Translate

Wednesday, September 24, 2025

BOMBSHELL: THE NATIONAL cATHOLIC REPORT PRINTS A COMMENTARY THAT PRAISES THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS!

 


You can read the NcR story HERE.

Here is an excerpt:

One of the most painful divides in the Catholic Church today is around how we worship. But when we really listen to the hearts of young Catholics, we see that the desire for tradition is not about ideology, but identity. It's about feeling rooted in something eternal when the world keeps shifting beneath our feet.


In my opinion, the traditional Latin Mass, with all its ritual precision and theological depth, continues to draw young Catholics precisely because it refuses to compromise the signs of the sacred. The use of Latin, incense, chant, sacred silence and the like are not frivolous or outdated. They engage the whole person — body, mind and soul — in an act of worship that lifts us out of ourselves and into the presence of God. 


Young people want a liturgy that reflects the weight and glory of what we profess. They want to hear sacred music that stirs the soul rather than mimic the culture outside the church walls. They want to see beauty. They want to be caught up in mystery. 


To move forward as one body, we have to stop pretending that reverence belongs to the past when, in fact, it's one of the only things still bringing young people in. The future of the Catholic Church depends not on reinvention, but on deepening. We don't need to discard what's still bearing fruit. We need to water it, tend it and let it flourish. 


My hope is that this pontificate offers space for that to happen; that we won't be asked to silence what gives life, but invited to share it freely and joyfully with the world.


My Comments, humble, but profoundly astute:

If Pope Francis who was very fastidious at imposing Traditionis Custodis in the most cruel and authoritarian fashion as possible, that now, Pope Leo would be as fastidious and authoritarian in forcing bishops to make sure that all Masses in the Modern Form be celebrated by reading the black and doing the red. That kneeling not be banned but be given pride of place in terms of receiving Holy Communion and that receiving on the tongue should be encouraged. And ad orientem has a place of honor too in the celebration of the Mass of Paul VI!

As well, make sure bishops cannot micromanage the Roman Missal and its general instruction and its various options by banning anything in the Missal that is allowed in rubrics and the GIRM. 

Make sure that bishops cannot impose that which is not allowed in normal circumstances on priests who celebrate the Modern Mass. I understand that a bishop in West Virginia has forbidden people to kneel during the Eucharistic Prayer—that bishop should be corrected by the papal nuncio of this country and forced to repeal such silly edicts that he has no authority to make. 

One of the reasons priests and laity love the TLM is that it is predictable. You know what you are going to get no matter the various forms, from the Low Mass, to the High Mass, to the Solemn High Mass, to the Solemn Sung Pontifical Mass. 

And as the NcR commentary indicates, you know that you aren’t going to get trendy sounding hymns, piano accompaniment and broadway ditties set to sacred words. Music is a disaster in the Modern Mass, an absolute catastrophe. A reform is long over due from the Vatican, top down!

The Modern Mass is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get! That must change and only the pope can change that!

Apart from that, I have already indicated ways that the Holy Father could re-enchant the Modern Missal with an appendix that makes the celebration of the Modern Mass more in line with the TLM, even if in the vernacular. 

13 comments:

TJM said...

Great minds think alike. I was just getting ready to send you this article, which every bishop should be forced to read at gunpoint!!!! They are either lazy, evil, or both when it comes to the TLM. The thoughts expressed in this article is how I felt in the 1960s when the "deforms" were introduced in the most high-handed fashion, and it is how I feel today.

big benny said...

Well if NCRep has published an article favourable to the TLM like this it looks like the debate is shifting towards a compromise and I hope a favourable solution can be reached soon which fosters church unity so we can focus on evangelisation.

The only thing I’d add is agreement needs to be reached at the bishops conference level so you don’t have the current ridiculous situation where one thing applies to one diocese but next door is different. Same applies to the posture during mass and holidays of obligation / age of confirmation etc - they should be set at a national level. This is precisely the kind of thing the bishops conferences are for.- collegiality in action.

While room for the TLM can be made, it needs to be clear that the new rite remains the ordinary form so over zealous priests don’t impose it on their congregations in a disruptive way which is what’s happened here in the UK.

I’ve grown to appreciate and love chant (polyphony less). While informality also has its place, I’ve always preferred dignified liturgical ceremony and hated sloppy masses but hope there’s still room for english mass settings / contemporary hymns in the new order. Many of which resonate with me from my youth and are part of my spirituality.

I don’t think bishops wary of the TLM are lazy or evil, They’ve had the fingers burnt by some objectionable individuals/ groups who have used it as a platform to contest V2 and reverse the liturgical reforms / doctrinal developments. It’s precisely this kind of talk that does TLM proponents no good.

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

The Bishops' Conference is a bit of a theological anomaly. Each bishop has a great degree of autonomy, including when it comes to the liturgy, in his own diocese.

Regarding the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum on 2004, the USCCB website says: "In regard to the celebration of the Eucharist, the Diocesan Bishop is given a particular role in the publication of norms for the regulation of the liturgy in his particular diocese. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM] assigns to the Diocesan Bishop the publication of norms on concelebration (GIRM, no. 202), service at the altar (GIRM, no. 107), Holy Communion under both kinds (GIRM, nos. 282-283), the construction and renovation of church Buildings (GIRM, no. 291 and 315), posture [GIRM no. 43.3, liturgical music (GIRM, nos. 48, 87), and the establishment of days of prayer (GIRM, no. 373). (see "The Diocesan Bishop and the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, in The BCL Newsletter: July, 2002, page 82. Also available at https://www.usccb.org/liturgy/innews/072002.shtml). Other rights of the Diocesan Bishop to regulate the liturgy are described by documents other than the GIRM, including the regulation of Masses on radio, television and via the internet, and his responsibility to establish a diocesan calendar. With the exception of these and other modifications of the law explicitly assigned to the Diocesan Bishop, no additional changes to liturgical law may be introduced to Diocesan liturgical practice without the specific prior of the Holy See."

Mark Thomas said...

I had read the article in question yesterday. I was unfamiliar with Roxie Beckles, who authored said article. I have since read about her...watched several youtube videos on her channel.

After I had read her article, my thought was...I guess that she is a "traditionalist." My research has revealed that Roxie Beckles is a "traditionalist."

Roxie Beckles is a "traditionalist" who has embraced "traditionalism" via the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul XVI. She has proclaimed that she is as "traditional" as any TLM "traditionalist."

Roxie Beckles has made it clear that "traditional" Catholicism is neither limited to, nor the property of the TLM/"traditionalists."

I appreciate her positive, uplifting approach to the issue of liturgy within the Latin Church. Roxie Beckles calls for reverent liturgy, Latin, Gregorian Chant...

She desires that the Church accommodate Catholics, including those (particularly young Catholics) who desire the TLM. Roxie has done so without having bashed Popes, Traditionis Custodes...

Nevertheless, Roxie Beckles does not harbor illusions in regard to "traditional" Catholics...at least a segment of "traditional" Catholics. Examples:

-- Trad Catholics Have DEMANDED I Change My Ways - So I DID!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ie2hm6HDiE

Be prepared: Her video in question, as she had declared, featured her "going off" on "traditional" Catholics. She stated, via her Youtube note:

"After the 1,537,653rd request by another faithful Trad Catholic here in my audience demanded that I must REPENT and change my ways to be a Catholic YouTuber, I finally SEE THE LIGHT. This is the NEW Roxie Beckles.

"On a serious note, we have to be careful about how we speak to other Catholics. Keep in mind, in one Body of Christ there are many voices, many faces, many personalities. We aren't all going to look the same, dress the same, or act the same.

"And just because someone claims to be "trad" they don't have any moral higher authority than you. Remember to keep your eyes on The Father - and simply take your concerns about how you are quick to judge others to the Lord.

"(I'm about to lose a ton of subscribers but today I have time and I'm risking it all - cause somebody needs to say it.) Matthew 7:3-5"

=======

-- I'm A Fake?! Tell Pope Francis To Run Me My Money!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCJtz0fgunk

Roxie address the following claims that have been leveled against her:

3:15 mark...she a paid shill for the Vatican.

10:17 mark...again, she is a paid shill.

14:45 mark...she encounter traditional Catholicism via the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

TJM said...

Based on what we have seen from some Diocesan bishops, they should be stripped of that authority if it implicates inveterate Catholic liturgical practice, such as employing the Latin language at Mass, Gregorian chant, ad orientem celebration and kneeling and receiving Holy Communion on the tongue. They should have ZERO authority to ban or restrict those matters. Ironically, the ones that do so, are fake "liberals" who are anything but liberal. They are evil, dictators!

Mark Thomas said...

big benny said..."I don’t think bishops wary of the TLM are lazy or evil, They’ve had the fingers burnt by some objectionable individuals/ groups who have used it as a platform to contest V2 and reverse the liturgical reforms / doctrinal developments. It’s precisely this kind of talk that does TLM proponents no good."

I appreciate your above comment.

By the way, Roxie Beckles, who authored the National Catholic Reporter that Father McDonald had linked, would agree with your above comment.

She has denounced the disgraceful, anti-Catholic nonsense that certain "traditionalists" have espoused.

"Traditionalists" who have bashed Vatican II, our Vatican II Era Popes...vile "Novus Bogus" declarations...do not have any place in Roxie Beckles' ministry.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

big benny said...

Yes I know but I think those norms need to be modified. It’s not helpful and causes discontent / confusion when there are national variations in posture / transferring holydays etc.

In the UK all these are agreed at bishops conference level, although appreciate it’s much easier to reach consensus among our 21 dioceses; plus we are more homogeneous. I feel the variations in basic liturgical practice in the US feed into your polarisation.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

BB, the USA has common agreements are postures for the Mass with some minor variances. During Benedict’s XVI time, seminaries restored kneelers and asked seminarians as well as laity to follow the USA’s rubrics to kneel after the Sanctus and through the Great Amen. (In Italy, they stand until the Epiclesis, kneel for the consecration and stand for the rest of the EP. Canada has some minor variances. In the USA, the norm in most dioceses is the kneel after the Agnus Dei for the “Lord I am not worthy” to stand for Holy Communion, with the clear option to receive on the hand or the tongue and their is a common guideline for reception in the hand, but a significant number do their own thing with Communion in the hand. In most of the USA, people return to their pew and kneel in prayer until Communion is finished, and the Hosts are replaced in the tabernacle. Some dioceses in the west require the laity to stand at their pews until communion is finished, quite a long time to do so and I think unreasonable. Since Francis and his progressive agenda, we have gone backwards in terms of bishops and local priests imposing on the laity their own desires and idiosyncratic desires, like no kneeling at all, removing kneelers to enforce that and not making it comfortable for those who wish to kneel at Holy Communion with a kneeler. It is all stupid and alienating.

big benny said...

https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/stand-up-like-free-men-the-modern

This pillar article explains that most of mass was standing in the US after the reforms and lessened due to complaints about it being too much.

The standing until everyone has finished communion is the kind of variation I don’t think is helpful. Uniform national posture is the minimum that can be agreed by the conference.

big benny said...

*unhelpful (sorry my eyesight is not great)

big benny said...

Stop using a small c for NCR, it’s so Fr Z!

big benny said...

I do think that where the TLM is said that the freestanding altar should be used.

If a freestanding altar is in place and the old high altar has become the altar of reservation no longer used for celebration, then it seems disrespectful to ignore it.

Using the freestanding altar for both forms of mass would be more faithful to the rubrics and a valuable sign of gathering around one altar of the lord.

Luke said...

The Bishop in West Virginia (Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston), Mark Brennan, has never banned kneeling during the Eucharistic Prayer. Someone apparently confused this erroneous claim with his decision to require people to stand after the Agnus Dei is said.
His excellencies two (not very good) predecessors required us to remain standing after saying the Agnus Dei which is the Bishop's option to require. The present Bishop's own newly reconstituted diocesan pastoral council asked him permit kneeling after the Agnus Dei is said and he said, "no." More recently he published a letter explaining that he had been asked again about this issue and after deliberation had decided that because his two (not very good) predecessors had adopted and maintained the practice and for other reasons he laid out in the letter, he saw no reason to change the rule. See: https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=64379