First Extraordinary Form Mass

[Wannabe_Monk_16]

As far as I am concerned, you are always welcomed to step in. You are one of those posters I most enjoy reading because of the thoughtfulness, knowledge, and experiences you bring to bear on the topics about which you write. Your time in an American seminary, at this particular moment in history, would have also given you a distinctive insight.

We shall team up here since you can only speak for the US of that era and I can say relatively little about the US then.

I am not a sociologist but, like you, I appreciate the great work of CARA and rely on their data and their data analysis.

Factors external to the Church were much more important in terms of what happened concerning the regard of outsiders for the Church at the time of the Council.

One thinks, for instance, of “The Quiet Revolution.” That had nothing to do with the Council or the liturgy. It had to do with a rejection of what was seen as overreach by the Church in life and in society by those wanting to be freed from that hegemony. One can understand what they were about. One can also disagree with various results. One can see it through the paradigm of a needed restructuring. But whatever the approach, you have to be honest about why it happened and what motivated it.

But from a European perspective, I can list A LOT of things that caused disaffection for the Church – and the liturgical reform and renewal would be at the very bottom of a long list.

You, OTJM, would have a better insight than I as to the extent that the Quiet Revolution had a mirror occurrence in the United States. I have never really heard it spoken of, as such, though I recognise the fingerprints of it in phenomenon of the 1960s in the United States that I have read about.

Those who selectively look back to the past with nostalgia for some “golden era that was” and to the present with “a lament for what is” do well to go back and re-read their history books.

When the much loved (today) Saint John Vianney took up his assignment in Ars, the number of people attending Mass was, essentially, zero. In the Italy of the 19th century, when Pope Pius IX died, as they were conveying his body for burial (he did not want to be buried in the Vatican, having been a prisoner in the Vatican) there was an effort to throw his bier into the Tiber. It almost succeeded but for the heroic effort of a few.

It was really God’s grace that brought the Church through – and out of – the 19th century. Having taught Church history, it is an era of which I can say some positive things but they are few, far between, and relate primarily to extraordinary individuals who, today, we can see were ahead of their time. These remarkable individuals suffered tremendously, I might add.

Dear Father,
Thank you for your perspective and especially for your priesthood.

 

[CuriousMike]

Reading some of the recent posts, I feel as though some are taking this far too personally. We’re here to share opinions and make friends. Not crucify one-another over minor details, whatever they may be.

OP, good on you for being open to alternate (and completely valid) forms of the Roman liturgy. Its great to hear you enjoyed the experience. I can understand your opinion that this Mass seems more focused on God than on the people. That can be partly attributed to the demographic in attendance, I think, but also due to the different rubrics of the Mass.

I was not around in the 1960s and 1970s when Vatican 2 and the changes of the Mass took place. However, it doesn’t seem reasonable to blame the exodus in attendance on any one thing.

Perhaps some clergy misinterpreted the intended meaning, and put this into action. Maybe catechists were not teaching the fullness of the faith, nor were adults being reminded in homilies of Church teaching*, and of course the world was already being subverted by various liberal forces. All this could combine to present us with the present situation we are faced with.

• Every so often, the readings of a Sunday or weekday are very important pieces of biblical evidence for our beliefs. Yet the homily is the (unfortunately) common “God loves you, that’s why we’re here today” wishy-wash that teaches you absolutely nothing, and probably bores those who aren’t well-versed in their faith. “Fire and brimstone” need not apply; our Church needs practical and relevant homilies to help us grow in our faith.

 

[babochka]

Not only are there not many priests who actually speak Latin but in many seminaries Latin is not even taught anymore.

I’ve heard that quite a bit here on CAF but in my informal survey of a number of priests ordained in the last 15-20 years, I have not come across a single one who has not studied Latin in seminary. Even my Byzantine Rite priest studied Latin in his Greek-Catholic seminary in Europe.

 

[PJM]

I’ve heard that quite a bit here on CAF but in my informal survey of a number of priests ordained in the last 15-20 years, I have not come across a single one who has not studied Latin in seminary. Even my Byzantine Rite priest studied Latin in his Greek-Catholic seminary in Europe.

AGREED!

It was either JO II or Benedict that made it mandatory! Amen:thumbsup:

 

[Omaestre]

There is a lot of interesting discussion here, I especially appreciate the response from those that lived before, during and thankfully after the council.

If I may lay down my 2 cents as relatively new Catholic. I cannot imagine going back to the Novus Ordo, unfortunately my diocese does not provide the traditional mass every week.

The Vetus Ordo is so utterly transcendent and reverent, that I have not seen anything like it save for the Orthodox liturgy. The Novus Ordo varies from priest to priest in reverence, and can at worst be a social club rather than a religious service.

This individuality does not seem to factor in the traditional mass. Here the priest is broken into a mould of humility where none of his individuality matters. Whether this is due to the added reverence or the ad orientem posture I do not know.

The only thing I could possibly imagine changing about the Extraordinary Form is the language from Latin to the vernacular and that is it.

But this is can be chalked up to aesthetics. I add another aspect in the Vetus Ordo is the emphasis on traditional catechism in the homilies, where the emphasis is for me to conform to the faith and not the other way around. Too few times have I attended a Novus Ordo mass where the homily was not about platitudes.

But this can be hand-waived as a difference in how priests were schooled.

The final and perhaps most important thing that binds me to the Old mass is that it is apostolic, it has deep, deep roots, whereas the Novus Ordo is an invention of the 60’s and is not an organic development of the liturgy. I could step into a time machine and would not feel as alienated by being familiar with the Vetus Ordo. This makes the traditional liturgy truly catholic across borders of culture, nations and time.

 

[peter26]

I cannot imagine going back to the Novus Ordo, unfortunately my diocese does not provide the traditional mass every week.

If you want other more traditional options for the remaining weeks, see if you can find an Ordinariate Use Mass (if you live in Britain, America, Canada or Australia). It is similar in many respects, but in traditional English. Many of the customs and gestures are the same, and ad orientem is common. A Latin Novus Ordo (which may be described as “Solemn Latin” or similar) is also likely to be reverent.

 

[Omaestre]

If you want other more traditional options for the remaining weeks, see if you can find an Ordinariate Use Mass (if you live in Britain, America, Canada or Australia). It is similar in many respects, but in traditional English. Many of the customs and gestures are the same, and ad orientem is common. A Latin Novus Ordo (which may be described as “Solemn Latin” or similar) is also likely to be reverent.

Thanks, but I live in Scandinavia so no luck there. I’d love to attend the Ordinariate/Anglican use at some point though. From what I have read the Sarum rite is exactly what the liturgical reforms should have been.

 

[peter26]

There are some videos online if you haven’t seen one. Its in essence the best of the Book of Common Prayer and the NO 1st translation with Tridentine ceremonial. Not everyone likes it, but I think its beautiful.