How can I get a Latin Mass started at my local Parish?

[Malkin71]

Yes and I see nothing wrong with that, at worst that is adding a one or two semester course. But you added the stipulation that all seminarians be able to celebrate both forms of the Mass.

This would require additional practicum classes because one should not just learn how to celebrate one of the Sacraments in the EF they should be able to get around all the others if necessary.

The issue as I see it, Latin to celebrate the Mass is fine as the OF can be celebrated in that way also, mandating the teaching of the EF, which is a preference and not required to be celebrated by any priest, is a lot more.

Wow, 123 credit hours, I guess I will stop complaining about the 102 credit hours. But I bet if we look at the work we will see the 102 I am required to take is close to the 123 there because for some reason my theologate likes to throw in a bunch of 2 credit classes (something that most seminaries/theologates do not do). I do not understand why becuase as it is, the 2 credit courses seem to have more work involved than the 3 credit courses, just less class room time.

I would also add that mandating the teaching of the EF at seminaries could also be an issue for religious as Summorum Pontificum is directed to the dioceses (bishops) and not religious priests.

I would tend to diasgree with your last statement about the seminaries. Prior to 1970 all Masses in the Latin Rite were the EF Form. Semenaries taught Latin and the EF Form. The OF did not exist. What Mass was said in the Religious orders prior to 1970?

From 1970 on The OF in the native language was the norm. Although the OF can be said in Latin. It is hard to find one. Here in Pittsburgh, I do not know of a Latin OF Mass? Everything is in English or some Slovak, Polish, etc. They are hard to come by.

If the Vatican can madate the change from the EF to the OF in the native Language. Why can’t they mandate that all Semanaries teach Latin and the EF form as well.

Summorum Pontificum says that any Priest can say the EF according to the 1962 Missal without approval.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Then if we follow this explicitly we should not be discussing Summorum Pontificum in this thread as that is a practice of the Church today.

I apologize for this smart remark.

Thank you for the information.

 

[NeelyAnn]

I think you are mistaken, at least as far as this forum is concerned. “Traditional” has never been defined. The T in TLM is for Tridentine, not Traditional. There is at least one poster here that is an old hand that attends the current Mass in Latin. He is a traditional as anyone here.

But you are right in that first the OP needs to determine what is wanted, Latin or the TLM. The first needs only for the priest to agree to say Latin. The second though, has protection through SP, which you quoted. I thing you gave a good formula in your first post. I will add the one caveat that a SP does specify a stable group of people are needed. For this reason, not only does one need more people to define a group, one may also need more time, to define stable.

All the best to the OP. I pray that everyone who desires the TLM is able to satisfy that desire.

You are wrong! The TLM does stand for Tridentine Latin Mass and it is the Mass that is referred to when one speaks of the Traditional Mass. Unless one is uninformed, they do not speak of the NEW Mass - aka Novus Ordo Mass - aka the OF Mass - aka the Pauline Mass, etc. - as the Traditional Mass. It is not the Traditional Mass. Even when done in Latin, it is still the NEW Mass. Period. Whether or not someone who attends the OF in Latin is Traditional minded is irrelevant. That person may be very Traditional, but that does ot make the OF Mass he attends a Traditional Mass. Everyone knows that when someone ask for the Traditonal Mass, they are speaking of the TLM.

As for the availability of the OF in Latin, regardless of the ones ByzCath knows of, they are still a rarity. Of all the OF Masses in the US, I doubt even 10% would be the OF in Latin. Not only does my diocese not have one, my entire state does not have one. So my statement remains. They are a rarity.

As for the whether or not the priest has to say the EF Mass (TLM), he himself may not have to but he is responsible for finding someone who can and will. If he does not, it is to be taken to the bishop. If the bishop does not get it done, then it is to go to the PCED in Rome. They will get it done. I have already heard of cases where it was taken to them and they made sure the EF Mass was made available.

Numerous interviews have already been given from those with the PCED that indicate the Pope’s dismay with those who are not following his orders on this and who are being disobedient. Also established in several interviews since Summorum Pontificum is that the Pope would like this Mass to be made available in every parish, not diocese but parish. Search for news and interviews regarding Summorum Pontificum and you will find countless interviews and articles relating the Pope’s mindset. A number of articles also indicate that the Pope wants Latin taught in the seminaries AND wants priests to be taught BOTH Masses. Funny, how there are many here who like to talk about obedience but that obedience seems to be selective.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I would tend to diasgree with your last statement about the seminaries. Prior to 1970 all Masses in the Latin Rite were the EF Form. Semenaries taught Latin and the EF Form. The OF did not exist. What Mass was said in the Religious orders prior to 1970?

While the OF did not exist, all Masses were not the EF. The Dominicans and Carmelites (just to name two) had (have) their own rites. So in their theologate they were taught their rite.

From 1970 on The OF in the native language was the norm. Although the OF can be said in Latin. It is hard to find one. Here in Pittsburgh, I do not know of a Latin OF Mass? Everything is in English or some Slovak, Polish, etc. They are hard to come by.

When I lived in Houston they were easy to find.

I also know of some who incorporate Latin into the native language OF.

If the Vatican can madate the change from the EF to the OF in the native Language. Why can’t they mandate that all Semanaries teach Latin and the EF form as well.

They can but, again, why force a preference on those who do not have it?

Summorum Pontificum says that any Priest can say the EF according to the 1962 Missal without approval.

The key word here is can, they can do it, they do not have to do it.

 

[reggieM]

I would tend to agree that the term “traditional” is not very accurate or precise as a descriptor. Certainly, the Byzantine Rites are fully traditional and fully Catholic and even the OF liturgy is a product of the Tradition of the Church.

But I think the term Traditional came into use back in the 1970s where the difference between the new and the former usages was so extreme in some cases that there was little question about it. Even just using the term “traditional Catholic” back then was enough to create lots of opposition and conflict.

So, the term has stayed around even though it doesn’t mean what it says and there is no one definition that can be inclusive or exclusive enough to satisfy everybody who uses the term to describe themselves or others.

It’s one of those phrase that should be prefaced with “for lack of a better word” … Traditional Catholic.

The good news for me is that more Catholics in general are able to fit themselves under the general concept of Traditional and many gladly identify themselves with the term. Ideally, sometime in the nearer future the phrase Traditional Catholic will not be necessary or useful any more. Then something like EF or OF or Eastern Rite would be enough to describe different spiritual paths within Catholicism.

 

[NeelyAnn]

This is a gross mischaracterization. Apologetics has nothing to do with the form of the Mass, neither does most of the other sub-forums. That it can be discussed there has nothing to do with it anyways.

It is very annoying that the sole criteria for many of a Traditional Catholic is preference for a certain form of the Mass.

Not a mischaracterization at all. The entire forum is open to everything that has to do with the OF and the modernized way of think in the Church. These are not Traditional Catholic thoughts, or topics. CA created a forum for Traditonal Catholicism so that Traditional Catholicism could be discussed and other forums and threads would not constantly go astray. Traditional Catholicism is more than the liturgy but the liturgy is part of Traditional Catholicism. You are only playing games to try and pretend it is not.

In the ‘world’ of Traditional Catholicism, the NEW Mass in Latin is not considered Traditional.

As for the chastising others. I did not chastise anyone. I simply made a statement. However, I will say that is the pot calling the kettle black because I have seen you, pnewton, and other similar posters chastise people on these forums when ever it works to your advantage.

 

[youngsaint]

The problem you may run into is that most priests now are not trained in the Extraordinary Form and so cannot conduct it. Your bishop would need to find a priest that can perform that particular Mass, and the parish must also be prepared to handle that Mass without affecting the Ordinary Form that may be conducted there.

Thats defiantly not a problem, all the priests at my parish could be put in a museum.

 

[youngsaint]

Just to clear up some misunderstandings, I was Talking about a Traditional Latin Mass

 

[NeelyAnn]

When I lived in Houston they were easy to find.

I also know of some who incorporate Latin into the native language OF.

What do you mean by easy to find? How many parishes in the Houston/Galveston area offer the OF in Latin (I am not referring to having a few words of Latin here and there, such as saying the Canon in Latin)? Which parishes say it?

I, too lived in Houston. My husband is from Houston. We visit Houston regularly. It is a very large diocese with a lot of Churches. I think I have only heard, in passing, of 1 or 2 Churches the say the OF in Latin.

 

[NeelyAnn]

I would tend to agree that the term “traditional” is not very accurate or precise as a descriptor. Certainly, the Byzantine Rites are fully traditional and fully Catholic and even the OF liturgy is a product of the Tradition of the Church.

The Byzantine Rite is not part of the Roman Rite. As for the OF, it is the new Mass put forth by Pope Paul VI. It is less than 50 years old and is not thought of as ‘traditional’. How much of it actually came from the ‘traditions’ of the Church is much debated. Pope Benedict, when Cardinal Ratzinger, has spoken of this issue often. As Pope, he has been working hard to make changes in the Masses he celebrates to make them reflect more closely the traditions of the Church. Over time he has added more and more changes.

 

[LoyalViews]

Write a letter to the Vicar. Then see what he has to say. If he says that he wishes too, then tell him about (as another generous replier said) the Una Voce Priest Training program. We have Una Voce in the closest Mercy convent. They are very successful, and the attendance is high.

 

[pnewton]

You are wrong! The TLM does stand for Tridentine Latin Mass and it is the Mass that is referred to when one speaks of the Traditional Mass. Unless one is uninformed, they do not speak of the NEW Mass - aka Novus Ordo Mass - aka the OF Mass - aka the Pauline Mass, etc. - as the Traditional Mass. It is not the Traditional Mass.

Oh, my goodness. So anyone who does not define this term as you do is uniformed. You back this up with what, an exclaimation point? As the term is not a theolotical term but one of practical use, there is no objective, immovable definition, exclamation point not withstanding. The only definition that should matter would be the one at use here by the administrators and moderators. They have never said this place is for discussion of the Tridentine Mass exclusively.

 

[pnewton]

Just to clear up some misunderstandings, I was Talking about a Traditional Latin Mass

Did you mean the Tridentine Latin Mass? If so, like was said earlier, you can read and follow SP. God’s speed to you on this. Why don’t you let us know how it goes?

 

[Granatelli]

I’ve often wondered what is considered a suitable demand for the EF to be celebrated? I’m sure it differs from parish to parish but is the number 50? 100? 200? 500?

I know one parish here locally that probably draws 300 people at each of 2 Masses on Sunday plus the vigil on Saturday evening, each one fairly full. It also probably draws 50 for the 11:00 AM EF Mass. That EF Mass adds to the load of the single priest and there has been talk of adding a third OF Mass on Sunday.

Would it be right to eliminate the poorly attended EF Mass to make way for another OF Mass that will have up to 6 times the attendees without putting further strain on the single priest? A very difficult and for some, emotional question.

 

[Speramus]

The T in TLM is for Tridentine, not Traditional.

When I write TLM, I mean Traditional-Latin-Mass.

The TLM predates the Council of Trent. I have been told that the Ordinary of the 1570 Missal was identical to that of 1474 and differed very little from the 8th century versions. Also, when we go attend a TLM, we don’t hear the 1570 “Tridentine” version, we hear the 1962 version.

 

[pnewton]

When I write TLM, I mean Traditional-Latin-Mass.

The TLM predates the Council of Trent. I have been told that the Ordinary of the 1570 Missal was identical to that of 1474 and differed very little from the 8th century versions. Also, when we go attend a TLM, we don’t hear the 1570 “Tridentine” version, we hear the 1962 version.

Thank you. I was just wanting clarification. As this thread shows, terms such like this do not mean the same thing to everyone. Most people here use TLM for Tridentine Latin Mass and “Traditional” can be as slippery as an eel.

 

[NeelyAnn]

Oh, my goodness. So anyone who does not define this term as you do is uniformed. You back this up with what, an exclaimation point? As the term is not a theolotical term but one of practical use, there is no objective, immovable definition, exclamation point not withstanding. The only definition that should matter would be the one at use here by the administrators and moderators. They have never said this place is for discussion of the Tridentine Mass exclusively.

Do you intentionally try to twist words, or do you just not read carefully?

I never said this forum is ONLY for the discussion of the Tridentine Mass. It is for the discussion of Traditional Catholicism, of which the Tridentine Mass is a part. The Novus Ordo (OF) Mass is not the Traditional Mass. The term Traditional Catholicism has refered to those things pertaining to the Tridentine Mass, the Traditional Theology, etc. for many years now. Basically that which came before Vatican II and those who adhere to pre-Vat II Catholicism vs those who embrace the post-Vat II Catholicism and the Mass that came with it. To now try and change what most people mean when they use that word is ridiculous. The term traditional was never meant to represent the modernized views in the Church, nor the New Mass which is less than 50 years old. This is just silly.

BTW - Even the Pope refers to the old liturgy, the Tridentine Mass, as the traditional liturgy.

One example is from his speach to the Bishops of Chile when he was Cardinal Ratzinger:

“While there are many motives that might have led a great number of people to seek a refuge in the traditional liturgy, the chief one is that they find the dignity of the sacred preserved there.”

Another example is in Milestones:

“In this context it is not surprising that the “model Mass” now proposed, which was supposed to (and in fact did) take the place of the traditional Ordo Missae, was in 1967 rejected by the majority of the Fathers who had been called together to a special synod on the matter.”

And in a letter to Dr. Heinz-Lothar Barth, 23 June 2003

“Still too great is the aversion of many Catholics, instilled in them over many years, against the traditional liturgy which they scornfully call “preconciliar”.”

From the same letter, he refers to those wanting the old rite of Mass as the ‘traditional faithful’:

"Dear Dr. Barth, if you commit yourself to work for the cause of the liturgy in this way, you will surely not stand alone, and you will prepare “public opinion in the Church” for eventual measures in favor of an expanded use of the earlier liturgical books. One should be cautious, however, about awakening too high or maximum expectations among the traditional faithful. "

There are more. There are others, too, such as Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos. But why dig them up? When speaking of the traditional liturgy/Mass the old Mass/EF Mass is what is typically thought of. It is relatively new for anyone to try to refer to the OF (in Latin, or not) as the traditional liturgy.

 

[NeelyAnn]

I’ve often wondered what is considered a suitable demand for the EF to be celebrated? I’m sure it differs from parish to parish but is the number 50? 100? 200? 500?

I know one parish here locally that probably draws 300 people at each of 2 Masses on Sunday plus the vigil on Saturday evening, each one fairly full. It also probably draws 50 for the 11:00 AM EF Mass. That EF Mass adds to the load of the single priest and there has been talk of adding a third OF Mass on Sunday.

Would it be right to eliminate the poorly attended EF Mass to make way for another OF Mass that will have up to 6 times the attendees without putting further strain on the single priest? A very difficult and for some, emotional question.

Those numbers are not needed. See here:

catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000281.shtml

ccjr.us/dialogika-resources/themes-in-todays-dialogue/good-friday-prayer/444-prisciandaro08may8

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0803186.htm

 

[Lujack]

Those numbers are not needed. See here:

catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000281.shtml

ccjr.us/dialogika-resources/themes-in-todays-dialogue/good-friday-prayer/444-prisciandaro08may8

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0803186.htm

All right, but what does this mean? I agree that parishioners should have the opportunity to attend in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass if they wish, but they should also have the opportunity to attend in the Ordinary Form. What should happen if, say one priest is assigned to a two-parish cluster? The priest celebrates one Mass at St. Peter’s and two at St. Paul’s (the names are just examples). In what form should the priest celebrate the lone Mass at St. Peter’s? What if just twenty people in the parish want to have the Extraordinary Form? The majority of this parish has grown up with the Ordinary Form, and it is the Mass they know; if its always said reverently, is it fair to drop the OF and switch to the EF for the parishes lone Mass?

Things are much simpler at larger parishes, where three and four Masses are said on Sunday, plus the Saturday Vigil, but when Masses are limited, the choices become more difficult. And I doubt that the Vatican is arguing that the Ordinary Form should be dropped in favor of the Extraordinary Form (although they are pushing, and wisely, for more reverent and beautiful celebrations of the Ordinary Form).

The ideal situation is one in which a parish can offer both, and I think that this should be the hope of all Catholics. Unfortunately, though, sometimes choices have to be made, and they aren’t easy ones. In a situation like the one above, shouldn’t the congregation and population of the parish be taken into account?

 

[Malkin71]

While the OF did not exist, all Masses were not the EF. The Dominicans and Carmelites (just to name two) had (have) their own rites. So in their theologate they were taught their rite.

What are the differences between those Mass and the EF?

When I lived in Houston they were easy to find.

I also know of some who incorporate Latin into the native language OF.

I am in Pittsburgh, PA. not Houston TX. I was talking about Pittsburgh.

They can but, again, why force a preference on those who do not have it?

Why force the OF on the Laity when there are those who want a EF Mass.

The key word here is can, they can do it, they do not have to do it.

It is just to let the Bishops and the Laity know that the “Old Mass”, “The Latin Mass”, “The Tridientine Mass” or “The Mass of All Ages”, or" The EF Mass" is allowed!