Hi! This may not be appropriate for this forum, but wanted to ask the people who come to here more often than in the other forums. Could you possibly send me all your comments and thoughts about this Motu Proprio? What do you think about it? I respect all of your thoughts a lot and would be happy if most of you posted them here!
I am a bit confused to be honest because I have read both good and bad things about this. Personally, though, besides those bad things I read, I find it to be so wonderful and am excited to finally see a Latin Mass - at least a televised one!

Your thoughts please!

Thank you!
Bernadette

Yes, I've always wanted to see one as well. Still haven't made up my mind whether or not it needs to be brought back entirely however.

My church council is meeting to decide whether or not the Latin mass will come to our church. I dont know if they have made any decisions about it... personally, if the Latin mass and the english mass are of equal status (which they definitely are) then why does everyone want latin? Does it bring them closer to God? If it does, then so be it. But i've been to one and i didnt understand what was going on. I prefer to understand the prayers that I am saying. Either way, mass is mass, and i just want to be with God.

Amen sista!

I don't care one way or another. I went to a Triddy mass once at an FSSP parish in my city. It was enthralling. Truely a thing of beauty. But the second time less so. It just seemd to be between the priest and the choir and the congregation just sat, kneeled, and stood when appropriate.

My parish does an extremely good and reverential Ordinary Form mass. I see no reason to switch. So does my abbey. In both places the Mass is very reverential.

St. Francis de Sales, a post-Reformation Doctor of the Church, told his parishioners to get a copy of the prayers in the vernacular, but that praying in Latin was more spiritually beneficial for them.

The Latin Mass was never outlawed, and that's the SSPX's main bone of contention (and I'm sure there are others out there who can explain this better than I can). With the Motu Proprio, the Pope was admitting that the Latin Mass had never been outlawed, and for it to be made more available. This flies in the face of the VatII bishops, who all said that the Mass had to be celebrated in the vernacular or else.

It's like I've said before, Latin is the Love Language between God and His Church. Those who have been in relationships know about "special" languages between themselves and their beloved--something only the two of them understand. Such brings them closer. The same holds true for Latin and prayer.

Blessings,
Gemma

Actually, any priest has ALWAYS been free to celebrate the Ordinary Form in Latin as Latin IS the official language of the liturgy. If this Mass had been promulgated and celebrated as it SHOULD be probably we wouldn't be where we are today.
At. St. Benedict Abbey www.abbey.org in Still River, MA the Ordinary Form of the Mass is celebrated in Latin and with the priests facing the people yet it is so reverent and contemplative. They offer it in English everyday as a "low mass" for the people in the area who need to get to work. The monks also celebrate the Extraordinary Form on Sundays at the community of sisters next door to them.

As I was raised with a lot of liturgical "diversity" (as you can tell from the above paragraph) I have no problem with a much wider use of the Tridentine. Time will tell as to what will happen in parishes after the initial enthusiasm. We could be in for some surprises and I think what WILL happen is that it will influence a greater reverence of the celebration of the Ordinary Form which is one reason why the MP was promulgated.

I think we need to pray for priests, many who are terribly burdened with work who now have to learn the old form and offer it for their people. Even if they want to do it it's still extra for them. We need to be understanding.

I grew up with the latin Mass and was so happy to see it gone. The Richmond diocese, which I belong to, has had little interest expressed by the people, so is not puruing it diocese wide. I believe that 2 churches will be offering it. We are critically short of priests here, many have 3 or more parishes to cover. The priests do not want that added to their already overwhelming responsibilities. Now, people will certainly argue with me over this, so kindly just check out the Richmond Catholic News and see the article last week. And kindly spare your unkind words to me.
I love the Mass as it is said today. I want to hear the word in my own venacular. I do, from time to time, enjoy hearing the Pater Noster or Sanctus sung.
There is room in the church for different expressions of Faith. The Charasmatics have drawn many to their type of liturgy for years.

I grew up with the Latin Mass as well; as an adult, I've been fortunate enough to see the Ordinary Form celebrated appropriately in the various parishes I've attended in my life, so I don't have any strong urge to revert to TLM. After all, it is ALL about the Holy Eucharist, isn't it? And I also prefer the use of the vernacular and priest facing the people for the same reasons mentioned above.

I do love liturgical music in Latin---so many lovely chants, choral, and polyphonic works that would enhance the Ordinary Form even more, sigh....I have quite a library of sacred music CD's and play them often on my way to work.

I think it's great!! I really love the Tridentine Mass/TLM/1962 Missal/Classical Roman Liturgy, now Extraordinary Form, as well as the Ordinary Form - both the same one Mass. I think it's wonderful how we can have two forms of the Roman Rite. Thank you Holy Father! And I believe bringing back a wider use of the TLM will definitely help lessen abuses that have often taken place at the Ordinary form, eg changing the Eucharistic prayers from the official texts, extraordinary ministers when it is not an extraordinary situation (I've been to many Masses with less than 10 people, where there was still an extraordinary minister! :/ ), etc.

So much of the Church's sacred music has become extinct today in most parishes, at least mine I know. I think this will definitely be a huge step in restoring this, and bringing it to the ordinary form, as was the intention of the VII document on the Liturgy. I'm starting to discover more and more of it myself, and it is so unbelievably beautiful! Up until recently, I was totally ignorant of pretty much all of this - all the beautiful hymns like Veni Creator, Salve Regina, Ave Maris Stella, O Gloriosa Virginum, Vexilla Regis, Jesu Dulcis, Adoremus te Christi (the one version I particularly love, often sung at Holy Communion, so beautiful!! ) Parce Domini, Attende Domini (often sung at Communion during Lent) and so many others!! the Te Deum - it makes me think of the Carmelite martyrs of Compiegne who sang that along with other Latin hymns on their way to the scaffold - all the different parts of the Mass, the different forms of the Kyrie, Sanctus, etc - aah, I love the Alleluia verse for the Solemnity of the Assumption!! Alleluia, Assumpta est Maria!! There is so much incredibly beautiful Gregorian chant and other sacred music out there that is never heard anymore. On the very rare occasion that some of it is used at my parish, it is such an epiphany WOW! amongst much of the other music!

Most of the music played at the ordinary form these days, at least at my parish, is so uncomparible. I remember my years in high school being really annoyed at Mass, feeling it was just a superficial community gathering - and I didn't want to sing hymns that I really didn't like that weren't coming from the heart. In CCD we were not taught at all about the Real Presence and the sacredness of the Mass.

I had never been to a TLM up until a couple years ago. The first Latin Mass I ever attended was actually in the ordinary form at this beautiful little parish in Omaha, and it was great! As I began going more and more to the TLM in my area on Sundays, when I could/can, I realized so many things that I personally like much better, though of course I also love the Ordinary form - the same one Mass, where Jesus comes down on the altar - eg how it is often a more meditative atmosphere, not having to worry at all about trying to really concentrate on the Divine Mysteries taking place at Mass to prepare for Holy Communion, the most solemn moment of our lives, as St. Peter Julian Eymard says ( thread on his treatise on Holy Communion) (often at my parish at the ordinary form I feel this way), receiving Holy Communion at the altar rail - soo beautiful!! I love how reverent it is, like right before Communion how they cover the rail with linens - it's as if you're receiving directly from the altar itself, and I feel so much more comfortable receiving this way - it is much easier to kneel down at the rail, and you don't have to worry about the possibility of Jesus falling to the floor (this has happen to me twice) Also, there is so much less of a risk distributing Holy Communion in this way, of people walking off with the Host, which seriously does happen (my mother has spotted people doing this on a number of occasions at my parish - and she stops them) or fragments of the Host being scattered. So often I find crumbs, and on a couple occasions, even whole Hosts on the floor at my parish.

Here's the thread in Vocation Station from July 7, the date of the Motu Proprio, with many posts from different people from here: Why is Latin attractive to so many?

Also, this recent one is related: Beauty and Vocations

Dear Phamily,

Just my 2 cents, having studied the issue:

One must remember that the term "Latin Mass" is ambigious.. The Novus Ordo can be properly celebrated in Latin , ad orientem (facing liturgical East), just as is done at Ave Maria Univ., etc. The "Extraordinary Form" commonly known as the Tridentine Mass (TLM) according to the Missale Romanum last promulgated in 1962, must be celebrated in Latin, due to its history and development.

However, even throwing the Latin issue aside, both the ordinary and extraordinary forms are distinctively different. I find the actual rubrics of the TLM much more inspiring and better connects me with the saints of salvation history.

I agree with what was said above... the novus ordo masses I've experienced all my life at your average parish is FAR from what Vatican II called for. These are unequivicable facts, please read the documents! However, that being said, We owe our absolute obedience to the Successor of Peter and the Magisterium, for through the inspiration of the Holy Trinity, they are our Shepherds.

We must thank God most heartily for His gift of Benedict XVI, and pray for the continued return of orthodoxy after the decades of confusion.

Everyone wants Latin because although they are both VALID when said properly (not the same as having equal status, since one is about 1,700? or so years older than the other, and thus MIGHT be considered to have additional weight), the current Missal is sometimes said reverently but very often not, whereas those priests who now say the Mass in Latin do not mess around. There is no room for a "Good evening everyone/Good evening Father" exchange, or a "You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church community."

Also, if one learns to attend Mass in Latin, it is JUST the same, except for perhaps a homily, in the US, France, Spain Canada Italy South America Mexico.... need I go on? I have spent time abroad and it reinforced this concept for me. These days, instead of having the Mass at St Peter's all in a single language, Latin, the language of the Church, at St. Peter's, they have most of the Mass in Italian, a reading in English, a reading in French, and the responsorial in Korean. Doesn't it seem better the other way?...

About not understanding, I just like you don't understand Latin well enough to follow the Latin Mass simply by listening, but with a little book called a missal that has English on one side, Latin on the other, I can follow extremely well. I hope that doesn't come across as sarcastic, some people really haven't heard of missals and you don't seem to.

In sum I am happy about the Motu Proprio. (Personal stats: Home parish: English Mass. Fairly reverent yet it doesn't always seem like everyone thinks it's important, NO ONE stays afterwards to make a thanksgiving. Music: awful. Abbey near school: English Mass, always reverent, often with Latin mass parts like the Gloria. Music: pretty good. School parish: awful, awful. (well depending which priest. can be: reverent, decent.) Latin Mass parish: always reverent, good music too.)

So receiving our Lord and savior Jesus Christ is more important when it happens in Latin?




Um... I've gone to masses overseas where the mass is the same the same as here? Thats why we're a universal church. Because you can walk into any mass and it will always be the same.




I do know what a missal is, but i would rather be focusing my attention on the tabernacle during mass rather than a book and having to follow along.



I'm not unhappy about it, I just dont think it will have a very big impact on my life.

For clarification, I'm using the term ordinary form to refer to the Novus Ordo (i.e 1965 Missal) and extraordinary form to refer to the Tridentine (i.e. 1963 Missal).



No, however, some people find it to be more prayerful. Really, that's the key difference between the ordinary & extraordinary forms of the Mass - they're different ways of praying the Mass.



A missal is just a prayer book that has the propers & ordinary parts in it. You probably have missalettes in your church now with the readings and stuff in it...same concept. They also have missals for the Novus Ordo that some people use. You don't have to use a missal when attending Mass in the extraordinary form - in fact, it's quite easy to follow along w/o it after you've attended a few times.


Fair enough. And that's the point - it doesn't necessarily have to if you don't want it to. It won't have a very big change on my life either, primarily because I have already had the privilege to attend either form of the Mass for quite some time and I intend to continue to go to both.

By Latin Mass, I'm assuming you mean the extraordinary form as opposed to the Novus Ordo said in Latin (which has always been allowed since the inception of the novus Ordo). Personally, I like it because the prayer is more contemplative and, in my view, more ontologically correct. I think that if there were better catechesis as to what happens during the extraordinary form of the Mass and why it is, more people who at least be able to appreciate it, even if they choose not to attend it.

I highly doubt that it will ever be brought back entirely. I'm just happy that it is becoming something that the whole Church can acknowledge as a venerable and radically holy possession of the Church. For too long it has been seen as a mark of disobedience by the mainstream. I believe that the motu proprio is a big step in cultivating appropriate and worthy attitudes toward that which was the holiest prayer of the Church for so many centuries (and still is as the extraordinary form of the Roman rite!)

The venerable and holy Mass of the Ages is nothing that Catholics should have to feel ashamed of or disobedient about. It is the right of every Catholic priest to celebrate these venerable rites which were never abrogated and which did not suddenly become unclean or anathema when nobody was paying attention.

The preservation of these profoundly rich and sacred rites is not a rejection of the liturgical reform or "turning back the clock" as many seem to fear at this stage. The Second Vatican Council taught that all of the Churches legitimate and holy rites are equal in dignity and ought to be preserved. The hard fact is, the liturgical life of the Church change a great deal really fast after the Council and it was not all for the better nor what the Council intended. Some countries are worse off than the U.S. and I believe the promotion of the forma extraordinaria will help foster a sense of mystery and interiority that is needed for the enrichment of the general liturgical climate of the Church after an age of activitism, exteriorized worship and a certain false priority of the subjective in the liturgy. Perhaps something the young Guardini might have described as the priority of ethos over logos.

And I must take issue with the sentiments expressed by another poster on this thread. In my adamant opinion celebration of the Eucharist versus populum is perhaps the biggest blunder of the liturgical reform (incidentally Vatican II did not call for this novelty -- it was a most unfortunate fad that was raised to the level of an imperative by zealots). Until this practice is eliminated the fullness of the spirit of the Roman liturgy will not be accessible (in my opinion at least, take it for what its worth). The reference one can find to moving the altar away from the wall was about being able to walk behind the altar as it was being incensed and was not in any way a mandate or recommendation to offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice versus populum.

Chicago Parish Already Living "Summorum Pontificum"

Hey, thank you all! All your opinions and thoughts are quite helpful! I am not on here a whole lot and totally missed the other thread about the Latin Mass and found all those thoughts helpful, too. God bless you all!

Bernadette