Traditionis Custodes

Where in parishes are these things discussed? The Archbishop of Dublin called for people to engage on the way forward by making online submissions recently. The video which was played at Mass was pleasant and positive but I couldn't help thinking of the Constitutional Conventions and having written to Bishops recently I didn't make a submission. Stephen mentioned in the last post a quote about parishioners not being happy if changes were made, but who are these parishioners who get to decide?

I have the Covid restrictions in mind too at the moment because as far as I know there has been no discussion, debate, teaching or reflection on the measures brought in and there's no way of knowing what people think - how many will never come back because of what they see (rightly or wrongly) as complicity in a lie. The restrictions seem to me an infringement of freedom of religion carried out by the parish team. Seemingly superficial but going to the heart of the faith.

The freedom to practise religion has been curtailed or taken away.  Are Church leaders right to give a dispensation from Sunday Mass? Surely they should be agitating all the time with Government for a return to normality and the lifting of restrictions.  It seems to me that if they don't, the implication is that all these things were dispensible and unnecessary, like holy water and so on.  Isn't there a balance to be struck between the priority of having the maximum number of people praying and the risk of infection?


When the masks first came in last year I spoke to a steward who told me "health is more important than spirituality".  Maybe it is to some people but I don't think the Church should take that approach.  I think of the collections too and I wonder how the financial health of parishes is.  I wonder whether the Church is now living off the donations of our ancestors and it's a bit unfair to the people who collected and fundraised over the years.  More worryingly, I suppose, is whether the Church is receiving financial reward for assistance with the rollout of the vaccination programme.  If it is, the incentive to roll back the restrictions wouldn't be there so much. 


In relation to masks I find them de-humanising and maybe disrespectful.  It might seem like a small thing for parishioners to co-operate with (as they see it), but when they do they are co-operating with a bigger agenda and Dr. Fauci and the CDC are now saying that children as young as 2, in daycare in the US, will have to be masked indoors.  So while half an hour at Mass might be bearable for people (although I have seen some people struggling), seven hours for teenagers in schools is not acceptable to me.  I think as Catholics, free will is crucial because we have to be free not to sin.  If we are expected to follow rules which don't make sense and no engagement is offered to help us understand, we are in big trouble.  A Catholic (or Christian) doctor or nurse has to be able to refuse to participate in treatment if it could break the Commandments.  "Thou shalt not kill" is not just the clear case where a person stabs or shoots another to death - it could be a slower process and being negligent as to whether what you are doing might harm or even kill another person is also a sin, I would say.  The common good pre-supposes respect for the dignity of the individual person and should have that as its objective and I'd like to hear the discussions that led to the line in the bishops' recent letter to the effect that no-one is safe until everyone is safe. 

One week on it appears relatively few bishops have clamped down on the TLM immediately. There has been a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the Papal document in many places especially as those churches which permit the rite generally have good relations with the local Bishop and have stable or even growing populations.

Many bishops have issued holding statements which Trads have reacted to with doubts seeing them as stays of execution. This could be true but this controversial confused document is also incoherent, intellectually dubious and motivated by animosity. Bishops are confused too. This whole mess is totally unnecessary especially when we consider the vast array of unaddressed but fundamental ecclesiastical problems.

I agree about simplicity but I think music is a crowd-puller.  In my local parish (as I'm sure in many) there are several choirs: children's, adults and a folk group.   The adult choir would be the most likely to sing pieces like Ave Verum, Panis Angelicus, Ave Maria and so on.  The musical director also encourages the congregation to participate by turning to them and conducting the well known hymns.  We should probably all be singing the Ave Verum and the others too but it's hard enough to get people to sing at all.  Something that drives me mad is clapping for the choir at the end of Mass.  I used to go to the Rathmines Folk Mass back in the 80's and 90's and at Christmas the priest would thank the folk group and they got one round of applause for the year.  Now it seems to be after every Mass in a lot of ordinary modern(!) churches.  I think someone would need to make an announcement thanking the congregation for their appreciation but reminding everyone that the music is prayer and it's not a concert.  I know I would be seen as a curmudgeon but I'm sure the traditional devotees would cringe at a round of applause too.  The poor priest doesn't get a round of applause.

There are lots of beautiful, older parish churches (which would have been built pre-Vatican II) still in use today, which have been renovated beautifully recently too, and they should be attracting bigger numbers to make/keep them viable.  If anything, they are more suited to more serious sacred music with their organs and choir galleries.  If numbers are increasing in the traditional rite congregations, it would be in everyone's interests to "take on the required tug-of-war" and not just for preserving the buildings but for church unity too.  Has there been a brain drain out of the Church towards the traditional rite? That would be a pity and a sort of abandonment too.   I notice Breda O'Brien writing about the Traditional Latin Mass in the Irish Times today. [/quote]









I agree Hilary about many of the points you raise above. The applause in church issue seems mainly confined to Dublin churches if I am not mistaken. It drives me mad. Mass and music is directed to God. Worship is for God. Fine and dandy if we like it but that's secondary. We usually are attracted and moved by good quality preaching reverence and music.

The Irish had a tradition of quick low masses which has its roots in penal times. I think that minimalist tradition suited many who conformed in the high point of Catholic Ireland but is no longer adequate.

Part of the reason why many including myself attend the old liturgy is the lack of reverent God orientated worship in most Catholic parishes. There has been no papal teaching document dealing solely with liturgical abuses and its link to the Eucharist ( politicians abusing the sacrament in public). A few under John Paul made references and one paragraph of the latest Motu Proprio laments various abuses usually without being specific.

This is nearly as diffuse as the disease doing havoc during the 2019-2021 plandemic itself. It begs questioning why a pope would state such a degrading smash in the face against Benedict XVI. Must be Church politics, if not even something more sinister. In the online area I read one msgr Arthur Roche mentioned as a possible ghost writer. Never heard his name before and haven't cared to search via web.

One of the reasons the Pope gave for this move was that the Latin Mass movement reject Vatican II. How fair or otherwise is this?