Should We Just Toll the Death Knell for the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite?

[At_Trent]

Who are these crazy trads ? The nerve of them ordaining priests via the old Mass
newliturgicalmovement.org/2011/06/fssp-ordination-in-krakow-poland.html

 

[At_Trent]

Someone forgot to ring the bell

ecclesiadei.org/Information.htm

 

[ProVobis]

In every day there are two masses, the TLM and the Ordinary form; this later has twice as much attendance, proving that the daily churchgoer prefer the new form. Once again the new form is full reverent with Gregorian chant, communion kneeling and to tongue, opportunity for confession in every mass and before; just as the council dreamed about the Mass.

If you’re speaking of Volo, that is really very misleading information. If it weren’t for the TLM, that parish would have been closed in all likelihood and its parishioners would have just “packed” the other parishes in that area. Same for St. John Cantius.

One more point, about my territorial parish. When I was young and fresh there was fourteen priest running a parish of same size. Here in this parish (4500 registered parishioners, about 2000 weekend attendance) there is just one priest, and a visitor on Sundays. Despite this the parish has vibrant community life, as active or more as was by 14 priest in my childhood. The parish is run by lay activist, who like the parish sacrifice their time and talent for it. This is typical at least around here, the result of Vatican II.

Before Vatican II, each of those parishes most likely had TWICE as many Masses, the “result” of many more priests and parishioners. Typically now parishes have 2-3 Sunday morning Masses with an increasing “substitution” of Spanish and other languages. The whole reason for a new English translation seems to be the dwindling interest of the old translation.

 

[laszlo]

Who are these crazy trads ? The nerve of them ordaining priests via the old Mass
newliturgicalmovement.org/2011/06/fssp-ordination-in-krakow-poland.html

FSSP priest always ordained their candidates according to the 1962 books anywhere is the world. At least once than Cardinal Ratzinger made the ordination.

 

[At_Trent]

FSSP priest always ordained their candidates according to the 1962 books anywhere is the world. At least once than Cardinal Ratzinger made the ordination.

That’s the point.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I believe in the world we live in today, a truly reverent OF will always attract more people. And maybe this is the death knell for the EF.

I would attend a reverent OF with kneeling, lots of Latin and communion kneeling and on the tongue with no problem.

But how are you defining “fully reverent?” Certainly, Gregorian chant/polyphany should have pride of place, but it is not absolutely required by the Church, so is a Mass without chant/polyphany somehow not “fully reverent?” The all-vernacular Mass is approved by the Holy See. Is a Mass where there is no Latin somehow lacking in reverence? The Holy See has approved of Holy Communion in the hand (now for most of the Catholic world) and Holy Communion given in procession (and most communicants at even papal masses recieve in that mode). Is this a Mass where this is more common lacking in essential reverence?

I find the mindset that insists on these things problematic. I know that outward postures and actions can influence interior attitudes, certainly, but this absolute insistence, especially when it sets itself against things permitted by the Church, is very strident and, frankly, obnoxious. And one poster said, “we will prevail.” What does “prevail” mean? “Traditionalists” won’t be satisfied until the EF has become the OF and the OF is the EF? Will you work to completely suppress the OF? What of those who love it? It almosts sounds as if we are less than Catholic in the minds of “traditionalists?” Whether anyone here believes it or not, many devout, orthodox Catholics love the OF, rightly celebrated. My old pastor, who died last Novemember, always offered a “fully reverent” Holy Sacrifice in the OF, and we had barely any chant, next to know Latin, and Holy Communion was recieved as is customary in most parts of the US.

 

[TrueLight]

I’m just getting back from my cruise so I’m just seeing this question. I think you made some good comments and they caused me to reflect. So I will respond to the best of my ability of what kind of masses I consider to be reverent.

But how are you defining “fully reverent?” Certainly, Gregorian chant/polyphany should have pride of place, but it is not absolutely required by the Church, so is a Mass without chant/polyphany somehow not “fully reverent?” The all-vernacular Mass is approved by the Holy See. Is a Mass where there is no Latin somehow lacking in reverence?

Of course a mass does not have to include Latin to be reverent. However, I find that when Latin is used, it sort of inspires reverence if only for the fact that we are speaking a language traditionally used and reserved to the church for over a thousand years.

Personally, aside from the reverence issue, I do not believe we should give up this wonderful, unique tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Holy See has approved of Holy Communion in the hand (now for most of the Catholic world) and Holy Communion given in procession (and most communicants at even papal masses recieve in that mode). Is this a Mass where this is more common lacking in essential reverence?

Again, I believe certain acts like genuflecting, bowing and kneeling and receiving communion on the tongue inspire reverence by clicking a switch in someone’s head that says, “you are before the Living God. Act like it.” Not to say that it is not possible to have that same humility and sense of awe in receiving in the hand.

I am not one that would presume to judge someone’s heart in that matter. Both ways are valid according to the Church.

I find the mindset that insists on these things problematic. I know that outward postures and actions can influence interior attitudes, certainly, but this absolute insistence, especially when it sets itself against things permitted by the Church, is very strident and, frankly, obnoxious. And one poster said, “we will prevail.” What does “prevail” mean? “Traditionalists” won’t be satisfied until the EF has become the OF and the OF is the EF? Will you work to completely suppress the OF? What of those who love it? It almosts sounds as if we are less than Catholic in the minds of “traditionalists?” Whether anyone here believes it or not, many devout, orthodox Catholics love the OF, rightly celebrated. My old pastor, who died last Novemember, always offered a “fully reverent” Holy Sacrifice in the OF, and we had barely any chant, next to know Latin, and Holy Communion was recieved as is customary in most parts of the US.

I can’t speak for other people. I am certainly not trying to suppress the OF. However, I would not want to see the EF completely disappear either.

 

[Santi2]

Where do you see the Extraordinary Form going in the next 10 years?

It has been a difficult 40 years over here. However, the future of the EF has never been more promising!

lms.org.uk/about-us

 

[InquisitorMax]

A Mass is composed of symbols; words, music, actions, icons etc. Change these and you change how the Mass is interpreted.

It’s a source of grim amusement to me that liberals don’t understand how their additions, subtractions, novelties and archeologisms affect how people react to a Mass.

e.g. It’s a Sacred Rite but we’ll get as many people as we can in the sanctuary. And then wonder why people aren’t so fussed about it any more.

The TLM is currently a refuge from local creativity. When you go to one, you’re 99.9% likely to get a Mass said according to the mind of the church, instead of according to the mind of Fr. X or liturgical director Y.

 

[SunnaB16]

It’s a source of grim amusement to me that liberals don’t understand how their additions, subtractions, novelties and archeologisms affect how people react to a Mass.

The spiritual entity who drives them understands perfectly.

The TLM is currently a refuge from local creativity…

Creativity or MISCREANTIVITY?

 

[Silver_Thread]

Thought you folks could use a good laugh. This is from an article in The Oxford Review. Fr. Eric Hodgens Melbourne, referring to the new translation for the OF of the Latin Mass calling it “The new consultive politically motivated super-imposition of a new defective translation of the liturgy”. Now…I wonder if he can find it in his heart to understand where we are coming from ?

 

[pataburd]

Short answer: no. : )

 

[TrueLight]

Just a quick reminder that we are not supposed to be debating whether one form is better than another as per the rules.

But regarding the idea of the EF dying out. If the 1962 missal were revised and the Church came out with a 2012 missal for example, which was very similar to the 1962 missal, but with a little more laity participation for example, the laity singing the Pater Noster and maybe the Agnus Dei. Would it still be the EF?

Or must the EF always follow the 1962 missal?

 

[ProVobis]

Or must the EF always follow the 1962 missal?

The UE apparently allowed new saints to be added to the 1962 calendar. That means new Latin propers, etc. Are you up to that?

 

[TrueLight]

The UE apparently allowed new saints to be added to the 1962 calendar. That means new Latin propers, etc. Are you up to that?

No, I’m not. Where do I find more info on that?

 

[ProVobis]

Thought you folks could use a good laugh. This is from an article in The Oxford Review. Fr. Eric Hodgens Melbourne, referring to the new translation for the OF of the Latin Mass calling it “The new consultive politically motivated super-imposition of a new defective translation of the liturgy”. Now…I wonder if he can find it in his heart to understand where we are coming from ?

Is that copyrighted? I’ll have to remember that one.

 

[ProVobis]

Where do I find more info on that?

New saints and new prefaces can be integrated and provisions will be issued about that.

latinmassjax.org/Universae-Ecclesiae.htm

 

[TrueLight]

latinmassjax.org/Universae-Ecclesiae.htm

Awesome! Thanks.

 

[malphono]

No, I’m not. Where do I find more info on that?

At this point, there really isn’t much information to be had. From Universae Ecclesiae:

1. New saints and certain of the new prefaces can and ought to be inserted into the 1962 Missal (*9), according to provisions which will be indicated subsequently

*9 Cf. BENEDICTUS XVI, Epistola ad Episcopos ad producendas Litteras Apostolicas Motu Proprio datas, de Usu Liturgiae Romanae Instaurationi anni 1970 praecedentis, AAS 99 (2007) 797.

 

[Planty_Pall]

Just a quick reminder that we are not supposed to be debating whether one form is better than another as per the rules.

But regarding the idea of the EF dying out. If the 1962 missal were revised and the Church came out with a 2012 missal for example, which was very similar to the 1962 missal, but with a little more laity participation for example, the laity singing the Pater Noster and maybe the Agnus Dei. Would it still be the EF?

Or must the EF always follow the 1962 missal?

The congregation already sings the Agnus Dei at High Mass. The only time the congregation says the Our Father is on Good Friday.

I don’t have to be talking or singing to participate. Honestly, when I go to an Ordinary Form for a funeral or graduation or something, it seems so distracting to always have to be talking. My participation is not going to be helped by reciting the Pater Noster or any other prayers currently reserved to the priest. I’m not saying I would resist it, but I wouldn’t welcome it. I don’t think anybody I know of who goes to this Mass feels deprived.

Speaking of Good Friday, Pope Benedict did change the prayers of intercession for the Jews and so no, the EF does not always exactly follow the 1962 Missal.