What Chages would you make in the Tridentine Mass

[lak611]

Actually you CANNOT even hear the priest during the Canon because it is intentionally prayed in silence so you cannot hear it. No one at the TLM hears the sacred words and the only time we know is when we see the priest genuflect and the bells ring. The Canon is prayed in silence so how did you know he was “speeding through the Latin?”

Ken

He was speeding through because I had not even finished reading the English in the missal (and I am not a slow reader). The whole Mass was over in 15 minutes.

 

[kleary]

He was speeding through because I had not even finished reading the English in the missal (and I am not a slow reader). The whole Mass was over in 15 minutes.

“15 minutes”??? that is virtually impossible. But I had heard some horror stories such as that concerning Low Mass here in America in some places. It wasn’t 15 minutes, about 30 minutes. I served Low Mass for a priest who said Mass fast like that and it took 30 minutes.

Also, you could not possibly follow the Latin at the Canon anyway.

Ken

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Lily, I understand that from your perspective ‘hearing’ the priest pray is important in that for you, it aids your participation in Mass. That is why I’m glad you have the ordinary rite, where this is normative.

But for many of us, ‘hearing’ the priest, or hearing the language we ‘normally’ speak is not necessary for US to fully participate in Mass. That is why I’m glad we have the extraordinary rite.

Both beautiful, both valid, both offer us full participation in the sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[lak611]

“15 minutes”??? that is virtually impossible. But I had heard some horror stories such as that concerning Low Mass here in America in some places. It wasn’t 15 minutes, about 30 minutes. I served Low Mass for a priest who said Mass fast like that and it took 30 minutes.

Also, you could not possibly follow the Latin at the Canon anyway.

Ken

It was a Low Mass during the week. I went to the daily TLM, after experiencing a 15 minute NO.

 

[estesbob]

1. The language of the TLM is Latin. Latin is used to show the unity of the Church. The Latin language never changes like living languages do. The defense of the use of the Latin language vs vernacular translations is extensively documented. No mistakes come from the priest praying the Latin words- the meaning of words stays the same. You can see this already in the ICEL translations vs the original Latin text from Rome in the Novus Ordo.
2. If you regularly attend the TLM like I do you do not see what I see. I see no meaning given to using a three year cycle of readings. To me, the Epistle and Gospel are not sung for my instruction, they are sung in worship of God.
3. The direction the priest faces, the direction the Epistle is sung, the direction the Gospel is sung, all have an embedded liturgical meaning. You jave to understand that everything in the TLM teaches us something, and if you change anything, then you change what it is teaching us, what it is showing us and others about the Faith.

The Latin Language is the enemy of all who hate the truth. In the TLM the Deacon faces “North” and sings the Gospel in Latin. North is the direction of the pagans- and he sings the Truth in Latin in their direction.

And to make changes so that it “opens it’s beauty to generations of Catholics”??? That is absurd. NOTHING needs to be changed to the TLM at all to attract people. Wherever it happens many people come, many people attend. That is how it is here in my area.

Ken

Then it will continue to be a fringe Mass celebrated by few, ignored by most-how is that unity?

 

[Walking_Home]

Then it will continue to be a fringe Mass celebrated by few, ignored by most-how is that unity?

---

Time will tell.

 

[japhy]

Then it will continue to be a fringe Mass celebrated by few, ignored by most-how is that unity?

That is not the opinion of the Holy Father. Perhaps you need to re-read the motu proprio and its accompanying letter. This is about making widely available a treasure that has been unjustly stifled for the past forty years.

Fr. Zuhlsdorf (from What Does the Prayer Really Say?) notes that this is part of a “marshall plan” by the Pope to re-establish Catholic identity in a time when the faith is being assaulted on many fronts. The TLM will hopefully exert a “gravitational pull” on the Novus Ordo (and vice-versa); the hoped-for goal is more reverent celebration of the Ordinary Form (such as: without abuses, with Latin and Gregorian Chant restored to their pride of place, etc.) and deeper consideration of the Extraordinary Form (such as: adding new saints to the Canon, adding new prefaces, etc.).

I implore you to re-examine the TLM; it is not a “fringe Mass”. For centuries it was, in the Latin Rite, the Mass.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

One thing to consider: Pope Benedict not only stated that the TLM was NEVER ABROGATED, he specifically noted that the two rites, ordinary and extraordinary, were both valid. . .and that means AS THEY ARE DOCUMENTED TO BE. We have the 1962 Mass (TLM) and we have the 1970 Mass (Pauline). Now, there were some ‘changes’ to the 1962 Mass even, and before that changes to some earlier Latin Masses etc. And heaven knows there were changes to the 1970 Mass (as R.S. and the GIRM have made abundantly clear) and they will keep coming it appears.

SO. . .no matter what we might dream of making in the lines of change . . provided you folks over at the ordinary rite are celebrating your Mass according to R.S. and the GIRM, you are perfectly valid right now. Any changes are not going to come from YOU or US but from your bishops under the direction of Rome.

And no matter what YOU might dream of making in the lines of change. . .provided we over at the extraordinary rite are celebrating Mass according to the rubrics as set down and as documented as valid by Pope Benedict. . .WE are perfectly valid. Any changes are not going to come from US or from YOU but from the bishops under the direction of Rome.

So let’s not worry on this thread or the other about the changes we would make. . .because we aren’t going to get to do any, are we?

 

[Hijikata]

Then it will continue to be a fringe Mass celebrated by few, ignored by most-how is that unity?

Celebrated by few now, but have you seen the seminaries of the FSSP and other religious communities? It will continue to grow…

 

[Ad_Deum]

There is none to change because they already did it and the result was the Novus Ordo Missae.
I rather stick to the Traditional Latin Mass, but for others it is up to them to choose now.

Pax
Laudater Jesus Christus
Instaurare omnia in Christo

 

[AJV]

1. If you regularly attend the TLM like I do you do not see what I see. I see no meaning given to using a three year cycle of readings. To me, the Epistle and Gospel are not sung for my instruction, they are sung in worship of God.
2. The direction the priest faces, the direction the Epistle is sung, the direction the Gospel is sung, all have an embedded liturgical meaning. You jave to understand that everything in the TLM teaches us something, and if you change anything, then you change what it is teaching us, what it is showing us and others about the Faith.

The Latin Language is the enemy of all who hate the truth. In the TLM the Deacon faces “North” and sings the Gospel in Latin. North is the direction of the pagans- and he sings the Truth in Latin in their direction.

No he does not because of that. That is a mystical meaning attached later in *popular *usage and is not sanctioned officially anywhere.

As for changing, was not the direction changed from South to North? And form facing the people to not? What meaning was changed there?

The Epistle and the Gosple like everything in the Mass is offered for the glory of God- but only insofar as the whole of public worship is offered to Him and for His glory. But it is for your instruction- most assuredly. What otherwise is the point of the priest or subdeacon intoning “Fratres” or “Carissime” when he begins most Apostolic lections, even though it is not in the original text? Look at yesterdays reading. How can it not be intended for the instruction of the listeners? It absolutely makes no sense as a primary prayer to God.

In the Summa, for exmaple, St. Thomas says

There precedes, in the second place, the instruction of the faithful, because this sacrament is “a mystery of faith,” as stated above (78, 3, ad 5).

Now this instruction is given “dispositively,” when the Lectors and Sub-deacons read aloud in the church the teachings of the prophets and apostles:

after this “lesson,” the choir sing the “Gradual,” which signifies progress in life; then the “Alleluia” is intoned, and this denotes spiritual joy; or in mournful offices the “Tract”, expressive of spiritual sighing; for all these things ought to result from the aforesaid teaching.

But the people are instructed “perfectly” by Christ’s teaching contained in the Gospel, which is read by the higher ministers, that is, by the Deacons.

 

[AJV]

.
Why must all of the Mass be said out loud? Much of it is not being spoken to us.

That is true. But if the argument for silece is that they are addressed to God, then the Collect is addressed to God. The Postcommunion is addressed to God. So is the Gloria, the Kyrie, the Sanctus, the Preface. Why then are they prayed aloud?

The aloud prayer, even if addressed to God has a subjective effect on its listeners.

 

[AJV]

.
Why must all of the Mass be said out loud? Much of it is not being spoken to us.

That is true. But if the argument for silence is that they are addressed to God, then the Collect is addressed to God. The Postcommunion is addressed to God. So is the Gloria, the Kyrie, the Sanctus, the Preface. Why then are they prayed aloud?

The aloud prayer, even if addressed to God has a subjective effect on its listeners.

 

[Melanie01]

For starters have it said in English and have the Priest face the people.

BTW-I started this thread becuase of the excellent insight recieved from TM fans on another thread about what changes should be made in the N.O. Mass. I thoughr N.O. Fans could similarly help them out

…uh no…the priest leads the people in offering the Mass to God.

catholics come from all nations Latin is the church language…missals have the vernacular for the person of that nation…the sermon is given in the vernacular and on Sundays the Epistle and Gospel are repeated in the vernacular…

for people orientated stuff…there is the stall after Mass to have a cuppa and cake and a chat supporting all the while the parochial school or what have you…

 

[stmaria]

What I would change in the TLM is the sermon. The sermons in the TLM tend to be too harsh, too instructive, too catholic. I have actually heard sermons about no salvation outside the Church! Sermons on invincible ignorance! Sermons on Fatima! Sermons on Freemasonry and even one that stated that missing Mass on a Sunday was a mortal sin! This must stop! The sermons should be gentle, more loving. Sernons about the dignity of man, how all religions, even pagan religions have truth and holliness! That’s what the TLM needs.

 

[japhy]

What I would change in the TLM is the sermon. The sermons in the TLM tend to be too harsh, too instructive, too catholic. I have actually heard sermons about no salvation outside the Church! Sermons on invincible ignorance! Sermons on Fatima! Sermons on Freemasonry and even one that stated that missing Mass on a Sunday was a mortal sin! This must stop! The sermons should be gentle, more loving. Sernons about the dignity of man, how all religions, even pagan religions have truth and holliness! That’s what the TLM needs.

I think you forgot a couple dozen 's in there.

 

[Sure]

What I would change in the TLM is the sermon. The sermons in the TLM tend to be too harsh, too instructive, too catholic. I have actually heard sermons about no salvation outside the Church! Sermons on invincible ignorance! Sermons on Fatima! Sermons on Freemasonry and even one that stated that missing Mass on a Sunday was a mortal sin! This must stop! The sermons should be gentle, more loving. Sernons about the dignity of man, how all religions, even pagan religions have truth and holliness! That’s what the TLM needs.

See, this is exactly why traditionalists get a bad reputation. You are assuming that anyone who would propose to change the TLM would also want to weaken the theology and the teaching of the Catholic Faith. You are saying that those who propose changes desire heresy. That is a stupid assertion. One can certainly call for the TLM to change ORGANICALLY as liturgies should without compromising the Faith.

 

[lak611]

See, this is exactly why traditionalists get a bad reputation. You are assuming that anyone who would propose to change the TLM would also want to weaken the theology and the teaching of the Catholic Faith. You are saying that those who propose changes desire heresy. That is a stupid assertion. One can certainly call for the TLM to change ORGANICALLY as liturgies should without compromising the Faith.

The organic changes actually did happen. The 1962 Missal is not the same as the 1955 Missal. There have been changes over the years, but none have been too drastic.

 

[estesbob]

See, this is exactly why traditionalists get a bad reputation. You are assuming that anyone who would propose to change the TLM would also want to weaken the theology and the teaching of the Catholic Faith. You are saying that those who propose changes desire heresy. That is a stupid assertion. One can certainly call for the TLM to change ORGANICALLY as liturgies should without compromising the Faith.

The dont change one iota of the TM is why it is doubtful it will ever catch on . Put it in the vernacular, update the readings and calendar of saints and it could replace the N.O.

 

[pig_boy]

1. Audible, still sotto voce, but use a good mic on the altar.
2. Option for vernacular.
3. Readings only in vernacular (repeating them is pointless).
4. Communion at a rail or in a line.
5. 3 year cycle of readings.
6. Add modern saints to the calendar.
7. Sing the Mass don’t say it!
8. Make the maniple optional.
9. Make sure that any changes occur organically, the liturgy is not frozen in time.

I think these are pretty good ideas. I’ve only attended the TLM a few times and I really appreciate the structure and the beauty of the liturgy, but there are some difficulties to overcome. I know some traditionalists say don’t change anything, but has the Mass truly not changed at all (I don’t know)? It seems as if there have been different Missals promulgated so I would assume there have been some variations.

I think the two biggest and most radical changes would be to have an option of the vernacular with certain prayers said in Latin and the second would be to have the Canon said audibly. The first is because it really is hard for people to follow the Latin for every aspect of the Mass. The second change is for two reasons. First, I think the laity should be able to know that the Canon was said correctly and that they are validly receiving the Eucharist. Second, I think the Canon is a great statement of the Catholic faith and allowing people to hear it every week is a wonderful way for people to be presented with our beliefs. It imparts so much more meaning than the other Eucharistic Prayers in the Novus Ordo (not that I’m questioning their validity).

I guess I’m going to add a third which is to include any new saints into the calendar. They should be honored in the Church just like all saints.

I think the extraordinary form is a great blessing on the Church but I also know that my wife (who is a better Catholic than myself) really struggles with the TLM because of the Latin. If we want to preserve the TLM exactly as it is that is fine. Maybe the Novus Ordo can morph organically into a new form that would incorporate some of these changes. I would be fine if that’s the case.