Skip Navigation Links
Free News via Email
Subscribe for a Friend
Send News Tip
Contact Us
About Us
Is California Catholic Daily important to you?
You can help keep us online!
See All Help Wanted Ads
Submit Help Wanted Ad
See Position Wanted Ads
Submit Position Wanted Ad
Churches Worth Driving To
* Submit Your Church *

News from the Trenches
Grow a uterus!...
Advertise with us
Currently more than 150,000 visitors read
Servant of God! Father John Hardon, S.J.
Refuse to Choose! Women deserve better!
Changing Times! Holistic approach in education.
See All Classified Ads
Submit Classified Ad
See All Calendar Items
Submit Calendar Item
German prelate to head Vatican doctrinal congregation KENNETH M. FISHER there you go again, using the word 'hereti... [max - 7/6/2012 6:45:51 PM]
Same-sex attractions in youth Retaction Gene, you are correct in what you are saying. I h... [Mark from PA - 7/6/2012 6:31:16 PM]
Will she be removed? Archbishop Jose Gomez is a wonderful bishop. Shame on whoev... [Shirley J. Schultz - 7/6/2012 5:59:07 PM]
A Constitutional wreck Constitutional validity depends entirely on an educated, pro... [JLS - 7/6/2012 4:55:28 PM]
Parents should not block vocations "Why does he call so few?" by Bob One: I cannot fathom how ... [JLS - 7/6/2012 4:46:36 PM]

Links to Other Sites
Prior Site Archives
Article Archives

A Mass Worth Driving To

New California Catholic Feature – $50 for Your Help

Starting this Friday, November 6, the California Catholic website will begin featuring profiles of Catholic churches in California.

Any valid Mass is infinitely worthwhile. But the human elements of a Mass vary.

The editors of California Catholic invite readers to provide information on churches of their choice -- sorry, California only, Catholic churches only.

We will pay you $50 if we print your submission.

The description of the church should include the following:

Name of Church
Phone number
Parish website
Mass times
Names of priests
Special events
Special parish groups

Description of the following:
Building exterior
Fellow parishioners
Literature in vestibule
Parish bulletin
Crying room
Additional observations

When submitting your item, please give as complete details as possible to the subjects above and email to:

Include your name, address, and social security number for payment.

Photos welcomed, but not required.

Honesty encouraged, but no personal attacks will be published.


Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:22 AM By Bud
What an excellent idea! So much of the truth and simply "what's happening" within our churches is suppressed and just never gets published.

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 8:29 AM By John
What you really mean is a "priest worth driving to." Does anyone really care about the parking lot or crying room?

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 10:38 AM By John F. Maguire
Given the intrinsic value of Christ's Sacrifice on Calvary, which Sacrifice is offered unbloodily on the altars of the Church today, it is first of all necessary to acknowledge that, in an absolute and transcendental sense, ALL Masses are WORTH driving to. Still, given the immemorial right of Catholics to access the traditional Latin Mass, such information as is proposed here is welcome indeed. More: Unfortunately, the Novus Ordo Missae, precisely because it is sometimes liturgically abused, occasions, in point of fact, the need to know where that Ordo -- solemnly adhered to -- also can be accessed.

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 10:40 AM By gvdennis
Unfortunately, I'll bet that you'd have more than you could keep track of if you changed the title to, "A Mass Not Worth Driving To."

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 11:14 AM By Willi H
I can only assume that the good people of California Catholic mean Novus Ordo Masses. All of the Tridentine Masses (Indult and now "Extraordinary Rite") are by definition devoid of all the questionable excesses. I hear all the time about "clown", "mariachi", "polka" Masses, ad nauseum. I would be curious to know where good N.O .Masses are (if any)!

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 2:07 PM By Rick DeLano
What happened to the Roamin' Catholic?????

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 2:15 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to G. V. DENNIS: If a Mass is valid; if the form, the matter and the intention of priest at the Consecration are intact, then, ALL such Masses are WORTH driving to, even though, to be sure, the liturgical and theological inadequacy of the Mass of the New Ordo must be taken fully into account in that decision. It is this validity, and just this validity, Mr. Dennis, that undercuts your dismissive comment ("I'll bet that you'd have more than you could keep track of if you [the Editors] changed the title [of this article] to "A Mass Not Worth Driving To.'). Mr. Dennis, strictly speaking, the worth of a Mass is the worth of Christ's Sacrifice on Calvary -- since the Mass is just this Sacrifice but now offered unbloodily. ~ If the priest uses proper matter and proper form in confecting the Host; and if the priest's intention in doing so is to do what the Church does, then the Mass in question is a valid Mass and Christ Himself -- Christ the Sovereign Priest -- is, in just such a Mass, both Priest and Victim of this, the very Sacrifice of Calvary now offerd unbloodily. This sacerdotal account of the Mass as Christ's ownmost Sacrifice on Calvary holds true whether the rite in question is the rite of the Mass of the Ages or the Montinian rite, its grave defects to the contrary notwithstanding. ~ WILLI H.: That the Montinian rite is patient of "questionable excesses" (which, by the way, are beginning to be eliminated per Pope Benedict's reform of the reform), whereas the Tridentine rite is not patient of such excesses, does NOT, as a practical matter, warrant your sweeping dismissal of the New Mass. You write: "I would be curious to know where good [Novus Ordo] Masses are" -- which in certain regions of California is a fair inquiry, but then you add parenthetically: "...(if any)." Whoa! This dismissive SUPPLEMENTATION is an injustice to the priests who, in good conscience, celebrate the Mass of the Novus Ordo. Clearly, WILLI, you've jumped over the horse.

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:03 PM By WOODY GUIDRY

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 7:27 PM By Linda Maria
Why not pay only for information regarding truly excellent parish churches, with priests and laypeople truly faithful to Church religious and moral teachings!! There are so FEW!! Also, most Vatican II liturgies are extremely poor!! Would you pay $50 for a review of the horrific Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco, home of the transvestite Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, gay sex, and every horror imaginable?? Our Archbishop sadly does not care !! It is tragic that we cannot have, in San Francisco, an excellent, old-fashioned Tridentine Mass parish church and school, complete with dedicated, inspiring priests, and nuns in habits, leading a deeply religious life. And the parish church bursting with wonderful, large, traditional, devout Catholic families!!

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 9:43 PM By Fatima Devotee
I cant comment about the pros and cons of this new service; but I would strongly advise against asking people to send you their Social Security Number to receive their payment. I only give my Social Security number, reluctantly and under protest to the IRS .

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 10:16 PM By Anne T.
Willi H., try Our Lady of Peace Shrine in Santa Clara, California. There is Adoration twenty-four hours day and night. The Church is always open. There is a wonderful giftshop there and confessions before every Mass and at certain other times.

Posted Wednesday, November 04, 2009 11:19 PM By Bev
I had thought about writing about my parish, St. Raphael in San Rafael, CA. We have beautiful liturgies, solemnly adhering to the requirements of the Novus Ordo (and fine homilies). But I realized the readers of this column would not be interested. All they want to do is complain about "clown" Masses which to the best of my knowledge have never occurred in the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Our parish is multi-ethnic. We have English, Spanish and Vietnamese Masses. Willi H. needs to be aware of using terminology like "mariachi" inappropriately.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:46 PM By Willi H
Anne T., Thank you for your infomation, but if I am ever in the Santa Clara area, I'll be at the Traditional Tridentine Latin Mass at Our Mother of Perpetual Help Chapel, 1298 Homestead Rd., Santa Clara, CA 95050-5405, (408) 248-4330 (plug, plug). But thanks anyway!

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 3:10 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to Woody Guidry: I share your concern. Just as there is website group-defamation as a general phenomenon, so there arises the possibility of website group-defamation of parishes as a particular phenomenon. Woody, the danger posed is as you describe it: the real possibility, perhaps even the substantial likelihood, of "mealy-mouthed forays" by the disgruntled into the life-world of diocesan parishes.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 5:21 PM By John F. Maguire
In further reply to Woody: I hope the grave prophecy according to which everything sacred will someday be subsumed under "the cash nexus" is not coming true before our eyes, but it does seem to me that the CCD Editors' $50 payment proposal for blogger attestations ragging or touting particular liturgies in particular parishes smacks of blogger payola ("blogola"). Compare restaurant payola. That's where a restaurant reviewer or customer is paid for touting or knocking a particular cuisine. True, the analogy is not perfect. Still, blogola is commonly defined as the payment of money to bloggers "to create buzz in the blogosphere" about a specific product (Webopedia Computer Dictionary). Apropos of the CCD Editors' $50 proposal -- by extension conceptually -- the term blogola would include payments to bloggers to create buzz on this website, say, touting or attacking specific liturgies in parish upon parish in diocese upon diocese in the State of California. ~ Woody, I am all for the restoration of the traditional Latin Mass, and at the same time I favor (a little warily) Pope Benedict's reform of the Novus Ordo Missae. But Woody, upon reflection, I think California's bishops should nix the CCD Editors' proposal as a form of blogola wherein the very repute of specifc liturgies is at stake.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 5:45 PM By Mark from PA
Willi, how many clown Masses have you ever been to? I have never even been to any such Mass and they are probably rare. I have been in many Catholic churches but never to a clown Mass.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:42 PM By Cal Catholic editor
In response to Woody G and John F. Maguire: see last line of the story re "no personal attacks." Please ignore requirement to submit Social Security Number; that is not necessary.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:54 PM By williamvlasic
a valid mass like a priest in good standing are very misleading.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 8:10 PM By JLS
In one novus ordo Mass I was at there were three old nuns in the modern gray pantsuit or whatever kind of uniform they wear ... could have been dresses or skirts. They stood together behind the altar table for the entire Mass, casting their school marm eyes upon all in the pews. How do people put up with that sort of thing? I left off being a child many decades ago, and it is disturbing that so many have not and rather prefer the condition.

Posted Thursday, November 05, 2009 8:50 PM By RR
Mark from PA: Believe me. Those types of Masses are out there. One N.O. Mass my brother went to in our home town(About 10,000 people) there was this so-called Mass where it was the priest's birthday. The ushers, others, and the priest thought it would be funny to roll the priest down to the altar in a wheelchair to make fun of the priest getting older. They did this at the beginning of Mass when the priest came in. My brother said people were laughing and carrying on. Another parish in the diocese also have had polka so-called masses where the would actually do a polka dance. I know this to be true because my brother-in-law's parents used to go to them. I went to a so-called Mass where it was, unbeknownst to me, an Ecumenical Mass. Let me tell you that this was the last Novus Ordo Mass that I ever attended. It was ten years ago. I felt like I was at a Baptist revival. Everyone was clapping, dancing, singing, arms waving... I cried and left after the feel-good sermon and I know I left skid marks in that parking lot. That is when I found the Mass of Pius V, the Mass of all times. I never turned back. So, these types of so-called Masses are more common than you think they are.

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 1:17 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Anne T. I am happy that you seem to indicate that the work founded by my late friend, Msgr. Sweeney, is still being carried on. If it really is, you can thank the Monsignor for it. I know he continues to pray for his "Our Lady of Peace Shrine". I witnessed his crying over what the local Ordinary was trying to do to that beautiful Shrine, and he cried in the presence of my late Archbishop friend who I served as his American Secretary, Archbishop Lawrence Khai. In fact I remember the Archbishop having to go the the Monsignor's Rectory to convince him to come to the Human Life International Conference where he, the Monsignor, was being honored. The Archbishop told me he found the Monsignor crying in his room. I am sure the Monsignor and the Archbishop are now laughing together, and praying for the Monsignor's tormentor as well. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 1:19 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Mark from PA, Have you ever attended a "Rock and Roll Mass"? God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 10:09 AM By John F. Maguire
In reply to the CCD EDITOR: As is well known, the Catholic Church has always encouraged professional societies to articulate "professional ethics" -- that is, ethics specific to each society's own responsibilities by way of service to the common good. For a secular account of this tradition and interest, see Emile Durkheim, _Professional Ethics and Civic Morals_, intro. Bryan S. Turner (London and New York: Routledge, 1992). In this connection, permit me to draw your attention to a rule that is incorporated in the CODE OF ETHICS OF THE SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS. The rule reads: "Journalists should distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two." MR. EDITOR: So-called "sponsored posts" -- that is, posts paid for by the Blogmeister or by the Blogmeister's principal (example: the CCD's offer of a $50 payment for blogger-posts dissecting particular liturgies) constitute just such a "hybrid" as should be "shunned" according to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. In this light, the CCD should nix its plan to purchase the liturgical judgments of bloggers as a payment violative of journalistic ethics. Whether these purchased posts tout one or another parish liturgy or attack one or another parish liturgy in vigilante style, they are the product of payola in the blogosphere ("blogola"). ~ Mr. Editor, as is normal, we as readers read bloggers' posts in the hope of reading what are first of all independent judgments, not judgments that are paid for.

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 10:56 AM By Mark from PA
Mr. Fisher, I don't really know what a "Rock and Roll Mass" is. Our parish has Masses in English, Polish and Spanish. All three Masses are beautiful. The Polish Mass is more traditional, I think. What is interesting at this Mass is that many of the people stay at the end of Mass and pray and slowly leave the Church. The Spanish Mass has guitars and the singing is very beautiful and uplifting. I know some of the Spanish hymns by heart.

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 11:02 AM By Willi H
Mark from PA. Google "Clown Mass", and weep at what passes for Christ's Sacrifice of the Altar. For my tastes, I hate the phony and distracting "sign of peace" and whince at the "for many" mistranslation of the Consecration (which the Holy Father has corrected in newer translations) in the new Mass. I make no claim of invalid Masses. It's is just not my thing. The most appalling thing I ever personally saw at Mass was when I attended a N.O. Mass in western NY. The priest had the Buffalo Bills logo on his stole! The sacred vestments of a priest with a profane (as defined in the dictionary) and secular image upon it. A different priest in Buffalo proper did the same thing and made the local paper. There was quite an uproar about that (even if they love their Bills). Google "chesse-head Bishop", go to images, and check out the first image, and let me know what you think. If your parish is devoid of such things, good for you! It's Tridentine for me.

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 12:05 PM By Bev
In reading this blog for a considerable length of time, I notice those complaining about behavior at certain N.O. masses never state the name of the church and its location. You are casting stones, perhaps with good reason, but you do not have the maturity to give complete information.

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 12:24 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to RR: Your discovery of the Mass of the Ages is a tremendous boon, but it does not warrant your predicating Novus Ordo Masses with a tendentious prefix, namely the prefix: "so-called" -- quite as if the Masses to which you haved referred are presumptively invalid. True, the abuses you cite are evidence of grave remissiveness on the part of the celebrant, but unless these abuses can be fairly construed as evidence of invalid intention (assuming proper form and matter), then the Novus Ordo Mass to which you refer is (to be sure, in itself) a valid Mass; and, precisely as valid, NOT to be labelled "so-called". RR, the possible invalidity of any one Novus Ordo Mass is not evidenced by how you or any one else "feels" at the Mass ("I felt like I was at a Baptist revival"). The invalidity of a Mass turns on an ABSENCE of the celebrant's sacerdotal intention to do what the Church does at the Holy Sacrifice -- I mean, if there is evidence of absence of intention in the first place. (Not infrequently the absence of sacerdotal intention is completely occult -- as Catholics discovered during the Modernist crisis in the 19th century).

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 4:57 PM By RR
So, Mr. Maguire, tell me. Was pushing the priest down the aisle in a wheelchair and carrying on laughing before Mass part of the form of a Latin Mass or even part of your Novus Ordo Mass form? Obviously, the correct form of Mass was not present, thus invalidating the Mass. The Mass is the WHOLE entire Mass, every word and action, not just the Consecration. I don't believe wheelchair birthdays for priests are found anywhere in any of the Rubrics of any Mass. Correct me if I am wrong. Also, not only did I "feel" a Baptist revival, I SAW it too.

Posted Friday, November 06, 2009 5:29 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Bev, The Rock and Roll Masses I attended were in Merida, Mexico and South Gate California. I don't remember the name of the Jesuit Church in Merida, perhaps my memory is serving me well there. The Church in South Gate is St. Helen's and the Mass was as a "Life Teen Mass". I wrote about that experience in the Wanderer and on the CRCOA, Inc., Group E-Mail. So there you have it. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Saturday, November 07, 2009 10:40 AM By John F. Maguire
BEV: You complain, for your part, that CCD complainants against liturgical abuses "do not have the maturity to give complete information" by "stating the name of the church and its location." To the contrary, Bev: It is IMMATURITY to scandalize parishes by broadcasting liturgical abuses on the Internet contrary to Church order. Indeed, it is COMPOUND IMMATURITY when that info-broadcast is based on a mere "perhaps". (Bev, you admit: "[These lit-complainants] are casting stones PERHAPS with good reason" [emphasis mine].) ~ No, from within the perspective of the good of Ecclesial order, the proper addressee for complaints in regard to liturgical irregularities is the pastor of the parish in which the liturgical irregularities have taken place. If an appeal to the pastor does not suffice, then an appeal to the bishop would be in order. In the present circumstance, then, immaturity consists in resorting to the gambit of roiling this or that parish in website scandal when, truth to tell, by following proper order within the Church scandal would be -- as here it should be -- avoided. In this same connection, I hope the CCD EDITOR sees his way clearly to acknowledging the pre-emptive requirements of Ecclesial order by desisting from doing on this website what, so far, it looks like he is intending to do -- I mean, with his 50 bucks solicitation.

Posted Saturday, November 07, 2009 2:17 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to RR: You ask: "Was pushing the priest down the aisle in a wheelchair and carrying on laughing before Mass part of the form of a Latin Mass or even part of [my] Novus Ordo Mass form?" You already know that the answer is NO. All the while, though, you neglect the fact that I've already granted in my post that such "abuses [as you describe] are evidence of grave remissiveness on the part of the celebrant...." So, RR, what's your problem? ~ Ah, yes, your problem is that you think that such abuses NECESSARILY vitiate the validity of the Mass within which context these abuses take place. REPLY: Sometimes abuses do vitiate validity, sometimes they don't. As I've already pointed out, when the abuses negate (1) the proper matter of the Sacrament, or (2) the proper form of the Sacrament, or (3) the proper sacerdotal intention of the priest, then, YES, that Mass is NOT valid. But RR, this "wheelchair/birthday party" event that you report as having been super-imposed onto the liturgy by the celebrant -- gross narcissistic foolishness though such clownishness is -- does NOT, by itself, constitute evidence dispositive to the CONCLUSION OF INVALIDITY of this particular Mass. ~ True, as I've already noted, the priest may have -- for all you or I know -- vacated his own requisite sacerdotal intention IN PECTORE (in the secret recess of his heart), but this occult invalidation of the Mass can take place in the context of a Traditional Latin Mass no less than in the context of a Novus Ordo Missae. It is obvious that occult invalidation is not an obvious invalidation.

Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 10:13 AM By Willi H
Mr. Maguire- You seem to be a staunch defender of the Novus Ordo Missae. That's fine. Go to whatever experimental, free-style, group-encounter liturgy you want. I choose the traditional over the trendy. If my indictment of the clergy seems sweeping, I'm sorry. Vatican 2 was supposed to be reforms that would increase conversions from the "separated bretheren". How's that working out? How's Mass attendence? How's seminary attendence? I blame the clergy from the parish priest who tinkers with the liturgy to be the center of attention during the consecration, then sits on the side lines while lay people perform functions during Mass that the priest should be doing, all the way up the line to the Pope. JP2 and B16 have done good things with respect to the Tridentine Mass and reforming the Novus Ordo. But more work has to be done and the Bishops should not stand in the way of the reforms the present Pontiff have called for. If the clergy is not part of the solution, they are part of the problem.

Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 4:36 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to Willi H: I've published a fair number of posts on this site pointing up the theological/liturgical deficiencies in the Mass of the Novus Ordo. All my Cardinal Stickler posts do this, as this beloved Cardinal made a point of defending access to the traditional Latin Mass as a "preferential option" enjoyed by the Catholic laity by right. I've recounted on this site my opposition to the imposition of the Novus Ordo Missae upon the Church. The consequence of this imposition was disastrous -- a DE FACTO suppression of the Mass of the Ages worldwide, though, in all actuality, this suppression was never a DE JURE suppression (much as the post-Conciliar Apparatus wanted us to think a DE JURE suppression had been imposed). So Willi, in this same spirit, I took the side of the SSPX in its work towards the restoration of the traditional Latin Mass. Some of my earliest posts on this site affirm the IMMEMORIAL RIGHT of the Christian faithful to access the MASS OF ALL TIME. You must have missed these posts (anyway, I have to surmise) because you write, just a touch ambiguously, that that I am "a staunch defender of the Novus Ordo Missae." Well no, Willi, not exactly -- so let's draw the crucial distinction: I am a staunch defender of the claim that the Novus Ordo Missae, in itself, is VALID. I am NOT a staunch defender of a liturgy I regard as gravely deficient. It is the VALIDITY of this theologically deficient New Mass that I defend, not this Liturgy as defective! ~ Willi, the INVALIDARIANS maintain that the Mass of the New Ordo is, in itself, invalid. On this point, the Invalidarians break with Pope Benedict XVI, who of course would not have initiated a "reform of the reform" -- that is, would not have inititiated a reform of the Paulinian Mass of 1969 -- had he deemed that Pope Paul VI's Mass was, in itself, invalid. So yes, both Josef Ratzinger and Marcel Lefebvre agreed that the New Mass was valid. The Invalidarians, then, are a splinter group.

Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 6:07 PM By Mark from PA
Mr. Maguire, I understand what you are saying here. I don't see why people criticize you in this matter. I don't think that the Novus Ordo Mass is theologically deficient. The Mass in and of itself is not deficient in my opinion. I see great beauty in this Mass. I live in Pennsylvania and I think things tend to be more conservative here.

Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 9:53 PM By JLS
Willi H has assessed Maguire accurately, although not specifically in each detail desired by Maguire. Maguire speaks favorably of the Tridentine Mass, although he has never out and out made his view clear (on anything at all, other than that the way to decrease abortion is to increase it). As Willi H points out, Maguire's disconnected ideas correspond well with the novu ordo / protestant types of relativists. I see him as kind of a traditional Mass guy who is also a neo / cryptic protestant aka liberal Catholic.

Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 9:55 PM By JLS
Bev, have you lost your marbles? Throwing stones without naming names of parishes? Why name them? The point is to name the abuses, not start litigation proceedings.

Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 10:47 PM By Anne T.
Kenneth, Monsignor John Sweeney was and is a Saint as far as I am concerned. Believe me, real miracles happened there when he was alive, and I do not mean of the "Jesus talked everybody into sharing the fish" kind. I mean REAL ones.

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 9:28 AM By Willi H
Mr. Maguire- Thank you for setting me straight on your outlook on the two Masses. I stand corrected. I myself do not know in my own soul whether or not N.O. Masses are valid or not. I know in my very being that Our Lord is present in the Tridentine Mass. I still think Novus Ordo was and is counter-productive and I still hold the clergy responsible. I will accept that we have more in common than not. Dominus vobiscum!

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 10:12 AM By John F. Maguire
To the contrary, JLS, there is an immediate and direct connection between my support for the Traditional Latin Mass -- the Mass I was privileged to serve as an acolyte in my youth -- and my agreement today with the critics of the Novus Ordo liturgy. But I do not jump over the horse in my critique of the Novus Ordo -- I do NOT deny the validity of this Mass. I do NOT call the Novus Ordo "protestant" (that would deny its validity) -- though there are seriously incongruous semi-protestant aspects of the Novus Ordo. Nor do I call the Novus Ordo "relativist" -- Pope Benedict XVI, who rejects post-modernity's dictatorship of relativism -- says the Mass of the Novus Ordo every day.

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 3:04 PM By Anne T.
Yes, things are more conservative in Pennsylvania from what I have heard. One Byzantine rite priest from there told a group of us that in Pennsylvania things that were talked about openly in California were not even mentioned in polite company in Pennsylvania. I wished it were more so here. I am tired of all the intimate commercials on television, too, that are things that any sensible person should discuss with one's family member, close friends whom one trusts or healthcare providers, not strangers.

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 4:05 PM By John F. Maguire
On the contrary, JLS, no "traditional Mass guy [or gal]" can be "crypto-protestant" let alone "neo-protestant" in his or her attitude towards things Catholic, except upon pain of self-contradiction. On the other hand, by remote and imperfect analogy, there is something neo-protestant about the Invalidarians. These faux-traditionalists refuse to recognize the validity of the Mass of the Novus Ordo and, adamantly, they make their own this refusal in the face of the universal consensus of Catholic bishops, who, as we know, affirm the validity of the Novus Ordo Missae, its gravely deficient liturgy notwithstanding. So: Where classical Protestantism rejects the Catholic Mass TOUT COURT, the neo-protestant Invalidarians reject the Eucharist Christ in but one Mass: the Mass of the Novus Ordo. In this accidental sense, then, the Invalidarians are semi-protestants, or at least analogous thereto.

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 4:32 PM By John F. Maguire
JLS, I've taken a look at John Rawls' book _Political Liberalism_, 2nd edition (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005) -- I mention this book here because it is one of the most articulate defenses of political liberalism in print -- yet I find Rawls' book incompatible with a properly robust conception of the good of persons and institutions. So no, JLS, I cannot say that I am a liberal in the current sense in which term liberal is used. ~ On the other hand, I accept Thomas Aquinas's full-fledged defense of "liberality" as one of the virtues within the organon of virtues. St. Thomas quotes St. Ambrose: "It is commendably liberal not to neglect your relatives if you know them to be in want." Thomas also quotes Aristotle: "Those who spend much on intemperance are not liberal but prodigal." The Church's Common Doctor concludes: "It belongs to liberality not only to use money [wisely and generously], but to keep it in preparation and safety in order to make good use of it." Indeed, this is why all men and women are obliged to BE liberal, that is, this is why all men and women are obliged to practice the virtue of liberality. In Catholic theology, then, to be liberal is to be generous wisely. For this reason, JLS, we are not free to abandon the traditional, celebratory sense of the term LIBERAL.

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 6:13 PM By JLS
Maguire, your little dances around your pole of contention only reinforce the perception that you are a relativist, hence liberal. Your word mincing one step has been sufficiently explained and clarified in a past post by an articulate and well informed blogger; and I, myself, have explained your relativistic and evasive posturing often. It is bizarre that you insist that you and you only have the key to the meaning of language.

Posted Tuesday, November 10, 2009 7:26 PM By John F. Maguire
I'm an ethical relativist? In your mind's eye only, JLS.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:06 AM By RR
Maguire:You are wrong. There are also Latin Masses that are invalid also. If matter, form, and intention are not present, then the Mass is invalid. Also, just because the Pope says the Novus Ordo doesn't mean that he believes it is valid. Maguire, you cannot, nor will you ever be able to, read anyone's heart. Not even the Popes. Nobody can judge the Pope. Good, bad, or indifferent, the Pope is the Pope. How do you know, since the Pope is lead by the Holy Ghost, that the Pope is not being told by God to continue to say the Novus Ordo at this time of the Church? Did you personally ask the Pope if he thinks the N.O. Mass is valid?How do you know God isn't going to let the Novus Ordo self-destruct before He will bring back the Mass of all times, The Mass of Pius V? Whatever the situation is with the Church right now is what God has ordained it to be for these Catholic times. Only God knows the Pope's heart. You don't. You CANNOT read what is in the Pope's heart or what his intentions are. Also, about the majority of Bishops approving of the Novus Ordo. Again, how do you know that they all think it is valid? Did you ask all of them personally? And by the way many of these Bishops also thought, like you, that it was o.k. to vote for Obama, the most pro-abortion president ever. The road to hell is paved with the skulls of bad Bishops. Remember, Maguire, the majority is NOT always right. The majority of the crowd called for Christ to be crucified. Was the majority right? Also, I never said the N.O. was invalid. I said that there is serious and grave doubt as to the validity. Only God can judge that, not you or I. The serious doubt is coming from all the abuses stemming from the N. O. and the fact that the N.O. was helped made up by 6 Protestant ministers, liberal priests and bishops, and, yes, Freemasons. The Church is supposed to be based on Tradition, which it was for almost 2000 years before Vatican II came and messed with the Mass of all times and it's sacraments.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:11 AM By RR
Maguire cont: As my mother has always said, "When in doubt, throw it out." So, I will continue to go to the SACRIFICE of Mass of all times, the Mass of St. Pius V and stick with Sacred Tradition and not a Mass?, Meal, Celebration that was made up by heretics and progressives at Vatican II.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:01 AM By JLS
Maguire, my "mind's eye", according to you is invalid; yet, your scorching denunciation only continues to validate my claim that you are a cryptic Calvinist with your deep predestining definitions of Catholicism being the plaything of politicians such as Obama whom you adore and worship ... what else explains your fascination with the cravenly stupid idea that such an abortion fanatic would ever reduce abortions by increasing them? Only the devil would take this position, in that of course once you eliminate great portions of population there won't be many left to abort ... that in effect is your position, as the only valid conclusion to what you are always saying. Everything you say hinges on that one vile drive of yours ... to validate and justify supporting abortion by calling it prolife. All your rhetoric convolutes in the same manner, by various subtleties. You provide fractional arguments and clip them, and then attempt to show that since you have said some accurate things, that your intrinsic position is justified. No, Maguire, just like the devil tempting Jesus with Scripture, you simply cannot be subtle enough to fool everyone, not even with your "big lie" that Obama will reduce abortions by increasing them.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:05 AM By JLS
If anyone has ever observed rattlesnakes going about their business as pure predators, then one can see that Maguire is doing exactly the same thing. The only people he contends with are those who are no holds barred anti-abortionists. Maguire does not take issue with anyone else.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 12:28 PM By Bob
We may have been reached the end of credibility here. Tradition spelled with a T and tradition spelled with a small t are two different things. The capital T essentially means the teachings of the apostles as currently represented by the magisterium. The small t is for traditions in worship and sacramentals that people have used over the years. For example, using green during ordinary times, or rose on the third Sunday in lent are small t, not big T. Now, as to the NO mass. IT IS THE MASS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. It is not invalid under any circumstances that would occur in normal day to day life for most of us. The TLM is also a mass of the roman catholic church. Pick the one you want to go to. Its ok. But, so is the NO, ok. There are really important things to talk about, Mr. Maguire and JLS. The posts for the last couple of weeks don't really constitute important in the life of poor people, immigrants and Joe Six Pack.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 3:57 PM By JLS
Bob, are you speaking with a big T or a little t? Bob, if you want to talk about something important, then go ahead. I'd prefer you start with Joe Sixpack.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 6:06 PM By JLS
Bob, you do not come across as a very spiritually aware man in the sense of describing such things with language; however, you seem to hang in somewhat. But Maguire is very spiritual, and he understands exactly what I am talking about. If you want to follow the issues, they are indeed embedded in the disputation, regardless of the symbolism used by him or me. He may even deny what I'm saying, but it wouldn't surprise me. One does not rattle off that much stuff, nor go to that much trouble to provide endless references, and withstand as much challenge as I and others give him without having a deep agenda. His agenda is to justify his vote for Obama. He has no other purpose in these blogs. If he can do that, whether by hook or crook, then he will win. The devil will not rest, and the author of The Imitation of Christ says that the faithful will have plenty of time to rest in eternity, and so there is no point for rest now. Whatever your position, if you are a faithful Catholic, you have to obligation of taking part in the spiritual war that Jesus Christ explains to us. You have been given some ground to hold, and you will lose it if you take a break. Remember that these posts, even though by individuals, are simply ideas, spiritual weapons, being used in this spiritual warfare -- The whole mystical Body of Christ is invovled in each movement in the use of these spiritual weapons. It is a network of millions upon millions of souls all in concert.

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:01 PM By bev
JLS: So what are you accomplishing by talking about liturgical abuses on this blog? Bev

Posted Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:02 PM By bev
JLS: So what are you accomplishing by talking about liturgical abuses on this blog? Bev

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 5:45 AM By RR
Bob: You and Maguire should team up and be the oppinion and post police to decide who's posts and oppinions are worth posting.

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 10:51 AM By Dave
JLS -- Where did John Maguire say he voted for Obama? I didn't see him say that anywhere. It's a sin to make rash judgments and assumptions about others. RR -- If any priest, bishop, or pope felt the Novus Ordo Mass was invalid, then he wouldn't say it period. It would be stupid and pointless to say a Mass that you didn't think was valid in the first place. However, the Novus Ordo, for all its flaws, is still a valid Mass, and all Catholics must believe and accept that. If it were invalid, then Jesus would have lied when he said the gates of hell would never prevail against His Church. Our Lord never guaranteed that the forms or translations of the rites of Holy Mass would be like Mary Poppins (that is, practically perfect in every way), but He did in effect guarantee that they would always be VALID and convey all the graces they're supposed to. To doubt this would be grave disobedience at best and heresy at worst.

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 4:06 PM By JLS
Dave, what's with the rash judgment, then? A. You can ask Maguire. B. You can look at his archived posts from before and after the election. *** Dave, what is with you blind faith in bishops? Have you ever heard of the concept of "wisdom"? Dave, you handling of the N.O. and Jesus didn't come across too well; please rethink it and try again. Your own magisterium about Jesus guaranteeing all forms of liturgy is ridiculous; try the real authentic Magisterium.

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 6:50 PM By Dave
Alright, as for the John Maguire matter, I apologize. I looked at previous posts of his, and yes, he apparently did vote for Obama. I stand corrected. But as for the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass, this has nothing to do with blind faith in bishops or "my own magisterium" (so now it looks like this time you really are making rash judgments). NO rite of Mass promulgated by the Church can be intrinsically invalid. I'm not talking about priests who mangle or omit the words of consecration or priests who use invalid matter for Communion or those who totally lack the intention to do what the Church does. In other words, I'm referring to the Novus Ordo Mass in and of itself, not individual celebrations of it, which can, of course, be invalid if the celebrant lacks the proper form, matter, and/or intention. So are you trying to say that YOU doubt the Novus Ordo Mass's validity? If so, then look at what the 7th Canon on the Sacrifice of the Mass from the Council of Trent: "If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of Masses are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety, let him be anathema." Thus, no approved Liturgy of the Catholic Church can be intrinsically evil, as it would become an incentive to impiety. If the Novus Ordo Mass were invalid in and of itself, that would make it an incentive to impiety. But no, it's an approved Liturgy of the Church, so according to Church Tradition DOGMATICALLY DEFINED at the Council of Trent, the Novus Ordo Mass CANNOT be invalid, evil, sacrilegious, etc. To believe otherwise is to place yourself under the canon's anathema.

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 6:58 PM By John F. Maguire
RR: I said a Mass is invalid if it lacks proper matter for consecration, or proper form for consecration (the correct words) or proper intention by the priest. Nowhere did I say or suggest that the traditional Latin Mass is immune from invalidity. No Mass is radically immune from invalidity. I have said that the traditional Latin Mass lacks the defects we encounter in the Novus Ordo. At the same time, these defects induce a remissive liturgical culture wherein the New Ordo of the Mass is more likely to be abused -- yes, but more: abused in such a way that these abuses do invalidate the Mass where these abuses occur. IN ITSELF, however, the New Order of the Mass is VALID -- and Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI have all affirmed the per se VALIDITY of the NOVUS ORDO MISSAE. To throw a valid Mass "out" -- you should come to realize in a kind of horror -- is to throw out the Eucharistic Christ himself. An enormous mistake, RR.

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:09 PM By John F. Maguire
No, RR, one of the tasks of an editor is to decide whose posts are NOT worth publishing.

Posted Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:35 PM By John F. Maguire
JLS: Whoa! You reify the concept of spirituality (you've forgotten that you've implied elsewhere that I have the spirituality of a rattlesnake) and once having reified the notion of spirituality, you give yourself permission to write at Bob's expense but also at my expense, as follows: "Bob, you do not come across as a very spiritually aware man...." JLS, no one who really does possess the power of cardiognosis; no one who really does possess the rare and special power of reading human hearts (as, for example, Padre Pio -- I mean, in the limited context of the confessional) would ever say such a thing as that X is less "spiritually aware" than Y. JLS, you compound your pretense: "....But Maguire is very spiritual...." Pshaw! ~ JLS, I hate to see you regress to the point of using the word spiritual in its hippie-idiomatic sense. Uncool.

Posted Saturday, November 14, 2009 9:09 PM By Anne T.
Kenneth Fisher, I need to clarify something I said in one of my posts. When I mentioned an incident when "Jesus talked all the people into sharing the fish", I meant the fish in their lunches. I was referring to how some heterodox theologians and priests try to say that Christ did not really perform the miracle of multiplying the loaves and fishes, but that he guilt-tripped the people into sharing what they already had. That is ridiculous, of course, since the Bible clearly states that the people were hungry and the Apostles and Christ knew they were without food, and it would not have been considred a "sign" if he had not performed a real miracle.

Posted Saturday, July 17, 2010 12:02 PM By J.NormanSayles
re: Church of the Assumption and the Episcopalian pastor's remark. Were not Enoch and Elisha assumed into Heaven? And why would our Lord allow his mother's body to rot in a grave? I think the Assumption of the Mother of God was mandatory. A Prodigal Son (40 yr. exile).

Posted Wednesday, July 06, 2011 10:52 AM By Lysan Curiel

Posted Wednesday, July 06, 2011 12:35 PM By Traditional Angelo
JLS, Where in the hec have you been hiding? I had already placed you on my list of prayers for the deceased. Were you ill? Welcome back, we have all missed you. This site certainly needs your wisdom. Deo Gratias!

Posted Wednesday, July 06, 2011 12:42 PM By Traditional Angelo
My mistake, I did'nt realize that JLS post was from back from November 2009. We sure wish we know where he is.

Posted Wednesday, September 28, 2011 1:46 PM By penis enlargement pills
brinkka2011 says: How is it that just anybody can publish a blog and get as popular as this? Its not like youve said anything extremely impressive more like youve painted a quite picture about an issue that you know nothing about! I dont want to sound mean, here. But do you really think that you can get away with adding some quite pictures and not really say anything?

Post your Comment
Email: (Optional: Will not display)
Comments are limited to 1500 characters, and cannot contain offensive or libelous language. For security, comments cannot contain html tags, including < and > symbols - and NO URLS or LINKS. Comments will appear after they have been approved by the editor. Inclusion of your email address is optional so the editor may contact you.

Calcatholic Mobile
Optimized for your
mobile device

Visitors since January 1st, 2009:
javascript hit counter