User talk:Roydosan/Westminster mediation

OK we'll get started here:

I'm going to interweave my comments with yours. I'll change colors to make it easier to tell which are mine. 17:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I have switched to red to answer your follow up questions. Roydosan 16:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Question 1

First off one of the clear areas of dispute is the role and size of the LMS relative to the diocese. What percentage of people are you are arguing partake of LMS related activities: ever, occasionally, regularly. I'm looking for something like "18% have gone to a Latin service at least one in the last 5 years, 4% attend at least once per month and 3% refuse to go to English language services." And of course some sort of source would be good (the more authoritative the better) As far as I can tell a good deal of this argument is about the importance of the LMS relative to other organizations in the diocese. To defend you position I'd like to establish the LMS is more important than minor organizations. jbolden1517^Talk 13:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Answer to question 1.

I’m not able to provide accurate statistics about attendance at Latin masses since these are only generally measured once a year (and not at all masses either). But I can give you some information about the number of masses arranged by the LMS (or advertised by it) and the priestly societies that support it.

OK well a comparison of number of masses by/for LMS relative to number of masses in English would be I think a reasonable comparison.

See my comments on Kevin's data.

Mass attendance is not necessarily a good indicator of support since there are many members/supporters who are unable to attend Latin masses due to there being none within there locality.

You don't feel that lack of availability is indicative of a low level of support / relative importance?

No I don't since there is not a free choice for the priest to say the traditional mass and therefore not for people to attend it since they are dependent on a priest being able to say the mass publicly.

This form of liturgy is important to the church in so many ways beyond its popularity. It is part of the liturgical history of the Church as well as experiencing a great deal of interest and a revival of its practice since the introduction of the novus ordo mass in 1969. The current Pope has celebrated the Latin mass in recent years. See here. There are also a lot of rumours that the mass will be further liberalised in the future. See here. Since 1988 a large number of religious orders have been founded that use the Latin mass specifically. See here. By highlighting this I’m trying to demonstrate that the Latin liturgy is an important part of the liturgical history of the Church and its future. This is much more important than the large number of organisations that one might find in each diocese, worthy though they all might be. The reason why the LMS is important is because it directly affects the liturgical life of the diocese in the number of masses available. The Catholic Church is not just about the mass but the mass/eucharist is described as the source and summit of the Church’s life. See here. So my reasoning to include the LMS in articles about the diocese is not based around any desire to promote it above all other liturgy in the Church but to recognise that it is an important part of what happens in the Church.

OK fair enough. So your argument is that anything that influences the mass should be given disproportionate attention because the mass is disproportionately more important than other church activities (like hospitals, schools, confession....)?

Basically yes but the LMS also enables confessions, marriages, funerals & confirmations in the traditional rites so it's not true to see it as being just about the mass.

One important point to mention here is that all Masses organised by the LMS are done with the full approval and knowledge of the diocesan bishop. If he refuses to give permission the LMS will respect his wishes and not arrange masses in the diocese. Therefore, LMS websites only carry details of masses which are approved by the diocese. Roydosan 21:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

So in other words they have institutional sanction? AFAIKT it was your friend not Kevin who was disagreeing on this point (though you appear to have convinced him) so I'll hold off on expanding since that may not be a topic for debate.

Yes all masses are sanctioned and approved by the local ordinary. The SSPX are the only ones who act without the permission of the bishops

Question 2

Second issue is you had mentioned that you believed Kevin had disdain for the LMS that is he had demonstrated bias. Can you give me some examples? Can you explain to me why somebody would have an anti-LMS bias? In other words the website on LMS basically paints them as "Indult Catholic" which is far to the left Society of St. Pius X so why would he have this bias? jbolden1517^Talk 13:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Answer to question 2.

I believe that Kevin gave a clear indication of his bias by describing the Latin mass as a ‘near obsolete rite’ and then going on to say that he wished that all the missals prior to the current (2002) one would become obsolete (the LMS supports the use of the 1962 missal). A lot of people share such a view and are opposed to the existence of the LMS just as much as the Society of St. Pius X are opposed to the Novus Ordo Mass. Without wishing to generalise, in my experience a lot of people who are opposed to the LMS are not satisfied with not attending the Latin mass themselves – they want to stop everyone else from attending as well.

Can you explain why he would want to stop everyone else from attending? What would be the goal of such a position?

to ensure that people only attend the current rite of mass and that there is uniformity of worship in the church - which in fact there has never been - there are in fact over 20 rites of mass officially sanctioned by the church though only the 1962, 2002 & Ukrainian rites are used widely in the English Church.

This can manifest itself in trying to prevent all mention of the LMS/Latin mass anywhere that could be considered mainstream Catholic. Hence, I interpreted Kevin’s desire to keep the LMS off diocesan articles as a means of censoring mention of them because he was opposed to their standpoint. The LMS as an organisation has always sought to gain acceptance for the Latin mass alongside the Novus Ordo and, as mentioned above, works with the bishops to arrange Latin masses. People are opposed to this because they basically do not like the Latin liturgy and want to stick to a narrow interpretation of the Second Vatican Council which promotes the idea of the ‘Spirit of the Council’ leading the Church rather than what the Church documents stated. I can provide further evidence of this if you wish debate. Roydosan 21:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Question 3

Third, lets take the example of Archdiocese of Southwark would you be OK with a link of the form "Latin Mass representation in Southwark" that when clicked went to a detailed description of LMS in the diocese and a collection of useful links. That is only one link per diocese but a much more collection of links as soon as the reader clicks on the first link?

Answer to question 3.

I would be fine with that – I would just like the place of the LMS recognised within the article as a legitimate and active part of the diocese – not because I want to promote it.

Good that strikes me as a reasonable compromise. I'm trying to get a reply from Kevin to a series of questions. That failing I'll help you create a utility page and then you are off to the races. Follow up question. Do you care if the link page is on or off site?

Maybe a link within Wikipedia where there is no diocesan website and an externallink where there is.

I admit I was perhaps in error to have put up a link to the national LMS website but this is compounded in the dioceses of Westminster and Southwark by the fact that despite the LMS being more active in these two diocese than any others in the country (except perhaps Birmingham) there is no diocesan specific LMS website for either diocese. So it is difficult to adequately acknowledge the presence of the LMS in the diocese.

That's why I'm thinking you should create a single page.

agreed.

In addition to the compromise I put on the dispute site and the option you have mentioned; I think a discussion of liturgy in the diocese in the actual article might also be a valid compromise. This could also mention Polish masses; Ukrainian rite Catholic masses, etc, as well as the LMS. Roydosan 21:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

That would fix it entirely. If you are prepared to write such a section for each diocese. I can't see any reasonable objection then. I'll propose the compromise while you get back to me on whether you are ready to write it.

I am happy to write it.

compromise offer

Kevin put forward a possible compromise offer.

in a paragraph about the pastoral and liturgical life of the diocese, in a sentence that said something like "Among the broad range of liturgical activities in Trumptonshire, there are regular celebrations of the Polish, Tamil and Spanish-speaking Catholic communities, the Latin Mass Society, Catholic Charismatic Renewal, and musical societies including the Society of St Gregory and the St Thomas More Centre Association." This sounds like your offer. You could then have links for LMS go to the diocese webpage or whatever you wanted. Is that acceptable. Do you have a counter offer....? jbolden1517^Talk 01:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Personally I prefer the compromise you put up on the mediation site but this one could be tweaked enough to be acceptable to both sides.

Roydosan 16:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Answer to statistical data provided by Kevin

We have statistics on size of LMS relative to English faction and it looks like it is well under 1%. Assuming this is correct that proves the issue of limited importance.

I have responded to Kevin’s comments about LMS popularity and included some of the diocese which he didn’t mention.

East Anglia: 9 Masses per month, in 6 locations: in a diocese of 121 Churches and other Mass centres, there are 132 priests listed as working in the diocese(source: www.eastangliadiocese.org.uk): if they each celebrate only 5 Masses per week (an active priest working in a parish is more likely to celebrate about 10 per week) this would equate to 2640 Masses in a 4 week period: the LMS Masses are less than 0.5 % of Masses celebrated. (I have not looked up the equivalent statistics for other diocese, but East Anglia is a relatively small diocese).

The facts about the number of masses celebrated by priests is quite frankly a misnomer in this case. To say the Novus Ordo mass a priest needs no permission and is free to say the mass as and when he sees fit. For traditional masses arrangements must be made with the local ordinary for permission to be granted. A priest is not free to say the traditional mass in public anytime he likes. The LMS is resolutely of the opinion that the hierarchy must be obeyed and therefore they will only ever arrange masses with diocesan approval. Therefore to see this as some kind of popularity contest is I think unfair since the results will be inevitably be skewed towards the novus ordo – which is the normative rite of the Church. If priests and people had a genuine choice about which mass they could attend it might be fair to make a comparison of this sort. I for one attend the novus ordo more often than the traditional mass for the simple fact that it is the only option available locally – many people are in the same position. If, as expected, the current pope frees the traditional mass from these types of restrictions then it is likely that the mass will be be celebrated much more widely than it is at present.

Middlesbrough: In this diocese there are 84 parishes and Mass centres. I would assume that each parish has at least 2 Sunday Masses, and a Mass most weekdays. The Middlesborough LMS site reports that there is one Mass per month in the diocese, and links to an on-line petition requesting the bishop's concession of a second. This petition has 6 names on it. It also links to a message board: this has had 8 messages posted in the current calendar year. I believe that the LMS in Middlesborough, on this evidence, can accurately be described as fringe.

This is not the case at all. Latin Masses are also said in two other churches in the north of the diocese (in Staithes & Ugthorpe) – though not arranged by the LMS A petition undertaken about 5 years ago raised over 600 signatures calling for Sunday Masses within the diocese. The current petition has raised over 200 over a period of 6-8 weeks. The online petition was not advertised by the LMS and is not indicative of support.

Clifton: The LMS Clifton site carries the following message " The Bishop has stated (in a letter to our Clifton Representative) that he has been generous in giving permissions for weekdays but he thinks that on Sundays people should attend the modern rite. " I believe that this says something significant about the bishop's thoughts about the place of the LMS in the Catholic community of his diocese.

The Bishop wrote again to the LMS rep to state that he was mistaken to interpret this statement as meaning he planned to revoke the permissions already given for Sunday Masses. Regular masses are arranged in a rota of different churches.

Arundel & Brighton: I cannot find any link to the website that R says exists: the most appropriate looking page has a redirect to a list of Masses indicating that there are, in the 2 months May-June 2006 a total of 8 LMS services in this diocese.

The website is currently down. It was up a couple of months ago.

Portsmouth: One church has a weekly service, the cathedral has one Tridentine Mass per year (my research showed no other Catholic cathedral hosting a Mass under the auspices of the LMS), two other parishes offer 3-4 Masses per year. Although a Tridentine Mass centre in Oxford is listed on this site, Oxford is not in the diocese of Portsmouth.

As for no other Catholic cathedral allowing Latin Masses under the auspices of the LMS this is completely incorrect. Masses have been held in Westminster Cathedral at least once a month (and a Latin novus ordo every weekday. Hallam and Lancaster cathedrals have also had Latin masses

Leeds 3 venues are used, none of which are churches owned by the diocese.

This leaves out a lot of information. The bishop of Leeds has requested the LMS to move their Sunday masses to the cathedral once the renovation is completed. He has also arranged for 8-12 younger priests to be trained how to say the traditional mass. Hardly the actions of one who wants the mass to be marginalised.

Hallam: Last listed Mass 25th October 2005: there were a total of 10 Masses in the 4 months leading up to that date.

Again this is incorrect. Latin masses are held every week in alternating parishes. There is an annual mass in the cathedral.

Lancaster 4 Masses per month

Plus an annual mass in the cathedral.

Hexham & Newcastle 3 Churches have a weekly LMS Mass: two others once a month.

Northampton 3 venues: 3-4 Masses per month (although the web page also lists Masses in another diocese). Evidence provided by Kevin McE posted by jbolden1517Talk 03:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Nottingham Diocese 2 Churches have weekly Sunday & Holyday masses. Permission has been given for a third.

Westminster One Church has daily traditional masses, two other have weekly masses. Confirmations are held in the traditional rite once a year at which one of the diocesan auxiliary bishops presides. A large number of masses are arranged in other churches but not to a regular timetable.

Southwark One Church has traditional masses daily; one other has weekly Sunday masses. Five parishes rotate Sunday masses. Confirmations are held in certain years at which a diocesan auxiliary bishop presides. A large number of masses are arranged in other churches but not to a regular timetable.

Birmingham Two churches have at least one mass a week A large number of masses are arranged in other churches but not to a regular timetable.

Brentwood The bishop has recently granted permission for a regular Sunday mass centre to be established.

Roydosan 15:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

implementation

I'm setting this up as a private venue for discussions of the implementation jbolden1517^Talk 17:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I am currently working on two paragraphs about diocesan liturgy as a potential implementation of the compromise. I'll post them here over the next couple of days. I would have done it before but I was waiting for a copy of a book with info on Ukrainian rite liturgy, etc in the UK. Roydosan 18:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Any change in status on this one? jbolden1517^Talk 16:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I have had a few things going on at the moment which have meant I haven't had time to get this done. I'll try and get it up ASAP. Roydosan 13:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok I have a first draft of what a paragraph could look like for the archdiocese of Westminster. It would go under the heading of liturgy or liturgy in the diocese

Liturgy and the Sacraments in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Westminster, as in the rest of the Catholic Church, is based primarily around the missal and breviary as introduced by Pope Paul VI. The Latin Mass Society arranges diocesan approved masses and confirmation according to the 1962 missal. Ukrainian Rite Catholics have a strong presence in the diocese and their own Cathedral in west London. There are also small communities of Melkite and Maronite Rite Catholics. There are a substantial number of Polish language masses catering for the expatriate community as well as a smaller number of French, German, Italian and Vietnamese churches serving their own respective communities.

Let me know if you think this (or something similar) would be acceptable

Roydosan 12:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

No. We had agreed diocese specific links. Also you needed more content about other subjects (like schools). What is your home diocese? jbolden1517^Talk 23:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how this differs that much from the compromise paragraph you put up - the fast link to the lms could be a link to the diocesan specific site (though in this case that would not be possible due to Westminster not having one). And why is info on schools needed? Seems a bit abstract - although for a fuller entry on the diocese they could be included and I could write such a paragraph. My home diocese is a difficult one to answer - I spend most of my time between westminster, arundel & brighton, portsmouth, hallam and middlesbrough. Roydosan 17:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I guess the question would be what diocese do you know the most about in terms of non LMS related activity? I want to get a full featured couple paragraphs together for these purposes. This easiest diocese is going to be one that you know well. jbolden1517^Talk 17:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

ok in that case Westminster is probably going to be the easiest for me to do this. I will expand the paragraph to include mention of schools, charities, music and other activities. This might be quite lengthy but most of the articles look like they could do with being expanded significantly anyway. I'll post it here once complete for your views and input. Roydosan 18:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Perfect. When do you figure you'll have it? jbolden1517^Talk 18:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok I'll aim for at least two paragraphs and I hope to have it completed by the end of the week. Did you get my e-mail explaining why I've been delayed on this? Roydosan 18:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)