The Latin Mass: Why You Can't Have It

[Seamus_L]

Translation of the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom into the vernacular works in all languages ? I guess anything is possible, but English sure isn’t one of them. I’ve even had a few EC priests agree in private that when it’s sung in English it sounds terrible.

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

Ok, sure, many do. Back to the point, the overriding reason people leave in my eperience is an intolerance for doctrine or a feeling of being unwelcome. Latin will not help them understand Catholicism better or draw them back. Quite the contrary. We (all of us) have to work on the substance of faith.

Well, strict adherence to doctrine is kind of Catholicism 101. If you don’t believe, then you’re out anyway. It’s kind of important(!).

It is a curious thing, but Catholics just don’t do fellowship. Offhand, I think it’s because Catholics know they have a Calvary to climb that they don’t do ‘hail fellow well met’. Mass is Serious Business. Christ is present. There’s a small window after mass why you might say Hi to someone, but the overlap between pious people as a type and hearty outgoing types might not be great. So it doesn’t happen. Just sayin’.

The thing about Catholicism is that it has the fullness of the Truth, the sacraments, Sacred tradition and the Apostolic Succession.

Swopping this for easy-going theology and company is folly. There’s a cult out there for everyone and they tend to ‘love bomb’ as a way of gaining and keeping recruits.

But there’s only one Church that is headed by the successor to Peter.

Doing down Latin because it won’t draw back lapsing Catholics? By itself? Wow. Really scraping the bottom of the argument barrel, there.
**
What traditionalists want is for the Roman Catholic Church with it’s Latin Rite to, you know, give Latin a fair shake.**

Given the opposition to it on here, I’d say the odds of a comeback are … getting better
Especially given that the new rite was imposed by fiat. It didn’t have to court popularity at all.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Translation of the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom into the vernacular works in all languages ? I guess anything is possible, but English sure isn’t one of them. I’ve even had a few EC priests agree in private that when it’s sung in English it sounds terrible.

Well, maybe they are the culprits.

There’s no problems in our Church for English. And there isn’t a problem with the OCA parish I sometimes visit.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

I think what the article writer IS looking at, the actual attendance figures week in week out in places where the EF is fairly well established, is a far better indicator of likely demand than a poll among people, at least some of whom might say yes simply because they have heard a little about it and may be curious to attend once or twice (or a few times a year) but not regularly enough to make the investment the writer speaks of worthwhile.

The diocese of Arlington is in general pretty “conservative”. Certainly very orthodox. So the coice here isn’t between the TLM and some crazy hippie Mass, but between the TLM and a beautiful, correct and reverant OF. In other words the distance between the two choices is smaller than in some other places.

So, when the mythical family with little John Paul who needs a nap right at 12:30 considers whether to attend their own local parish where the OF is done well with organ music and appropriate hymn selections, or drive across town in NoVA traffic (yes, we have it even on Sundays) to attend one of the 8 EF, they may on any given Sunday decide that the local parish is just fine.

That said, we know several of the priests who regularly celebrate the EF, and while we go to special Masses, we attend our own parish the vast majority of the time, where we’re trying our best to work up to a waiting list for the St Vincent DePaul Society.

 

[OraLabora]

Well, strict adherence to doctrine is kind of Catholicism 101. If you don’t believe, then you’re out anyway. It’s kind of important(!).

No, and no, on both counts. Acceptance of doctrine is Catholic 101. Strict adherence is impossible, because we are all sinners, and that’s why we have a sacrament of reconciliation.

On the second point, anybody baptized into the Catholic faith is in. For life. They may be wrong, they may be incompletely catechized, they may have the wrong understanding, they may be stubborn in their sin, they may excommunicate themselves for heresy or any other number of reasons, but excommunication, sin and sheer cussedness do not mean you cease to be Catholic. Excommunication (and confession for that matter) is a form of discipline meant to heal and bring you back in line.

The changes to the code of Canon Law in 1983 make it impossible for a Catholic to formally renounce their faith. If you cease to practice, you are still a Catholic. All that’s required to get back in, is to confess. The Church may cut one off from the Sacraments, but she acknowledges that nobody can cut one off from the Holy Spirit’s action on us, in the hope that some day we may drop our stubbornness and let the Holy Spirit permeate us and open us up to His grace.

 

[sw85]

Common sense

Again, Mass was said in Latin for like 1000 years. No one seemed to think it was a problem until approximately five minutes ago. Go read my post again as to why.

We are the children of a perverse, degenerate, and apostate age. Who are we to be accusing generations of sainted Catholic martyrs and doctors of the Church of a lack of common sense?

And you know that because…?
Of how many heads rolled in the revolution? (I don’t know myself, I’m just trying to fill in the gap there…)

Wait, the French Revolution? You’re suggesting the French Revolution was the product of dissatisfaction with the use of Latin in the Mass? Come on, man.

Where are you attending Mass, that the sacred has been lost?

Where are you attending Mass, that jokes during the homily, tambourines, and applause are not the norm? Or do you genuinely think these things are consistent with a healthy and robust sense of the sacred?

 

[OraLabora]

Wait, the French Revolution? You’re suggesting the French Revolution was the product of dissatisfaction with the use of Latin in the Mass? Come on, man.

There was a lot of dissatisfaction with the Church in the French Revolution; many priests were martyred because of it. There were also anti-eccliastical laws at the turn of the 20th Century that forced religious orders into exile from France.

I can’t say how much influence Latin had on this though, but the hatred for the Church was certainly very real.

 

[clem456]

Wait, the French Revolution? You’re suggesting the French Revolution was the product of dissatisfaction with the use of Latin in the Mass? Come on, man.

No, you suggested that the illiterate peasants of France had no problem as long as the Church kept praying in Latin. It solved aaaaallll their problems didn’t it.

Where does this idea that people have to understand what’s being said come from?
The Tridentine Mass was instituted in 1570. Mass was said in Latin long before then in the Roman rite. So for at least 1000 years, Mass was said everywhere in Latin.

I really doubt the illiterate peasants of medieval France knew Latin, much less could they read a Missal. They didn’t seem to think it was a problem.

This idea of happy ignorance and superficial faith needs to be rejected and thrown into the dustbin of history. It leads to tragedy. People need to understand the Mass, understand their faith, and live it, and not obsess over a language.

Where are you attending Mass, that jokes during the homily, tambourines, and applause are not the norm? Or do you genuinely think these things are consistent with a healthy and robust sense of the sacred?

I’ve never been to such a Mass in all my 52 years with tambourines. Jokes and applasue at the recessional hymn a few times. Make sure you report me to the bishop. Out of the billions of Masses said, are you going to look for the few deviations to represent the Church you love?

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

No, and no, on both counts. Acceptance of doctrine is Catholic 101. Strict adherence is impossible, because we are all sinners, and that’s why we have a sacrament of reconciliation.

On the second point, anybody baptized into the Catholic faith is in. For life. They may be wrong, they may be incompletely catechized, they may have the wrong understanding, they may be stubborn in their sin, they may excommunicate themselves for heresy or any other number of reasons, but excommunication, sin and sheer cussedness do not mean you cease to be Catholic. Excommunication (and confession for that matter) is a form of discipline meant to heal and bring you back in line.

The changes to the code of Canon Law in 1983 make it impossible for a Catholic to formally renounce their faith. If you cease to practice, you are still a Catholic. All that’s required to get back in, is to confess. The Church may cut one off from the Sacraments, but she acknowledges that nobody can cut one off from the Holy Spirit’s action on us, in the hope that some day we may drop our stubbornness and let the Holy Spirit permeate us and open us up to His grace.

Yes, I was kind of waiting for someone to say that.

But if you don’t actually believe what the Catholic Church teaches, what does that matter, in terms of the argument? What I said was in response to a previous poster saying that Catholics were being put off the Catholic Church … by what the Catholic Church teaches!

It’s a logical short circuit.

And you do have to strictly adhere to doctrine. You may fail, but you have to try. Otherwise, what are the rules for? The 10 commandments are not guidelines, they’re commandments.

Another fruit of the 60’s is the “Jesus loves you” attitude which seems to imply “I can do X and repent on my deathbed”. Really dumb stuff, but it seems quite popular. Like you’re guaranteed a final chance at repentance and the will to take it.

People don’t understand that you can get so bad you will say NO! to God.

 

[JRKH]

I think what the article writer IS looking at, the actual attendance figures week in week out in places where the EF is fairly well established, is a far better indicator of likely demand than a poll among people, at least some of whom might say yes simply because they have heard a little about it and may be curious to attend once or twice (or a few times a year) but not regularly enough to make the investment the writer speaks of worthwhile.

That’s a fair point. A bishop might not be inclined to devote a parish to the EF because people indicate their curiosity on a pew card. Thinking it would be cool to experience in theory here and there is different from actually going regularly and helping to sustain the effort.

Lily,
Agree with you and Joe on this but I have to say that I still think that there would be an advantage to it.

1. It would gauge actual interest, even if just “curiosity” (some of which could be easily delineated on the poll card).
2. The level of interest expressed would give the bishop and idea where the greatest interest is concentrated.
3. Many - I dare say most Catholics are a) not aware of the moto proprio (sp?) and/or b) have never had the opportunity to partake of the EF…it appears that few diocese have asked or offered or promoted the EF as an option.
4. number three above means that there could well be those would go a couple of times and then stop…but it also means there are probably those who never thought about but would be “blown away” by it and become regulars…

Just some thoughts…

I always respect your opinion, James, and I want to add a kind of reverse to your obverse. For me, the OF is the one at which I am most contemplative and most … connected, I think. I so much don’t want to be looking at a translation of something being said when they can just say in English.

Fair enough Julia…this is why I love having both forms.
As I said earlier, I love the EF high mass, but I prefer the OF week-day “low” mass

I also think it was a good article and he put the issues in the correct order: the no. 1 reason there aren’t more EF Masses is: demand.

While I never expect there to be a tremendously large demand for the EF, I also think that the actual demand has not been adequately evaluated and worse…many who would benefit greatly from the EF don’t even know it because they have never been exposed.

This idea of “demand” is, to me little more than an excuse and here is why…
In modern marketing demand is created. How many “demanded” video games before they were widely offered? how about cell phones, ipads, etc etc etc…

Now I don’t mean that the mass should be “marketed”, but when I mention EF to most people they look at me like I’m an ET. They haven’t even heard the term "Extraordinary form. Say “Latin mass”, or TLM and the defenses go up and they say, "no one in our parish is interested…
My question is - How do they know that if nobody ASKED???
If they haven’t even heard of the possibility??

This is really my main gripe - this “come back” that I have heard over and over…“Nobody wants it here”…But nobody can show me the polling numbers to back up there assertion……Besides which, I’m a member of the parish and I would like to see an EF occasionally celebrated at our church…So that disproves their assertion on the face of it…

So the bottom line for me is that the actual interest - the demand - has never been determined…

Peace
James

 

[Micah11]

There is no evidence that the Mass is better understood in one’s native language, but then it depends on what understanding means in the first place

??? You are writing this post to me in my language. I understand every word.
Do it in Latin, and I won’t be able to answer you.

. I have a different understanding when I attend a Polish or Spanish Mass rather than in English Mass but I see I get no where with that argument. Let’s just say you prefer the English Mass to a Latin OF or a Vietnamese OF or an EF and leave it there.

It’s not all that complicated. I just want to know what’s being said.
It doesn’t do me a bit of good to be saying it in another language whatever that might be.

 

[clem456]

It is a curious thing, but Catholics just don’t do fellowship. Offhand, I think it’s because Catholics know they have a Calvary to climb that they don’t do ‘hail fellow well met’. Mass is Serious Business. Christ is present. There’s a small window after mass why you might say Hi to someone, but the overlap between pious people as a type and hearty outgoing types might not be great. So it doesn’t happen. Just sayin’.

It’s part of the call for the Mystical Body of Christ to edify and support one another. This can include talking to one another after Mass, coffee and donuts, fundraising breakfasts, Bible studies, etc…What an awful thing to say, that Catholics don’t do fellowship.

The thing about Catholicism is that it has the fullness of the Truth, the sacraments, Sacred tradition and the Apostolic Succession.

Swopping this for easy-going theology and company is folly. There’s a cult out there for everyone and they tend to ‘love bomb’ as a way of gaining and keeping recruits.

But there’s only one Church that is headed by the successor to Peter.

You didn’t really read my post. The point is, people are not leaving the Church because of the vernacular Mass or because the priest stands facing the west, they are leaving because of pastoral and docrinal issues. You can go on and on reinforcing the rules, (thanks we all need to be reminded) but at some point, wisdom would indicate you are not ministering to these people by simply throwing doctrine and languages at them. They will not listen to this approach.

 

[Corki]

??? You are writing this post to me in my language. I understand every word.
Do it in Latin, and I won’t be able to answer you.

It’s not all that complicated. I just want to know what’s being said.
It doesn’t do me a bit of good to be saying it in another language whatever that might be.

1. Listening in the vernacular is ONE was of understanding what is being said but it’s not the ONLY way. For example, it takes about 5 seconds to figure out that “gloria” means “glory”. Everytime you hear “gloria” at Mass, you will then know that the prayer is a prayer of praise to God.
2. Hearing the words is only one part of understanding the Mass. In any language the Mass is a combination of what you hear, see, and even smell. Think about your typical OF Mass, one entirely in your own language. When the priest raises the host or the chalice after consecrating them, do you need him to tell you in plain English, to look up and acknowledge that the consecration has taken place and that this is the Body and Blood of Christ? No, you undertand that from the gestures and from the context.

Not to mention that there are several prayers that are said silently by the priest. Your “wanting” to know what is being said is not a consideration.

 

[clem456]

Yes, I was kind of waiting for someone to say that.

But if you don’t actually believe what the Catholic Church teaches, what does that matter, in terms of the argument? What I said was in response to a previous poster saying that Catholics were being put off the Catholic Church … by what the Catholic Church teaches!

It’s a logical short circuit.

No, it’s not a short circuit. It’s a fact. Many Catholics are put off by Church teaching. Church teaching is not easy. And before you go excommunicating others, realize there are concepts we all do not understand and live well.
Get involved in adult ed or RCIA please before you tell us what lapsed and non-Catholics are thinking. Latin has absolutely nothing to do with solving this problem. Many people just plain don’t understand the faith and it’s doctrines, or in a less likely scenario, they do understand it but reject it. I know, I help teach the faith. And another bunch of people do not feel welcome in the Church for various reasons. Is the Church teaching error? No, that’s not the point, which seems to be lost on you. Should the Church water down doctrin somehow? Again, no. You and I have an obligation to know these people and have fellowship with them and bring them to the faith. Doctrine is only part of it of the answer. Latin? Not even remotely on the radar screen.

 

[jwinch2]

I apologize for the provocative title. I’m simply carrying it over from this blog article:

The Latin Mass: Why You Can’t Have It

I think it’s a very well-reasoned articulation on why the EF/TLM hasn’t exploded in the last 5 years in the wake of Summorum Pontificum. It looks at some of the practical considerations that often get overlooked.

I think it’s a helpful article in that it encourages us to really look at what’s going on instead of falling prey to hand-wringing.

So I guess I’m just posting this as a good read and wondering if others agree/disagree.

Please, no OF vs. EF debate! I’d prefer the thread remain opened.

If this topic is inappropriate, please accept my apologies. As far as I could ascertain, there is no moratorium at present, so I went with it.

Very interesting and well-reasoned article. Thanks for sharing it.

Peace,

 

[carlos19]

Would be nice if the Tridentine Mass can be translated. Why didn’t they just do that?

I ask myself the same question. Then I found the Anglican use mass…problem solved

 

[ProVobis]

People need to understand the Mass, understand their faith, and live it, and not obsess over a language.

Do you call it an obsession when people use terms like “et cetera,” “ante meridiem,” “post meridiem,” “anno Domino”? You probably don’t understand them but you know how to use them, right? (Hint: etc, am, pm, AD) Lawyers use terms like “habeas corpus,” “pro bono,” when translated literally, no one would know what they’re talking about. BUT THEY KNOW HOW TO USE THEM, especially before a judge. “Hoc est enim Corpus Meum” only means only one thing and all Catholics better know what that represents and when it’s used. OTOH, translated into English, it would better serve the feminists or perhaps it is reference to the bread, in which case it lead to a FALSE understanding of the Mass. Do you see what happens in translations? The whole concept of transubstantiation could be lost. No such thing as a perfect translation. Major wars have started because of mistranslations and misinterpretations. That’s hardly what one would call good understanding.

 

[TrueLight]

I apologize for the provocative title. I’m simply carrying it over from this blog article:

The Latin Mass: Why You Can’t Have It

I think it’s a very well-reasoned articulation on why the EF/TLM hasn’t exploded in the last 5 years in the wake of Summorum Pontificum. It looks at some of the practical considerations that often get overlooked.

I think it’s a helpful article in that it encourages us to really look at what’s going on instead of falling prey to hand-wringing.

So I guess I’m just posting this as a good read and wondering if others agree/disagree.

Please, no OF vs. EF debate! I’d prefer the thread remain opened.

If this topic is inappropriate, please accept my apologies. As far as I could ascertain, there is no moratorium at present, so I went with it.

A really good article! He keeps it real.

 

[TrueLight]

While I never expect there to be a tremendously large demand for the EF, I also think that the actual demand has not been adequately evaluated and worse…many who would benefit greatly from the EF don’t even know it because they have never been exposed.

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

No, it’s not a short circuit. It’s a fact. Many Catholics are put off by Church teaching. Church teaching is not easy. And before you go excommunicating others, realize there are concepts we all do not understand and live well.
Get involved in adult ed or RCIA please before you tell us what lapsed and non-Catholics are thinking. Latin has absolutely nothing to do with solving this problem. Many people just plain don’t understand the faith and it’s doctrines, or in a less likely scenario, they do understand it but reject it. I know, I help teach the faith. And another bunch of people do not feel welcome in the Church for various reasons. Is the Church teaching error? No, that’s not the point, which seems to be lost on you. Should the Church water down doctrin somehow? Again, no. You and I have an obligation to know these people and have fellowship with them and bring them to the faith. Doctrine is only part of it of the answer. Latin? Not even remotely on the radar screen.

From what I’ve read on here, the problem is that RCIA is not simply teaching the Faith in the traditional way. Posters on this forum complain that they were not taught basics. I perceive there has been an attempt to water down our religion to make it more palatable and that, I think, is doomed. The sayings of Jesus are hard.

As regards Latin: a religion, which points to the eternal, dropping an integral part of its worship, a sign and a symbol of its patrimony, isn’t exactly inspiring. The idea that something which isn’t immediately useful in catechesis, therefore has no place being restored to the main rite, does not follow.