainly. The principle of giving the reserved sacrament a place of its own rather than plopping it down on the altar of sacrifice and confusing the mysteries is a sound and legitimate principle.

Broad, general and wide condemnation of this practice is of questionable merit. Specific, defined and local commentary on the proper way of doing this should be welcome in the particular communities.

But the format can inspire reverence... would you agree? If you went to a Mass where they used glass vessels for Communion, and there were no kneelers, and people danced during the Mass, - I don't think that would inspire as much reverence as something more traditional.

I don't find crystal glassware to be profone by its essense.

I have been to Mass (Divine Liturgy) without kneelers and found great reverence.

 

[AMDG]

Which was not commonplace before the Council.

I beg to differ with you there. It was usually a later Mass and sometimes included Benediction. It just wasn't the "usual" Mass that a majority of the folks would go to. (I know, I would chose to go to the Missa Cantata, a form of High Mass.)

I don't find crystal glassware

She didn't say crystal, she said glass--as in "thrift store special". I guess you know that the GIRM (in the sacramentary book at the altar) for the Tridentine Mass required gold (nothing is too good for God) and even the Novus Ordo requires unbreakable noble material. (That sort of leaves out crystal or glass, since that is easily broken and would therefore spill the Sacred Blood.)

 

[Kotton]

Which was not commonplace before the Council.

I'm going to agree with AMDG, it was common when I was growing up and through my 20s. The first Mass was at eight and low Mass, the second at ten was high Mass. And yes, there was usually Benediction.

Kotton

 

[Ave Maria]

What it says is, most of the priest who commited sexual abuse were not pedophiles, but, homosexuals.

And we already know that homosexuals are not necessarily pedophiles.

Jim

Is it not possible that the priests who committed sexual abuse were not only mostly homosexuals but also pedophiles? I mean, I don't think that pedophilia is limited to one sexual orientation or another. I mean, just look at NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association), they are clearly an organization that wants the legalization of pedophilia and they are also a homosexual organization.

 

[KatherineS]

I beg to differ with you there. It was usually a later Mass and sometimes included Benediction. It just wasn't the "usual" Mass that a majority of the folks would go to. (I know, I would chose to go to the Missa Cantata, a form of High Mass.)

I wil clarify. I meant commonplace to mean the most common form of worship, not that the Hogh Mass was practically unknown. It was highly unusally for any parish to have more than a single weekly High Mass. All other Masses were Low Masses. Some parish -- small ones -- did not even have that. So, a majority of Catholics would have worshipped at Low Mass.

I would also say, it was us liturgical reformers (as even Pope Benedict gives us credit) that promoted more frequent High Mass.

She didn't say crystal, she said glass--as in "thrift store special". I guess you know that the GIRM (in the sacramentary book at the altar) for the Tridentine Mass required gold (nothing is too good for God) and even the Novus Ordo requires unbreakable noble material. (That sort of leaves out crystal or glass, since that is easily broken and would therefore spill the Sacred Blood.)

1. The priests I know are not klutzes. Yes, maybe "Father Fatfingers" should not use glass.

2. Fine crystal can be far more noble than some of the dented, cheap gold-plate I have seen used. Gold, of course, is a symbol of mammon. Crystal involves art and craftwork than a plated tin cup does not.

 

[AMDG]

2. Fine crystal can be far more noble than some of the dented, cheap gold-plate I have seen used.

Still, the New GIRM and the RS states that the material used for the chalice should not be breakable.

BTW, an incident happened to me many years ago before the regulations of RS that really brought the issue into "crystal clarity" (forgive the pun). The Novus Ordo parish in which I was a extraordinary minister used glass chalices. (They actually removed Father's gold chalice from before and replaced it with glass--not even crystal.) In fact, all the extraordinary ministers used glass as well. Well after Mass, when we extraordinary ministers were cleaning the vessels and in just putting the glass chalice down it "clinked" against another and the stem was immediately broken (glass you know). Imagining what could have happened if this was at Mass, I felt awful. Not sure if the actions of the extraordinary minister in charge made me feel much better though. He simply opened a 4-pk of the glasses one would get at a thrift store and replaced the broken glass with the one that wasn't! Thankfully, the new regulations about a chalice not to be of breakable material came through some years later so our parish complied--had to buy another "parish" chalice for Father to use (guess they got rid of the old gold one.)

 

[JimR-OCDS]

No, Jim.. the format matter.

If we do not have proper format, ie form, matter and intent, we don't even have a Mass. We are no better then the Protestants at this point when we begin to change this and that to the point where isn't even a Mass.

The Mass is not there for our entertainment. It is a prayer of the highest form offered to God as the ultimate act of worship we can offer Him.

The format only matters as a form of having organization and unity within the celebration.

Reverence comes from the people.

I have attended many reverent Novus Ordo Masses and many irreverent.
I have also attended many reverent TLM and those irreverent.

It depends on the spiritual level and attitude of the people.


BTW, protestants can be reverent, sometimes more reverent than Catholics. Its the Holy Spirit that moves our level of reverence.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

benedictaoo

Jim said format does not matter- yeah, it does.

I was speaking of the TLM or NO. Format between the two doesn't matter
when it comes to reverence.

Its the people participating that make them reverent, not the format.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Ave Maria

Is it not possible that the priests who committed sexual abuse were not only mostly homosexuals but also pedophiles?

If the majority of cases of sexual abuse were in fact pedophilia, then yes that would be the case.

However, the reality is, most of the cases of sexual abuse were not pedophilia, i.e. adults having sex with puberty children, but homosexual priest committing various levels of sexual acts with post-puberty teens.

Psychiatrist now term this as Epedophilia.

I mean, I don't think that pedophilia is limited to one sexual orientation or another. I mean, just look at NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association), they are clearly an organization that wants the legalization of pedophilia and they are also a homosexual organization.

Homosexuality is a disorder just as pedophilia is. Its being debated but there are reports showing that homosexuals make up the majority of pedophiles. Members of NAMBLA, are predominantly homosexual. Most of the data that showed pedophiles were married men, was outdated. It was done when homosexuals were staying behind closed doors and many were married men. Since homosexuals are not forced into these closed door situations, the numbers have change dramatically.



Jim

 

[benedictaoo]

benedictaoo



I was speaking of the TLM or NO. Format between the two doesn't matter
when it comes to reverence.

Its the people participating that make them reverent, not the format.

Jim

and that's the whole problem Jim, the format- they way it's set up, people are irreverent as the day is long now days because NO is designed and set up that way.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

and that's the whole problem Jim, the format- they way it's set up, people are irreverent as the day is long now days because NO is designed and set up that way.

No, its not designed and set up to be irreverent.

In fact the two formats aren't so different that one could be more reverent than the other. The words of the consecration are the same, except one is in the vernacular which people understand, the other is in Latin, were only a few understand.

I've attended many reverent NO Masses, but they're usually at a monastery were people take the Mass very serious.

Make the TLM the norm instead of the extraordinary, and you'll see irreverence that will surpass the NO today, because you'll have people
the same attitudes with even less understanding of what's going on.

Jim

 

[benedictaoo]

Perhaps this article will help: The Catholic Knight: Pope To Be Crucified This Easter ,
or maybe the open-letter from George Wiegle that Michie posted,
or maybe the EWTN archived World Over program with George Wiegle that dealt with the scandal.

You mean the apologists schmoozing, damage control and down playing attempts? That is exactly what I'm talking about and what has me outraged.

To what extent this pope knew what was going on? I don't know... do you?

To what extent did the last pope knew what was going on? I don't know. Do you?

To what extent did Paul 6 knew what was going on? I don't know. Do you?

What did John 23 know? We have no idea.

Do you understand, we have no idea what these Popes and Cardinals in high places knew during the many many years it was going on?

All I know is, I have been made sick over the attempts to explain it all away, pin it on all homosexuality and even the victims.

The fault is the Catholic Church's obvious policy for bishops to protect priests at all cost.

as along as they get rid of this policy, I'm good but do we really have a way of knowing they have or not do it again in the future.. heck it could be going on now somewhere and we won't know until the big bad media breaks it.

 

[benedictaoo]

No, its not designed and set up to be irreverent.

But yet it happens and it happen far less in the TLM. why is that? Oh yeah, because the format sets it up that way.

 

[benedictaoo]

Ave Maria



If the majority of cases of sexual abuse were in fact pedophilia, then yes that would be the case.

However, the reality is, most of the cases of sexual abuse were not pedophilia, i.e. adults having sex with puberty children, but homosexual priest committing various levels of sexual acts with post-puberty teens.

Psychiatrist now term this as Epedophilia.

and it makes what the Catholic Church did better HOW, Jim?

How is this in your mind, less horrifying then pedophilia????

 

[JimR-OCDS]

But yet it happens and it happen far less in the TLM. why is that? Oh yeah, because the format sets it up that way.

It happens far less in the TLM because the TLM isn't the norm of every parish in the world, but the extraordinary form, and that has only become recent.

Those who attend the TLM go out of their way to do so. They take the Mass far more serious than the average Catholic attending Mass in his/her own parish.

Change the situation where the TLM were the norm, and the level of irreverence would surpass what we have now with the NO, because on top of irreverence, we'd have a greater degree of ignorance on what is taking place.


Jim

 

[drstevej]

Prayer that this will be dealt with firmly by all Churches who name the name of Christ. The reputation of Christ himself and the safety of these kids is what counts.

 

[AMDG]

except one is in the vernacular which people understand, the other is in Latin, were only a few understand.

This claim is so old it has whiskers! And it isn't now (nor was it ever) quite true either. The inexpensive missals (inexpensive then, but not now) were used for folks to prayerfully follow the Mass (BTW that was called "participation"). The Missals had the vernacular on one page, and on the other page (right next to it) was the Latin. Oh, forgot to mention that purchasing one missal (which was very inexpensive to begin with) had the Mass and readings for 10 years--not like the newer pew missalettes that must be changed every season--or the newer regular missal that require much page turning.

But yes, I can actually see much abuse now occurring if the "regular" people (those who just want Mass over with) return to the Tridentine (especially with the background they have now.) They have already been trained to be sloppy with their Faith! Few places have silence in God's House anymore--it's more like a parish hall get-together; and then there's the casual dress--I swear Protestants seem to "get it" more that this is not about us--but is about giving glory to God. Then there's the fact that people today are more interested in "what's in it for me" rather than "how can I show greater glory to God"--it seems that people just want to be entertained--one hears it in the applause or the laughing at joke Father tells in the homily, or the fact that the choir feels that it must take center stage so all eyes must be on them. And yes, in my experience as an extraordinary minister, there is irreverence. I still remember instructions about not allowing people to snatch the Host, telling teens to take the gum out of their mouths (before reception of Communion ), not to stare at filthy hands (with all sorts of things written on them) that most teens present as they shuffle forward in the Communion line, and not to read (or look askance at) the strange things on T-shirts that even the adults migh wear when presenting themselves to receive the King-of-Kings.

You are right, it's going to take more than a more reverent Mass to change how people react. The people have been carefully taught to be less reverent.

 

[benedictaoo]

Prayer that this will be dealt with firmly by all Churches who name the name of Christ. The reputation of Christ himself and the safety of these kids is what counts.

exactly.

 

[Fantine]

I wil clarify. I meant commonplace to mean the most common form of worship, not that the Hogh Mass was practically unknown. It was highly unusally for any parish to have more than a single weekly High Mass. All other Masses were Low Masses. Some parish -- small ones -- did not even have that. So, a majority of Catholics would have worshipped at Low Mass.

I would also say, it was us liturgical reformers (as even Pope Benedict gives us credit) that promoted more frequent High Mass.



1. The priests I know are not klutzes. Yes, maybe "Father Fatfingers" should not use glass.

2. Fine crystal can be far more noble than some of the dented, cheap gold-plate I have seen used. Gold, of course, is a symbol of mammon. Crystal involves art and craftwork than a plated tin cup does not.

In the high growth areas of the Church, priests may travel over bumpy or non-existent roads to say Mass once a month in one of the many little 'missions' under their responsibility. If he were to carry a gold chalice with him, he might be at the mercy of marauders and bandits and never get to his destination.

And it is doubtful that the different little missions he served would each be able to afford their own gold chalice.

Now, I know that some of you think that Jesus would want this missionary priest to put his life at risk carrying a golden chalice, because, after all, that's the rule, and your God is the God of rules.

Besides, those missionaries in Africa are pretty liberal. Why, they supported Obama. They should be excommunicated, and then the people in Africa won't have a gold chalice OR a missionary, because, after all, it's better to be pagan than to have a missionary who puts the needs of the people he serves above the needs of the unborn in the US.

 

[benedictaoo]

It happens far less in the TLM because the TLM isn't the norm of every parish in the world, but the extraordinary form, and that has only become recent.

Those who attend the TLM go out of their way to do so. They take the Mass far more serious than the average Catholic attending Mass in his/her own parish.

Change the situation where the TLM were the norm, and the level of irreverence would surpass what we have now with the NO, because on top of irreverence, we'd have a greater degree of ignorance on what is taking place.


Jim

Okay great but when you use the format of the TLM, it's really hard to be irreverent.

You would have to go way out of your way and be deliberately irreverent.

The New Order, the way it is set up, one can easy be irreverent and not even realize it.

Example:

TLM:Communion time, in order for it to end up on the floor, one would have to, on purpose, spit the host out on the floor.

NO: It can easy fall out of a person's hands on to the floor for several reasons.