What was the traditional Latin Mass like?

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

ddimitro:

This is only the case with laity confusing the mode of participation in the Novus Ordo with that in the TLM. The congregation, even today, are not supposed to respond at a Low Mass. A sung Low Mass is a different story, as is the High Mass.

Actually I believe that the only responses are to come from the Choir in a sung Mass.

This happens in the Mass currently also, there are some parts to be sung by the choir if there is one.

 

[Scotty_PGH]

ByzCath:

You were expected to come to Mass and say your own devotions, such as the rosary.

Whose expectation do you presume to represent? As I wasn’t around in “the old days,” I can’t comment with any certainty. However, in the 1962 Daily Missal I use, there are numerous quotes stating that it is of the utmost importance for the faithful to follow along and silently join in everything the priest is saying. That is why we are said to “assist” at the Mass.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Scotty PGH:

Whose expectation do you presume to represent? As I wasn’t around in “the old days,” I can’t comment with any certainty. However, in the 1962 Daily Missal I use, there are numerous quotes stating that it is of the utmost importance for the faithful to follow along and silently join in everything the priest is saying. That is why we are said to “assist” at the Mass.

That is what I am talking about. The 1962 Missal was not the same Mass as was codifed in the time of Trent. This was one of the changes.

So the claim that many in the “traditionalist” movement make that the Mass from Trent can not be changed is bogus as the 1962 Missal was already modified.

 

[Scotty_PGH]

ByzCath:

That is what I am talking about. The 1962 Missal was not the same Mass as was codifed in the time of Trent. This was one of the changes.

So the claim that many in the “traditionalist” movement make that the Mass from Trent can not be changed is bogus as the 1962 Missal was already modified.

Actually the quotes are from historical figures, speaking before 1962. For instance, Pope St. Pius X is quoted as saying “Follow the Mass, say the prayers of the Mass!” One can find many other historical quotes suggesting that the faithful’s participation at Mass is expected. That’s why I’m questioning your claim that the faithful were expected to occupy themselves with private devotions and rosaries during Mass. That may have been what some of them ended up doing, but I can’t believe that they were encouraged to do so.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Scotty PGH:

Actually the quotes are from historical figures, speaking before 1962. For instance, Pope St. Pius X is quoted as saying “Follow the Mass, say the prayers of the Mass!” One can find many other historical quotes suggesting that the faithful’s participation at Mass is expected. That’s why I’m questioning your claim that the faithful were expected to occupy themselves with private devotions and rosaries during Mass. That may have been what some of them ended up doing, but I can’t believe that they were encouraged to do so.

From my study, rather limited I will admit, that is what I have heard.

For on thing, not everyone could read along in the middle ages for a couple of reason, books were expensive so everyone did not have Missals (was there even a Missal for the laity?), not everyone could read even if they had a Missal, and last not everyone knew Latin.

I also think that following along in silence is not active participation, I could even argue that following along in silence is not even passive participation.

 

[Angels_Watchin]

ByzCath:

From my study, rather limited I will admit, that is what I have heard.

For one thing, not everyone could read along in the middle ages for a couple of reason, books were expensive so everyone did not have Missals (was there even a Missal for the laity?), not everyone could read even if they had a Missal, and last not everyone knew Latin.

I also think that following along in silence is not active participation, I could even argue that following along in silence is not even passive participation.

And yet THEY (those in the middle ages) did it!! WITHOUT COMPLAINT! There was no “We can’t do it” from the people!! And there were pleanty of vocations, plenty of priests, true belief in the true presence, overwhelming participation in daily and Sunday mass, etc, etc, etc.

We don’t have to refer back to the "middle ages’ to discuss the ‘participation’ in the Tridentine Mass. It was the ONLY (I repeat “ONLY”) mass from the ‘middle ages’ up until 1964!

And at that time (1964), latin was THE language learned in high school (prior to that anyone who was in school was READING Latin. (check the 1917 edition of the Catholic encyclopedia on www.newadvent.com - there are quotes in latin within the entry and they ARE NOT TRANSLATED! Knowledge of Latin by ANONE WHO COULD READ was a ‘given’!)) And (by 1964) most Catholics could afford a missal (or be given one for their first communion, or read along with mom or dad, or whomever was next to you! or get one as a birthday gift) AS SOON AS THEY COULD READ!. It was important!

Altar boys would learn latin to become altar boys (There IS SOME WORK INVOLVED for the privilege of serving at the altar) and they would teach their (many) brothers and sisters, so that they, too, could participate.

The missals in 1964, could be (and still can be) purchased with the latin and english printed side by side, for those wanting to learn the mass. - The hebrews learn hebrew STILL!

And for whomever stated that “the novus ordo is the same, only in english” has never read the mass. Get yourself an old missal (prior to 1962) and read the glorious, holy prayers prayed during the mass. There is absolutely NO comparison.

Ex: "Wherefore, we humbly pray and beseech Thee, most merciful Father, through Jesus Christ Thy Son, Our Lord, to receive and to bless these gifts, these present, these holy unspotted sacrifices, which we offer up to Thee in the first place for They holy Catholic Church, that it may please Thee to grant her peace to guard, unite, and guide her throughout the word: as also for They servant (Benedict) our Pope, and (…) our bishop and for all who are orthodox in belief and who profess the Catholic and apostolic faith." (note that: “orthodox in belief”)

at the communion:** "Into a pure heart, o Lord, may we receive the heavenly food which has passed our lips; bestowed upon us in time, may it be the healing of our souls for eternity.**

after communion: "May Thy Body, O Lord, which I have received, and Thy Blood which I have drunk, cleave to mine inmost parts: and do thou grant that no stain of sin remain in me, whom pure and holy mysteries have refreshed: Who livest and reignest world withou end. Amen."

And praying, or reading prayers in silence is a more perfect way of contemplating - ask the saints.

And …
And…
And…

And, now that we have this ‘great novus ordo’ what is the result.

Fewer that 1/2 of Catholics believe in the ‘true presence’ , you can’t get an altar boy to serve because it’s no big deal and there are so many girls and women on the altar ( no young man looks up to the altar and sees a woman up there says, “Gee that’s what I want to be when I grow up”.), vocations have been cut by 80%!!!,
and mass attendance has also deteriorated.

“Ye shall know them by their fruits”.

Yes, the novus ordo is a valid mass, because the church says it’s a valid mass.

“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven”

But I don’t think He’s real happy about it!!

God help us,
Angel

(WHEW!)

 

[rcn]

Angels Watchin:

Fewer that 1/2 of Catholics believe in the ‘true presence’

This is the easiest part of your position to refute. In another thread you mentioned that you’ve read Akin’s writings - so I’m surprised you aren’t aware of this -

**Q: I have repeatedly heard it said that only 33 percent, or something like that, of Catholics believe in the Real Presence. How scandalous! Is this true? **
A: No, it’s not, and it makes me want to tear my hair out every time I hear that bogus statistic.

catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9910qq.asp

 

[Lux_in_Tenebris]

I humbly suggest (David the Byzantine). That you read Professor Eamon Duffy’s, Book. “The Stripping of the Altars” (Yale University Press) He is a Fellow of Magdalene College,Cambridge. And an authority on Medieval Catholicism. And the devastating changes forced on the English People, during the so called (Reformation).

Be forewarned,This is a weighty Tome. Not your garden variety “dumbed down” revisionist History,politically correct. Load of ****. This Professor challenges the belief,(long held) that the Laity in the Middle ages, were an illiterate group of spectators at the Holy Mass. (and yes they had hand held Missals!) This falsity one foisted upon western thinking, by the Leaders of the reformation. It is A position erroneously held at large today, By Believer and Non Believer, Priest and Lay.

Though why this would in the least, interest an Eastern rite Catholic, Is anyone’s guess. I noticed you post replys to many Topics concerning Latin Rite Catholicism, Particularly on the subject objectively comparing the TLM to the NO. And particularly on the way the Mass was said prior to VII. It’s history and organic development. I hope I am dead wrong on this one ; But here it is: When you make statements about the attitude of the pre VII laity and their assistance at a rite that is not your own. I sense a little of a snarl. Hope I am wrong! Just my perception.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Lux in Tenebris:

Though why this would in the least, interest an Eastern rite Catholic, Is anyone’s guess. I noticed you post replys to many Topics concerning Latin Rite Catholicism, Particularly on the subject objectively comparing the TLM to the NO. And particularly on the way the Mass was said prior to VII. It’s history and organic development. I hope I am dead wrong on this one ; But here it is: When you make statements about the attitude of the pre VII laity and their assistance at a rite that is not your own. I sense a little of a snarl. Hope I am wrong! Just my perception.

I am a Catholic and I do not appreciate posts such as this that attempt to tell me to mind my own business.

I will not get into my background and what I am doing today as really they are none of your business but I have talked about it elsewhere for you to find if you feel like it.

I post on these issues to defend the Teachings of the Catholic Church. The main one is that the current Mass is valid and that the Church has a right to change the form of the Mass.

I would also add that it is very uncharitable for you to apply motives to what you do not know. I see you have only posted 5 times here and only just registered. I have been here for almost a year now.

Now that I put aside that nasty bit.

This Professor challenges the belief,(long held) that the Laity in the Middle ages, were an illiterate group of spectators at the Holy Mass. (and yes they had hand held Missals!)

I am aware that not all historians agree on the matter of literacy
during that time period but there is much disagreement on this matter.

There is also the fact that books were very expensive, so while the laity may have had Missals (evidence of which I have not seen) it is very doubtful that everyone had one or even the majority of peasants could afford to have one.

 

[benedictusoblat]

The question is a misnomer. “What was the traditional Latin Mass like?” should read “what IS the traditional Latin Mass like?”

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

benedictusoblat:

The question is a misnomer. “What was the traditional Latin Mass like?” should read “what IS the traditional Latin Mass like?”

True, unless one is interested in what it was like when it was codified.

 

[benedictusoblat]

Wow … how can I respond to what Angel wrote earlier?

The traditional Latin Mass IS like

Heaven
on
Earth.

It is heaven on Earth because Jesus is made present there, upon the altar, by the words of consecration spoken by the priest.

Of course some regions of heaven are more glorious than others. If I might use the analogy of the Paradiso by Dante. I would claim that the Traditional Latin Mass is on a higher plane than its more modern cousin the so-called “Novus Ordo” Mass. The reason for this lies in the perfection of its prayers and the delicacy of its gestures/rubrics, which all focus the mind and heart of souls upon the Reality of what is going on at the altar. The Latin Mass is so designed to minimize distraction and maximize active participation of the soul in the mysteries ongoing in the sanctuary.

The prayers are profound in their exposition of Catholic truth. Read them. The prayers are profound in their humility and spiritual delicacy. Pray them. The prayers are profound in their power to sanctify individuals and congregations who approach them with devotion. Experience them.

The traditional Latin Mass remained largely the same for over a thousand years. It was offered by the likes of St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Ignatius Loyola, St. Francis Xavier, St. John Bosco, St. Pio and it has been the joy of life for innumerable Catholics from the fall of the Roman empire to the present day. Though it has undergone some development over the centuries, that development has been slow and, frankly, modest in nature. What you have here is the liturgical equivalent of the Hope diamond. It is priceless and irreplaceable.

I have attended this Latin traditional Mass for over 25 years in chapels and churches and cathedrals in America and Europe. It is clearly God’s will that it should survive, despite the concerted effort of many to destroy it in the last 40 years. Those who attend it are relatively few, but each year their numbers are growing - in both the developed and developing worlds.

It is beyond my comprehension that good Catholics can think ill of the traditional Latin Mass. Say it is not to your taste, but to speak ill of it??? Shame. The number of “modern” Catholics who are holier and more charitable than myself is legion. But I dare say none of their number would look with jaundiced eye at the traditional Latin Mass. For those who do, I dare say it is because of ignorance or an unfortunate previous experience at a Mass offered irreverently or offered by a priest who couldn’t find the time to explain the beauty and power of the prayers and rubrics.

So, dearest brothers and sisters in Christ, this elitist “traditional” Catholic would gladly welcome any and all of you at the Latin Mass and would hope that you would approach it with the awe and wonder that it deserves.

Benedicite!

Benedictusoblatus

 

[rcn]

benedictusoblat:

The traditional Latin Mass IS like

Heaven
on
Earth.

Yeah, yeah, we’ve all heard it a zillion times before. It’s like you folks have stuff like this standing by.

I would claim that the Traditional Latin Mass is on a higher plane than its more modern cousin the so-called “Novus Ordo” Mass.

And on that point, you’d
Simply
Be
Wrong.

There is simply no justification for making such a claim. Unless you’re also willing to say the same thing about ALL the legitimate Rites of Mass.

Say it is not to your taste, but to speak ill of it??? Shame.

No one here has said anything disparaging about the TLM, so to drag out the tired old “boo-hoo, you’re attacking us” routine here is of no value.

 

[benedictusoblat]

It is a commonly held belief that contemplation is a higher form of prayer than vocal prayer. To the extent that that is true, a more contemplative Mass brings the soul closer to Almighty God, thus the analogy to the different levels of Dante’s Paradiso. Of course the analogy does not end there. All the souls in Paradise are perfectly happy and are as perfect and holy as they can be. It just happens that some souls are holier than others. I believe the “Novus Ordo” Mass AS IT IS USUALLY OFFERED is doubtless less contemplative than the “traditional” Latin Mass AS IT IS USUALLY OFFERED, and thus it is more likely to better assist the soul in the attainment of its final end, Heaven which is on earth in the Mass (Novus ordo included).

As it stands no one is holding a gun to anyone’s head to attend the traditional Latin Mass, so why the vitriol directed at those who choose to do so? I want to worship God at Mass and interact with my neighbor over donuts and coffee afterwards. What’s the problem?

 

[benedictusoblat]

Ha! I messed up with that long convoluted sentence:

"I believe the “Novus Ordo” Mass AS IT IS USUALLY OFFERED is doubtless less contemplative than the “traditional” Latin Mass AS IT IS USUALLY OFFERED, and thus it is more likely to better assist the soul in the attainment of its final end, Heaven which is on earth in the Mass (Novus ordo included). "

“and thus it is MORE likely” should read “and thus it is LESS likely”. My apologies.

 

[rcn]

benedictusoblat:

As it stands no one is holding a gun to anyone’s head to attend the traditional Latin Mass, so why the vitriol directed at those who choose to do so?

That’s not the issue, and I suspect you know that. The issue is that far too many discussions here are hijacked by people claiming that “if only everyone attended the TLM, problem X would go away”. Or that any discussion that comes even remotely close to the TLM always results in the claim that TLM attendees and the TLM itself are “hated”, when nothing of the sort was ever said.

I have nothing against the TLM. It’s the attitude that seems to all too often come with it, that bothers me.

 

[benedictusoblat]

I just arrived in town, so to speak. I suppose it is insensitive of me to presume to comment on this issue which is vitally important to me without having reviewed the lengthy discussions that have come before.

The “Novus Ordo” is a Mass. That’s what the Pope says and I accept it. I don’t attend it and I don’t want to comment at length on it. For those who love the modern Mass, my commentary would be unwelcome. For those who find the modern Mass is holding them back spiritually (for whatever reason), such commentary is unnecessary.

Once again, find me a saint or a pope who has anything bad to say about the traditional Latin Mass. I’m waiting.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

benedictusoblat:

The “Novus Ordo” is a Mass. That’s what the Pope says and I accept it. I don’t attend it and I don’t want to comment at length on it. For those who love the modern Mass, my commentary would be unwelcome. For those who find the modern Mass is holding them back spiritually (for whatever reason), such commentary is unnecessary.

Actually the “Novus Ordo” is the Mass of the Latin Catholic Church. The TLM is offered under an Indult.

Once again, find me a saint or a pope who has anything bad to say about the traditional Latin Mass. I’m waiting.

I am will gladly do so when you find me a saint or a pope who has anything bad to say about the Mass.

Let us not forget what the 22nd session of the Council of Trent had to say.

CANON VI.–If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

 

[bellesjoy]

I grew up with “old latin” mass, which is different from the present mass in more ways than latin to english. I love the present mass and accept it fully, but I do miss the beauty of the old mass.

I never fond it difficult to follow or to participate in that mass. Most Catholics in those days understood the latin, at least enough latin to understand mass, and there were translations available for those who didnt’. The reverence was palpable.

The priest faced the tabernacle along with the people and this actually made me feel like we were joined with him in offering the sacrifice of the mass. The priest was an extention of us and we were all joined as one body. Not as it is today with everyone facing each other. How or why does a “body” look at itself?

There were less opportunities for abuses in the old mass, although I’m sure it did occur. Today, in english, I have witnessed many priests (I travel a lot) ad lib in just about every part of the mass, and think it is okay to do so.

I do believe that the beauty of the “new” or the “old” mass is tied to the reverence of the priest and the laity. Unfortunately, that is far from being uniform. I have seen the EWTN mass(which is beautiful) and total side shows. Lets all pray for more sanctity in every mass.

 

[Scotty_PGH]

rcn:

Yeah, yeah, we’ve all heard it a zillion times before. It’s like you folks have stuff like this standing by.

And on that point, you’d
Simply
Be
Wrong.

There is simply no justification for making such a claim. Unless you’re also willing to say the same thing about ALL the legitimate Rites of Mass.

No one here has said anything disparaging about the TLM, so to drag out the tired old “boo-hoo, you’re attacking us” routine here is of no value.

You’re adding nothing to this thread. The OP wanted to know about the TLM and this poster is giving his (name removed by moderator)ut. Why attack him?