|
Post by Ranger on Jan 13, 2016 11:16:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 22, 2017 20:09:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prayerful on Oct 24, 2017 21:01:02 GMT
Interesting. West Africa, Gabon I think was the origin of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, for which the government of Gabon built a fine chapel or church. He had to combat the tendency of his own Igbo people towards inculturation, a fascination with aping the West, and in those early years, the so called 'New Mass' was something to ape.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 12, 2018 18:32:01 GMT
Rod Dreher draws attention to this post by an American trad priest warning that the idea that people will automatically come back to Mass as the EF becomes more widely available is mistaken. He argues that numbers seem to have hit a ceiling, that the TLM is an acquired taste, and that there's no substitute for evangelisation. A couple of observations: (1) The idea that wider TLM availability would bring more people back to Mass had more credibility when most of the Catholic or lapsed Catholic population could remember the older liturgy. We need to realise that it is at least 50 years since the older form was generally available, and two generations have grown up without encountering it. I grew up with a positive attitude towards the TLM as a result of contact with traditionalist relatives, but I remember how startled I was the first time I attended one. It takes time to "get" it (indeed I have met people whose instinctive attitude is revulsion). (2) A lot of the basic infrastructure to understand the TLM has been lost - we need to be conscious of this and to engage in active reconstruction and outreach. www.ncregister.com/blog/msgr-pope/an-urgent-warning-about-the-future-of-the-traditional-latin-massBTW here is Dreher's post, which argues that talk of both a "JPII/ Benedict effect" or of a "Francis Effect" producing a major revival has turned out to be insubstantial and that the only way forward is conscious evangelisation through intentional communities: www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/francis-effect-us-catholicism-decline/
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Apr 12, 2018 20:03:03 GMT
Rod Dreher draws attention to this post by an American trad priest warning that the idea that people will automatically come back to Mass as the EF becomes more widely available is mistaken. He argues that numbers seem to have hit a ceiling, that the TLM is an acquired taste, and that there's no substitute for evangelisation. A couple of observations: (1) The idea that wider TLM availability would bring more people back to Mass had more credibility when most of the Catholic or lapsed Catholic population could remember the older liturgy. We need to realise that it is at least 50 years since the older form was generally available, and two generations have grown up without encountering it. I grew up with a positive attitude towards the TLM as a result of contact with traditionalist relatives, but I remember how startled I was the first time I attended one. It takes time to "get" it (indeed I have met people whose instinctive attitude is revulsion). (2) A lot of the basic infrastructure to understand the TLM has been lost - we need to be conscious of this and to engage in active reconstruction and outreach. www.ncregister.com/blog/msgr-pope/an-urgent-warning-about-the-future-of-the-traditional-latin-massBTW here is Dreher's post, which argues that talk of both a "JPII/ Benedict effect" or of a "Francis Effect" producing a major revival has turned out to be insubstantial and that the only way forward is conscious evangelisation through intentional communities: www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/francis-effect-us-catholicism-decline/Amen. I must admit that, as a Catholic who feels entirely at home in the Ordinary Form, I have to grit my teeth innumerable times at a lot of Traditionalist rhetoric. I have to remind myself that the Traditionalist community haven't been treated very well themselves for decades and to try to be understanding. I feel the Ordinary Form is done a grave injustice, often being treated as a cesspool of irreverence. It's reached the stage where I am unwilling to volunteer any mention of abuses at the Ordinary Form because I don't want to give ammunition to its critics, who inevitably exaggerate them. I have become very guarded about what I say regarding Mass. For instance, I've had the experience that, if I mention being bored at Mass, a Traditionalist will say: "Well, of course you're bored at Mass. You need to go to the Traditionalist Mass, you would never be bored!". Or, on the Other Forum, someone was writing about Blessed John Sullivan and made some offhand comment comparing his experience (as an Anglican) on Mount Athos to the pre-Vatican II Mass, "which still had a sense of the sacred", or some such thing. As though there is NO sense of the sacred in an OF Mass. And these kind of throwaway comments are not meant in any way maliciously, but do reflect a very dismissive attitude towards the Ordinary Form. I've been to several Extraordinary Form Masses. My feelings are neither attraction nor revulsion. I appreciate the reverence and solemnity but ultimately, to me, the supernatural reality and the Real Presence is what matters. There is so much talk of young families at the Traditionalist Mass. One would swear there were no young families at Ordinary Form Masses. In absolute terms, there are exponentially more. There's also something rather ageist about such talk, as though one couple with a child outweighs thirty pensioners. Also, given all the talk of how reverent Traditionalist Catholics were, I was quite taken aback at how many people turned up late. Critics of the "New Mass" often complain that it's a "performance" rather than a sacrament, perhaps because of the occasional guitar or because people sometimes applaud (neither of which I like). However, the Traditionalist Mass seems much more of a "performance" to me-- the focus is so much upon aesthetics and style. I entirely agree that the "draw" of the Traditionalist Mass is rather exaggerated. It's wonderful that some people have a transformative experience there, thanks be to God for that, but it's wrong to assume everybody else would have the same experience. The liturgy means very little to me-- but the Mass means everything. On the other hand, Hibernicus, I wonder if the fact that "two generations have grown up without encountering it" matters so much? It seems to be a certain sort of young person who is especially drawn to it, often young people with little or no experience of Catholicism at all. I do believe that there is a certain sort of "spirit of Vatican II" Catholic who hates the Extraordinary Form for what it is, and who would never look favourably on it under any circumstances. However, I think it's probable that SOME Traditionalists breed resentment with a certain supercilious attitude towards the Ordinary Form.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 7, 2019 20:04:55 GMT
I've just been reading Ed Moloney's SECRET HISTORY OF THE IRA (2011 revised edition) and on p.75 it says that in the 1970s the Provo Belfast weekly REPUBLICAN NEWS was "edited by someone who many years later became a leading light in the Irish Tridentine Mass movement". Who was this, and was he/she in the SSPX, an indult group, or some other body?
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Mar 7, 2019 21:49:08 GMT
I've just been reading Ed Moloney's SECRET HISTORY OF THE IRA (2011 revised edition) and on p.75 it says that in the 1970s the Provo Belfast weekly REPUBLICAN NEWS was "edited by someone who many years later became a leading light in the Irish Tridentine Mass movement". Who was this, and was he/she in the SSPX, an indult group, or some other body? That was Seán Caughey, who was involved in Pobal na hÉireann in Befast. Alaisdir has a post which discusses the movement here. See also his Wikipedia entry.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Mar 8, 2019 9:18:42 GMT
I've just been reading Ed Moloney's SECRET HISTORY OF THE IRA (2011 revised edition) and on p.75 it says that in the 1970s the Provo Belfast weekly REPUBLICAN NEWS was "edited by someone who many years later became a leading light in the Irish Tridentine Mass movement". Who was this, and was he/she in the SSPX, an indult group, or some other body? That was Seán Caughey, who was involved in Pobal na hÉireann in Befast. Alaisdir has a post which discusses the movement here. See also his Wikipedia entry.It surprises me Seán Mac Eochaidh could be a serious figure within Sinn Féin. He was very anti SSPX. But he achieved little in Belfast for the traditional Mass.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 14, 2022 23:08:11 GMT
Bishop Edward Daly's first volume of autobiography, MISTER, ARE YOU A PRIEST? (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2000) has some comments on his memories of the TLM and the changeover (which in the Derry diocese happened en bloc in 1970 on the decreed date, rather than piece by piece and earlier as in some other dioceses; I suspect this reflects the more disciplined nature of Northern Catholics as an embattled minority). He thinks on balance the change was for the best, but he admits it was traumatic for priests and people, and he regrets the disappearance of the Tenebrae liturgy of Holy Week.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Dec 15, 2022 19:17:51 GMT
Bishop Edward Daly was also the first bishop in Ireland to actually say the Mass publicly after the 1984 Indult.
I understand the Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Alibrandi was doing so privately on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 23, 2023 23:00:28 GMT
In fairness I should add that in his second memoir A TROUBLED SEE Bishop Daly says that his experience of saying the TLM after Summorum Pontificum was spiritually dry and that he thinks its revival is not a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on Mar 24, 2023 10:06:37 GMT
Ok 3rd time lucky, as an aside is anyone else having issues with Perlico broadband. I am going to play devil's advocate here. I know one man who was asked to leave seminary in England along with a host of his pro EF peers. He loved that form of Mass, the otherness of it, the drama spoke of the drama of God. Or something. Anyway he was prolife pro Rosary pro EF Mass pro Pope, all the pros you could want. We were shocked at his expulsion and he felt it was because he stood up for his peers and their stance on fidelity to Church. We all agreed, damned liberals! Two years later M'laddo is out and proud, never attends Mass and has become increasingly anti Church and provocative with his homosexual lifetstyle. His dad was a drunk, mam passivity itself, a broken home. I also know some pro EF Mass men, young enough, with odd attitudes towards women (no college ed, don't work, no trousers, home school the children only). Some of those things aren't bad in themselves but it shows a fear of women and makes me wonder why I never meet the likes of that at NO Mass. I don't want to offend any men here but we are not producing a great calibre of men, generally, in this country today. As for those attracted to the EF Mass well the odd ones and the wrong 'uns like my friends above are going to be among those devotees and some of them will be attracted to seminary. It's the well adjusted young men in our parishes we should encourage and embrace, not the kooks. Pro EF men should not be accepted de facto, we accepted all candidates before and look where we are now... It makes sense that some men with issues are going to seminary and some will be attracted to the Tridentine. But those being asked to leave are just as likely to be expelled for their psychological problems as for their preferences at Mass. We can't assume that's the case, because we may be missing an important clue as to how the devil will next infiltrate the seminary... We need good strong smart well adjusted men, pro EF devotees doesn't necessarily guarantee that as some people believe. I'm not saying there isn't an push against the SP but it's not always the case. Just noticed this today and will likely come back to it. I think it needs to be said that Ireland has not been fertile ground for traditional vocations. The only Irish member of the FSSP was already a priest of the Galway diocese on joining; no Irish candidates for either the FSSP or ICRSS remained the course; and the SSPX don't have a good record on this one either. Similarly, I don't see many strong marriages emerging out of the traditional communities. Now, I think there are a million reasons for all this, and this is the place to start talking.
|
|
|
Post by Beinidict Ó Niaidh on Mar 24, 2023 10:08:47 GMT
Good point, Banaltra. It is certainly the case that people with psychological problems are often attracted to highly ritualistic forms of religion for various reasons (it gives them a sense of control and belonging to a select group of initiates, for example, in much the same way that some people are Trekkies or obsessed with Lord of the Rings). At the same time, psychology is not an exact science and I suspect we are all of us to some extent neurotic or can be seen as such - that doesn't mean we are all incapable of functioning or not responsible for our actions. There is unquestionably a strong tendency among theological liberals to assume that conservative/traditionalist views can ONLY be due to psychological illness (on the assumption that there can be no valid reasons for taking the traditionalist viewpoint). The ACP, if you look at their website, quite often remark that traditionalists are simply insecure and nostalgic, they rant about silk vestments and incense as if there was nothing more to the TLM. I remember a young priest from Carlow who often features in ACP commentary denouncing the recent LMSI High Mass at Maynooth as being like "something out of a horror film". This was the standard form of worship in the Latin Rite for hundreds of years, and he reacted ONLY with revulsion and regarded it as so monstrous that he could not even be bothered to understand the views and feelings of the attendees before denouncing it. I think you are talking about Father Paddy Byrne there who was a poster-boy for the ACP, principally because he was the only young priest in it. These fogies have absolutely no success rate either.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 18, 2023 22:16:35 GMT
The link below is quite a good dissection of the contradictions of a recent statement on the TLM by Wilton Cardinal Gregory, Archbishop of Washington DC. Amongst other things, the Cardinal complains that conservative priests create a "need" for the TLM by celebrating it and attracting congregations. What we seem to have here is an ideologically driven desire to attribute the existence of a TLM constituency to "clericalism" and therefore to downplay the existence of significant lay demand for it. To paraphrase one of Newman's sayings, the priests would be isolated without lay support; and anyone who thinks all lay trads become trads through hypnosis by some priest hasn't met many trads. www.catholicculture.org/commentary/cardinal-gregory-and-dominant-rite/
|
|
|
Post by annie on Jan 15, 2024 22:11:11 GMT
|
|