Pope set to bring back Latin Mass that divided the Church

(I really don’t like the tittle but I have to use it, was hoping some posters here would have other links to more reliable Catholic Sources on this)

=================================================

THE Pope is taking steps to revive the ancient tradition of the Latin Tridentine Mass in Catholic churches worldwide, according to sources in Rome.
Pope Benedict XVI is understood to have signed a universal indult — or permission — for priests to celebrate again the Mass used throughout the Church for nearly 1,500 years. The indult could be published in the next few weeks, sources told The Times.

Use of the Tridentine Mass, parts of which date from the time of St Gregory in the 6th century and which takes its name from the 16th-century Council of Trent, was restricted by most bishops after the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).

This led to the introduction of the new Mass in the vernacular to make it more accessible to contemporary audiences. By bringing back Mass in Latin, Pope Benedict is signalling that his sympathies lie with conservatives in the Catholic Church.

article ]

I received this in an e-mail this morning from a parishoner at my parish:

11-October-2006 – Catholic World News Feature Story

POPE WILL BROADEN USE OF LATIN MASS
Vatican, Oct. 11 (CWNews.com) - Pope Benedict XVI is preparing to release a motu proprio extending permission for priests to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass, Vatican sources have confirmed.

The new papal document-- for which a publication date has not yet been set-- would give all priests permission to celebrate the Mass of St. Pius V. This permission, a “universal indult,” would replace the existing indult that dates back to 1988, when Ecclesia Dei authorized use of the Tridentine rite until more restricted conditions, requiring the permission of the local bishop.

Pope Benedict has long favored moves to accommodate traditionalist Catholics, and to integrate the Tridentine rite into the regular liturgical life of the Church. The motu proprio that he has prepared-- which, according to informed sources, is now in final form-- addresses other liturgical questions as well as the issue of the traditional Mass.

Vatican sources say that the papal document affirms the principle that there is only one liturgical rite for the Latin Church. But this rite has two forms: the “ordinary” liturgy (the Novus Ordo, celebrated in the vernacular language) and the “extraordinary” (the Tridentine rite, in Latin). These two forms have equal rights, the text indicates, and bishops are strongly encouraged to allow free use of both forms.

Pope Benedict is reportedly waiting for the best moment to release the new document, which is currently circulating among Vatican dicasteries. Speculation in Rome is that the indult will be announced at the same time that the Pope releases his apostolic exhortation concluding the Synod on the Eucharist. That document is expected soon, perhaps in November.

There is significant opposition to the indult among Vatican officials, and the papal text has been the subject of serious debate and criticism. But Pope Benedict has made it clear-- notably in his meeting with the College of Cardinals in March-- that he will move forward with efforts to accommodate traditionalists.

In 1988, with his own motu proprio Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II allowed the celebration of the old Mass in parish settings, provided that the local bishop gave his approval. The Ecclesia Dei commission was created to supervise implementation of that policy. Despite the urging of Pope John Paul for a “broad and generous” use of the indult, many bishops have been reluctant to allow the traditional Mass, or have severely restricted its use.

The papal document is likely to take the form of an apostolic letter, with the added status of a motu proprio-- a document that carries the force of canon law. The document has been reviewed by the Congregation for Divine Worship and by Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, the president of the Ecclesia Dei commission, as well as the Pope; it is now in at least its third draft.

plh - very nice. THANKS!

I think its good for those who want this, but I’ll stick with an English Mass.

This is ridiculously alarmist. He is just extending an indult already issued by Pope John Paul II. Tridentine masses performed under indult have already been happening for years, and are old news, and it’s not like anyone’s throwing the Novus Ordo out of the window.

Media. Sheesh.

:clapping: :bounce: :thumbsup: SO glad to hear this!!! Now all we need are willing priests to do this.

:blessyou:
Pope Benedict!

Two things in the article seemed contradictory. One was that this is the Mass used for 1500 years and the other is that parts of the Mass date back to the 6th century. My question is: how far back did the TLM date since the last change? Any TLM fans have the answer? Thanks.

I think most people would be surprised if a claim was made that his sympathies lie with liberals in the Church. The passage you quoted suggested the pope’s sympathies lie with the conservatives in the Church. I think that’s a fair assessment. What exactly do you find alarmist about the passage?

I pray this is true.

Some of us have been denied access to the TLM because our Bishop refuses to allow it. It is his right to do so I understand this. But, if we have a priest willing to provide the TLM we should be able to go. The nearest Indult is in the next county and 45 miles away.

Excellent.

I pray for seeing this day.

I want the Latin back because I want to witness that tradition. Those who want to stick with the English can still do what the traditionalists do today and follow through Mass with Missals.

That means the Latin Missal will have to be mass-produced.

This may still be case even if a broader indult is issued, according to this article: timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,1-3-2397919-3,00.html

The new indult would permit any priest to introduce the Tridentine Mass to his church, anywhere in the world, unless his bishop has explicitly forbidden it in writing.

(Emphasis mine)

If the Latin Mass returned, I would not be sorry. Nor would I see it as a step forward. Rather, it would a return to a previous position, so that a truly forward move can be made this time, as opposed to last time.

Saying that, I suspect very strongly that what we have here is not a non-Latin Mass problem, but an English Mass problem. One trouble with the move to the vernacular was that there were so many of them, and unfortunately, the pop psychologists got in on the ground floor in coming up with the English Mass. Whenever there was a choice between praying a hard truth, and making the folks feel good, guess which one won? For instance, the Confession was utterly gutted – it got in the way of feeling warm and fuzzy.

I’ve been where the English Mass is celebrated with dignity and solemnity (and the '70s “hymns” are nowhere to be heard), and it WORKS. But it came out in a form that was just too plastic in the hands of those who put the teachings of psychology ahead of the teachings of the Church in implementing the liturgy.

I cannot imagine anyone attending the Latin Mass coming away with the view that either the moment of consecration, or the moment of reception of Communion, was the high point of the Mass. Today, thanks to what was done with the English Mass, it’s all too easy to find people who say it’s when they hold hands at the Lord’s Prayer.

Blessings,

Gerry

One more point.

Neither the Latin Mass, nor the change in the liturgy, “divided the church.” What caused division was the false (perhaps Satanic) notion that there was one Church before Vatican II, and another Church after Vatican II, and the notion of some that the latter was free to change anything in the former, or of others that nothing at all could be changed at all from the former.

There was no former or latter Church, and any interpretation of Vatican II that does not take that into account is simply not Catholic. However, the liturgical changes were highly visible, and people on both sides of the error rallied to either the new (plasticized) liturgy or the old (Latin) one

Blessings,

Gerry

It’s not divisive, but inclusive.

Archbishop Weisgerber said the new indult was apparently motivated by a desire to bring comfort to older people who may miss the old rite. But in his archdiocese, he said, the few people asking for it are “young people who never experienced it.”

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0605776.htm

The “TLM” changed many times. That is why the indult specifies the Missal of 1962. That Missal, I believe, was the first one to expressly allow the dialoge form of the Mass with the congregation saying many of the responses that had previously been said only by the deacon and/or servers. That was a pretty big change in its day but pales compared to the more drastic change of the Pauline Mass. I am sure there are people more expert than me but I believe there was another change back in 1948 (or 47?).

I am a fan but not an expert so I may be completely off on this.

Very astute and true observation Gerry! blessings…

elijahson

the TLM and NO Masses didn’t divide the Church.

The folks who cower at change and who were disobedient to the Second Vatican Council, they divided the Church.

What is the Latin Tridentine Mass and what’s the difference between that and masses now?

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.