Latest TLM Rumor

Check out this item:

perso.wanadoo.fr/civitas.dei/blog_10-05.htm

The item for October 13th says that November 19 will be the day that the Vatican will announce that all Latin Rite priests can say the Traditional Latin Mass!!! :clapping:

I hope this turns out to be true.

  • Kathie :bowdown:

[quote=harinkj]Check out this item:

perso.wanadoo.fr/civitas.dei/blog_10-05.htm

The item for October 13th says that November 19 will be the day that the Vatican will announce that all Latin Rite priests can say the Traditional Latin Mass!!! :clapping:

I hope this turns out to be true.

[/quote]

Although I would love it, this is just another rumor.

Nov. 19 … that’s my birthday!

If it were true, it would make for an awesome birthday present. :wink:

it will be a landmark decision vindicating many traditional Catholic claims that Quo Primum, and immemorial custom, forbids any future Pontiff from abrogating the primary rite of Mass in the universal Church.

It would do no such thing. If such a universal indult is issued it will vindicate many non-traditional Catholic claims that Pope Paul VI had every right, by exercising his power of the keys, to issue a new edition of the Missal and abrogate all previous versions. It will further confirm that bishops in communion with the Holy See had every right to supress the celebration of the traditional Latin Mass if they so chose. If such were not the case, this universal indult would not be necessary.

The great thing about the internet is now we can spread rumors worldwide in just seconds when it used to take days or weeks. :smiley:

Pertinent excerpts from today’s Zenit:

Tridentine Mass “Not a Priority,” Says Cardinal Arinze

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 13, 2005 (Zenit.org).-The prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, Cardinal Francis Arinze, mentioned this at a press conference today when he evaluated the first phase of the synodal assembly.

“No synodal father has mentioned this point,” said Cardinal Arinze, the co-president of the assembly. The so-called Tridentine rite was approved by Pope St. Pius V.

“If there are groups that desire the Tridentine Mass, this is already provided for,” he said. "Bishops may allow it for groups."
ZE05101305

I have asked this before and it has been ignored but I will try again.

For those who want this universal indult, which is a misnomer because an indult is “a license granted by the pope authorizing an act that the common law of the Church does not sanction” and by making it universal would, in essence, change the common law of the Church, what happens to the parishes that do not want the TLM?

Also, priests can say the TLM whenever they want, privately.

So lets say this happens and all the priests in a diocese decide that they will only celebrate the TLM, yet a majority of parishes do not want this, what happens? Do these parishes now become priestless?

What does the bishop do? Does he just lay off these extra priests while hunting for new priests to serve these parishes that are now priestless due to the priests not wishing to serve them?

What about the promise (or vow in the case of religious priests) of obedience? If the priest is in a parish that does not want the TLM and the bishop can not move the priest, what will happen?

Seems to me that this longing for a “universal indult” is the longing for the end of some parishes and the forcing of those who do not want the TLM out of the Church.

[quote=ByzCath]I have asked this before and it has been ignored but I will try again.

For those who want this universal indult, which is a misnomer because an indult is “a license granted by the pope authorizing an act that the common law of the Church does not sanction” and by making it universal would, in essence, change the common law of the Church, what happens to the parishes that do not want the TLM?

Also, priests can say the TLM whenever they want, privately.

So lets say this happens and all the priests in a diocese decide that they will only celebrate the TLM, yet a majority of parishes do not want this, what happens? Do these parishes now become priestless?

What does the bishop do? Does he just lay off these extra priests while hunting for new priests to serve these parishes that are now priestless due to the priests not wishing to serve them?

What about the promise (or vow in the case of religious priests) of obedience? If the priest is in a parish that does not want the TLM and the bishop can not move the priest, what will happen?

Seems to me that this longing for a “universal indult” is the longing for the end of some parishes and the forcing of those who do not want the TLM out of the Church.
[/quote]

Now, David, seems to me you’re being a bit hysterical. :tsktsk: Even if this “indult,” for want of a better term, is granted, that doesn’t mean we’ll see a TLM in every corner Latin Rite church. In fact, I would imagine it wouldn’t be any more widely available than it is now.

First, the priest has to know Latin. Second, he has to know the minutia of the TLM rubrics. Third, he has to have the vestments, and other liturgical accouterments available. Fourth, he has to train altar boys to serve the Mass. Fifth, he has to give some sort of training or heads up to his congregation who may have never attended a TLM or haven’t been to one in decades.

Give our priests some credit. I would imagine the ones who, the first Sunday after the “indult” is issued, would start saying the TLM with no forewarning, don’t have much pastoral sensitivity and are probably few and far between.

I just don’t see that much will change in most parishes. The most we can hope for is seeing an occasional TLM televised on EWTN, which is currently forbidden.

[quote=ByzCath] So lets say this happens and all the priests in a diocese decide that they will only celebrate the TLM, yet a majority of parishes do not want this, what happens? Do these parishes now become priestless?

What does the bishop do? Does he just lay off these extra priests while hunting for new priests to serve these parishes that are now priestless due to the priests not wishing to serve them?

What about the promise (or vow in the case of religious priests) of obedience? If the priest is in a parish that does not want the TLM and the bishop can not move the priest, what will happen?

[/quote]

You’re hinting of what the real problem is in expanding the Latin mass.

There just isn’t enough staff, just not enough priests to provide this option on a wide basis. I foresee in the not too distant future where many of the indult priests and FSSP priests are impressed into service to pastor and administer mainstream parishes, saying the mainstream liturgy for the vast majority of mainstream Catholics.

The number of priests out there, just doesn’t make it very feasible for an expansion, and makes contraction seem inevitable.

[quote=Kielbasi]The number of priests out there, just doesn’t make it very feasible for an expansion, and makes contraction seem inevitable.
[/quote]

This is the 2nd time you’ve made this observation, K. You’re assuming that, in the future, the number of priests will remain static or decline. On what are you basing this?

[quote=Dr. Bombay]Now, David, seems to me you’re being a bit hysterical. :tsktsk: Even if this “indult,” for want of a better term, is granted, that doesn’t mean we’ll see a TLM in every corner Latin Rite church. In fact, I would imagine it wouldn’t be any more widely available than it is now.

[/quote]

I don’t think I am being hysterical. I am just asking questions that those who are singing the praises of this rumor are ignoring.

I would add, that most of those who want this rumor to be true seem to be giving the idea that every priest will jump at this and there will be no more Mass according to the current Missal out there any more.

First, the priest has to know Latin. Second, he has to know the minutia of the TLM rubrics. Third, he has to have the vestments, and other liturgical accouterments available. Fourth, he has to train altar boys to serve the Mass. Fifth, he has to give some sort of training or heads up to his congregation who may have never attended a TLM or haven’t been to one in decades.

Give our priests some credit. I would imagine the ones who, the first Sunday after the “indult” is issued, would start saying the TLM with no forewarning, don’t have much pastoral sensitivity and are probably few and far between.

I just don’t see that much will change in most parishes. The most we can hope for is seeing an occasional TLM televised on EWTN, which is currently forbidden.

Thank you, you have truly thought about the questions I have asked and given some very good answers that many seem to be ignoring.

Seem some think this rumor will solve many issues, I just see it creating other issues. You know, the grass is always greener.

[quote=Dr. Bombay]This is the 2nd time you’ve made this observation, K. You’re assuming that, in the future, the number of priests will remain static or decline. On what are you basing this?
[/quote]

The current average age of the current active priests, and the relatively few number of seminarians on the path to ordination.

[quote=ByzCath]I don’t think I am being hysterical. I am just asking questions that those who are singing the praises of this rumor are ignoring.

I would add, that most of those who want this rumor to be true seem to be giving the idea that every priest will jump at this and there will be no more Mass according to the current Missal out there any more.

Thank you, you have truly thought about the questions I have asked and given some very good answers that many seem to be ignoring.

Seem some think this rumor will solve many issues, I just see it creating other issues. You know, the grass is always greener.
[/quote]

You’re welcome. :tiphat: I forsee many possible problems with this, should the Pope issue such permission. But then, he’s more brilliant than I could ever hope to be, especially about the Mass, so I’m sure he’ll have thought all these things thru.

Another thing to fear is the “mixing” or rites. You know, adding the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar to the new Mass, adding the congretational Sign of Peace to the old, that kind of thing.
This is just fraught with possible headaches.

And until I see something concrete from Rome, this is all just another internet rumor to me, like the one about Bill Gates giving me a million dollars for responding to an e-mail. I’m still mad he didn’t. :mad:

[quote=Kielbasi]The current average age of the current active priests, and the relatively few number of seminarians on the path to ordination.
[/quote]

Yes, but I thought the number of seminarians was climbing slightly but steadily over the past few years. Or was I misinformed again?

[quote=Dr. Bombay]Yes, but I thought the number of seminarians was climbing slightly but steadily over the past few years. Or was I misinformed again?
[/quote]

The number of seminarians isn’t at the bottom, but its still not high enough to replace those priests retiring and dying.

Here’s a chart of recent ordinations from the USCCB.

usccb.org/comm/USStatsJune2005.pdf

Number of priests:

1995- 49,551
2000- 46,603
2004- 43,304

The future? Don’t know, but with an average age of American priests in the late 50’s, ordinations are going to have to pick up pretty quickly.

[quote=Dr. Bombay]Another thing to fear is the “mixing” or rites. You know, adding the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar to the new Mass, adding the congretational Sign of Peace to the old, that kind of thing.
This is just fraught with possible headaches.

[/quote]

I agree with you on this.

I am one that is for the vernacular, but then it is my tradition.

From what I have seen, the 1965 Missal, the was that followed the TLM but was before the current Missal, was more of a vernacular TLM than anything else, why not return to that or something like it?

I have another question regarding the TLM that maybe you could address for me Dr. Bombay.

You said that the priest would have to train the altar servers. Now I have only been to one or two TLM’s but from my reading I understand that the deacon and sub-deacon have roles within the TLM and that the Latin Church had started to use priests to fill these roles. Is it still so today?

This is known as an abuse because when a man is ordained to a higher order he should not go back to a role of one of the lower orders of clergy.

Now this is an abuse we have in the East. During the ordination of a priest, the archdeacon is to lead the candidate forward and present him to the bishop. Even though we do have deacons our Church has been having a priest fill this role.

[quote=ByzCath]I agree with you on this.

I am one that is for the vernacular, but then it is my tradition.

From what I have seen, the 1965 Missal, the was that followed the TLM but was before the current Missal, was more of a vernacular TLM than anything else, why not return to that or something like it?

I have another question regarding the TLM that maybe you could address for me Dr. Bombay.

You said that the priest would have to train the altar servers. Now I have only been to one or two TLM’s but from my reading I understand that the deacon and sub-deacon have roles within the TLM and that the Latin Church had started to use priests to fill these roles. Is it still so today?

This is known as an abuse because when a man is ordained to a higher order he should not go back to a role of one of the lower orders of clergy.

Now this is an abuse we have in the East. During the ordination of a priest, the archdeacon is to lead the candidate forward and present him to the bishop. Even though we do have deacons our Church has been having a priest fill this role.
[/quote]

My brother just gave me our mother’s copy of the 1965 Missal and it brought back a lot of memories. (I was brought up learning that and it was my FIRST experience as a grade schooler of the Latin Rite Mass).
I would prefer THIS over what is being said in the Mass. Yet, in my Byzantine Divine Liturgy, we are going to have a revision of our Liturgy, and I’m afraid to see what has happened to what I cherish now.

As for the TLM, I was VERY young and don’t remember it, but every priest in the Latin Rite should have the option to say what ever version of the Mass they wanted, but according to the desire and need of those in the individual parishes.

[quote=Kielbasi]You’re hinting of what the real problem is in expanding the Latin mass.

There just isn’t enough staff, just not enough priests to provide this option on a wide basis. I foresee in the not too distant future where many of the indult priests and FSSP priests are impressed into service to pastor and administer mainstream parishes, saying the mainstream liturgy for the vast majority of mainstream Catholics.

The number of priests out there, just doesn’t make it very feasible for an expansion, and makes contraction seem inevitable.
[/quote]

The FSSP is growing and has a full seminary at a time when many diocese have empty seminaries and aging priests. Why would the FSSP be compelled to say the NO? Do the NO attendies worship the liturgy? the TLM is a valid mass that has produced many vocations at a time when at least in this country they tend to be down.

[quote=ByzCath]I agree with you on this.

I am one that is for the vernacular, but then it is my tradition.

From what I have seen, the 1965 Missal, the was that followed the TLM but was before the current Missal, was more of a vernacular TLM than anything else, why not return to that or something like it?

I have another question regarding the TLM that maybe you could address for me Dr. Bombay.

You said that the priest would have to train the altar servers. Now I have only been to one or two TLM’s but from my reading I understand that the deacon and sub-deacon have roles within the TLM and that the Latin Church had started to use priests to fill these roles. Is it still so today?

This is known as an abuse because when a man is ordained to a higher order he should not go back to a role of one of the lower orders of clergy.

Now this is an abuse we have in the East. During the ordination of a priest, the archdeacon is to lead the candidate forward and present him to the bishop. Even though we do have deacons our Church has been having a priest fill this role.
[/quote]

I’m not sure about the roles of deacons and sub-deacons in the TLM, being a relatively new attendee. At the two indult Masses I frequent, the priest is assisted by two other priests at a High Mass. I would assume they are performing the roles of deacon. (Although these men may be seminarians from FSSP instead of priests. I really don’t know.) At the other, during High Mass, it’s just the priest and 6 altar boys.

I’ve often wondered about abuses during the TLM. I know for a fact that Ecclesia Dei specified the 1962 Missal in which the Confiteor just before Communion was suppressed. However, at both indult Masses I attend in separate dioceses, the Confiteor is very often said before Communion, but occasionally skipped. There doesn’t seem to be any rhyme or reason to it and it really makes me wonder. :confused:

First, the priest has to know Latin. Second, he has to know the minutia of the TLM rubrics. Third, he has to have the vestments, and other liturgical accouterments available. Fourth, he has to train altar boys to serve the Mass. Fifth, he has to give some sort of training or heads up to his congregation who may have never attended a TLM or haven’t been to one in decades.

Thanks for a lucid and non-hysterical explanation.

I am tired of hearing that we can’t expand the indult because there aren’t enough priests left who know how to say the TLM. Somehow, we didn’t have a problem expecting priests to learn the new rubrics and the prayers in the vernacular with a wave of the 1965 Missal (and later the “real” NO) but we seem to think that the current crop of priests is incapable of doing the reverse. We need to give our priests more credit.

Almost all priests know some Latin. It wasn’t taught in seminaries for a while but that it was ordered put back in several years ago. And you don’t have to be fluent in Latin to say the Mass prayers. The rubrics might take a little longer and many if not most priests won’t be jumping to offer High Mass with all the smells and bells right away.

Personally, I don’t think we will see an immediate rush to put the TLM in every parish bulletin. However, this will free up many priests to offer the TLM for those who wish it at non-scheduled Masses such as funerals, weddings, organization Masses (ie KOC) and retreats. To do so now doesn’t quite fall under the category of “private” Masses.

[quote=Forest-Pine]Pertinent excerpts from today’s Zenit:

Tridentine Mass “Not a Priority,” Says Cardinal Arinze

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 13, 2005 (Zenit.org).-The prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, Cardinal Francis Arinze, mentioned this at a press conference today when he evaluated the first phase of the synodal assembly.

“No synodal father has mentioned this point,” said Cardinal Arinze, the co-president of the assembly. The so-called Tridentine rite was approved by Pope St. Pius V.

“If there are groups that desire the Tridentine Mass, this is already provided for,” he said. "Bishops may allow it for groups."
ZE05101305
[/quote]

“No synodal father has mentioned this point”

I wonder why… all i’ve seen them talk about is following liturgical norms, because that always seems to remedy the abundance of abuses…

Not to say the Tridentine would come and be a perfect remedy. But i’m pretty sure (and this is one of the reasons I want it) it’d be picked up without the hassle of Bishop interference, by priests who want the mass and want to celebrate it reverently and beautifully.

Gotta love Mama T “Do something beautiful for God” How about worshiping in such a manner?

At any rate, i’m starting to think the Synods are all talk and no action.

I base this on the historical evidence.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.