How Many Here Would Attend The Traditional Latin Mass If It Were Available ?

[choy]

this is all i have to say to you

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 15:8[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Ockham]

Externals may be important, but they are not the only thing.
I have seen many people put a pious show for the people at Church,
only to go home and spend the entire week being very un-Christian!

So you are saying people who attend the EF are hypocrites and un-Christian. How tolerant of you not to mention charitable.

 

[Ockham]

when we pray, God doesn’t look at the language we’re using or the form of the prayer, He listens to what our hearts are telling him. God is not a language translation professor who’s going to fail us if the translation is inaccurate

Latin isn’t reverant. It is the official language of the Church, virtually un-changeable and universal. At V2 the bishops from every corner of the world talked to each other in the Church’s mother tongue. You used to be able to attend Mass anywhere in the world and know each word being said.

 

[distracted]

haven’t read any posts… yet.

i would attend …

i don’t like the Vaticn II changes ONE BIT

there was something funny going on at Vatican II…

but then maybe nobody wants to hear all about that… hmmmm…

 

[choy]

Latin isn’t reverant. It is the official language of the Church, virtually un-changeable and universal. At V2 the bishops from every corner of the world talked to each other in the Church’s mother tongue. You used to be able to attend Mass anywhere in the world and know each word being said.

sorry, but i can’t see how any of your statements makes sense in the context of the discussion. can you please explain them to me?

 

[choy]

So you are saying people who attend the EF are hypocrites and un-Christian. How tolerant of you not to mention charitable.

the same can be said to traditionalist who look down on those who prefer the OF

 

[JMJ_coder]

So you are saying people who attend the EF are hypocrites and un-Christian. How tolerant of you not to mention charitable.

I think you completely misinterpreted her post. I read it as: “having all the external bells and whistles doesn’t automatically make one a Saint”.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Wasn’t the vernacular a punishment from God so as to confuse those who displeased Him?

Do you honestly think that Latin (the vernacular of the Romans) was the one language used before Babel?

 

[JMJ_coder]

You used to be able to attend Mass anywhere in the world and know each word being said.

You still can, if you’re fluent in another language (as always, since no one has spoken Latin natively in over a millenium). Do you actually think that even a quarter of the Catholics in the early 20th century leading up to Vatican II knew enough Latin to be able to know each and every word being said and what it meant?

 

[Barb3]

I posted several pages back but wanted to respond to the person who said “how many would understand the Latin being said in the Mass” – you didn’t have to know or understand Latin – we all had Missals that we always used during Mass so we knew what the priest was saying.

 

[JMJ_coder]

I suppose that you are correct when you say that we all have different standards for reverence.
For those of us who grew up with the Traditional Mass such things as:

-grip, grin, and chatter at the the beginning of Mass, and again at the sign of peace;
-raucous laughter at jokes made by the presider at several points during the Mass;
-piano music often more appropriate to a bawdy house than a church;
-hand holding rituals during and after the Our Father that form a human chain across the aisles from pew to pew throughout the church (and may God help the parishioners, who dare to break the chain by refusing to join in)

tend to strike many of us as irreverent.
But then again, I suppose that I also have “limited views”.

Prior to Mass should generally be quiet, a chance to reflect on the Sacred Mysteries about to be entered into. But, in the USA at least, a handshake is the customary way of showing peace. Now, I myself would place the Sign of Peace before the Offertory, but that’s just me.

I’ve never heard jokes at Mass outside of the homily, and I highly doubt that Priests were so stoic prior to Vatican II that they never told a joke during a homily.

Music for the Mass varies from parish to parish. My Parish uses a majority of traditional hymns, such as Salve Regina, Jesus Christ is Ris’n Today, Parce Domine, etc., etc.

There is no clear directive on the proper posture during the Our Father (as a quick search on this forum will show). My parish doesn’t hold hands (and I’ve only been to one in my Diocese that almost everyone holds hands).

It seems one problem with so-called “traditionalists” is that they tend to take one limited case and map that onto every OF Mass. I went somewhere that had bad music so everywhere there’s bad music. I saw such and such a liturgical abuse so every Catholic parish does such and such a liturgical abuse. I saw a picture of a clown Mass once so every OF Mass is a clown Mass.

 

[JMJ_coder]

I posted several pages back but wanted to respond to the person who said “how many would understand the Latin being said in the Mass” – you didn’t have to know or understand Latin – we all had Missals that we always used during Mass so we knew what the priest was saying.

But, how hard would it be to follow along in your Missal and pray the Rosary at the same time?

 

[Oneofthewomen]

So you are saying people who attend the EF are hypocrites and un-Christian. How tolerant of you not to mention charitable.

No, that is not what I said.
I actually made no mention of OF or EF.
Externals in either form are not the most important thing.

I think you completely misinterpreted her post. I read it as: “having all the external bells and whistles doesn’t automatically make one a Saint”.

Yes, this is what I meant!

 

[Viceroy]

Why is it so important to understand what is being said in the Mass? I use a missal currently, but once I know basically what is happening when I’m going to stop using it.

 

[choy]

Why is it so important to understand what is being said in the Mass? I use a missal currently, but once I know basically what is happening when I’m going to stop using it.

for various reasons, it is important to a lot of people

speaking for myself, i want to be involved in it. i want my attention to be in the prayers and whats going on, at the same time reflecting on the words of the priest. hard for me to do that if you add one layer of trying to translate everything through a Missal.

 

[mick321]

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 15:8[/BIBLEDRB]

**whats the use of external signs of reverence when internally you are not reverent?
**
this is the same issues about Latin that i and some people here keep bringing up. none of us are against Latin, just against the perception of some like yourself on why Latin should be used. its like Latin is instant reverence, no matter what. reverence is not something attached to tangible things like actions and speech. its something that comes from the heart of the person. and the actions should follow the heart, not the other way around. its like giving flowers to the person you love as a sign of love. but not every time you give flowers automatically would mean you love the person. sometimes you just give for the sake of giving.

if a person doesn’t even believe in the Real Presence, for example, no amount of bowing or genuflecting will ever put reverence in there. if they’re going through the motions because it is required, instead of understanding why the motions are done

its good i see some people here express that kind of reverence. they say, “i want to kneel because i want to show my reverence for God.” but there are those who would immediately judge other people that just because they do not perform an action that in their own opinion expresses reverence, then immediately dismiss them as disrespectful.

Jesus himself has abolished traditions that people no longer understand what the tradition is all about. they just go through the motions for the sake of going through the motions. and i think there are people here who call for EF and resist the OF not because of a genuine understanding of the EF, but because they are resistant to change and they do not fully understand the change and refuse to understand the change. because they associate reverence with the action, not action with the reverence, and therefore completely miss the point

What is the use of external signs of irreverence if internally you are reverent?

For the sake of discussion, let’s agree that a Catholic is internally reverent. Can you explain why genuine reverence should be concealed behind a veneer of irreverence? Why the disconnect between the internal and external? It’s as though some a need to “prove” that reverence is unnecessary. Why participate in this sort of race to the bottom? Is some kind of stressful peer group pressure being brought to bear?

Or what?

 

[Cat]

I believe She is, but it’s a slow movement. one overnight transformation of the Church was traumatic enough. If the Traditional Latin Mass is to become the norm again It is going to have to be because it follows naturally from the orthodox catholic faith that is being restored today.

This is an opinion, and I respect your opinion. But I disagree. I don’t think the Catholic Church can afford to take the financial hit, as I believe that many many Catholics would depart if Latin Mass were the norm instead of the extraordinary.

I also think that the Catholic Church would not take a step that would drive away so many nominal/cafeteria/liberal (whatever you want to label them) Catholics and thus put them in grave danger of hell. As long as a Christian is at Mass, they are receiving graces. But when they stop attending Mass, it becomes very difficult for a Christian to grow in faith and avoid sin.

I sometimes sense on this board that some Catholics would prefer that all the “non-committed” Catholics leave the Church and allow all the traditional, committed Catholics to have the Church to themselves. But I don’t think this is what the Lord prefers.

The Lord wants all His children to be gathered together, including all the rebellious children who insist on talking before Mass, playing piano music during Mass, etc. I think that we are supposed to learn to get along and love each other. It’s easy to love people who think and act just like we do. It’s a lot harder to love the woman sitting in front of you who’s wearing a skimpy tank top to Mass, or a teenager who spend Mass sleeping, or the convert who enjoys Gospel music and doesn’t like Latin or chant.

 

[Cat]

Wasn’t the vernacular a punishment from God so as to confuse those who displeased Him?

But the vernacular was also given as a sign of the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

Acts 2: 1-11

And St. Paul spoke strongly of the need to use a language that is understood by others. I Corinthians 14: 1-12, especially vs. 11.

Of course anyone can use a translation guide, such as a missal. But do not delude yourself. According to linguists, each of us has a “heart language,” the language that we speak and understand not just with our head, but with our hearts, the language that we speak with our family and friends and society. Using a translation guide is not the same as understanding with our heart. Instead, it’s like little children who think they can read because they have memorized a favorite book. Some people are gifted to be able to learn and understand more than one language, but most of us aren’t able to do this, and we struggle to grasp the depth of meaning.

It seems to me that there are those who wish to separate our bodies and brains from our spirits and souls. This is a fallacy that Protestants often practice, as they disparage the body and the physical world and strive to live only in the spiritual world. Catholics should instead strive to recognize the entire human being, physical and spiritual. Language is part of that physical part of us, and it is good and proper for us to learn and understand with our physical brains, not just our souls and spirits. (See the passage in I Corinthians above.) It is not necessary for us to abandon our physical language in order to grow spiritually.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This is an opinion, and I respect your opinion. But I disagree. I don’t think the Catholic Church can afford to take the financial hit, as I believe that many many Catholics would depart if Latin Mass were the norm instead of the extraordinary.

I also think that the Catholic Church would not take a step that would drive away so many nominal/cafeteria/liberal (whatever you want to label them) Catholics and thus put them in grave danger of hell. As long as a Christian is at Mass, they are receiving graces. But when they stop attending Mass, it becomes very difficult for a Christian to grow in faith and avoid sin.

I sometimes sense on this board that some Catholics would prefer that all the “non-committed” Catholics leave the Church and allow all the traditional, committed Catholics to have the Church to themselves. But I don’t think this is what the Lord prefers.

The Lord wants all His children to be gathered together, including all the rebellious children who insist on talking before Mass, playing piano music during Mass, etc. I think that we are supposed to learn to get along and love each other. It’s easy to love people who think and act just like we do. It’s a lot harder to love the woman sitting in front of you who’s wearing a skimpy tank top to Mass, or a teenager who spend Mass sleeping, or the convert who enjoys Gospel music and doesn’t like Latin or chant.

Very well said!! :clapping:

:tiphat:

 

[Lycorth]

Why is it so important to understand what is being said in the Mass? I use a missal currently, but once I know basically what is happening when I’m going to stop using it.

Indeed. God forbid someone goes deaf and there is no one signing the Mass, or a foreign traveler goes to Mass who does not understand enough of the vernacular to follow along.

If you know what is going on, you can follow along just fine. That’s why even though the vernacular is very handy, it is not necessary, and rejecting Latin on the basis of “no one understands it” is simply not a viable argument.