PDA

View Full Version : Latin Mass - Yes or No?



Mercator
Saturday, October 21st, 2006, 03:45 AM
Return of the Latin Mass

Vote here:
Corriere della Sera (http://www.corriere.it/appsSondaggi/votazioneDispatch.do?method=risultati&idSondaggio=176)

mischak
Sunday, November 5th, 2006, 07:25 PM
I didn't see the point of changing it in the first place..

Drakkar
Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 01:28 AM
If my memory serves me correctly, the change was to "unalienate" the public from the meaning of mass. I think all it really did was remove the mystery and decorum that made mass so sacred in the first place. It has since been watered down to folk guitars and clapping instead of keeping the traditions handed down for centuries.

Thrymheim
Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 07:43 AM
Not being Christian I'm not sure if I qualify to reply, but I believe that you should keep your traditions, I do see however that as no-one understands Latin any more this could make it inaccessible, so maybe do both or something.

Maelstrom
Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 08:06 AM
I also am not a Catholic or Christian of any denomination, though I wholeheartedly agree with Drakkar. The purpose of having the mass in Latin was to create an atmosphere of there being some sort of esoteric knowledge or truth being spoken.

In a sense it would have seemed other-worldly to those who had no concept of Latin.

Also, as Thrymheim points out it is important to retain your traditions, no matter what your faith or beliefs.

Imperator X
Sunday, September 7th, 2008, 05:50 PM
A long-standing German Catholic community Latin Mass church closed down here near Boston, I would have loved to have seen the Mass. Yet another example of watering down in the Roman Church.

It's just for the Latin and the architecture... If I were Christian (and I'm not) I could not be a Catholic and have a clear conscience about it.

I do believe however, that using the vulgar tongue strips the Mass of its mystical qualities, especially considering Catholicism is essentially a mystery cult (in the antique sense.)

The Dragonslayer
Sunday, November 9th, 2008, 06:40 PM
I am a Christian, but I belong to no particular church. I am interested in Traditional Catholicism. I've been to several Latin Masses in the past. If there was one located closer to me, I might actually attend there on a regular basis. I have no idea in the modern Catholic Church. The ones in my area are a disaster. The church buildings look about like any Baptist church. The people dress is jeans, t-shirts, etc. They talk during the services. The music is horrible. It sounds like something a hippie would listen to. The homilies are not that good. Plus the parish nearest me has a priest from Colombia. He speaks very bad English. It was always hard to understand him. The Latin Mass takes one into another world. It's so beautiful and awe inspiring. It definitely made me feel closer to God. I left it enriched and feeling blessed. I left the Novus Ordo Mass with a headache.

Teuton
Sunday, November 9th, 2008, 07:33 PM
The masses were in Latin because Latin was the language most people understood.

Unfortunately, with Latin a dead language, it defies it's purpose.

As far as I'm concerned, priests should learn to speak Latin while in training and then teach the children of the church to speak Latin as well.

Hanna
Sunday, November 9th, 2008, 07:54 PM
In any ideologies you need a common language, beside those days Latin were considered the language of aristocratic. We had that crap in our Scandinavian churches before the church turned progressive.

Anfang
Sunday, November 9th, 2008, 08:07 PM
In any ideologies you need a common language, beside those days Latin were considered the language of aristocratic. We had that crap in our Scandinavian churches before the church turned progressive.

Honestly I much prefer how the Norwegians handled the church issues before
their Conversion. I read about one particular Wiking who after a successful raid made quite a fashion statement. He took the front cover binding of a fancy gold damascened and jewel encrusted bible, and put it on a chain, making a big Jeweled pendant. He started a trend! When he went back to Norway, people saw it and others did the same later on.

The best thing that happened in the 9th century to the 10th and 11th were the Wikings. May the Gods bring them back. I will row.

Soten
Sunday, November 9th, 2008, 08:14 PM
At the same time the Catholic church got rid of Latin and decided to put the mass in the vernacular they also made the priests face the congregation instead of always facing the altar like they had been doing.

The change was meant to include the churchgoers more rather than have it feel like you were a mere spectator. This change didn't happen too long ago. My mom said it was like the mass was being carried out and you just happened to be watching.

Alsatia
Wednesday, June 10th, 2009, 05:22 PM
We shan't forget that there were many instances of Vikings who struggled, in their own Viking way, to establish Catholic churches in/around the 1100s. When a Viking would have a conversion, he quickly set the locals straight: if the aristocrats didn't provide the best for the Mass and the church itself, they would pillage their way in order to obtain whatever they needed. (Conversion is an on-going process!)

An emphatic "YES!" to the Latin Mass.

Here are just a few of my own reasons:
1.) It is time tested and approved by the saints --- every, single one of them.
2.) It was created organically, over nearly 2000 years, and never were substantial changes made to it --- except when the Novus Ordo came into being. The continuity is reflective of the theological continuity of doctrine and dogma which does not change, since God does not change. Compare the basic content of the Latin Mass (even as it is today) as compared to the Ambrosian Rite (the Mass as St. Ambrose celebrated in order to combat the Arian heresies which were very rampant in his time) --- they are basically the same.
3.) It reflects most accurately the teachings of the Roman Catholic faith. The main purpose of the creation of the New Order Mass was to deflect from the Roman Catholic teachings that were unpopular and even offensive to non-Catholics. The idea was to "open the windows" to the "new world", not to maintain and preserve the liturgy which protected and represented her true teachings.
4.) Far less rubric options: The priest who celebrates the Latin Mass has hardly a single opportunity to make it his own idea and thereby teach heresy.
5.) It is dignified and reverent because it keeps its attention on God and away from the things that are transient/temporal and only to do with the culture of today. God is timeless, and the Latin Mass helps one to separate in his conscience the spirit of the world from the Spirit of God.
6.) It is based on sound theological and philosophical principles, unlike the Novus Ordo which is largely influenced by immanentism* (*think: "We are Church" heresy).
7.) Because it evolved over time with the main principle in mind to COMBAT the heresies of the present, rather than boastfully cave into their influence. It is of God because as protects His Church, therefore, it is of the hand of God and should not be altered. (Remember the punishments God imposed on His people for liturgical abuse or changing the rubrics of His ceremonies for the transporting of the Arc of the Covenant -- a swift death. A legacy which continued for a long time with the Jews before Christ, and is the reason why whatever priest was the celebrant had to wear a robe and bell around his ankle --- that if he made a mistake, the priests behind the veil could drag his then dead body away from the altar without risk to their own lives.) Its rubrics and language reflect its teachings to be universal: true for all peoples, for all places, and for all times. ***Edited for emphasis, with this point: It was even condemned that is should be tampered with or much less abrogated by Pope Pius V under the apostolic constitution "Quo Primum" from 14 July, 1570. In the bull Pope Pius V declared: "By this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it." And he concluded: "No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul."**

It really says something here, these posts that people who aren't even Catholic get it, yet it seems that most Catholics don't. That, in it of itself, is a product of the innovations which didn't open it's windows to those who didn't know the faith, but rather, largely confused those who were already Catholics.

Jldugan
Monday, October 19th, 2009, 08:34 PM
I am converting to the catholic church and the Latin mass is more pretty (granted I've only seen it on ewtn once:() then the normal mass today that we have a my church its sad that my church and other churches don't offer a Latin mass for the people that want one. That would prove I think to be the preverbed mass of my church. I wish I could just once in my life get to be apart of a Latin mass:D

Alice
Friday, November 30th, 2018, 10:11 AM
Yes to the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite, with the Mass celebrated ad orientum (versus populam) and where communicants kneel and receive communion on the tongue. But if the Ordinary Form of the Latin Rite is celebrated in Latin or with the responses in Latin, that's beautiful, too, but please just omit the Sign of Peace (GIRM says it's optional).

schwab
Saturday, December 1st, 2018, 05:26 AM
Can't find that ceremony/tradition in the Holy Scriptures.