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

[choy]

Do you honestly believe the Novus Ordo is participated in reverently?

so are you trying to tell me i am not reverent because i participate exclusively in the OF mass?

Did the congregation prior to 1969 not understand what was going on during Mass?

i’m pretty sure there are those who are there reverently and open their hearts to God, but are confused by the language

 

[Feanor2]

I went to the EF because it was at the most convenient time in our city. 1:30 on Sunday- sleep in. . . . But now it isn’t being offered here anymore. We would have to drive and the masses are earlier so I won’t be attending again any time soon. This is unfortunate because I was finally firguring out what was going on. . .

I mean for me Mass is Mass is Mass. . . . I’d rather have an EF than a “folk” style mass though.

 

[Ockham]

Are you trying to link the falling away of so many Catholics to the establishment of the OF of the Mass?

Check the numbers since V2 (outside your own parish of course).

cara.georgetown.edu/sacramentsreport.pdf

 

[Ockham]

There seems to be a lot of “I think…”, “I’m pretty sure…” “In my opinion…”, etc. If you can reserve your emotions and study this subject objectively you may be surprised by your findings. If you are being fair and honest then a primary distinction between the two forms is degree of reverence.

While it’s everyone’s prerogative to prefer the OF it’s a stretch to say “reverence” is the central theme. Perhaps on EWTN, Papal Masses, or maybe even in some parishes there is an attempt at it but the vast majority of OFs I"ve been to it is not a priority.

The OF’s theme is communal supper, joyful celebration while the EF’s theme is Calvary. The very structure of the OF distracts from reverence with laity walking into the sanctuary for readings, talks, distribute Holy Communion, ‘hugs’ of peace, CITH, Lutheran hymns, etc.

youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5it20gKqw&feature=related

youtube.com/traditionallatinmass

 

[Cat]

There seems to be a lot of “I think…”, “I’m pretty sure…” “In my opinion…”, etc. If you can reserve your emotions and study this subject objectively you may be surprised by your findings. If you are being fair and honest then a primary distinction between the two forms is degree of reverence.

While it’s everyone’s prerogative to prefer the OF it’s a stretch to say “reverence” is the central theme. Perhaps on EWTN, Papal Masses, or maybe even in some parishes there is an attempt at it but the vast majority of OFs I"ve been to it is not a priority.

The OF’s theme is communal supper, joyful celebration while the EF’s theme is Calvary. The very structure of the OF distracts from reverence with laity walking into the sanctuary for readings, talks, distribute Holy Communion, ‘hugs’ of peace, CITH, Lutheran hymns, etc.

youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5it20gKqw&feature=related

youtube.com/traditionallatinmass

So why doesn’t Holy Mother Church call an end to it? Why does the Holy Father continue to offer Mass in the OF?

You criticize others for citing their own opinions based on their own experiences. I would ask what your facts are to prove that the OF is so badly offered? Have you attended a large percentage of OF Masses in the U.S.? Have you visited any of the OF Masses in my city or even in my diocese? I would say that you have to have a very large sample size to be justified in drawing any conclusions.

As for the list of things that you criticize, the Catholic Church has established all of these things (Sign of Peace, etc.). Is She wrong? Has She foisted sin upon Her people?

 

[Ockham]

Have you visited any of the OF Masses in my city or even in my diocese? I would say that you have to have a very large sample size to be justified in drawing any conclusions.

Once again your perspective is restricted by your limited view. The Church exists outside your parish, outside the US even. It has been around longer than the past forty years too.

 

[ProVobis]

Or more than likely, the dwindling attendance in the 1970s and 80s has more to do with the location rather than the Mass form. The Oratory is downtown, in the middle of the city, and very few people live downtown, and those who do live there are generally lower-income. This has been the case since the 1970s and 1980s. In fact, the main demographic group that lived near the downtown population in the 70s and 80s was the African-Americans, who generally are not Catholic, as you know.

Yes, location is the key here. If you check with some other EF’s you will find a lot of cases where it is being said in places where the NO has failed or attendance is dwindling. St. John Cantius among other places would probably not exist today had it not been for the 1984 and 1988 Papal TLM Indults.

 

[choy]

Once again your perspective is restricted by your limited view. The Church exists outside your parish, outside the US even. It has been around longer than the past forty years too.

with all due respect, but your comments are also filled by your limited views. especially when you talk about reverence. how can you say people in the OF doesn’t have reverence? because they don’t meet YOUR standards, and YOUR view of what is being done is not reverent. i for one grew up with the OF and attend the OF exclusively. i feel its reverence. of course you will not agree with me because YOUR view is different

honestly, how can you judge the reverence of others? how do you quantify one action as more reverent over the other, and how do you justify it to another person and convince someone with another opinion that yours is the right one? so far everything i read from you is about your viewpoint

 

[roadsend]

with all due respect, but your comments are also filled by your limited views. especially when you talk about reverence. how can you say people in the OF doesn’t have reverence? because they don’t meet YOUR standards, and YOUR view of what is being done is not reverent. i for one grew up with the OF and attend the OF exclusively. i feel its reverence. of course you will not agree with me because YOUR view is different

honestly, how can you judge the reverence of others? how do you quantify one action as more reverent over the other, and how do you justify it to another person and convince someone with another opinion that yours is the right one? so far everything i read from you is about your viewpoint

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”.

 

[Viceroy]

So why doesn’t Holy Mother Church call an end to it?

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.

 

[Domnall]

For the first eight or nine years of my life we attended a church that only used the TLM (its a long story.) I really remember enjoying it and I wish I could still attend Mass at my church.

I really really wish there was one closer to me. I enjoy the EF so much, it feels more respectful to God. However, the language barrier is a problem. However, the Catholic Church pre-Vatican II allowed certain areas to have Mass in their vernacular. My source, Cabinet of Catholic Information published in 1912.

 

[Ockham]

with all due respect, but your comments are also filled by your limited views. especially when you talk about reverence. how can you say people in the OF doesn’t have reverence? because they don’t meet YOUR standards, and YOUR view of what is being done is not reverent. i for one grew up with the OF and attend the OF exclusively. i feel its reverence. of course you will not agree with me because YOUR view is different

honestly, how can you judge the reverence of others? how do you quantify one action as more reverent over the other, and how do you justify it to another person and convince someone with another opinion that yours is the right one? so far everything i read from you is about your viewpoint

This is a common defence of the OF - internal reverence. What I’m speaking of are the externals. To genuflect is more reverent than to bow, the sign of the Cross is a reverent gesture. There is a place in the Mass for “reverent silence”. The EF has much more of these external signs of reverence, no laity walking into the sanctuary, and all eyes on the Holy Sacrifice.

Do you not agree that the theme of the OF is communal supper celebration?

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This is a common defence of the OF - internal reverence. What I’m speaking of are the externals. To genuflect is more reverent than to bow, the sign of the Cross is a reverent gesture. There is a place in the Mass for “reverent silence”. The EF has much more of these external signs of reverence, no laity walking into the sanctuary, and all eyes on the Holy Sacrifice.
Do you not agree that the theme of the OF is communal supper celebration?

Not according to Jesus-
*Matthew 6:-6
"(But) take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father.
When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing,
so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.
"When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you. *

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!

 

[AnthonytheGreat]

I went a few times and thought is was boring, but I went again last week and was totally transformed by the reverence of it. The music is also infinitely better. I am a convert.

 

[choy]

This is a common defence of the OF - internal reverence. What I’m speaking of are the externals. To genuflect is more reverent than to bow, the sign of the Cross is a reverent gesture. There is a place in the Mass for “reverent silence”. The EF has much more of these external signs of reverence, no laity walking into the sanctuary, and all eyes on the Holy Sacrifice.

Do you not agree that the theme of the OF is communal supper celebration?

[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

 

[choy]

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”.

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

 

[roadsend]

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

What does your response have to do with my quoted post?

 

[jlhargus]

All are welcome to vote in the poll, but the purpose is in hope those who have never attended one will vote yes or no.

For those who may not know, H.H. Benedict XVI freed the use of the 1962 Missal of indult and any priest can now pray it without explicit permission of his Bishop. Assuming he can pray the Mass in a competent manner of course.

Feel free to explain your answer. Thank you for taking time to vote

JL: I voted no because, I perfer the active participation in the new order. I have nothing against those who perfer the old order

 

[choy]

What does your response have to do with my quoted post?

it was a comment on the first line of your post
i didn’t feel the need to comment to the rest of your post because it was already addressed by my earlier post when i tackled the same issue regarding reverence

 

[ProVobis]

God is not a language translation professor who’s going to fail us if the translation is inaccurate

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

[Genesis 11]
[Genesis 11]

{11:1} Erat autem terra labii unius, et sermonum eorumdem.
{11:1} Now the earth was of one language and of the same speech.

{11:2} Cumque proficiscerentur de oriente, invenerunt campum in terra Senaar, et habitaverunt in eo.
{11:2} And when they were advancing from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt in it.

{11:3} Dixitque alter ad proximum suum: Venite, faciamus lateres, et coquamus eos igni. Habueruntque lateres pro saxis, et bitumen pro cæmento:
{11:3} And each one said to his neighbor, “Come, let us make bricks, and bake them with fire.” And they had bricks instead of stones, and pitch instead of mortar.

{11:4} et dixerunt: Venite, faciamus nobis civitatem et turrim, cuius culmen pertingat ad cælum: et celebremus nomen nostrum antequam dividamur in universas terras.
{11:4} And they said: “Come, let us make a city and a tower, so that its height may reach to heaven. And let us make our name famous before we are divided into all the lands.”

{11:5} Descendit autem Dominus ut videret civitatem et turrim, quam ædificabant filii Adam,
{11:5} Then the Lord descended to see the city and the tower, which the sons of Adam were building.

{11:6} et dixit: Ecce, unus est populus, et unum labium omnibus: cœperuntque hoc facere, nec desistent a cogitationibus suis, donec eas opere compleant.
{11:6} And he said: “Behold, the people are united, and all have one tongue. And since they have begun to do this, they will not desist from their plans, until they have completed their work.

{11:7} Venite igitur, descendamus, et confundamus ibi linguam eorum, ut non audiat unusquisque vocem proximi sui.
{11:7} Therefore, come, let us descend, and in that place confound their tongue, so that they may not listen, each one to the voice of his neighbor.”

{11:8} Atque ita divisit eos Dominus ex illo loco in universas terras, et cessaverunt ædificare civitatem.
{11:8} And so the Lord divided them from that place into all the lands, and they ceased to build the city.

{11:9} Et idcirco vocatum est nomen eius Babel, quia ibi confusum est labium universæ terræ: et inde dispersit eos Dominus super faciem cunctarum regionum.
{11:9} And for this reason, its name was called ‘Babel,’ because in that place the language of the whole earth became confused. And from then on, the Lord scattered them across the face of every region.