Why are there more low masses than high?

[C794]

I’ve noticed that parishes that offer the Extraordinary Form tend to offer more Low Masses then High Masses. It seems that the High Mass is done once a week and on holy days. Is there a reason for this? Is there any significance in the Low Mass being more common?

Thanks

 

[corsair]

Well, I don’t know about other parishes but our groups have trouble with getting Altar boys properly trained and choirs brave enough to sing the correct ordinaries. So far we have 4 Altar boys that are at last pretty reliable at low Mass. Our choir has three folks willing to learn to sing Gregorian chant. We are loosing our director who is moving to Rome next month, so it looks kind of bleak for a high Mass at least for a while.

 

[otjm]

Prior to Vatican 2, in the parish I was in, there was only one High Mass a week. Period.

And priests were not running around saying Solemn High Masses every which way; there were two a year; Christmas and Easter.

And any altar boy who could serve a low Mass could serve a High Mass. Thatg was never, ever an issue.

 

[Tradosaurus_Rex]

I’ve noticed that parishes that offer the Extraordinary Form tend to offer more Low Masses then High Masses. It seems that the High Mass is done once a week and on holy days. Is there a reason for this? Is there any significance in the Low Mass being more common?

Thanks

Yes it’s mostly because the priest does not have the means to offer a High Mass everyday.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Usually because of music and/or altar boy issues.

It would be wonderful if every Mass was Solemn, but it is not practically feasible.

 

[malphono]

Usually because of music and/or altar boy issues.

It would be wonderful if every Mass was Solemn, but it is not practically feasible.

Very true. It’s funny, though, that in some places there could be more of them, if only “permanent” deacons would be involved. Sadly, that doesn’t seem to happen very often.

 

[TimothyH]

Very true. It’s funny, though, that in some places there could be more of them, if only “permanent” deacons would be involved. Sadly, that doesn’t seem to happen very often.

I’m curious as to why you put the word permanent in quotes.

Not challenging anything, just curious, that’s all.

-Tim-

 

[YoungTradCath]

Very true. It’s funny, though, that in some places there could be more of them, if only “permanent” deacons would be involved. Sadly, that doesn’t seem to happen very often.

What do you mean?

 

[malphono]

What do you mean?

It’s really quite simple: whether he’s “permanent” or “transitional” a deacon is a deacon, and many parishes are blessed to have one or more of the former. To me it’s a shame that so few of them are involved with the Usus Antiquior.

 

[L_Marshall]

I’ve noticed that parishes that offer the Extraordinary Form tend to offer more Low Masses then High Masses. It seems that the High Mass is done once a week and on holy days. Is there a reason for this? Is there any significance in the Low Mass being more common?

Thanks

The majority of the decision rests on resources.

For a Low Mass, you only need one priest, and one server.

For a High Mass, you need three clergymen (one priest, one deacon, one extra of either to be sub-deacon), vestments for all the Sacred ministers, a minimum of four servers (and that’s really stretching it), incense, and a choir.

It’s just a lot easier to do a Low Mass.

 

[ProVobis]

And priests were not running around saying Solemn High Masses every which way; there were two a year; Christmas and Easter.

Not true. There were plenty of Solemn High Funeral Masses. Eight of us were trained to be MCs. thurifers, and accolytes. Most of these Masses cut into our school time.

There were plenty of Masses for the Dead as well; typically they were sung.

 

[Tradosaurus_Rex]

It’s probably also good to note there are 3 different ways that are common for EF.

1. 
   *]Solemn High Mass
   *]Missa Cantata
   *]Low Mass
   1. Celebrant, deacon, and sub-deacon, along with a choir to sing, although the clergy could chant the entire Mass themselves.
   2. Celebrant and usually a choir. No deacon or sub-deacon.
   3. Celebrant and no chant/music sung by a choir or the celebrant.
   In most parishes that offer the EF you will probably get #2 on weekends and Holy Days, and #3 will be common for weekdays throughout the year. #1 is usually not offered as much because most parishes that celebrate the EF are only staffed by one or two priests. There are also other issues like; are there going to be servers available, will a choir be available, is the parish sharing a church with another parish which results in the visiting parish having to have odd Mass times? There are a lot of factors these days which will have to be taken into consideration.
   
   I’m sure most of the priests who celebrate the EF though would love to be able to have the resources to do a Solemn High Mass every day.

 

[twf]

It’s really quite simple: whether he’s “permanent” or “transitional” a deacon is a deacon, and many parishes are blessed to have one or more of the former. To me it’s a shame that so few of them are involved with the Usus Antiquior.

Unfortunately, I get the feeling that some “Traditionalists” Latin Catholics are still wary of “permanent” deacons. Even when it comes to “mainstream” Novus Ordo parishes, some regions simply have no or little experience with them. Vatican II (well Pope Paul) restored the “permanent” diaconate, but as far as I can tell it has thus far only been truly implemented in Italy and the USA - maybe a few other places. Not sure about Latin America. In my home archdiocese in Western Canada, the Archbishop only started a formation program within the last couple years, and I think they are still waiting for the first class of graduates to be ordained. In a diocese within the same province, I remember attending the ordination of a man to the diaconate (transitional) and an elderly lady asked “I don’t understand - what is a deacon?”.

 

[twf]

I get the impression that a lot of devotees of the EF just adore low masses. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying low masses, but as other posters have pointed out, it is primarily for practical reasons that they are celebrated in lieu of high masses. The “ideal” of the Roman Rite is the solemn high mass, not the low mass. Fr Z elaborated on this on his blog recently:

First, there is Pontifical Mass “at the throne”. This is a solemn Mass sung by a cardinal (anywhere) or a bishop in his own diocese or an abbot at his abbey or elsewhere by permission of the local bishop. It is quite elaborate and represents the summit of the Roman liturgy. This is the paradigm for the Roman Rite, not the silent Low Mass of a priest, which most people think is the standard.

wdtprs.com/blog/2013/08/quaeritur-pontifical-mass-in-the-novus-ordo/

 

[YoungTradCath]

Unfortunately, I get the feeling that some “Traditionalists” Latin Catholics are still wary of “permanent” deacons. Even when it comes to “mainstream” Novus Ordo parishes, some regions simply have no or little experience with them. Vatican II (well Pope Paul) restored the “permanent” diaconate, but as far as I can tell it has thus far only been truly implemented in Italy and the USA - maybe a few other places. Not sure about Latin America. In my home archdiocese in Western Canada, the Archbishop only started a formation program within the last couple years, and I think they are still waiting for the first class of graduates to be ordained. In a diocese within the same province, I remember attending the ordination of a man to the diaconate (transitional) and an elderly lady asked “I don’t understand - what is a deacon?”.

I think the thinking is something like, “Well, they died out for a reason.”

I get the impression that a lot of devotees of the EF just adore low masses. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying low masses, but as other posters have pointed out, it is primarily for practical reasons that they are celebrated in lieu of high masses. The “ideal” of the Roman Rite is the solemn high mass, not the low mass. Fr Z elaborated on this on his blog recently:

wdtprs.com/blog/2013/08/quaeritur-pontifical-mass-in-the-novus-ordo/

I don’t think most traditionalists adore low Masses. Certainly they have their own spiritual flavor, but a Solemn Mass is probably the preference of most traditionalists, if not on an emotional level then on an intellectual level.

 

[L_Marshall]

Unfortunately, I get the feeling that some “Traditionalists” Latin Catholics are still wary of “permanent” deacons. Even when it comes to “mainstream” Novus Ordo parishes, some regions simply have no or little experience with them. Vatican II (well Pope Paul) restored the “permanent” diaconate, but as far as I can tell it has thus far only been truly implemented in Italy and the USA - maybe a few other places. Not sure about Latin America. In my home archdiocese in Western Canada, the Archbishop only started a formation program within the last couple years, and I think they are still waiting for the first class of graduates to be ordained. In a diocese within the same province, I remember attending the ordination of a man to the diaconate (transitional) and an elderly lady asked “I don’t understand - what is a deacon?”.

I think that the Church is still getting used to the permanent diaconate. I think it’s a good idea, and it opens up a lot of doors, but I think that sometimes parishes don’t know what to do with deacons.

Unfortunately, I have seen deacons just treated as glorified altar boys – they show up for Masses on Saturday and Sunday, and they’re not seen until next weekend. I don’t blame this on the deacons or the parish, but I think that most parishes genuinely don’t know what to do with a permanent deacon.

I think firstly, we need to recognize that the diaconate’s purpose is service. They’re a good option to bring Communion to the homebound, since they are Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.
They also can preside at a lot more things than most people think. I’ll give two examples:

1. 
   *]Father apologizes because he can’t provide Benediction every week due to his schedule. Any deacon is allowed to preside at a Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.
   *]Father will need to rush through the Rite of Christian Burial, since he needs to get back to meet with a couple who wishes to get married. The deacon could be sent to preside at the burial.
   
   Nota bene: I don’t mean to sound cynical at all, but I honestly believe that the most parishes don’t use their permanent deacons enough.

 

[Gidge]

I think it is easier to say a Low Mass, so it’s a good place to start, IMO.

High Masses are sung and there is much more to do on the altar, which requires training altar boys for the various duties of a High Mass.

Solemn High Mass is a rarity these days (I have been to a handful though) – as it takes 3 well trained priests (or a priest and a deacon minimum, as an altar boy can “pinch hit” for the subdeacon, if need be).

Then there are the cultural mores regarding which Mass to say
(e.g. The Irish seem to prefer Low Masses as High Masses remind them of the High Anglicans they’ve been warring with over the past few centuries).

 

[wtmartin]

All the replies have been accurate, but more importantly, the entire liturgy…the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…has been gradually watered down by both the laity as well as the clergy. We must have a restoration of the Faith, and that starts with the Holy See, down through the bishops, and to their priests. His Holiness seems to be the right man for the job. Now we desperately need our bishops to get on board and implement the changes that are needed. I am fortunate enough to have lived pre-Vatican II. I came home in 1969 after serving two tours in Vietnam with the Marine Corps. It was as if I were in a Protestant church! Everything had changed! The “rock and roll” Masses were the worst. My theory is that the Church (the One True Holy and Apostolic Roman Catholic Church) has sold out to become more “user friendly”, to appeal to more people, especially the young, at the cost of losing the reverence we once had. Just as a start, there’s talking and socializing before Mass, making it difficult for those of us who come early to pray. We rush through the Mass so that parishioners don’t start squirming in their seats.We allow people to leave Mass right after Communion. No comments from our pastors! And do you notice almost everyone receives Holy Communion? They all are in a state of grace? I seriously doubt it.
The Church needs our prayers for the bishops, priests, and religious to preach the path to salvation and rid ourselves of this cancer that they allowed to infect our Church.

 

[otjm]

Not true. There were plenty of Solemn High Funeral Masses. Eight of us were trained to be MCs. thurifers, and accolytes. Most of these Masses cut into our school time.

There were plenty of Masses for the Dead as well; typically they were sung.

Given the fact that my mother had 70+ first cousins and I have no clue on my dad’s side, and given that I served other funeral masses not of relatives, I can vouch that having attended who knows how many, not a single one of them was a Solemn High Mass. They were High Masses. And it didn’t matter if it was a parish priest, a Monsignor, or a bishop saying the funeral Mass.

And at any funeral there was a thurifer as well as a cross bearer and two servers; but no one except the priest himself. Maybe in your area they had Solemn High Masses, but they not only weren not the norm, they simply didn’t happen.

And those funeral Masses cut into our school time too, which was why only the better students were allowed to serve.

 

[C794]

Thanks for the replies. I never thought this could be due to not having enough people for the High Mass and Solemn High Mass. It would be nice if we could have more of them; from what I’ve heard they’re very beautiful. I have yet to attend one, but I’m eagerly awaiting the opportunity.