Are Some People Afraid Of The Latin Mass?

[Timothysis]

When one hears this right after the presentation of the bread and wine “of human hands” he may not quite get the connection to the types of sacrifices of the Old Testament that were supposed to be most pleasing to God.

Matt1618 does try awfully hard, I’ll give him that much.

Sorry, but I don’t quite get your point.

 

[tobinatorstark]

I think some people are afraid of the Latin Mass. I have the highest regards for the TLM. I haven’t been to a TLM although I want. I have started studying about the TLM. I wish my parish would offer a Latin Mass once in a while. The Latin Mass worked for a long time. At the time Latin was universal. That I feel was a decision that Church made right by having Mass said in Latin. From what I gather from Vatican II is that Latin is no longer a universal language and many languages did derive words from Latin, is that with the number of English and Spanish speaking people and others of different languages they felt it to be appropriate to celebrate Mass in their own native tongue. It is fine that it is in our native tongue, but the problem lies on the barrier of translation between Latin and English or Latin and Spanish or Latin and whatever. Thus loses the universal language said for Mass. I do have a Marian Children’s Missal and other resource that would help me get through a Latin Mass. I think some just a plain lazy and don’t want to learn the Latin. I on the other hand want to learn it and feel comfortable with it. By having a Latin Mass every now and then would be beneficial and enhance spiritual growth. I don’t see a total revert to Latin though.

 

[Dauphin]

Off the top of my head I recall that the placement of the Mystery of Faith in the latin missal holds a confused understanding. While there are copious commentaries trying to “explain” exactly what it means they all lack any specific, particular definition. What exactly does “Mystery of Faith” mean and why is it particular only to the consecration of the wine?

The Eucharist itself is the mystery of faith, a meaning which is obscured in the Pauline Mass. When the priest says “let us proclaim the mystery of faith”, and the people answer “Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again”, they’re not proclaiming the mystery of faith.

Also, the “spotless oblation” as offered is confused, as most would consider it “spotless” after the consecration, not before.

Are you referring to the “Holy and unspotted sacrifices” offered in the Te Igitur? If so, it’s simply an allusion to the sacrifice which is about to happen.

Lastly, I have read many times how the latin Roman Canon seems to be a hodge-podge of prayers and petitions, lacking a certain cohesiveness.

Take it up with St. Gregory the Great. This is the Latin tradition. Take it or leave it.

 

[Dauphin]

On the subject of why the Eucharist is called “The Mystery of Faith”, Pope Paul’s Encyclical Mysterium Fidei might be helpful:

newadvent.org/library/docs_pa06mf.htm

"The Eucharist is a very great mystery. In fact, properly speaking, and to use the words of the sacred liturgy, it is the Mystery of Faith. “Indeed, in it alone,” as Leo XIII our predecessor of happy memory very wisely remarked, “are contained, in a remarkable richness and variety of miracles, all supernatural realities.”

 

[Cat]

I’ll admit that I’m very wary of “experiences.”

I grew up evangelical Protestant, and was an enthusiastic and active member of several evangelical Protestant churches for the first 47 years of my life. Evangelical worship services are all about “experiencing God.” (In fact, about 15 years ago, this was an extremely popular book in evangelical circles.) As a pianist, I was part of planning and presenting “worship experiences” to the congregation. Uggh. I shudder to recall what we did to people’s emotions in the name of winning them to Jesus Christ.

I realize that the Catholic Mass is not an “experience” but a sacrifice. However, the Latin and ceremonies and symbols and all the rest in the TLM would definitely be an “experience” for someone like me. Believe it or not, I am still reeling from all the “tradition” and “symbolism” and “spectacle” in the OF! To me, as an ex-evangelical Protestant, this way of “doing church” seems remarkably ancient and steeped in tradition and ritual. I not sure if I could handle a TLM at this point!

I think it’s best for me at this time that I stay away from the more theatrical TLM Catholic Masses, and stick with a very simple OF that I don’t have to follow in a program to understand and pray through. Simple and basic Catholicism is best at this point. You don’t feed a baby steak and potatoes until he is older.

I do beg of all of you to please not attack. The OP asked, and I answered as honestly as possible. I’m not saying that a TLM is out forever for me. But I think it would be good for me to grow more as a Catholic and become well-grounded in the Church before trying out something “new,” which I realize is actually something “old.” But it’s new to me.

 

[jakobsprenger]

I guess I may fall into this category. I am a recent revert to my Faith after 21 years away and have returned to the TLM in September last year. At 42, I never knew the TLM; I grew up wholly and solely with NO Masses. Ours was one of the first parishes in Australia to have altar girls, and nuns plucking guitars and banging bongoes during the mid-late 70’s. Anyway after much soul-searching and making the initial decision to return to the Mass, I turned up to a TLM. As someone previously stated the unknown can be scary, as it was for me. I had my Dad’s old (1930’s) missal and barely followed things. But the sense of reverence and solemnity really hit home. That and the welcome I received. weepixie71’s post #16 really resonated with me.

Yes a part Catholicism is about the Mass and many folk here have commented on the minutae of both EF and OF, but for me the faith is also about the sense of community in the Holy Spirit. And I had never in my 42 years came across its like till I attended the TLM I now attend weekly, even though it’s a half hour drive across town. Everyone is really helpful and I’m not afraid to ask questions; the FSSP priest even gave me an appointment for a Mass “tutorial”. So my advice to anybody reading this thread and contemplating attending Traditional Latin Mass is to go ahead and do so. You may just be surprised. For myself, I’m only a few steps into a whole new world and am looking forward to the rest of the journey.

Up until I began attending the TLM, the only Latin I knew was from High School and those little orange booklets following a chap named Caecilius and his family, and that was nearly 25 years ago!

The second post (Yes I posted the video from a local current affairs show) in this thread explains how one NO Catholic parish in Brisbane, Australia has taken things a tad too far. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=301422 I’m well aware that this is only one parish among many here in Oz, but when I compare the Mass I attend now to this; I am truly, truly grateful the Holy Spirit led me to where I currently am.

God Bless.

 

[AJV]

What a fascinating comment. According to this, the ancient Anaphora of St. Hippolytus (indeed, any Anaphora with an Epiclesis), which is actually derived from an earlier Eastern prayer, implies the doctrine of transubstantiation. That is, some of the earliest Christians believed a doctrine which the Catholic Church would only formally define centuries later.

You’d think Protestants would have a hard time admitting that!

Actually, the explicit Epiclesis for the conversion of the elements was added to the Anaphora by the commission (as were several other things). The ‘original’ Anaphora’s epiclesis only says “Et petimus ut mittas Spiritum tuum Sanctum in oblationem sancta Ecclesiae” (and we beseech you to send your Holy Spirit on the offering of the holy Church) and it is even debated whether this is a later insertion

 

[AJV]

Many of the traditional Roman prayers have been excised from the Mass because of their unambiguous reference to the Mass as a sacrifice offered for the remission of the sins of the living and the dead (a doctrine entirely absent from the Pauline Mass). Compare the offertory in the Traditional Latin Mass to that in the Pauline Mass. Also, although it is possible to have a Mass with many references to the sacrifice, it is equally possible (Through the use of Eucharistic Prayer II, which is the most frequently used one around here) to have one without any unambiguous references to the Mass itself as a true sacrifice, distinguished from merely a “sacrifice of praise” (which is why the NeoCats, who deny that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice, agree to say the Orate Fratres).

But shouldn’t the question be: was it removed because of the “unambiguous reference to the Mass as a sacrifice offered for the remission of the sins of the living and the dead” or because the entire Offertory was regarded as an anticipatory and duplicatory acccretion? Several books form that time period, especially ones of those sitting on the commissions, criticize the Offertory on those grounds, not on its doctrinal content. That was also what one of the declaratios submitted to the Council Fathers said “…the prayers which accompany the offering should be so revised so as to better correspond with the meaning of an offering of gifts to be consecrated later…” (Acta Synodalia, submitted 8 Oct 1963)

 

[Grace_Angel]

Opinions ?

                           My own observance has been that alot of people believe we can never fully return to it.

No I am not afraid of the Latin Mass but I would sooner participate in one well said NO Mass where I can fully participate than a Latin Mass where I am a spectator.
Further I would suggest that Jesus did not say a “Latin” Mass at the cenacle. Jesus spoke the language he and his apostles spoke. I think the greatest gift of the Second Vatican Council was the Mass in the vernacular. Indeed the Mass in the Vernacular is the reversal of Babel. Babel Confused the Mass in whatever language it si said/offered is said/offered by the Holy Spirit and He speaks one language…Love, Sacrifice, Jesus.
GraceAngel.

 

[ProVobis]

Also, the “spotless oblation” as offered is confused, as most would consider it “spotless” after the consecration, not before.

I think you need to study your Bible a little bit. Reread the Cain and Abel passage again.

 

[ProVobis]

I think the greatest gift of the Second Vatican Council was the Mass in the vernacular.

I believe Vatican II voted to retain Latin in the liturgy.

Indeed the Mass in the Vernacular is the reversal of Babel.

Huh?

 

[peregrinus_WA]

I am not afraid of it because I regularly go to it at my parish.

As I have said in the past, it is not the EF Mass I do not care for, it is some of the people associated with it that I could do without.

 

[bkovacs]

Opinions ?

                           My own observance has been that alot of people believe we can never fully return to it.

That’s because the majority of Bishops in the West and the clergy under them. As well as the church ruling laity in high positions are deathly afraid of it!. The only ones who aren’t are possibly the new seminarians, nuns, monks, etc. And those laymen/women who are into Catholic tradiiton.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

yeah thats the attitude I see as well, mainly from the baby boomers who talk about the “dark ages”. They make it seem like people were dragged in chains to church. My RCIA experience was like that from one person who assisted with it. When I suggested that people should not be allowed to go into the sanctuary when they felt like it, she got all huffy and puffy with me.
She was also one of those that looks at me like I am a demon because I go to the traditional latin mass.

I think some people fear what we represent to them, and that is the Catholic Church as it was 50 yrs ago. They prefer their ultra-liberal parishes where Hell and Purgatory are never mentioned, most people never go to confession, altar girls and female eucharistic ministers are the norm, and no one want’s to go back to the “Bad Old Days” because they’ve already spent alot of time apologizing for that.

 

[bkovacs]

To me, it’s all about relevance. The Latin Mass just doesn’t connect. Sorry.

Blame that on the liberal clergy for taking away the “beautiful” traditions of the Catholic Church you never knew. Our Catholic identity!. Their to blame!!. Especially the Bishops for not putting their foot down to defend tradition!. And giving into secularism and pleasing the protestants. Not Orthodoxy!. Time to take a blood pressure pill!.

 

[CradleCath]

I am so very tired of hearing this. Have you ever read Eucharistic Prayer III, which is the prayer that is used at my church at least 95% of the time?

You are blessed indeed. E.P. III is lovely. However, I have heard neither that nor EP. I in years. In my medium sized city, our Churches use EPII & that’s it. The message has become clear through the last 40+ year…do not ask for anything else.

The Roman Canon was the only Eucharistic Prayer that was said in the Latin Rite from the time of the Counter-Revolution until Vat.II. It’s rich in Catholic history & calls on our Jewish heritage. It also mentions, by name (as if they really mattered) our earliest Popes & martyrs, the apostles, Mary, etc. to intercede for us. It does not rewrite Christ’s words as quoted in Matthew. “This is My Blood of the New Covenant, which shall be shed for MANY”.

Reading the Roman Canon (not ICEL’s translation) bears resemblance to reading the history of the Catholic Church.

The Second Eucharistic Prayer (one of the new ones introduced by Pope Paul VI after Vatican II) . It is the shortest of ALL of the many EP’s &, around here at least, it’s the “default” Eucharistic Prayer. On the other hand, I can go to any EF. Mass, anywhere, & I will hear the Roman Canon.

 

[ElizabethPH]

When I asked about a Latin Mass in the area amongst a group of women one of them said why don’t you just go to the Spanish Mass. I am assuming she meant you can’t understand that any more then Latin. It was strange, I didn’t respond and just kind of gave her a look like ‘What’???’ she just smiled at me. I guess it was a joke.

 

[mullenpm]

Dauphin, I disagree with you. I grew up with the Latin Mass, with the Priest facing away from the congregation.

I used my missal at Mass and followed with the English side of the missal.

With the Latin Mass there was no participation with the Priest. It was a Priest’s Mass. He did his thing, we sat in the pew and followed with the missal.

Now, the Priest faces us; we see what he is doing; we participate.:yup:

I don’t object to the Latin, in fact, I love it but I want to see the Priest. The Pauline Mass is beautiful when done as on EWTN’s Daily Mass - part English and part Latin.

 

[malphono]

When I asked about a Latin Mass in the area amongst a group of women one of them said why don’t you just go to the Spanish Mass. I am assuming she meant you can’t understand that any more then Latin. It was strange, I didn’t respond and just kind of gave her a look like ‘What’???’ she just smiled at me. I guess it was a joke.

That’s actually kind of funny … As for it having been a joke, I wonder Kind of reminds me of a story from 40+ years ago (in the brief 1965-Missal period when the liturgical “oddities” started) where a woman was frantically searching for a church that had the traditional Mass. A friend who apparently didn’t get it, suggested she go to the Italian-speaking parish where she went so that she “didn’t have to understand the Mass” … I wonder if the friend ever did get it

 

[hamburglar]

I know a lot of people are afraid of it because they don’t understand it. I can’t tell you how many times people have commented on how I go to the TLM that it is “Pre-Vatican”