Replies

Not all of us younger Post-V2 Catholics want the Tridentine Mass to be a carbon copy of the liturgical culture of the 1950's.

I firmly believe in full liturgical participation. I have studied and mastered the Latin language, not just because I had to in High School, but because I believe it is necessary to know be better able to participate in ther Liturgy (and not rely on goofy translations).

We live in a mono-glot society where non-English is scorned. This mindset has and continues to infect many Catholics in addition to the population at large. I disdain this mentality. The easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself in it. This is very easy to do if one actually makes the slighest effort to follow the Mass actively.

Unfortunately, many of my Trad brethren have a "Low Mass" mentality or are simply indifferent to this. This issue of liturgical participation will continue to be a matter of contention in the traditional circles.

However, I would not characterize the younger generation as being for the good old days of Low Mass. In fact, it is my generation that is the most receptive to actively participating in the Tridentine Mass. All we need is good instruction and nudging from liturgically minded priests and other leaders of example.

And yes, the Latins do have a lot to learn from the East concerning liturgical participation. It is a sad fact of history that liturgical minimalism has infected the West.

NYER, I believe your experience of the TLM is accurate for the situation in Troy, NY. That would be a minimalist Indult setting, hardly an ideal TLM. Contrast this with a typical FSSP or SSPX Church. In these latter, you would discover a much richer (but not quite perfect) liturgical culture a la "Mediator Dei." In fact, this very reason for the differences in one TLM to another is why we are moving to NJ next year. We are going to be full time parishioners in a liturgically active, and diocesan TLM Church as opposed to the sorry minimalist Indult in Baltimore.

C'mon now, not everyone is a monoglot.

We picked up the Viadana "Exultate Justi in Domino" tonight at choir practice. I sang it 2-3 times in my old (Episcopal) church, and amazingly all the Latin just rolled out. I didn't even need the music (which was good because we were short on copies.)

Exultate Justi

Isn't that nice?

Exultate justi in Domino;
rectos decet collaudatio.
Confitemini Domino in cithara;
in psalterio decem chordarum, psallite illi.
Cantate ei canticum novum;
bene psallite ei in voci feratione.
Quia rectum est verbum Domini,
et omnia opera ejus in fide.
Diligit misericordiam et judicium,
misericordia Domini, plena est terra.

Rejoice o ye just in the Lord
for the upright is worthy of praise.
Sing praises to the Lord with the harp,
Praise him with the psaltery of ten strings.
Sing to him a new song,
Sing praises to him with a loud voice.
For the word of the Lord is right,
and his works are done in truth.
He loves righteousness and judgement,
the earth is full of the goodness of the Lord.

(of course now it's stuck in my head. But it's better to have GOOD music stuck in your head . . . )

"Not all of us younger Post-V2 Catholics want the Tridentine Mass to be a carbon copy of the liturgical culture of the 1950's."

A hearty Amen to that.

My Juventutem/WYD experience was full-on Solemn High, through-sung, Latin liturgy unambiguously for the glory of God and our own sanctification. It is my intention to, as they say, "bring it".

At the Indult Masses I will soon direct choirs for (if you know singers in Queens and Brooklyn, send them to me!) it is the pastor's intention and my task to have the Masses be through-sung Dialogue Masses with Gregorian propers. I will teach the pastor the sung formulas for the readings and prayers. And, no, we will never force the faithful to sing the parts that pertain to them, but only encourage them while respecting their liberty to worship as they please (as I understand this is Eastern Rite practice).

While I appreciate the pregnant silence of the Low Mass, High Mass was to be the norm for Sundays and solemn feasts. That is what Vatican II intended. Options for a partially vernacular celebration of the classical Latin Rite were given in the 1965 Missal, whose revisions I believe were inspired at least in part by Eastern praxis, based on my experience of English-language Divine Liturgy at the DC Basilica in June, and the "low" Syro-Malabar Divine Liturgy celebrated at Juventutem by Bp. Alencherry of Thuckalay, India. Unfortunately (or fortunately - we shall see what comes out of the synod), this organically-developed revision of the liturgy was unceremoniously dumped after less than 5 years for the novus Ordo Missae, while valid, some have called a "chastisement".

Kolokotronis - I cannot thank the East enough for her examples. While it's said that we Latins are first among equals, I firmly believe that it also means we're first when it comes to institutional blockheadedness. God knows we've proven it time and time again. Pray for us!

(For those interested in the 1965 Missal, a 21-year old student has started a blog dedicated to its study and makes a compelling case for its being the revision intended by Vatican II. I find I am thus far in complete agreement with this thesis. http://traditionalromanmass.blogspot.com/ )

"I firmly believe in full liturgical participation. I have studied and mastered the Latin language, not just because I had to in High School, but because I believe it is necessary to know be better able to participate in ther Liturgy (and not rely on goofy translations)."

As a classics major in college (back in the days when whale oil for our lamps and wood for our fires were part of the room and board bill), I can appreciate your love for Latin and commend you on it, but.... Several years ago we got a new priest in our parish. He gradually moved the Divine Liturgy from almost totally Greek to almost totally English. Initially I was against it, but as time has gone on, I've developed a true love for the English. While I think its silly to say that anyone who had attended the Liturgy regularly didn't understand what it was about or what was said when it was all in Greek (it is in koine/Byzantine Greek, not modern Greek), I think its equally silly to think that everyone understood, for example, the daily services in Great Lent, which are rich in the theology of The Church. Fully participating in these devotions in English, understanding what the priest and cantor are saying as well as understanding my own responses has been quite wonderful. For us, the retention of some Greek is important because it reminds especially the converts who established our parish about 100 years ago, but beyond that, the vernacular has to be the language of choice if we truly believe lex orandi, lex credendi.

This is not to say that I object to Greek for us or Latin for you Western Catholics. I don't. Were it simply all about me, I'd be fine with the Greek or Latin were I a Latin Rite Christian. But the fact is it isn't all about me or even people like me. Since we switched to mostly English, our parish has been blessed with many, many converts who have added immeasurably to the social and spiritual dynamics of our parish. Indeed, our Metropolitan once said to us all, after a Divine Liturgy, that when he looked at us and learned the names and histories of the parishioners, he knew he was looking at the face of the future of Orthodoxy in this country.

At any rate, love your Latin, learn it well, but remember that for most people it always was and will continue to be, something of a barrier to full participation in the Liturgical life of the Church in the West.