Noticing alot of opposition to the Tridentine Mass

[Frank_Fenn]

Originally Posted by maryj

“I gotta say I left that church Thanking our Lord for the V2 council and the changes that were made.”

Yes, explain please?

 

[BobP123]

And yes Latin needs to come back, when I’m a priest, I’m loading my NO masses with Latin, as VII intended:thumbsup:

And I would start with the most solemn prayer of the Mass, the words of Consecration.

Hoc est enim Corpus Meum.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

It’s the people who celebrate it now. Don’t worry, if the MP comes out, I’m sure you’ll see some problems with some people celebrating it against the rubrics.

How come we didn’t see these problems for 400 years? I’m not saying there weren’t any problems, but the TLM never had the abuses of the NO.

TLM was codified by St. Pius V specifically to guard against the heresies of the reformation. The prayers and rubrics make it incredibly difficult for abuses to happen. Yes, people can find a way to abuse anything. We have free will. However, the TLM was codified to stop abuses. Remember, St. Pius V abrogated all rites that were less than 200 years old.

Let’s put it this way, there were a bunch of homosexuals up here that were pushing for the TLM not too long ago because they thought it was “pretty”.

Do you have any documentation to back up this accusation?

I can just see it now, we might even have the TLM with liturgical dancing because that’s pretty too.:doh2: [Edited by Moderator] That said, most will be happy and the traditionalists would definitely get a big glimpse into our lot of loving the Novus Ordo and seeing it trampled on.:crying:

Let’s see, the TLM didn’t suffer the abuses in 400 years that the NO suffered within its first 5 years, but when the motu proprio is finally released these abuses will surface. I guess it must be true because you said so.

I think your “wish list” of TLM abuses says more about what you think of the TLM than what will actually happen once the motu proprio is released.

Remember, if you don’t like the TLM, you don’t have to go. I don’t know why you and people like you who only want the NO are so afraid of the TLM.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Why quietly whispered? And as I understand the Divine Liturgy " when “we lift our hearts up to the Lord” we are in participation with all the angels and saints in the eternal offering of the Lamb in Heaven, we are really in heaven on earth. I would venture to guess there is no whispering in heaven. I’m sure that if one were to attend a TLM on a regular basis, the understanding of what was going on, and in which order, would deffinately happen, even become “routine”. I kept thinking that as I was fumbling through the Mass. Must be how Protestants feel the first time they are exposed to a Mass. I just truly don’t see how catholics who have never been exposed to a Latin Mass, would be drawn to it. Maybe I’m just jealous, never know!!

So God can’t read our hearts? He needs us to verbally express our prayers?

We pray the Holy Mass as St. Pius X said. Prayer involves the entire person. It involves not only our bodies but our minds and souls as well. Yes, there is time for vocal prayer during Mass, which you have even at a Low Mass. There is also time for quiet contemplation, especially at the moment Our Lord becomes present on the altar through the priest.

Don’t give up on the Traditional Latin Mass. Remember, the canon of the Mass was always silent prior to 1969. There is something to be said for quiet contemplation at Mass.

 

[bear06]

How come we didn’t see these problems for 400 years? I’m not saying there weren’t any problems, but the TLM never had the abuses of the NO.

We didn’t have the 60s back then. We are living in a rebellious time that the Church hasn’t seen for years.

TLM was codified by St. Pius V specifically to guard against the heresies of the reformation. The prayers and rubrics make it incredibly difficult for abuses to happen. Yes, people can find a way to abuse anything. We have free will. However, the TLM was codified to stop abuses. Remember, St. Pius V abrogated all rites that were less than 200 years old.

Yes, people can find a way to abuse anything and they will.

Do you have any documentation to back up this accusation?

You’re joking, right? You actually think I made this up? And what would the reason be for that? Sorry. No link for this one. It came up about 5 or 6 years ago. You must remember that I live in near the San Francisco diocese.

Let’s see, the TLM didn’t suffer the abuses in 400 years that the NO suffered within its first 5 years, but when the motu proprio is finally released these abuses will surface. I guess it must be true because you said so.

Uh, we haven’t had mass amounts of TLMs and we haven’t had any in SF for awhile. Just wait.

I think your “wish list” of TLM abuses says more about what you think of the TLM than what will actually happen once the motu proprio is released.

Excuse me but you know very little about what I wish for the TLM. Again, you shoot yourself in the foot.

Remember, if you don’t like the TLM, you don’t have to go. I don’t know why you and people like you who only want the NO are so afraid of the TLM.

You’ve been around for awhile Swiss Guard and you should know my position. Maybe you should try and look up some of my posts. I have absolutely nothing against the TLM. I promote it and I fully support the MP. I just think you are in for a dose of reality.

 

[historyb]

I just truly don’t see how catholics who have never been exposed to a Latin Mass, would be drawn to it. Maybe I’m just jealous, never know!!

Well I never experienced a Latin Mass, came in after V2 way after and I was always drawn to it. Unexpectiably so, but still drawn.

 

[TNT]

TLM
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
TLM

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Explain? Iam not undestanding? Iam German, so not all English is clear to me.

The days of the Latin Mass had a greater focus on the Eucharist which was practiced by more DISCIPLINES, such as:

Fasting from 12 midnight until receiving Holy Comunion. Also water was allowed but had to be abstained from for at least an hour.

The practice of Communion-in-the-hand was unheard of during the Latin Mass era…it was a time for reflecting the awe of this great Sacrament. The Latin Mass instilled greater humility in the people.

No one touched the Body of Christ (Communion) with their hands, but only the consecrated hands of the priest.
. The emotions are just not contained or described in English as it is in Latin.

Latin gave the Church a sense of “oneness” with the Catholic world over. Since the Latin Mass has been decimated fewer vocations were noted. The Church today suffers from a priest shortage.

 

[maryj]

So God can’t read our hearts? He needs us to verbally express our prayers?

We pray the Holy Mass as St. Pius X said. Prayer involves the entire person. It involves not only our bodies but our minds and souls as well. Yes, there is time for vocal prayer during Mass, which you have even at a Low Mass. There is also time for quiet contemplation, especially at the moment Our Lord becomes present on the altar through the priest.

Don’t give up on the Traditional Latin Mass. Remember, the canon of the Mass was always silent prior to 1969. There is something to be said for quiet contemplation at Mass.

Not an answer to my question, but a question answered with another question I certainly know what prayer is, and what it involves. I am feeling attacked due to the fact that I did not happen to understand nor feel fulfilled by attending a low Mass at a church that has a tridentine mass. There was no vocal prayers, I left that church feeling as though I had missed mass. No this was not the Masses fault but through my lack of any understanding of what was going on. Quiet contemplation? Am I to assume you think that everyone who does not attend a latin mass is not in quiet contemplation and waiting in joyous expectation to receive our Lord? And Remember that there is also something to be said for vocal prayers as well. I’m out of here. Thanks for those who replied with thoughtfullness.

 

[sosayi1960]

Alright here I go!! Please keep in mind I am only stating my very simple minded opinions. I am 45 years old and happened to be on vacation in another state this past weekend and found a beautiful catholic church to go to Mass at. To our surprise and to my delight it was a parish that offered the TLM. I have never attended a latin Mass, and I was very eager to see what all the hub bub was about especially on this forum. Our heads were not covered and immediately I felt out of place. Not only was the priest speaking latin but he was french and had a very think french accent. I immediately looked for communion rails, found those and then thought I’ll just pay attention to what the others are doing and I’ll just follow along. There was no following along, the missal was very hard to follow, I felt out of place and VERY IRREVERANT, and yet still I kept an open mind. We received Holy Communion on our knees, on the tongue, without saying amen. That was particularily bothersome to me(the no amen thing not the kneeling thing). I gotta say I left that church Thanking our Lord for the V2 council and the changes that were made. I am certain that I would have understood more had the priest been mic’d but we were half way back (didn’t want to sit in anybodys regular spot) and basically couldn’t hear anything. Someone made the comment a few pages back in this thread about TLM’s worshipping instead of celebrating, that the latin Mass is about God not about us… I had the distinct feeling of…dismissal …for the lack of a better word, at that mass. And one last thing I come from a very traditional catholic family, and very orthodox parish. I wouldn’t go again, and in my opinion I would like to state that I think that a latin Mass would be more likely to drive people away from the church than a N.O. mass. Just my opinion of course

I went to a Latin mass once in my life and I agree. It’s virtually impossible to follow. I am much older than you, i’m 47. If the latin mass is going to be the 'new, (old norm) for the church. I think its gonna drive more people away. If people like the latin mass fine.
I can’t imagine the entire church will prosper more. I just think that church membership will decrease. It appears to me that the priest facing the altar disconnects the community. At the Last Supper, Jesus, was with his friends. He was at supper. When he gave us the Eucharist, He was reverent but I can hardly imagine he turned his back on them. The Latin mass appears too legalistic. Just an old altar boy from Ioway.

 

[BobP123]

I went to a Latin mass once in my life and I agree. It’s virtually impossible to follow. I am much older than you, i’m 47. If the latin mass is going to be the 'new, (old norm) for the church. I think its gonna drive more people away. If people like the latin mass fine.
I can’t imagine the entire church will prosper more. I just think that church membership will decrease.

For 1600 some years the Church prospered with the Latin Mass. Sure there were a few stumbling blocks along the way; in fact, there were many PROTESTant activities going on, but each seemingly making the majesty and integrity of the Catholic Faith stronger. Hopefully we shall see this again, even though it might not seem that way to those who have been conditioned to accept [edited by Moderator] their liturgies.

It appears to me that the priest facing the altar disconnects the community.

How?

 

[johnstown_johnn]

The return of the Latin Rite from what we are seeing here on this thread will cause another split in the Church.
When that time comes we will have to pray to the Holy Spirit to make the right choices.

There are criteria for making decisions. One would likely be the bishop of your particular diocese. Is he one that you would place your trust in? Does he exude holiness? Things of that nature.

Then again, there is the Holy father and his decrees. Do all bishops comply? If not, are they disobedient?
My feeling is we will have another schism in the Church and it will be confusing for some and obvious to others.

Many of the words in the Apocalypse will become clear.

 

[E.E.N.S]

I went to a Latin mass once in my life and I agree. It’s virtually impossible to follow. I am much older than you, i’m 47. If the latin mass is going to be the 'new, (old norm) for the church. I think its gonna drive more people away. If people like the latin mass fine.
I can’t imagine the entire church will prosper more. I just think that church membership will decrease. It appears to me that the priest facing the altar disconnects the community. At the Last Supper, Jesus, was with his friends. He was at supper. When he gave us the Eucharist, He was reverent but I can hardly imagine he turned his back on them. The Latin mass appears too legalistic. Just an old altar boy from Ioway.

Oddly enough, since the New Rite of Mass has been introduced we have had a MASSIVE decline in Mass attendance, (among other things such as belief in the real pressence, confession, etc.), not to mention a huge increase in dissention and immorality.

Here is an interesting blogpost by Fr. Z that you should read:
Save the Liturgy, Save the World!

 

[sosayi1960]

Oddly enough, since the New Rite of Mass has been introduced we have had a MASSIVE decline in Mass attendance, (among other things such as belief in the real pressence, confession, etc.), not to mention a huge increase in dissention and immorality.

Here is an interesting blogpost by Fr. Z that you should read:
Save the Liturgy, Save the World!

Perhaps the church needs a Vatican III. The Holy Spirit is the only one who can clean up all the division.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Perhaps the church needs a Vatican III. The Holy Spirit is the only one who can clean up all the division.

A big problem is this: it seems as if most people, instead of trying to be obedient to the Church’s desires, are only looking for loopholes in her teaching so that they can “make fit” their own ideas and desires.

A Third Vatican Council could be helpful, but it would need to be extremely clear and leave no room for doubt, confusion or ambiguous language, because there are not a few who would not use that opportunity to push their agenda, (as we have seen has been happening this last 40 years).

 

[mshealy]

I don’t dislike the TLM, but isn’t the reason fairly simple? It doesn’t have to do with the collapse of tradition or anything like that. Yes, the Church does allow other liturgies, especially in Eastern Catholicism. There are a few other examples, but can we really be ONE Church with two Masses side by side? I suppose if it were 1570 instead of 2007 and if folks had the internet back then, they would be criticizing Pope St. Pius V for the “innovations” in his new Mass? If we go back to the TLM, then the next thing someone will want is to do the Ambrosian Mass or the Mass of Pope St. Gregory the Great. Where does it all stop? Every parish will do its own favorite version of the Mass. If Pope St. Pius V can, based on the Council of Trent, promulgate a Mass, then so could Paul VI. And, if you REALLY study the developement of the liturgy, the NO is no more or less less “organic” than the TLM. One other pont, as soon as the TLM is more freely allowed, there will be abuses in it. There were abuses before V2!!! What the Church should do is demand that priests adhere to the GIRM and the rubrics of the NO.

At the risk of being divisive, as I hope for nothing more than reunion with the Orthodox, it is amusing to hear Orthodox lecturing Roman Cahtolics on tradition. There isn’t ONE Orthodox Church! It is bitterly fractured and splintered along ethnic and nationalistic lines that are worse than some of the divides in western Christianity. If that is what the Orthodox tradition has produced and called the apostolic succession, then let’s have no part of it in the Latin Church.

 

[E.E.N.S]

I don’t dislike the TLM, but isn’t the reason fairly simple? It doesn’t have to do with the collapse of tradition or anything like that. Yes, the Church does allow other liturgies, especially in Eastern Catholicism. There are a few other examples, but can we really be ONE Church with two Masses side by side? I suppose if it were 1570 instead of 2007 and if folks had the internet back then, they would be criticizing Pope St. Pius V for the “innovations” in his new Mass? If we go back to the TLM, then the next thing someone will want is to do the Ambrosian Mass or the Mass of Pope St. Gregory the Great. Where does it all stop? Every parish will do its own favorite version of the Mass. If Pope St. Pius V can, based on the Council of Trent, promulgate a Mass, then so could Paul VI. And, if you REALLY study the developement of the liturgy, the NO is no more or less less “organic” than the TLM. One other pont, as soon as the TLM is more freely allowed, there will be abuses in it. There were abuses before V2!!! What the Church should do is demand that priests adhere to the GIRM and the rubrics of the NO.

At the risk of being divisive, as I hope for nothing more than reunion with the Orthodox, it is amusing to hear Orthodox lecturing Roman Cahtolics on tradition. There isn’t ONE Orthodox Church! It is bitterly fractured and splintered along ethnic and nationalistic lines that are worse than some of the divides in western Christianity. If that is what the Orthodox tradition has produced and called the apostolic succession, then let’s have to part of it in the Latin Church.

You really shoud read the book entitled Reform of the Roman Liturgy by Msgr. Gamber.

In his preface, Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XI) called Gamber “the one scholar, who, among the army of pseudo-liturgists, truly represents the liturgical thinking of the center of the Church.”

It’s a great book and I think it would do a lot to help clear up many of the misconceptions that you have just shown in your post.

 

[ncjohn]

A big problem is this: it seems as if most people, instead of trying to be obedient to the Church’s desires, are only looking for loopholes in her teaching so that they can “make fit” their own ideas and desires.

While I believe that statement to be pretty darn true, except that I don’t believe it to be “most people”, it must be fairly admitted that it cuts to both “sides” of the division.

I personally see the attempt to bend the Church to one’s own desires almost exclusively at the fringes of both preferences. Most in the “center” seem to be either oblivious to the whole thing or willing to go along with whatever the Church decides.

The one thing I am seeing though, which does not bode well for those on the “traditional” side, is that as the more vocal “traditionalists” continue to state and imply that those who don’t hew to their preference are in someway inferior or deficient, many who didn’t used to care, or supported their desire to bring back the TLM, are now becoming actively opposed.

I have long supported the indult, but I am having increasing reservations about the tremendous division it is creating.

Peace,

 

[E.E.N.S]

While I believe that statement to be pretty darn true, except that I don’t believe it to be “most people”, it must be fairly admitted that it cuts to both “sides” of the division.

I personally see the attempt to bend the Church to one’s own desires almost exclusively at the fringes of both preferences. Most in the “center” seem to be either oblivious to the whole thing or willing to go along with whatever the Church decides.

The one thing I am seeing though, which does not bode well for those on the “traditional” side, is that as the more vocal “traditionalists” continue to state and imply that those who don’t hew to their preference are in someway inferior or deficient, many who didn’t used to care, or supported their desire to bring back the TLM, are now becoming actively opposed.

I have long supported the indult, but I am having increasing reservations about the tremendous division it is creating.

Peace,

While division itself is something to be avoided, I don’t see much of this particular division as necessarily a bad thing. At least from what I can see, much of the division is coming from those who are in teaching positions and are not teaching according to the Holy Catholic Faith. (This is the only real division that I have seen firsthand, aside from a few people who think it may cause division, but that is another thing entirely.)
Pope St. Pius X addresses these people, to whom I am refering, in his encyclical Pascendi Gregis. Unfortunately, these are not a few, and not even the episcopate is free of their subversion.

 

[ncjohn]

While division itself is something to be avoided, I don’t see much of this particular division as necessarily a bad thing. At least from what I can see, much of the division is coming from those who are in teaching positions and are not teaching according to the Holy Catholic Faith. (This is the only real division that I have seen firsthand, aside from a few people who think it may cause division, but that is another thing entirely.)
Pope St. Pius X addresses these people, to whom I am refering, in his encyclical Pascendi Gregis. Unfortunately, these are not a few, and not even the episcopate is free of their subversion.

And again, I don’t disagree with you as long as we recognize that what you say is true of both sides. There are those on both sides of the TLM preference who are proclaiming things that are outside what the Church teaches.

I do disagree though about the division in this case not being a bad thing. When people are saying, from either side, that a valid liturgy of the Church (either one) is better/worse than another one–when the Church has bluntly stated that to not be true in Sacrosanctum Concilium–the division that is created in causing people to take sides against their fellow Catholics is indeed a very bad thing.