The Latin Mass - Should It Be the Universal Catholic Mass Again?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trickster
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wouldn’t work in a Benedictine monastery, where the choir is in the sanctuary and many monks are non-ordained and aren’t involved in serving the Mass. And also where versus populum, to integrate the community, has been the norm for a very long time.

I agree with you on EMHCs, but not communion on the tongue, nor kneeling unless the Church has a communion rail (our abbey doesn’t, it has a cloister gate instead). Unless you plan to provide a crane to lift me back into position 😃
Alright. I forgot to make the usual disclaimer that I am not referring to Religious. Of course if they choose to adopt it, that’s fine too. 🙂
 
I think part of the problem is that traditionalists on this site do have a tendency to equate Traditional Catholicism with specific forms of the rite. Being faithful to Catholic Tradition should not necessarily be attached to a specific form of a rite. The Mass has changed over the centuries. So too has the Divine Office, in fact 3 times in this century alone, with two of those times prior to Vatican II.

There are ways to make authentic Catholic Tradition shine through the modern rites of the Church. Everything is in place for it, the Graduale Romanum, for instance.

Being a “traditionalist” shouldn’t be exclusive. It should be inclusive and also look towards means of making Catholic Tradition visible and alive in all rites of the Church, regardless of form.
Traditional versus traditionalists. Traditionalists favor the EF for sure. That’s part of the definition.
 
My understanding is the pitting the forms against each other violate forum rules. The Latin Mass could be either the EF or OF and that, I thought, was the basis for our discussion.
I don’t think speculating about the relative demographic composition of the exclusive parishioners of the two forms is what the admins meant when they banned “pit[ting] one form against the other,” especially when the answer to that question is relevant to the OP’s wondering if the EF might ever displace the OF.
 
I think every Priest should be trained at Seminary to celebrate both the EF and OF of the Mass. Both should be offered at every Parish. One english Mass, one latin Mass and another Mass that could be based on the population of that parish (ie if there are a lot of polish people in the community it could be in polish, or like we have at sycamore a spanish mass while dekalb has one in vietnamese etc)
 
And yet, on Pentecost Sunday, the Holy Spirit gave gifts of tongues to the apostles, and all the people in the city heard the Gospel in their own language.

Surely this demonstrates to us that there can be unity in diversity.
No, actually it doesn’t.

People do hear the Gospel in the vernacular, even in the TLM.

All the great religions offer their prayers in their holy language although any teaching is in the vernacular.

Why would one think it is different for the Catholic Church? Offering our prayers in a language reserved for the Mass is a cue to our brains that a mystery is taking place.

If it was good for the Catholics of old, it is good enough for me.
 
My understanding is the pitting the forms against each other violate forum rules. The Latin Mass could be either the EF or OF and that, I thought, was the basis for our discussion.
Thanks for the reminder. Maybe this thread should be deleted because otherwise if one answers honestly, one is taking the bait. And that wouldn’t be fair.
 
In the past,perhaps Catholics were willing to spend more time studying on their own, and children and teenagers truly paid attention and studied hard in their parish religious education classes.

Those days are gone, and I don’t think they’ll ever return. We are a Sesame Street people now.
Your basic argument is that we should lower standards in order to accommodate those who are not willing to put in the effort to save their own souls. Here’s an analogy. I’m a teacher. I can have more people get higher grades if I lower my grading standards. But those higher grades are meaningless and don’t reflect any increase of learning.

Another analogy: let’s just print more money and then it will look like we are rich. But we all know about inflation…

Instead of accepting the poor spiritual state of many of the faithful, we need to reinstate the traditional practices (orthodox Catholic schools and catechism, for starters) that nourished those in the past.
  • PAX
 
Well, at the OF I attend:

-Propers and ordinary are in Gregorian chant
-All of the rest is in French plainchant; even the readings and Gospel are chanted
-On all Sundays, Solemnities and feasts incense is used at the entrance procession; the altar is incensed before Mass begins; the Gospel book is incensed before the Gospel is proclaimed, and the ambo is incensed by the acolyte as the deacon chants the Gospel; the altar and gifts are incensed at the offertory; the community and the faithful are incensed after that.
-The bells are rung at the consecration
-Mass is facing the people… but that’s actually an ancient Benedictine tradition, and it IS a Benedictine monastery after all;
-People kneel when they are supposed to kneel and genuflect whenever the Blessed Sacrament is on the altar (the tabernacle is in a side chapel, also an ancient Benedictine tradition)
-The pipe organ is the only instrument used, but the chant is a cappella as it is supposed to be (the organ is used to play a prelude, at the offertory, and a postlude after the Mass)

I have also been to an OF Benedictine Mass facing the altar (at Monte Cassino in Italy), but the choir is behind the altar so the celebrant is actually facing his community in keeping with the Benedictine tradition.

Honestly, what more do you want???
Honestly, how many OFs are celebrated this way? Therein lies a major problem. The OF is pretty set in stone in being celebrated the way it is commonly celebrated. If a priest wanted to make the massive changes to the way the OF is celebrated to have everything you list above, he might as well celebrate the TLM, which is commonly celebrated the way you list above.
  • PAX
 
I see very few people in this section who have disdain against traditional Catholicism. Actually, I can’t think of any one of the regulars here who show disdain towards traditional Catholics.
Perhaps that is the problem. You are unable to see it. (Not meant as an insult, btw)
 
Perhaps that is the problem. You are unable to see it. (Not meant as an insult, btw)
I’m unable to see it, perhaps, because it’s not there at all. Can you provide an example of someone showing disdain against traditionalists?

Do you find that I show disdain, for example?
 
What was exciting and wonderful to me was actually understanding the Eucharistic Prayer, and the last Gospel in English - for a time.
Well, since the Roman Canon is said silently in the EF, you don’t have to worry about hearing a prayer you can’t understand 😃 Instead, you can read the prayer during the Mass, or you can read the prayer before the Mass and spend the silent time praying and preparing the Mystery of Faith, the Consecration, which is about to occur.
I got dinged again by a younger person on another thread, but really, the OF made the Mass something to participate in, not just “attend”.
You should ask people who go to the EF if they participate or just “attend.” I think you may be surprised at the answer and have to change your opinion.
  • PAX
 
And yet, on Pentecost Sunday, the Holy Spirit gave gifts of tongues to the apostles, and all the people in the city heard the Gospel in their own language.
The homily is given in the vernacular, as are the readings (either at the Altar, as the Pope said was permissible, or at the ambo before the homily).
  • PAX
 
Actually what happens is people make the case for why they prefer Traditional Catholicism and try to discuss Traditional Catholicism with others that prefer it but are met by people, that have disdain for Traditional Catholicism, who spend a great deal of time in the Traditional section trying to convince them they are wrong to think the way they do. The section that is to be a place to discuss Traditional Catholicism has become a place of attack against Traditionalists.
Indeed. We seem to be always on the defensive.
  • PAX
 
And yet, on Pentecost Sunday, the Holy Spirit gave gifts of tongues to the apostles, and all the people in the city heard the Gospel in their own language.

Surely this demonstrates to us that there can be unity in diversity.
Hmmmmmmm… You speak in tongues at your mass? My point being that not every Sunday is a ‘Pentecost Sunday’ Yes?

I still find multi lingual Mass not only time consuming but indecipherable. When one compounds the issue with 3 or more languages in one Mass it is simply prohibitive IMHO.

Instead of just learning just Latin, I now have to learn 3 or more other languages.

Working very hard not to zone out at Mass regards-

Nimzovik.
 
Personally I don’t think there’s any going back on the vernacular – at least completely.
However, most of the rest of the changes could be rolled back, and probably eventually will be, in my opinion.

In my opinion, three changes relating to the mass and its celebration would greatly improve the ordinary form:
  1. Replace the “prayers over the gifts” with the traditional offertory.
  2. Mandate exclusive use of the Roman canon.
  3. Require ad orientem celebration in parish churches.
In addition, eliminating the indult for receiving holy communion in the hand would be another laudable (and I think actually inevitable) change.
 
I’m unable to see it, perhaps, because it’s not there at all. Can you provide an example of someone showing disdain against traditionalists?

Do you find that I show disdain, for example?
This made me chuckle… 🙂
  • PAX
 
In addition, eliminating the indult for receiving holy communion in the hand would be another laudable (and I think actually inevitable) change.
I agree that such would be laudable and desirable, given the many problems it’s given us for virtually no discernible benefit. But what makes you think it is inevitable? Benedict XVI seems to be the most liturgically conservative Pope we’re going to have for the foreseeable future, and he doesn’t seem to have a problem with it.
 
Honestly, how many OFs are celebrated this way? Therein lies a major problem. The OF is pretty set in stone in being celebrated the way it is commonly celebrated. If a priest wanted to make the massive changes to the way the OF is celebrated to have everything you list above, he might as well celebrate the TLM, which is commonly celebrated the way you list above.
  • PAX
Be honest now: if the EF was the only Mass, with the same clergy we have now, how many would break the rules, speed through the Mass in 20 minutes, etc?

Like I said earlier if you think there would be no mistakes and abuses if the EF was the only Mass, then you have greater faith in human nature than I have. At the moment the EF is celebrated in a unique cultural context by people determined to preserve it, not your average backwater parish.

So for sure there would be beautiful sung high Masses like I described but at the same time a lot of plain low Masses, and not all of them necessarily relevant. Much of the OF abuses people complain about are a product of a particular place and time, not the form of the Mass. Do you really think that a priest that derogates from the Missal in the OF would be any less inclined to do so in the EF if the EF were the only Mass?

The Mass I described is in an abbey determined to do an excellent job with the liturgy. It is a standard on which parishes can take on elements it can handle (I don’t expect the average parish choir to be able to handle the average Gradual in Mode V for example, and that won’t change if we go back to the EF). A properly sung EF High Mass would probably only be found in larger urban parishes, cathedrals and religious communities only. The vast majority of parishioners would be stuck with recited low Masses.
 
Be honest now: if the EF was the only Mass, with the same clergy we have now, how many would break the rules, speed through the Mass in 20 minutes, etc?

Like I said earlier if you think there would be no mistakes and abuses if the EF was the only Mass, then you have greater faith in human nature than I have. At the moment the EF is celebrated in a unique cultural context by people determined to preserve it, not your average backwater parish.
This is very true. I think it is one of the positives of having an OF/EF split. It allows the EF to remain virtually abuse free.
  • PAX
 
Allow me to quote Bishop J.C. Hedley in his book The Holy Eucharist:

www23.us.archive.org/stream/holyeucharist00hedl/holyeucharist00hedl_djvu.txt
One of the most striking features of the Western
Mass is the use of the Latin tongue. This usage, as it
need not be said, is derived from the Church of Rome,
the mistress, and, to a large extent, the founder of the
Churches of the West…
To any one who looks calmly at this question, it will
appear evident that the use of one unchanging and uni-
versal language in the Liturgy was a moral necessity, if
there was such a thing as one universal Church. 2 The
forms and prayers of the Liturgy are intimately con-
nected with the Faith. Just as the Church’s canons
and definitions must be expressed in an official language
that must remain the same through all the alterations of
written and spoken tongues that time may bring about
or diversity of nationality develop, so her liturgy, which
embodies great dogmatic truths that every age and
country must acknowledge and make use of day by
day, must be expressed in an idiom which will not be
exposed to the danger and inconveniences of perpetual
change.Had the Church from the beginning adopted
the principle of a vernacular Liturgy for each nation or
people, one of two things would, by this time, have
happened in eveiy case; either the original liturgical
forms would be as obsolete and as difficult for the
people to follow as the English of Alfred or the French
of the early Normans, or else there would have had to
be alterations and adaptations in every century
. Now
it would have been morally impossible thus to keep the
liturgical prayers on a level with the changing and de-
veloping language of the peoples of Europe. The task
would have been too vast, and too hard to organise.
Misunderstanding, heterodoxy, heresy, arising from the
incompetence or the wilfulness of translators and adap-
tors, would have taxed the vigilance of the Church’s
pastors to such an extent that disaster would only have
been averted by a standing miracle. The spirit of
nationalism, which must always be one of the dangers
against which the one universal Church has to contend,
would have found in the manipulation of a vernacular
liturgy endless opportunities for loosening the bonds of
unity.
As it is, the* Latin unites the Western Church
together in one Catholic body *with a union which is
that of a family or a household. Every Catholic is at
home in every Catholic Church of the world. More-
over, the Latin keeps the whole Church in union with the
See of Rome
, the source and principle of Catholic unity.
The grand dogmas on which the Liturgy rests, and
which are interwoven in its very substance, remain for
all generations in that form of sacred words which the
teaching Church has authorised. Unity of belief and
fixity of expression must always be found together
.
Emphasis mine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top