TLM misconceptions

[Contra_Mundum_1]

IThey seem to fear the Mass of the Ages.

My thoughts exactly.
So many poeple are afraid of it. I don’t understand why.

I also have tried very hard to love the NO Mass but it just never felt real. I can’t really explain it - I felt something was missing but I didn’t know what. I was completely ignorant of the tradition and had no clue what the differences between the TLM and NO were. I thought that the NO was simply translated from latin (RCIA in the mid 90s with a sister who was proud of the fact that we could change the orded of the Mass because that wasn’t important at all, as long as we had the Eucharist).
Imagine my shock and delight when I encountered the TLM. I simply can’t go back to the NO, it just feels so stripped bare and banal. How very sad.

 

[magdalina]

And yet there are some (not all!) Traditionalists who seem to truly not understand the Ordinary Form. They seem to think that a Mass in the OF is automatically a “clown mass” or at least something utterly devoid of reverence, focusing entirely on the people, and celebrated by priests spouting heresy. Maybe that’s based on bad experiences like you mentioned… but it’s hardly the full picture.

Most Catholics have attended many, many Ordinary Form masses before becoming aware of the existence of the EF, finding one in their diocese, getting there, learning enough to participate, and developing a preference one way or another.

Even those who eventually become hardcore trads, have been to enough OF masses to know in their hearts that clowns, liturgical dancers in leotards, open sacrilege and outright heresy are very rare. We should all recognize these “widespread abuses” are cited to unfairly cast the OF in a negative light. Nobody honestly believes that “abuse” is the OF “norm”.

Or do they?

Maggie

 

[Layman]

If you do it long enough and/or
Can get a Bishop behind it and/or
Can stretch the rubrics and the GIRM wide enough and/or
Can cite an example of it occuring in any Catholic rite at any time or place in history …

It isn’t an abuse.

Psst: Using the phrase “It is the Holy Spirit at work amongst the people” is a big help.

[Starts looking on eBay for liturgical ballet shoes]

 

[CradleCath]

Most Catholics have attended many, many Ordinary Form masses before becoming aware of the existence of the EF, finding one in their diocese, getting there, learning enough to participate, and developing a preference one way or another.

You are correct about that & it’s a shame. Our Holy Father has expressed a desire to see the TLM. be made available to those who want it, yet 75% of the Catholics in my city aren’t even aware that the Mass of the Ages is available to them.

Even those who eventually become hardcore trads, have been to enough OF masses to know in their hearts that clowns, liturgical dancers in leotards, open sacrilege and outright heresy are very rare. We should all recognize these “widespread abuses” are cited to unfairly cast the OF in a negative light. Nobody honestly believes that “abuse” is the OF “norm”.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

It isn’t an abuse.
Using the phrase “It is the Holy Spirit at work amongst the people” is a big help.
]

This has made me laugh out loud. How true.
:clapping:

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

None of these practices adher to the teachings of the Second Vatican council. And they make a circus like atmosphere that makes it very hard to participate** inwardly.**

 

[magdalina]

Layman, CradleCath, ContraMundum,

We have all seen what can happen when the inmates seize the institution and begin making the rules. Sometimes the captive “authorities” make “concessions” to buy time until the HRT arrives to sort things out. However, if the situation is allowed to continue, there is the risk that that the Stockholm syndrome will begin to effect the captive authorities. Hostages often view their captives as “giving life” by simply not taking it. In this sense, the captor becomes the person in control of the captive’s basic needs for survival and life itself. The condition becomes worse with time and in some cases, the captive will actually risk his own life to protect and defend his captors. Sadly, some parishes have crossed that threshold.

This thread was not started to itemize liturgical abuses which may occur within either form of the Mass. I think that most of those who attend and assist the Ordinary Form truly believe that they are experiencing the fullness of the Faith. Why wouldn’t they?

If RCIA programs began presenting candidates with a better history of the origin and development of both forms of the liturgy, graduates if these programs would be better equipped to practice their new faith, in whatever form they choose.

Maggie.

 

[joedecarlo]

So true.
Also, I don’t understand the ‘argument’ that Latin makes it impossible to understand what’s going on. It is so easy to use the missal. Most people these days know how to read, right? I’m sure everybody is capable of holding a book and following the text. I’m convinced it’s just a question of laziness.

I think another reason that people don’t go to the TLM is that a High Mass is about 1 1/2 compared to 45 mins for a NO. Secondly, Latin and English are side by side in the Missal.

If anyone is close to the South Jersey area, please come Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin, NJ. It is part of the Camden Diocese and it is in communion with the Pope. We have daily mass and two mass, low and high, on Sunday. All Latin masses. The music is magnificent. The pastor is great.

 

[joedecarlo]

You are correct about that & it’s a shame. Our Holy Father has expressed a desire to see the TLM. be made available to those who want it, yet 75% of the Catholics in my city aren’t even aware that the Mass of the Ages is available to them.

 

[jeanannemarie]

It is still my humble opinion that people who hold postitions of responsibility in the OF of the Mass do not want to move to an EF form of the Mass, thereby giving up the opportunity to “actively participate in the Mass.” Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but I really feel this is a large part of the difference in preference. I also hear often from people who prefer the OF that we would somehow be going "backwards (as in losing the progress we have made) by picking up with the EF again. MODERNISM has a firm foothold among us. Pray to Our Lady of Good Counsel! Many errors beguile us.

 

[The_Bucket]

Very well put, this summarises what many people see as the problem with the NO. There is so much going on that distracts from the very focus of the Mass. The emphasis is all on external activity.

First off, I don’t know if non “Trads” are supposed to post in this section of CAF, so if not, my apologies.

But I did want to say that I’ve experienced both forms and really do like the EF, though I haven’t had the opportunity to attend a High Mass since I was a kid I did go to the EF low Mass that was held every couple of weeks in my parish in the previous city I lived. I don’t have a parish near me that does the EF, mostly because there’s such a large immigrant population that they dedicate other time slots to Spanish and Creole Masses.

At any rate, I think you have a point… when it comes to your faith and how you experience it. I’m very intellectual in my faith; I enjoy reading apologetics, Scripture, works of theology, and debating more than say, simply sitting in front of the Eucharist. I know that the presence of God is there and I’m reverent and I know it’s important to worship God for His sake so I do it, but it’s not “inspirational” to me. However, I do find the atmosphere of an EF Mass to be more inspirational with the Latin and I definitely enjoy OF Masses that include Latin chanting. That’s good stuff… for me. Not everyone has the same relationship with God.

And while it’s not good for any celebration of the Eucharist to deviate too greatly from maintaining it’s focus on the sacrifice, it is probably good for others that there are other elements in the OF in that those elements are attractive to them and keep them solidly in the Faith and help them re-focus on the Mass. See my point here? Basically, I think the arraignment we have in the Church today is very good. The Holy Father was wise to make the EF a little less extraordinary and begin a process of moving both forms of the Mass to a side-by-side position. Both follow Christ’s command to “Do This In Remembrance Of Me” and the different forms, I believe, will attract a wider flock and bring more people to the fullness of faith without compromising on anything of greatest importance, like the Doctrine.

 

[utah_rose]

Interesting point. I know of a few actually. They do feel more strongly about the issue than other people and tend to avoid the OF if at all possible. But they are not ignorant of the OF, they have objections that are grounded in facts. They are all very devout and faithful to the magesterium.

We go to the TLM Mass about once a month. One of the gentlemen there is a convert, and he said going to the OF Mass reminds him of a Protestant service. He was formerly a Presbyterian.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

on the flip side of things, the same can be said true of Traditionalist who “hate” the OF

i think its fairly common in anything that people would hate something that they don’t fully understand. possibly for fear of the unknown or simply the misconceptions because of the lack of knowledge

Hardly - the reason traditionalists prefer the latin mass over the OF is because of their experience with the OF of which it being horrible. Most of those who have hatred of the latin mass NEVER experienced it

 

[Eric_Olsen]

Again…wrong! We do not automatically assume that! It’s been our experience that the majority of the OF masses lack reverence. I have been fortunate enough to never have experienced a clown mass when I do go to the OF mass.

And yet there are some (not all!) Traditionalists who seem to truly not understand the Ordinary Form. They seem to think that a Mass in the OF is automatically a “clown mass” or at least something utterly devoid of reverence, focusing entirely on the people, and celebrated by priests spouting heresy. Maybe that’s based on bad experiences like you mentioned… but it’s hardly the full picture.

 

[rapunzel77]

Hardly - the reason traditionalists prefer the latin mass over the OF is because of their experience with the OF of which it being horrible. Most of those who have hatred of the latin mass NEVER experienced it

This is not exactly true. Granted, I have attended some OF Masses that had some abuses in them but for the most part the reason why I don’t like to attend the OF is because I fell in love with the EF more. I love the prayers which express our faith in a more explicit manner than the OF. There is NO ambiguity. It is clearly a sacrifice and worship directed to God alone. At the OF, although you know in your mind that it is supposed to be directed to God, the fact that there are many watered down prayers and ambiguity should be cause for concern. Most of the songs that are sung sing either about the congregation coming together or singing some clearly heretical stuff . Of course, I don’t believe that the OF is invalid, etc. Afterall, I was confirmed and received into the Church at an OF mass and occasionally I will go to one if it is a holy day of obligation or if we have a chance to go to Mass on a weekday. To me, I believe that the EF Mass expresses our Faith more clearly than the OF.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

I used to go once a month to Mater Eccleiae and have not been there in 4 years since my daughter was born( I traveled from the norristown pa area). Father Paisley is a great preacher…

I think another reason that people don’t go to the TLM is that a High Mass is about 1 1/2 compared to 45 mins for a NO. Secondly, Latin and English are side by side in the Missal.

If anyone is close to the South Jersey area, please come Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin, NJ. It is part of the Camden Diocese and it is in communion with the Pope. We have daily mass and two mass, low and high, on Sunday. All Latin masses. The music is magnificent. The pastor is great.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

well perhaps you are correct because when I returned to the faith in 2003 that’s when I found the TLM by accident at a parish in Norristown PA. After the first time, I wondered, why the heck did they water down the OF? Needless to say I attend it regularly except when my wife, who prefers the OF, doesn’t want to go to it.

But I think many of the problems are with the abuses.

This is not exactly true. Granted, I have attended some OF Masses that had some abuses in them but for the most part the reason why I don’t like to attend the OF is because I fell in love with the EF more. I love the prayers which express our faith in a more explicit manner than the OF. There is NO ambiguity. It is clearly a sacrifice and worship directed to God alone. At the OF, although you know in your mind that it is supposed to be directed to God, the fact that there are many watered down prayers and ambiguity should be cause for concern. Most of the songs that are sung sing either about the congregation coming together or singing some clearly heretical stuff . Of course, I don’t believe that the OF is invalid, etc. Afterall, I was confirmed and received into the Church at an OF mass and occasionally I will go to one if it is a holy day of obligation or if we have a chance to go to Mass on a weekday. To me, I believe that the EF Mass expresses our Faith more clearly than the OF.

 

[Bbigam]

Again…wrong! We do not automatically assume that! It’s been our experience that the majority of the OF masses lack reverence. I have been fortunate enough to never have experienced a clown mass when I do go to the OF mass.

That’s why I said “some - not all!” I know not all Traditionalists assume that. But some seem to. It also seems some Traditionalists think that anything different from the Extraordinary Form rubrics is automatically irreverent - oh, maybe they wouldn’t say that that way, but that’s how it comes across. For example, celebrating facing the people versus ad orientem. While I love ad orientem and the theology behind it and even overall prefer it, facing the people is not inherently irreverent like some Traditionalists suggest. A Mass doesn’t have to have Latin to be reverent either, as much as I love Latin.

Even (gasp!) Communion in the hand while standing and EMHCs are not inherently irreverent, although I think they have encouraged a trend of irreverence and I wish they would go away…

I guess my point is that a) sometimes some Traditionalists characterize OF Masses based on the worst possible scenario; and b) sometimes some Traditionalists assume something is irreverent merely because it’s different.

And, lest anyone think I am anti-Traditionalist/EF… yes, there are also lots of people who incorrectly view the EF Mass as being a priest turning his back on the people to mumble words nobody can understand while the congregation stands/sits/kneels cluelessly. Major lack of understanding in people who see the Extraordinary Form that way.

 

[ljubim]

CradleCath;6814196:

The Holy Father approved the Latin Mass, but I don’t believe he has said the latin Mass since his Motu Proprio.

Correction: He did once, 1990. (I think just once…)

He says it almost every day though, for his private Mass

 

[VetA]

Agree. Good comparison!

There seems to be a general belief that, because the vast majority of us dont know Latin, we should stay well clear of the TLM. ***Absolute baloney!*** i dont know Latin, and never will; but just to be there, and soak up the reverence, the dignity and the beauty of it overwhelms any (imaginary) minuses.
Theres a real fear of the "dead language". And theres the stupid belief that only the elderly want it.

When we understand what the Mass is, and what its various parts mean, language doesnt mean much. Its our Lord`s time-transcending Ultimate Sacrificial Act that matters.

If only we could lasso some of the well meaning but mistaken TLM opponents, and cart them off to the TLM!

A lot of folks are also happy in their laid back, often very liberal, comfort zone…
… “Do Not Disturb”

what do they think of me at 18 . i must be the ‘exception that proves the rule’