latin mass


#1

Hey! I was reading about Ave Maria University and that they have a Latin Mass there 3 times a week. Does anyone know if this is a Tridentine Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin (the picture looked as if the priest were facing the tabernacle). Thanks!


#2

Although I’m not certain, I’m pretty sure it is a Tridentine Mass. Fr. Fessio (I think that’s his name) may also offer the Novus Ordo in latin too, though.

J89


#3

According to the AMU website, each Sunday at 10:00 am they also celebrate something called the “Festive Latin” Mass. Do I even want to know…?

:ehh: :confused:


#4

[quote=msproule]According to the AMU website, each Sunday at 10:00 am they also celebrate something called the “Festive Latin” Mass. Do I even want to know…?

:ehh: :confused:
[/quote]

Please don’t burst my bubble! I’m hoping there’s a Catholic university where only the Latin Mass and traditional Novus Ordo Masses are celebrated. :thumbsup:


#5

the NO is only like 35 years old. what is a “traditional” NO mass?


#6

In the US, it would be exceedingly unlikely to find a priest who could pronounce the Latin in a correct and reverent fashion. This was alredy true in 1955 or so. In fact, congregations at many Masses would have been angered at a priest who attempted this because he was prolonging the Mass when they could have been out of there in a half hour or less if he had just mumbled an approximation of the stuff at top speed as was expected in those days. Preserving a church that could have done the TLM uniformly in a worthy manner is as much a chimera as preserving a church in which every couple is going to abstain from sex until marriage and then never practice birth control. Plese note that I do not comment on the moral correctness of any of these situations, but merely on the reality and the fantasy nature of expecting anything approaching the ideal.

Ominous Nabisco! Et cum speeree, two two oh!.


#7

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

DaveBj


#8

The Latin Mass is the current Order of Mass. Tridentine Masses are not permitted at the university.


#9

In the US, it would be exceedingly unlikely to find a priest who could pronounce the Latin in a correct and reverent fashion.

I am not sure on what basis you make this claim, but rest assured that every week scores of priests throughout the US are celebrating Mass in Latin, properly and reverently. They are part of a movement that has a great desire to celebrate the liturgy correctly.


#10

I guess I mean traditional NO Mass as in a NO Mass in which there aren’t altar girls, liturgical abuses, and Protestant hymns, but there’s a sense of the sacred and mysterious (i.e., Latin hymns, incense, beautiful vestments, reverent priests, well-trained altar boys, homilies rooted in orthodoxy). Perhaps the Latin Mass wasn’t always celebrated with the reverence due the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Neither is the NO Mass, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, or any other of the Liturgies approved by the Vatican. Having attended an Indult Mass for the past 2 years I honestly think that the majestic stateliness of the Latin Mass leads to a sense of wonder and awe at the Liturgy that I’ve rarely found at NO Masses (although I do tend to find daily NO Mass almost apostolic in its austerity). Just because reverent Latin Masses were impossible to enforce in every parish doesn’t mean that we should lower the standards anymore than we allow the failings of many Catholics in regard to birth control or sexual purity to lower the Church’s moral standards.


#11

[quote=Chatter163]The Latin Mass is the current Order of Mass. Tridentine Masses are not permitted at the university.
[/quote]

Pax vobiscum!

The NO is the current Order of the Mass, yes, but the TLM can be said if an indult is granted by the bishop.

In Christ,
Rand


#12

[quote=goreyfan]Hey! I was reading about Ave Maria University and that they have a Latin Mass there 3 times a week. Does anyone know if this is a Tridentine Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin (the picture looked as if the priest were facing the tabernacle). Thanks!
[/quote]

There are some physical differences in TLM and the Ad Orientem mass. Though both are facing the tabernacle (in case that the tabernacle is in the east). Try to observe a card in both sides of the altar. if you can see a card in both side then it is a TLM if not then that is an Ad Orientem


#13

[quote=viktor aleksndr]There are some physical differences in TLM and the Ad Orientem mass. Though both are facing the tabernacle (in case that the tabernacle is in the east). Try to observe a card in both sides of the altar. if you can see a card in both side then it is a TLM if not then that is an Ad Orientem
[/quote]

Come to think about it, I don’t think that there was a card. Does the NO Mass have to be celebrated on a freestanding altar facing the people?


#14

The NO is the current Order of the Mass, yes, but the TLM can be said if an indult is granted by the bishop.

I am aware of this, but the question was specifically about Ave Maria University, and no indult Mass is permitted there, not even for a visiting priest, hence my response.


#15

[quote=Chatter163]The Latin Mass is the current Order of Mass. Tridentine Masses are not permitted at the university.
[/quote]

Are you speaking of SSPX Masses in the Tridentine sense that is not permitted? Or are you talking about
the Tradtional Latim Mass that is approved, and they
wont allow that one? Please define which one you are
referring to that is not allowed.


#16

[quote=goreyfan]I guess I mean traditional NO Mass as in a NO Mass in which there aren’t altar girls, liturgical abuses, and Protestant hymns, but there’s a sense of the sacred and mysterious (i.e., Latin hymns, incense, beautiful vestments, reverent priests, well-trained altar boys, homilies rooted in orthodoxy). Perhaps the Latin Mass wasn’t always celebrated with the reverence due the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Neither is the NO Mass, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, or any other of the Liturgies approved by the Vatican.
[/quote]

okay. that works.
I find TLM beautiful too, but a reverent NO more or less as you have described is just as stunning


#17

[quote=Brain]okay. that works.
I find TLM beautiful too, but a reverent NO more or less as you have described is just as stunning
[/quote]

Pax vobiscum!

Yes, I agree. I once went to a NO High Mass con-celebrated retired Bishop Basil Meeking and a Dominican Prior, who is the pastor at the church it was at. It was chanted completely in Latin (with the exception of the readings and homily) and a world-class Latin choir singing the Mass (William Byrd’s liturgy songs). They did a solemn procession, burned incense, the communion rail was used, there were 10 altar servers. It felt like we had been transported to heaven. The Dominican Rite High Mass I went to on Ash Wednesday (very similar to the TLM; there are a few very small differences) was another time when it felt like heaven had come right into the church.

In Christ,
Rand


#18

[quote=Chatter163]I am aware of this, but the question was specifically about Ave Maria University, and no indult Mass is permitted there, not even for a visiting priest, hence my response.
[/quote]

Pax tecum!

Ok, sorry. I misunderstood.

In Christ,
Rand


#19

[quote=jbuck919]In the US, it would be exceedingly unlikely to find a priest who could pronounce the Latin in a correct and reverent fashion. This was alredy true in 1955 or so. In fact, congregations at many Masses would have been angered at a priest who attempted this because he was prolonging the Mass when they could have been out of there in a half hour or less if he had just mumbled an approximation of the stuff at top speed as was expected in those days. Preserving a church that could have done the TLM uniformly in a worthy manner is as much a chimera as preserving a church in which every couple is going to abstain from sex until marriage and then never practice birth control. Plese note that I do not comment on the moral correctness of any of these situations, but merely on the reality and the fantasy nature of expecting anything approaching the ideal.

Ominous Nabisco! Et cum speeree, two two oh!.
[/quote]

Frankly, you are wrong. All priests could correctly say Mass in 1955. Many of the laity could, too. Whether all priests did say Mass correctly and reverntly is another issue altogether. I will note that many priests in the '50s could not spontaneously speak or understand conversational Latin. That was the famous problem at Vatican II where Cardinal Cushing offered to install a translation system. But Latin was not spoken in the chanceries - it was written in correspondence or translated, as appropriate. It was well understood in writing. It was well understood in the Mass. Outside of Rome, very few spoke it as general language for communication. Priests had a minimum of 7 years of Latin at that time - and that focused on reading and writing.

One unusual result has been that with the decline of Church usage, the philological pronunciation used in public schools has almost completely replaced the italianate pronunciation used by the Church (but retained in music). Therefore you will find a lot of people now who have been taught Latin recently believe the Church is using the wrong pronunciation because it was not what they were taught. They don’t even realize that the Church pronunciation is a perfectly acceptable, though different, pronunciation.


#20

[quote=johnnykins]Frankly, you are wrong. All priests could correctly say Mass in 1955. Many of the laity could, too. Whether all priests did say Mass correctly and reverntly is another issue altogether. I will note that many priests in the '50s could not spontaneously speak or understand conversational Latin. That was the famous problem at Vatican II where Cardinal Cushing offered to install a translation system. But Latin was not spoken in the chanceries - it was written in correspondence or translated, as appropriate. It was well understood in writing. It was well understood in the Mass. Outside of Rome, very few spoke it as general language for communication. Priests had a minimum of 7 years of Latin at that time - and that focused on reading and writing.

One unusual result has been that with the decline of Church usage, the philological pronunciation used in public schools has almost completely replaced the italianate pronunciation used by the Church (but retained in music). Therefore you will find a lot of people now who have been taught Latin recently believe the Church is using the wrong pronunciation because it was not what they were taught. They don’t even realize that the Church pronunciation is a perfectly acceptable, though different, pronunciation.
[/quote]

Well, it’s my turn to disagree. The gap between the degree to which American priests (and even the hierarchy) had mastered Latin and that in Europe was vast. It was the European prelates like Suenens who argued in elegant Latin for a vernacular Mass while the US prelates like Cushing argued in broken Latin for the retention of Latin. American priests, and I blush to say it, were a working class phenomenon, while European priests were an aristocratic phenomenon. That is an overgeneralization, but basically true. Have you ever read Henry Morton Robinson’s The Cardinal ? Everything in it rings true except for one thing, and that’s the title character (originally a priest from working class suburban Boston) and his mentor Cardinal Glennon, whose sophistication was beyond the capacity of the American hierarchy at the time and a pure wishful fantasy of Robinson.

On the matter just of pronunciation, everyone who ever learned Latin properly knows perfectly well that classical pronunciation differs from ecclesiastical. This is not the issue. The issue is that American priests acted in general as if it didn’t deserve any pronunciation at all, just mouthing like so much gibberish. And in terms of comprehension, they might have, after years of expereience, been able to figure out the ordinary, but the proper and the readings? I imagine they had to go to the St. Joseph Missal, etc., just like everyone else. It was all phonetic, and badly so at that. If you walked up to the average US priest in 1955 and showed him a random passage in Latin and asked him for the meaning, he would not have a clue. I’m sure someone else here knows what I’m talking about and will back me up.

Anyone who has been involved with second language instruction knows that it is possible to have seven years of it and not know diddly squat more than you did to begin with. There was no motivation for a true mastery of Latin in most American seminaries. The motivation was to churn out priests with other priorities in mind. In fact, I would not be surprised if a true scholar seminarian who got into the Latin would not be made fun of by his good old boy classmates, especially at the minor seminary level.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.