Why do you like the Latin mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter misstherese
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

misstherese

Guest
For those who enjoy the EF of the mass, what pulled you in? When did you start attending, and why do you like it now? This is a question out of pure curiosity; I’ve always been interested in hearing people’s stories.

Ps. Please no harsh criticizing of the OF on this thread.
 
Last edited:
I attended my first TLM approximately 2 years ago. Unfortunately it’s about a 35 minute drive from my home so I don’t get the opportunity to go as often as I’d like. Before I attended I had read up on what to expect and how to participate. My first experience was one of amazement and mild frustration. Amazement at the beauty and reverence shown for the Mass. My frustration came from not being able to follow along as well as I had hoped. It was simply a matter of unfamiliarity, but after going a few more times, I really enjoyed it and I began to prefer it over the OF.

I’m not criticizing the OF, but what I found most troubling wasn’t the OF itself, but the way it was celebrated. I have attended several different Catholic parishes within my city and nearly everyone celebrated the Mass differently. Now the differences weren’t always major, but in some cases you could see that everything about the Parish seemed different. The music was always Christian Contemporary, played by a large group which resembled what I’d seen in a few Evangelical churches. There were no statues of any kind, the Tabernacle was relocated somewhere in the back out of view, even the Crucifix, which is found in many Parishes, was now a large tree with several branches and a very “artistic” representation of Jesus was depicted, the readers were nearly always women and the number of Eucharistic ministers was always in the mid to high 20’s!

I guess l preferred the consistency of the TLM and even if a Church’s architecture and design didn’t reflect Catholicism, as I preferred it, I at least felt like the TLM would.

There is a parish here in my town which offers a High Mass, celebrated in the OF. This was probably the best OF of the Mass that I have ever attended. The prayers are all in Latin, the music is Gregorian Chant, even the reading of the Gospel is chanted by the Deacon. They bring out kneelers for those who wish to kneel while receiving and the use of Eucharistic ministers is usually only a small handful. I was also pleasantly surprised to find this Sunday, that the Priest was celebrating the Mass Ad Orientem. It made me wonder if this was the way Church leaders had initially intended the OF to be celebrated at its introduction. It was beautiful and powerful all at the same time. I had never seen anything like it, except at the TLM.
 
Last edited:
What drove me really in to the Extraordinary Form of the Rite was it’s beauty and big respect to the Holy Eucharist, something I don’t usually see in the Ordinary Form.

In the EF, I see big reverence, even the slightest things, are given such priorities. If a host falls, the priest stops the communion for a second, gets a purificator and wipes the floor and makes sure no piece or particle has been left, then he eats the fallen host.(Just one of the many things)

In the OF, I won’t say that has the same reverences, but we tend to see more liturgical abuses to the Holy Eucharist, I remember when a host fell, the “Lay Minister” just took it from the floor, and I saw some particles on the floor just being stepped.

That is why I like the EF, not in the nostalgic form.
 
I don’t dislike Latin Mass, but in America, everyone pronounces the responses like they’re speaking Spanish. I prefer the “Novus Ordo” and Byzantine Liturgy, but the cool thing about the Church, is there is room for everyone. Although, I don’t go to it very often, if I had a problem with it, I wouldn’t go at all. Might go next week, if I can.
 
I don’t prefer either form of the mass, but I do appreciate aspects of each.

When I’ve assisted at an EF mass, what I appreciated was:

Consistency in music (I’m a musician, so this is a big deal to me). I’m not talking about the quality, but the type of music – traditional hymns and lots of chant. I think if I were to travel around the country attending OF and EF masses, the music at an EF mass would be more or less consistent, while the music at the OF masses would run the gamut from Marty Haugen to 16th century counterpoint.

Consistency in action. What I mean is that, from what I have observed, each role (from the musicians to the altar servers) is clearly defined and identified through action and appearance (i.e., garb).

What I find difficult about the EF is the lack of the vernacular.

But honestly, Our Lord is present at each mass, regardless of form. 'Nuff said. ❤️
 
My experience and thoughts on both forms are very similar to yours. I would say I feel more “fed” when attending the EF.
 
I attended the EF all my life, but now attend the OF because of distance (4 miles vs 40 miles). I don’t really have a problem with the OF mass itself, but it is the atmosphere and the people that attend are very different. I am certain not all churches are the same, but in general at the various OF masses I’ve attended, people are talking and socializing before, during, and after mass. Just this week, during the consecration, I heard a person behind me asking someone else if they found an apartment yet. I have never experienced the same at any EF mass.

My other dislike, is that often times the music is closer to “feel good”, non-denominational music. One example is “Shall we Gather at the River” shall we gather at the river - - Video Search Results. Nice song, but it doesn’t seem to be Catholic sacred music. Catholics have such a rich collection of songs that are rarely used in the OF masses. Ironically it also seems that they use such songs to get people to sing along, but it is the traditional Catholic songs that get the most participation from the congregation. At least that has been my experience.
 
Gertabelle said:
I don’t prefer either form of the mass, but I do appreciate aspects of each.
Click to expand...
I agree.

I love the beauty of the EF when celebrated as a High Mass or Solemn High Mass. The Low Mass doesn’t really do anything for me, unless it’s a Low Mass with Music. I have no interest in attending an EF Low Mass without music.

I’m attracted to the beauty. Again, it can be EF or OF. The OF can also be equally beautiful, as I’ve been to many beautiful OF mass too.

The Canons Regular of St. John Cantius do a great job of showing the beauty of the Catholic faith, in both the OF and EF (I wish they were in my Archdiocese)

 
adamhovey1988 said:
I don’t dislike Latin Mass, but in America, everyone pronounces the responses like they’re speaking Spanish
Click to expand...
You should cut the priest a bit of a break on that- a majority of American Catholics will be of a hispanic heritage sooner rather than later- and a lot of the priests would like to be able to speak to the emerging majority.

When I was a kid, back when Latin was universal, the Latin masses were said with an Irish brogue accent.
 
The reason I attend the Latin Mass is because it is a lot more reverent than OF Masses tend to be in my area. There are good OF Masses in my diocese but they are about 2 hours away while the Latin Mass is about 45-50 minutes. That is doable. I have nothing against the OF when done properly. I think it is beautiful when it is done (as someone else said) St. John Cantius style.

Although I do think it is good to attend the other “version” of the Mass every once in a while if you can. Going to the EF most of the time? One Sunday go the OF and get a little different piece of holiness there (it may be less reverent but you can follow the Mass more easily). Going to the OF most of the time? Take a trip to your local EF parish if you can. You might get something out of the contemplative prayer that happens. Going to either of the two most of the time? See if there is an Eastern rite Church around and get the eastern version of Catholicism. Alas there isn’t one in my diocese.
 
Last edited:
I like and prefer the Latin Mass because it is more “Catholic”.

The Latin - or Tridentine - Mass is ‘a mystical reality in which the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is renewed is very evident in the text. As the Council of Trent declared, “The same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, is present and offered in an unbloody manner” in the Mass.’ As opposed to the current Ordinary Mass which closely resembles a Protestant communion service.

I consider the Novus Ordo to be valid, and I attend it weekly, but if there were a Tridentine Mass offered within a half-hour drive of my house, I would attend there.

In MY opinion, the Novus Ordo is a Protestant-izing and watering down of Sacred Catholic Liturgy. Paul VI and his closest advisors seemed to want to make Catholicism more appealing to Protestants, and therefore gutted the Liturgy and made it less “Catholic” and less scary to our separated brethren. No scary Latin. No weekly or daily re-sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. No bizarre rituals while the priest has his back to you.

I wonder if a single Protestant ever came into the Faith because the Church did away with so much of its Catholic Liturgy and tradition? As I said, I like and prefer the Latin Mass because it is far more Catholic than the alternatives.
 
In the short time since becoming Catholic I’ve attended mass at several different parishes. My home parish is OF. But it’s celebrated extremely reverent, like the EF is, in comparison to the other parishes I’ve visted. I prefer the EF bc it makes more sense to me as a sacrifice than the OF. Not that the OF is any less of one, but its easier for me to wrap my simple mind around in the EF. The OF can be just as reverent and solemn as the EF though.
 
I saw my first Latin Mass about 6 years ago. These things impressed me:
  1. A bell was rung, and then the priest and altar servers came in.
  2. During the homily, the priest always removed his biretta whenever he mentioned Jesus.
  3. Immediately after the consecration, the priest held together the thumb and forefinger of each hand, like doing the “OK” sign. I don’t know why this fascinated me so much, but it did.
  4. The two altar servers were like a precision drill team. They moved in lockstep with each other. It was beautiful.
  5. The altar servers bowed so low, their heads almost touched the ground. They held this pose, then rocked from side to side. It looked very reverent.
  6. Kneeling at the altar rail.
  7. After Mass, the priest kneeled in front of the altar and we all said the Hail Holy Queen and Michael the Archangel prayers.
 
Only based upon my experience so far, which is limited, I favor the EF due to its tradition, reverence, beauty and theological content. I have been to OF masses and it seems, for the most part (again, in my experience), there is a trend to shorten most components of the liturgy. For me, I compare it to sitting down for a full course meal vs something less than that.
 
BoomerangToo said:
The two altar servers were like a precision drill team. They moved in lockstep with each other. It was beautiful.
Click to expand...
Yeah, when you get two brothers serving they are like one body. It is a lot harder to serve in lock step when you aren’t related. You have to practice a bit more.
 
To me it is the most prefect and beautiful form of worship.
 
Reverence. Large families. The music is beautiful. The priests don’t shy away from hard truths, excellent sermons. Altar boys. I find it more difficult to pray in the OF. I just feel more at home in the EF.
 
I first went to a TLM as a curiosity and immediately acquired a deep appreciation. It was so much easier to perceive what Mass really is. This actually helped me to better appreciate Mass according to the newer rite too since it made my spiritual senses a bit more attuned. For me, the nature and meaning of Mass was much more explicit in the TLM (even without understanding a single word–understanding the words just makes it even moreso). It takes more effort for me to perceive it in the NO–but the TLM helped me know what I was “looking for” in the NO.

At least for me (and I surmise for many given the documented results) the reform which was ostensibly intended to make the Mass more intelligible, actually made it a lot less so…the priest was turned around and the vernacular introduced so the people in the pews could see the actions of the priest and hear the prayers–but then the rites were simplified to such an extent that there wasn’t as much left to see or hear. The two goals kind of canceled each other out.
 
Last edited:
IrishCoffee said:
Reverence. Large families. The music is beautiful. The priests don’t shy away from hard truths, excellent sermons. Altar boys.
Click to expand...
The OF is perfectly capable of all of what you listed. My wife is a composer with myself also being a musician, we’ve both seen (and participated in) reverent music at the OF. Large families attend the OF. I hear hard truth in homilies from both deacons and priests.

I would posit neither Form is inherently better. It comes down to “garbage in, garbage out”; all being involved putting their best foot forward.
IrishCoffee said:
Large families.
Click to expand...
Repeating this again for a simple reason; I so very much love having my Catholicism being defined as inferior due to my wife’s and mine inability to have more than one child.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top