Responding to: I get nothing out of the Latin Mass

[holdencaulfield]

This is the typical Neo-Catholic argument. I would say this. Do you not receive the Eucharist in the Tridentine Mass. Of course you do, in fact in a more reverent way. Also if you attend enough you will learn what is going on and “get something out of it”. Furthermore how does the beauty of the Mass not “give you something”? However what is most important is to worship Our Lord the Most Holy and Blessed Trinity.

 

[palmas85]

THE NO can be said in Latin…it’s first form was Latin…he was not imposing elements of TLM but rather doing was is quite allowable in the NO, saying parts of it in Latin, which has a particularly symbolic message when people of many languages are in a common location. However, for a local mass at a local parish the Vernacular is Spectacular.

I suppose that may be true in a Parish where everyone is of exactly the same ethnic and linguistic background, which for better or worse is seldom the case anymore. As an example, in San Diego my Parish had relatively equal numbers of Spanish speakers of different heritages, Filipinos, Vietnamese and Anglos. Many of the Filipinos and Vietnamese were older and spoke limited if any English. No vernacular Masses for them:tsktsk: There was one, I repeat, one Spanish Mass, and all of the others, twice daily, Vigil on Saturday and four Sunday Masses, all in English. Fair to say at least half of those at at any given Mass, except the Spanish Mass had a limited understanding of what was being said.

Now my own situation. I arrived in the US in the early 50’s, a very small, dark skinned Filipino boy who spoke only Visayan, no Tagalog or English for me. BUT I knew the Latin responses to the Mass and what those responses:thumbsup: meant. This enabled me, to actively participate in the Mass even though no one else there spoke my language or I theirs. In fact, I was serving at the Altar in less than two months after arriving here.:

I could not have done that today. And I wonder just how many today are like I was then, a new arrival, an immigrant and unable to communicate effectively are frozen out today,

Many on this forum seem to feel that Latin divided the Church. It didn’t. It unified Catholics from all over the world and I’m afraid that is one of the biggest losses the Church has had since Vatican II. That sense of global unity that was in great part based on the common use of a language that was not particular of any of us, but we were all part of.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Mon frere. You are too humble. You also spoke Y’at.

 

[holdencaulfield]

I suppose that may be true in a Parish where everyone is of exactly the same ethnic and linguistic background, which for better or worse is seldom the case anymore. As an example, in San Diego my Parish had relatively equal numbers of Spanish speakers of different heritages, Filipinos, Vietnamese and Anglos. Many of the Filipinos and Vietnamese were older and spoke limited if any English. No vernacular Masses for them:tsktsk: There was one, I repeat, one Spanish Mass, and all of the others, twice daily, Vigil on Saturday and four Sunday Masses, all in English. Fair to say at least half of those at at any given Mass, except the Spanish Mass had a limited understanding of what was being said.

Now my own situation. I arrived in the US in the early 50’s, a very small, dark skinned Filipino boy who spoke only Visayan, no Tagalog or English for me. BUT I knew the Latin responses to the Mass and what those responses:thumbsup: meant. This enabled me, to actively participate in the Mass even though no one else there spoke my language or I theirs. In fact, I was serving at the Altar in less than two months after arriving here.:

I could not have done that today. And I wonder just how many today are like I was then, a new arrival, an immigrant and unable to communicate effectively are frozen out today,

Many on this forum seem to feel that Latin divided the Church. It didn’t. It unified Catholics from all over the world and I’m afraid that is one of the biggest losses the Church has had since Vatican II. That sense of global unity that was in great part based on the common use of a language that was not particular of any of us, but we were all part of.

Excellent post. The Tridentine Mass was in fact the Universal form of the Liturgy because everyone could participate and understand it. It’s sad that it has fallen out of use.

 

[palmas85]

Mon frere. You are too humble. You also spoke Y’at.

Actually old friend, I didn’t totally realize that “yat” wasn’t standard English until I went into the Navy. You should have seen some of the looks I got in Boot Camp . Nobody knew what I was and couldn’t figure me out at all… Of course when I got to Vietnam, all the locals thought I was Cambodian and wouldn’t have much to do with me.

My shipmates thought I was nuts or retarded because of the way I pronounced some words. I’ll bet you can guess some of those

 

[brotherhrolf]

Let me know when you come down here again. I’ll take you to lunch. We can talk NO high schools - you probably know my cousins in the class of 67 and class of 69. We did grow up differently my friend, did we not?
I wouldn’t trade it for the world. And Fr. Seelos is now Blessed Fr. Seelos.

I want to move “home”

 

[anthony022071]

I continued on by asking what the purpose of mass is and he responded with well to hear the readings and receive Jesus in the Eucharist. I responded with no, the purpose of the mass is to worship God.

Along with this the argument of well I don’t understand it came up I responded with, “It’s a mystery – if you know everything that’s going on, something is wrong.”

What sense does that make?
Did the Christians of 3rd century Rome not know what was going on,or were they missing out on the mystery of the mass when they heard the liturgy in their own language? And the central purpose of the mass is indeed to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. That,along with hearing the scriptures is part of worshiping God. The mass doesn’t cease to have mystery when you hear it in your own language and when you know what’s going on. The gospel was meant to be heard in people’s mother tongue,as at the beginning of the Church on Pentacost.

 

[anthony022071]

Too many people view the use of Latin and the Silent Canon as a kind of temple veil to keep the unwashed masses from getting to close to the Sacred Mystries. The thought seems to be that if they could understand, or even hear the words of consecration, the people would be less in awe of the Divine Mystery of the Eucharist.

Yes,we’re not Jews.

Mark,15;37-38

Jesus gave a loud cry and breathed his last.

The veil of the sanctuary was torn in two from top to bottom.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

It’s hard to worship when you don’t understand the words being used to worship. The mass is NOT the sacrafice of the priest alone, it’s the sacrafice and celebration of the congregation as well, that’s why now days they require a priest, in most circumstances, to have a congregation when offering the mass.

**1. The Priest says Mass daily (Latin Rite Priests) regardless of whether or not they have a congreation.
**
**2. The Sacrifice is Christ’s and Christ’s alone.

1. A priest is the only one authorized to offer the Holy Sacrifice (all Ordained persons besides deacons are authorized to offer the Holy Sacrifice).
2. We are there to receive Christ in the Eucharist, that IS worship.
3. In cases where a priest is absent a deacon may offer a “communion service” to the congregation but not offer the Holy Sacrifice. This is where there is a Liturgy of the Word said and pre-consecrated wafers are used for Holy Communion, with readings etc.
4. It doesn’t matter which tongue the Mass is in; the Mass is the Mass.
   **

 

[Yerusalyim]

Excellent post. The Tridentine Mass was in fact the Universal form of the Liturgy because everyone could participate and understand it. It’s sad that it has fallen out of use.

Except that everyone did NOT understand it and sometimes participation was relegated to praying the rosary and receiving communion. Speaking with my family members (mother, father, grandparents, etc) they did NOT understand latin and responded by rote…if they responded at all.

I DO get Something out of the Latin mass…I get SO MUCH MORE from Mass in English or Spanish.

**1. The Priest says Mass daily (Latin Rite Priests) regardless of whether or not they have a congreation.
**

Yes, but it’s by EXCEPTION that this is done without members of the Laity present according to Canon 906.
2. The Sacrifice is Christ’s and Christ’s alone.
We as laity (and as priests, etc) participate in offering the sacrafice…and the celebration is ours as a congregation.

3.** A priest** is the only one authorized to offer the Holy Sacrifice (all Ordained persons besides deacons are authorized to offer the Holy Sacrifice). Well duh, but the liturgy is the act of the ENTIRE CHURCH.

4. We are there to receive Christ in the Eucharist, that IS worship.
No, we are there to participate in the entire act of worship…again, go back and read both the theology of the mass and the CCC, the liturgy is an act of the ENTIRE people of God, not just the priest.
**5. In cases where a priest is absent a deacon may offer a “communion service” to the congregation but not offer the Holy Sacrifice. This is where there is a Liturgy of the Word said and pre-consecrated wafers are used for Holy Communion, with readings etc.**Yes, I’m quite familiar with that, unfortunately…what’s your point?

6. It doesn’t matter which tongue the Mass is in; the Mass is the Mass. My point exactly…it doesn’t matter, so folks need to stop insisting that the NO mass is somehow deficient because it’s not in said in Latin.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Boy, here we go again. I fell asleep at teh computer and woke up with the same myth being flouted in my face. Nope, I never saw my mother’s fingers showing me the words in Latin and English. This little round faced Irish kid had no idea of what those words meant on the laminated placcard while serving Mass. All holy mumbo jumbo that could just as well have been Vietnamese.

You cheapen my mother. You cheapen me. No. I had no idea what was going on when I was a kid. I had not one iota of understanding of what I was saying all those years of six AM Mass with just me and Father present and no, I was not abused.

My pastor back then was a holy man who was a chaplain durining WWII and jumped out of a plane into Normandy along with our troops. No, I didn’t experience any of that. I didn’t understand what was going on in Mass until 1968 when the guitars got brought out and “Sons of God” was proclaimed.

Stop this myth! I am sick of it! I am not a scholar. I am not unusual nor was my mother from whom I learned how to read a missal.

I am tired of being cheapened and ridiculed. We did know what we were saying. I bear unto you as a servant of Our Lord Jesus Christ that I knew what I was saying all those years ago when I served Our Lord in Latin.

Stop this stupidity that we had no idea what we were saying. It was all by rote, etc. Can I speak Latin? No. But did I understand what those prayers meant? Yes. Can I understand what those Latin motets my choir sings mean to this day. You betcha.

I can read Spanish fluently but I didn’t understand a word of the sacro-salsa sung at the Washington DC Mass of the HF.

I am so tired of hearing this blatant taurine foecal matter. No. I don’t/didn’t understand. We didn’t understand until the veil was lifted off our eyes in 68. NOT!!!

 

[Joannm]

I am sure that growing up with the Latin Mass would make a huge different. But because I did not grow up with it, its more of a distraction for me. I am glad that both are available to the faithful.

I did grow up with Latin and I thought it was the greatest thing that I was able to pray the Mass in English after Vatican II. Also, once the mass was in English my mother, who did not go to mass at all, started going to Mass because she was able to participate better and understand it.

 

[mercygate]

I suppose that may be true in a Parish where everyone is of exactly the same ethnic and linguistic background, which for better or worse is seldom the case anymore. As an example, in San Diego my Parish had relatively equal numbers of Spanish speakers of different heritages, Filipinos, Vietnamese and Anglos. Many of the Filipinos and Vietnamese were older and spoke limited if any English. No vernacular Masses for them:tsktsk: There was one, I repeat, one Spanish Mass, and all of the others, twice daily, Vigil on Saturday and four Sunday Masses, all in English. Fair to say at least half of those at at any given Mass, except the Spanish Mass had a limited understanding of what was being said.

Now my own situation. I arrived in the US in the early 50’s, a very small, dark skinned Filipino boy who spoke only Visayan, no Tagalog or English for me. BUT I knew the Latin responses to the Mass and what those responses:thumbsup: meant. This enabled me, to actively participate in the Mass even though no one else there spoke my language or I theirs. In fact, I was serving at the Altar in less than two months after arriving here.:

I could not have done that today. And I wonder just how many today are like I was then, a new arrival, an immigrant and unable to communicate effectively are frozen out today,

Many on this forum seem to feel that Latin divided the Church. It didn’t. It unified Catholics from all over the world and I’m afraid that is one of the biggest losses the Church has had since Vatican II. That sense of global unity that was in great part based on the common use of a language that was not particular of any of us, but we were all part of.

When I was an undergraduate at The University of Michigan, the English liturgy was introduced and the Catholic Chaplain was beside himself. He had native speakers of Italian, French, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Tagalog, German, Polish, Czech, Russian attending Mass – happy as clams – and now he was going to have to figure out how to make this thing universal without the use of Latin.

 

[Fergal]

My initial response would probably have been: “Perhaps you’re not putting enough in.”

Or put more directly “You get out of it what you put into it!”

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

And the central purpose of the mass is indeed to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. That,along with hearing the scriptures is part of worshiping God.

4. We are there to receive Christ in the Eucharist, that IS worship.

We are actually there at Mass to offer the sacrifice of Christ to God the Father. The reception of communion is wonderful but incidental. Those who will be unable to receive communion are still bound to assist at Mass on all Sundays and holy days because communion is NOT the main point of the Mass.

You might be interested to know that for many centuries before 1962, the communion of the faithful was not even an integral part of Mass (that’s where the so-called “second Confiteor” came from - people integrating the rite for reception of communion into the Mass). Somewhat like the homily (which was not a part of the Mass until 1969/70), communion was seen as fittingly done during Mass, but not inseparably linked to it.

 

[palmas85]

Except that everyone did NOT understand it and sometimes participation was relegated to praying the rosary and receiving communion. Speaking with my family members (mother, father, grandparents, etc) they did NOT understand latin and responded by rote…if they responded at all.

I DO get Something out of the Latin mass…I get SO MUCH MORE from Mass in English or Spanish.

So what do you propose for the multi-lingual parishes that exist in so many areas today? To be fair the vernacular must be offered to all if it is offered to any don’t you agree? If not, which vernacular do you use? That seems a bit elitist and segregationist to me.

Or would you argue that we should have different vernacular Masses for all different languages? That would seem to be more devisive than unifying. I know that was the case at my Parish in San Diego which went so far as to have two RCIA programs, one English, one Spanish, with no interaction between the groups and the Spanish speakers baptized and confirmed at a totally different Church that had the entire Vigil Mass in Spanish.

Or do you propose that all be required to learn, speak and understand the vernacular of the area? That would seem unfair to those who for whatever reason are not fluent in the local vernacular and cannot become so as is very often the case for older people in oparticular.

I’m sure you feel you get more from an English or Spanish Mass but imagine for a second that you are as I was in an area where not only was your language not spoken but no one had ever even heard of it. What would you get then? If not for the unifying effect of the** COMMON** language of Latin, I would have been completely lost.

Now I was a small boy, not very bright or educated, and yet my mother, pretty close to being completely illiterate, made sure I knew what the Latin was and how it was used, and I don’t think I was that special or unique. Not by a long shot.

If your family for whatever reason refused to learn the Latin, which is exactly what it was, then that is truly and completely on them. I’m sorry to speak bluntly but it is true. Learning the Latin was a common sacrifice that ALL had to be willing to make and it DID unify those of us who took the time to do so. The fact that your family chose not to actually explains your resistance to the Latin Mass quite adequitely. You learned your lessons well.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Somewhat like the homily (which was not a part of the Mass until 1969/70), communion was seen as fittingly done during Mass, but not inseparably linked to it.

Sigh! What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. We had sermons and then they changed the name to homily.Sigh!

 

[brotherhrolf]

My friend Palmas, we can talk until we are blue in the face and they just won’t believe us. Despite your mamma and my mamma, they just won’t believe. God bless our mammas from whom we learned Latin.

Why is there this huge disconnect between reading and speaking a language? I can read Spanish fluently but ask me to speak Spanish to my Puerto Rican sister in law and I fall flat on my face. You and I both know that you don’t need to speak a language to be able to understand it. I can read a Spanish newspaper from anywhere in the world and be able to understand the articles. Is it so hard to think that I might have been able to do the same with a far more restricted vocabulary in Latin?

We have two males from widely divergent cultures who consistently state that we understood what we were saying as altar boys. I can’t speak Latin anymore than I can speak Spanish but I can read liturgical Latin as well as I can read Cervantes.

I served 10 years as an altar boy. I’ve sung for 25 years as a cathedral chorister. Please don’t tell me I don’t know what I was saying or singing. If I can pick up the latest newspaper from Mexico City and translate the articles for you, don’t you think that I knew what I was saying in the Mass 40 years ago?

 

[Yerusalyim]

So what do you propose for the multi-lingual parishes that exist in so many areas today? To be fair the vernacular must be offered to all if it is offered to any don’t you agree? If not, which vernacular do you use? That seems a bit elitist and segregationist to me.

Or would you argue that we should have different vernacular Masses for all different languages? That would seem to be more devisive than unifying. I know that was the case at my Parish in San Diego which went so far as to have two RCIA programs, one English, one Spanish, with no interaction between the groups and the Spanish speakers baptized and confirmed at a totally different Church that had the entire Vigil Mass in Spanish.

Or do you propose that all be required to learn, speak and understand the vernacular of the area? That would seem unfair to those who for whatever reason are not fluent in the local vernacular and cannot become so as is very often the case for older people in oparticular.

I’m sure you feel you get more from an English or Spanish Mass but imagine for a second that you are as I was in an area where not only was your language not spoken but no one had ever even heard of it. What would you get then? If not for the unifying effect of the** COMMON** language of Latin, I would have been completely lost.

Now I was a small boy, not very bright or educated, and yet my mother, pretty close to being completely illiterate, made sure I knew what the Latin was and how it was used, and I don’t think I was that special or unique. Not by a long shot.

If your family for whatever reason refused to learn the Latin, which is exactly what it was, then that is truly and completely on them. I’m sorry to speak bluntly but it is true. Learning the Latin was a common sacrifice that ALL had to be willing to make and it DID unify those of us who took the time to do so. The fact that your family chose not to actually explains your resistance to the Latin Mass quite adequitely. You learned your lessons well.

Despite your insistence most parishes are not multi-lingual…at least not to the point that a common language can’t be used and understood. In my home parish we have Indians, Pakistanis, Hispanics, Poles, Germans, Italians and Caucasions…we all share two linguistic oddities…we all understand English and speak it in our lives outside the home, and none of us understand Latin to the point that it would be a viable language for conversation.

Another fine example, in an Indiana town there were large numbers of Hispanics that didn’t speak English. They formed a seperate mission parish, but as the immigrants learned English they started going to the English language Mass. The mission Parish no longer exists and the primary parish offers Mass in Spanish once a month…none of the Spanish speakers speak Latin to this day.

Look, I have absolutely no problem with having a Latin Mass, What I have a problem with is the Traditional Insistence that we go back to the archaic language of Latin for no good reason. Keep your Latin Mass, let me keep my English (or Spanish for that matter). It’s really that simple. If you want to appeal to tradition as the sole reason then I suggest we go back to saying Mass in Aramaic, which was the first language the mass was said in.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Look, I have absolutely no problem with having a Latin Mass, What I have a problem with is the Traditional Insistence that we go back to the archaic language of Latin for no good reason. Keep your Latin Mass, let me keep my English (or Spanish for that matter). It’s really that simple. If you want to appeal to tradition as the sole reason then I suggest we go back to saying Mass in Aramaic, which was the first language the mass was said in.

No one is saying that we go back to the Mass in Latin exclusively. I certainly don’t promote that. But to throw away our heritage simply because it is not in the vernacular is to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Forty years ago those Hispanic folks up in Indiana could have walked into any parish in the USA and would have been able to participate. They might not be able to have coffee and doughnuts in the parish hall after Mass but they would have been able to participate fully in the Mass. Why is this objectionable?