Why no dialogue?

[Mike12]

Many years back I had a number of experiences with the tridentine Mass. It was not very available where I lived (Michigan), but I traveled enough to have attended Mass at a few different places (and even went to a few unapproved Masses). I had thought I understood what to expect.

Recently I have come back to church, and wanted to go back to a tridentine Mass. I have since moved and live in an altogether different part of the country. I have attended a tridentine Mass in my new home state, and was quite surprised. I was not really surprised that it was a “low” Mass (or at least what I considered a “low Mass”), but I was surprised that not only did the congregation not speak the responses, but they did not even sing the hymns. I remember singing and speaking the responses as an important part of attending a tridentine Mass (even the “low” Masses involved the congregation responding). Furthermore, I had such a hard time following along because not only were the people not responding, but I could hardly tell what the priest was saying (I really don’t remember this happening in Michigan).

I am kind of confused. I used to love attending various traditional Mass and occasionally drove a long way to attend even what I thought was a low Mass (perhaps it was a dialogue Mass?). I left this Mass feeling confused and frustrated, and kind of sympathise now with some of the criticisms of the traditional Mass (the priest and congregation are doing different things, the priest is whispering too much, and the congregation stands there without saying a word). Is this form of Mass popular among people who favor the traditional Mass? Is this really what people struggled for in all the work leading up to the recent moto proprio?

 

[otjm]

Many years back I had a number of experiences with the tridentine Mass. It was not very available where I lived (Michigan), but I traveled enough to have attended Mass at a few different places (and even went to a few unapproved Masses). I had thought I understood what to expect.

Recently I have come back to church, and wanted to go back to a tridentine Mass. I have since moved and live in an altogether different part of the country. I have attended a tridentine Mass in my new home state, and was quite surprised. I was not really surprised that it was a “low” Mass (or at least what I considered a “low Mass”), but I was surprised that not only did the congregation not speak the responses, but they did not even sing the hymns. I remember singing and speaking the responses as an important part of attending a tridentine Mass (even the “low” Masses involved the congregation responding). Furthermore, I had such a hard time following along because not only were the people not responding, but I could hardly tell what the priest was saying (I really don’t remember this happening in Michigan).

I am kind of confused. I used to love attending various traditional Mass and occasionally drove a long way to attend even what I thought was a low Mass (perhaps it was a dialogue Mass?). I left this Mass feeling confused and frustrated, and kind of sympathise now with some of the criticisms of the traditional Mass (the priest and congregation are doing different things, the priest is whispering too much, and the congregation stands there without saying a word). Is this form of Mass popular among people who favor the traditional Mass? Is this really what people struggled for in all the work leading up to the recent moto proprio?

It may or may not be. Be careful of making comparisons from one example.

Reading through the threads, it has seemed that there are priests who are not necessarily limiting themselves to the 1962 Missal. Whether that is right or wrong I will leave to others to decide. There are some pretty strong feelings running through those who are seeking the EF, and not all share the same feelings. It is easy for one to say "This is what we (want, accept, beleive is permissible, prefer, think is uncorrupted). They are not all on the same page, even though they would have you to believe they are.

 

[utunumsint]

Many years back I had a number of experiences with the tridentine Mass. It was not very available where I lived (Michigan), but I traveled enough to have attended Mass at a few different places (and even went to a few unapproved Masses). I had thought I understood what to expect.

Recently I have come back to church, and wanted to go back to a tridentine Mass. I have since moved and live in an altogether different part of the country. I have attended a tridentine Mass in my new home state, and was quite surprised. I was not really surprised that it was a “low” Mass (or at least what I considered a “low Mass”), but I was surprised that not only did the congregation not speak the responses, but they did not even sing the hymns. I remember singing and speaking the responses as an important part of attending a tridentine Mass (even the “low” Masses involved the congregation responding). Furthermore, I had such a hard time following along because not only were the people not responding, but I could hardly tell what the priest was saying (I really don’t remember this happening in Michigan).

I am kind of confused. I used to love attending various traditional Mass and occasionally drove a long way to attend even what I thought was a low Mass (perhaps it was a dialogue Mass?). I left this Mass feeling confused and frustrated, and kind of sympathise now with some of the criticisms of the traditional Mass (the priest and congregation are doing different things, the priest is whispering too much, and the congregation stands there without saying a word). Is this form of Mass popular among people who favor the traditional Mass? Is this really what people struggled for in all the work leading up to the recent moto proprio?

It can take a while to get use to the latin mass. But it grows on you. Especially during the high mass with the Gregorian chant. In my parish, we are lucky enough to have over ten very well trained choir members.

About the dialogue. There is some, but not nearly as much as what you have in the novus ordo mass. Are you sure you weren’t going to a novus ordo mass said in latin?

God bless,
Ut

 

[BobP123]

I have attended a tridentine Mass in my new home state, and was quite surprised. I was not really surprised that it was a “low” Mass (or at least what I considered a “low Mass”), but I was surprised that not only did the congregation not speak the responses, but they did not even sing the hymns. I remember singing and speaking the responses as an important part of attending a tridentine Mass (even the “low” Masses involved the congregation responding). Furthermore, I had such a hard time following along because not only were the people not responding, but I could hardly tell what the priest was saying (I really don’t remember this happening in Michigan).

I am kind of confused. I used to love attending various traditional Mass and occasionally drove a long way to attend even what I thought was a low Mass (perhaps it was a dialogue Mass?). I left this Mass feeling confused and frustrated, and kind of sympathise now with some of the criticisms of the traditional Mass (the priest and congregation are doing different things, the priest is whispering too much, and the congregation stands there without saying a word). Is this form of Mass popular among people who favor the traditional Mass? Is this really what people struggled for in all the work leading up to the recent moto proprio?

From my observations, I tend to think the louder the priest says the prayers, the most responsive the congregation is. (This is true in the Novus Ordo too.) But then perhaps many priests maybe are not that confident in their Latin pronounciations to be effective response-getters. Personally I’d like to hear as much as I can to what the priest says, realizing of course there are parts of the Mass which are intended to be said in a low tone, albeit with many gestures so you know where he is in the Mass.

 

[Mike12]

About the dialogue. There is some, but not nearly as much as what you have in the novus ordo mass. Are you sure you weren’t going to a novus ordo mass said in latin?

I remember quite distinctly it was not novus ordo. It is not that there was a lot of dialogue, but occasionally the congregtion said something. I do know the difference between the two. I may however, be wrong in calling it a “low Mass”. Until now, I mostly assumed that most tridentine Masses were either “low” or “high”, and “high” Masses generally included an “asperges” rite, the use of incense, and was mostly sung—a “low” Mass did not have these features. This may be incredibly uninformed.

 

[utunumsint]

I remember quite distinctly it was not novus ordo. It is not that there was a lot of dialogue, but occasionally the congregtion said something. I do know the difference between the two.

It may have been a latin mass that was not executed well. At some NO masses I’ve attended the parishoners barely respond and the priest just mumbles through the liturgy. I would think that the same thing could happen in a tridentine mass.

I may however, be wrong in calling it a “low Mass”. Until now, I mostly assumed that most tridentine Masses were either “low” or “high”, and “high” Masses generally included an “asperges” rite, the use of incense, and was mostly sung—a “low” Mass did not have these features. This may be incredibly uninformed.

Join the club. I’m still getting used to it. I’ll ask my priest about it the next time I talk with him. In the meantime, you may want to buy yourself a 1962 missal if you are going to attend more often. I use the St Joseph version which has the latin and the english side by side.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Silver_Thread]

If there was singing it should have been a High Mass. At a Low Mass, the Altar Server is the only one who should be responding to the Priest. Of course you can whisper. No liturgical police to tag ya. At High Mass generally, the people respond with the Choir (a blessing). I don’t recall as a youngster responding with the Choir, I guess it is a carry-over from the NO Mass.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Dialogue is just something that never seems to have caught on in the USA. In many ways it is a natural outgrowth of the liturgical movement and there is nothing to prevent it from being done, so theoretically I have nothing against it. In practice I’m not a fan as I find it distracting, but I recognize that’s just me. I don’t think anyone pushing for the EF was ever really “fighting for” the low Mass, though, be it done as dialogue or not, because the ideal of the EF is the sung Mass. So dialogue or not is really just a side issue if the real goal of restoring the full EF has been carried out.

 

[jj2011]

There’s nothing wrong with the dialogue mass, but the ideal, as just noted, is the solemn high mass with a proper schola and congregational singing of Gregorian chant.