Would you support the Traditional Latin Mass in the vernacular?

[DihydrogenOxide]

Vernacular is a primary purpose of Novo Ordo, not Tridentine Mass. We were never meant to take all latin out of Novo Ordo masses anyway.

The tradition of latin in the traditional latin Mass is an important tradition of the Roman(latin) rite of the Church.

 

[Lujack]

This is just an out there idea, but what about the readings in the vernacular, but everything else in Latin?

 

[malphono]

This is just an out there idea, but what about the readings in the vernacular, but everything else in Latin?

This is already permitted by the terms of article 6 of Summorum Pontificum.

 

[Onegin]

This is just an out there idea, but what about the readings in the vernacular, but everything else in Latin?

They tried this once at an FSSP parish and it didn’t fly over too well with the congregation. Plus, I don’t really see the point when, at most TLMs, the Priest re-reads the readings and the Gospel in English anyhow.

I agree with Rites who posted at the beginning of this thread. If they wanted to transition the OF using this method, I would be in favour of it, but not as an alternative to the existing TLM - that should remain the same.

 

[mick321]

This is just an out there idea, but what about the readings in the vernacular, but everything else in Latin?

In my parish’s TLM, the Epistle and Gospel are repeated in English as part of the Sermon. In my opinion, it is a very good solution that leaves the EF intact. No official “change” is required.

A high percentage of those who assist in our liturgy were either born or converted into the Ordinary Form. Motivated by personal desire to experience a more specialized fullness of the Faith - with a community of like minded Catholics - they learned the EF through full immersion, one Mass at a time. Although it requires a bit of effort in the beginning, it doesn’t take long to get up to speed if one applies oneself.

My 12 year nephew is an example of this. He attends a hardcore modernist Catholic school. He was trained as an OF mass server and is required to participate in his parish’s Masses with altargirls, emhc’s, etc. About 18 months ago, I mentioned to his mom that I had been attending the EF. She had never been to a Latin Mass of any sort and was curious. She found out that the parish where she had attended Catholic School has regular weekly TLM’s.

Long story short, less than one year ago, my nephew served his first EF Mass there. When I saw him last month, I thought it would be fun to test him on his Latin responses. When I began [totally out of the blue] with “…Introibo ads Altare Dei…”, I discovered that he could recite the entire Ordinary of the EF, both his part and the celebrant’s, through the final blessing. His cheat-sheet, is business-card sized, printed on both sides, and is kept on his person at all times. He now helps his priests train younger EF servers. He is still required to serve the OF in his home parish twice weekly.

The OF was designed to be easily accessible to all people, Catholic, non-Catholic, pagan, etc. It can accommodate all past, present and future languages. It can accommodate every form of innovation, novelty, abuse, music that we can imagine. It can be accurately described as a big tent or a big landfill, depending upon one’s personal perspective. It was designed for those who want what they want. It’s all good, licit and valid. It is the premier venue for Liturgical experimentation on this Earth.

The EF is not.

We do not need a Third Form of the Roman Rite at this time.

 

[Lormar]

I voted no - we already have an English Mass.

I’m afraid of what would happen to my beloved Mass if they started tampering with it. There are still too many stuck in the sixties priests left who think that the Mass belongs to them to do with as they “feel.”

 

[Cristiano]

I voted no. I am also a supporter of the OF to be done mostly in Latin.

 

[RobbyS]

I voted yes, but that doesn’t totally explain my position.

Having a vernacular TLM would certainly be vastly better than continuing with the Novus Ordo (no matter how reverent they try to make it), but I would only hold it up as an option if it were being used as a transition to the full Latin-only TLM. Latin is the sacred language of the Roman Church and should be forever retained in her rites. Replacing the NO with a vernacular EO should not be anything permanent IMO.

The same with the music. If you want to use “traditional” hymns, fine, but chant should be retained as the most fitting form of sacred music, over and above anything else.

This was the mass that I knew for several years during the '60s. Since I was long familiar with the use of a missal, the transition was easy to make. I was somewhat startled by the changes made by the NO, but accepted it. At the same time I witnessed the distress of older people who saw no advantage in the changes. In retrospect, I think many of them were wrong.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I voted No.

There is no need to substantially change the EF Mass. We’ve had enough liturgical changes in the last forty years; we don’t need anymore. We need to let the dust settle and allow the liturgy to develop organically. The OF ruptured the organic development of the liturgy, and I think a forced vernacular translation of the EF would be another rupture.

If you want the Mass in the vernacular, then you have the option of attending a vernacular OF. The EF should remain as it is. The only change I would endorse would be an update of EF calendar to include recently canonised saints, such as St. Padre Pio.

 

[Cristiano]

…The only change I would endorse would be an update of EF calendar to include recently canonized saints, such as St. Padre Pio.

 

[Lycorth]

You seem to be in favor of removing the Latin language from the Traditional Latin Mass.

That’s foolish. Wherever you got that from anything I’ve posted, I do not know.

I’m certainly not talking about “changing” the TLM, either, to those who are concerned about such.

I wish people would read before they click “submit reply”.

 

[Lujack]

They tried this once at an FSSP parish and it didn’t fly over too well with the congregation. Plus, I don’t really see the point when, at most TLMs, the Priest re-reads the readings and the Gospel in English anyhow.

I agree with Rites who posted at the beginning of this thread. If they wanted to transition the OF using this method, I would be in favour of it, but not as an alternative to the existing TLM - that should remain the same.

What if, and this is just tossing out a hypothetical that I’m toying with in my head, the OF was to be replaced with an EF that had the readings in the vernacular? Or what if the OF was suppressed, and an option was added in the EF for readings, and readings only, to be said in the vernacular (I’m not in favor of either option, but the idea is interesting, at least to me)?

 

[mick321]

That’s foolish. Wherever you got that from anything I’ve posted, I do not know.

I’m certainly not talking about “changing” the TLM, either, to those who are concerned about such.

I wish people would read before they click “submit reply”.

[Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this.]

Foolish is as foolish does.

There is no need to dumb down the EF for those who are not motivated enough to accept it for what it is. That’s what the OF is for. It is far better to make the genuine Extraordinary Form more available, admit that it’s not for everyone, and call it a day.

I do agree with your last statement.

MICK in POST 65 said:

In my parish’s TLM, the Epistle and Gospel are repeated in English as part of the Sermon. In my opinion, it is a very good solution that leaves the EF intact. No official “change” is required.

A high percentage of those who assist in our liturgy were either born into or converted into the Ordinary Form. Motivated by personal desire to experience a more specialized fullness of the Faith - with a community of like minded Catholics - they learned the EF through full immersion, one Mass at a time. Although it requires a bit of effort in the beginning, it doesn’t take long to get up to speed if one applies oneself.

My 12 year nephew is an example of this. He attends a hardcore modernist Catholic school. He was trained as an OF mass server and is required to participate in his parish’s Masses with altargirls, emhc’s, etc. About 18 months ago, I mentioned to his mom that I had been attending the EF. She had never been to a Latin Mass of any sort and was curious. She found out that the parish where she had attended Catholic School has regular weekly TLM’s.

Long story short, less than one year ago, my nephew served his first EF Mass there. When I saw him last month, I thought it would be fun to test him on his Latin responses. When I began [totally out of the blue] with “…Introibo ad Altare Dei…”, I discovered that he could recite the entire Ordinary of the EF, both his part and the celebrant’s, through the final blessing. His cheat-sheet, is business-card sized, printed on both sides, and is kept on his person at all times. He now helps his priests train younger EF servers. He is still required to serve the OF in his home parish twice weekly.

The OF was designed to be easily accessible to all people, Catholic, non-Catholic, pagan, etc. It can accommodate all past, present and future languages. It can accommodate every form of innovation, novelty, abuse, music that we can imagine. It can be accurately described as a big tent or a big landfill, depending upon one’s personal perspective. It was designed for those who want what they want. It’s all good, licit and valid. It is the premier venue for Liturgical experimentation on this Earth.

The EF is not.

We do not need a Third Form of the Roman Rite at this time.

 

[Lycorth]

[Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this.]

No problem. We all have lives offline

Foolish is as foolish does.

There is no need to dumb down the EF for those who are not motivated enough to accept it for what it is. That’s what the OF is for. It is far better to make the genuine Extraordinary Form more available, admit that it’s not for everyone, and call it a day.

I do agree with your last statement.

MICK in POST 65 said:

In my parish’s TLM, the Epistle and Gospel are repeated in English as part of the Sermon. In my opinion, it is a very good solution that leaves the EF intact. No official “change” is required.

A high percentage of those who assist in our liturgy were either born into or converted into the Ordinary Form. Motivated by personal desire to experience a more specialized fullness of the Faith - with a community of like minded Catholics - they learned the EF through full immersion, one Mass at a time. Although it requires a bit of effort in the beginning, it doesn’t take long to get up to speed if one applies oneself.

My 12 year nephew is an example of this. He attends a hardcore modernist Catholic school. He was trained as an OF mass server and is required to participate in his parish’s Masses with altargirls, emhc’s, etc. About 18 months ago, I mentioned to his mom that I had been attending the EF. She had never been to a Latin Mass of any sort and was curious. She found out that the parish where she had attended Catholic School has regular weekly TLM’s.

Long story short, less than one year ago, my nephew served his first EF Mass there. When I saw him last month, I thought it would be fun to test him on his Latin responses. When I began [totally out of the blue] with “…Introibo ad Altare Dei…”, I discovered that he could recite the entire Ordinary of the EF, both his part and the celebrant’s, through the final blessing. His cheat-sheet, is business-card sized, printed on both sides, and is kept on his person at all times. He now helps his priests train younger EF servers. He is still required to serve the OF in his home parish twice weekly.

The OF was designed to be easily accessible to all people, Catholic, non-Catholic, pagan, etc. It can accommodate all past, present and future languages. It can accommodate every form of innovation, novelty, abuse, music that we can imagine. It can be accurately described as a big tent or a big landfill, depending upon one’s personal perspective. It was designed for those who want what they want. It’s all good, licit and valid. It is the premier venue for Liturgical experimentation on this Earth.

The EF is not.

We do not need a Third Form of the Roman Rite at this time.

I’m not advocating a third form of the Roman rite, which I agree we do not need more of. I’m advocating a replacement of the Mass of Paul VI with a vernacular Traditional Mass.

The thing about the EF is that it is for everyone, as we well know. Plenty of people like to say “it’s not for everyone”, but that simply isn’t true; otherwise the Lord would not have moved Pius V to codify the Mass.

A vernacular Traditional Mass certainly isn’t intended to “dumb down” the Mass, but merely to offer it in the common tongue as a replacement for the Mass of Paul VI; I could just clamor for the Mass of Paul VI to be said in the required Latin, but it’s still the Mass of Paul VI, Latin or not. Yes, I fully support that Mass being said in the required Latin, but I support even more the replacement of that Mass with the Traditional Mass, and if using (even if, and preferably if, temporarily) a vernacular translation of the Traditional Mass helps speed the process along and helps stubborn folks see that the Traditional Mass is for everyone and is the best and holiest Mass in the Roman Rite, then why not at least consider it?

The only thing that would make me rethink my position is that Pius V declared that no new Masses should be used when he codified the Traditional Mass. However, this has already been done and the ship needs to be steered back to her rightful course. Even if debating a vernacular Traditional Mass helps to encourage interest in the already-extant TLM, then an even better work is accomplished through this talk, wouldn’t you agree?

 

[white_sheep]

I haven’t settled on an opinion yet, but it seems to me the answer the Easter Orthodox, Eastern Catholics, and SSPX have given is the only one which will work. No. There can be no change, however minute, to the liturgy(once it has been restored that is). Any change at all is to be completely and emphatically denounced, the congregations should rise in upheaval, the priests, deacons, and bishops should preach and rant and fight against it from the pulpit and with letters, speeches, public outcries, and all they have.

I’d like to say sure, give them a mass in English and a few modern hymns out of the spirit of American negotiation, but that’s how it begins. Also, the mass is not about you so it shouldn’t matter if you like it in English, it’s better in Latin, period. I don’t know Latin myself.

 

[mick321]

No problem. We all have lives offline

[/INDENT] I’m not advocating a third form of the Roman rite, which I agree we do not need more of. I’m advocating a replacement of the Mass of Paul VI with a vernacular Traditional Mass.

The thing about the EF is that it is for everyone, as we well know. Plenty of people like to say “it’s not for everyone”, but that simply isn’t true; otherwise the Lord would not have moved Pius V to codify the Mass.

A vernacular Traditional Mass certainly isn’t intended to “dumb down” the Mass, but merely to offer it in the common tongue as a replacement for the Mass of Paul VI; I could just clamor for the Mass of Paul VI to be said in the required Latin, but it’s still the Mass of Paul VI, Latin or not. Yes, I fully support that Mass being said in the required Latin, but I support even more the replacement of that Mass with the Traditional Mass, and if using (even if, and preferably if, temporarily) a vernacular translation of the Traditional Mass helps speed the process along and helps stubborn folks see that the Traditional Mass is for everyone and is the best and holiest Mass in the Roman Rite, then why not at least consider it?

The only thing that would make me rethink my position is that Pius V declared that no new Masses should be used when he codified the Traditional Mass. However, this has already been done and the ship needs to be steered back to her rightful course. Even if debating a vernacular Traditional Mass helps to encourage interest in the already-extant TLM, then an even better work is accomplished through this talk, wouldn’t you agree?

In the short term, increasing the availability of the EF will allow those faithful who already have an interest the convenience assisting in their own parish. One Sunday Mass per parish is an appropriate goal. Bishops should immediately identify priests and lay employees within their diocese who have the motivation and skills to support the program. Pastors should do the same within their parishes. Resources should be organized and deployed toward achieving a one Sunday EF Mass per parish goal within one year. Every parish should establish a program to publicizing their EF at every other Mass and parish function. Bishops and Pastors should avoid any heavy-handedness when dealing with the Faithful. They are providing an opportunity for those who wish to take their Holy Faith to another level. The the program’s progress should be monitored and tuned to fit the needs of each diocese and parish. Failure to achieve this modest goal is unacceptable.

The Traditional Latin Mass is an essential part of the Roman Catholic Church’s history and culture. It should be presented as such and indeed, celebrated once and a while. Those Faithful willing to accept this fact will respond positively. Others have the OF.

Regardless of which we choose to fulfill our Sunday obligation, at the very least, the most basic level of training should be mandatory for everyone wishing to be identified as a Roman Catholic. When he hears “In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spirtus Sancti…”, he should realize immediately that he’s hearing his native tongue.

Happy Holidays.

 

[markomalley]

I wouldn’t mind it, but I can see value in both ends.

One thing that EF Mass aficionados must realize is that most people who attend an EF Mass are there because they want to be there and they want an in-depth experience. If the EF was merely translated into the vernacular, that would not correct the horrendous level of catechesis that has happened in the Church for the past 50+ years. Therefore, many, if not most, of the abuses that occur in most NO parishes would simply be translated into the EF, if this proposition occurred.

I, for one, think that a far easier and more effective step would be simply require that the NO Eucharistic Prayer (if not the entire Liturgy of the Eucharist…if not all prayers offered to God throughout the entire liturgy) be offered ad orientem. Most of the liturgical abuses we all notice would be completely silly if the priest was standing in the correct direction.

(Can you imagine what he would look like if he waved the host around during the consecration like what commonly happens when the NO is prayed versus populum?)

 

[malphono]

I wouldn’t mind it, but I can see value in both ends.

One thing that EF Mass aficionados must realize is that most people who attend an EF Mass are there because they want to be there and they want an in-depth experience. If the EF was merely translated into the vernacular, that would not correct the horrendous level of catechesis that has happened in the Church for the past 50+ years. Therefore, many, if not most, of the abuses that occur in most NO parishes would simply be translated into the EF, if this proposition occurred.

Sad but true. It’s exactly what happened shortly after the introduction of the short-lived and ill-fated “interim Missal of 1965” and (as I mentioned [post=6465355]earlier[/post]) it only got progressively worse.

I, for one, think that a far easier and more effective step would be simply require that the NO Eucharistic Prayer (if not the entire Liturgy of the Eucharist…if not all prayers offered to God throughout the entire liturgy) be offered ad orientem. Most of the liturgical abuses we all notice would be completely silly if the priest was standing in the correct direction.

Yes. Quite a similar thought to what I expressed [post=6466462]earlier[/post] in this thread.

(Can you imagine what he would look like if he waved the host around during the consecration like what commonly happens when the NO is prayed versus populum?)

Yep … not that it doesn’t look absurdly silly when done versus populum all that over-emoting would look even more ridiculous.

 

[white_sheep]

I am not terribly in favor of having one mass at every parish be an EF and the rest OF. To me it is better, I would like it. But think about it for a second, we’d have two different liturgies at every parish on Sunday? Isn’t that a bit weird?

 

[Jerry-Jet]

What if TLM in the vernacular was a third option and most parishes that now use the OF chose it instead whilst still offering the EF in Latin?

Would that be a step backwards?

I don’t think so.