Should Latin mass be brought back?

[OraLabora]

Extrinsically…well…Gregorian Chant and incense convey the sacred nature of the Mass better than banjos (the latter which you simply will never see at the Traditional Mass.)

I attended an OF Mass this very morning in Gregorian chant, as I did last Sunday, and as I will next week and every other week this year. I have never heard a banjo at an OF Mass though I do understand a guitar has been known to be heard in the Tridentine Mass.

So…your point is?

 

[R_H_Benson]

I attended an OF Mass this very morning in Gregorian chant, as I did last Sunday, and as I will next week and every other week this year.

There are relatively few OF Masses that incorporate any Gregorian Chant. I attended the Novus Ordo Missae for nearly 25 years at various parishes and I would hear the (very) occasional Gregorian melody used in the place of a hymn or the Sanctus and Agnus Dei set to Mass 8 or 9, but never once did I hear the propers chanted.

I have never heard a banjo at an OF Mass though I do understand a guitar has been known to be heard in the Tridentine Mass.

I have. One difference is that in the Novus Ordo Missae, the use of a guitar does not necessarily constitute an abuse. Whereas in the Traditional Mass, it does.

 

[R_H_Benson]

Sure, some people like the pomp and seemingly fancy trimmings. For a while, …but if their ROOT religious ed is lacking and they believe it’s not necessary to continue learning about their faith?

For the majority of Catholics, the one hour they spend at Mass weekly IS their religious education. If the liturgy doesn’t convey to them that it is necessary to be there, then isn’t something wrong with it?

 

[JoyToTheWhirled]

Sooo not understanding this dispute. I attend an OF Mass, and I consider it the most reverent church service I have ever been to. No banjos, Father chants most of the liturgy, the host is treated with the utmost care and reverence. What am I not getting?

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Summorum Pontificum issued by Pope Bededict XVI in 2007 does not specify that as the sole reason for the liberation of the Traditonal Mass. That was JPII’s 1988 Ecclesia Dei. SP

Furthermore, Benedict explicitly cites the interest of the youth in the Traditional Mass as a reason for issuing SP:

“Immediately after the Second Vatican Council it was presumed that requests for the use of the 1962 Missal would be limited to the older generation which had grown up with it, but in the meantime it has clearly been demonstrated that young persons too have discovered this liturgical form, felt its attraction and found in it a form of encounter with the Mystery of the Most Holy Eucharist, particularly suited to them. Thus the need has arisen for a clearer juridical regulation which had not been foreseen at the time of the 1988 Motu Proprio. The present Norms are also meant to free Bishops from constantly having to evaluate anew how they are to respond to various situations.”

EDIT: this is not a quote directly from SP, but from the letter given to the Bishops by Pope Benedict along with SP

The recognition of some youth that are attracted to TLM is mentioned in passing in the letter to the bishops. The reason given in the Moto Proprio is:

In some regions, however, not a few of the faithful continued to be attached with such love and affection to the earlier liturgical forms which had deeply shaped their culture and spirit, that in 1984 Pope John Paul II, concerned for their pastoral care, through the special Indult Quattuor Abhinc Annos issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship, granted the faculty of using the Roman Missal published in 1962 by Blessed John XXIII. Again in 1988, John Paul II, with the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei, exhorted bishops to make broad and generous use of this faculty on behalf of all the faithful who sought it.

Given the continued requests of these members of the faithful, long deliberated upon by our predecessor John Paul II, and having listened to the views expressed by the Cardinals present at the Consistory of 23 March 2006, upon mature consideration, having invoked the Holy Spirit and with trust in God’s help, by this Apostolic Letter we decree the following:

The letter to the bishops talks about this point much more than the passing mention that some youth are attracted to it.

 

[Walking_Home]

pianistclare:

Sure, some people like the pomp and seemingly fancy trimmings. For a while, …but if their ROOT religious ed is lacking and they believe it’s not necessary to continue learning about their faith?

For the majority of Catholics, the one hour they spend at Mass weekly IS their religious education. If the liturgy doesn’t convey to them that it is necessary to be there, then isn’t something wrong with it?

---

The majority of my Sunday church going in-laws – left the Church – back before the the OF. I doubt – they were the only ones. Doesn’t look like the traditional Mass was conveying to them at that time.

 

[BornInMarch]

Most people don’t speak Latin but would still like a mass where we can actually understand what the Priest is saying.

 

[twf]

“Latin Mass” is a poor term. The Novus Ordo is also a “Latin Mass” (a form of the Mass promulgated for the Latin Church and written in Latin…). Our cathedral uses Latin every Sunday for certain parts of the Mass…

 

[R_H_Benson]

While that is sad for your in-laws, I’m trying to look at trends, not anecdotes.

 

[Walking_Home]

No – what you were actually saying – is that the EF Mass itself – is sufficient to convey the Faith – as opposed to the OF.

That fact that people left the Church – prior to the OF – says different.

 

[R_H_Benson]

I acknowledged that things weren’t perfect before 1965. Far from it. Yes, sadly many people left the faith or were ignorant of it while the Traditional Mass was the norm. But since the mid-1960s, a statistically verifiable crisis has been afflicting the Church. As I mentioned before, Mass attendance is virtually zero in Western Europe and dropping in the United States. Belief in the Real Presence is dropping. Few go to confession. The majority of Catholics can’t explain what the Church teaches about the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. All of this coincides chronologically with the introduction of a new liturgy. Why are so many Catholics of good will so afraid to acknowledge this? We are all on the same side. Shouldn’t we be honestly assessing the reason that the “ship is capsizing” to paraphrase Pope Benedict? Shouldn’t a critical and honest examination of the efficacy of the liturgy that is, for most Catholics, the only time they learn about their faith, be the first step in righting the course? If not, why?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Mass attendance is standing room only in Poland, and most of those Masses aren’t TLM. There is nothing magical about one form of Mass over another.

Having said that, I will reiterate what I always say every time this topic comes up, which seems to be weekly. I like all different types of Masses. I enjoy attending different forms. They all have the same Jesus and gospel. All are good in different ways. No one form is greater than others.

 

[pianistclare]

No. If they have no clue what’s going on (and believe me, there are people who don’t) it doesn’t matter how beautiful others perceive it to be. And what kind of catechesis exists where the teacher speaks in a non-native language and has his back tot he students? How effective is that?
People have to know why they are going in the first place. Parishes and instructors need to back WAY up for some people. Simply saying “you ought to be getting this” leaves people believing that we don’t care. We see this all the time posted on CAF. My parish has failed me.
Well yes, we have. We don’t offer much in the way of continuing ed.
When was the last time your parish offered a Teaching Mass??

 

[1Lord1Faith]

You’ve got a correlation - causation thing going on here that is way off. Western culture changed, and it was not because of Vatican ll. The cultural changes were underway before Vatican ll, and there is every indication to me that the changes from Vatican ll kept more people from leaving and brought more people back who had already left because of the way the Church was before Vll. Vll was not just about the liturgy, it’s not the OF’s fault. Period. That’s why no one feels a need to talk about it.

 

[PJM]

It would be a VERY good thing with positive results

GBY

Patrick

 

[R_H_Benson]

Then, if you absolve the new liturgy of any responsibility for the crisis in the Church, in your opinion, where does the ancient saying lex orandi, lex credendi (roughly translated as “the way we worship is the way we believe”)fit in? Is it just an irrelevant old cliche? Or does it lend credence to some insights that many Catholics feel uncomfortable acknowledging?..

 

[pianistclare]

That’s loose alright.
Try reading this:

https://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/how-we-teach/catechesis/catechetical-sunday/word-of-god/upload/lex-orandi-lex-credendi.pdf

 

[Trishie]

The first Mass, the first transubstanciarian and Communion at the Last Supper was celebrated with little ceremony, very simply in the vernacular. The early apostles, the first priests, also celebrated in the vernacular, which is to say, their native language, Aramaic.
Latin was introduced to provide a universal language, the language of the Roman Empire that had conquered much of the known world.

The essential reality of the Mass is profound beyond understanding.
For some, the beauty and reverence of the ceremony, combined with that essential awesome supernatural reality which inspires and uplifts the spirit; for others, it is that essential awe-inspiring supernatural reality, held within quiet simple reverence, that touches the soul.
This is why the Church offers both.

A random thought…While Latin was chosen as the universal language, would it be true that English is the modern equivalent?

 

[commenter]

shouldn’t we consider the maxim lex orandi, lex credendi? A strong argument can be made for the correlation of the quality of liturgical worship with the beliefs of the faithful. Sure, things weren’t perfect before 1965. But now things are in an abysmal state - for example, few Catholics come to Mass even on Sundays and even fewer go to confession. Based on the tried and true test of lex orandi, lex credendi, I think it is prudent to assign at least some of the blame for the current crisis to a deficiency in the new liturgy.

I can’t refute you. I think we both agree that things are in an abysmal state, on many levels. I also think the EF should be made far more widely available.

The only thing I would add is that there was a group of people, especially priests and sisters, who imposed or allowed abuses of liturgy, and other abuses, especially catechetics, mainly in the late 1960s, though continuing after that. All of those people had been raised exclusively on the old liturgy, usually daily Mass for many decades.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Well, no, if the tabernacle is not behind the alter you’re supposed to bow when entering a pew. At my church the tabernacle is behind the alter, and everyone still bows when they approach or leave the alter.

Yea, I love watching a Mass in St. Peter’s Square on TV and seeing people approach the barriers with their hands outstretched for the Eucharist and then being made aware that they need to have it placed on their tongue, or shoved in their mouth…awkward.