On the website of the one of the worst, one of the most liberal newspapers in the USA, the execrable Minneapolis Star-Tribune, there is an informal poll:

Instant poll: Should the church allow wider use of the Latin Mass?

Pope Benedict has decided to relax restrictions that have existed since the 1960s.

          Yes No Don’t know   

Whaddya, think? 

Get out the vote!  Post links on your own blog, if you have one.  Make a difference.

Remember, a lot of clergy of that Archdiocese will be reading these results. 

Folks!   You have your marching orders.


In the paper, there is a piece from the AP.  This is how the paper is shaping opinion:

Pope seeks wider use of Latin mass

Last update: June 28, 2007 – 9:16 PM

VATICAN CITY – Pope Benedict is proceeding with his plan to allow more churches to use the Latin mass.

The decision follows months of debate. Some cardinals, bishops and Jews have opposed any change to the current vernacular rite, voicing complaints about everything from the text of the old mass to concerns that the move will lead to further changes to the reforms approved by 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council.

To celebrate the Latin mass now, a priest must obtain permission from the local bishop. Roman Catholic leaders are anxiously awaiting the details of Benedict’s decision, to see how far he will go in easing that rule.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican secretary of state, told reporters Thursday that bishops will still have a "central role" — but he didn’t elaborate. Bertone called a return to the Latin mass a "great treasure."

In a 1988 document, Pope John Paul II urged bishops to be generous in granting dispensations to allow the Tridentine rite to be celebrated. But many proponents say bishops have been stingy — for personal reasons or because not enough priests can do it.

Benedict appears wary of ignoring tradition. This week, he changed the rules for the election of a pope, reinstating the rule changed by John Paul requiring a two-thirds majority for election of the pontiff.

In the 1997 book "Salt of the Earth" Benedict said it was "downright indecent" for people who are still attached to the Latin mass to be denied it.



Please share!

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

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


  1. Thomas says:

    Fr Z,
    Links to the vote (at least on my computer) aren’t “hot”. We need hotlinks! (Or did I miss something?)

  2. Theodoricus says:

    By you’re command Father!

    It’s done!

  3. Thomas says:

    My bad – I thought we could vote from your page. I see it’s linked to the Star-Trib.

  4. Brian says:

    I voted, but upon attempting to review the tally later, it appears they have changed the link.

    Can someone find the new lonk for the poll and post it?

  5. Jonathan Bennett says:

    I voted, but upon attempting to review the tally later, it appears they have changed the link.

    I think you have to register with the site. Just sign up for their “free 7-day pass)- all you have to give is your age and postal code.

  6. WRiley says:

    Done Father!

  7. Karen Russell says:

    I’ve just now contributed my 2 cents’ worth.

    At that time, “Yes” was running about 62%, “No” at about 31%, and “Don’t know” at about 5%.

  8. Arieh says:

    Vote early, vote often…

  9. C.M. says:

    What sort of fascist would vote “No”?!?

  10. Thomas says:

    What sort of fascist would vote “No”?!?

    I know plenty of them, actually (unfortunately).

  11. Theodoricus says:

    Just enter year of birth and your zip-code, then you can vote as many times you want… I’ve been voting for an half hour now. Let’s teach them a lesson folks! Keep voting! For God and his Church!!!!

  12. Thomas says:

    I found that if you click on the first link (Minneapolis Star-Tribune, there is an informal poll:) it takes you directly to the voting page without having to register.

  13. danphunter1 says:

    Classical Rite kickin keester as of 1:48 EST.

  14. Jason in San Antonio says:

    Where a sentence begins, “Some cardinals, bishops and Jews. . .,” awesomeness will follow.

  15. GCC Catholic says:

    Fr. Z,

    What happened to your “Tu Es Petrus” post? I see it’s gone from the main page and when I reloaded the post page I got this: “Съжаляваме, но няма постове, които да отговарят на Вашите критерии!”

    I just wanted to report it if it’s a technical problem (and I can’t read Russian, so that doesn’t help).

  16. Janet says:

    I’m always both amazed and amused at the people who waste their time voting “don’t know” or “unsure” when taking part in a poll! If they can’t figure out what they think, why bother answering a poll at all??? :-)

  17. GCC: I removed the photo. The page no longer exists.

  18. Jon says:

    Done, my Leader!
    (Yep, I’m just lil’ ol’ mind-numbed robot)

  19. Brian Day says:

    I just cast a second vote.

    Yes 73%
    No 23%
    Undecided 4%

  20. Nick says:

    We need to worry about bigger issues, like the Letter to Chinese Catholics which is coming out tomorrow at noon, Rome time. That means about 3am Pacific time. (Not sure what state Fr Z is in).

  21. Hammerbrecher says:

    We got them on the run now..

  22. Aventicus says:

    The problem is that the poll will be taken down soon for it is not the outcome that they had hoped for. Best, Jeff

  23. Aventius: So have some fun now and vote Chicago style!

  24. Nick: As an accredited member of the press corps, I will be able to get it some hours early.

  25. Vincenzo says:

    Father Z wrote: “Aventius: So have some fun now and vote Chicago style!


  26. Jon says:


    Not to change the subject, but I just saw a very disturbing article regarding yesterday’s motu-meeting at COL. It’s a wire story from UCANews //www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=24566

    The most disturbing line of the story is the last one, “The Motu Proprio provides for a review of the situation in three years.”

    I certainly hope this isn’t true. If Benedict isn’t pope three years from now…God forbid.

    I can’t believe there would be a time limit to this thing. Any pastor or bishop for whom this is bad medicine can simply swish the cure around a bit before spitting it out in 2010.

    Reports have said that the MP might be adjusted a bit before release. I suggest we raise holy heck about this (by respectfully objecting to it here and elsewhere), while we still have the chance.

  27. Henry Edwards says:

    On my first StarTribune visit, I cast my Yes for Latin vote. Just now I tried to go back, just to check the running vote total, and couldn’t get in, even after I gave my birth year and zip code to get a “7-day free pass”. Tried again, and they wanted still more personal info, so I said I’m outta here. Does this mean I’ve been nailed as a nasty trad who might try to cast a second wrong vote?

  28. Vincenzo says:


    It’s probably counting the number of times that you’ve accessed their site and doing that upon the second attempt. Use another browser for the 2nd time (worked for me).

  29. Jordan Potter says:

    Jon, thanks for the link to that UCA News story. You found the article “disturbing.” I do too, but for a different reason. What bothers me is that this story provides alleged details from “a meeting held sub secreto (under secrecy) in the Vatican,” but doesn’t cite any sources for those details. It doesn’t even attribute the details to “an informed Vatican source,” but just baldly asserts that things were said and done without any means of verifying the information. It’s unacceptable, shoddy journalism.

    And it might even be true. It wouldn’t be the first time somebody at the Vatican who was sworn to secrecy had violated their oath so they could leak information to the press.

    Anyway, the only details that haven’t already be reported are these:

    Pope Benedict suggested in his nearly one-hour meeting with participants that if five or six Sunday Masses are offered in a diocesan cathedral, the bishop could designate one of them for celebration according to the John XXIII missal, if a sizable number of people ask for it.

    All participants expressed their views at the meeting. Some saw the Motu Proprio as an expression of “pastoral charity,” or a strong affirmation of “diversity in unity.” By the end of the meeting, most indicated their basic acceptance of the text, but a few, like the French, still had reservations.

    The Motu Proprio provides for a review of the situation in three years.

    Now, assuming this last statement is true, I don’t see anything disturbing about the Church taking stock of things in three years. It would be irresponsible and unwise to just institute an important change and then go your merry way without stopping to see if the change is doing any good.

  30. Jordan Potter says:

    Oh, I forgot this little gem from the UCA News story:

    Some participants admitted it was hard to understand the Motu Proprio because it is in Latin.

    Too funny.

    [In voice of teenage bimbo] “Hey Pope dude, I don’t, like, understand this part. Latin is, like, haaaarrrd, you know?”

  31. Janet says:

    I managed to squeeze in a 3rd vote from my computer somehow… the 3rd time involving a different year and zipcode. But couldn’t get to vote further.
    I just now voted on my ex-husband’s computer, and will now try it on different browser before moving to my son’s computer. :-)
    This is fun and funny enough that it’s bound to be a sin!

  32. Brian Day says:

    A second browser worked for me. I guess there is a reason to keep IE around. :-p

    Latest results:
    Yes 78%
    No 19%
    Undecided 3%

    1775 votes cast

  33. Janet: I just voted again from a second computer, at my wife’s behest, of course. But a 3rd wrong vote would raise a serious moral issue, would it not. Hmm … except perhaps on behalf of my sister-in-law, who doesn’t use a computer but would certainly want her view recorded. And then there’s my …..

  34. techno_aesthete says:

    Yes 79%
    No 18%
    Don’t know 3%

    Total votes 1816

  35. Daniel says:


    Looks like the vast majority of people voting in your city agree with the Holy Father! 1200 ayes to 300 nays when I voted.

  36. Richard says:

    I voted – up to 80% yes!

  37. They “ayes” have it, we win. Don’t they understand Rome has spoken the matter is closed… That poll was going down as fast as Teddy Kennedy’s car on Cape Cod.

  38. Guy Power says:



    Yes: 1580 (80%)
    No: 336 (17%)
    Don’t Know: 54 (3%)

    Someone share this with HE Cdl O’Malley!!

  39. Robert says:

    If you clear out your browser cookies after voting, you can revisit the site and vote again.

  40. Beth v. says:

    I just cast my Aye vote. Affirmatives have it at 86%.

  41. I dont want to seem a kill joy,but someting in me does not agree with voting more than once.I voted……once.

  42. Bob R. says:

    I just cast my vote and noticed this:

    “Editor’s note: Instant polls are intended as entertainment. They are not considered to be true measurements of public opinion.”

    Was this disclaimer added after the results did not go their way or was it always there?

  43. michigancatholic says:

    I think that article on COL is bogus. It’s reporting things not mentioned anyplace else, things that were “under secret” and it has a goofy tone to it, saying things that are pretty ridiculous, ie complaints that the MP was hard to understand since it was in latin, etc. The reader must remember that people in the room at the time aren’t exactly bagger boys at the grocery. They understand more than COL is willing to admit, I’d wager.

    COL is patronizing it’s readers, I expect. Some Catholic media outlets have a long history of doing this, especially since V2.

  44. Elizabeth V says:

    I voted yes! :)

  45. Brian Crane says:

    Was this disclaimer added after the results did not go their way or was it always there?

    The disclaimer was always there. But that is for their convenience. If the poll says something that they don’t like, then it is not an accurate gauge of public opinion. If it says something convenient to them, then who knows, maybe it will be quoted (“A poll of 2,350 randomly-selected persons indicates…”).

  46. Xavier Landry says:

    But, Father Franklyn, we must vote for all those who have no computers. ;-)

  47. Xavier Landry says:

    These polls are like American Idol voting. They measure passion for something rather than numbers.

  48. Chris says:

    I would like to know just what an acceptable number of interested parishioners for the Tri mass would be. Our parish with around 700 families has an average attendance at the 7:30 a.m. daily mass of around 16 people – pretty much the same ones each day! Now, say, 12 other people approached the pastor for a weekly Tri liturgy and he refused, for the reason of not enough number, would they have grounds for complaint to the bishop and/or the papal nuncio if the bishop didn’t speak to the pastor for this freedom of “diversity” to actually be carried out?

    I mean, perhaps there would be a small number, in the beginning, who request the Latin, and compared to the entire parish it would seem miniscule, but when compared to those who actually attend mass during the week, the number might have a decent percentage…in an awful lot of parishes.

    The other thing I found to be a little beyond Cardinal Sean’s expertise is how he seemed to take it upon himself to speak for the entire US a couple of times and what the entire nation/every diocese desired – yes, a little too dismissive. And to sum up the pope’s entire personal perspective that he’s put to writing, deep thought, and obviously several years in producing this actual first movement toward a greater dignity in the liturgy, as merely pastoral, sounds a little arrogant, humble Capuchin or no.

  49. swmichigancatholic says:

    I wonder how many people will come to the Latin mass a few times just to see what it is like? I’ll bet there will be many. And some of them will stay. We may even get new converts from this. =)