"Latin-Rite" Catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Big_Feet
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Big_Feet

Guest
I see a number of posters here using the term “Latin-rite Catholic” in the description for their “Religion.” Does this indicate that they are Roman Catholic as opposed to Byzantine Catholic, or member of another Catholic church, or are they trying to indicate that they prefer the Extraordinary Form (Latin only) of the mass over the Ordinary Form (Latin or vernacular) of the mass?

Thank you for helping me understand.
 
Big_Feet said:
Does this indicate that they are Roman Catholic as opposed to Byzantine Catholic, or member of another Catholic church
Click to expand...
This is the correct definition. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they attend the Extraordinary Form. For instance, I usually go to the Ordinary Form but I and all my fellows would still call ourselves Latin Rite.
 
The Latin Rite or Latin Liturgical Tradition refers to those Catholics of the Western Church, that is, of the Roman Church. The Roman Catholic Church is comprised of Catholics who worship according to the Roman Rite, the Mozarbic Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, the Dominican Rite, and several other rites and sub-rites like the Anglican Use.

Latin Rite is just an umbrella term that describes all of these things. The Latin Rite is the liturgical rites used by the Roman Catholic Church, of which there are several, but which all stem in some way from the Roman Rite. The EF and the OF of the Roman Rite can equally be called part of the Latin Rite.
 
I use the term sometimes in order to show respect for our Byzantine/Eastern Catholic brethren who are in union with Rome. Their tradition is legitimate and as Bl JPII said, the other “lung” of the Church.

It doesn’t refer to EF/OF.
 
As an aside, you refer to “Latin Rite” Catholics as possibly those that prefer the TLM or “Extraordinary Form”.
The norm of the “Ordinary Form” or Novus Ordo is actually in Latin.
The NO was actually promulgated as in Latin and many “Ordinary Form” Masses are offered in Latin, as they all were intended to be by Pope Paul VI.
Once a month we go to an “Ordinary Form” in Latin, Ad Orientem.
The whole Mass is in Latin except the sermon [which is not part of the Mass]
This is the Paul VI Mass, the way he envisioned it.
 
I got this flowchart of the various rites off, I believe, this forum. I save so much data and pictures that I honestly can’t remember. Either way, hope this helps and thanks to whomever posted it, as well as whomever put it together:

 
Yes, and if we can take that “Latin Rite” and break it into the Roman Rite, Mozarbic Rite, Ambrosian Rite, etc., then we will have the current situation. The reason there is a term for all of these rites together, Latin Rite, is because they are all very closely related. Most of them developed directly from the Roman Rite.
 
Big_Feet said:
I see a number of posters here using the term “Latin-rite Catholic” in the description for their “Religion.” Does this indicate that they are Roman Catholic as opposed to Byzantine Catholic, or member of another Catholic church, or are they trying to indicate that they prefer the Extraordinary Form (Latin only) of the mass over the Ordinary Form (Latin or vernacular) of the mass?

Thank you for helping me understand.
Click to expand...
Well like many definitions they can be poorly used. But RC’s are LR’s as our prayers and liturgy is translated from Latin. However, some who attend EF Tridentine mass refer to themselves as LR to point this out.
 
Roman refers to the Church. The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, therefore the Roman Church.

Latin is the Rite, as in the praxis or tradition. The same in the East, Eastern Catholics from the Constantinopolian Rite are sometimes called Greek Catholics, because of the Greek Patrimony of the Churches and its faith. This is in spite that a great number of these Churches are ethnically Slavic.

Roman Rite refers to the Liturgy of the Roman Church, which has two expressions, the Ordinary Form and Extraordinary Form. Of course we simply refer to it as the Mass.
 
Big_Feet said:
I see a number of posters here using the term “Latin-rite Catholic” in the description for their “Religion.” Does this indicate that they are Roman Catholic as opposed to Byzantine Catholic, or member of another Catholic church, or are they trying to indicate that they prefer the Extraordinary Form (Latin only) of the mass over the Ordinary Form (Latin or vernacular) of the mass?

Thank you for helping me understand.
Click to expand...
There 23 such autonomous Churches, one “Western” and 22 “Eastern.”

That one “Western” church is the Roman Catholic Church aka the Latin-Rite Catholic Church.

**I am a Roman Catholic, I am a Latin-Rite Catholic:thumbsup:

I love my Eastern-Rite Catholic brothers and sisters - we are in communion with His Holiness, the Pope in Rome.👍**
 
YoungTradCath said:
Yes, it is.
Click to expand...
The homily/sermon in either form of the Latin Rite Mass is not a requisite part of the Mass.
It is a good thing and should be preached on at least all holydays, but I have been to many Ordinary Form Mass’s as well as TLM’s where for various reasons the priest has decided not to preach.
I went to one Ordinary Form Mass several months ago at our Diocesan Cathedral where the Ordinary offered the Sacrifice and HE opted not to give a sermon.
 
Old_Salt said:
The homily/sermon in either form of the Latin Rite Mass is not a requisite part of the Mass.
It is a good thing and should be preached on at least all holydays, but I have been to many Ordinary Form Mass’s as well as TLM’s where for various reasons the priest has decided not to preach.
I went to one Ordinary Form Mass several months ago at our Diocesan Cathedral where the Ordinary offered the Sacrifice and HE opted not to give a sermon.
Click to expand...
The homily is a requisite part of the mass for all Sundays and Holy Days in the Ordinary Form. What the rubrics are in the Extraordinary Form, I do not know.
 
Big_Feet said:
I see a number of posters here using the term “Latin-rite Catholic” in the description for their “Religion.”
Thank you for helping me understand.
Click to expand...
they are being accurate, and identifying their affiliation not with the common RC but Latin rite, as opposed to any of the other rites such as Byzantine.

your preference of which Mass to attend does not change your canonical rite.
 
YoungTradCath said:
Yes, it is.
Click to expand...
In the EF the sermon is considered an interruption of the mass. This is because the old rite didn’t assume there would always be a sermon.

In the OF the sermon is assumed and is therefore part of the rubrics of the mass and does not constitute an interruption.
 
G.I.R.M.
  1. There is to be a homily on Sundays and holy days of obligation at all Masses that are celebrated with the participation of a congregation; it may not be omitted without a serious reason. It is recommended on other days, especially on the weekdays of Advent, Lent, and the Easter Season, as well as on other festive days and occasions when the people come to church in greater numbers.
 
I use it as a sort of “in your face” reminder that Latin is the language of our liturgy, of our poetry and hymns, of our doctors and our saints. I use either Latin-Rite Catholic and Roman Catholic interchangeably though as I am both.
 
Warloff said:
In the EF the sermon is considered an interruption of the mass. This is because the old rite didn’t assume there would always be a sermon.

In the OF the sermon is assumed and is therefore part of the rubrics of the mass and does not constitute an interruption.
Click to expand...
The homily in the EF is not an “interruption” of the mass. While yes, it was commonly considered as such, it was not, and is not, in reality.

The homily is not always assumed in the OF. It is only assumed on a very few occasions, relatively.
 
The sermon is an interruption of the Mass, which is why the priest takes off the maniple during the sermon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top