What Chages would you make in the Tridentine Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter estesbob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
japhy said:
I don’t even understand that last sentence.

And why are you so against other people embracing Mass (whether the Ordinary Form or the Extraordinary Form) in Latin? It’s fine if you don’t want it, but you don’t speak for all of the Catholics in the world, let alone your parish.
Click to expand...
I was expressing an opinion. I thought that’s what these forums were for. However if one reads the defenders of keeping the Tridentine mass the same way that is you will easily see why so many people are turned off by the prospect of attending it.
 
estesbob said:
Most express an opinion. I thought that’s what these forums were for. However if one reads the defenders of keeping the Tridentine mass the same way that is you will easily see why so many people are turned off by the prospect of attending it.
Click to expand...
Vatican II intended to keep the Latin in the liturgy so acually those who scrapped it acted against the will of the council.
 
  1. Restore the epiclesis (calling down) of the Holy Spirit upon the gifts to make them the Body and Blood of Christ;
  2. Remove the “Filioque” clause ("… and the Son") from the Creed; and
  3. Restore the chalice of Christ’s Blood to the laity. Joe
 
Just one: I wouldn’t have a problem with the Canon being audible. With the other things I don’t really see a need to change them. Although it’s not my preference, Latin is the official language of the Church and of the Latin rite, and the Ordinary form of the Mass when celebrated properly is very beautiful, so I don’t see a need to completely make a vernacular TLM (although it is definitely possible to have a very reverent Mass in the vernacular). I don’t think it really needs to be in the vernacular though. As many people as there are that say they get scared by the Latin (or that they just don’t like it), there are also those who say that’s what drew them into the Church. I think there is definitely something about having the Mass in such a language that attracts people to it. And I don’t know that I would change this, but I don’t really understand why there is the Last Gospel after the priest says “The Mass is ended” (only in Latin of course 😛 ).
 
estesbob said:
Of course it’s on the rise. Having went from near zero any increase would be significant. If you really think that a large number of Catholics are going to embrace a Mass in Latin you are mistaken. You are letting the perfect become the enemy of the possible.
Click to expand...
Impossible? First of all, you seem to forget that the vernacular mass is a novelty. Sixty years ago, a higher percentage of Catholics went to mass, and it was all in Latin.

We must also look at it from the clergy’s point of view. Who is most likely to introduce people to the TLM? Properly trained clergy. Nowadays, there is a vocation shortage. We also see a great number of priests either “specializing” in the Tridentine Mass, such as the FSSP or the Institute of Christ the King, learning it alongside the Novus Ordo, or even learning it after ordination. If fifty years from now most priests are capable of saying the TLM, and prefer it (in my experience, most priests who know both personally prefer the TLM), then people will become acquainted with it. The idea is for the TLM to eventually become as common as a very reverent form of the NO, which I am sure will happen.
 
estesbob said:
How much demand would there be for the Cathecism if it were written in Latin? How many would read Scripture if it were in latin? how many would seek guidance of the Church if their spiritual advisor spoke to them in latin? How many will respond to those who speak out against abortion and contraception if they did so in latin?
Click to expand...
Why is Latin such a huge problem for you? Did you have a hard time following the movie “The Passion of the Christ?” It was in Aramaic, with vernacular subtitles. The Latin Mass is no different. The dialogue of the Priest is in Latin and your missal provides the vernacular subtitle.
The Traditional Latin Mass provides the Church with a unity that the vernacular Mass cannot. You can be in Germany and go to the Latin Mass and it will be the same as the one in your parish.The congregation, even though they speak German, respond in Latin. You will also respond in Latin.The TLM is the same anywhere in the world. That is Unity.
 
SemiTrad said:
How do you miss consecration when there are bells? How do you “miss the boat” during a sung mass, when consecration is the only time when all is quiet, and there is a hushed reverence all around?
Click to expand...
The bell argument always cracks me up. I’m pretty sure I have this right. The bells are not rung at the moment of Consecration but after during the genuflection and then the elevation.
 
There is an enormous amount of symbolism in the TLM that has been passed down over the centuries. The OF has removed much of this symbolism

Q. 954. What meaneth the priest’s coming back three steps from the Altar, and
humbling himself before he begins?
A. It signifies the prostrating of Christ in the garden, when he began his passion.
Q. 955. Why doth the priest bow himself again at the Confiteor?
A. To move the people to humiliation; and to signify that by the merits and passion of
Christ, (which they are there to commemorate) salvation may be had, if it be sought with
a contrite and humble heart.
Q. 956. Why doth he beat his breast as Mea Culpa?
A. To teach the people to return into the heart, and signifies that all sin is from the heart,
and ought to be discharged from the heart, with hearty sorrow.
Q. 957. Why doth the priest, ascending to the Altar, kiss it in the middle?
A. Because the Altar signifies the church, composed of divers people, as of divers living
stones, which Christ kissed in the middle, by giving a holy kiss of peace and unity, both
to the Jews and Gentiles.
Q. 958. What signifies the Introit?
A. It is, as it were, the entrance into the office, or that which the priest saith first after his
coming to the Altar, and signifies the desires and groanings of the ancient fathers longing
for the coming Christ…
Q. 961. What means the Kyrie Eleison?
A. It signifies, “Lord have mercy on us,” and is repeated thrice in honour of the Son, and
thrice in honour of the Holy Ghost…
Q. 970. What signifies the Epistle?
A. It signifies the old law; as also the preaching of the Prophets and the Apostles, out of
whom it is commonly taken: and it is read before the Gospel, to intimate that the old law
being able to bring nothing to perfection, it was necessary the new should succeed it.
Q. 976. Why do we rise up at the reading of the Gospel?
A. To signify our readiness to go, and do, whither, and whatsoever it commands us.
Q. 977. What means the Gospel?
A. It signifies the preaching of Christ; and is
Q. 978. Why is the Gospel read at the North end, or left side of the Altar?
A. To signify that by the preaching of the Gospel of Christ, the kingdom of the Devil was
overthrown.
Q. 979. How prove you that?
A. Because the Devil hath chosen the North (figuratively infidels, and the wicked) for the
seat of his malice. “From the North shall all evil be opened upon all the inhabitants of the
land.” Jer. i. 14. and Zach. ii. 7.
Q. 980. Why doth the priest before he begins the Gospel, salute the people with
Dominus vobiscum?
A. To prepare them for a devout hearing of it, and to beg of our Lord to make them
worthy hearers of his word, which can save their souls.
A. To move attention, and to signify what part of the Gospel he then reads.
Q. 983. Why then doth the priest sign the book with the sign of the cross?
A. To signify that the doctrine there delivered, appertains to the cross and passion of
Christ.
Q. 984. Why after this do both priest and people sign themselves with the cross in
three places?
A. They sign themselves on their foreheads, to signify they are not, nor will be ashamed
to profess Christ crucified: on their mouths to signify they will be ready with their
mouths, to confess unto salvation: and on their breast to signify that with their hearts they
believe unto justice.
Q. 993. What is the Canon?
A. It is a most sacred, essential, and substantial part of the mass, because in it the
sacrifice is effected.
Q. 994. Why is the Canon read with a low voice?
A. To signify the sadness in our Saviour’s passion, which is there effectually represented.
Q. 995. Why doth the priest begin the Canon bowing his head?
A. To signify the obedience of Christ unto his Father in making himself a sacrifice to sin.
Continue-
 
More symbolism in the TLM
Douay Catechism of 1649

Q. 953. What signify the several ornaments of the priest?
A. The Amict, or linen veil, which he first puts on, represents the veil with which the
Jews covered the face of Christ, when they buffeted him in the house of Caiaphas, and
bid him prophesy, “who it was that struck him.”
2. The Alb signifies the white garment, which Herod put on him, to intimate that he was a
fool.
3. The Girdle signifies the cord that bound him in the garden.
4. The Maniple, the cord which bound him to the pillar.
5. The Stole, the cord by which they led him to the crucified.
6. The priest’s upper, Vestment, represents both the seamless coat of Christ, as also the
purple garment with which they clothed him in derision in the house of Pilate.
7. The Altar-stone, represents the cross on which he offered himself unto the Father.
8. The Chalice, the sepulchre or grave of Christ.
9. The Paten, the stone which was rolled to the door of the sepulchre.
10. The Altar-cloths, with the corporal and Pall, the linen in which the dead body of
Christ was shrouded and buried. Finally, the candles on the Altar puts us in mind of the
light which Christ brought into the world by his passion, as also of his immortal and ever
shining divinity.

remnantnewspaper.com/The%20Douay%20Catechism%20of%201649.pdf
 
Where vernacular is offered, include it IN ADDITION to the Latin. I know it helps me to read/hear the Latin first, then the (attempted) translation. I agree with that poster about receiving multiple (name removed by moderator)uts to make the readings more meaningful. Think of how many times we have to ask a person to paraphrase something we don’t understand even in the vernacular. Aren’t the words of God even more important?

I would also add that an announcement made beforehand as to which Mass that is being offered. As I attend the EF often with my missal, I’ve often found myself being prepared for the wrong Mass and flipping pages trying to find the correct readings frantically during the Mass.
 
BobP123 said:
Where vernacular is offered, include it IN ADDITION to the Latin.👍 I know it helps me to read/hear the Latin first, then the (attempted) translation.😃 I agree with that poster about receiving multiple (name removed by moderator)uts to make the readings more meaningful. Think of how many times we have to ask a person to paraphrase something we don’t understand even in the vernacular. Aren’t the words of God even more important?

I would also add that an announcement made beforehand as to which Mass that is being offered. As I attend the EF often with my missal, I’ve often found myself being prepared for the wrong Mass and flipping pages trying to find the correct readings frantically during the Mass.
Click to expand...
I agree with this part as I usually have my Missal ready for the day no matter what rite. But, my missals are old and the calender is not up to date. 🙂 We attend the NO, TLM and Byzantine rites. The priest at the Byzantine parish (we go with the homeschool groups) will tell us what pages to use and when to use them in the small missal so we can participate. Maybe the TLM could have someone announce the same way for the small private Mass so we can learn or re-learn the propers.
 
stmaria said:
More symbolism in the TLM
Douay Catechism of 1649

Q. 953. What signify the several ornaments of the priest?
A. The Amict, or linen veil, which he first puts on, represents the veil with which the
Jews covered the face of Christ, when they buffeted him in the house of Caiaphas, and
bid him prophesy, “who it was that struck him.”
2. The Alb signifies the white garment, which Herod put on him, to intimate that he was a
fool.
3. The Girdle signifies the cord that bound him in the garden.
4. The Maniple, the cord which bound him to the pillar.
5. The Stole, the cord by which they led him to the crucified.
6. The priest’s upper, Vestment, represents both the seamless coat of Christ, as also the
purple garment with which they clothed him in derision in the house of Pilate.
7. The Altar-stone, represents the cross on which he offered himself unto the Father.
8. The Chalice, the sepulchre or grave of Christ.
9. The Paten, the stone which was rolled to the door of the sepulchre.
10. The Altar-cloths, with the corporal and Pall, the linen in which the dead body of
Christ was shrouded and buried. Finally, the candles on the Altar puts us in mind of the
light which Christ brought into the world by his passion, as also of his immortal and ever
shining divinity.

remnantnewspaper.com/The%20Douay%20Catechism%20of%201649.pdf
Click to expand...
I could be mistaken but it seems that only 3 or 4 of the 27 or so items you listed are not a part of the OF. The rest are all there. So, I’m not sure how removing 3 or 4 elements out of 27 is removing “much of this symbolism” that has been “passed down over centuries.” On the contrary, it would seem that the OF is RETAINING much of the symbolism.
 
Sure said:
I could be mistaken but it seems that only 3 or 4 of the 27 or so items you listed are not a part of the OF. The rest are all there. So, I’m not sure how removing 3 or 4 elements out of 27 is removing “much of this symbolism” that has been “passed down over centuries.” On the contrary, it would seem that the OF is RETAINING much of the symbolism.
Click to expand...
I think that the symbolism is only a secondary aspect, developed much later, meant to aid in a meditation. I have a feeling that had the gesture been different, the explanation would have been so as well. For example, “coming back three steps” in not a rule for all Masses (only Low), depends on the steps of the altar (of which there can be 1 or 5 or 7 or 9, etc.) The Gospel was originally read towards the South not North. The fact that there are so many meanings for the vestments, and so many differing explanations of the Life or Passion of Christ superimposed on the gestures of the Mass shows that the symbolism is not “integral” (can’t think of the right word)

I mean, if I wanted to give a purely utilitarian explanation, I would say that he kissing the altar as a sign of reverence, facing North because that was the side of the men (or in imitation of the priest, as Micrologus writes), rising for the Gospel because it is the words and actions of Christ.
 
AJV said:
I think that the symbolism is only a secondary aspect meant aid in a meditation. I have a feeling that had the gesture been different, the explanation would have been so as well. For example, “coming back three steps” in not a rule for all Masses (only Low), depends on the steps of the altar (of which there can be 1 or 5 or 7 or 9, etc.) The Gospel was originally read towards the South not North. The fact that there are so many meanings for the vestments, and so many differing explanations of the Life or Passion of Christ superimposed on the gestures of the Mass shows that the symbolism is not “integral” (can’t think of the right word)
Click to expand...
My point is that symbolism is good and is a part of our tradition but it seems that we have kept **very much **of the symbolism in the OF…I’m not sure what st. maria was getting at???
 
The change I think I would make is I would have the Gloria and Sequence always be sung- even at a low Mass.
 
Offer the whole of it in the vernacular.

No birettas coming on or off.

The faithful make all of the responses, always.

One Confietor.

Use the new cycle of readings.

Sign of Peace fully implemented in a dignified way, after the Confietor.

Discourage some of the fussier stuff, such as the deacon and subdeacon lifting the hem of the celebrant’s robe for him, etc. I wish we could keep to the simplicity of the NO’s vestments, in terms of style and sheer volume, but retain the finer cloth normally associated with the TLM.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Offer the whole of it in the vernacular.

No birettas coming on or off.

The faithful make all of the responses, always.

One Confietor.

Use the new cycle of readings.

Sign of Peace fully implemented in a dignified way, after the Confietor.

Discourage some of the fussier stuff, such as the deacon and subdeacon lifting the hem of the celebrant’s robe for him, etc. I wish we could keep to the simplicity of the NO’s vestments, in terms of style and sheer volume, but retain the finer cloth normally associated with the TLM.
Click to expand...
I have attended the TLM, and the priest did not wear biretta.
 
Sure said:
My point is that symbolism is good and is a part of our tradition but it seems that we have kept **very much **of the symbolism in the OF…I’m not sure what st. maria was getting at???
Click to expand...
You didn’t address the first part that I posted on the symbolism of the TLM. Much of that is gone from the OF, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top