First Tridentine Mass: Mixed Feelings

[milimac]

I’ve been to EF Masses a few times. My experience is a similar mixed opinion to the original post by CFXDrummer.

What I like:

• Silence and reverence before and during Mass: This need not be not exclusive to the EF of course, as has often been my experience at daily NO Masses, but for whatever reason seems to be more inherent to the EF. Perhaps its because this Mass attracts those who are more naturally reserved (?).
• The priest and the people facing the same direction: especially after reading about the rich symbolism involved with everyone facing the “litugical East” as Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in “Spirit of the Liturgy”.
• A strong sense of tradition: Things are done with more attention to the rubrics which conveys that this is something that must be done with great care.
• Kneeling to receive the Eucharist on the tongue: I have heard good symbolism for receiving in the hand and have no problem with that, but receiving on the tongue while kneeling just feels like the must humble and reverent way to me.
• Latin: reflects a continuity with the past and universality (catholic) – it is the language of the Church.

What I am uncomfortable or unsure about (I won’t say I disliked it, but it may take some time to get used to):

• Lack of verbal prayer during the Mass: it doesn’t feel like I’m as fully engaged, but I also see the possibility that this may help me focus on internal participation. But I’m not there yet.
• Sometimes hard to tell what’s going on during the silent times of the Mass; there are visual cues, but they could be easily missed if you’re also trying to follow along in the missal. Some training videos would be very helpful.
• Not sure how to teach this Mass to my 7-yo and 3-yo sons if I brought them with me. They’re not always good at paying attention in the NO Mass as it is, but sometimes they are. Will the silence and Latin make it harder for them to figure out what’s going on?
• Latin: I’ve never been good at learning new languages; would like to know what’s being said as it’s being said.

What I’d really like to see is for some of the elements of the EF to be re-incorporated into the NO, such as kneeling to receive the Eucharist on the tongue from the priest, the priest facing the same direction as the people and leading them in prayer, more attention to following the prayers and rubrics, sacred music, and even a little more Latin since that’s the language of the Church.

 

[DavidPalm]

I’ve often wondered how one person can be more sanctified than another…

Because sanctification is not a one-time event, as Protestantism would have it, but a process of transformation in Christ, as the Catholic Church has it.

In reading all of the responses, I started thinking that perhaps the differences between the EF and the OF is like the difference between the sisters Mary and Martha in the Gospels.

I know I’ve always been more of a Martha person, and I have to really struggle to be still and just listen. The EF is really good for me, in that regard. I’m glad the Church has both (just like both Mary and Martha are saints).

You may be right. But remember, “Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her” (Luke 10:42).

 

[Modelsim]

I think your problem is a misunderstanding of the role of the lay in the liturgy. I suggest reading “Liturgy and Contemplation” by Jacques Maritain.

 

[EnchantedEve]

A few weeks ago I attended my first Tridentine Liturgy, something I’ve been meaning to do for some time now. And while others’ testimonies seem to be nothing but glowing, I find myself of mixed opinion on my experience.

For starters, I’m not totally in bed with anyone liturgy as the “best.” I love the Novus Ordo, I’m in awe of the majesty and mystery of the Divine Liturgies of the Eastern Rites, and I see a great deal of beauty in the Tridentine Liturgy. It’s a mass very rich in symbolism and ritual, which I find incredibly beautiful, and reading the texts of the mass is a very inspiring experience – there are definitely a few things from the old mass that I wish we’d incorporate into the Novus Ordo!

My biggest problem, however, was my own lack of participation. Much of the Eucharistic Prayer is said inaudibly by the priest, and while I can read along in a missal, it isn’t quite the same as hearing the words audibly. And many of the responses are simply sung by the choir of chanters (who are AMAZING), and I find that the majority of my time at mass is spent twiddling my thumbs in the pew. Now, I say that with some sarcasm because of course I was keeping myself attentive to the Mass, but it was still a bit of a difficulty.

All said, I see a great deal of what people love about the Tridentine Liturgy, but I don’t think it’s something I could ever do every week as my regular Mass. I routinely move between my home parish, a nearby Byzantine Catholic church, and now I’m adding the parish in our diocese that celebrates the Latin Mass to my rotation, but I have a hard time imagining experiencing the Tridentine Mass every week.

Just thought I’d offer my thoughts as a first-timer

I think your reactions to the Old Mass will also depend on your attitude toward the purpose of the Mass itself.

If you feel it is the community gathering to commemorate Christ and gather in fellowship with others of like mind, then the New Mass is designed for this purpose. If this is your view, then of course, lack of participation and the priest facing the altar praying to himself would seem silly, if not counter-productive. To such a worshiper, the Old Mass would seem foreign, if not distant, from the intent of the Liturgy.

On the other hand, if you feel the Holy Eucharist is a primarily a sacrificial act of worship directed to God alone, where fellowship with like believers and commemoration are at best secondary attributes of the liturgy, then the idea that the priest does everything facing the people, out loud, and everyone chimes in at various times, would be bizarre and would in fact seem like interruptions to the flow of the Mass itself. To such a worshiper, the fact that they did not hear 50%+ of the Mass out loud, and merely meditated silently the entire time while the liturgy was conducted in a completely foreign language, would be unimportant, for simply being present at such a momentous event would be satisfaction in itself.

Neither of these views is necessarily wrong, however there is nothing to say that a via media between these views is impossible. The Anglo-Catholics, for example, have out loud responses and vernacular liturgy, even though Mass is said facing the altar.

I personally hold the second view, that Mass is primarily an act of worship, and fellowship is secondary. However, that does not mean the Old Mass could not have had minor reforms permitting for more participation, such as the so-called “dialogue Mass” under Pope Pius XII, for example.

 

[EnchantedEve]

Just noticed someone else mentioned the Anglo-Catholics. Sorry!

 

[EnchantedEve]

Hmmm… I’m not so sure about that, given that even if the priest is in a state of mortal sin, the Mass is still valid. The Sacrifice is still offered, and the supreme gift of Holy Communion remains the same.

I can see that one could FEEL in receipt of more graces, more moved and so on, but to say one actually receives more graces?

Validity and effectiveness are two different concepts. The Church, for example, prior to the Second Vatican Council, held that protestant baptisms were valid but did not confer grace. The Sacraments can be conferred more effectively by some than by others.

 

[EnchantedEve]

Okay . . . I understand what you’re saying, and I agree with the sentiment completely.

But people attending my EF actually glare at me when I attempt to sing along with the all-male choir (I’m female). And I’m not that bad–I’ve managed to hold my own in an OF choir, and I know how to pronounce the Latin. The priest even chastised the congregation once in his homily for speaking our responses “too loudly”. The church was only a quarter of the way full (and no one was shouting)–how could we possibly be too loud? /end rant

I love the EF. I really do. But there is a difference. It’s a good difference, a Mary/Martha kind of difference, but it’s different!

That may be because Pope St. Pius X said that women are not to sing in church, unless it is nuns in their convent. Technically, clerics alone were permitted to sing because only to them was given the recitation of the Liturgy. Only for lack of clerics were lay men even supposed to be permitted to sing. Even the singing of vernacular hymns was permitted only before and after Mass, since anything sung within the Mass had to be part of the Liturgy proper, and therefore, proper to clerics. However, I believe that this was eased by Pope Pius XII. I do not recall how the pre-John XXIII rubrics had been revised to change the status of women and lay singing.

Anyhow, this may be why people frown at you for singing.