Should Latin mass be brought back?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow. Many who replied as of today sure had a lot to say in defense of the NO and not many kind words for the young person who would like to bring back the sacredness of TLM. Maybe he used the wrong word. Every Mass, if using the proper words of consecration, is a sacred Mass. I understand that. But why aim for the least you can do that will still allow the Mass to be valid or sacred? Why not aim for greater REVERENCE, greater personal reflection on God, and less celebration of ourselves? I am sure to set off a firestorm by mentioning “celebration of ourselves” in the NO. When I consider how many newer hymns use the words I and me, I can’t help but wonder where the focus is. Some older folks do have a great attachment to the NO because it expresses many things they worked so hard for in their religion. I can understand the attachment to something you worked for. They worked for emphasis on the community meal aspect of the Mass, love of neighbor, the endless mercy of God. Not that those are wrong, but some people are ready for another step, which is a greater focus on God, a use of ancient powerful hymns and prayers, more self reflection, and attending the Mass of most of the great saints, These do not cancel out what others have worked for, and those who long for greater liturgical reverence have a right not to be held back or held in error by others. Everyone is at a different place on the journey, and we should always treat each other charitably, from whatever vantage point we are at.
 
Last edited:
Lucky you! You might have gotten this. And some liturgical practices do lead to this celebration of self! We all need to be vigilant.
Notice that the priest (or someone dressed as a priest) is dancing as well.
 
Never seen that in any of the parishes – where I have attended Mass. Don’t try to make it like --something like that is the “norm”-- and one is lucky to not encounter it.
 
Last edited:
There is a saying – pride goeth before the fall. Meditate on that.
 
Last edited:
I think it’s the bishop’s call.

Unless it’s a monastery Mass. 🙂
 
What “bringing it back?” It never went away.

Bishops who allow it has the following condition. :

Tons of people who desire it and he needs to make it available, period.
The fact is, not that many people want it.
There are a VOCAL few that get online and bang this drum.
Reverence can be found anywhere. Speaking Latin is not magical.
Some people like it, correct.
Lots of other people don’t prefer it.
You need to accept that fact and go your merry way, to a Latin Mass. Enjoy.
Or a country where people speak Latin as their vernacular.
Oh wait, there isn’t one.
 
R_H_Benson said:
As an example of “wreckovation”, have a look at the new altar in the Fatima Basilica. Beautiful, right? Pay close attention to the flowers planted in front of it, making it impossible to offer Mass ad orientem.
Click to expand...
I’m surprised you’re not upset that someone is taking pictures during Mass, as it isn’t exactly the most reverent thing to be taking pictures.

It’s probably the mendicant in me, but when I’m not participating with music at Mass, I’m a longstanding proponent of austure liturgy and surroundings. Even when I’m participating with music, I prefer a more low-key approach.
 
Last edited:
Melchior_1 said:
I’m surprised you’re not upset that someone is taking pictures during Mass, as it isn’t exactly the most reverent thing to be taking pictures.
Click to expand...
It appears to be a picture of the ceremony of the dedication of the altar. I can understand why they would want pictures of that event. Other events like ordinations, weddings, etc., I don’t think there is anything wrong with having a photographer. It isn’t necessarily irreverent. It certainly could be though if it were intrusive or disruptive.
 
Looks like to be the part of Mass where they’re mixing the water and wine.

It’s interesting that you give the person taking this photo possibly during the Mass the benefit of the doubt, but not other things.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think it is ‘toxic’ to express a preference for the Traditional Latin Mass.
 
I believe that is why Walking_Home put the word “traditionalism” in scare quotes. Of course there is nothing wrong with the EF or traditionalism. But personally, while I don’t remember ever encountering anyone bashing traditionalists in my diocese or country, I remember many vocal proponents of the EF, including certain Fr. Z. (**), acting snidely and condescendingly towards OF-goers. But that is purely personal experience and I’m more than willing to believe those who claim mistreatment of traditionalists – just not where I’m from 😃

The sad reality is that while most people simply desire to attend the form of liturgy that leads them best towards Christ, there are those who tend to actively separate themselves into “camps” and to be always ready to argue their own holier-than-thou superiority. I firmly believe that they are a small but loud minority, but as far as toxicity goes, either of these camps is the pot calling the kettle black.

Coincidentally, it is noon around here, and in about two hours, I’m leaving to attend the EF for the first time in my life. I’m really looking forward to it.

(**) Anyone reading, please disregard this, I had Fr. Z. confused with someone else.
 
Last edited:
I’ve been reading Father Z for at least 7 years. I’ve never experienced him 'acting snidely and condescending towards (sic) OF-goers. However, that kind of subjective judgment rests largely on the experience of a given reader, doesn’t it? So it should not be surprising that a person who might already ‘feel’ that somebody who likes the EF is ‘condescending’ toward the OF simply by nature of liking the EF, and therefore to ‘read into’ comments that are perfectly neutral and polite a ‘condescending feeling’. And it should also not be surprising that somebody who likes the EF and has been barraged for 40 plus years with statements that are ‘toxic’, condescending, and snide toward their preference (I believe I have heard even in these enlightened times statements about ‘rigidity’), that those people likewise might look at a statement that is ‘neutral and polite’ and see 40 plus years of sneering and sniggering behind it.

So maybe both groups should try a little harder not to immediately assume a ‘snide and condescending attitude’ on the part of the other group and try to be a little more objective.

One last remark: I know that there is a small and vocal group of people who really are nasty about the OF. That group does not, repeat does not, include Father Z. Desiring to have more of the EF in order for the mutual enrichment of EF AND OF is certainly not, IMO, snide and condescending. The very few ‘fringe’ groups are indeed condemned. However, there is a much larger vocal group of people, especially in the last 10 years, who are extremely condemning of the EF, and this is far more worrisome to me. If it were the kind of small fringe ‘progressive’ groups that were condemning the EF, one could look at the phenomenon as simply ‘extremes’, and note that the vast majority of people were tolerant and accepting of both rites (which is what it should be). But it isn’t. I mean, this is Catholic Answers, and in the 13-1/2 years I’ve been on here, I have seen an incredible ‘slide’ whereby more and more of the people who are solidly orthodox in most all Catholic teachings --the kind of reasonable, healthy, kindly people that were the backbone of the members here–are coming, more and more, to an attitude that ranges from 'Well, the EF is ok for the people who like it, but honestly, they aren’t the kind of people I’d like to know, the OF people are a lot healthier and nicer" to “The EF is really not helpful, the OF is sufficient, and I wish people who liked the EF would shut up because they’re so negative and hate the OF” to “The EF should be gotten rid of once and for all, the people are so sanctimonious, they want to drag us back to the Dark Ages, I hate Latin, and above all, the EF people HATE our dear Pope Francis and that’s why they and their kind should be forced to atone for their sins against Pope Francis and the OF. We don’t want to go ‘back’ to ANY of the ‘old ways’, we’re an Easter people, we need to be open and move forward and keep on developing new better ways”.
 
stpurl said:
I’ve been reading Father Z for at least 7 years. I’ve never experienced him 'acting snidely and condescending towards (sic) OF-goers.
Click to expand...
And your right, of course. I went back to see the post I had in mind and after 30 minutes of searching found out that it was written by someone else. I guess I also sometimes tend to argue with fervor inversely proportional to my knowledge of the matter. My sincere apologies, I’ve amended my post (hopefully) approprietly.
 
It’s toxic when people resort to tearing down the OF – to give “superiority” the EF.
 
Last edited:
poche said:
authentic
Click to expand...
Which version is authentic though? Pope Gregory I (590–604) made a large number of changes to the Roman Mass, and also the earliest forms (of the Roman Mass) were in Greek.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top