The Latin Mass

[bones_IV]

McBrien’s latest.

Take a look at this sentence right here.

*But if such Catholics are under the ages of 45 or 50, they have little or no hands-on experience of the pre-Vatican II Mass. It is a mystery how one can be nostalgic for something one had never experienced.

*This is bad comedy! He can’t possibly be serious when writing this. He of all people should know that the Holy Father is trying to restore the sacred. I pity McBrien.

 

[Tomster]

McBrien’s latest.

Take a look at this sentence right here.

*But if such Catholics are under the ages of 45 or 50, they have little or no hands-on experience of the pre-Vatican II Mass. It is a mystery how one can be nostalgic for something one had never experienced.

*This is bad comedy! He can’t possibly be serious when writing this. He of all people should know that the Holy Father is trying to restore the sacred. I pity McBrien.

I think it is safe to say that of all people he does know that the Holy Father is trying to restore the sacred but that he [McBrien] will continue to try and frustrate the process with his writings - as usual.
McBrien deserves to be ignored.

 

[THurifer2]

McBrien is regarded higher than the pope in my diocese…Pray for us.

 

[JRKH]

The whole hullabaloo about the Latin vs vernacular - Tridentine vs NO mass strikes me as rediculous. And it is equally obvious that this author has no clue as to why some younger people are interested in the TLM.

Personaly I like both forms of Mass for different reasons and don’t think one should be ousted for the other. What really bugs me is the controversy itself, and how the so called “liberal” elements of the Church feel threatened by something they should be embracing.

If one is a Liberal and wish the Church to be more inclusive, why should the TLM crowd be left out? What is so fearfully wrong with the Latin Mass that it should be buried instead of celebrated as the elder and respected brother in the eucharistic family?

As far as the younger folks having no exposure, well that is not their fault. I was about 10 or 11 when things changed.
I don’t remember there being any discussion about keeping the Latin, or now much interest there was in the diocese for the new mass, or how many old masses and how many new masses to say. The Latin was just dropped and you were expected to go along quietly and accept the changes - Period!!

It is interesting that the Holy Father’s new instruction is not greeted with the same enthusiasum as the VII documents. We are told by the liberals that there isn’t that much interest in the TLM. Well I don’t remember being asked how much interest there was in changing to the English in 1964 so why should the level of inerest matter.

If younger people are to be exposed and able to make up there own minds then more Latin masses need to be offered. People should be encouraged to come and experience the TLM in both the Low Mass and the High Mass Let the parishoners make up there own minds about which they prefer. Why is this so threatening?

May God guide our bishops to understand that the TLM is no threat to the NO but rather a compliment to it. That each, when offered properly, are a blessing and a gift. That each has it’s place in the liturgy and can only enrich the lives of all Catholics.

Peace

James

 

[anamchara]

“The pope’s recent authorization of the Tridentine Latin Mass,without the need to seek the local bishop’s permission, has stirred some measure of debate within the Roman Catholic Church,** especially in letters-to-the-editor and on blogs written by individuals who seem not to have day-jobs.”**

I thought that was funny. I like McBrien and I don’t see a problem with his take on on the whole debate about TLM.

The definition of nostalgia:

1. 
   *] A bittersweet longing for things, persons, or situations of the past.
   *] The condition of being homesick; homesickness.

1. 
   He is right. If you didn’t live in the past you can’t really have nostalgia for it at least by the strict definition anyway.
   The way I’ve hear the old Latin Mass described, I wouldn’t like it. No sermon? I’ll have to read “A Dinosaur Ponders the Latin Mass,” by Bishop Welca. It sounds interesting.

 

[Pious_Mat]

He forgets that a majority of Catholics under 45 have no hands-on experience of any mass–EF, OF, Dominican, Ambrosian, Marionite, Greek…how many “Catholics” do you know haven’t been in a Church since they were confirmed? I know hundreds.

And then there are the people who only go at Christmas and Easter…

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

Why isn’t this over in Traditional Catholic?

 

[anamchara]

I think it is safe to say that of all people he does know that the Holy Father is trying to restore the sacred but that he [McBrien] will continue to try and frustrate the process with his writings - as usual.
McBrien deserves to be ignored.

Of all people, I think he is more aware than most posters in here, no offense to any of the good folks posting in this thread. But he is entitled to his opinion just like any traditional supporters are entitled to theirs. Should I ignore all traditional supporters? Wouldn’t any Latin supporter be the first to link me to several writings supporting the Latin Mass to convince me how great it is? Just a thought.

 

[anamchara]

Why isn’t this over in Traditional Catholic?

I was going to say the same thing.

 

[JRKH]

Why isn’t this over in Traditional Catholic?

Perhaps the OP is looking for a broader view.

James

 

[VociMike]

Why isn’t this over in Traditional Catholic?

If the topic is “The Latin Mass” that encompasses both OF and EF (NO and TLM). Is the NO celebrated in Latin now considered only “Traditional Catholic” territory?

 

[Strummer]

Personaly I like both forms of Mass for different reasons and don’t think one should be ousted for the other.

Agreed.

What really bugs me is … how the so called “liberal” elements of the Church feel threatened by something they should be embracing.

I take then you are equally bugged by those who feel threatened by the NO and insist upon the TLM?

It is interesting that the Holy Father’s new instruction is not greeted with the same enthusiasum as the VII documents. We are told by the liberals that there isn’t that much interest in the TLM. Well I don’t remember being asked how much interest there was in changing to the English in 1964 so why should the level of inerest matter.

Now, I was born during VII so I do not recall anything about that time. However, if it was as you say “greeted with…enthusiasm” then it seems some sort of interest was indeed present and somehow registered with Rome. Certainly there are those who sought a return to the TLM and they have been heard. In both periods there were supporters and detractors of each particular movement. The difference today, my opinion, is in the numbers (read percentage) of people supporting the particular change and their ability of each side to communicate to their audience. As indicated above, VII seems to have had a large support at it’s time of introduction. The MP seems to have a somewhat smaller percentage of support. However, it is large enough and the supporters have leveraged modern communication channels such that they’ve had their desired effect.

 

[JRKH]

I take then you are equally bugged by those who feel threatened by the NO and insist upon the TLM?

Yes it does bug me as well. However, the reason that I am particularly bugged by the 'Liberal" arguments is that it belies what they themselves claim to believe. That of being an open and inclusive church.

Now, I was born during VII so I do not recall anything about that time. However, if it was as you say “greeted with…enthusiasm” then it seems some sort of interest was indeed present and somehow registered with Rome.

Certainly there were those who saw the need for changes, but there were also large numbers at that time who had grown up with the Latin mass and saw no reason to change it. I remember my father (a WWII vet) commenting that during the war he could go to Mass in any country and know what was going on because everyone did it exactly the same way (or nearly).
Since the Holy Father in his recent document points out that the TLM was never outlawed, why did it so completely go away virtually overnight?

Certainly there are those who sought a return to the TLM and they have been heard. In both periods there were supporters and detractors of each particular movement. **The difference today, my opinion, is in the numbers (read percentage) of people supporting the particular change and their ability of each side to communicate to their audience. ** As indicated above, VII seems to have had a large support at it’s time of introduction. The MP seems to have a somewhat smaller percentage of support. However, it is large enough and the supporters have leveraged modern communication channels such that they’ve had their desired effect.

I’m sorry but in this you are wrong. If the rank and file catholics had been polled in my parish in 1964 I can virtually guarantee that the Latin Mass would have been retained.

Think about it for a moment. What would happen if the TLM were suddenly mandated as THE mass across the board. No more NO at all. How do you think people would react? In a sense that is what happened in 1964/65

The fact of the matter is that the NO and the TLM have never stood side by side as options in every parish. The NO was presented as a fiat accompli and the TLM yanked, period.
I don’t know if you have ever been to a TLM or understand it’s particular beauty or not, but if the more liberal elements have there way you won’t have the chance to find out. Right now in the Cincinnati area there is ONE TLM offered per week. There is also ONE offered in Northern KY and I think ONE in Dayton OH. Three Masses (all on Sunday) for an area of at least a couple of Million People.

I’m not on one side or the other, but I think that the playing field should be level.

James

 

[Dempsey1919]

If younger people are to be exposed and able to make up there own minds then more Latin masses need to be offered. People should be encouraged to come and experience the TLM in both the Low Mass and the High Mass Let the parishoners make up there own minds about which they prefer. Why is this so threatening?

Excellent post! I agree 100%. I am 21 years old and I love the Tridentine Mass. I think it’s one of the most reverent and beautiful things that the world has ever known.

However, many “traditionalists” actually make people want to distance themselves from the Tridentine Mass. Some Catholics believe that the Tridentine Mass is only attended by angry schismatics in open disobedience to the Pope.

The liberals don’t help either. They want to convince everyone that the Tridentine Mass is only attended by SSPXers and other radicals.

To be honest, I think that the traditionalist movement needs to distance itself from the schismatics and improve it’s image. We need to convince people that we are faithful Catholics who have a sincere love for the Tridentine Mass.

We need to do more to promote traditional Catholic worship. Read my “Take Action” thread for more details:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=193721

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Fr. McBrien:

“The challenge to offer a specific, compelling argument for the Latin Mass has just been made more difficult by a witty, down-to-earth article in the October 8 issue of America magazine, written by Emil Wcela, the retired auxiliary bishop of the diocese of Rockville Centre, who also happens to have a degree in Sacred Scripture from Rome’s Pontifical Biblical Institute.”

Here is the article posted on Fr. Z’s blog:

wdtprs.com/blog/2007/10/bp-wcela-in-american-magazine-on-the-latin-mass/

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Fr. McBrien:

In the past three months, liturgical scholars have published articles which carefully pick apart the reasoning behind the papal document that authorizes the use of the Tridentine Latin Mass. (The document is technically known as a motu proprio, in that it is produced by the pope “on his own initiative.”) Each critical analysis usually provokes a flurry of indignant reactions from a handful of Latin-Mass advocates.

Where? What articles? It would be nice if he could give some references.

Again, while no one should question their freedom of speech, not one of them, to my knowledge, has presented a credible justification for their preference. A few substitute ridicule for reasoning.

Who does Fr. McBrien read? Over the years, traditional Catholics have produced a number of articles and books making the case for the TLM.

The challenge to offer a specific, compelling argument for the Latin Mass has just been made more difficult by a witty, down-to-earth article in the October 8 issue of America magazine, written by Emil Wcela, the retired auxiliary bishop of the diocese of Rockville Centre, who also happens to have a degree in Sacred Scripture from Rome’s Pontifical Biblical Institute.

See my above post for the link to this article. I really don’t think the Bishop has made things much more difficult, to say the least. Many of his arguments were already answered in 1966 by the article in my signature line, “The Case for the Latin Mass”:

latin-mass-society.org/dietrich.htm

I would have no hesitation to compare the quality of writing and arguments made by von Hildebrand, Dom Alcuin Reid, Fr. John Parsons, Fr. Aidan Nichols, and books like “The Heresy of Formlesness” with any of the writers Fr. McBrien alludes to. Let anyone read these authors and decide for themselves if any of them can manage to present “a credible justification for their preference.”

And actually even on blog sites, or in the comments on blog sites, I have seen a number of Traditionalists present rational, cogent arguments for the TLM.

 

[BobP123]

“After one of those breaks,” Bishop Wcela continues, “I suggested to the other priests an experiment: in the fall, we would not reintroduce it unless people asked for it.”

It’s truly sad that the Mass has become just another “experiment” in the eyes of bishops and priests. The Holy Sacrifice might as well be in the same laboratories where cures for the many diseases are being developed. What’s happened to the Catholic Church?

 

[veronica_daisy]

I believe you can have a homesick feeling for something even if you’ve never known it. Don’t we all feel a sort of homesick for Heaven? I think the draw to the Mass itself is the most important thing. Not necessarily this sort of mass or that sort of mass. They all offer Eucharist and isn’t that why we go?

 

[PaixGioiaAmor]

To be honest, I think that the traditionalist movement needs to distance itself from the schismatics and improve it’s image. We need to convince people that we are faithful Catholics who have a sincere love for the Tridentine Mass.

We need to do more to promote traditional Catholic worship. Read my “Take Action” thread for more details:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=193721

Actually, what you need to do is not abandon so-called “Novus Ordo” parishes.

Think of it this way: By the account of many people on this board, most regular parishes are struggling to maintain reverent liturgies with good music. The “rock mass” and “guitar mass” has not died out, unfortunately. There is a large minority who wants good, reverent music and liturgies. Now if that significant group abandons their parishes to go to so-called “traditional parishes” and immerse themselves in the Tridentine mass, what do you suppose will happen? In all the other parishes the “rock” crowd will win - because there will be no one to challenge them.

Also, by the way, contrary to your beliefs many people will not flock to the Tridentine masses. There are a great many people who want reverant liturgy and music but do not want the latin mass. So, with all of you gone to the latin masses, where does that leave them? There will be a few parishes in the diocese that offer the latin mass, and do quite well - their churches may very well be filled to the brim. Meanwhile, the other 90% of parishes will have bad music and bad liturgy.

Consider very carefully your strategy and what you want to accomplish here.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Actually, what you need to do is not abandon so-called “Novus Ordo” parishes.

Think of it this way: By the account of many people on this board, most regular parishes are struggling to maintain reverent liturgies with good music. The “rock mass” and “guitar mass” has not died out, unfortunately. There is a large minority who wants good, reverent music and liturgies. Now if that significant group abandons their parishes to go to so-called “traditional parishes” and immerse themselves in the Tridentine mass, what do you suppose will happen? In all the other parishes the “rock” crowd will win - because there will be no one to challenge them.

Also, by the way, contrary to your beliefs many people will not flock to the Tridentine masses. There are a great many people who want reverant liturgy and music but do not want the latin mass. So, with all of you gone to the latin masses, where does that leave them? There will be a few parishes in the diocese that offer the latin mass, and do quite well - their churches may very well be filled to the brim. Meanwhile, the other 90% of parishes will have bad music and bad liturgy.

Consider very carefully your strategy and what you want to accomplish here.

I think the Pope issued the Motu Proprio, in part, so that the TLM will have a good influence on the NO.

Also, speaking personally, while I hope all NO’s become more reverent, I myself would much rather assist at the Mass assisted at and celebrated by countless Saints and Martyrs, and pray the same prayers. Hence even if there were a reverent NO I would still choose the TLM.

And I think it will take a while to gauge a real level of interest. Those who might show no interest may never have been to a TLM, or are making a quite hasty judgment. Let them attend a TLM with Gregorian chant for a bit (or at least have an opportunity) and then maybe we can see where the interest lies.