Denver Newsroom, Sep 2, 2020 / 05:03 pm (CNA).- In normal times – when there is not a global pandemic – Linda Dyson assists Catholics at the Cathedral of Christ the King in Atlanta, Georgia with pastoral care ministries, which are for people who are experiencing some kind of spiritual, emotional, or physical need.
“Which means everything’s sad,” Dyson said. “All of the sad ministries fall under me.”
This includes everything surrounding death – pre-funeral planning, day-of funeral coordination, and post-funeral services such as grief classes.
Now, when there is a global pandemic, Dyson is still in charge of pastoral care ministries – but many things have changed. In Atlanta, as in most places throughout the country, the coronavirus pandemic has impacted everything surrounding grief, from families not being able to say goodbye to their dying loved ones due to isolation and quarantine, to small funeral sizes due to limits on crowds, to few supports available after the funeral because of fears of spreading the virus.
“After the March announcement about the virus…the tragic thing is that we were in the middle of two relatively large funeral plans for two people who had just died,” Dyson said.
One person was a prominent artist from the area. Another one was a young man from a university.
“So obviously, two different types of funerals, but at the same time, a lot of people that loved both of those individuals,” she said.
Within a matter of days, due to coronavirus precautions, the families at those funerals went from anticipating “400, maybe even 800 people” to not being allowed to gather more than 10 people in a space.
“The family of the young man went ahead and had a funeral, and there were probably about 10 people there,” Dyson said.
The artist’s family decided to postpone, to see if they could wait to hold the funeral until more people were allowed to gather.
“So, that’s really been the flavor of the whole (pandemic) period is either getting along without your closest friends and family, and having to limit the funeral to a much smaller size,” she said, or postponing in hopes that restrictions lift to a point where a larger funeral is allowed.
Neither situation – a limited funeral, or a delayed funeral – is ideal, Dyson said. For families who press on, the funeral experience is very stripped down – no sympathizing with anyone other than immediate family, no luncheon after the funeral to swap stories with friends, no lines of hugs and condolences.
“It’s really the family, the remains of the person that they love, and the Eucharist, which in some ways is very lovely, and in some ways it’s heart wrenching, all at the same time,” she said.
She added that “2020 probably has to be the worst year for grief.”
“When you think about grief, there is that aspect of wanting to be alone and just to process that grief,” she said, “but a big part of that processing is community. And so when we don’t have that community, you don’t have the people that you would normally expect to come by and even bring a fresh baked loaf of bread, and they’re not coming over to hug you, and there’s no touching, and there’s no warmth – there’s an extra layer of loss.”
Even as some coronavirus restrictions have eased, many still remain in place. Nursing homes and hospitals still maintain strict rules on visitors, meaning that some families may miss the opportunity to say goodbye to a sick and dying loved one. Gatherings in Georgia are now limited to 50 people – still a far cry from the hundreds that used to show up at bigger funerals.
Dr. Julie Masters, a professor of gerontology at the University of Nebraska Omaha, said that pandemic-induced limits on the normal death and grieving processes can make it even harder for people to cope with loss, “especially those who have either a close relationship with the deceased or those who may have had a strained relationship.”
Those with strained relationships with the deceased may have lost opportunities to make amends, Masters said, while those in a close relationship with the deceased “might [have] a feeling of letting the person down by not being present, especially at the end.”
“Grief is itself disorienting,” Masters added. Normally, if someone misses the moment of death of a loved one, they might look to ceremonies such as wakes, rosaries and funerals as a way to process those emotions, as those services “all give some amount of structure to saying goodbye.”
Canceled or restricted ceremonies take away those structures.
“As things are now, even the usual sources of support are lacking,” she said.
Kevin Prendergast is a Catholic clinical counselor who has been practicing for 32 years. He has counseled people who have experienced loss directly from coronavirus as well as other kinds of losses. He has also spoken to clergy who have ministered to those experiencing loss at this time.
Pandemic restrictions can disrupt grief in certain ways, Prendergast said. Being unable to attend the funeral of a loved one may mean that the loss takes even longer to process. There might be feelings of “I can’t believe they’re really gone,” he said.
Prendergast said that loss and grief are already very difficult, and that customs in the United States surrounding death typically do not allow people adequate time and space to process their emotions, when compared to other countries.
“We don’t have the same way of approaching death or the same foundation or rituals that other people have,” he said.
For example, he said, he has numerous friends from Africa, including a priest from Ghana whose mother died in early spring.
Due to the pandemic, the priest has not yet been able to travel back to Ghana to mourn his mother, but once he does get back, “there’s a whole set of rituals that people go through the month after the person dies, and then at different intervals, and then there’s the big one at the first anniversary of the death,” Prendergast said.
People will walk for days and come for miles around to be with the bereaved and offer their support, and feelings of grief are expected to last a long time.
But in the United States, the approach to grief seems to be “all about getting closure. And I think people mean by that, ‘Well, why aren’t you, or are you over your mother’s death now? It’s been a month, you’re probably getting back to normal,’” Prendergast said.
“And I think what people just don’t realize…is grief just takes time,” he said.
“Grief…comes in waves. At the beginning it’s really intense, but then it does subside and get back to some normal. But then all of a sudden, out of the blue, because there’s the special date on the calendar, or we see a location or we hear a song, we look at a picture, and it all comes back. And so I think we have to ride through those waves,” he said.
But even in the face of pandemic precautions and limitations, there is much that can still be done by friends, family and the community that can support the bereaved, Masters said.
“It becomes necessary for people to find a way to sort things out in their minds. This is where having good friends who are willing to listen to our stories over and over become key,” she said, or pastoral ministers, deacons and priests who can step in and fill the gaps when friends or family are scarce.
Offering condolences or support “in person may not be possible, but perhaps with a phone call,” she said, adding that older people may prefer simple calls to more complicated technology if they are not well-versed in it. Regular check-ins and sending notes or cards are also important, she said.
“This is key for them – and also for us. We are called to be there for each other,” she said.
“Showing up” for the bereaved continues to be important even months after the loss, Prendergast said. If there is a delayed funeral or memorial service that is safer to attend as restrictions are lifted, show up. When the deceased person’s birthday or anniversary comes, send a note or make a call.
Telling stories about the deceased are also a great comfort to the bereaved, he added.
“Any story: ‘I remember this about your dad’, or ‘Did your dad ever tell you this?’ or ‘Maybe I’ve never mentioned to you how much your loved one helped me, what they meant to me.’ People treasure those stories. A lot of times that’ll happen at the funeral service or afterwards, people will say those kinds of things. And we can’t replace that,” he said, but phone calls or letters with those stories go a long way.
Masters added that she has been heartened by the many good people and accommodations being made for those experiencing loss during the pandemic.
“There are so many people who are doing great things that we fail to see. Funeral directors who are conducting services with few people or no one present. Priests whose role in life is to provide us the sacraments but are limited in what they can do. Nursing assistants, nurses, doctors, housekeepers, dietary staff, who are serving in a surrogate role as the last people to be present while someone is dying is also impactful. They need our prayers to sustain them,” she said. “They exemplify Bishop Robert Barron’s quote: ‘Your life is not about you.’”
Dyson said at the cathedral, they’ve tried to make as many accommodations as possible. They live-stream funeral services for families and offer DVD copies, in case anyone missed the live version. They’ve arranged phone-calls and visitations – even if limited, outdoor, distanced ones – when possible. They’ve sent out prayer shawls and cards to grieving families, “just to let people know that we care and we haven’t forgotten.”
The parish grief classes were transferred online to Zoom, and then partially in-person and partially online as restrictions lifted. Dyson said that the grief class, which started in April and just wrapped up, went “very, very well.”
“I think the pain and the struggle and the challenges that they went through had an unexpected benefit, in the sense that they all have a deep sense of what grief is, and also a sense of purpose,” she said.
Several people from the class that just wrapped up have offered to minister to other people experiencing grief, Dyson said. Usually it takes people much longer to get to a place where they want to minister to other grieving people, she noted, but this class “really feels committed to paying it forward.”
Masters said for those who have lost someone during the pandemic, establishing reminders of their “continuing bond” with that person is important.
“There is never really closure,” she said. “What it is – is learning to live without the person in a physical way but realizing they are still part of our lives. Grief researchers talk about continuing bonds. Whether it is memories, stories, photographs or other things that serve as reminders of how the people we have lost are still part of us,” she said.
Prendergast said this is where Christians – and particularly Catholics – are at an advantage.
“We believe in the communion of saints. We believe in the resurrection, we believe in eternal life. And so we can talk to our loved one and we can ask their intercession, we can pray for them if they’re in purgatory, or wherever they are. That really matters,” he said.
This can be especially powerful for people who weren’t able to be with their loved one at their death or at their funeral, and who need to ask for forgiveness or make amends in some way, he added.
“I think through the communion of saints and our spiritual belief, there’s a way that we can make amends and ask for forgiveness, even after someone’s gone,” he said.
Prendergast said he has had some clients write down letters of amends or reconciliation, and take them to the cemetery to read out loud at their loved one’s grave.
“As Catholics, we know that that’s a powerful reality, that forgiveness, reconciliation can continue even after death,” he said.
The pandemic and the many ways it has impacted death and grief could be a good wake-up call for people to cherish the time that they have with their loved ones, and to seek reconciliation where it is needed, Prendergast added.
“I don’t want to waste time, so let me redouble my efforts with the people that are still living, so as not to have those regrets when they’re gone,” he said.
Masters also said that this time of pandemic could be the impetus people need to do some serious thinking and planning when it comes to the end of their life – from advanced care planning (making decisions about healthcare in advance), to getting their relational and spiritual lives in order.
“The focus on physical health is key but what about spiritual health – especially for the person whose life has not always gone as planned?” she said.
“We seem to be viewing things in the short-term rather than the implications of isolation (and similar restrictions), in the long-term. This is also important,” she said.
Ultimately, “God is showing us something important with COVID-19,” Masters noted.
“We are not in control, only he is. The more we can prepare ourselves for the end, the better.”
[…]
German Archbishop authorizes blasphemous dance at ancient cathedral:
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/05/30/fowl-behavior-chickens-in-diapers-dance-performance-at-westphalia-cathedral-blasted-as-blasphemous/
Chickens in Diapers and half-naked men Dance Performance at Westphalia Cathedral Blasted as ‘Blasphemous’
The question for Martin is this: Have the sheep abandoned the shepherd? Jesus told us that he knows the sheep and the sheep know him. It seems to me that the crisis in that diocese is less about the Tridentine manner of offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass but the full frontal assault on the liturgical sensibilities of the worshipping community in the diocese of Charlotte. Standing v. kneeling, mantillas v. barehead, and on and on. It’s all so arbitary. What’s important is that we do God’s will, proclaim the Gospel to the world and seek the kingdom.
A delay of five months is delaying the inevitable. Trads simply need to accept and live with the reality that Traditionis Custodes requires bishops to phase out the use of the 1962 Missal.
The bishop’s reversal will probably convince trads that if they make a big enough stink, then they can get their way. That’s not true. The Roman Rite is now in the form of the Third Edition of the 1970 Roman Missal: i.e., the reformed Mass. The TLM is going away, as it should, because that’s what Vatican II decreed when it called for the liturgical books to be revised.
Miss Dorothy, should we refer to other Catholic Christians as “Trads “?
I see a lack of charity on all sides of the issue. Catholic means universal and there’s room for diversity in rites and liturgies.
Let’s model charity and respect towards each other please.
They call themselves trads with pride; it’s not derogatory. Besides, Dorothy is right that the TLM should have the plug pulled. There is no place for a pre-Vatican II liturgy in a post-Vatican II Church. The TLM is not liurgical diversity; it’s liturgical backwardism. The Roman Rite has evolved.
Sebastien, do you think similarly about the Byzantine Rites?
I think we should all consider charity more seriously in commenting. Myself included.
mrscracker, yours are universally, always the most charitable of comments.
My thinking seconds Mr. Meynier’s.
Did we ever think we’d live to see the day? Liturgical ressourcement is now portrayed as backward!?!
Seabass and Dot would pull the plug on Jesus’ liturgical practices! After all, he lived a very long time ago. Even paper had not been invented then. Design and development have EVOLVED. We know more today than the mork trads of yesteryear. Down with tradition, no matter its stem, root, source or foundation.
Sebastian, your comment reveals that you are unaware (perhaps due to living in a news bubble rather than lack of Christian princple) that Pope Francis practiced clericalis, presumption, and hypocrisy when it comes to accompaniment and dialog for those he did not understand and was inclined to be judgmental toward. He was a man of deep empathy and compassion, but not with the consistency of a saintly pope. George Wiegel, who is exlusively Novus Ordo and does not care for the TLM, points out that Traditiones Custodes is “cruel and unnecessary”. When you get into the details you will realize that TC is based on lies as well as being a way of promoting Vatican II by betraying Vatican II. I pray that Pope Francis was manipulated, and was a victim of the lies rather than an architect.
Excellent comments, Mrscracker! You are right on!
“Bishop Martin is Out of Touch”
https://firstthings.com/bishop-martin-is-out-of-touch/
Perhaps the TLM saves more souls, brings the sinner closer to Jesus; has that been considered?
Are we to just look like the Protestant brands?
SWhatDorothy said was nonsensical. The Church still allows the Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Dominican, Carthusian, Carmelite, Anglican Use, Byzantine, Alexandrian, Maronite (Antiochene) Rites, and more. Pope Benedict XVI was clear that the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms were two forms of the SAME Roman Rite. He also said they could help each – there were some minor changes to the Tridentine, for example – it is NOT pure Tridentine.
Yes, but — for example — the Mozarabic rite does not have the legal fiction of an ordinary form and an extraordinary form: there is one Mozarabic rite. Same with the other rites. Similarly, there is one Roman Rite: the post-Vatican II evolution of the Roman Rite, which is the Missal of Paul VI.
There are approved “uses” of the Roman Rite, but they all follow the post-Vatican II form of the rite. The TLM cannot be considered a “use” of the Roman Rite nor a “form” of the *current* Roman Rite (Pope Benedict was wrong). The TLM is properly understood as a prior liturgical form of the Roman Rite, a form that has been superseded by the new form: the Missal of Paul VI.
That’s exactly what trads like about it: that it is preconciliar, because at heart the trads reject the reforms of Vatican II.
The permissions to celebrate the TLM have their origin in pastoral concessions to avoid schism, not in the intent to preserve the celebration of the TLM in perpetuity. Trads have wrongfully turned a temporary pastoral concession into a hope for perpetual indulgence of their preconciliar proclivities.
Pope Benedict was a careful scholar who studied and wrote on the Divine Liturgy. Pope Francis was often rash and rarely a nuanced thinker (though he had some good ghostwriters). As Father Stravinskas has pointed out the Novus Ordo is the Roman Rite Mass with parts removed and some parts added. Basically, it is to the TLM what a movie adaptation is to a classic novel. When staying close to Sacrosanctum Concilium it can be a quite adequate and satisfying abridegment. But as you know, some movie adaptations are both unfaithful and horrid messes. Pope Francis was much less zealous about fixing actual abuses; one hopes that only his mind and not his heart was in the wrong place.
Rads have wrongfully turned episcopal power into a hope for perpetual eradication of their postconciliar proclivities.
FIFY, you’re welcome.
Yes. Many rites, one Faith.
No, Dorothy, we “Trads” do not have to accept and live with the reality that TC requires bishops to phase out the TLM. The bishops (and you) need to accept and live with the reality of Pope Pius V’s Quo Primam Tempore. Read it and you will see that Traditiones Custodus is invalid and anathema.
Quo Primum was a liturgical directive that bound the Church at that point in time, and was understood to be in force in perpetuity until a subsequent change occurred by a future pope. It was an ecclesiastical law, not a Divine law. It set policy for worship, but was not a definition of faith in and of itself. “Trads” have used this document (especially the SSPX) to further their argument as proof that the Tridentine Mass can never disappear or be limited because it is necessary for salvation to the exclusion of the so-called Novus Ordo Mass. But Tradition is not more important than the living authority of Christ via His Church. Like it or not, the OF form of the Mass is an acceptable and valid form of worship. To claim otherwise is private judgment and Protestant in spirit.
Everything you wrote can be applied to Traditiones Custodus.
Given that “Trads” (I note this is used as invective, especially if you are part of the FBI-are you part of the FBI?) are the ones doing the marrying and having children, perhaps they should be accommodated.
If it was up to me, I’d allow both forms. If it fifty or a hundred years, we see a growing, pious and faithful Church because of Novus Ordo, even if the music is guitars and flutes-so be it.
But if the TLM is what fills pews, so be it.
I agree Pitchfork. But I also have qualms about both forms being in competition with each other. I like the premise of the EF being preserved, and people having a choice, but I dislike the outcome of one eventually winning and the other losing. Which in effect means we all lose. The EF was never intended to remain in force, it was to be phased out. And many adherents weaponize it to discredit Vatican II. On the other hand, we are all too familiar with the lousy implementation of the OF and all the satellite nonsense surrounding it, crummy music being at the top of my personal list. Traditionis Custodes is the last current document in effect and until Leo or a future pope changes it, it should be accepted.
Did you see Pope Leo XIV talk to the Eastern Catholic Patriarch after the Conclave? He said their ancient orthodox rite was beautiful and should continue on. If the Eastern Catholics can have their ancient rite, then why can’t we have our also ancient Latin rite? What’s the difference?
Looking back on the last 69 years, 60+ of which I can remember, including starting as an altar boy, and choir boy, in the ancient Mass, and having lived through the ugly, brute force NO implementation, and over the last 30 years reading deeply and widely about the “reform of the Mass,” and the “reform of the reform,” it seems that the plan of the Church establishment is to commit cultural suicide.
Chris, we might paraphrase Orwell’s famous 1984 quote:
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Novos Ordo boot stamping on the Latin Mass forever ?
Neither form of the Mass are the enemy though. This is about fallen human nature, not liturgical preferences.
Too true, alas. I have no idea why the Tridentine Mass went from the visible symbol of Catholicism’s universality–the thing that made a Catholic feel at home no matter where he was–to the epitome of liturgical evil. And, of course, made thd Catholics who still cherish it outcasts in their own Church…
The answer is simple: the liturgical reforms of Vatican II changed the form of the Mass for the whole Roman Church. The new form of the Mass is the current liturgical form to which all Roman Catholics are expected to adhere. The TLM is the former, preconciliar form of the Mass, which has been superseded by the conciliar mandate to revise the liturgical books and the subsequent promulgation of those books.
I don’t understand why trads can’t understand that simple logic. Nor why they won’t accept Vatican II.
Sebastian, in an effort to help you to understand why trads can’t understand “that simple logic” I suggest that you read Quo Primum Tempore. You will understand quite clearly that the TLM cannot be abrogated or suppressed. It is there for all to read.
It’s time for all Roman Rite Catholics who care deeply about reverent liturgies to switch affiliation from the Roman Rite to the Anglican Rite or any of the multitude of Byzantine Rites.
The Roman Rite extant in 1960 worked for the vast majority of Catholics and churches were filled to the brim. That “good-enough” Roman Rite was tossed aside and now only about 19% of Catholics attend the new rite Masses on a regular basis. Draw your own conclusions.
The New Mass, written by a committee which included Protestants, did not follow the guidelines of Vatican II in many ways. The Council Fathers wanted minor changes, such as perhaps the scripture readings in the vernacular and perhaps the congregation joining the priest in the Our Father, but not the wholesale tearing up and starting over (in large part) of the resulting mass. They definitely wanted the Roman Canon to remain as it was, and always to be in Latin. Now there are at least 8 Eucharistic prayers, one of which is mostly the Roman Canon. Depending on the whim of the priest, there is almost infinite variety in the new mass, and complete uniformity in the old rite.
“I don’t understand why trads can’t understand that simple logic. Nor why they won’t accept Vatican II.”
Have you read the documents which outline Novus Ordo, I mean HOW it must be celebrated? It clearly states such rules as priests facing the same direction as parishioners is a major choice; Gregorian chant is a major choice; silences and solemnity and so on. I do not go to TLM but two things are clear to me:
1 – Novus Ordo can and must be celebrated according to the actual prescribed rules (see above)
2 – the reforms of the Vatican II were overtaken and “interpreted” by the people who want to worship themselves instead of God. And so, when you speak about NO which “superseded” TLM and thus must be accepted, you in fact speak of its narcissistic “interpretation”. Alas, the possibility of such an interpretation, up to sacrilege, seems to be inherent in some aspect of the NO. It probably shows that the Church must not allow a choice when it is a liturgical matter; too many priests take it as a license to perform and improvise, making the worship impossible. The very predictability, word after word and solemnity makes Mass universal i.e. belonging to everyone. When you are free from a fear of “improvisations” bordering on sacrilege you actually can pray. This is why, I think, people appreciate the Latin Mass.
The God-orientation of TLM, so often being compromised by NO, is, I believe, the major reason why it is being suppressed. NB: Novus Ordo also has the God-orientation and can be done splendidly, but it is far easier to “bring it down” to the level of “us, beloved”.
I was a young adult around the time of Vatican II. While the vernacular Mass was instituted worldwide, the Tridentine Mass was not abolished, and in fact was to continue to have a place in the Church. There is no particular reason why Mass in both forms cannot continue to be accepted. But it is the intensity of its rejection that I find especially troubling.
Jo-Anne, the TLM was never hated as much since 1789. Today’s freemasons can idly watch on, as the post-conciliar-catholic bishops finish the work of the 18th century Luciferian sects for them. The devil hates latin…
IMO this is the first real test for our new Pope.
Let’s hope and PRAY that he passes.
Terence; Sadly, whatever he decides will never please all. He doesn’t have a chance of passing “the test”, for there is no correct answer.
Br. Jaques. I think there IS an answer. As with all other PROTESTANTS , they can leave, cross the Tiber and join their Vatican II deniers on the other side.
Please define what a “Vatican II denier” means. It was a legitimate council of the Church, and a legitimate disaster for the Faith. Does that make me a denier? According to every study I have seen, 67% of Catholics attending Mass today deny the Real Presence of the Eucharist. How does that fit into your “denial” litmus test?
Agree
Pope Benedict XVI on the Traditional Latin Mass:
‘What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.”
Pope Benedict XVI used his 2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum to affirm the use of the Traditional Latin Mass (Extraordinary Form) alongside the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo). He stated that the TLM was not “forbidden” but should be honored and preserved as part of the Church’s rich liturgical tradition. He also emphasized that the Tridentine Mass was not a “faulty” Mass and was valid and could be celebrated freely by priests.
YES! Also, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote:
“What happened AFTER THE COUNCIL was something else entirely: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came FABRICATED LITURGY. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it–as in a MANUFACTURING PROCESS–with a FABRICATION, A BANAL ON-THE-SPOT PRODUCT.” [Emphases added.]
~From the Preface to the French Edition of “The Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background.”
He’s not the pope anymore. He was overturned by Pope Francis. He was also wrong. You’re quoting a document that is obsolete. You have to do better than that.
Francis too is no longer the pope, so by your logic, are his documents not also obsolete?
Also, what relevance does Scripture hold under your understanding of obsolescence?
Finally, what authority gives you the right to claim that Benedict was wrong?
Finally, no one ‘overturned’ Benedict. A successor pope simply chose to dishonor the beauty, truth, wisdom, and goodness of some of Benedict’s work. QED.
It’s not a court decision.
What is accomplished by the delay if the end result is to cancel Latin Mass there anyway? I am not a Latin Mass attendee, have not been to one in 50 years, but I dont see what harm is done by allowing people to worship at what had been a legitimate form of Catholic Mass for thousands of years. Who are they bothering?? Except of course, the control freaks, of which this Bishop appears to be one. Its my opinion that this Bishop has already squandered what little good will he had among the members of his diocese, and he will be ineffective going forward. He appears to have been primarily an administrative type before this assignment and it shows in his “my way or the highway” attitude. Would not be in his diocese for anything, nor would I donate a dime while he was still in power.
This type cant admit the installation of V2 changes heralded large scale damage to the church. The effect of fleeing clergy, non-church going parishioners, drop in donations, and flat out stripped, ugly churches resulted in damage to the Church which is felt to this day, decades later.
I come from a long line of Protestants. If I wanted to pray in a stripped down church devoid of inspiration , I could select from any number of denominations. Our parish church says the “Lamb of God” response in Latin during lent. So far no one has died from the experience . I would not mind keeping a touch of Latin all year round. It adds a bit of special beauty to the liturgy.
My parish church is primarily done in marble and which was too expensive to remove during the V2 tragedy. Thats why it survives to this day. Beautiful. The interior looks traditional and yet a reverent NO Mass is offered there. For us it works. But I think traditionalists should be free to attend a Latin Mass if they want to.
Where in the documents of Vatican Council II did it call for “Clown Masses”? (we had those in our parish church in Ridgefield, CT).
Where in the documents of Vatican Council II did it call for “Balloon Masses”? (we had those too).
Where in the documents of Vatican Council II did it call for “Religious Sisters doing interpretive dance in the center aisle”? (saw that at a Jubilee celebration at the Motherhouse of the School Sisters of Notre Dame in Wilton CT)
BUT “NO” TO COMMUNION ON THE TONGUE!!!!
(BTW, I’m not one who attends to Extraordinary Form )
It is truly sad that this Mass was ever let go! I grew up with it, as did so many, and they took it away! We always had translations in our St. Joseph Daily Missal! WE HAD TO CHANGE!!! Bishop Martin needs to see the many folks who attend this Mass at Our Lady of Grace, Greensboro! I appreciate his delay, but he really should reconsider his decision! It is truly a beautiful, well attended Mass! In my opinion, it should remain! Many young families attend every Sunday! We are all praying for Bishop Martin and for ourselves that we will grow closer to Christ! Thankyou!
Every argument that traditionalists use for the TLM has its exact counterpart among LGBTs who want gay marriage blessed by the church.
We just want to worship/love the way we want.
The church is persecuting us, a minority.
Why won’t the church just listen to us about our experience?
This is how we connect with God.
There should be room for diverse expressions of faith in the church.
The church does not have the authority to ban our worship/our love.
I’m going to do what I want anyway, regardless of what the church says.
Et cetera.
Wake up call.
I’d be very interested if you could state the source of your belief that traditionalists think such as you’ve listed. How does continuing in a state of make-believe differ from living a lie?
You might try better reading material:
The Heresy of Formlessness: The Roman Liturgy and Its Enemy (Revised and Expanded Edition), by Martin Mosebach.
Close the Workshop: Why the Old Mass Isn’t Broken and the New Mass Can’t Be Fixed, by Peter Kwasniewski, Ph.D.
A Forest of Symbols: The Traditional Mass and Its Meaning, by Abbé Claude Barthe, translated by David J. Critchley, with a Foreword by Robert Cardinal Sarah.
Bolderdash, Amy. Absolute bolders.
There is no link what-so-ever between sacred apostolic tradition being trashed and the promotion of sodomy and alphabet derivitives. No link, other than this: the novos Ordo protestants are also the pro-sodomites.
It would seem to me that what would suffice is a concise letter or homily reminding the Faithful that they should not assume attendance at a Latin Mass confers greater individual holiness or superior spirituality. However, in my experience, attendees do tend to show greater reverence, and it is a beautiful Mass. Personally, I am more drawn to the centrality of the Eucharist.
Martin’s restrictions included: “Neither an upright crucifix nor fixed candles may be placed on the altar, lest they interfere with the sight-lines of the congregation.”
Bishop Martin ‘sees’ a crucifix or a source of light on the dining table interfering with vision! Does he not understand irony?
He obviously prefers the congregants not to be reminded of the light of the world nor of the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.
Personally, I remember the last meal and the bold details of the deathbed of my dear mother.
This priest/bishop Martin is clueless regarding the riches of vision and memory as they pertain to the Lord.
Jesus: “But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them. Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. ~Matthew 13:16-19.
Good Jesus, have Mercy on us, and deliver us from evil.
I remember the lighting in the room where my mother died.
Rorate Caeli: News from Charlotte: Bishop Comes for the Catholic Schools’ Masses
Posted by New Catholic at 9/04/2025 06:53:00 PM
Excerpt:
“We have received a report of the new liturgical directives which Bishop Michael Martin of Charlotte wishes to impose on the masses of Paul VI celebrated in the three Catholic high schools under his jurisdiction. The goal is apparently the decatholicization of the new liturgy in the schools under his authority.
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, they are exactly what we would expect, given what we have previously seen of his ideas about “liturgical norms.”
The use of kneelers and communion rails for the distribution of Holy Communion is forbidden.
There must be students to serve as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.
A projector and screen are to be installed in the chapels to facilitate the singing of hymns and longer parts of the Mass such as the Gloria and the Creed. (It is, of course, a major pastoral problem that young people today spend too much time reading from books, and not enough time interacting with screens.)
At large Masses, a student is to give a testimonial about their faith life, lasting 3-5 minutes, between the final prayer and the blessing and dismissal.”
We might be tempted to say that Bishop Martin has learned nothing from the international backlash that resulted when his would-be liturgical norms, full of absurdities and illegalities, were leaked, but this would be unfair. He has learned not to put such things in writing, and to communicate them only by word of mouth.