Mystery Solved

If Rorate Caeli had just bothered to look outside its epistemic closure bubble for ten seconds, it would not have been difficult to understand why Bp. Olsen told the embittered malcontent running Fisher-More why he couldn’t celebrate the EF. Here’s what Universae Ecclesiae, an instruction from the Church on this matter actually says:

19. The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.

And here’s what Dr. Taylor Marshall describes the Administration doing at Fisher-More:

FMC hosted a public repudiation of Vatican 2 and the Ordinary Form of the Mass in April of 2013 that was so offensive that my wife and I walked out of it before it’s conclusion. That did not do much to heal the breach with the local diocese or presbyterate and it contributed to the priests of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) discontinuing their support and presence at FMC. The current FMC website advertises that the FSSP provides a chaplain, but this is not true.

At the same time, Michael King estranged himself from the diocese of Fort Worth by not allowing the Ordinary Form (as stipulated by the previous ordinary Bishop Vann of Fort Worth). He also contracted an irregular/suspended priest without faculties, and hired “trad resistance” faculty while there was no bishop in Fort Worth to check these developments. Mr. King was able to create a community in his image (he affectionately referred to himself the “father” of this community) during the episcopal inter-regnum of the diocese of Fort Worth.

Clearly, a bishop’s intervention was inevitable. The current controversy really has nothing to do with the Latin Mass per se. The Latin Mass is at the center because Michael King is politicizing the Latin Mass in his favor, knowing that “bishops vs the Latin Mass” is red meat for some traditionalist blogs.

There’s your problem right there. (A problem anybody but a blind man could see when King was hosting loons like Fr. Nicholas Gruner.) Deploying the EF as an assault weapon against a Council of Holy Church and using it to blaspheme the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the OF is directly contrary to Summorum Pontificum. Directly. Contrary. The bishop was not only within his rights to act, but he did exactly the right thing and would have been wrong not to act.

But wherever shall students go to participate in the EF? Oh, I don’t know. How about up the road two miles where the EF is offered with the approval of the bishop, who turns out not to be the persecuting monster Rorate Caeli and their sycophants shriek that he is. I walk that on any given day.

One would think that after this ridiculous spectacle and the stupidity of declaring Francis “The HORROR!” within minutes of his election–all on the word of some Argentinian Holocaust-Denying nutjob–no one would ever take Rorate Caeli seriously again. But the pride and arrogance of the Reactionary is resiliently unteachable. They may be massively wrong and deeply destructive of the Church and of innocent people, but like Buzz Lightyear, they are always sure. It goes with being the bestest, purest, most awesome and perfect Catholics on the planet.

Reactionaries perpetually complain about “do nothing bishops who do not protect the Church from its enemies.” Behold! Your prayers are answered, boys. You have a good and courageous shepherd who has weathered the brickbats of the Church’s enemies in order to do the right thing. Thank you, Bishop Olson.

  • http://www.godandthemachine.com/ Thomas L. McDonald

    Mark, you’re causing Rorate Caeli deep spiritual pain again.

    And that’s good.

    You know one of the main ways leprosy destroys? It keeps the victim from feeling pain. Pain is diagnostic. Pain is clarifying. Rorate Caeli needs to feel a little more spiritual pain, and then maybe they would correct their ways and return to the faith, because right now they’re doing the Devil’s work by sowing fear and dissent.

    • http://hjg.com.ar/ Hernán J. González

      Nope. I agree with you and Mark’s sentiment about Rorate Caeli and friends, and I spend quite time (perhaps too much) fighting against catholic reactionarism. But I object to those assertions: “pain is diagnostic, X needs to feel more (spiritiual) pain”. To cause pain can be justified, but it’s never a cause for celebration. Never.
      It’s quite a typical motto from reactionaries: “truth hurts”. Yes, only that the phrase is used by people who assume that truth always hurts… the other ones, “the enemy”; people who pretend to be on the right side and who doesn’t even imagine that truth can be painful for anyone who is not a saint (you and me).
      We need to enlight the others (and ourselves), and for this we might need to cause pain. But we should never need to assume (and even less, to proclaim, so that the other can hear it) that the pain that we cause is healing, and the other “needs” it.

      • http://www.godandthemachine.com/ Thomas L. McDonald

        Well then it’s a good thing I didn’t say it was healing, but rather “diagnostic,” which is the precursor to healing.

        And who’s celebrating? It’s matter of telling to someone to snap out of it when calm explanation has failed. As a quote attributed to St. Augustine goes: “The doctor doesn’t stop cutting just because the patient is screaming for him to stop.”

    • http://tonylayne.blogspot.com/ Anthony S. Layne

      Lies hurt as much as does unwelcome truth, so pain is an equivocal diagnostic tool. Still, too often, there’s no healing without some pain.

      Augh, let’s dispense with the medical metaphors!

      Anyway, I’m not really sure how much good yelling at people like Rorate Coeli does; it may just reinforce their conviction that “no one understands us”. Nevertheless, I do think they’re beyond the point of charitable discussion; their position doesn’t need to be refuted like a syllogism but rather snapped like a magic spell (paraphrasing GKC).

  • Abby

    The quote is actually not from Summorum Pontificum itself, but from the Pontifical Commission _Ecclesia Dei’s_ “Instruction on the Application of the Apostolic Letter _Summorum Pontificum_.”

  • Matthew R

    This is a perfect post.

  • Evan

    From Rorate Caeli:

    “Update: — As is typical, certain bloggers
    who don’t like to do their homework, are suggesting the chaplains at
    Fisher More could have been SSPX or independent priests. A nominal
    amount of fact checking would have informed them that there were four
    chaplains, all in good standing. And all were personally approved by the previous bishop (or diocesan authority). Click here for a link to the list.”

    Wow. I don’t know who to believe. A website written by angry reactionary individuals, with a terrible track record, who engage in lazy “anonymous” below the belt attacks; OR a calm, rational presentation from several bloggers who all have clearly done quite a bit of research on the issue without nameless ad hominem attacks.

    It astounds me that anyone could take RC seriously.

    • UAWildcatx2

      Ah, see, RC had a typo in that “update.” It should have read, “As it typical, certain blogs jumped onto the most sensational story they could to cry ‘Francis hates the TLM!’ without checking the facts of the story first. A nominal amount of fact checking would have informed them that this story isn’t about banning the TLM, since a parish 2 miles away offers it; rather, it’s about a serious pattern of ultra-radical traditionalism, VII denial, and priests celebrating mass without proper faculties, in addition to numerous financial irregularities. We apologize for yelling FIRE.” There ya go, RC! I cleaned it up for ya!

  • Chip98

    Excellent article. Thanks for the clarity

    • Gordis85

      I concur! ^^ And thanks also to Dr. Taylor Marshall for his.

  • Cypressclimber

    I don’t doubt Rorate has some intense followers; but I think its stock has been falling ever since Francis’ election — precisely because, within hours, they astonishingly declared him a heretic.

    • Gordis85

      Amen!

    • Paul PSMLG

      They must be psychic. They were (are) pretty accurate,

      • Cypressclimber

        Oh, so you’re jumping on the “the pope is a heretic” bandwagon?

        Have you completely lost your senses?

        • Paul PSMLG

          Nope. My eyes and ears are working just fine and I believe them.

  • Paul Stilwell

    I believe this is an example case of that term Pope Francis has used in voicing his main concern regarding the TLM: its “INSTRUMENTALIZATION”.

    Rorate Caeli: bullet, meet foot.

    • http://hjg.com.ar/ Hernán J. González

      Speaking of instrumentalization of the TLM:

      The same argentine nut (Marcelo “the horror” Gonzalez) that was hosted by RC to give this expert evaluation of Bergoglio hours after the election, in september 2010 had done the following… campaign: he publicly and loudly announced, in the traditionalist news site “Panorama Catolico” (of which he is director) that he had some data regarding an alleged adulterous relationship in which some argentine bishop had been involved; and he threatened the catholic hierarchy that he would make the name public unless they gave in exchange, as a “gesture of good will” … guess what? Yes, the TLM.
      (I’m not making this up, anyone who understands Spanish can google http://goo.gl/Rtj4NZ )

      • chezami

        The more I see of these creeps, the happier I am that Francis refuses to be intimidated by them. Nor should we. They need to grow up, not be coddled.

      • Sean P. Dailey

        What a piece of work. Because nothing says “holy fidelity to the Church’s sacred liturgy” like blackmail.

      • Francisco J Castellanos

        I read the articles. Oh wow, I am trying to be charitable here, but that gentleman is either: a. seriously disturbed, b. evil, or c. all of the above.

  • TexasCatholic

    Thank you Mark for this well reasoned article. As someone who both loves the Extraordinary Form and knows Bishop Olson personally (he was my seminary Rector for 2 years) this whole ordeal has saddened and frustrated me. Bishop Olson is a good and holy man who only wants what is best for his flock. I pray that he has the continued grace and courage to do what is best for the souls in his care.

  • Wendell Clanton

    Well done! Informative post! I love the EF (Sundays), and the OF (daily), for that matter, but the ideologues at both Forms—on the one hand sedevacantists, on the other liberal religionists—frequently make going to Mass a… sacrifice.

    • BHG

      Oh well said!!

  • chezami

    Tough. Grow up. The bishop is perfectly within his rights and you guys are way the hell out of line. The universe does not revolve around you. Your Reactionary bullying, venom, and narcissism are absolute poison. Repent.

    • http://alittlemoresentience.blogspot.com/ Ana_v

      Your admonishment does not address the points I raised in my post. I think that you, wittingly or not, are attempting to summarily dismiss what I said, in what is an (ironically) reactionary statement against me. It is not my fault if you have encountered “bullying, venom, and narcissism” elsewhere among those who are critiquing the action of the bishop. Some uncharitable voices in the category of “those who disagree with the bishop”, does not mean all voices in that category are uncharitable. Now, if you are going to reply to me, then deal with what I wrote. Otherwise your reply resembles something like an antagonistic cookie cutter response to anyone who questions the lawfulness of what Bishop Olson did.

      Anyways, I presume that by “your”, you intend it to be understood in the plural sense (i.e. referring to the critics of the bishop’s decision in general).

      Otherwise your post doesn’t make sense. There is no bullying, venom, or narcissism in my post. I am basing my opinion on revealed facts and published documents, in response to a rather inflammatory post published by Mark Shea.

      • chezami

        That’s because I could not care less about your legalistic pettifogging, nor about Reactionary whining and self-pity. Grow up.

        • Capreolus

          BTW, is “chezami” a pseudonym for Mark Shea, or is this someone else (presumably “Shay’s ami”)? Curious because “chezami” seems kind of angry and, well, unpleasant.

          • chezami

            Why would I be angry and unpleasant toward vicious Pharisees who gin up a mob against an innocent man and then, instead of apologizing, come to demand pity for themselves and insult me and people I like for the umpteenth time?

            • Capreolus

              Why would you be angry and unpleasant towards your enemies? Because the Sermon on the Mount is harder to live by than it seems, maybe? Just a suggestion. Each man has to answer that for himself, I reckon.

              • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

                Are people really interested in helping Mark Shea the man become like Christ, or are they lifting up their pouty criticism in a desperate attempt to shield themselves from his rhetorical bazooka?

                Mark’s definitely a hothead and – as he occasionally admits – could probably use an injection of grace for those with whom he disagrees. But commenters who drop in on his blog just to complain about his tone need probably to examine their own motives.

                • chezami

                  FWIW, I have never had the sense that Reactionaries reqard me as anything other than an enemy to be hated and destroyed. Not once, not ever, have I encountered anything remotely like the love or mercy of Christ from them. Pride and accusation are all I get from them. I pray for them because Jesus commands it. But their sheer hatefulness makes it an act of will. And when I do sin in anger and attempt to make it right with an apology, I can be assured that mercy will be refused and my sins will be used as grist for more accusation and malice. I have *never* experienced an ounce of grace from Reactionaries. Traditionalists, yes. But not Reactionaries.

                • Capreolus

                  Maybe so. A certain Catholic organization that has asked me for donations over the years has collaborated at times with Mr Shea, and I admit that his “tone” as you call it is of interest to me insofar as it helps me determine to what extent I want to be involved with said organization.
                  Otherwise, I think we agree–at least I hope so–that here or elsewhere we do far better to consider what is said rather than who said it.

  • http://hjg.com.ar/ Hernán J. González

    > Cut the rhetoric and get straight to the substance. Rhetoric isn’t helping in this case, it is just distraction
    [...]
    > the very fact of it having been written *presupposes* that bishops DO NOT have an absolute right to arbitrarily disallow or restrict the TLM

    For me that (that profusion of extremist adverbs and adjectives) is the perfect example of distracting rethoric.
    Replace TLM by anything, and it’s vacuosly true (“bishops do not have an absolute right to arbitrarily do X”).

    Also your “presuppositions” are a not self evident, as you seem to suggest.

    • http://alittlemoresentience.blogspot.com/ Ana_v

      Hernan:

      For me that (that profusion of extremist adverbs and adjectives) is the perfect example of distracting rethoric

      I am not sure what you are referring to. My words that are in caps, bold, italicized? Those are for emphasis. My use of the abbreviation “TLM”? Tridentine Latin Mass is not an “extremist” term. It’s a correct and historical term. What do you suppose the identifying term was, for the past five centuries, for the form of the Mass universally celebrated in the Latin Rite of the Church?

      • chezami

        What you call extremist, I call clear and plain. Pettifogging legalism is one of the tools of the Reactionary when the facts are obviously against you. Grow up. The universe does not revolve around your poisonous little subculture.

        • http://alittlemoresentience.blogspot.com/ Ana_v

          What did I call extremist? Hernan was the one who suggested that some adverbs and adjectives in my original post were “extremist”. I was simply responding to him.

          And do you not perceive the reactionary nature of your own comments? Your posts drip with condescension, vitriol, and unfounded labels, the latter considering that you are replying to me – an individual. I’m a person, not whatever category of people your’re filing me under. I’m a person, not a group. But your mentality is obstructing your ability to respond accordingly.

      • http://hjg.com.ar/ Hernán J. González

        The extremist adverbs and adjectives are, respectively, ‘arbitrarily’ and ‘absolute’. Extremist on the rethorical sense.

  • Diane K.

    This quote is actually from Universae Ecclesiae, Paragraph 19. That is an instructional letter that came out in 2011, almost 4 years after Summorum Pontificum. I discussed it here last night: http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2014/03/did-fisher-more-college-run-afoul-of_4.html

    • Sean P. Dailey

      Diane, thanks. You said on your blog that Universae Ecclesiae is silent on what actions a bishop may take in cases of violations of paragraph 19. Paragraph 27 may give some guidelines: “27. With regard to the disciplinary norms connected to celebration, the ecclesiastical discipline contained in the Code of Canon Law of 1983 applies.”
      Anyone know what the Code of Canon Law says?

      • Diane K.

        I read through the whole document after reading SP and it’s accompanying letter last night. Paragraph 27 is talking about the disciplinary norms to be used in the liturgical celebration. It has to do with various “how to’s” or what not to do during the Mass.

        • Dan C

          I do not understand why this requires Canon Law perusal. Would one want the bishop to be able to close down the use of the EF as a weapon against Catholics like me? Should the Eucharistic celebration that occurs in most of the Church be mocked?

          Why is this needing study? I am an OF person. After reading RC and Fr. Z, I am struggling not to be their mirrors-condescending and oppositional to the liturgy that I do not use.

          I honestly do not understand, and feel that in most discussions about liturgy, I am considered to be an inferior Catholic and in inferior parishes to EF liturgies.

          That is the task of EF advocates- to build bridges back to those of is who have lived under traditionalist scorn (and my father, ordained a Deacon in 1976, would attest heavily to this scorn). Pretense that the lack of EF for a few decades was a human rights violation or even equivalent to the centuries long suppression of the Qurbana in India by TLM folks (and it’s accompanying racism) leaves me unsympathetic and even more than a little annoyed.

  • Char

    You know what gets me about this story is that it’s THE Catholic news story of the moment and yet only 25 students are affected. No better proof that the biggest mouths in the Catholic internet are usually Trads or the uber pious. Oh my, 25 people can’t go to the TLM, call Father Z, get all the European blogs to cover this story, Rotate begging every one who reads them to blog and re tweet about it. They think they are so important and clearly take any and all actions, no matter how small, as a threat. Fear based Catholicism.

    • Char

      Rorate, sorry, auto correct

    • chezami

      Actually, it’s 25 people have to go *two whole miles* to go to the EF. Butthurt narcissist: thy name is Reactionary.

      • Montenegro

        Some dude (who has a “guest op-ed” on Rorate) said on Taylor Marshall’s FB that the nearby 5:30 PM TL Mass is inconvenient. When I questioned him on it, he said he has 6 kids and that is their dinner time. (This is all hypothetical as based on his own FB page, he lives nowhere near Ft. Worth.) There you have it: Martyrs died for the Faith so lay Catholics could complain about an “inconvenient” evening Mass in the rite they prefer!

        • chezami

          O the humanity. Has anyone ever suffered as these people suffer?

    • EMS

      According to a Dallas based CAtholic blog (mentioned on Erin Manning’s blog), at most a dozen might be affected (not counting staff). The commentators on the blogs I’ve seen regarding this far exceed the number of students that school ever seems to have had (@70). I think most people assumed that FM was a big school with hundreds of students instead of a teeny tiny school that would fit inside most pre-schools in my area.

  • Montenegro

    Mark, I’m afraid your reasoning won’t do any good when it comes to Rorate. Rorate already tweeted me (before he/it blocked me on Twitter for raising other issues/calling him/it on his/its garbage style) this little gem: “We arent a party in a private fight between individuals. Our concern is the integrity of Summorum, only that.” _That’s_ his out. How convenient! Michael King could be a serial axe murderer with Girl Scouts in his freezer, and all Rorate has to do is say, “But is the Summorum being violated?”

    This is why I find Rorate so pathological. Mark, I disagree with you on a lot of stuff. I prefer the TLM, I am a Voris fan, and you’ve referred to me as a “toady” on your FB page. :o) But on this one, I’m in agreement with you. Rorate has done a ton of damage, and refuses to acknowledge it. On FMC, he/it regards any disagreement or introduction of new information — both of which I have attempted with him on Twitter on more than just this topic — as “debating,” and will block any perceived “debater” on Twitter. He’s blocked me 2 or 3 times now since migrating his Traddie Catholic Jerry Springer Combox Sideshow from his blog to Twitter.

    • chezami

      You know, the irony is the Louie Verecchio and this freak show are now attacking Michael Voris for the grave sin of treating Francis with charity and refusing to trash him the way these vipers do. Strange to find myself commending Michael, but I do. I hope he continues to hold out against this toxic filth.

      • Montenegro

        Oh yes I saw something about Louie V…I’ve got no idea who he is…looked as his FB to try to learn his POV, and I still can’t figure it out. Rorate (main blogger’s screen name is “New Catholic” – I’ve no idea of his true identity) and other crypto-SSPXers (who claim btw _not_ to be SSPX, and claim they support Francis, except when they don’t) talk out of both sides of their mouths, throw the FMC cat amongst the pigeons, cause a global firestorm on the eve of Lent, and then walk away saying “they only care about SP.” It is sickening. They are the reasons I was so uninterested in the TLM years ago. It was only when I met normal people who are attached to the old rite that I was able to see its beauty and become an adherent myself. Goodness, let’s all pray and fast this Lent for everyone involved and affected by this unfortunate situation.

        • chezami

          His point of view is simple: Francis is evil and God has sent Louie Verecchio and similar Reactionary hysterics to save the Church from him. All *real* Catholics will condemn Francis and if the Church does not get with the program he may just decide we have no pope. I have no patience left with this ying yangs. This crap is pure poison.

        • Joejoe

          Don’t forget that SSPX isn’t “really” schismatic, but they’re not “actually” aligning with SSPX nonetheless. (Wink wink!)

  • Beth

    I don’t know the details of the happenings at Fisher-More but I do know one thing, Mark Shea sure hates them! He despises these folks. He throws stones at them; he spits at them; and he seems to delight in it…..

    • Bill

      Mark doesn’t hate anyone. Your post is an absurdity. He’s pointing out some very poisonous beliefs and points of view.

  • Baptismal Vows

    All fine and good Mark. Thank you for being right on this and setting us straight. But I find it ironic (and rather sad) that when a “conservative” breaks the rule, the local bishop is all over it. But when “liberal” heresy and liturgical rule breaking takes place, local bishops are nowhere to be found, while some even condone it. And the liberal nonsense is much, much more frequent and ten times worse in it’s destructiveness.

    • chezami

      Where would Reactionaries be without oceans of self-pity? Can you not just acknowledge the bishop was right and Rorate Caeli was (yet again) outrageously wrong without talking like a six year old trying to point at his brother and whine “He’s worse than me!” Grow *up*!

      • JoseProvi

        I agree totally with you Mr. Shea and in fact I decided to stop following Rorate, Pewsitter, and any other reactionary news source. I do, however, ask myself the same question that Baptismal Vows asks. I’m not sure there is a clear answer. Having worked in a diocesan chancery it seems to me that the “liberal” rule breakers are often good people who are doing their best with the not-so-great education they got from Catholic institutions. Meanwhile, the trads and reactionaries are not very nice and are always pointing fingers. They have an answer for everything and tend to talk with such authority (quoting this or that council or pope) that instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt many bishops just can’t stand them. Most people would be surprised how many complaints dioceses get from rad trads. I hardly ever got complaints or hate mail for the bishop from liberals. It was almost always the reactionaries. That to me says a lot.

        • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

          They have an answer for everything and tend to talk with such authority (quoting this or that council or pope) that instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt many bishops just can’t stand them.

          They know the words but not the tune.

        • Andy

          It is interesting you say that – as chair of pastoral council the biggest complaint i hear from liberals is to use Free Trade Coffee for our after Sunday Mass coffee and bible study. I am badgered constantly by the more virulently traditional set with – need/have to have more TLM, how can we use Eucharistic Ministers, is Father going to address Mr. So and so receiving Communion I know he is living in sin – the list is endless. I have reached the point of not listening -

  • Paul O’Brien

    Thanks man. I heart logic, reason, and getting the facts straight.

  • John_Charles

    I too love truth, logic, reason, and getting the facts straight; yet is it necessary that your cynicism and invective words cut like the blunt end of a shank.

    • chezami

      Dunno. Is it necessary that Reactionaries heap scorn and slander on most of the human race and never ever offer a word of repentance and humility for their towering pride? To quote Flannery O’Connor, “When people are deaf, you shout.”

    • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

      You must be new here.

  • No one of consequence

    I agree 100%, but there’s no need to rub salt in the wounds. Quite a few people jumped to conclusions when the news first came out (I was tempted to). Rather than rage against all the “embittered malcontents”, “persecuting monsters”, “loons”, “nutjobs”, and “sycophants” trapped in their “epistemic closure bubbles”, you could have responded lovingly like Dr. Taylor Marshall, whom you quoted. Yes, Marshall had plenty of criticism for Fisher More and its administration, but he stated it so as to persuade rather than to anger. I was persuaded by reading Marshall’s commentary. Yours made me wish I was one of the “reactionaries”.

    He also emphasized his sympathy for the students of Fisher More (to whom you showed very little sympathy), most of whom are probably faithful traditional Catholics who have only been hurt by Michael King’s spiritual mismanagement of the college, and are deeply in need of our prayers at this time.

    I intend no offense by this, but if I were you, I would rewrite this post, dump the vitriol and triumphalism, and replace it with language that’s more designed to turn hearts than further embitter them.

    God bless.

    • Bill

      Mark is right to call a spade a spade if certain people are broods of vipers.

      • MenAreLikeWine

        I thought this was a shameful piece for a Catholic to write.

  • Peter Williams

    Happy Ash Wednesday. May you all have a holy and spiritually fulfilling Lent.

  • BJM

    Thank you Mark. I had no idea what went on at the College and I certainly was no party to the meeting between Bp Olson and Mr King so I wouldn’t have presumed to take sides from 1,500 miles away. It is only through your leadership that I had enough sense to waken from my Ashen silence to know the joy of dancing on the heads of reactionaries! It does so ease the strain of fasting and abstinence to have something to redirect my bloodlust at. Again, I thank you.

  • Oceanus

    If your goal is to alienate those you call Reactionaries, this type of post a great way to do that.

    Though not a traditionalist myself, I consider myself a sympathizer, and this type of mean-spirited rhetoric just pushes me further over into the traditionalist camp.

    You know what they say about honey and vinegar.

    • Jacob Suggs

      Is it mean-spirited to point out when others are being mean spirited? If you think Mr. Shea is exaggerating, then you can disabuse yourself of that notion just by reading some of the things the “reactionaries” write.

      Of course, “traditionalist” and “reactionary,” as Mark uses the term, are not equivalent. I am not a traditionalist either, and I also sympathize with the actual traditionalists – you know, the ones who respect Tradition as well as tradition, which includes the facts that the Church has the authority to hold councils and change the Mass – but what remaining sympathy I have for these people who are willing to trample on the bishops (who, by Tradition, lead the Church) without having any idea what is going on, and without having any more justification than that something they like isn’t treated as The Most Important Thing Ever despite not being The Most Important Thing Ever, is running out.

      The SSPX lost all remaining sympathy when they took Pope Benedict’s efforts to find them a place to loyally serve the Church and spat on them. The Rorate crowd is little better, they spit on any effort of any bishop that is not immediately and clearly working towards the externals they like, and demean Benedict’s efforts to help them by turning around and using these efforts to justify attacking the Church. Sympathy for traditionalists is a fine a thing, but don’t let it blind you to the fact that there are wolves mixed in with the sheep.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      As Jacob points out below, “traditionalist” and “reactionary” are not synonymous. Traditionalists are Catholics who generally prefer the liturgy, devotions, etc. from before the Second Vatican Council, but without necessarily denying the validity of that Council. There’s nothing wrong with that. Reactionaries are Catholics who take things too far, rejecting the Council, the Ordinary Form of the Mass, possibly even some or all of the popes since Pius XII.

      Not all Traditionalists are Reactionaries; in fact, I believe the term applies also to the non-trad Catholics who have taken issue with Pope Francis over the past year. They, too, are “reacting” in a bad way to something new, even if they have no attachment to the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. So one need not be a Traditionalist to be a Reactionary.

      Until a short time ago, many Catholics in the blogosphere called Reactionaries “radtrads,” short for radical traditionalists. Even then, a distinction was made between regular Traditionalists (the non-reactionary type) and radtrads. Yet Traditionalists who visited this blog constantly misunderstood this; they assumed radtrad was a slur directed at all Traditionalists, which it was not. So some bloggers dropped radtrad and started using “Reactionary” instead, to make it clear that it was not such a slur (and to include non-trads who hate the current pope). So Reactionary is not an anti-traditionalist slur.

      (BTW, I’m also something of a sympathizer with Traditionalists.)

  • Howard

    Tone it down a little, Mark. Not long ago you were apologizing for this kind of behavior. I agree with you in the substance (though I do not completely discount Rorate Caeli because of a couple of bad stories), but what good can you possibly hope to achieve with this tone?

    • Dan C

      There is plenty of evidence that “change of minds” for folks like these guys is unlikely. In fact, often times opposition creates further entrenchment. What needs to happen is to make sure that the “I understand” crowd realizes that these folks insult me, an OF Catholic all the time. In their eyes and the eyes of their “I understand” enablers, I am an inferior. One can read the condescension and insults on the leading EF-advocacy blogs all the time.

      I am thrilled that someone is saying these EF-only whiners and their enablers are actually hurting everyone. Especially their interest in better liturgy.

      • Howard

        I’m not sure your comment is really in response to mine, since I did not use phrases like “change of minds” or “I understand”.

        As for EF enablers, that would obviously include Pope Benedict XVI and Bishop Olsen. I wouldn’t put them in the same category as those who say that SSPX was justified in going into what is at least effectively schism and that Marcel Lefebvre will inevitably be declared a saint — nay, a doctor! — of the Church.

        But my point is that nothing good comes of either side mocking the other or pretending that the biggest nuts on the other side characterize the whole.

  • Sherry Weddell

    A very thoughtful post from an EF fan on TLM “Onlyism”

    http://scottericalt.com/why-latin-mass-onlyists-are-destroying-the-latin-mass/

    • Dan C

      Latin Onlyism. It is insulting to those of us who are OF folks.

      Those enabling Latin- Onlyism sometimes include non-EF folks scoring culture war points or those who are promoters of better liturgy. It’s annoying to end up linked to a Fr. Z article, who I avoid reading due to his uncharitable nature (we can just use his “Biologic Solution” tag line as an example).

  • Eric Hanson

    I think the problem for many wasn’t that the Bishop intervened at Fisher-More, it’s that such swift action doesn’t seem apply equally to Catholic schools that stray from the Church. Many Catholic colleges have had speakers that are in favor of abortion with utter silence on the part of Bishops; Fisher-More has a speaker that repudiates Vatican 2, and swift action is taken.

    • Dan C

      Fisher Moore is in the wrong then? And RC is incorrect in calling them out? And when folks are sympathetic to RC, it is analogous to being sympathetic to a liberal parish with a pro-abortion speaker at its functions? Is that what you are saying?

      Because it sounds it.

      • Eric Hanson

        I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion.

        • Dan C

          You relate the swift action to other misbehaviors, just liberal ones. As such, I thought you acknowledged error.

          • Eric Hanson

            Again, I’m not sure what you’re getting at. I was just pointing out that it seems that if a Catholic college strays to the right action is taken, but if a Catholic college strays to the left nothing happens. I think intervention by bishops needs to be proportionate.

            • Dan C

              Most interventions are unheard of because college presidents are wisely silent on this matter.

              This letter was leaked. You have no data whatsoever on bishops’ actions against liberal institutions.

      • Howard

        Yes.

        Yes.

        It depends how far you are willing to stretch an analogy. Is embezzlement analogous to armed robbery?

        • Dan C

          The charge of embezzlement is not yet established. We are discussing ecclesial concerns.

          • Howard

            I had not noticed that a charge of embezzlement was involved. My point really had to do with analogies. Embezzlement is like armed robbery in that both are stealing. It is unlike armed robbery in that it is not commonly understood as “violent crime”. They have the same end — robbery — but different means. If the effect of supporting Rorate Caeli and the liberal parish is in both cases to introduce a practical separation from Peter, then they are alike in their effects but different in their methods.

            Your tactic was essentially to dare anyone to answer those three questions “yes”. It’s not a good tactic for two reasons. It can turn someone on the fence into an opponent. Also, when someone says “yes” you can only say “nuh-uh!”

            • Dan C

              EF-advocates have rarely been anything but an opponent of mine. I am an OF attendee. Or an attendee of the Syro- Malabar Qurbana, truly an ancient rite suppressed by TLM advocates actually. For centuries.

    • Charlotte

      How does that make it reasonable to defend Mr. King? If he’s wrong, he’s wrong.

      • Eric Hanson

        I’m not defending Mr, King and from what I’ve read from RC, they were not defending him either.

        • chezami

          That’s because they were too busy hysterically attacking the bishop and smearing his good name.

          • Eric Hanson

            They weren’t doing that either.

            • UAWildcatx2

              If not directly, then indirectly, absolutely.

              • Eric Hanson

                That’s quite a pass of judgment

                • UAWildcatx2

                  Their own words pin them down.

                  • Eric Hanson

                    Exactly what words did they use to “hysterically attack the bishop and smear his good name?”

                    • Denise

                      I’m hoping to see an answer to your question regarding what words they supposedly used to attack the bishop and smear his good name. If a proper answer can’t be given, then it may be a case of calumny. It is a sin to unfairly accuse a person or persons of something they didn’t do or say.

                    • chezami

                      Saying he is behaving tyrannically is smearing his good name.

                    • Eric Hanson

                      Wrong again. Calling RC a pack of hysterics is name smearing. Criticizing someone’s actions is not.

                    • chezami

                      Calling the bishop tyrannical is name-smearing–and hysterical. Just like calling Francis “The Horror” on the word of a Holocaust-denying nutjob.

                    • Eric Hanson

                      Firstly, you originally said RC stated that “the bishop behaved tyrannically” now you say RC actually said the bishop was “tyrannical.” Which one is it and where are you getting it from? Secondly, you calling RC a pack of hysterics is exactly the type of name smearing you decry and accuse RC of committing.

  • LewistonCatholic

    While I do think Rorate was over the top here, I have a problem with all the vitriol directed their way. While I understand about the King and the FMC it is still puzzling that the solution is to prevent students from assisting at the TLM on campus. I mean, if say a liberal Catholic college brought in speakers that advocated for Women priests and same sex marriage, would the local bishop deal with it by decreeing they can no longer say the Ordinary Form in the Chapel and must use the Extraordinary form? I won’t hold my breath for that to happen.

    I have occasion to go there and read that site as well as many others of all flavors, such as New Advent, Fr. Z, etc. because I am tired of reading about how wonderful the Church is in the US in spite of only 20% of Catholics going to Mass regularly, the precipitous drop in vocations, widespread acceptance of contraception (which is one reason we have no vocations) and so on. I like to read people who have not drunk the kool-aid and are willing to tell the truth about what is going on in the church.

    • Dan C

      Are you saying then that the points are correct: that EF-only ism is an error, should not be advocated on campus ever, and FMC is equivalent in its error to advocating for women priests?

      That the only thing that should stay the hand of the bishop against this error-prone administrator and college is that the students will be harmed? Otherwise this essay above and the Bishop is correct in his actions, but should have mercy on the students?

  • Dan C

    I do not have a “have pity on the students” tune going on in my head. These folks are adults and there would be a whole line of reasoning against merciful considerations in a discussion of , say, the welfare needs of 18-22 year old parents that would go along the line of “they are adults and made adult choices…” Well, these students are adults and made adult choices to align and associate and advocate for an institution that sounds a bit like the SSPX.

    College students are adults. I am uninterested in coddling them.

    • Howard

      I’d like to agree with you, but Charlie Sheen (to take one example among millions) is 48, yet I doubt you could call him an adult.

      • Dan C

        He is an irresponsible adult.

    • No one of consequence

      The students are not responsible for Fisher More’s problems any more than the students of, say, Georgetown are responsible for that Catholic institution’s problems. They attend the school, yes, but that doesn’t mean they all agree with the administration, especially since the hijacking of Fisher More as a haven for dissident traditionalists is fairly recent. If you don’t believe me, and you still think the students are just a bunch of SSPX sympathizers, please read Dr. Marshall’s commentary. He knows Fisher More better than either of us. https://www.facebook.com/DrTaylorMarshall/posts/400180263452671

      • Dan C

        These students held fund raising on behalf of their school, choose to continue to attend. As such, they are agents of the school and stake holders. If certain habits of mind, such as intense deference to authority, prevent them from positively impacting their school after raising a quarter million dollars on its behalf, and can’t find it in them to exert some presence and authority in leadership on campus, that is their fault. The minor annoyance with attending a parish nearby for any Mass is not actually a problem I even resonate a small bit with.

        1. Big deal. 25 college students need to attend to a local Mass (maybe even-horror- and OF Mass). Good.

        2. “The students” are nothing but an excuse for many to whine. I don’t think that rises to a level if national concern, or even local concern. These students at their school have bigger problems and should be asking for “better” from their board.

        • No one of consequence

          How do you know the students aren’t asking for better from the board? This is precisely the problem; we’re making sweeping assumptions about people we know nothing about. We have no cause to judge them.

          Also, I’m not saying Olsen was wrong in revoking their right to use the EF. I’m simply condemning the “Those rotten closet-SSPX students got what was coming to them!” rhetoric.

          My college is a liberal Presbyterian school, to which I pay money and which I voluntarily choose to attend. As such, I am apparently “an agent of the school and a stakeholder”. Am I therefore a liberal Presbyterian?

          Again, I suggest that you read Dr. Marshall’s commentary before making conjectures on the character of the students. You seem either not to have read it or to have ignored it.

          • Dan C

            1). I am unsympathetic to the “but it’ll hurt the students” approach. To read this as condemnation is an error. I think this imposes little trouble for these young adults. I waste few tissues on these men and women on this matter. They have bigger problems then this.

            2). As a student, yes you are a stakeholder. Should the institution fail or have scandal, your degree and its value would change negatively. Yes you are a stakeholder in your university.

            3). These students engaged in a quarter million dollar fundraising effort over the past year on behalf of the school with the premise that it was to keep the school open. They are even greater stakeholders in the future of FMC (having raised about 10000 dollars per student for this institution).

            4. This school’s direction is in error. They are moving in a schismatic direction.

            I have read Dr. Marshall on FMC before and re-read this recently. One note he fails to make is whether or not the school should continue. When the students are raising money to pay the instructors, I say “no.” Dr. Marshall may have too many EF sympathies to let go of the FMC dream. I have no EF sympathies . Any money sent to this school is sending good money after bad.

            • No one of consequence

              1. If you’re not condemning the students, then we may be on the same team here. If that’s the case I apologize for misinterpreting you. My point was that 1) the students are not necessarily guilty of the sins of their administrators, but 2) that doesn’t mean that Bishop Olsen was wrong to act as he did. What I don’t like is the attitude of many commenters here, who have been taking a smug, serves-you-right approach to the students.

              2. I was not suggesting that I am not a stakeholder in my school (my apologies for using the word ‘apparently’: my quibble was not with the substance of what you said but with how you said it). What I meant was that you cannot draw from that premise the conclusion that the students are ‘guilty by association’ of the schismatic viewpoints of their administrators, just as I am not ‘guilty by association’ of liberal Protestantism. But if you’re not accusing them of being guilty of that, then I drop my charge.

              3. I’m a little confused as to why you think FMC must be closed down. One would think it would be better to try to restore it to what it once was (it wasn’t always hostile to the Church), and if all else fails, close it down as a last resort. Wouldn’t fixing FMC be better for all parties involved?

              4. And yes, the students DO have bigger problems than this. The fact that their college is run by Michael King and that their school might not stay open much longer. What would be best for them would be to find a way to return FMC to being a faithful Catholic college, and allow the students to finish their education there. Wouldn’t you agree?

              • Dan C

                I do not assume guilt by association. But if I work for a company that despite my best efforts goes bankrupt the negative consequences of being a part of that group fall on me too, independent of my competence or productivity. Such is being a part of this enterprise.

                FMC is failing first off as a business venture. That will likely be its downfall, not the presence or absence of the EF. Even when more. ” faithful” to its mission, it was troubled. It has had a shaky foundation and business plan.

  • Sherry Weddell

    One interesting thing I noted during my recent trip to Ireland and the international conference I was part of in Malta which had attendees from 23 different European nations. The kind of debates about Traditionalism and its extreme forms that are common here are almost unknown there. Even though I have done my utmost to stay out of all such debates and away from anything that smacked of it, I have still been deeply affected because the venom and debate has become so mainstream in the US over the past 6 – 7 years. (Lets put it this way, I have been told in the recent past to hide the fact that I’m a convert when speaking at major event so that people would take me seriously. Such advice was simply *unimaginable* until recently.)

    When talking about the realities of life in the US, I brought up some of these American debates with mainstream to conservative Catholic European leaders and they just looked at me, mildly puzzled. I was genuinely surprised. No energy. No flicker of recognition. What even the least clued-in American leader would instantly recognize produced no flicker of emotion or interest from Europeans.

    We have to grasp that there are only two major centers of Traditionalism/Rad tradism in the world: the US and France. And even in France, Rad tradism as we know it here, does not factor into the mainstream debates the way it does here. (It is telling that it was the organizers of Catholic Alpha which is active in over 600 parishes in France who were invited to speak of their experience at the Synod on the New Evangelization in Rome in 2012 under Pope Benedict.)

    But it has colored our discussions for the past six years largely in the US because of a huge Trad presence online – a presence that far exceeds their actual numbers in the Church.

    We have to grasp that the sort of debate that we have seen over the past few days about Fisher-More College is not a true global debate. It is not “the Church’s debate”. It is a uniquely American polarization that is primarily poisoning our own discussions. It is time that thoughtful American Catholics stood up and said “enough”!

    We have far more urgent things to wrestle with.

    • Dee Gray

      Amen! Thank you Sherry. Thank you Mark!

    • Barbaric Yawwp

      Get used to it because we may be small now but we’re young, growing and don’t plan on going anywhere.

      • Dan C

        The growth of the EF-folks? Well, if you are aggressively championing an attack on the OF, you attack the Sacrament of the Church.

        I suspect you mistake growth in numbers of EF attendees with Internet “noise.”

        • Barbaric Yawwp

          How long have you been Catholic?

          • guest

            More proof that Mark’s assessment of rad/trads, while overly harsh, was accurate.

            Setting yourself up as the arbiter of who is truly Catholic, aren’t you?

          • chezami

            The arrogant unselfawareness! It burns!

          • Dan C

            I was born Catholic and I am in my late 40′s. But, being an OF person who does the liturgy of the hours in English every day, do I still count as a Catholic? Am I an inferior Catholic?

            • Barbaric Yawwp

              You’re not an inferior Catholic. You’re not Catholic at all but a Protestant just like your pal Mark.

              • Dan C

                Hahahaha! Like Pope Francis too? Or Benedict? Who dared to say the OF in a stadium in the US in English? Like them?

                • chezami

                  I am not, I promise you, paying that guy to illustrate everything I say about the pure poison Reactionaries spew.

                • Biff Spiff

                  Is the Pope Protestant? Does a bear use a port-a-potty? Sorry, couldn’t resist.

              • chezami

                Wow. A walking parody.

              • Dan C

                I confess, I also like the Syro-Malabar Qurbana. Have you ever been? It’s older than the EF.

              • Marthe Lépine

                And who gave you the authority to make such judgements? Did not Jesus said not to judge…

          • gwythe

            How long have you?

      • guest

        Well, the only place I’ve run into any of you is the internet. Not sure where you’re growing, but you’re not very attractive to most of the Catholics on the internet. I don’t find your disrespect of and defiance of the church any better than that of the liberal dissidents.

        • Barbaric Yawwp

          Oh? So, you know most of the Catholics on the internet? Please tell me more about what Internet Catholics think.

          • guest

            Well. for starters, read Mark’s posts on the subject ( over the last year or so) and the overwhelming tone of the replies. ;)

            Then, maybe read other conservative and non-radical blogs and forums.

            • Barbaric Yawwp

              Examples?

    • Dan C

      I have said similarly about how Americans view Opus Dei in the States too. Both conservatives and liberals. And this is different in other countries.

      These are the wounds of the Catholic Wars (May they rage forever.) These wars were well received and highly promoted until just recently. A guerrilla war. As such, good luck disarming the guerrillas. And the PTSD that certain matters evoke is so much like a war effect.

      The liturgy was a battlefield in this war. It still is. The Catholic Wars still rage (may they last forever).

      • Rosemarie

        +J.M.J+

        May they rage forever???

        • Dan C

          Sure. Weren’t we all eager in 2004 to fight the Culture Wars and Catholic Wars?

          • Rosemarie

            +J.M.J+

            Were we? I’ve never liked the dispute between Traditionalists and non-trad orthodox Catholics. Many Catholics of a more “progressive” bent are decent people as well and I’m getting tired of attempts to make anyone walk the plank of the Barque of Peter. The thought of eternal war between Catholics just makes me want to say, “Dona nobis pacem.”

            Besides, it’s an internet thing – particularly a blogosphere thing – so it’s really a proverbial tempest in a teapot. About 99.9999% percent of Catholics in the world have no idea that this “war” is waging in St. Blogs tonight.

            • Dan C

              Sure. One can get a glimpse of former combatants at Over the Rhine and into the Tiber and the American Catholic.

              Once can view Thrownback, Catholic KerryWatch, or even now Dwight Longenecker or the Archbolds on NCRegister to see the current eager Catholic Warriors.

              They battles still go on. It’s an American thing. I personally think It really is about politics but we make it about religion

              • Rosemarie

                +J.M.J+

                Most “religious” disputes and wars are really about politics. It’s not religion that poisons everything; it’s politics.

              • Rosemarie

                +J.M.J+

                Anyway, speaking of Dona Nobis Pacem:

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKz_aBRhCIk

            • Paul PSMLG

              99.9999% of Catholics have no idea what distinguishes them from protestants. Let’s put aside non-existent differences and just luv each other.

  • jarms40

    “Deploying the EF as an assault weapon against a Council of Holy Church and using it to blaspheme the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the OF is directly contrary to Summorum Pontificum.” So..every…family…that..sends..their..kid…to…this…college…does…it… with…this…intent? To…form…a..group..hostile…to…the…ordinary…form…and…the…pope?

    I’m speaking slowly, here, because, Mark, you just don’t seem to get it. The basic conditions for UA #19 that you breathlessly (queue little girl hysterical voice) quote to justify your continuing clerical toadyism were not present, if you actually read UA #19. Canonical penalties that determine what form of a licit mass will be permissible are available as against separatist groups. You know these families and these kids to be separatists, how? Is every kid who goes to Georgetown schismatic because Georgetown routinely enacts policies contrary to Catholic teaching and hosts groups and events that deny various aspects of the Magisterium and Holy Tradition? Get a grip on yourself!

    • MillerJM

      You CANNOT have a public repudiation of a legitimate form of the Mass. That is unacceptable behavior that crosses a line and cannot be tolerated. Calling Mark a hysterical little girl also crosses a line. Back off sir.

    • RSM

      Wow, a non sequitor, a strawman, a ad hominem, loaded question, composition, tu quoque, not a real Scotsman, Texas sharpshooter… I’m having a heck of a time deciding which logical fallacies apply here.

    • http://www.subcreators.com/blog Lori Pieper

      How about you getting a grip on yourself, jarms40? Mark said absolutely nothing of what you imply. He has said not one word about the students or parents, only about the actions of the college president, Mr. King, who has made some very bad and extreme decisions. It is HE who is acting like a separatist.

      Many traditionalists are bailing out of the college because of his misguided leadership. All the evidence I have read suggests that the bishop had to remove the TLM because King is making it the battleground. He is the one who is making it impossible to have Mass a the college in either form. If he wont adhere to the instructions in UE (which insists that groups wanting the EF must not reject the OF and must adhere to the authority of the Church), then that document itself suggests he should not be allowed to have it.

      True, the students are also affected, but why blame the bishop? King himself has rejected celebration of the daily OF, even though the bishop has allowed it. I have learned that there are both students and faculty there who would have welcomed it. That says about everything you need to know about King. He is a dissident and separatist. And the students still have the opportunity for a Sunday TLM at a nearby church.

      What amazes me about the traditionalist commentary is that there is no concern for the wider problem at the college, of the spreading of an ideology poisonous to the students, and destructive of a calm atmosphere for studies, not to mention the tearing of the unity of the body of Christ. No, as long as “their” Mass is offered, everything is all right. Unbelievable.

    • Dan C

      The students are part of an institution acting incorrectly. They are stakeholders in the institution and “clients.” The institution from which these Masses originate is in error. As such, the students need to go to Mass elsewhere. Which is within walking distance of the campus.

    • Dan C

      Sadly, the students seem silent and without any voice in this institution. It is unclear if this is their choice. Either way, the institution is responsible for them, the institution acted in a way to alienate the bishop, and as such, the institution created this problem. Not the bishop.

      Blame the correct party.

    • guest

      You have just offered perfect support for Mark’s assessment of rad/trads. I’m new to the Catholic blogoshpere and haven’t had much contact with them prior to this dustup. Frankly, I wondered if Mark’s assessment was too harsh. Having seen you in action in this thread and the apology thread, I understand his reaction to you and your cohorts. I don’t condone all of his harshness, but the substance of his argument seems correct.

      • Salvelinus

        “rad/trads”??
        That’s a term made up by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) – A notorious anti-Catholic pro-abortion group.

        • Dan C

          Rad Trads is not exclusive to the SPLC (who did veer into anti-Catholicism, after yeoman’s work plotting out hate groups for years). Prior to the SPLC discovering radtrads, this term was frequently used as a descriptor, one many held in pride.

          • Salvelinus

            Interesting. Didn’t know that. So I go to the TLM, attempt to chant in the choir, and sometimes wear a tie.
            My wife veils because it was standard before the womens liberation of the sixties, we weren’t yet alive then.
            I like to say I’m Catholic.
            Am I actually a raf trad?
            Please define.

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          “Radtrad” was coined by Sandra Miesel, not the SPLC.

  • The_Monk

    What FMC did is almost as bad as what Notre Dame has done in the past, including giving Obama an honorary doctorate among other major acts against the Church. Almost….

    • Dan C

      Which the local bishop responded to also.

      • Eric Hanson

        How did he respond?

        • Dan C

          The ND stuff was all over the web. You can check it out.

          Wuerl is not one for culture war publicity. It is unclear, as it should be, how this worked out in his diocese. Because the President did not publicize anything.

          • Eric Hanson

            So your answer is “I don’t know.” That makes two of us.

            • Dan C

              Exactly, which is not “it did not happen.” Which is your point: that it does not happen to liberal colleges.

              The reason you know this much is because FMC released the letter.

              Your point: liberals are not scolded cannot be proven- because likely this stuff happens and is managed by professionals. As opposed to FMC’s search for sympathy.

              • Eric Hanson

                I was basing my point on how those colleges continue to jettison Catholic teaching on their campuses. If the Bishop or any authority figure took action you can bet the rent there would be outcries and protests by students. I have witnessed that first hand.

                • Dan C

                  I am confused. So now you are saying that bishops do not scold liberal schools. That is different than “I don’t know.” Which is what I claim is actually the case.

                  Which is it? Do you know that bishops don’t scold liberal schools because…? Or not.

                  • Eric Hanson

                    I don’t think Bishops scold liberal schools because such schools continue to jettison their Catholic Identity and mission, and if the Bishops did respond as you say, there would be outcries and protests by liberal students that would make headlines.

                • Dan C

                  You are then claiming to have a baseline knowledge of the private communications between college presidents and the local bishops . Communication which, should professionals be involved, be private.

                  • Eric Hanson

                    You said the bishop responded. I just maintain he never took any swift disciplinary action. I’m basing my assertion on the fact liberal schools continue to jettison church teaching and the lack of outcry from liberal students.

                    • Eric Hanson

                      I have no idea what your talking about or what your basing your assertion on when you said that the Bishop responded

    • Eric Hanson

      Or Georgetown allowing Kathleen Sebelius to give a commencement speech, or the decision of Gonzaga’s president to comply with the HHS mandate or the countless other actions of Catholic colleges that allow and promote speakers and viewpoints contrary to the moral teaching of the Church. That all goes by without any sort of disciplinary action.

      • Dan C

        How do you know? This should not have been anything but a private communication. That this “College President” who has a school smaller than most day cares leaked this information is why you know about this activity.

        • Eric Hanson

          Because those colleges presently continue to operate in the same fashion and still enjoy the “Catholic” label.

      • chezami

        All this would really be germane if anybody here was applauding Georgetown or Notre Dame. But, of course, nobody is. Please stick to the subject.

        • Eric Hanson

          The point is Fisher-More, Georgetown and Notre Dame have all strayed but only one gets disciplined. Nobody is applauding Fisher-More. I just wish Catholic schools that allow speeches promoting abortion, contraception, and same-sex marriage would receive the same condemnation as Catholic schools that allow speeches promoting the invalidity of Vatican II.

          • http://www.subcreators.com/blog Lori Pieper

            The difference between this and Notre Dame or Georgetown is that those colleges were run by religious orders, over which a local bishop has little power or control. The international power of the Jesuits order that runs Georgetown is pretty formidable.

            Fisher More is granted its license to operate as a Catholic school by the local bishop, which as I understand it, isn’t the case with many Catholic colleges. Naturally a small place run by a layman like this is something a bishop can better control. It doesn’t mean the situation isn’t messy.

            Plus, a bishop is going to be a little more likely to issue an order when he has a glimmering of hope it will be obeyed. Orders delivered to many liberal institutions are like water off a duck’s back. But the places that proclaim their Catholic faithfulness with every breath – they will always obey, right?

            Riiiiigghht.

        • http://www.subcreators.com/blog Lori Pieper

          sorry, put comment in wrong place. Not addressed to Mark. Go below. Or above, as the case may be.

          • Dan C

            I am pretty sure a Catholic college functions under a local ordinary.

            • http://www.subcreators.com/blog Lori Pieper

              Well, when it comes to the bishop of South Bend dealing with a religious college prez like Fr. Jenkins, there is only a certain amount of power he has to order him around. He is really answerable to his religious superiors (Holy Cross Fathers, if I remember right).

              Of course, there are often large lay boards that hold the real power. It is complicated.

          • Dan C

            The difference is that much of the local ordinary/ college President interactions occur quietly.

            FMC can’t organize an astronomy field trip quietly.

            • http://www.subcreators.com/blog Lori Pieper

              True enough.

  • Bob

    I can believe the amount of charity expressed by this author

  • Hegesippus

    To get down to bare bones, every person must be able to answer for his own actions/words/not. It is not about what others do/say/not; it is about oneself.

    To try to reform the Church by acting within is the norm for members of the Catholic Church with an issue; to act in defiance of the Catholic Church has a different label.

    Every individual has the responsibility for himself, then his brother and neighbour. It is Lent. A time especially to put one’s house in order first.

  • Denise

    Mark, how can you be certain that Taylor Marshall has presented the absolute and undeniable truth here?

    • chezami

      Because he is a good and honest man and Rorate Caeli is a pack of hysterics with a long track record.

      • Denise

        Mark, how do you know that he is a good and honest man?

        • Dan C

          Making this about Marshall is trying to distract that this note from this man is but one more huge piece of evidence that FMC is a chaotic mess and should be closed.

          Making this about Marshall is an attempt to distract. FMC is a mess.

          • Denise

            No, it is not an attempt to distract. We can no more know if Marshall is telling the truth than if Michael King is telling the truth. I read King’s rebuttal to Marshall, and it’s good to read his viewpoint. Have you read it? Do you intend to be fair to Fisher Moore, or will you condemn them?
            Or do you only want to see Marshall’s side because he’s preaching against the evil rad trads, which is, on this site, a good, worthy and noble cause, especially at Lent.

            • Dan C

              It is one more piece of evidence of a failing institution.

              I would have no interest in the EF had the condescension not been so evident. I start with zero interest and before long I am an inferior Catholic or a Protestant for attending the OF. I should be able to discuss whether saying that an institution of higher education should have a modicum of administrative discipline or fiscal responsibility or should close. FMC displays neither. This is not a sin.

              • Denise

                How do you know that there’s really been an lack of fiscal responsibility on the part of the FMC administration? Because Marshall say so? It would seem that FMC has been tried, found guilty, and convicted based on Marshall’s testimony. Again, have you read Michael King’s rebuttal? It’s on the FMC website. Why is Marshall seen as the absolute authority in this matter? Isn’t he a lay person?

                • Dan C

                  If the students had to raise a quarter million dollars to keep the school open, there is a high degree of administrative fiscal failure.

                • Dan C

                  Marshall is but one piece of evidence.

                  • Denise

                    True, but he is the main source of evidence in the article to which these comments are attached.

                    • chezami

                      So what?

                    • Dan C

                      1. Gruner gets a podium.
                      2. Sungenis gets a classroom. (There is so so much wrong with this possibility.)
                      3. Marshall’s letter
                      4. Fiscal failure in several arenas.
                      5. That the President of the college sent this communication to Rorate.

                      I came up with this as I was walking down the hall. A little effort and the list triples.

                      FMC is a mess. Attacking Marshall’s credibility is one small piece of evidence.

                    • Joe M.

                      You don’t know the President sent the communication to Rorate Coeli. That’s entirely conjecture.

                    • Dan C

                      So, are you suggesting such would be unprofessional should the college president or a highly placed admin official sent this to RC? Because someone did.

                    • Salvelinus

                      How are any one of those points a reason for the Bishop to state “you cannot celebrate mass in traditional Form – Novus Ordo only now”.

                      Why not end all masses at the college?

                      Or why not end all Novus Ordo masses which allow “gay friendly” trans-cross-dresser clown, and have the Bishop state that they must now be in EF form? Has that ever been done?

                    • Dan C

                      Oooh! The boogie man was mentioned! The infamous clown Mass. Unicorns are more prevalent.

                    • Dan C

                      A college chapel differs from a parish. Permission for Masses differ.

                      I am OF. I have become aware of the use of the EF as a weapon. I support stopping that.

                • Dan C

                  You are fixated on distracting by saying “Marshall” over and over.

          • Salvelinus

            Regardless if the college is a mess, why should a valid mass be censured by a bishop, Dan?

            • Dan C

              The Mass in question that is now censured was used as a weapon against folks like me. I can support that censure.

              • Salvelinus

                A weapon? If a mass is open to the public, attracting more and more young families and just as valid as one in the vernacular, how is that a weapon?
                With that statement your saying the EF is “invalid”?
                Its just as valid as the novus ordo, everyone being welcome.
                By the way, having Fr Gruner speak (not illicitly celebrate mass) is not as bad as, for instance, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, et al continue to be provided thr blessed sacrament in any number of novus ordo mass in Washington… shouldn’t cardinal Weurhl ban the novus ordo with that actual sacrilege, done by that priest?

                • Dan C

                  1. Did I say invalid? Where did I say that? That is an extraordinary form advocate’s obsession, not mine. I said, “used as a weapon.” This is a well-known possibility. But you avoid that discussion.

                  2. The term is “ordinary form” as in usual. The NO usage is a slur among EF, and there is a deliberate avoidance of its established nature.

                  3. Gruner speaking is not “bad” as much as part of a pattern of a certain subculture extremism.

                  • Salvelinus

                    Novus ordo is short for novus ordo missae. This is what the document was named in 1969 when released.
                    It can also be called the Pauline mass or the Bugnini mass.
                    Considering the mass was the same for centuries, more or less, minus organic changes, the radical changes in the 1970 mass is very new.
                    The prayers at the foot of the altar are not there, the offertory is gone, the last gospel is gone, leonine prayers gone.
                    Many novelties (communion in the hand, ad populatum -priest facing people instead of God to the east, altar girl priesteses, 100 percent vernacular, protestant music with protestant theilogical themes like amazing grace) were added but not part of sancrosanctum concillium.

                    • Dan C

                      Ah. The altar girl priestesses.

                      I suspect, although you call others “Protestants” are actually yourself less in union with Rome than say, me, an OF-loving liberal.

                      You use a liturgy that its advocates once used previously as a weapon (with racist tones) in India suppressing the more ancient Qurbana for centuries. A suppression marked by real human rights abuses.

                    • Dan C

                      And this is part one the condescension that seems innate to EF advocates. I worship at a vernacular-spoken liturgy which is in union with Rome and at this Liturgy, we celebrate the Eucharist. Your sneers and disdain at the volunteers who assist cannot take that away, even if the aesthetics are not to your pleasure.

                    • Dan C

                      I am aware of the source of the NO. But for you it is a slur.

        • chezami

          Denise: Aside from the fact that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Catholic tradition *presumes* he is a good man and does not search, as you are doing, for a reason to condemn him, I know he is a good man from familiarity with his writing, work, and character, including sacrificing his job when he has a family of seven to feed, rather than go along with the corruption and incompetence at FMC. Now, you can continue desperately trying to prop up this assault on *two* good men in order to make excuses for RC and the behavior of Michael King or you can stop trying to get me to condemn and innocent.

          • Denise

            No, I am not trying to find a reason to condemn him. You assume the worst of motivations to me because I’m sympathetic towards traditionalists, and because I question the validilty of Marshall’s claims. You always take the side against traditionalists whenever possible, and assume the worst of them, unless they tow your view, behave themselves and are silent and humble. But that’s not the real world. Trads who question the state of the Church aren’t going to go away. No matter how much you try to correct them, it isn’t going to work, and you will only upset yourself and others in an attempt to change the situation.
            You are in some sort of crusade against the “evil trads” (as is Marshall) and no doubt believe that you are doing God’s will, so in that I cannot blame you, except to say that if you truly believe that trads are the enmey of the Church, which you seem to, then you should love and pray for them, as Our Lord has instructed. Otherwise, you do not understand the Cross, or Our Lord as you think you do. That’s all I’ll say on this subject, and won’t post further on this.
            God bless.

            • Rosemarie

              +J.M.J+

              You are aware that Marshall is a traditionalist, right?

            • chezami

              You do realize that Marshall is a Traditionalist and is on no crusade? This is what I’m talking about, Denise. The one doing the condemnation here is you. I don’t care what Mass people go to.

          • Guest

            Mark – Do you “actually” know? Really? Because I attended the college last year, Know Dr. Marshall well and attend Mater Dei now.

            How can you be sure that your facts are correct?

            • Dan C

              Was Gruner an invited speaker?

              Was Sungenis to teach?

              Did the students have to raise money to keep the school open?

              Were there speeches that I, an OF attending man, would find insulting or demeaning suggesting I was inferior or attached to an inferior liturgy?

    • Dan C

      One cannot. But it is a school so troubled, it’s students had a fundraising effort that was likely more successful than what the College President could do (even though It is his job).

      It probably should be shut down. It sounds like the school’s leadership lacks basic administrative competence.

  • Terrye Newkirk

    A twofer! Why spell Bishop Olson”s name only *one* way?

  • Michael

    For those who note that the hand of justice
    falls more heavily on groups which claim an attachment to tradition,
    consider the following:

    Your three-year-old child covers the wall with scribblings in permanent marker. What punishment is appropriate?

    Your eighteen-year-old child covers the wall with scribblings in permanent marker. What punishment is appropriate?

    We get the heavier hand because we should know better.

    If we claim to be holding true to 2000 years of tradition, practice,
    and belief, we should know better. Can you really argue that someone who
    claims a “right” to abortion is “sacred ground” would understand the
    spiritual benefits of submission? How about those who think 60-year-old
    women in tights dancing with tambourines is appropriate for the
    Sacrifice of Calvary – can we really think that they would fully grasp
    the benefit of fraternal correction?

    If we claim to know better than them, we should damn well act like
    it, and not cry unfair when the harsher punishment falls on us when we
    fail to do so. Submit humbly to those whom the Lord has placed over us,
    and offer any frustrations we feel to Him in prayer.

    • Denise

      If trads are expected to “know better,” then surely this is a confirmation that traditionalists have the correct view as to Church teaching and tradition? After all, liberals aren’t expected to “know better,” right?

      • chezami

        Pharisees said exactly this sort of thing about themselves in comparison with pagans. And yet Jesus commended the pagan centurion and warned the Pharisees they were in danger of the fires of hell.

        • Denise

          So you’re warning the trads that they are in danger of the fires of Hell?

          • Jacob Suggs

            Everyone is in danger of the fires of Hell, but to whom much is given, much is expected. (I think someone famous might have said that.)

            The Pharisees were right or nearly right about most things, but were so focused on externals and rituals (which are good things, if not used improperly) that they neglected to actually follow the truth that they had in other respects.

            Likewise, those who say that we should respect the ancient tradition of the Church, and have some idea what that is, have a lot of truth at their disposal. And that makes it more dangerous to oppose. Someone who is steeped in the traditions of the Church has little excuse for using a (good) form of the Mass as a bludgeon to get what he wants or sow discord.

            Also note that no one ever said that all traditionalists or all lovers of the EF are in the same category as the insane people who are doing bad things.

          • Salvelinus

            Of course he is, Denise. You see Mark is a Protestant at heart. He was, and still is.He hates tradition

            • Dan C

              A gentleman yesterday declared me a Protestant, too. Fascinating. He is not.

              No more than Benedict or Francis. Lefebvre on the other hand-he embraced modernism.

            • chezami

              You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

            • Jacob Suggs

              Ah yes, because it is the protestants who support the authority of the bishops, pope, and Church councils – real faithful Catholics just pitch a fit upon hearing things they don’t like and go off by themselves and do their own thing because their personal interpretation tells them that that’s ok.

              Did I get it right?

    • Eric Hanson

      All Catholics deserve the benefits of fraternal correction

  • bosco49

    “The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria…”

    Ask?

    • Dan C

      Yes. Ask.

      Because while permitted, there remains a personnel demand for folks who have the knowledge, desire, expertise (because plenty of EF-capable priests have been punished by the obsessive compulsive perfectionists of EFadvocates). Additionally, resources are required and these may require certain judicious budgeting.

      Yes, there has to be requests in substantive number to support EF Masses.

      Just ask David Alexander, his ability to self-cite is accurate, and entertaining.

  • Joseph Mazzara

    Mark,

    I don’t disagree with you that the Bishop was within his rights to act, and that he is as close to the situation as Michael King, and can make his own prudential judgments, the prudence of which are difficult to judge for anyone not connected as closely as he and Mr. King.

    If action was necessary, I agree with you that it would have been wrong for the Bishop not to act.

    What I take issue with is your wholesale assumption of the accuracy of Dr. Marshall’s words.
    -”He also contracted an irregular/suspended priest without faculties,”
    -This claim has been explicitly refuted by the school on their website.

    -”hired “trad resistance” faculty while there was no bishop in Fort Worth to check these developments.”
    -This claim has not been explicitly refuted as far as I can tell. However, looking over the meager faculty they have, none stand out as notoriously “trad resistance,” whatever that means. This is a conclusory accusation supported by zero evidence that any of the faculty are “trad resistance”, and it gives no definition to the key term.

    -“Mr. King was able to create a community in his image (he affectionately referred to himself the “father” of this community)”
    -This is extremely misleading editorializing. A) It lacks context. Did Mr. King mean father as pro-genitor, or did he mean father as someone who has a deep responsibility that extends beyond the legal, a responsibility to properly steer school and ensure it is properly established in the Catholic academic world? B) If it was the latter, if Mr. King didn’t look at himself in relation to the college as a sort of father, and instead looked at it his relationship with it as purely a legal reality with tasks he must legally accomplish, but with no investment of the heart in the affair, then we’d probably criticize him for that too. This comment is meant to make Mr. King look overly-paternalist, or megomaniacal, but if said in a different context than what IS IMPLIED, it may in fact be commendatory.

    We don’t know if the Bishop is acting imprudently or not, and we probably won’t really be able to find out. We also don’t know if Michael King is deserving of the kind of vitriol associated with the accusation that he is using the liturgy as a weapon.

    • Dan C

      “We don’t know if the Bishop is acting imprudently or not, and we probably won’t really be able to find out. ”

      He probably is being prudent. Just go with that assumption. Nothing suggests otherwise.

      • Joseph Mazzara

        Dan,

        So we should automatically assume 1) “Cleric prudent, laymen wrong” as a rule?

        Or wouldn’t it be better to assume, 2) “At this time, we don’t have enough information to know whether Bishop Olson was prudent or not, or whether Michael King did anything he is being accused of by Dr. Marshall, so we should just reserve judgment until more comes out.”

        Frankly, I’m not sure Pope Francis would like your adopting option 1), simple clericalism.

        • chezami

          We have plenty of information and it all points to the fact that the Bishop is *obviously* right and the Administration and the Reactionaries foolishly shrieking in its defense are *obviously* wrong. Obviously.

  • RJO

    I certainly agree with all that is stated in the articele, except concerning Fr. Gruner. I’ve followed his story for some time, and he is not a loon, nor w/o facilities. Remember what they did to St Pio for half a century…his story seerm similar.

  • RJO

    Sorry for the typos, in a moving vehicle.

  • Salvelinus

    “embittered malcontent running Fisher-More….hosting loons like Fr. Nicholas Gruner…..of some Argentinian Holocaust-Denying nutjob…. ”

    In Lent of all times, a very uncharitable an article, bordering on pure calumny, Mr Shea. It sounds like you are really deserving the reputation of “neo Catholic” now.

    Wow!
    Maybe you should take a look at the college website that has already disprove everything written (including the bad blood from Dr. Taylor Marshall).

    Why anybody would think of you as a “Catholic apologist” is beyond me with such vile hatred spewing forth. Shame on you….

    • Dan C

      Gruner is suspended.

      The Argentinian had the poison of anti-semitism.

      The characterization of the leader of FMC is harsh, but, had he been a liberal, wold have been acceptable. I personally reserve comment on him. He does not run the college well, that is obvious.

  • Salvelinus

    *Statement from Fisher More College President Michael King re: Dr. Taylor Marshall

    It was with great sorrow that I learned of Dr. Taylor
    Marshall’s public criticism of me and his allegations concerning affairs
    at Fisher More College. I am saddened for our students and staff, for
    our College, for Catholics suffering through this incredible fury of
    ugliness, and for my wife and children. But I am especially saddened for
    Dr. Marshall. He was always treated well by the College, by me
    personally, and by my family, and we will continue to act in charitable
    consideration of him and his deserving family.

    As with all personnel matters, I will not comment publicly
    on any of the circumstances surrounding Dr. Marshall’s employment and
    departure. This policy serves to protect any current or former
    employees, none of whom we wish to see personally harmed by statements
    that would be necessary to explain and justify our actions. It also
    serves as a guardian of our own souls, particularly when the devil
    besets us with the temptation to respond to an injustice by committing
    one of our own.

    Needless to say, the College is obligated to address Dr.
    Marshall’s puzzling allegations about finances and the real estate
    transaction involving our campus. We have issued a detailed statement
    addressing these matters here. While it was disturbing that Dr. Marshall abused his privilege as an ex officio
    member of the Board, his indiscretion could have been mitigated by
    fairness and accuracy, rather than being aggravated by
    misrepresentation. For instance, Dr. Marshall knows that the College
    originally considered purchasing the real estate by using seller
    financing, but the Board instructed me to seek different terms from the
    sellers. Further, he knows that the sellers agreed to a two-year lease
    with an option to purchase. Finally, he should know that the terms of
    our lease-purchase-option are so advantageous to the College that, as a
    result, the sellers (who are not Catholic) are now considered among our
    most generous benefactors. Anyone experienced in commercial real estate
    would envy the terms of a transaction he has called crippling. Moreover,
    I recall no member of the staff being more enthused about our future
    home than was Dr. Marshall, nor do I recall him ever suggesting a viable
    alternative to the one that he now claims has crippled us through my
    personal orchestration.

    From his seat in Board meetings, Dr. Marshall should also
    be familiar with all of the budgets and expenditures that followed the
    sale of our former campus. In fact, financial issues should have weighed
    heavy on his mind because fundraising and development were the main
    duties of a title, office, and job description that he personally
    requested and confidently assumed. So it is bewildering that he would
    imply a lack of knowledge or understanding with respect to financial
    affairs. I am certain that Dr. Marshall knew fully well that our future
    depended on winning over a donor or small group of donors with the means
    to finance the mission. I am certain of this because he and I spent
    many hours discussing both this fact and the fact that time was of the
    essence.

    Missing from his unfortunate public narrative are many other important facts that are now available in our published statement.
    As we mention therein, Dr. Marshall’s allegations unjustly implicate
    and calumniate other former colleagues of his on the staff and Board,
    all of whom treated him well and did nothing to deserve this.

    I should hope it goes without saying that a public retraction is in order.

    JMJ

  • Rick

    After reading through most of the posts on this topic I sense a bit of tension between the Traditionalist and the New Order (Novus Ordo) crowds. I think a little more charity from all sides including the author during this time of lent would be prudent. I image the Mr. Michael King and a probably most of the students and faucilty in the school were heading down a road that was becoming very critical of Vatican II and the current leadering ship in the Church, Pope, Bishops and Priests. That does have a tendency to happen when you practice the faith in the manner that it was practiced prior to Vatican II and introduction of the New Order of the Mass. It is because the two forms of worship are so different, as a person that has experienced it for over 6 yrs. now I can vouge for the emotional swings and anger people experience when they discover the mass and traditional teachings of the Church. At first you are very angry at being duped by the leaders of the Church and all of its blemishes in this era seem huge and ugly. The sex abuse scandals that are crippling the Church spiritually and financially, the huge influence of homosexual priests and bishops in the Church and the improvisitions of the Holy Mass by so many priests and bishops. The changes in the Catichisis of children and adults and sacraments. The structural changes required by not having enough priests and religious to serve the laity. The many changes and variations in form, posture, architecture in so many Catholic Churches. But these things are no worse than other major problems the Church has had in the past such as the Arian heresy, the Renaisance, and the “reformation” (protestant revolution). You first want to unleash your anger on all those that persist in the moderist errors of the Church but once you get through that you realize your not going to bring people to a deeper form of worship or greater understanding of the faith by attacking everything they do. So my recommendation to all you brother and sister “radical traditionalists” out there that worship in the same manner as the vast majority of saints in heaven do as St. Francis said preach with your actions and not your words. When it is time the Lord will give you an opportunity to teach the faith and express why you love to worship our Lord at the Extra Ordinary Form of the Latin Rite Mass, raise our children with the Baltimore Catechism, dress appropriately for the Wedding Feast, sing praise and glory to our Lord in the official language of His Church. The mass we attend is extraordinary and so should our lives when we are not extraordinary we give our detractors reasons not to enter into the depth of the faith but simply skim across the surface. Remember your first resposibility to our Lord is for you and your family to know, love and serve Him. Once you have your house in order than when the Lord brings people into your life that are seeking Him, teach with charity.

    • Dan C

      Your pure worship was once before a weapon against Indians, people worshiping on a rite more ancient than the Latin Rite. Historically, your liturgical predecessors with similar assurance of ritual purity rained oppression and suppression of Indians’ ancient rite until it was reinstated in the 19th century.

      You worship at a rite that it old but not our faith’s oldest rite. It is a rite that was the liturgy of many of out saints, and it was a rite that was used as a weapon in Asia.

      Humility would serve you. Condescension such as this is exactly the opposite of the instructions of the Motu.

      • Rick

        The mass has never been used as a weapon, many associated with the mass may have done evil in the
        past just as they do today. I am shocked that you would put pagan worship at the same level as the wedding feast of our Lord. Many priests were murdered violently by the Indians just as many Indians died at the hands of the European
        explorers and colonialists. But more native Americans died from the diseases brought by the Europeans than by the sword. It was not the mass or the Church that can be faulted for man’s shorts comings it is mans and they will all be judged just as we shall be. Just like the problems in the Church today
        are man’s creation not God’s. The older rites are Aramaic and Greek but if you look at the structure of the mass they are very similar in form. What is totally out of sorts with the Aramaic, Greek and Traditional Latin Masses is the New Order of the Mass created by Bp. Bugnini for Pope Paul VI. When
        you put those masses together the New Order of the Mass takes on a very Protestant look. When you take a historical look at the mass It really wasn’t until after Constantine freed the Church from persecution and the Vulgate was translated from the Greek and Aramaic into Latin did the Latin mass
        start to develop as the universal form of worship in the Western Church. At the time our Lord walked the earth Hebrew was a liturgical language, Aramaic was the common language in the Region, Greek was still the language of international commerce but the Romans pretty much ruled southern Europe, Asia Minor, the Middle East and North Africa. The Apostles spoke and wrote in Aramaic and Greek, read the scriptures in Hebrew and Greek (Septuagint). The mass developed out of the Sabbath Worship of the Jews with additional
        reading from Epistles and Gospels (Mass of the Catechumens) with the addition of the Mass of the Faithful where a priest ordained by the Church leads us in our offer of the fruits of the earth (Bread and Wine) and they become the Body
        and Blood or our Savior which we partake of in communion for our everlasting salvation. For you to blame this mass of all time that is offered on earth as in heaven for the evil deeds of man is a perfect example of poor catechesis that is offered by the post Vatican II era Church. As much as I loved many of
        the things Pope Benedict XVI did for the Church I am constantly reminded that he was a student of Karl Rahner. The Motu offered to the faithful by Pope Benedict was tinged by shackling it with requiring and acceptance of the
        neutered Mass of Paul VI and acceptance of the vagaries of the documents of Vatican II with no clarification. When the likes of Hans Kung were enraged by the Moto Proprio you know it was pleasing to God.

        • Dan C

          Goan Portuguese TLM-advocates crushed the St. Thomas Christians and their use of the Qurbana. A rite older than the Newer Latinist rite. This was not a pagan matter. This was actual human rights and physical oppression in the name of the purer than pure TLM that was used as the weapon to oppress.

          • Rick

            Dan who is oppressing who in Ft. Worth? Who has tried to wipe out the Traditional Latin mass? We wouldn’t be trying to recover something that wasn’t nearly wiped off the face of the earth by the modernists after Vatican II. It has been the progressives that forced their new form of worship on the Church. The Traditonalists are not preventing anyone from going to the New Order of the Mass, it is the Church that keeps stomping on the Traditionalists in my life time.

            • Dan C

              I worship in the Ordinary Form and am not a modernist. That from you is an insult, accusing me of heresy.

              In Ft. Worth, the FMC is creating a culture that you may enjoy but insults me, my worship, and is in grave error. OF worship is routine, normal and holy. In Ft. Worth, that is not the message at FMC, a tiny college that is allowed Masses at the pleasure of the bishop, like any Catholic college.

              • John Fisher

                There was a whole world and Catholicism that existed before 1970. Why define yourself by attending Mass written by Modernists. Bugnini was a Modernist and Free Mason. He died in Iran where he was sent after it all came out. But Paul VI … like Hamlet, was torn because he had changed the Mass using his own authority. Authority often feels when it does the wrong thing unable to reverse the change because it undermines itself.

                • Dan C

                  Bugnini died in Italy.

                  Bugnini was entrusted with very important diplomatic missions at the time.

                  What Trads call evidence of Freemasonry is rumors of rumors of a piece of paper. Such is not evidence.

                  Your history is based in rumor of the 1970′s.

                  Conservatives spent most of that era looking for Communist bishops, rooting them out. Now Freemasons? You guys are hysterical.

                  You imbibe a culture that teaches you to insult others.

                • Marthe Lépine

                  That’s interesting… Source, please? And how do you know what Paul VI was thinking? Did you of all people have such an intimate relationship with him that he confided in you?

            • Dan C

              Your history as note above about India was in error, as most Latinist-advocates, you, like the ACLU defending The KKK right to speech, can see no time for which your advocacy needs to dial back and perhaps not all Latin masses should be said in a given environment , like not all speech, given a right to say it or not, should be said.

              This style of advocacy is a page out of the book of the ACLU.

            • Dan C

              How about cutting back on your “my rite is Holy and Pure” and “your rite is dirty” attitude?

        • Dan C

          I am shocked you try to warp my argument into something I did not say or know history so poorly.

        • Dan C

          In order to rectify the error of the imposition of the purer than pure Latin rite, the Syro-Malabar Church and the Syro-Malankara Churches were established and their older rite which was unjustly suppressed by the TLM-advocates was reinstated.

        • Dan C

          Your perpetual condescension to my way of worship is annoying.

        • Marthe Lépine

          Seems to me that you are contradicting yourself here. You admit that Latin, Greek, Aramaic were the languages used by the peoples at the time the mass was being developed. That’s it: Mas then was understood by the people attending to it. To me it does not make sens to now cling to a dead language such as Latin because it was used then when most people understood it! What kind of understanding of Scripture did ordinary people have when even the readings during mass were in a language that had long ago fallen into disuse. There is nothing wrong with enjoying a Latin mass, that is not where the problem is. What is wrong is to keep claiming that your way is the only way, and that even Paul VI, who was then the pope, was mistaken. What is also wrong is to claim that Pope Benedict was not even bright enough and learned enough to correctly understand the documents of Vatican II. If my knowledge of history is correct, it is that kind of pride that contributed to the desertion of Luther and Calvin…

      • Dave G.

        Wow Dan, we can all thank God that our generation has come by to save the world from a vile and contemptible Church that truly lived up to all the worst stereotypes. Speaking of humility…

        • chezami

          Nice straw man. Not addressing a word he said, of course. But nice straw man.

          • Dave G.

            Actually my response was nothing but addressing what he said. Easy to see no straw man here. Unless, of course, you share his appraisal and its use in the conversation. Then I can see that being your response.

            • chezami

              No Dave. He does not say the Church is vile and contemptible. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

              • Dave G.

                First, obviously I wasn’t bearing false witness. That’s obvious. I was commenting on Dan’s response to Rick and how you could see my response as a straw man. Now Dan could have said many things. But instead chose to basically play off the old ‘your way was once a tool of evil’. Nothing unusual, but not beneficial either. It merely plays into any critic’s viewpoint: ‘See? A Catholic admits that they came with a rosary in one hand chanting Latin and a sword in the other!’ Is it correct? Sure. Did it happen? Probably. But that’s not what Dan was trying to say, and that much is clear. Dan wasn’t making a historical case. He was making a dig by using the old ‘your ancestors used what you like for evil’ tactic I didn’t agree with everything Rick said, but didn’t see anything he said suggest that was an appropriate response. Either helpful for Rick, or the Church in general.

  • Maccabeus

    Dr. Marshall’s comment reads true to me. There is no malicious tone. A simple statement and condemnation of a series of poor decisions by leadership of FMC. I am hopeful that the leadership at FMC has the best intentions for their students and faculty. Unity with Holy Mother Church is absolutely necessary. Hopefully future institutions offering a traditional Catholic education with the most Extraordinary Mass will learn from this circumstance.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X