Answering Msgr. Charles Pope's article on the TLM
#11
(01-14-2016, 06:35 PM)richgr Wrote:
(01-10-2016, 10:52 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote:
(01-10-2016, 08:11 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote: The TLM and the culture surrounding it are not supported by the modern popes, the bishops or most laity. It's a niche market, an antiquarian option on the smorgasbord of other options.  There's just no real support for making the TLM and its culture more mainstream from within the hierarchy. I think that's what Monsignor Pope is trying to say.

The TLM is not even mainstream at the highest levels of the Church, and neither is the devotional life, the theology or the general culture surrounding it. It's just a niche option for those who won't or cannot move on. It's sad but this is how it is.

To be fair, you could change "TLM and its culture" for "serious Catholicism" and all you said would still hold. Not sure what's your point, then.

Btw, good article. I was not aware this Pope defended Gospel music in the Liturgy. Sounds like he deserves a good ol' ignoring.
But to be fair to FB, he's applying the logic of a lack of serious Catholicism to its implications in the matter of the TLM: the TLM cannot be expected to grow substantially in the present environment of the Church except as anything more than a niche, especially if even traditionalists can come in with a deeply embedded pluralism.

The article on OnePeterFive is good, but it doesn't seem to actually disagree with much of what Msgr. wrote, only to say that the issue is bigger than what Msgr. claimed. And I think in fairness to Msgr. Pope, he would agree.

It's really an issue of where one is in the Church. The "point" of talking about these things is relative to our individual goals as we work out or salvation as well as what God seems to have given us the opportunity to do. Thus to some who are simply trying to survive in this crazy world, articles like these just ultimately lead to a kind of despair--because how can we evangelize others if we ourselves are gasping for air? Others, who are perhaps a bit more sanguine, are in good positions to help spread the word and promote Traditionalism. Hence, for them, the article can be taken in other ways.

As for TLM attendance, OnePeterFive notes it well; it's a matter of anecdotal evidence. My personal experience has seen both mostly empty churches and churches packed into the vestibule for the TLM. I think it comes down to what RF was saying, serious Catholicism regardless of the numbers. The numbers can only tell us something about the current state of things and therefore a little about what we can do to help but nothing more.

I appreciate your charity towards what I said, and your attempt to understand what I meant. I think you got the gist of what I was going for.

The TLM is a niche, a side chapel attraction for those who are attached to it but largely nothing more. This will not change unless there are popes or bishops that promote it because when push comes to shove the style and content of a trad chapel and a TLM is alien in many ways to the modern Roman Rite and the style of Catholicism that goes along with it. For every trad priest or laymen that speaks in the language of the old Roman catechism, older prayer books or ways of theology there will be members in high ranking places--- including the pope--- that will not see things in those old ways anymore. For better or worse the language of Catholicism today is the language of Vatican II. It's ubiquitous, and it's not going to go away at this point in time,if ever.

If we think that Vatican II was evil,the new Mass is evil or whatever than perhaps we ought to revisit our take on the question of sedevacantism. After all, the majority of the world episcopate, every pope for the last half century and an ecumenical council ( which has been interpreted explicitly and implicitly ) reject the old ways or at the very least want them on the margins. We must deal with this reality.

It's not easy to evangelize or promote the old when almost no one in the leadership of the Church wants much to do with any of it. That's my point.  Promote the TLM and Traditional Catholic piety by all means, but don't have any illusions about things. Smells and bells, chant, polyphony or Latin and ad orientem are important for us on the periphery but they are largely meaningless for most Catholics today--- including most bishops and the Pope. This is the way it is today. We must just deal with it.
Reply
#12
I'll consider your non-sequitur about sedevacantism if you can answer me why, if the TLM is nothing more than a side chapel attraction--in other words, a bit of a fad--then why do we have the best Catholics?

I can't really say this, but its like what Shaw implied: the TLM seems to be the dividing line between serious Catholics and what JPII called the silent apostates. Weird thing for a side chapel banality to do, eh?

Reply
#13
(01-14-2016, 09:00 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(01-10-2016, 07:54 AM)puppy99 Wrote: It's great to hear of the news, at least Msgr's comment is defeated by US figures.

Msgr operates in the same delusion Obama operates on with his (guns cheaper than books mentality).  If you think it's true, because you don't like it...it's true. Don't use facts, don't use reason...just use platitudes to support your bias.

No, he's just being unduly shaped by what he's experiencing at some of the TLM's he celebrates in DC. And he's right, the attendance has dropped. But it's not really representative of the larger picture.
Reply
#14
And what about the "Gospel" Mass he regularly holds...does he see the same decline?

I highly doubt Catholics are rushing to hear crappy middle-aged Christian "rock" bands and clapping hands as a form of "worship".
Reply
#15
(01-14-2016, 09:53 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I'll consider your non-sequitur about sedevacantism if you can answer me why, if the TLM is nothing more than a side chapel attraction--in other words, a bit of a fad--then why do we have the best Catholics?

I can't really say this, but its like what Shaw implied: the TLM seems to be the dividing line between serious Catholics and what JPII called the silent apostates. Weird thing for a side chapel banality to do, eh?


JPII talked about " silent apostasy" and he was a man ( and considered a saint now) who never said Mass according to the old rite during his papacy and whose entire outlook and focus was on interpreting and promoting the post conciliar brand of Catholicism.

I'm not sure that theres a way to judge whether or not the best Catholics are TLM goers, I mean, how can we really judge or know that? TLM Catholics know Catholic history and traditional Catholic piety better, but that doesn't necessarily equate to being a better Catholic, at least I don't think there's a way to say so.

Don't get me wrong I can see that the TLM and the theology and piety surrounding it is more faithful to our Latin Rite patrimony, but don't see how, without possibly resorting to sedevacantism, that one could possibly say it's anything more than one option on the smorgasbord. It's fuller in teaching what is the Faith, and in passing down our Latin heritage, but it fails to reach people anymore because it does not take into account the Council and the reforms that sprang from it.  Vatican II--- barring sedevacantism---has been a wildly successful Ecumenical Council that has left untouched nothing of the past at least externally.

If I step outside say, as an outside observer like a sociologist would, I'd see that the trad chapel represents a throwback option for those who want something more old fashioned, and that this throwback option is not going to go anywhere fast because it is utterly alien to the accepted way of doing things for the last half century, from the altar of St. Peter's at a papal Mass to every butchers block table around the globe where the new is offered.

Of course feel free to disagree...I've got a feeling you will. At any rate it's fun discussing this stuff with you and everyone else here.
Reply
#16
(01-15-2016, 06:45 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote:
(01-14-2016, 09:53 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I'll consider your non-sequitur about sedevacantism if you can answer me why, if the TLM is nothing more than a side chapel attraction--in other words, a bit of a fad--then why do we have the best Catholics?

I can't really say this, but its like what Shaw implied: the TLM seems to be the dividing line between serious Catholics and what JPII called the silent apostates. Weird thing for a side chapel banality to do, eh?


JPII talked about " silent apostasy" and he was a man ( and considered a saint now) who never said Mass according to the old rite during his papacy and whose entire outlook and focus was on interpreting and promoting the post conciliar brand of Catholicism.

I'm not sure that theres a way to judge whether or not the best Catholics are TLM goers, I mean, how can we really judge or know that? TLM Catholics know Catholic history and traditional Catholic piety better, but that doesn't necessarily equate to being a better Catholic, at least I don't think there's a way to say so.

Don't get me wrong I can see that the TLM and the theology and piety surrounding it is more faithful to our Latin Rite patrimony, but don't see how, without possibly resorting to sedevacantism, that one could possibly say it's anything more than one option on the smorgasbord. It's fuller in teaching what is the Faith, and in passing down our Latin heritage, but it fails to reach people anymore because it does not take into account the Council and the reforms that sprang from it.  Vatican II--- barring sedevacantism---has been a wildly successful Ecumenical Council that has left untouched nothing of the past at least externally.

If I step outside say, as an outside observer like a sociologist would, I'd see that the trad chapel represents a throwback option for those who want something more old fashioned, and that this throwback option is not going to go anywhere fast because it is utterly alien to the accepted way of doing things for the last half century, from the altar of St. Peter's at a papal Mass to every butchers block table around the globe where the new is offered.

Of course feel free to disagree...I've got a feeling you will. At any rate it's fun discussing this stuff with you and everyone else here.

Yes, apparently even saints suffer from inner contradiction or misleading conviction.
As one who also knows this struggle, described amazingly in Romans 7, I suppose this gives me hope.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)