Statistics on Latin Mass?

[Megan7]

Probably a pretty good ballpark number. I would be interested to see priestly vocations per as a similar ratio.

I would like to see the same numbers as well. Priestly vocations matter a great deal.
If you happen to get that information, please share it here.
Thank you for your post Jason,

God bless you,

Pax

 

[jwinch2]

I would like to see the same numbers as well. Priestly vocations matter a great deal.
If you happen to get that information, please share it here.
Thank you for your post Jason,

God bless you,

Pax

I saw a number in France that about 100 out of the 700 total seminarians they had in 2012 were products of the EF of the Mass. I am not sure what the percentage of parishes celebrating that Mass is compared to those using the OF, but I would suspect it is much smaller than 14%. I could be wrong, but I don’t see it being that high.

 

[ProVobis]

According to Rorate Caeli, there are 400 Masses in the EF weekly.

Not bad, considering that many, if not most, of them were introduced in parishes where the attendance for the 1970 Missal became almost nil.

 

[JuantheTuba]

Could someone post a link to the article the OP mentioned, please? I’d like to read what else Cardinal Lehmann had to say.

 

[Kevin12]

I hope so. I don’t think so many people would be leaving, if the Church would restore an attitude towards the sacred. I have been to too many churches where the priest says Mass in an overly casual way. If Mass does not convey something that is distinct from our daily secular experiences, it becomes less important to take time out of a Sunday to go from one in an array of secular experiences, to what just feels like another.

I know that Christ’s True Presence in the Eucharist is the central reason for attending Mass. But I feel that where once the Church treated His Real Presence as a visit from Christ our King, He is now treated like Jesus the Dude; where we say “Come on in and sing Kumbaya with us.”

I’d like to ask - how much emphasis during his ministry did Christ spend worrying about whether certain rituals were being performed exactly as they were in the past, and how much time did he spend wandering from town to town with only a single set of clothing that included, yes, sandals. And how much time did he spend preaching as the teachers of the law prescribed, and how much time did he spend using parables drawn from common experience so people could understand his message?

I would also point out Aquinas’s first point of Charity, the Love that God is:

*It is written (John 15:15): “I will not now call you servants . . . but My friends.” Now this was said to them by reason of nothing else than charity. Therefore charity is friendship.

I answer that, According to the Philosopher (Ethic. viii, 2,3) not every love has the character of friendship, but that love which is together with benevolence, when, to wit, we love someone so as to wish good to him. If, however, we do not wish good to what we love, but wish its good for ourselves, (thus we are said to love wine, or a horse, or the like), it is love not of friendship, but of a kind of concupiscence. For it would be absurd to speak of having friendship for wine or for a horse.

Yet neither does well-wishing suffice for friendship, for a certain mutual love is requisite, since friendship is between friend and friend: and this well-wishing is founded on some kind of communication.

Accordingly, since there is a communication between man and God, inasmuch as He communicates His happiness to us, some kind of friendship must needs be based on this same communication, of which it is written (1 Corinthians 1:9): “God is faithful: by Whom you are called unto the fellowship of His Son.” The love which is based on this communication, is charity: wherefore it is evident that charity is the friendship of man for God. *

As to people leaving the Church, correlation is not causation. There has been an overall downtrend in religiosity in the last 50 years in the West. The fact that the Mass was changed to the vernacular has nothing to do with that, because the same thing happened in religions that were already using the vernacular. I do not know about religions that were similarly “traditional” in terms of worship, but I expect that even the ones who didn’t modernize had the same downturn, if not a greater one.

 

[Kevin12]

As to what the Bishop said, while I think that the Latin Mass should be preserved if people want to hear it, in the same way that there should be a Spanish Mass here in America if people want it, but as to his point - my experience with those who favor the EF has largely been that those who attend it consider the OF a second-class Mass and those who attend it as second-class Catholics, just like the Bishop suggested. I know many people will object to this, but really, you don’t need to go to Fish Eaters to know that this opinion of those who attend the NO may not be universal among those who only attend the EF, but it is at least the majority (more than 50%) opinion. I cannot of course judge anyone’s heart, but I can at least say that I can count the number of times an EF-only attender has said anything that could be construed as, “I attend the EF out of personal preference and not because I feel the OF is in some sense inherently inferior” on one hand, and whereas the number of times I’ve heard an EF-only attender directly say or insituate that there is something inherently wrong with the OF are far more than I can count.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Hello there everyone,

I just saw that Cardinal Lehmann of Germany is against having more Masses in the Extraordinary Form. At the “Eucharistic Congress” in Cologne, he told the local news “I have the feeling that all the enthusiasm, including for Latin, has much to do with prestige and the false pretending of a certain cultural elite”. He believes “an increased side-by-side existence of the two liturgical forms does not make sense, partly because it didn’t grow from the ground up” (I assume he means there was no big demand among the laity) and that “development is leading towards the renewed Mass”.

My attending the EF does not make me have illusions of grandeur, nor do I maintain a pretense of being part of a cultural elite. I am a mutt: I look Irish, my grandmother is an immigrant from a farmer German family, and the rest I don’t even know. Sure, I like nice things, but who doesn’t, and how does that make me part of a cultural elite? My blood is po’.

I don’t know about Germany, but here in the USA I don’t notice an overflowing of fine clothing and English shoes at EF Masses. More often than not, in fact, there are plenty of average, plain families. Perhaps in Germany the remnants of the House of Hohenzollern are the main attendants of the EF, but in most other places it seems the main attendants are common folk.

And what’s that bit about not growing from the bottom up? That is exactly where the restoration of the EF came from. Sure, had it not been for the SSPX the EF would not exist, but had it not been for the laity who support them financially they would not exist; as well, were it not for the non-SSPX-attending laity begging on their knees to their bishops for decades upon decades to permit its celebration once a month on a Thursday at 3:17 PM, the EF would not exist. Also, last but not least, were it not for our Joseph Ratzinger, and his own life experiences, the EF would not exist.

The existence of the EF is a supreme example of a grassroots, bottom-up movement in the Church on an international scale if I’ve ever seen one.

Is there such a thing as a fifty year fad that manages to keep lots of young men and women interested? No, and that’s proven in more ways than one. This is not a fad.

“Development is leading towards the [renewed] Mass.” What development is meant here? It exists already. It is as developed as it can be, really. There is no work to be done there. Unless he means RotR, but I don’t think that is what he means.

 

[Cat]

I have a very different perspective than many of you, and I hope that you will read this without attacking me and others who share my feelings. I think that there are a lot of Catholics who feel the same way I do, but they’re not here on CAF, and if they are, they keep quiet on threads like this.

I sincerely hope that the OF Mass will not go away.

I won’t be around in 150 years, so it probably won’t matter to me anyway.

I respect your love of the Latin Mass, and agree that it should continue to be offered, if for no other reason, to preserve the history and tradition of the Catholic Church.

I’ve been Catholic 9 years now, and I’ve been on CAF for almost as long, and I’ve read thousands of words here on CAF and from other sources in support of Latin and chant.

But I still dislike Latin and chant. It means nothing to me. It is gibberish to me. I’m sorry if some of you find this honest comment offensive, but it’s my point of view, the way I feel. I wasn’t raised Catholic, so unlike many of you, I have no fond memories of Latin and chant in the context of the Church or Christianity. I do not associate Latin or chant with “church” or “God.” I don’t find them “reverent” or even “religious.” Latin and chant do not help me to concentrate or focus more on Jesus; quite the opposite–I find them distracting.

I was raised Evangelical Protestant (47 years) and we were taught to avoid “experiences,” so to me, the Latin Mass, Latin, and chant are “experiences” that I am not interested in. I know that other Evangelical Protestants do love Latin and chant, and fully embrace the EF Mass, and I respect that. But I’m not one of those Evangelical Protestants.

We have a priest now who used both frequently in our parish (OF) Masses, and I just don’t like it at all. Yes, I know that Mass is most certainly not all about me, and I accept that fact intellectually and submit to whatever our priest presents in our Masses, and I love this priest for his passion for the Church and Jesus, and I’m grateful to have a priest to say Mass for us. (We actually have 3 priests in our parish.)

But I really, really dislike Latin and chant, everyone, and I can’t imagine attending Mass all the time that is all Latin and chant. I would attend out of obedience, of course, and I know (intellectually) that the Holy Spirit would continue to give me graces of the Holy Mass. But my heart wouldn’t be in it.

How about this–if there were Latin Masses available in all dioceses within fairly comfortable driving distances, would that make all of you happy? Would you be willing to allow the rest of us to continue to have the OF Mass? Why does it have to be all EF?

 

[YoungTradCath]

How about this–if there were Latin Masses available in all dioceses within fairly comfortable driving distances, would that make all of you happy?

yes

 

[CutlerB]

Could someone post a link to the article the OP mentioned, please? I’d like to read what else Cardinal Lehmann had to say.

It’s in German, but you could probably have it translated fairly well by Google or so. It’s from the German Bishops’ Conference’s official news site.

katholisch.de/de/katholisch/themen/news/page_news.php?id=15034

 

[CutlerB]

My attending the EF does not make me have illusions of grandeur, nor do I maintain a pretense of being part of a cultural elite. I am a mutt: I look Irish, my grandmother is an immigrant from a farmer German family, and the rest I don’t even know. Sure, I like nice things, but who doesn’t, and how does that make me part of a cultural elite? My blood is po’.

I agree!

I don’t know about Germany, but here in the USA I don’t notice an overflowing of fine clothing and English shoes at EF Masses. More often than not, in fact, there are plenty of average, plain families. Perhaps in Germany the remnants of the House of Hohenzollern are the main attendants of the EF, but in most other places it seems the main attendants are common folk.

I’m afraid I can’t speak to the first point, since there is no EF Mass around my place. The part on Hohenzollern would of course depend on which Hohenzollerns you mean. The Prussians wouldn’t go anywhere near a Catholic church.

And what’s that bit about not growing from the bottom up? That is exactly where the restoration of the EF came from. Sure, had it not been for the SSPX the EF would not exist, but had it not been for the laity who support them financially they would not exist; as well, were it not for the non-SSPX-attending laity begging on their knees to their bishops for decades upon decades to permit its celebration once a month on a Thursday at 3:17 PM, the EF would not exist. Also, last but not least, were it not for our Joseph Ratzinger, and his own life experiences, the EF would not exist.

No idea why the Cardinal said that. It’s definitely a lay initiative, along with parts of the hierarchy.

“Development is leading towards the [renewed] Mass.” What development is meant here? It exists already. It is as developed as it can be, really. There is no work to be done there. Unless he means RotR, but I don’t think that is what he means.

I believe he means that people want the OF Mass. “Trend” could have been a better translation on my part for the German “Entwicklung”.

Quite honestly, the insistence on the OF Mass only is a typical thing in German Catholicism. The situation here is currently such as that the laity are largely strongly at odds with Rome and its decisions. Many movements are going off into dissent, especially on women’s ordination and priestly celibacy. The spirit is one of dissent and “renewal”. I completely disagree with all those institutions that demand such things. unfortunately, the Bishops’ Conference is shying away from opposing the dissent and, in my opinion, giving in on some points.

In my not quite so humble opinion, I wish the dissenters would just shut up because it is not for them to decide nor demand change which does not pertain to them.

 

[sw85]

My attending the EF does not make me have illusions of grandeur, nor do I maintain a pretense of being part of a cultural elite. I am a mutt: I look Irish, my grandmother is an immigrant from a farmer German family, and the rest I don’t even know. Sure, I like nice things, but who doesn’t, and how does that make me part of a cultural elite? My blood is po’.

I don’t know about Germany, but here in the USA I don’t notice an overflowing of fine clothing and English shoes at EF Masses. More often than not, in fact, there are plenty of average, plain families. Perhaps in Germany the remnants of the House of Hohenzollern are the main attendants of the EF, but in most other places it seems the main attendants are common folk.

And what’s that bit about not growing from the bottom up? That is exactly where the restoration of the EF came from. Sure, had it not been for the SSPX the EF would not exist, but had it not been for the laity who support them financially they would not exist; as well, were it not for the non-SSPX-attending laity begging on their knees to their bishops for decades upon decades to permit its celebration once a month on a Thursday at 3:17 PM, the EF would not exist. Also, last but not least, were it not for our Joseph Ratzinger, and his own life experiences, the EF would not exist.

The existence of the EF is a supreme example of a grassroots, bottom-up movement in the Church on an international scale if I’ve ever seen one.

Is there such a thing as a fifty year fad that manages to keep lots of young men and women interested? No, and that’s proven in more ways than one. This is not a fad.

“Development is leading towards the [renewed] Mass.” What development is meant here? It exists already. It is as developed as it can be, really. There is no work to be done there. Unless he means RotR, but I don’t think that is what he means.

It’s a strange sentiment to be sure, at least from an American perspective. Here EF-goers (the ones, at least, that are in full communion with Rome, who are the only ones I’ve had any personal encounters with) are overwhelmingly ordinary, lower-middle-class types people.

Things may be different in Germany, of course. I don’t know. But I’m interested in his accusation that EF-enthusiasts constitute some kind of “cultural elite” in the Church, and by “interested” I really mean “baffled.” Are things that different in Germany?

 

[QuestingKnight]

The old Mass, being said for hundreds of years, cannot be wrong. If it is, then our forefathers were wrong in saying it. What was sacred for them is sacred for us.

Emphasising hierarchy, priesthood, sacrifice, sacrality, technicality and transubstantiation, it is at odds with the dumbing down, democratisation and populism trends since the 70’s. A priest after the order of Melchisidech offering a sacrifice is a different being to a presider at a communal banquet.

People need to realise the Church is not immune to fashions. It gives leeway according to local custom. The locals can run away with the ball. Traditionalists tend to be keen on sticking to the rubrics and being ornate and complicated as possible Hence we favour the TLM.

 

[CutlerB]

It’s a strange sentiment to be sure, at least from an American perspective. Here EF-goers (the ones, at least, that are in full communion with Rome, who are the only ones I’ve had any personal encounters with) are overwhelmingly ordinary, lower-middle-class types people.

Things may be different in Germany, of course. I don’t know. But I’m interested in his accusation that EF-enthusiasts constitute some kind of “cultural elite” in the Church, and by “interested” I really mean “baffled.” Are things that different in Germany?

I can’t authoritatively or even representatively speak on this, but I seriously doubt that it’s different here. Europe and America are too similar, since we’re so linked to each other.

 

[sw85]

I can’t authoritatively or even representatively speak on this, but I seriously doubt that it’s different here. Europe and America are too similar, since we’re so linked to each other.

Could he be talking about the SSPX or something? Don’t they have a stronger presence in Europe than America?

 

[CutlerB]

Could he be talking about the SSPX or something? Don’t they have a stronger presence in Europe than America?

Well, they’d be quite strong in France, but there’s not much talk at all about it in Germany. I wouldn’t even be aware of a German SSPX representative.

 

[L_Marshall]

Could he be talking about the SSPX or something? Don’t they have a stronger presence in Europe than America?

Their presence depends on the area. They’re very common in France, where they were founded; also Switzerland, where they have their main headquarters and seminary.

In the U.S., they’re more common around Minnesota and Virginia (they have seminaries and other projects around there), but they’re almost unheard of outside of those areas.

 

[april32010]

How about this–if there were Latin Masses available in all dioceses within fairly comfortable driving distances, would that make all of you happy? Would you be willing to allow the rest of us to continue to have the OF Mass? Why does it have to be all EF?

i have a question for you, why did you convert ? if the Mass was E.F. and O.F. didn’t exist would you still of converted?

 

[jwinch2]

But I still dislike Latin and chant. It means nothing to me. It is gibberish to me. I’m sorry if some of you find this honest comment offensive, but it’s my point of view, the way I feel. I wasn’t raised Catholic, so unlike many of you, I have no fond memories of Latin and chant in the context of the Church or Christianity. I do not associate Latin or chant with “church” or “God.” I don’t find them “reverent” or even “religious.”

I can understand your position, but I think it might be important to remember that Latin and chant are not about the EF of the Mass, they are about the Mass, period. Chant is the only form of Church music which was not developed out of the mind of some composer. Rather, it developed out of the prayer life of the Church, in the praying of the psalms in early monasticsm and the cathedral version of the Divine Office.

I once thought and felt as you did. I also used to think that this was merely an issue of personal preference, rather than something that the Church has spoken on. Then I took some time to read what the Church has taught about both Latin, and Chant. Over time, I have come to understand, and even appreciate these teachings.

If you are interested, here are some pertinent once regarding chant that may be worth your time. All are cited so that you can track down the original document should you desire:

*Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple (Pius X: Tra le sollecitudini).

In order that the faithful may more actively participate in divine worship, let them be made once more to sing the Gregorian Chant, so far as it belongs to them to take part in it (Pius XI: Divini cultus, 1928).

The Church acknowledges Gregorian Chant as especially suited to the Roman Liturgy. Therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services (Sacrosanctum Concilium).

The main place should be given, all things being equal, to Gregorian chant, as being proper to the Roman Liturgy (General Instruction of the Roman Missal)

With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the “general rule” that St Pius X formulated in these words: “The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian melodic form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple”. It is not, of course, a question of imitating Gregorian chant but rather of ensuring that new compositions are imbued with the same spirit that inspired and little by little came to shape it (Blessed John Paul II: Chirograph for the Centenary of Tra le sollecitudini).

While respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (Benedict XVI: Sacramentum caritatis).

A liturgy devoid of the modulation of Gregorian chant, which is born in the most intimate fibers of the heart and in which faith is enthroned and charity burns, would be like a blown-out candle which henceforth could neither shine nor attract the gaze and thoughts of men (Pope Paul VI, Sacrificium laudis).

Would you therefore, in collaboration with the competent diocesan and national agencies for the liturgy, sacred music and catechetics, decide on the best ways of teaching the faithful the Latin chants of Jubilate Deo and of having them sing them…. You will thus be performing a new service for the Church in the domain of liturgical renewal” (Pope Paul VI, Voluntati Obsequens).

…make it easier for Christians to achieve unity and spiritual harmony with their brothers and with the living tradition of the past. Hence it is that those who are trying to improve the quality of congregational singing cannot refuse Gregorian chant the place which is due to it (Letter to the Bishops on the Minimum Repertoire of Plain Chant. Voluntati Obsequens: Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, 1974).

Would you therefore, in collaboration with the competent diocesan and national agencies for the liturgy, sacred music and catechetics, decide on the best ways of teaching the faithful the Latin chants of Jubilate Deo and of having them sing them…. You will thus be performing a new service for the Church in the domain of liturgical renewal (Letter to the Bishops on the Minimum Repertoire of Plain Chant. Voluntati Obsequens: Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, 1974).

In order to preserve the heritage of sacred music and genuinely promote the new forms of sacred singing, “great importance is to be attached to the teaching and practice of music in seminaries, in the novitiates and houses of study of religious of both sexes, and also in other Catholic institutes and schools,” especially in those higher institutes intended specially for this. Above all, the study and practice of Gregorian chant is to be promoted, because, with its special characteristics, it is a basis of great importance for the development of sacred music (Musicam Sacram).

The Entrance and Communion chants with their psalm verses serve to accompany the two most important processions of the Mass: the entrance procession, by which the Mass begins, and the Communion procession, by which the faithful approach the altar to receive Holy Communion (Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship, USCCB, 2007).*

 

[Elizabeth502]

We are winning the battle to restore the Church… My priest said in 150 years the Novus Ordo will be gone. In France because so few Catholics go to mass, 25% of Catholics in France that actually go to mass go to the traditional mass. Time is on the side of the counter reformation in the Church.

We can only hope.