I am curious whether the RotR finally gets pace now in my parish.

Our pastor is a fervent promotor of liturgical precision and traditional devotion, he introduced over the years:
- a home-made (DoM!) traditional hymnal,
- B-XVI altar arrangement,
- lifting the automatic connection lector=EMC,
- rosary before Sunday mass,
- a 'one-person communion rail' (aka kneeler),
- good vestments and regular use of incense,
- male adult altar servers (in addition to our seven [3m/4f] juvenile ones!),
- one anticipated (NO-) mass per month with gregorian chant
etc.
Since 2007 our parish hosts a small regional TLM group, which has one weekday (low) mass; this was made public in 2012 or so, when our priest was installed as pastor.
There has never been any attempt for 'mutual enrichment' from either side...
- TLM group remains much on their own, pastor wanted to keep it like that 'for pastoral reasons', not taking the risk that people (like me!) stir up dust;
- pastor said he 'dreamed of' a high TLM sung by the local schola but never came with a plan (now it's too late);
- 'Latin' NO mass on Saturdays never had a Latin canon and was always speckled with varying vernacular elements 'for pastoral reasons', to the dismay of our schola leader: 'those who want full Latin go to the TLM anyway' (hey, not me!);
- abolishing the use of choral vestments by the schola & banning it from the sanctuary, 'returning' to the loft (after some negative remarks, ignoring the positive ones), official reason: not so fit for the NO;
- that mass was always with sparse use of incense (if any) and with only one altar server (no torch bearers) to 'keep it less solemn' than the Synday mass.
(@experts: Isn't this a misguided interpretation of "gradual solemnity"?)

Then there is the issue of using (or abusing?) corona restrictions for RotR improvements:
- communion distribution by the celebrant only → I bet EMCs won't return
- altar servers 'hand-selected' by pastor, rather than scheduled in self-management → phasing out altar girls by just not recruting new ones ('trads' won't anyway, not-so-churchy parents of 1st communicants won't know that all used to be invited to join)
- lector cannot 'walk up' from the pews → readings by an adult altar server → former lectors might never reappear again
- no choir → no singers complaining about incense → full use of incense,
- still (!) no congregational singing → DoM sings the propers (even when there is a solist or choir group for the ordinary & communion motet) → people might not complain to the pastor that they miss the 'traditional' (hum... ya know) hymns although they do so → ???

I am curious whether the RotR finally gets pace now in my parish.

@MarkB

This is false. The Novus Ordo is well within the parameters and guidelines for liturgical reform decreed by Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Really, the N.O. goes far beyond SC! We had excerpts from SC published here, pointing out all the places the N.O. goes beyond what was asked for (3 and 2 year cycles! multiple prayers made up in cafes in Rome). I would list more but as I have not been to the N.O mass for around 25 years, it really is not any of my business.

I hate when EMHCs come to the choir loft.
Why can't the choir just receive immediately following Mass, as is often the case at the TLM, anyway?

Elmar,

Girl altar boys are always a bad thing. Thank God, that your pastor is doing (even accidentally) a good thing.

Trent Session XXII Chapter VI

The sacred and holy synod would wish indeed that, at each mass, the faithful who are present should communicate, not only in spiritual desire, but also by the sacramental participation of the Eucharist, ...

If Pius V committee had not agreed they would not have included rubrics for the faithful present to receive immediately after the celebrant. (Ritus servandus X. 6.)

trentonjconn,
The thing that worries me most is that pastor's motives are unclear. I'm no way sure that he is actually phasing out altar girls, just a few months ago he told me how proud we could be as parents of two dedicated servers, my elder daughter also serving as lector when she's on duty. So maybe it's really just his own odd idea of 'vacation time', whilst we are mostly home due to covid restrictions - and I'm enjoying restarting of my two choirs, mid July!!!

I wholeheartedly agree with your statement on "a rather unfortunate and erroneous interpretation of active participation"; but taking the opportunity of the covid restrictions for definitely 'dropping' the superfluous EMHCs and pseudo-clerically behaving lectors without a word of explanation why this is a necessary move, that's what alienates village families by the dozens, whose ancestors resisted reformation, built our marvelous church in the 19th century and have kept it intact by their donations ever since. There are people who say, their parish ceased to be theirs with this pastor (which I believe is unfair btw.)
We had this dropping of the ageing youth pop choir - before covid! - which possibly saved more parish money than it cost in losing donations...

I'm not afraid for the faith of my own children in case this is the end of their altar serving, but I lament the missed opportunities for evangelization of others. We had several families who got again in contact with their maybe-forgotten faith by the mere fact that their son or daughter was eager to become an altar server after first communion. We would have missed out half of these with an altar-boys-only policy, whatever its possible theological soundness.

No doubt any change will cause some people to shout, but DW:TM shows some changes which work within GIRM (as modified by the 'rubrical directory). More options, unfortunately, but the prayers at the foot of the altar can be used, and a Last Gospel. And, optionally, a restoration of all those prayers said in a low voice at the offertory in place of the 'table prayer'.

Elmar - it is essential, but getting liturgy carried out within the rubrics is distinct from changing the rubrics. I see RotR as about structural defects, some of which I have mentioned above. (And I believe there were structural defects in 1962, some corrected in 1965 and 1967)

On Saturday, our diocese (Knoxville) moved the remains of [SoG] Fr. Patrick Ryan from the cemetery to our Basilica, the original building of which he had once been pastor.
Both the bishop at that Mass, and our rector at Sunday's, mentioned why he is a model and martyr of charity - staying and ministering, even door to door, taking care of the physical and spiritual needs of those terrified and made ill during the yellow fever epidemic.
They drew parallels to that being a time of epidemic, and this being a time of "pandemic."
Our bishop celebrated Mass in the Novus Ordo. Not irreverent, but still lacking what we normally see at a TLM.
Our rector mentioned that 8 years after Fr. Ryan's death, the bishop celebrated a Solemn High Requiem Mass for Fr. Ryan, and they moved him, as a hero, with great ceremony, from the attached church cemetery to the cemetery that was purchased a few miles away. He was the first to be buried there, and the positioning in that cemetery is called Priest's Hill.
He mentioned Fr. Ryan's vestments upon exhumation - those of a priest who would even now be offering a TLM.

However, the parallels in my mind were different from the parallels they tried to draw (including the 2 overly-pushy suggestions by the bishop that everyone "do their part" and get "vaccinated.")
They both failed to mention how not parallel were the responses of current priests and bishops... in that staying and helping meant (very-likely) death, but the Sacraments and spiritual well-being of the people was more important than the physical well-being of a priest or other religious.
In this relatively short period of time, we went from bishops who could celebrate Solemn High Masses to our bishop who doesn't even know the Latin Mass, much less seemingly support it, outside of keeping people away from the SSPX.
That Father's vestments match because he was offering the Ancient Mass, currently under later attack, which this brave priest was able to celebrate openly, freely, for the benefit of all.

Yes, our priests celebrate their NO Masses with much greater solemnity and obvious reverence, according to a RotR, than many of the priests in the very-near-by parishes, because they love the TLM Mass.
They learned the TLM because, upon discovery, they realized there was so much more they should be offering with and for us to God in their priestly duties.

Some bishops obstinately refuse to even learn the TLM.
Why would someone simply refuse and disdain such? That isn't keeping with any hermeneutic of continuity, of carrying on(ward) any faith traditions.

It's sad.
I watched, sang, participated during Saturday's Mass, and I was sad.

Supporting or acknowledging V-2 doesn't mean wholeheartedly accepting after as equal to that which came before.
This situation is so very sad.

Doing so at a parish that consistently offers the TLM would be nothing more than a very pleasant surprise.

There is a lengthy explanation before each weekly TLM.
I'd be interested to know what sort of explanation would be made before a NO Mass.

IF they need no explanation, how do you account for the fact that, of those who attend regularly, no one can recall hearing a sermon on the need to be in the state of grace in order to receive Holy Communion, or what the Holy Eucharist is?

Excuse me. I didn't realize how much in the middle of a thought that post was.

Since things don't need much explanation, being in the vernacular, why do 2/3 of those who attend Mass regularly not accept or understand the teaching of the Church on all sorts of subjects? If things don't need much explanation, why is Holy Communion, received kneeling, rare?

Elmar,

You side-swiped my questions, but you have touched on important points. [Side-swiped means something like "hit in an oblique fashion"]

The words of popes and cardinals to the effect that the normative way of receiving Holy Communion is kneeling, and on the tongue fall on deaf ears and blind eyes because the text of the Missal (and the rubrics, and the architecture and the music) tell priest and layman that Mass is about us, and that we're all grown up, and that "these or other similar words" are good enough, that there is something rigid, mentally unstable about those who wish to receive Our Lord reverently.

A Mass said on the front of jeep in a warzone is still Mass, it's true, but the warzone is every bit as real.

Of course, priests don't spend much time on the topics I mentioned -- homiletics is the application of Scripture to the lives of the assembled faithful, and no hard teaching can be allowed there because the lectionary has led by example: important difficult uncomfortable texts are "optional".

...and even horses will avoid ransid water

[If you are tempted to post sarcastic talk like this, then you have run out of worthwhile things to say on the topic. Please desist. --admin]