For those who have been asking about why the bishop (who favors the TLM) does not just advocate a return to it, here is the answer he gave to someone who asked the same question at the above-cited talk:

Q: It would seem that all of your ten points, your suggestions for renewal of the liturgy, could possibly be accomplished by simply returning to the old form of the Mass. (Applause)

BAS: (Smiling) Vox Populi, Vox Dei. (Laughter) You understood? The voice of the people is the voice of God. And you...represent the people. And even you are a lady, even more, and you also are a member of the common priesthood. And so you spoke very well. Well, it is...I'm agreeing...but we also have to consider the reality in which we live. In the vast majority of the parishes the people don't know the ancient liturgy, and so for many of them, they are not psychologically...not ready to change completely to that older liturgy. We have to consider the psychological aspect of that. And therefore I suggested to introduce gradually these...ten points which are expressed in the ancient liturgy and which corresponds to the idea of the Second Vatican Council.

In his recent interview with Rorate Caeli, Bishop Schneider also said:

"We must always pray that God provides His Church with traditional-minded Popes."

He has told me personally that we must pray for this. And so we shall.

Many thanks again Steve!!! Liturgy! Since I was a 10 years old altar boy (chierichetto - little cleric) at the V.O. Mass I am in love with the Liturgy and any article such as this really fills my soul with Hope! Liturgy is what kept me going in my life because it is the Lord. .
You're always in my prayers!

I'm 55, The knees and hips aren't what they used to be. No kneelers. Now, the best I can do is genuflect before I receive our Lord. Soon, I won't even be able to do that as my genuflection is getting kinda "rickety" too.

The only liturgical reform I'm really interested in would be to get rid of the "Sign of Peace".

This is true, as we are focusing on ourselves during the Sign of Peace, when we should have our focus on Jesus Christ. We should be more worried with the peace we have with Jesus Christ first and foremost, especially during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I can't tell you how much I dislike the Sign of Peace. Either end it or perhaps if we were to do it to the one in front of us, the one in back of us and only the ones on either side (making a cross). It's just so haphazard and awkward. Another way is a simple nod. The fact the SofP is not in the TLM, makes it my go to Mass.

Element # 11:

Restore the sense of the "vertical" and eliminate the obsession with the "horizontal" at the most sacred time of the Mass (i.e. Communion). Eliminate all human distractions and frivolity or any activity which detracts from the reverence due to the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament in the period immediately before Holy Communion, especially the "Sign of Peace". No glad-handing, back-slapping, waving, high-fiving, pew-jumping, aisle-crossing, kissing, laughing or hand signals.

Just kneel down and prepare yourself for the reception into your soul of Almighty God. The frivolity can wait until after Mass.

After Mass in the parish hall please, or outside.

Thank you, Bishop Schneider, for speaking to those of us that want the depths of Catholicism and not the shallows.

Or just go to the Latin Tridentine Mass. Its all there as he describes!

Many people cannot "just go to the Latin Tridentine Mass" because there is not one celebrated anywhere reasonably near them! It's not that easy to solve THIS problem. Any suggestions for how and where we can have more Latin Masses?

All these elements except for the use of Latin are in the Anglican Ordinariate's Divine Worship. Instead of Latin, we have sacral English.

To the good Bishop's [God bless him] point #3 of Ten Elements of Renewal:

541Piety has its own good manners. Learn them. It's a shame to see those 'pious' people who don't know how to attend Mass — even though they go daily, — nor how to bless themselves (they throw their hands about in the weirdest fashion), nor how to bend the knee before the Tabernacle (their ridiculous genuflections seem a mockery), nor how to bow their heads reverently before a picture of our Lady. - The Way > Holy Mass > Chap. 23, St. Josemaría Escrivá [http://www.escrivaworks.org...]

*
I have never understood when attending the OF of the Mass how most of the faithful never bow when they ought to during the Nicene Creed yet they will pray the Our Father in the Orans posture and/or hold hands. I can't but conclude that people are doing their own thing rather than what they what they ought to be doing and obviously that cannot be pleasing to God.

Many have been instructed to hold hands, etc. I recently attended a Catholic school mass and the children even crossed the aisles to hold hands. They are not so much doing their own things as doing what they were taught to do...like communion in the hand. But at another parish, a campus parish, there were only a dozen or so children for First Communion but they received on their tongue while kneeling!

On the importance of "signs" in Japan:

"Japanese Tea Ceremony, the classic ritualised ceremony of the Far East,
was influenced by the Traditional Mass, which one of the great Masters
of the ceremony witnessed, and found profoundly impressive."
— Joseph Shaw, The EF and Japanese culture

Also: Rev Daniel Horgan, The Traditional Mass and Asian Peoples

And the "tempura" Japanese recipe originates it's name from the latin word "tempora". It was eaten during Lent (tempora) by the Japanese catholics.

Thank you so much!!! I always wondered why the name Tempura. Now I know Thanks!!!!

Wow! Thank you for that excellent article. I have been living in Asia for a while now and this article captured many similar thoughts I have had when trying to understand the relationship between the TLM and Asian culture.

So he is saying there should be more TLMs. The Roman rite of the Church.

So essentially, just go back to the Traditional Mass. That covers all these points!

I am sure his excellency realizes that with his 10 points, we would be creating something that looks and sounds like the Latin Mass.

(Cross-posted from Facebook) One of the things I've never understood about recent Catholic history is how the transition to the New Mass and the irreverent things that went with it (referenced by Bishop Schneider) happened so quickly and with seemingly so little opposition. I don't think it would be like that going in the other direction. In other words, if somehow Pope Pius XIII decreed that we were going back to the Old Mass or enforced Schneider's recommendations, or whatever, I think you would see riots. It's true that the Old Mass or the New Mass in Latin + Reverence is gaining while the "mainstream" parishes are shrinking. But it's difficult for me to see the precise path that will lead us out of this.

Worth noting, lots of people did leave the Church, beginning almost immediately and extending for some years after the liturgical reform hit its stride, including large numbers of priests and religious. We just don't hear from those people, because no one is asking, because no one in charge cares what they think.

Many of these people are coming back into the church via the traditional Masses all over. The fssp has many of them and so a revival of holiness is slowly becoming a fact. As the liberals fade out for lack of interest when they think they have won the battle, well, the devout faithful will persevere. It just takes patience.

You are dead on.

People who would have riots to change the faith into liberalism, have no business in the church anyway. They can go to another church that allows deviancy. Liberals are out to destroy the true faith and therefore we must not give in to their wishes. Ignore them and let them disperse to other places or they will rot the church from within and cause splits all over and confusion all over. Keep the sermons conservative and that will get rid of the evil wreckovators. Make the liturgy holy and the devil flees. One does not have to do anything other than bring back beauty and moral purity and evil flees. If these demonic individuals cause riots, just have them escorted out of the sanctuary and told to go elsewhere if they will not believe in what the church has always taught.

I agree. It may take many years, but people who lack the faith will drift away, and the remaining faithful will lead the Church back to the traditional Catholic faith.

"...happened so quickly and with seemingly so little opposition."

In no small part: It was good old fashioned Catholic obedience. "The Pope wants this. So we will receive it." And we had had a pretty darned good run of popes for quite a stretch there.

Thomas J. Kearns' view from Queens, NY, USA covers a lot of ground, including an area particularly relevant to Athelstane's comment:

I have this little analogy: the Liturgy of All Time has roots in the Old Testament. Like the Mustard seed, it grew into a great and beautiful tree, one which the birds of the air knew, and in which they could find shelter. In 1969 that tree was cut down, and mounted on its stump was a potted plant – and we were told that this potted plant was an organic growth from the old tree. Like good Catholics we bobbed our heads, saying ‘This must be so, it is from our Priests, Arch Bishops and Cardinals!’

It didn’t occur to us that Luther was a Priest, and Cranmer an Arch Bishop.

And we bought into the heresy of false obedience.

The laity did not have any choice in the matter; and neither did the individual priests. The bishops did have a choice. But I don't know whether all of them knew they had a choice. It was before the Internet. The bishop of Campos, Brazil, continued with the Latin Mass and Sacraments, exclusively. In his diocese, the faith, the Sacraments, and vocations flourished. He retired about 10-15 years ago. They continued for a while with his precedent...but I do not know if they still do.

Recommended reading: Death of a Catholic Parish, or the book by the same title.

This is true, but the clergy embraced the changes and were ahead of the laity. To some of the laity it seemed like a trahison des clercs.

Did you live through the 1960s? The West was going through a cultural change that started from—opinions differ on how far to go back. People were sick of the old ways—the old oppressive ways. People really did say "Don't trust anyone over 30." "Avant-garde" meant something positive. It was, as Guardini wrote, "The End of the Modern World." (1956). All this was already old news. Even the Church believed it. The clue to understanding this is that there was great impatience, not love; it was the idea that if we "got rid of" what was holding us back, better things would automatically happen. Original Sin was dismissed. Nobody wanted to look at reality. As Jacques Barzun wrote,

"Feelings are stronger than facts when it is a question of bringing a civilization to its close. The particular urge that demands renewal at any cost has behind it the tremendous force of unreasoning hate against what seems false and confining. "I feel something within me," said the Chieftain from the North, "that compels me to burn Rome."

As to the Old Mass returning, it will be fast or slow. It would have been much faster if John Paul II and Benedict XVI had actually celebrated the Old Mass. It will be a revolution (counter-revolution? conversion? miracle?) if the Pope of Surprises does. It remains true that God writes straight with crooked lines.

You are correct, as the return of tradition will go quicker if a Pope would celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass in St. Peter's Basilica.

Fr. Hesse said that a sentence was censored from the Church-approved 1846 AD La Salette France Apparitions, that said "there will be two moth-eaten popes." (in French of course). I don't think that applies to Francis because he is an anti-pope. I think that applies to John XXIII, who was reportedly a Freemason and Paul VI, who reportedly had a secret homosexuality issue. Both were instrumental in the disastrous results of the Vatican II Council.

Worm-eaten (ver moulu). I also believe they were J23 and P6.

The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is still celebrated in the Byzantine Catholic Church -- as well as by our (sadly) separated brethren of the Orthodox Church. I was blessed for a period of time to serve at the Holy Table in the Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church, and it was there that our Lord really gave me a deepening sense of what is described in St. John the Divine's Book of Revelation, chapters 4 and 5.

May liturgical renewal in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church be part of the movement toward reunion among Christians -- not a stew of Christianity for the 21st Century that stirs in bits and pieces of ideas from the various Christian sects to form a mixture of truth and error (which still comes out as diluted error), but a return, from error and aloofness, to the Harbour of Truth, for which Pope Pius XI -- and most especially our Lord Jesus Christ -- so ardently prayed.

Now we know that with the "chi-Ness pandemic" Our Lord is telling us that we must return to the full Traditions without any conditions.

Great article Steve and thanks again to Bishop Schneider.....but why your hand in your pocket in the photo??

As I said in a previous comment (which is old, and bears re-posting):

For those who have been asking about why the bishop (who favors the TLM) does not just advocate a return to it, here is the answer he gave to someone who asked the same question at the above-cited talk:

Q: It would seem that all of your ten points, your suggestions for renewal of the liturgy, could possibly be accomplished by simply returning to the old form of the Mass. (Applause)

BAS: (Smiling) Vox Populi, Vox Dei. (Laughter) You understood? The voice of the people is the voice of God. And you...represent the people. And even you are a lady, even more, and you also are a member of the common priesthood. And so you spoke very well. Well, it is...I'm agreeing...but we also have to consider the reality in which we live. In the vast majority of the parishes the people don't know the ancient liturgy, and so for many of them, they are not psychologically...not ready to change completely to that older liturgy. We have to consider the psychological aspect of that. And therefore I suggested to introduce gradually these...ten points which are expressed in the ancient liturgy and which corresponds to the idea of the Second Vatican Council.

In his recent interview with Rorate Caeli, Bishop Schneider also said:

"We must always pray that God provides His Church with traditional-minded Popes."

He has told me personally that we must pray for this. And so we shall.

He fails to understand that most Catholics have left the Novus Ordo Mass. Most European countries are averaging 3-5% Sunday Mass attendance. So for the sake of the 3% who are not psychologically ready, we shouldn't go back. What about the 97%? They might be brought back by a change. Even here in the U.S., Mass attendance is 23-25%. 75% of Catholics are gone. If that is not an emergency that requires a new Missal and the TLM right now, then I don't know what is. It is an utter catastrophe. He needs to grasp the magnitude of the complete and total failure of the liturgy in the Church right now. That is the reality in which we live. 3% Mass attendance in Catholic countries. 3%!

He grasps it.

What if the liturgy was just de-renewed?

What about the early churches in India, Iran and Iraq - before they were conquered by Islam? Certainly they did not face East. Did they face West? I don't think so. I think the business about churches facing East is an excuse for the priest facing away from the congregation. But we don't need an excuse. It appears to me that churches were sensibly built according to the land available and its particulars. In the early centuries, the priest faced away from the people because he was facing the tabernacle and doing things at the altar.

It is no excuse, the priest is leading the people in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass towards Jesus. As Pope Benedict stated in the past, and I am paraphrasing, we have become a closed circle with the priest facing the parishioners, closed in on ourselves. He stated this in his book, Spirit of the Liturgy, when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger. We worry about ourselves more than Jesus Christ today during the Mass.

I agree, Andrew, the priest should face Jesus in the tabernacle...and we should follow him. I just have seen no architectural evidence for the idea that Catholics formerly faced East to worship during Mass, e.g. that churches were built with the altar on the East side of the building. Many historic basilicas and cathedrals have multiple altars that face different directions. If facing East was important, they would not have been built that way. In the first three centuries, when Christianity was illegal, they often worshiped in the catacombs, and they would have faced the direction which allowed adequate space for the congregation. Or hidden in the larger homes of Believers, they would have faced the direction which the home's architecture allowed. Both old and new churches are constructed according to the lay of the land, with the altar towards the direction that works for construction. I think the priests' position, before Vatican II, was geared to his facing the altar and the tabernacle... and not about facing East. I am concerned that facing a particular direction to worship is borrowed from Islam. I have never read a saint or a father or doctor of the church who so much as mentioned facing East to worship.

Churches used to be oriented (no pun) towards the east.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...

I am not arguing against your point of view with regards to facing East, as the Catholic Church in my town faces North. I was only refuting the point that this was an excuse to have the priest face away from the parishioners. Having the priests face the congregation is an invention, which focused more on unifying with the world than with Jesus Christ.