Old Latin Mass Makes a Comeback (in St. Louis)

St. Louis Catholic Blog ^ | June 14, 2007

[kosta50]

Yeah, even Pope Benedict XVI has worn mitres smaller than the one Archbishop Burke is wearing in the pic. That one is a more traditional design I guess

It was explained to me that the color of the hat (mitre) is significant but it is only recently that I noticed the difference in size as well and was wondering if it is also significant.

[Pyro7480]

“According to the great Orthodox liturgical scholar and saint, Nicholas Cabasilas, the prayer in the Roman rite “Supplices te rogamus” (”Most humbly we implore Thee”) is an “ascending epiklesis.””

Bowing profoundly, with his hands joined and placed upon the altar, he [the priest] says:

Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens Deus: jube haec perferri per manus santi Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum, in conspectu divinae majestatis tuae: ut quotquot [he kisses the altar] ex hac altaris participatione sacrosanctum Filii tui [he joins his hands, and signs the Host and then the chalice with the Sign of the Cross] Cor+pus et San+guinem sumpserimus [he signs himself with the Sign of the Cross] omni benedictione caelesti et gratia repleamur. [He joins his hands.] Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

We must humbly beseech Thee, Almighty God, to command that these offerings be borne by the hands of Thy holy Angel to Thine altar on high in the sight of Thy Divine Majesty, that many of us as at this altar shall partake of the Body+ and Blood + of Thy Son, + may be filled with every heavenly blessing and grace. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.

[kosta50]

Oops! Nicholas Cabasilas was not a modern liturgist, but a 14th century Orthodox saint

I was going to say that I never heard of a living Orthodox saint, but then, technically speaking, they are all very much alive in heaven and fervently praying for the Church Militant! :)

[unspun]

How unfortunate, such return in the direction of mysticism, obscurancy, and eclipsing of the relationship between God and each individual He died for, to directly relate with.

[Pyro7480]

The epiklesis is the supplication of the Holy Spirit to mystically change (i.e. transubstantiate in the western terminology) the bread and wine. My understanding is that the traditional Latin Mass does not call on the HS specifically, but that there are additional prayers that do.

There's this prayer during the Offertory of the Traditional Latin Mass.

Standing erect, he [the priest] extends, and then joins his hands, lifts his eyes up to heaven, and immediately lowers them, saying

Veni, Santificator omnipotens aeterne Deus, et bene+dic hoc sacrificium, tuo sancto nomini praeparatum.

Come O Sanctifier, almighty and eternal God, and bless + this sacrifice prepared for Thy holy Name.

[GOP_Raider]

Question:

Would either you or one of the Catholics in this thread explain the significance of a Latin mass and why it’s considered important in the Catholic faith? Note: I’m not being critical or condescending, I’m just curious about this. Thanks.

[kosta50]

I think the objection of the Orthodox side was/is that the traditional Latin Mass does not invoke the Holy Spirit to change the Gifts.

I am not sure I understand the significance of the difference, except that it is the Holy Ghost, Who, in the Divine Economy of Our Salvation, is affecting the changes.

It is also my understanding that the TLM also contains additional prayers (from about the 13th century) that do call on the Holy Ghost.

[Pyro7480]

See my post #85.

[Petrosius]

While Orthodox theologians have sought to identify the Supplices as the epiclesis it would seem to me that the prayer Quam oblationem would come closer to the mark:

Quam oblationem tu, Deus, in omnibus, quaesumus, benedictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere digneris: ut nobis Corpus et Sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi.

And do Thou, O God, vouchsafe in all respects to bless, consecrate, and approve this our oblation, to perfect it and to render it well-pleasing to Thyself, so that it may become for us the Body and the Blood of Thy most beloved Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord.

Perhaps those Orthodox theologians who would prefer to identify the Supplices as the epiclesis do so because, like the Byzantine epiclesis, it comes after the Consecration.

It should be noted that this ambiguity does not exists in the new Eucharistic Prayers of the Novus Ordo Mass which have explicit invocations of the Holy Spirit.

[vladimir998]

You wrote: “Would either you or one of the Catholics in this thread explain the significance of a Latin mass and why it’s considered important in the Catholic faith?”

Significance? Well, I think most people would say the old Latin Mass is significant because it is like toughing the past (while still re-presenting Christ’s once and for all sacrifice!) through an ancient liturgy. My ancestors 500 years ago, 1000 years, etc. worshipped in much the same way, using much the same liturgy, in the same language.

Most people who think the old Latin Mass is important do so usually for several reasons: 1) it’s very beautiful, 2) it is theologically sound through and through, 3) it’s ancient and embodies so much tradition, 4) it was the Mass of the saints for so many generations, 5) it was a universal in the Roman Rite (50 years ago you could go to Tokyo or Rome or Mexico City or Kansas City and the Mass would be the same in a Roman Rite parish; now it is a little bit different wherever you go), 6) it is a wonderful, traditional and beautiful way to re-present Christ’s once and for all sacrifice from Golgotha to the Father.

[Sacajaweau]

When the Latin Mass went out the door, together with the statues and they rolled in the guitars and said I had to shake hands with everyone around me, I walked out the door. It was no longer a quiet, respectful place to be on Sunday. It was a floor show with the Mass being the least of the show.

[vladimir998]

You wrote: “While Orthodox theologians have sought to identify the Supplices as the epiclesis it would seem to me that the prayer Quam oblationem would come closer to the mark.”

You’re not alone in that view:

“The Dominican Ambrose Catharinus (sixteenth century) thought that our Consecration takes place at an Epiklesis that precedes the recital of Christ’s words. This Epiklesis he thinks to be the prayer “Quam oblationem.” A few others (including Renaudot) more or less shared his opinion. Against these Hoppe (op. cit. infra) showed that in any case the Epiklesis always follows the words of Institution and that our “Quam Oblationem” cannot be considered one at all. He and others suggest a mitigated theory, according to which the Invocation (in our case the “Supplice te rogamus”) belongs not to the essence of the sacrament, but in some way to its (accidental) integrity. John of Torquemada at the Council of Florence (Hardouin IX, 976), Francisco Suárez (De Sacram., disp. lviii, 3), Bellarmine (De Euch., iv, 14), Lugo (De Euch., disp. xi, 1) explain that the Invocation of the Holy Ghost is made rather that He may sanctify our reception of the Holy Eucharist. This is a theoretical explanation sought out to account for the fact of the Epiklesis, without giving up our insistence on the words of Institution as alone consecrating. Historically and according to the text of the old invocations they must rather be looked upon as dramatically postponed expressions of what happens at one moment. There are many like cases in our rite (examples quoted in “The Orth. Eastern Church,” loc. cit.).”
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05502a.htm

Anglicans:

“Now it is remembered that the clause Quam oblationem in the Roman Canon stands in the like place with the epiclesis in the liturgical papyrus; and this Roman form is claimed as a true epiclesis.” http://anglicanhistory.org/liturgy/legg_unexpected.html

[kosta50]

Perhaps those Orthodox theologians who would prefer to identify the Supplices as the epiclesis do so because, like the Byzantine epiclesis, it comes after the Consecration

I would say you are right about that. the new Eucharistic Prayers of the Novus Ordo Mass which have explicit invocations of the Holy Spirit

Yes, indeed. See mny post #80 (bottom). Which goes back to the canonical changes between the 5th and the 7th centuries in the Latin-Rite Mass, as discussed earlier. Apparently the post-Vatican II Mass is using an earlier liturgical form.