Is it wrong to view going to a NO Mass as Penance?
#21
(09-29-2009, 03:12 PM)mike6240 Wrote:
(09-29-2009, 03:01 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: More often than not, it seems, at the NO parish, the laity (and by laity, i mean old people involved in the upper-rungs of the parish) control the parish.  They stay there for life, and they are always working on the parish council, in the rectory, etc, etc, and after a few years, they gain the ear of the Bishop (or can make enough racket that the bishop finds it easier to transfer the priest than deal with these idiots). 

That, and unlike the priests, these people stay at the parish for life.  So they become entrenched.

Pitiful.  That's no excuse for the laity telling priests what they may or may not do liturgically.  And it's no excuse for a priest to become a spineless slave to a congregation.  Who went for years to seminary?  Who was ordained?  Who paid thousands of dollars to go to college and seminary and then be told by a bunch of ignorant old ladies how, when, and where to offer Mass?
Totally pitiful.

The priest may be in control, but he also has to bide his time and play his cards.  When the Mass switched overnight in the 60s many people were scandalized, and left the Church.  This was in an environment when many people were fairly well catechized, so perhaps the falloff was cushioned because the educated ones knew they really couldn't go elsewhere and that they should just put up with the changes.  However, today isn't 1969.  There's been two generations of abysmal catechesis, and even without a change in the liturgy, people have chosen their religion based on their preferences.  Now what would happen if Fr. O'Malley is assigned to a relatively liturgically degenerate parish, and decides to implement the TLM immediately?  I think attendance would falloff immediately.

If the liturgy rolled down a mountain in the 60s, then the new priests are going to have to slowly pull the parish back up.  If the parish was liturgically degenerate under the old priest, then the new one will have to slowly implement good liturgical practices.  Once the parish is liturgically sound, then I think it would be a good time to announce you're adding a TLM to the schedule.
Reply
#22
I don't think attendance would fall off that much in most parishes if the TLM were introduced, especially if it were just one Mass on Sunday, like the earliest one.  I suspect most people who are still in the pews at this point, through the scandals and the innovations  and the constant second collections, will sit through just about anything.  That recent poll seems to back me up, too: only 20% of weekly Mass-goers were opposed to bringing back the TLM, and you know a certain number of those are just repeating what they've been told and haven't actually experienced it.  I suspect the number that would actually walk out is much lower than 20%, and most of them would just go at a different time of day.

However, I also suspect that in many parishes there would be a very vocal minority, maybe no more than 10%, that would complain loudly to the bishop; and if the bishop isn't a friend to tradition, the priest could find himself in trouble.
Reply
#23
I sort of viewed it as penance when I still went. It never did much good for me, I got the Eucharist and that helped but that was about all I got out of the NO. The loud music made it impossible to pray, the women in mini skirts were a near occasion of sin, and it always made me sad to see the liturgical abuses and the disrespect of the people. I've vowed never to attend another if I can at all help it.



pax
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)