Could Pope Francis ever remove the Latin Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter misstherese
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
An1OrthodoxChristian said:
Are you saying the Pope’s power is vague and ill defined?
Click to expand...
I am not sure to whom you are replying, but I’ll respond in reference to the Original Post and thread title.

Does the Pope have the authority to remove the Latin Mass?
 
Last edited:
LordParrott said:
He could just as Pope Benedict restored it to a position where the local bishop had no authority to suppress it. He has even been heard in private to express sadness that the Latin Mass has grown as fast as it has. I think it is disturbing to hear a pope say this.
Click to expand...
Nothing but gossip.

Please refrain from slandering the Holy Father on the basis of hearsay.
 
Last edited:
Exactly why would the Pope want to remove the Latin Mass? What would the point in doing so be? :confused:
 
Sorry for highjacking the thread, but I always wondered the big issue withe the Latin Mass
I don’t really understand the argument for the Latin Mass. Because once you translate one time, you can’t say that translations “fail to capture the majesty”. You never hear traditionalists saying “Bring back the Greek Mass!”
I do understand that Greek Mass does exist in the Eastern Catholic churches. So technically it was never retired to begin with. But you get the point.
Latin is not some some mystically designated sacred language that people think it is. This is not like Islam, where Arabic has some devine status. It’s no more special, theologically soeaking, than other languages used in liturgies (Russian, Armenian, Serbian).
 
Last edited:
Melodeonist said:
Exactly why would the Pope want to remove the Latin Mass? What would the point in doing so be? :confused:
Click to expand...
None that I can see. It’s the monster in the closet these days for some people. They are convinced that Pope Francis is not their friend and is out to take away everything about the Catholic Church that they love the most.

Such fear mongering is not necessary. Could Pope Francis suppress the EF Latin Mass? Sure. He’s the pope. That’s part of what falls under his authority.
CCC 937 The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, “supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls” (CD 2).
Click to expand...
Will Pope Francis suppress the EF? Doesn’t seem very likely to me.
 
As the FORM of the Mass is a discipline and not doctrine a Pope could do that.
Also because the FORM of the Mass falls under disciplinary law a Pope cannot bind a future Pope on this.
The only things that cannot be changed in a Mass is the consecration and the priest receiving. Everything else can be changed.
 
garegin_asatrya said:
Because once you translate one time, you can’t say that translations “fail to capture the majesty”.
Click to expand...
I’ll bet there are still a lot of people who think that there is POWER in the word “Sabaoth” that just can’t be replicated in a translation. Even the Latin Mass left it alone.
 
garegin_asatrya said:
Sorry for highjacking the thread, but I always wondered the big issue withe the Latin Mass
I don’t really understand the argument for the Latin Mass. Because once you translate one time, you can’t say that translations “fail to capture the majesty”. You never hear traditionalists saying “Bring back the Greek Mass!”
I do understand that Greek Mass does exist in the Eastern Catholic churches. So technically it was never retired to begin with. But you get the point.
Latin is not some some mystically designated sacred language that people think it is. This is not like Islam, where Arabic has some devine status. It’s no more special, theologically soeaking, than other languages used in liturgies (Russian, Armenian, Serbian).
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for others, so I’m just going to speak for myself.

While I don’t attend the Latin Mass every week, I love the Solemn High Mass.

My Reasons:
  • I prefer meditative prayer vs charismatic prayer
  • I find that when the mass is in Latin, I’m less distracted and can focus on prayer. I’m easily distracted by silly things, like voice infection, etc.
  • When attending a Solemn High Mass, there is Gregorian Chant almost the whole time… it feels like I’m in a medieval monastery, which I find very solemn, beautiful, peaceful, & meditative; which makes it very easy for me to pray.
  • With the Latin Mass, the priests are dedicated to preserving it, so they perform the rituals with the utmost seriousness and faithfulness to the rubrics and rituals.
  • When I was in college, I was my fraternity’s master of ceremonies for our initiation ritual. I always made sure ever single attention to detail was followed and made sure our performance of the ritual was the best. I was that guy that told everyone that symbolism is everywhere, even how we tie our robes. So I love ritual.
  • I sometimes dream of what it would have been like to be a cannon at a great cathedral during the middle ages… to me that would have been so awesome, to be a monk or cannon with my hood up and chanting the mass and liturgy of the hours all day, every day.
  • Also, the music… I love classical music, it’s what I listen to at home or in the car. To me, the most beautiful music ever written in all of Western Civilization was written in Latin for use in the Church. When I hear “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus. Dóminus Deus Sábaoth…” I get goosebumps!
And a Pontifical Mass is ever better, where you get to see the Bishop vest and perform the prayers… you get to see all the different vestments used in all their splendor… it’s one of the most beautiful 2.5-3 hours you can ever spend in Church.

So for me, it connects me to centuries past, and transports me back in time. That’s why Iove attending the Latin Solemn High Mass (but again, I don’t attend it often… only when they have one for most holy days and special Masses at the Cathedral Basilica of Saints Peter & Paul in Philadelphia.

Its no different than visiting an ancient Church to admire the architecture and art.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
Indeed. Becuase our culture places so much emphasis on “feelings”.
 
No. He could probably try if he wanted (I doubt he does) but it wouldn’t work.
 
Those people have a decent arguement. But as I said, once you translate it once, you can’t bring up arguments that only Jews and Muslims would (the sacred language argument)
Interesting tidbit. Even though the Armenian liturgy does retain a lot of Hebrew, Syriac, and Greek words, it doesn’t Sabaoth. If Armenians have managed to be “majestic” enough without it for 1700 years, so can people in Wisconsin.
 
Last edited:
thistle said:
As the FORM of the Mass is a discipline and not doctrine a Pope could do that.

Also because the FORM of the Mass falls under disciplinary law a Pope cannot bind a future Pope on this.

The only things that cannot be changed in a Mass is the consecration and the priest receiving. Everything else can be changed.
Click to expand...
Maybe but I’m sure there would be an outrage if all the readings were removed.

Okay, not an outrage maybe, but certainly questions.

Edited to state that the Assyrian Church of the East and the Chaldean Catholic Church do not have the words of consecration as the West does (unless they changed it).
 
Last edited:
I think the answer is YES, as the FORM of the Mass is “PRACTICE”, not Doctrine

HOWEVER, some PARTS of the Mass are Sacred TRADITION and changeable
 
Actually, according to the Council of Trent, no pastor of the Church can make changes so to form a new rite. (See Session 7, Canon 13)

Pope Pius XII through Mediator Dei stated that only the Pope can make changes to the liturgy. (1947)

So we are left with the more relevant question IMO of whether the bishop on his own can suppress an accepted and approved rite of the Church.
 
You aren’t the only one on this thread who believes the Latin Mass is the same rite, just not in English. I recommend a side by side comparison of the two, particularly from the Offeratory onward.

I’d also recommend reading about who wrote the new Mass and how they did so. It is authored by some really stand out guys with excellent motives, which is the principal reason why i prefer the old Mass. The language itself is pretty far down on my list.
 
garegin_asatrya said:
Sorry for highjacking the thread, but I always wondered the big issue withe the Latin Mass
I don’t really understand the argument for the Latin Mass. Because once you translate one time, you can’t say that translations “fail to capture the majesty”. You never hear traditionalists saying “Bring back the Greek Mass!”
I do understand that Greek Mass does exist in the Eastern Catholic churches. So technically it was never retired to begin with. But you get the point.
Latin is not some some mystically designated sacred language that people think it is. This is not like Islam, where Arabic has some devine status. It’s no more special, theologically soeaking, than other languages used in liturgies (Russian, Armenian, Serbian).
Click to expand...
It’s not only about the Latin language, but rather the spirituality of the EF. Most traditional Catholics don’t actually believe that the Latin language has any mystical power, although opponents of the EF (why they even exist I’m not sure) like to make it seem that way. We are well aware that the Mass was not originally in Latin, and that Jesus would have performed the original consecration in Aramaic, but nevertheless Latin has many benefits, not least of which is the fact that the majority of Cathlolic history has been written in that language. Browse the articles on sanctamissa.org for a far better explanation than I could ever give.

As for the original question, the Pope can cetainly suppress it if he chose to, but I doubt he would. While Pope Francis may not prefer the EF himself, and while he has made some statements that make it seem as if he doesn’t understand its appeal, I have seen no indication that he plans to take it away. Many traditionalists don’t like to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt, but he seems to be a compassionate individual who would not want to alienate millions of the faithful based on a personal preference. Even those unsubstantiated reports, by sources with a clear agenda, that he plans to revoke SP state that he would only do so after reconciling the SSPX and allowing for the continuation of the EF within that ecclesiastical structure. In that case, most traditionalists who live within a reasonable distance of an SSPX chapel would switch their registrations over there. I imagine also that many now former EF parishes would begin offering a largely traditional version of the OF, replete with Latin and chant, and with frequent use of the Canon and the ad orientem posture. Of course, if the Ecclesia Dei indult were not also revoked, then bishops would be able to allow celebrations of the EF even without SP.

Overall, I would say that this is not something to worry about.
 
What is very instructive on this whole issue is, if you read Pius V, say, and Pius X even…they are explicit that they are not innovating. They are maintaining tradition.

Since Paul VI (and to a lesser extent Pius XII, the real founder of modern papal maximalism), there has been the rise of a strange idea in some circles that the Mass is “just discipline” and can be changed at the mere whim of a pope.

You won’t find that idea anywhere in Pius V or Pius X.

Interestingly, Archbishop Bugnini did request that Paul VI explicitly abrogate the Pian Missal. He did not. Some would argue, because he could not. He can introduce a “Novus Ordo.” But banning the tradition of millennia? No. That would be impossible for the man who is the SERVANT of tradition, NOT an absolute monarch who can do whatever he pleases with the liturgy.
 
OraLabora, I wish it was just that simple. My sources are reliable. I wish otherwise. It is not slander when it is fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top