Frozen in time

A reader sent the following photo and comment.  I thought it germane to our discussion of concelebration, in another thread, and the interest of many that the older form of Mass be offered everywhere.

St Charles Seminary, Carthagenia,  Ohio.  former home of the Society of the Precious Blood.(approximately 6 miles from my home) now a retirement center for CPPS Priests and Catholic lay people, this area hasn’t been used in decades, it just seems frozen in time…

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

89 Responses to Frozen in time

  1. LCB says:

    Wow, haunting.

    Would I be over the line in suggesting that the seminary might still be in use of the priests were still using the altars?

  2. Rudy of CC says:

    One priest one mass. sounds good to me. Never did like all the freaky colored stoles back in the 80’s

  3. Jim says:

    This reminds me of the several unused altars behind the high altar in St. Aloysius Gonzaga Church, Spokane, WA . Needless to say, St. Al’s is a jesuit parish. I can remember going into St. Ignatius Church, SF, in the morning and seeing 3-4 priests saying mass at side altars. These were the days of the 20-minute low mass.

    Interestingly, the concept of each priest saying an individual mass every day never caught on in the Eastern churches. To this day, your typical orthodox or Byzantine Catholic parish has only one celebration of the Divine Liturgy on a given Sunday morning or feast day. That’s because Matins and the Divine Liturgy take about three hours to celebrate. There is vastly more “active participation” (including signing in four-part harmony) in an eastern church than in the west, where (with exceptions) the congregation sits through 45 minutes of bad music, bland liturgies and tepid sermons. Sorry to be critical, but it is true.

  4. Dinsdale says:

    Jim, please don’t generalize. I have heard my share of bland (often Protestant) music and incoherent sermons in Eastern churches, and I would not think to tar all of these Churches with the same brush.

    Happy Thanksgiving – I suggest we all appreciate and give thanks for the blessings that God has, in His infinite kindness, bestowed on us.

  5. Andrew, UK and sometimes Canada says:

    Just goes to show that, what looks like 1960s liturgical architecture (i.e. pot lights) can be brilliant when put to the right use.

  6. Gravitas says:

    Thanks for this additional thread father. I asked this question in the other one but was hoping to get an answer here.

    Can anyone tell me if concelebration ever happened between Trent and Vatican II?

    And if not, why it should be allowed now or seen as organic now?

  7. Jim says:

    Dinsdale,

    You’re right; I do tend to generalize based on my own, limited experience. It is a natural human tendency, through a flawed one. A very happy Thanksgiving to you and your family. We all should be thankful for our Lord’s sacrifice and the many other blessings He has bestowed on us.

  8. The last trad standing says:

    Please God someday the altars will be in use again.

  9. Anthony says:

    I know this is wrong, but I’d be very tempted to snatch those altar cards and give them to young priests who may actually use them.

  10. Thomas says:

    In the curved area of the Chapel of St. Mary’s Seminary in Houston, behind the high altar, is a curved hallway with several altars for priests to celebrate their own mass. Unfortunately, the altars haven’t been used in decades and now the hallway and altars are cluttered with random statues and candlesticks.

  11. Gere says:

    Our parish is staffed by the CPPS, and some of our priests are among the most reverent, dedicated to the ars celbrandi, fervent priests you could hope to know.

    Also, I’d like to remind many of your readers that the blogger at http://gasparian.stblogs.org/, Refugio San Gaspar, is a member of the Society.

    And finally, currently, we have a CPPS transitional deacon in residence, and he is going to be the kind of priest who knocks your socks off with the excellence of his preaching and draws you deeply into the mysteries by his deportment, his orthodoxy, his devotion, and his reverence.
    Be hopeful!

    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

  12. Larry says:

    Pardon me but I think this might be a picture of the “War Room” and it may get quite busy if India, and Eygpt and NY threats are carried out. Not to mention the economy and what our President -elect may do. Lot’s of Priests imploring God to make it stop. Yes it is a war room and I’ll bet the Rosaries are just out of sight. Secret Weapons are always kept under wraps. Be thankful we are not in India today! May God have mercy on these poor people! May they trun to God and invoke His Mercy.

  13. Larry: A GREAT insight. You got it exactly right.

  14. Sorry…trying to grasp its purpose. Why 7 uniform altars (I assume more) in a single room? Would several Masses really be celebrated in such a long corridor (it is hard to tell from the picture) all at the same time? [Of course.] I can see such things perhaps at multiple shrines dedicated to various saints in a cathedral. But these all look the same.

    Quite frankly it makes me grateful for the restoration of the practice of concelebration after Vatican II. [It’s a Latin Church deal, you know. And concelebration must never be forced.]

    Happy Thanksgiving.

    God bless,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  15. Widukind says:

    An update to the photo.
    The photo is of a postcard,c.1964, and so
    does not show the room as it presently is.
    The altars are still there as in the photo, but now with missals, lectionaries, etc. for the NO. Some of the altars are still used daily by some of the retired priests who prefer to offer Mass privately rather than concelebrate at the community Mass.

  16. Cory says:

    With respect to Fr. Deacon Daniel,

    Concelebration had been used in the Latin Rite for centuries, but only during the ordination of a priest or bishop–the ordinandi would concelebrate with the ordaining bishop; new priests would kneel behind the altar and offer the prayers along with the bishop, while new bishops would actually offer the Mass simultaneously with their consecrator. The practice as it is used in the west now was intended only to be used on special occasions, but is used exceptionally often–in a parish with multiple priests or a monastic setting, it is not uncommon to see multiple concelebrants at Mass daily.

    I’m not too in favor of it being used so often in the Latin Church, as the priest tends to be viewed as acting in the person of Christ, and so having one priest offer the Mass emphasizes that a bit better than having multiple concelebrants. As I understand, and correct me if I’m wrong, in the East, the priest is viewed more as a successor to the Apostles (in function, of course, not talking about episcopal lineage here), and so to have multiple concelebrants is just seen as a continuance of there being multiple Apostles.

  17. Hugo says:

    I think it’s Carthagena.

  18. Daniel says:

    I recently visited Ampleforth Abbey (Yorkshire, UK) where there must have been about 20 altars in the crypt, from when all of the priests in the Abbey had to say their own Mass. Unfortunately, they are very rarely used now (I think one monk says Mass there daily). I can’t help thinking the sacristan would have been happy when the change came – a lot less altar linen to deal with!

  19. Fr K Holland says:

    I agree with Deacon Daniel. Individual Masses being celebrated in an individualistic way simultaneously at seven altars seems far from ideal. Even the concelebration at the ordination Mass in the EF seems distinctly odd. I attended the ordination of two FSSP priests last Saturday and to see the two newly ordained kneeling at either end of the altar in plano reciting all the prayers with the Archbishop and then receiving Communion as a layman would and only under one Form, [they drank wine from a chalice set up at a side table as an ablution] quite frankly looked weird. Compare that with say the concelebration in the Sistine Chapel last Epiphany with the Pope and the wisdom of the Council Fathers in restoring [not introducing]concelebration in the Latin Rite at Vatican II can be seen. I agree that very often concelebration with a Mass facing the people and the priests huddled round the altar in large numbers is not a good look, but when facing ad orientem that aspect seems to disappear. I must say too that while there were a large number of clergy at the ordinations all sitting in choir, it would have been nice to have the option of concelebrating; perhaps one day it will be permitted in the EF. Of course, it always must be optional. Just a comment: in my country it has become quite normal for priests NOT to concelebrate; nor to sit in choir. It has something to do with ‘political correctness’ and priests habitually sit in the pews like laymen [and dress like laymen]at Masses. It is some sort of protest because concelebration is viewed as an assertion of patriarchy and is exclusive. Usually, priests that concelebrate are considered to be ‘conservative’ or even ‘reactionary.’ Things are that bad!

  20. I think the thing to bear in mind is that the fulness of liturgical worship is the bishop with his presbyters gathered around the altar table and a myriad of deacons concelebrating. This is the root of any notion of concelebration, and it seems to be the image St. Ignatius had in mind when he defines what a Catholic Church is. The fact that the bishop is not personally present does not eliminate the importance of the ideal of concelebration.

    I agree with Father Z., though. It is never something that should ever be forced. But the fact that some priests approach concelebration in a slipshod manner is not a reason to see it as less than desirable. Concelebration is also expressive of priestly fraternity, which is one of the reasons I believe it was part of the Old Rite of ordination.

    I simply cannot bring myself to agree that the 7 altars in one room with individual priests celebrating their own Mass is a good thing, even in the Latin church. Perhaps it is the notion that in the Temple, there was only one altar of sacrifice…not 7.

    God bless!

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  21. I was wondering, is it an advantage of priests saying private Masses as to the effects of grace? I’ve always thought that the more Masses said, the better. I said this to one of my priests at my liberal college parish and they said that grace is not quantifiable. (That devolved into a rant against indulgences, by the way.)

    I understand that every Mass has infinite merits, but it still makes sense that more Masses celebrated is a better thing. Wrong or right?

  22. Gravitas says:

    With all due respect father deacon, deacon father, whatever, if you don’t understand why multiple Masses said at once, whether in churches around the world or altars all in a row is a glorious thing that is pleasing to our Lord, then you simply do not understand the importance of the Mass itself.

    Let’s say all the Masses said were for the holy souls in purgatory. Do you think they wouldn’t see the importance?

    Do you think they would rather have 30 priests on one altar for one Mass with their hands in the air looking awkward or would they rather have 30 Masses being said to ease their time and suffering?

    If you like concelebration, fine. Whatever. But please don’t insult those of us who would die to see each of those altars in a row having Mass said at each of them, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

  23. Jonathan: understand that every Mass has infinite merits, but it still makes sense that more Masses celebrated is a better thing.

    The distinction between infinite merit and finite grace was discussed in a preceding thread:

    http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/11/my-position-it-should-be-safe-legal-and-rare/

    Fr. Holland:
    It is saddening to think that Catholics in your area have so little comprehension that the relationship between celebrant offering sacrifice and the Eternal High Priest is so unique that — for instance, when a young priest offers the traditional Mass in the presence of his bishop, which often happens these days because so many TLM celebrants are the younger priests, then the bishop receives Holy Communion (one kind) from him on the tongue while kneeling, as do any other priests who may be present as ministers (deacon, subdeacon, etc.) or in choir.

    Why would you refer to this as “receiving communion as a layman would”? It is how every non-celebrant (lay or cleric) at a traditional Mass receives Holy Communion.

    As for priests dressing like and sitting in the pews like laymen, as a layman my initial inclination would be to find this personally offensive. I am proud of my distinct status as a layman, and would resent the condescension of a cleric who would not respect it, acting as though he can blithely usurp it.

  24. Gravitas,

    First of all, if it is difficult for you, Father Deacon Daniel or Deacon Daniel is just fine. And may I remind you in all humility, I am in apostolic succession. You may disagree with my opinion but Christian charity would demand of you a more respectful and fraternal tone, especially when addressing clergy, whatever our rank or rite.

    Secondly, it is not simply a matter of “not understanding.” It really is more of a disagreement with this sort of arrangement, not with the Mass itself. The offering of any single Sacrifice of the Mass, no matter where or how it is celebrated, has infinite value for souls. The notion that sheer multiplication of Masses within 5 feet of each other is somehow MORE meritorious than a single concelebrated Mass is sheer nonsense. It is the same Sacrifice. It is the same High Priest who offers. Multiple celebrations at a single institution should really be a matter of providing more people with an opportunity to attend, as well as opportunities for all priests to celebrate (concelebrate or celebrate individually) on a daily basis.

    And no – I said nothing of 30 priests concelebrating at one altar table. The most I have seen is about 6, and that was at my ordination. Typically it is about two or three. Most of the liturgies I attend have only one priest celebrating. I’m not fanatical about the need to concelebrate. But I do think it represents the ideal – with the bishop as the main celebrant surrounded by his spiritual sons, the priests and deacons.

    So no insult is intended. Just a disagreement with what is more representative of the ideal.

    In ICXC,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  25. Gravitas says:

    Statements like this is why i have a hard time showing respect: The notion that sheer multiplication of Masses within 5 feet of each other is somehow MORE meritorious than a single concelebrated Mass is sheer nonsense.

    You offend my Catholic sensibilities when you make such an ignorant statement.

    Yes, I should try to be better. But your awful statements bring out the worst in me.

  26. Rasheed says:

    I wouldn’t be so quick to despair for these recent pictures of Cardinal
    Egan behaving very traditional could signal that these days may be with
    us again!!!

    http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Avis=BK&Dato=20081123&Kategori=NEWS01&Lopenr=811230803&Ref=PH

  27. Gravitas says:

    He’s walking in front of a girl altar boy. That’s traditional?

  28. Rasheed says:

    Not behind!

    Brick by brick

  29. JML says:

    found this on Wiki today:

    “The Eucharist is a renewal of the sacrifice on the cross, with Christ, the priest, sacrifice and purpose of the sacrifice. The faithful should participate but they do not have priestly authority. They participate in the sacrifice together with the priest. They participate by cleansing the souls of arrogance, anger, guilt, lust and other sins, and thus see more clearly the picture of Christ in themselves.”

    Mediator Dei (Pius XII)

  30. David Osterloh says:

    My apologies Hugo your spelling is correct, thats what I get for being in a hurry when I post.

    Widukind, the picture is from the St Charles web site http://www.st-charles-cpps.org/images/pic6a.jpg
    main page http://www.st-charles-cpps.org/
    I used to take tours there up till about 2000, the altars were bare and Brother Bernie claimed that they were rarely used any more, even pointed pointed out the buzzer that summoned seminarians to serve. When I was a young mass server (all of 8 years old) the seminarians used to host an annuial servers picnic for all the CPPS parishes in the area (approximately 25 or 30) That place was crawling with boys (no girls) 2nd graders to high school seniors, swimming in the pond, fishing derbys in the fishing pond, straw bale mazes in the dairy barn loft and all kinds of races, and a baseball tourniment for the older, mostly high school, servers. I have amusing memories of being chased out of the elevator, we loved to sneek up to the tower for the view, it seemed to have been set up as a chapel but was used for storage when we were there. Also remember all of the older seminarians and all of the priests were in cassocks, the CPPS wore a large crucifix (at least 12 inches tall with a long draping gold chain) fastened to their cassocks with loops. When the seminarians were moved to UD in Dayton the picnics ceased. Ah those were the days

  31. Gravitas,

    In the interest of charity, I think it best for you and I to refrain from commenting then, since you are having difficulties here.

    May Christ’s peace be with you in this Advent season.

    In ICXC,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  32. Gravitas says:

    I am not having any difficulties.

    Charity is exactly why I’m speaking out — because you are misinforming Roman Catholics. That is the true definition of charity. If I were to stay quiet, that would be uncharitable of me.

  33. mao now says:

    Meanwhile back at the ranch…My only expeience with concelebration is watching those televised Masses from the National shrine of the IC in DC. I didnt like it at all, Hundreds (maybe thousands?) of Priests gathered around the Altar. Entrance procession that stretched for blocks, and took forever to get in. I didnt like it at all. too much showmanship IMHO give me the tried and true, One Priest One Mass One Altar any ol Day. Byzantine sensibilities not withstanding.
    -Peace
    Mao

  34. Thanks, Henry Edwards, for the link.

    That confirms what I thought. The more Masses, the better!

  35. TerryN says:

    Without having read all of the comments, I have this to offer: Concelebration is not a new invention after Vatican II – it was customary for High Masses in religious communities, monasteries (daily), Cathedrals, and at the ordination of priests of course. Low Masses celebrated individually at separate altars was customary in monasteries and religious houses, which includes seminaries and cathedrals, as well as parishes with several priests.

    Individual Masses were offered by individual priest out of devotion, and/or to offer a votive Mass for a particular need, or to fulfill a Mass intention requested by the faithful. Individual Mass intentions should be fulfilled by offering an individual Mass for that particular intention. Since the ordained priest is the ordinary minister of the Eucharist it follows that his greatest desire would be to offer holy Mass, even privately.

    Though the photos of multiple altars appears bizarre, in Cathedrals and abbeys the private side altars were constructed for the purpose of individual priests celebrating low Masses. It also ought to be remembered the Mass was mostly silent and the audible parts would be recited in a low voice. St. John Vianney spoke of the infinite value of just one holy Mass – and the priest was ordained for the celebration of holy Mass. Hence, each priest that celebrates privately or individually celebrates one Mass. I may be mistaken, but it is my understanding that when several priests concelebrate together – collectively they celebrate only one Mass.

    It isn’t an odd custom at all.

  36. Hugo says:

    David, it’s an easy mistake. Like spelling out Josephinium instead of Josephinum.

    Rasheesh, great photos of Cardinal Egan. Very dignified. Will he offer the TLM soon?

  37. Franzjosf says:

    I drove by St. Charles Seminary many times in my youth. A glorious place, with the long lane of trees leading back to the wonderful big pile of a brick building looking ever so Catholic. My mother’s first cousin went to seminary there, and she would visit him, but not during his year of silence! Imagine.

  38. ED says:

    How many graces are being lost due to the lack of priests saying the Gregorian Rite at those altars,hopefully change is on the way!!!!

  39. Alexander the Mongol says:

    Gravitas, one thing I associate when I see Extraordinary Form Masses is people like you. [I really dislike this kind of comment, which veers from the real issues and starts getting personal. I really don’t like that.]

    That is one reason why this Eastern “Catholic” (people here seem by the treatment of our clergy to deem us less Catholic hence the quotes, apparently everything is relative after all) would take an Ordinary Form done in a beautiful church and good traditional music over a Tridentine any day.

  40. Gravitas,

    “because you are misinforming Roman Catholics.”

    Not so.

    Look – let’s go back to the original issue. You are saying that 7 priests saying 7 separate Masses 5 feet from each other is far more meritorious than 7 priests concelebrating a single Mass. Set aside the fact that 7 is a bit of an excessive number for concelebrating, it is simply not true. My point is that a single offering of the Mass is of infinite value and merit. And each Mass is the same Sacrifice offered by the same High Priest, Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ! You are simply applying a “quantitative” approach to the unquantifiable and calling it Catholic doctrine.

    Based on the logic of your position, the Church should simply ask her priests to celebrate Mass ten times a day since it will only increase the “merit pool” to be applied to the holy souls, to the faithful and to the priests themselves! Why stop at only one celebration per day? And why stop as a daily communicant receiving communion more than once per day? Why not twice per day…or even hourly since the act of receiving Holy Communion is truly meritorious?

    I can see part of your point as it is applied to geography. Even St. Paul exhorts Titus to appoint elders/presbyters in every town. The infinite merits of the Eucharistic Sacrifice need to be applied locally and daily. The Kingdom of God is in our midst and should be announced everywhere!

    I think it is a very praiseworthy thing for a priest to celebrate Holy Mass every day. As a priest, I believe it is a principal part of his vocation to do so, especially for some of the reasons Terry outlined above. To offer the daily Eucharistic Sacrifice for himself and for the Church, which is strengthened by every liturgy, is a glorious grace. But this offering can be done worthily and meritoriously either in the context of concelebration or an individual celebration (with at least one other person present). It risks cheapening the Mystery celebrated to say that the one approach is more meritorious than the other. (My argument is not that concelebration is more “meritorious” in the theological sense than individual celebration. Rather, I believe concelebration with or without one’s bishop is more reflective of the ideal. One could say that is the Eastern Catholic bias, but there is certainly a strong patristic basis for it.)

    To Mao’s point, I agree – the notion of hundreds or thousands of priests concelebrating together is a bit, well, absurd. A priest certainly can and should attend a Mass, even if he is not concelebrating. In our Byzantine tradition, priests who are in the congregation and not in the altar area, are usually vested in a simple cassock (riassa) and stole (epitrachelion) in the pews. They do not consecrate from the pews, but they do usually enter behind the iconostasis and receive during the communion of the clergy.

    I personally think a more balanced approach to concelebration says that if there is no room “on the altar,” you take a pew in the nave, while still vested as a cleric.

    God bless,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  41. Alexander,

    God bless you! I will only say in defense of this forum that there are some very good people here who are open to the Catholic East and have no issue seeing our practices and theological approaches as fully Catholic. I am grateful for a place to find points of common agreement and interest, and to dialogue about our differences from time to time. Sometimes there are those for whom the Eastern perspective seems foreign – even aberrant since it falls so far outside of their experience and customary way of thinking and worshipping. Apart from the fact that very often we have the magisterium of the Church on our side, we have the glorious witness of our many martyrs and confessors for Catholic unity who suffered terrible persecution and death, rather than forgo communion with the Apostolic See of St. Peter, to inspire us to hope that charity will ultimately prevail among the brethren in the end.

    That said, we can also learn from those who desire to teach us about the true glories of the Latin tradition (Fr. Z being one of the greats), even if we disagree on certain points of emphasis. Such is the reciprocal nature of our communion.

    A blessed Fast to you, my brother.

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  42. MPod says:

    “With all due respect father deacon, deacon father, whatever…”

  43. shadrach says:

    I am saddened to see Alexander the Mongol having a go at those devoted to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite. I am also saddened that our Eastern Catholic brethren occasionally feel undervalued. The eastern Catholic churches are indispensable in making the Church Catholic but, then again, so are those devoted to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite. The issue of concelebration in the Roman rite is a knotty one. I think Fr Z has arrived at the golden mean in his definition of the form the issue takes today. The increased leeway for concelebration has often been abused in the saying of the NO in the last two decades and this has hurt the perception the faithful have both of the mass and the priesthood. Equally a narrowly quantitative approach to grace leads to scandalous scrupulosity, and the danger of making the unquantifiable appear absurd. At the moment in history we find ourselves in today it is essential to do all we can to protect the dignity of the liturgy.

  44. MPod,

    “With all due respect father deacon, deacon father, whatever…”

    Yes?…

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  45. MPod says:

    My apologies, I must have pushed something to send the message above when I did not intend to.

    “With all due respect father deacon, deacon father, whatever…”

    Brother Gravitas,

    First of all, you deserve a bit of fraternal correction. The way in which you have posed your arguments is plain rude. You seem to know better. Let’s try to keep an even keel here.

    Secondly, we musn’t forget that our Latin tradition is not the only Catholic tradition. And we musn’t act as if our Latin rite is the only legitimate way of doing the sacred actions, especially since some of the Eastern rites pre-date St. Gregory’s form of Mass. This of course does not make our Latin rite less, for it is the Roman rite, the queen (if you will) of western liturgy.

    Thirdly, remember that in a concelebration, each priest has his own intention, which is carried fully by the single Mass to the throne of God. I am not sure a theological case can be made otherwise.

    Now I am not suggesting that our shared preference for private Masses (except perhaps, for me, in those cases articulated by the fathers of the Second Vatican Council) should not be promoted. But neither is Father Deacon Daniel. He is simply (and quite graciously) sharing his salient thoughts from his own fully legitimate and valid tradition. He said nothing to bring out the “worst in you.” As your brother in the faith, I pray you ask his forgiveness for your harshness.

    Concelebration is an option of the revised Roman Rite, the so-called Ordinary Form. It is an option in my opinion overused, many times with rather poor pastoral justification. Let us pray together that the genuine intentions of the fathers of the Council will be restored to our Roman tradition.

    Best regards, and peace,
    Michael

  46. KM says:

    Sorry if I sound a little naive about this discussion but I became a Catholic in the late 70’s and I didn’t even know there was/is a controversy over Mass celebrated by one priest versus concelebrated by a group of priests until I read this.

    On a trip to Italy several years ago our group was fortunate to be able to attend a very early morning Mass in the Tomb of St. Peter celebrated by a friend of ours who worked in Rome at the time. There are no words to describe what that particular Mass meant to us. As we were quietly leaving St. Peters after Mass I noticed that at almost every altar we passed there was a Priest with an alter server saying Mass. I asked Msg. what they were doing and he kindly explained to me that a Priest is encouraged to say Mass daily. I thought that was really great because I was imagining all those prayers being offered up.

    I still don’t understand what the problem is with concelebration except maybe if it causes others not to be able to attend Mass because all the Priests have already said Mass. But 6 months ago when I went to the same friend’s ordination as an Auxiliary Bishop there were about 14 Bishops concelebrating and one half of the church was filled with Seminarians, Deacons and Priests. So it seems like there are times when it’s not a problem. And there wasn’t a need for Eucharistic Ministers
    (personally I don’t ever see the need for them).

    On this Thanksgiving, I’m thankful to still be able to attend Mass everyday, whether it’s one Priest or a dozen. Deo Gratias.

  47. Geoffrey says:

    “On this Thanksgiving, I’m thankful to still be able to attend Mass everyday, whether it’s one Priest or a dozen. Deo Gratias.”

    I’ll second that! Amen! Alleluia! Laudetur Iesus Christus!

  48. Nick says:

    Went to high school at a Benedictine Abbey pre N.O. Masses began around 6 AM — we boys would gear up and queue in a hallway and following the next priest to one of the back altars — my memory says that there could be up to six Masses said at one time.

    Washing altar clothes was also a big item for Brother the Sacristan as there were three clothes per altar — it took the better part of a day once per week to change and clean — he was very meticulous. (He was also tasked with keeping the Angelica under heavy lock and key…heh)

    (A con-celebrated Mass is only ONE MASS regardless of the number of priests — and only one of the priests can rightfully take a stipend.)

  49. Jon K says:

    I believe Dom Guéranger, Cardinal Ottaviani or Pius XI would have been very surprised att Deacon Daniel´s views on private mass and the common practice of the Latin church for centuries. Obvously, one is free to side with Pius XI against Deacon Daniel. After all, Pius XI too had some part in apostolicity, I fancy.

    Using one´s sacred character, as Deacon Daniel did supra, as an argument is not very worthy of a discussion between grown-ups. At least that´s my opinion. Or perhaps I misunderstood. Being only a layman, I usually do.

    I find the Mongol´s unfriendly and ad-hominem remark against Gravitas sanctimonious and not very substantial. But that´s me.

  50. David Osterloh says:

    Franzjosf, He was probably not there during that time, he would have been at the Noviciate farm for that year of silence, 10 miles southwest at Burkettsville, Ohio. The main building burned down in the late 70’s or maybe 1980s, one green shingled barn remains and the two employee houses are still there, the main building was being used by the diocese as a home for troubled inner city youth, a fire was set as a diversion and got out of control, so much of history gone.

  51. David Osterloh says:

    if some of you don’t lay off the snarkieness, Fr. Z will strike, so cool it OK?

  52. Franzjosf says:

    David, I’m sick. That glorious building gone? How sad.

    I’m sure you’re right about the novitiate, I’m sure I got the story wrong when I was little. But because of the story, that building represented something important to me. We always talked about it when we drove by as a family. As a child I remmeber thinking along the lines of, “Someone is willing to be silent a whole year! What dedication to God!” So I respected the building, more properly I respected what I thought was going on inside.”

    A powerful childhood memory.

    Thanks for the info.

  53. David Osterloh says:

    Franzjosf, do not dispair, the novitiate, was a very simple building, mostly frame, I never remember seeing it, we never seemed to go out that direction, I was afraid that you had the impression that St Charles was gone, its still there

    http://stcharles.homestead.com/

    now it’s a retirement center, at least it beats tearing it down, as was discussed at one time

  54. Franzjosf says:

    Glad to know it. The fire you spoke of was the novitiate, not the seminary. I’m going to make a point of visiting it when I’m in the area next. (I was raised in Van Wert, Ohio)

  55. Scott RP says:

    The more Masses the better. Seems pretty simple to me.

  56. The debate about multiple Masses versus one concelebration is interesting. What the individual Masses truly symbolize better is the one High Priest offering Himself in the one Sacrifice on Calvary. Cory touched on this already. Concelebration, excepting the special case of ordination where the new priest celebrates with his Bishop, offers a symbolism as if there were many Jesuses. There is only one Jesus, one High Priest. Concelebration also has a similar issue as when ad orientam is not used – priests facing each other instead of facing God – the community focus. And the laity in the pews have so many to look at rather than the one focus. The individual priest offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass shows best the one High Priest. That one Sacrifice and one High Priest should be the ultimate emphasis, shouldn’t it?

  57. Fr. Keyes says:

    hmmm. As a CPPS priest I have visited our Motherhouse many times and know many priests who celebrate mass there each day. I have celebrated Mass there.

  58. Widukind says:

    David O.,
    Thank you for your comments. It is still, nonetheless,a postcard from c.1964. Having just been there, I can state that the present look of the “crypt” is not the same as in the photo. As well, the old novitiate building was a late 19th century brick building, and the addition was as well as of brick. It was never a frame structure. As to its burning, the cause was of a much more sinister origin
    which I will not reveal here.

  59. Alexander the Mongol says:

    “[I really dislike this kind of comment, which veers from the real issues and starts getting personal. I really don’t like that.]”

    No apologies, Father, for I have no need to apologize for plain fact that when I encounter EO Masses I immediately associate it with reactionaries and other unpleasant demographic groups. Are all people who attend such masses nut jobs? Of course not but the small minority have left me with a bad taste of it, well deserved I might add after what I encountered.

    “I find the Mongol´s unfriendly and ad-hominem remark against Gravitas sanctimonious and not very substantial. But that´s me.”

    LOL if anyone on this forum is going to hell it is probably going to me, don’t get too worried though I will be in good company.

  60. Eames says:

    “No apologies, Father, for I have no need to apologize for plain fact that when I encounter EO Masses I immediately associate it with reactionaries and other unpleasant demographic groups.”

    My friend you are not the only one. My first experience of the TLM did much to engender within me an aversion to Traditional Catholics. I had inadvertantly stumbled upon a Traditional Mass Centre, and was much too curious a character not to have investigated it. In the church I was a solitary teen in a small congregation, the best part of whom were old enough to qualify for free bus passes. Other than myself, the few young people who were there were invariably men, and in their late twenties/early thirties. They were wearing turtle-necked fleeces, and indeed, one would imagine, that had they been French, they would be card-carrying members of the Front Nationale. I hadn’t a clue how to use my missal, and remember being struck at the brazen legalism of those around me who kept telling me to ‘sush’ when I flipped the pages, cluelessly searching for the texts of the Mass. After the Mass the handful of ‘young’ men there went off by themselves. I tried starting a conversation with some of them, and indeed a few people in the chapel, but my endeavours were to prove fruitless. I still regularly go, but I ‘keep my place’. I have to say that the Traditional Catholics at this church are the coldest and most boring group of people I have ever met in my life. I have been to many liberal parishes, and the liturgy is usually intolerable. But I must say, that despite their horrendously bad standards in liturgy and doctrine, liberal Catholics are on the whole much friendlier and warmer than traditional Catholics. Of all the different types of Roman Catholics (liberals, traditionalist, conservative, etc) I find the Charismatics the most amiable.

  61. RBrown says:

    Without having read all of the comments, I have this to offer: Concelebration is not a new invention after Vatican II – it was customary for High Masses in religious communities, monasteries (daily), Cathedrals, and at the ordination of priests of course. Low Masses celebrated individually at separate altars was customary in monasteries and religious houses, which includes seminaries and cathedrals, as well as parishes with several priests.
    Comment by TerryN

    In religious houses, e.g., Dominicans, Benedictines, before Vat II, it was NOT customary for High masses to be concelebrated. There was a rotation with a different celebrant each week.

  62. RBrown says:

    Secondly, it is not simply a matter of “not understanding.” It really is more of a disagreement with this sort of arrangement, not with the Mass itself. The offering of any single Sacrifice of the Mass, no matter where or how it is celebrated, has infinite value for souls. The notion that sheer multiplication of Masses within 5 feet of each other is somehow MORE meritorious than a single concelebrated Mass is sheer nonsense. It is the same Sacrifice. It is the same High Priest who offers. Multiple celebrations at a single institution should really be a matter of providing more people with an opportunity to attend, as well as opportunities for all priests to celebrate (concelebrate or celebrate individually) on a daily basis.
    Fr. Deacon Daniel

    As I wrote on another thread, your argument–which claims that more than one mass at a time in a place us superfluous–ultimately means that all masses are superfluous: The merits of Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross are infinite; therefore, following your line of thought, there is no need for mass at all.

  63. Eames: My first experience of the TLM did much to engender within me an aversion to Traditional Catholics.

    It’s usually a mistake to generalize to a diverse class of people whatever you observe in a single instance or experience.

    I attend OF Mass in several different parishes, but the youngest and most amiable bunch of Catholics I have ever seen in any parish are those at the TLM I attend (though I don’t doubt that some of them see me as old and probably somewhat stuffy). This doesn’t prove anything either, except perhaps traditional Catholics likely are as diverse as any others.

  64. Deirdre says:

    As I wrote on another thread, your argument—which claims that more than one mass at a time in a place us superfluous—ultimately means that all masses are superfluous: The merits of Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross are infinite; therefore, following your line of thought, there is no need for mass at all.

    Hang on – that doesn’t follow. Fr. Deacon Daniel seems to be saying that multiple Masses at the same time and place are not necessary – which is not to say ‘superfluous’ in the sense you seem to mean, that of ‘inconsequential’ – and that the private, individual, saying of Mass is praiseworthy and in keeping with/part of the priestly vocation and, finally, that concelebration seems to him to be theologically rich and patristically grounded. You can hold all these conjuncts to be true at the same time.

    Even were he to be saying that “more than one mass at a time in a place us superfluous,” you cannot extend that to “All Masses are therefore superfluous, in the sense that there is no need for the Mass.” At most you could say “More than one Mass at the same time and place is more than needed.”

    I have no opinion, really, on this matter since I haven’t studied it and am not qualified to make a statement on it as such. But at least be fair to an interlocutor!

  65. DCS says:

    One of the priests buried there is a Fr. Roth, who, in the ’80s, said one of the very first TLMs in Toledo after the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei was released. One of the very first of the few bricks laid in Toledo. We have driven past this beautiful building for almost 20 years and think of this priest almost every time. May he and all those buried there rest in peace.

  66. shadrach says:

    There is an interesting debate bubbling under in this thread about the relative amiability and attractiveness of distinct groups of Catholics that adhere to different forms of the liturgy. Maybe this is a subject that could be debated at another time? It is tremendously important that those who seek a more dignified approach to the liturgy present both an attractive face and a firm resolve to the world.

  67. Cathguy says:

    I am stunned by the ad hominem attacks being bandied about in this forum.

    Since some have attacked those who attend Traditional Latin Masses, allow me to share my perceptions.

    I regularly attend the Ordinary Form, and rarely, attend the Extraordinary Form as it is far from my house and the kids get antsy after we have to drive for more than hour and then sit through a latin mass. There is a sedevacantist chapel 5 minutes from my house… I obviously wouldn’t go there!

    Here is my perception: I have a growing family. When I attend the Novus Ordo Masses, my family is one the larger ones there (we have three children thus far, and pray and hope for more). We get lots of strange looks for staying after and saying the St. Michael Prayer, and we are kind of known as those “more Catholic than the Pope” people at our Parish.

    Our children are by far among the best behaved at the Novus Ordo Mass, and people often notice and comment. Our family is one of the biggest in our parish.

    Now… let me share my experience of my first Extraordinary Form Mass. This occurred after the Motu Proprio.

    My youngest had just been born, and we went to the EF about an hour from my house. We sat in front of a man who was about my age (maybe a tad older). He had 6 children with him. They sat in order from the oldest (right next to him) down to the youngest (way at the end of the line). His wife was home with the new-born and had attended Mass earlier that day. (I learned this later after I struck up conversation after Mass)

    In any event, his children were PERFECTLY behaved. They participated throughout the Mass. Even the youngest had a picture missal. When they went up for communion the youngest who had not yet made first communion went up with their arms crossed over their hearts so they could receive a blessing at the altar rail.

    My wife and I looked around and did a quick gander at the assembly. There were young people, and old people. Very few in-betweeners.

    And, our family was one of the smallest there.

    Primarily, as a humble member of the laity (I don’t want to debate any hostile priests, that is for certain!) what I notice is that there seems to be connection between how we worship and the practice of true Catholic family life. I see more authentic, large, practicing families who accept the Church’s teaching on the evils of contraception at EO Masses. It is just my personal experience (I am not quoting empirical research), but it certainly seems that those families who attend the EO get it.

    I would also conclude that MANY if not MOST of the married couple attending the OF are contracepting and are also presenting themselves for the Eucharist every week.

    I wonder if others more competent than I would care to comment on Humanae Vitae and the possible connection between Traditional Catholic worship and authentic Catholic family life?

  68. RBrown,

    You wrote: “As I wrote on another thread, your argument—which claims that more than one mass at a time in a place us superfluous—ultimately means that all masses are superfluous: The merits of Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross are infinite; therefore, following your line of thought, there is no need for mass at all.”

    I never said that multiple Masses at the same time were always superfluous. There could be good reason to do so, such as the multiple Masses going on at the various shrines at St. Peter’s in Rome for various groups.

    HOWEVER, I do disagree with the notion that multiple Masses at the same time are more meritorious than a single concelebrated Mass.

    You are stretching my words to mean more than what I intended. Certainly the Sacrifice of Our High Priest is of infinite value. Why would one even attempt to argue against such a point? But do not attempt to draw from that point a Protestant argument against the value of the celebration of the Mass. The infinite merit of the sacrifice must be re-presented (such is the command of Christ, “Do this in memory of me”) and applied in the here and now (“for as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” – 1 Corinthian 11:26). It is a matter of our participation in the self-same Holy Offering – the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ…and, mysteriously, His return. Such is the provisional nature of the sacramental worship we offer in the age of grace, until all of these signs are all fulfilled in the age of glory.

    God bless,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  69. Hugo says:

    Cathguy:

    My experience is almost the same as you except for a regretable decision that will leave us with no more than 2 kinder. ;-(

    My experience is that most EF folks don’t think much of HV or the way it was promulgated: “loopholes big enough to drive a Mac truck thru, changed the ends of marriage, unnecessary talk of birth regulation, overpopulation etc…” They seem to prefer C.C. from the thirties.
    If you went to the sede chapel, you’d see a pick and choose mentality similar to the masses at the typical O.F. Mass. Should that surprise any one??

    Little off topic, but the ad hominen remarks begged for a response.

  70. Jordanes says:

    Father Deacon Daniel said: The notion that sheer multiplication of Masses within 5 feet of each other is somehow MORE meritorious than a single concelebrated Mass is sheer nonsense.

    But sheer multiplication of Masses is certainly more meritorious — the more Masses celebrated, the better. Geographical considerations are irrelevant. Whether the Masses are 5 feet away from each other or 500 feet, makes no difference in terms of merit.

  71. Jordanes,

    Again, respectfully, I do not think it is as certain as you say. I think that we need to be wary of attempting to quantify what is ultimately unquantifiable. I see them as essentially equal, since it is the same Sacrifice of Christ celebrated by all of the priests who concelebrate. We are running a great risk theologically when we start to “multiply” the Sacrifices as if God somehow maintained an accounting sheet for purposes of merit pooling.

    It just may come down to agreeing to disagree on this point. The point where I find this worrisome is that some would then argue that a concelebrated Mass is somehow of less value to the Church than one celebrated by an individual priest, ergo, concelebration diminishes the glory of that the Church renders unto the Most Holy Trinity. I would argue instead that it rather manifests more perfectly the glory of the Church and her sacerdotal dignity, especially along the lines outlined by St. Ignatius of Antioch.

    Some of this goes back to what I believe to be the exaggerated place the Latin West has given to the presbyterate in popular piety seemingly over and above the High Priesthood of the Episcopate. One could say, to borrow a phrase from our Lord addressing another issue, “in the beginning, it was not so!” A Bishop’s first ministry, which manifests his priestly, prophetic and royal dignity as a successor to the apostles, was and is always liturgical, not administrative. The pastoral and administrative should flow from and through the Eucharistic assembly. The Bishop is always the main celebrant at every Mass, even if he is not himself personally present, but rather has his delegates act in his name. The development of the “parish” and diocesan structure as the Church grew, caused the role of the presbyter to grow in prominence because of his delegated sacerdotal ministry to the rural and suburban areas. Originally, there was one sacrifice offered in the local Church, and it was by the Bishop and it was concelebrated by the presbyters and the deacons.

    (For further reading, I recommend Metropolitan John Zizoulas’ book: “Eucharist, Bishop, Church.”

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Eucharist-Bishop-Church-Divine-Centuries/dp/1885652518 )

    This explains why the Hierarchical Divine Liturgy or Pontifical Mass with the Bishop, his presbyters and the deacons is the highest form of the worship in our traditions. It is not simply “pomp and circumstance” for the occasion. Rather, it signifies a greater fullness since the Church achieves its fullest manifestation as a local Church with all three ordos concelebrating. Where the bishop cannot be personally present and two or three priests can gather, this act of concelebration can and should continue where possible and practical.

    In ICXC,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  72. Jordanes says:

    Father Deacon Daniel said: Again, respectfully, I do not think it is as certain as you say.

    So one Mass said is just as meritorious as 5 million Masses said?

    I think that we need to be wary of attempting to quantify what is ultimately unquantifiable.

    Masses are not unquantifiable. We can count them. We can also count the numbers of priests who celebrate them, and how often they say them.

    I see them as essentially equal, since it is the same Sacrifice of Christ celebrated by all of the priests who concelebrate.

    If they were essentially equal, then there could never be any benefit in concelebration.

    We are running a great risk theologically when we start to “multiply” the Sacrifices as if God somehow maintained an accounting sheet for purposes of merit pooling.

    If there’s really such a risk, then it would seem to be safest not to offer Masses or to pray at all.

    Look, it’s not that difficult. Try this quick hypothetical: you can have 10 priests offering Christ’s Sacrifice for 10 intentions, or you can have 10 priests offering Christ’s Sacrifice for one intention. In which example is the Sacrifice of Christ being applied to more intentions?

  73. Phillip says:

    I wonder if those altar cards and missals are of the Extraordinary form. It would be great if a group of priest could go there and each say a Mass. That is the picture I want to see.

  74. I wonder if those altar cards and missals are of the Extraordinary form.

    Rhetorical question, I assume. What else could they be?

  75. Jordanes,

    Glory to Jesus Christ!

    “So one Mass said is just as meritorious as 5 million Masses said?”

    Yes, one Mass CONCELEBRATED by five priests is just as meritorious as five Masses celebrated by five priests INDIVIDUALLY.

    “Masses are not unquantifiable. We can count them. We can also count the numbers of priests who celebrate them, and how often they say them.”

    But what is NOT quantifiable is the amount of “merit.” (Incidentally, for the sake of our communication I am using Latin theological terminology here to describe an ineffable mystery of the spiritual value of the Divine Liturgy. “Merit” is not really a theological category per se for us Easterns.) It is not a simple mathematical formula: X (number of Masses) x Y (amount of merit) = Z (total pool of merit). Chronologically we certainly can count the number of Masses. But ontologically, each Mass is essentially the same Eucharistic Sacrifice – the sacred event of the Upper Room extended through time and space by virtue of apostolic succession. Therefore there is no difference ontologically speaking between the offering of five priests simultaneously or five priests separately. It is still the same offering. And if 50 people were in attendance at one Mass concelebrated by 5 priests or 50 people divided up into 5 groups and attended 5 different Masses 5 feet from each other, the meritorious effect on the Body of Christ, of which both the clergy and the laity are members and which is built up and strengthened by the Eucharistic Sacrifice, would be precisely the same.

    “If they were essentially equal, then there could never be any benefit in concelebration.”

    What I have been arguing is the value of the sign – its iconic significance, which is more than simply symbolic – of concelebration, versus individual celebration. Concelebration comes closest to the earliest apostolic and patristic model, which I have shared above. (Bishop, with his priests and deacons) Concelebration is not more “meritorious” in terms of the spiritual value of the offering. In other words, God still condescends to become the Bread of Life and the Cup of Eternal Salvation for us. The catabasis of the Divine Gift is still the same. But I believe that the sign of the Church as an apostolic body – the New Temple of the Heavenly Jerusalem – is more greatly manifested in and through concelebration.

    “If there’s really such a risk, then it would seem to be safest not to offer Masses or to pray at all. Look, it’s not that difficult. Try this quick hypothetical: you can have 10 priests offering Christ’s Sacrifice for 10 intentions, or you can have 10 priests offering Christ’s Sacrifice for one intention. In which example is the Sacrifice of Christ being applied to more intentions?”

    Again, if all ten priests are concelebrating, all 10 of their petitions are there at the altar.

    Thanks very much for the responses.

    God bless,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  76. When you think about other prayers besides the Mass, I think the argument that one Mass is just as meritorious as many makes even less sense.

    Why say 50 Aves when you can just say 1?

    Individual indulgenced prayers, for example: all the grace we get from them ultimately comes from Jesus through Mary. There is infinite merit and grace, but it is applied to us in measures. When it comes to the Mass, each priest is offering the Sacrifice of infinite merit, but still the more the better.

    We must guard against falling into superstition and saying that we can just hop from Communion to Communion, or praying indulgenced prayers over and over again while treating them as magical words. On the other end, we can’t dismiss the common sense conclusion that more is better.

  77. Jon K says:

    Alexander,

    Reactionaries, you say. Reactionaries? That´s what my Leftist friends who favor abortion call the Pope.

    Deacon Daniel,

    I´ll restate what I said earlier on: I´ll trust Dom Guéranger, Pius XI and immemorial custom over a deacon any day. My point is: the ease with which you dismiss what was done for c e n t u r i e s shocks me. Besides, you´ve obviously never been to a monastery where 15 silent masses are being offered at the same time. (I´m amazed that the priests reading this blog have so little to answer Deacon D.)

    Hugo,

    I disagree. At least in France and Sweden, “Humanae vitae” is well-known and frequently defended by those attached to the classical liturgy. One thing is certain: traditional Catholic families tend to be large, not to say very large.

  78. Brian Clark says:

    Cath Guy: you speak the truth and many others have the same observations

    Hugo: Did you mean Casti Cannubi sp? vs. Humanae Vitae??

    Jonk : Who in Sweden is reading papal encyclicals? This is interesting!

  79. Alice says:

    I am a frequent reader, but a seldom commenter. My experience here in the States has been the same as Hugo’s in regards to Humanae Vitae and EF congregations. The people I knew tended to dismiss it as post-Conciliar and Modernist (usually without reading it). After my family stopped going to the EF, I started noticing all the large families in our orthodox OF parishes. I also discovered that some of the people I had judged as “contraceptors” were unable to have more children due to the cross of infertility or repeat miscarriages. I was one of the people Alexander describes as reactionary. May God have mercy on me.

    As far as the picture above, pardon the pun, but it looks like a Mass production room. If each priest is to say his own Mass, there should be fitting chapels where Mass can be celebrated with reverence and an appreciation for the mystery. If the priests join together in praying a community Mass, is the amount of grace released on the world the same? Since grace is immeasurable, perhaps it does.

  80. Stephen says:

    Can anyone tell me when the practice of one priest saying the Mass all by himself developed in the West? One would never see a priest alone in the Eastern rites.

  81. Stephen says:

    and by alone, I don’t mean other presbyters or bishops; in the East, I believe it is a canonical requirement to have at least two people, one of whom must be a priest or bishop, and the other can be a layman. But never just one priest completely alone. This must be a relatively new development in the west I would bet.

  82. Jon K,

    You wrote:

    “Deacon Daniel, I´ll restate what I said earlier on: I´ll trust Dom Guéranger, Pius XI and immemorial custom over a deacon any day. My point is: the ease with which you dismiss what was done for c e n t u r i e s shocks me. Besides, you´ve obviously never been to a monastery where 15 silent masses are being offered at the same time. (I´m amazed that the priests reading this blog have so little to answer Deacon D.)”

    Having trusted sources is a very valuable thing indeed. Perhaps instead of citing their names you could offer a few citations which you find helpful? Perhaps you could also engage me directly on the issue, as opposed to apparently disparaging me because of my rank among the clergy. (Your mention of my rank is curious. Would you trust your sources over a priest or a bishop as well?) And why leave it to the priests to correct me? I’m sure there are deacons and laity who share your perspective on these matters. Might they not be able to address this as well?

    I have been to visit several monasteries – both Latin and Byzantine. I am not sure how visiting one that had 15 altars in a row would benefit my perspective at all. Clearly it was meaningful to you, and I certainly would not want to disparage your experience.

    Finally, as to dismissing “immemorial custom” (quite a phrase…but is it truly so?) of 15 altars in a row with 15 Masses being more meritorious than a concelebrated Mass with the same number of priests, please cite your sources. I am open to being proven wrong. I am one who submits myself to the authoritative magisterium of the Church. If you can show me that I have erred, I will gladly and humbly retract whatever part of my statements are in error. As a deacon I am consecrated to serve the Church, “the pillar and foundation of truth.”

    Yours in ICXC,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  83. Maureen says:

    There is much to be said for either way of doing things, which is why both have their place in the Latin Rite.

    Every Mass has infinite merit, ne? Every Mass has all of Christ, ne?

    But… just as Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross was perfectly capable of taking care of all the sin in the world in one fell swoop and DID, and yet Jesus also asks us to be His co-workers in salvation, and for the Church to re-present His sacrifice to the Father even while He stands in Heaven doing that same thing to the Father on His throne —

    just so does Christ ask the Church for more than one Mass, and more than one priest. “From East to West” the incense and the perfect sacrifice go up, every day and every hour and every year, right?

    Now, practically speaking and especially from the eternal standpoint, every point in time and space is the same as every other point. So having a priest in Rome and a priest in California say Mass, or a priest in the year 500 and a priest in the year 2500 say Mass — well, they’re not really standing any farther apart than a priest saying Mass at an altar two feet away from another priest saying Mass.

    So it’s really more of a pastoral and disciplinary question, honestly. Whatever works better for credendi, I’m for it.

  84. Alexander the Mongol says:

    “I was one of the people Alexander describes as reactionary.”

    Yeah, since all of you have declared me guilty of supporting abortion with out me saying anything like that it is off to the fire pit to burn as a witch. Not that it bothers me I’m going to hell anyways so whatever why live when you can die hell cant be any worse than my hopeless life

    By reactionary I was referring to those who in my case reacted to the part of me which is asian, and their reaction was not a nice reaction. “The Mongol” isn’t just a nefty handle. But of course I have now offended even more people on the internet by mentioning some latin mass attenders had a problem with a mixed racial person (me) which has caused me to sin by inadvertently always thinking of that when I come across a latin Mass but it is obviously my fault, maybe God in divine justice will hopefully throw in some more coal to avenge all of you offended, my humble apologies hopefully I will burn hotter and have more painful punishment for sinning against you, my brothers and sisters. But don’t worry about me, at least in hell I can be in the company of my mothers ancestors and my hindu friends and we can all roast for eternity together.

  85. Alexander the Mongol says:

    Alice, im very sorry i thought you were attacking me, if you could pray for me i would be very thankful, im at the lowest point of my life

  86. Prayers for you, my brother. Do not despair. God’s mercy can bring good even out of the worst situations either created by others or even our worst personal failures.

    “Our sins are as so many grains of sand cast into the ocean of God’s mercy.” – Saint Isaac the Syrian

    “Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God and Son of Mary, have mercy on me a sinner!”

    “Jesus, I trust in You!” – Saint Faustina

    Yours in ICXC,

    Fr. Deacon Daniel

  87. Alice says:

    Alexander, I am praying for you. Please also pray for me.

  88. David Osterloh says:

    Widukind,

    Yes with a frame interior to support the floors and many interior walls, similar to the convent at Maria Stein, I realize that there many theories to the cause of the fire, I chose not to bring them all up here, needless to say the youth housed there were causing a lot of problems for the local community.

  89. David Osterloh says:

    Fr. Keyes

    I based my original comments on the tours hosted by Br Bernie Barga and others, I helped with the tourism office in the area in the late 80’s and early 90’s, and escorted several tours to the Seminary and several churches in the area, My Mother and I did a presentation at St Joseph at Egypt, and them we wold visit several of the better preserved churches in the area, ending at the shrine and it’s gift shop, People from outside that area were astonished at the beauty and architecture, of the churches in such a rural area, many even wrote later to express how the tours were an inspiration to them, made my day, again my apologies for inaccuracies