I know this is hard to believe. Due to the 1962 Missal or earlier I am able to follow the Latin on one page to the English on the other. I know. Amazing isn’t it! What all these detractors don’t admit is that when Latin was the universal language of the Mass no matter where in the world you were one could follow the Mass. Now that was the unity the make believe synodal Church is now striving for. The caveat in all this: Strict Traditionalists do not advocate the dialogue Mass. I have found that it grounds me in the entire liturgy as it is happening and is a blessing to me as it makes me pay attention to what is being said by the priest the entire Mass.
Exactly. The Latin has never been a serious obstacle either to prayer (which it fosters) or understanding (with a minimum of effort).
I'm not sure what you're saying about the dialogue Mass: are you in favor or against?
I used to be in favor, but my experiences with it convinced me that it's usually rather distracting to have a decent number of people trying to stay together in Latin responses. It really only could work for a small congregation anyhow.
The Dialogue Mass is a true blessing. Not only do I get to respond in Latin to the servers responses but it makes the Mass easier to follow rather than a few Dominus vobiscums here and there:) It also has improved my very poor Latin. Often when I stick my neck out and say I go to a TLM the question becomes “but I don’t understand Latin”. This is the teachings of the new religion that Latin was obscuring understanding (Protestants too). But the translations have been there to follow for a very long time. That being said I believe the Last Gospel is such a powerful exposition I believe it would be better served in the vernacular.
People in general were not when it was in Latin. They were zoning out. Not everyone is an academic and for that I thank God. I am thankful that the Church fathers, when Latin stopped being a mother tongue, saw that too. Let's face it, the vernacular doesn't guarantee anyone paying attention either. Any foreign language will make the battle worse.
The Mass is not designed for travelers to have it easy to canvass the globe. It is not about academics by nature or vocation feeling superior to their working class brethren, who frankly have more important jobs than to decipher older languages with their daytime hours. The Mass is the sacrifice, the wedding feast, and weekly formation/catechesis, all in one hour+, for every single person in the congregation. Any move out of the vernacular language, then, is a compromise about the very nature of Mass. The goal of Mass is not to make you better at Latin or a better reader of missals. It is to be closer to Christ, ready to take on the coming week, with a deeper understanding of the faith.
I disagree. There was much more devotion and faith in the Real Presence and the Mass as a sacrifice before all the changes. Now, we don't know WHICH changes were the most damaging - indeed, the greatest damage was done by having SO MUCH change all at once. But there is no question that the faith of the Church was nourished for centuries on the Latin Mass. It was never just about "academics."
My experience has been that, even before I grasped the meaning of the words in Latin, the classical Roman Rite was more objective, more beautiful, and more challenging, with a kind of silent majesty to it that captivated me. This is why so many love it.
I appreciate your response. However, there’s nothing I will be able to say that will convey the realities of the world I inhabit, nor the history that I believe of it.
At least this much I ask: that those who prefer the vernacular not elevate it into an absolute principle without which, according to them, active participation or maximum spiritual benefit is not possible. For that is the attitude that has driven the anti-Latin Mass brigade for decades, and it has polarized the Church. I do not want to prohibit anyone from praying in the vernacular, even if I think the reasons behind the use of Latin are superior; nevertheless, I would like us to be free to worship as our forefathers did.
Once again. One can read along with the Latin in English. And if your TLM Church uses the dialogue Mass all the better. I pretty much believe the NO Mass is not Holy or worshipful but a Protestant construct very similar to any other Protestant Church but more akin to the Anglican Service. They threw the baby out with the bath water when that Service was forced on us. and made a totally new Mass when it wasn’t necessary. At this point in time I don’t consider the NO (synodal religion if you will) Church anywhere close to Roman Catholic as almost everything has changed and very little for the better. If they had only wanted the vernacular the Mass could have been done entirely in the vernacular with not the wholesale sudden changes and the ditching of the entire TLM. The hierarchy of this present church must get rid of the TLM as now two completely different religions are in competition. Thus the hypocrisy about all religions are a way to salvation and God (Francis, Leo) except those professing to be Catholic and adhering to the traditional faith.
In the supernatural realm of Serendipity Doo. I just read Radical Fidelity’s excellent commentary on the Synodal religion as it pertains to someone Church shopping for a more conservative NO rather than clown world NO. He makes basically much better points than I ever could. Thanks!
What's the point of reading/proclaiming the Mass in Latin when everyone in the room understands English? God doesn't need Latin. We need the Mass to aid in our salvation. We engage intellectually with the Mass as a benefit to us, not to God. Reading along in a translated missal is a waste of time for even people who learn best through reading, when a common language exists. People who learn best by hearing will be greatly benefitted by a Mass in their language. So too, with children and other people who might be poor readers. College level academic skills should not be required to attend Mass.
There is no such thing as the "TLM" by the way. Most licit older form Masses are using the Missal of 1962, to the best of my knowledge, a transitional missal.
I am not sure what to do with the idea that the current missal is Protestant in origin. It suggests very little familiarity with the current missal, the history of Vatican II or Protestantism, unfortunately. Anglican services have their origin in the Roman Rite. The Ordinariate has been accepted by Pope Benedict to aid in reunion with Anglicans, properly in the Roman Rite, the place of it's origin. It's as Catholic as the current missal because it's in use by Catholics, approved by the Holy See.
The Catholic faith is about loving Christ enough to inhabit less than perfect places with less than perfect people and experiences. Christ is humble, we can be humble enough to spend time with the less than polished in our personal opinion.
Joseph Shaw gets to the truth about Latin Mass. It is indeed a prayer, the highest form of worship. If you miss that, then you stay at the superficial level.
Are the classicists you speak of picking up the Missal to follow along or, if not, are they bothered more by the fact that much of what the priest recites is inaudible?
People who often make statements like “finally the priest is facing us”, are also the ones who appear never reading along. It’s as if they just want to show up, be spoken to rather than participate with any real effort, to say a few salutations or solemn affirmations, and pray that Mass finishes as fast as possible.
I often read both the Latin and the English translation in parallel and find more times than not the Latin words to have more depth and richness to their meaning than the vernacular translation. Why would I not want this richness when my goal is to become closer to God?
No one likes their favorite drink to be severely watered down, so why do we expect the Mass to be any different? A mana far more nutritious to the soul than any worldly food we may consume.
This is the quiet irony nobody likes to admit. For people who really know Latin, it stops being mystical incense and becomes… language. And once it’s language, all the projection collapses. You’re no longer floating in sacred fog, you’re parsing verbs. The fight isn’t really about Latin vs English. It’s about whether the liturgy is meant to mean something clearly or feel like something safely opaque. Some people don’t want the veil lifted, they want it preserved.
Actually, you're missing one hugely important point. No, two.
First, most of the Latin Mass is not even said aloud or for the attention of the people. So far from being ordered to immediate verbal comprehension, it seems designed almost to baffle it. That's because it's toward God, not toward the people. They benefit from understanding something about it, but they benefit more from being placed in a devout frame of mind.
Second, I know Latin decently enough (can read St. Thomas easily and most liturgical texts), and yet the language still has a very special quality for me. It is indeed like verbal incense, because, although there are some few Latin speakers left in the world, 99.999% of the time you will only ever hear Latin in church. It's similar to incense: some people burn it in their homes, but 99% of the time it's just burnt in church. And while some people play chant at home, where you will hear chant sung live is in church. All these things work together.
English is the vulgar tongue. But it isn't just about language with the Mass but all that has been skimmed away. My analogy is Vitamin D to 2% milk. The 'fat' if you will, has been stripped away.
A couple other reasons you could add are Latin was sanctified by being one of the three languages affixed to the Cross, and that any argument you could make for the pope and Church being based in Rome would also apply to Latin being the official language.
I know this is hard to believe. Due to the 1962 Missal or earlier I am able to follow the Latin on one page to the English on the other. I know. Amazing isn’t it! What all these detractors don’t admit is that when Latin was the universal language of the Mass no matter where in the world you were one could follow the Mass. Now that was the unity the make believe synodal Church is now striving for. The caveat in all this: Strict Traditionalists do not advocate the dialogue Mass. I have found that it grounds me in the entire liturgy as it is happening and is a blessing to me as it makes me pay attention to what is being said by the priest the entire Mass.
Exactly. The Latin has never been a serious obstacle either to prayer (which it fosters) or understanding (with a minimum of effort).
I'm not sure what you're saying about the dialogue Mass: are you in favor or against?
I used to be in favor, but my experiences with it convinced me that it's usually rather distracting to have a decent number of people trying to stay together in Latin responses. It really only could work for a small congregation anyhow.
The Dialogue Mass is a true blessing. Not only do I get to respond in Latin to the servers responses but it makes the Mass easier to follow rather than a few Dominus vobiscums here and there:) It also has improved my very poor Latin. Often when I stick my neck out and say I go to a TLM the question becomes “but I don’t understand Latin”. This is the teachings of the new religion that Latin was obscuring understanding (Protestants too). But the translations have been there to follow for a very long time. That being said I believe the Last Gospel is such a powerful exposition I believe it would be better served in the vernacular.
People in general were not when it was in Latin. They were zoning out. Not everyone is an academic and for that I thank God. I am thankful that the Church fathers, when Latin stopped being a mother tongue, saw that too. Let's face it, the vernacular doesn't guarantee anyone paying attention either. Any foreign language will make the battle worse.
The Mass is not designed for travelers to have it easy to canvass the globe. It is not about academics by nature or vocation feeling superior to their working class brethren, who frankly have more important jobs than to decipher older languages with their daytime hours. The Mass is the sacrifice, the wedding feast, and weekly formation/catechesis, all in one hour+, for every single person in the congregation. Any move out of the vernacular language, then, is a compromise about the very nature of Mass. The goal of Mass is not to make you better at Latin or a better reader of missals. It is to be closer to Christ, ready to take on the coming week, with a deeper understanding of the faith.
I disagree. There was much more devotion and faith in the Real Presence and the Mass as a sacrifice before all the changes. Now, we don't know WHICH changes were the most damaging - indeed, the greatest damage was done by having SO MUCH change all at once. But there is no question that the faith of the Church was nourished for centuries on the Latin Mass. It was never just about "academics."
My experience has been that, even before I grasped the meaning of the words in Latin, the classical Roman Rite was more objective, more beautiful, and more challenging, with a kind of silent majesty to it that captivated me. This is why so many love it.
I appreciate your response. However, there’s nothing I will be able to say that will convey the realities of the world I inhabit, nor the history that I believe of it.
At least this much I ask: that those who prefer the vernacular not elevate it into an absolute principle without which, according to them, active participation or maximum spiritual benefit is not possible. For that is the attitude that has driven the anti-Latin Mass brigade for decades, and it has polarized the Church. I do not want to prohibit anyone from praying in the vernacular, even if I think the reasons behind the use of Latin are superior; nevertheless, I would like us to be free to worship as our forefathers did.
Once again. One can read along with the Latin in English. And if your TLM Church uses the dialogue Mass all the better. I pretty much believe the NO Mass is not Holy or worshipful but a Protestant construct very similar to any other Protestant Church but more akin to the Anglican Service. They threw the baby out with the bath water when that Service was forced on us. and made a totally new Mass when it wasn’t necessary. At this point in time I don’t consider the NO (synodal religion if you will) Church anywhere close to Roman Catholic as almost everything has changed and very little for the better. If they had only wanted the vernacular the Mass could have been done entirely in the vernacular with not the wholesale sudden changes and the ditching of the entire TLM. The hierarchy of this present church must get rid of the TLM as now two completely different religions are in competition. Thus the hypocrisy about all religions are a way to salvation and God (Francis, Leo) except those professing to be Catholic and adhering to the traditional faith.
I agree with your analysis.
In the supernatural realm of Serendipity Doo. I just read Radical Fidelity’s excellent commentary on the Synodal religion as it pertains to someone Church shopping for a more conservative NO rather than clown world NO. He makes basically much better points than I ever could. Thanks!
What's the point of reading/proclaiming the Mass in Latin when everyone in the room understands English? God doesn't need Latin. We need the Mass to aid in our salvation. We engage intellectually with the Mass as a benefit to us, not to God. Reading along in a translated missal is a waste of time for even people who learn best through reading, when a common language exists. People who learn best by hearing will be greatly benefitted by a Mass in their language. So too, with children and other people who might be poor readers. College level academic skills should not be required to attend Mass.
There is no such thing as the "TLM" by the way. Most licit older form Masses are using the Missal of 1962, to the best of my knowledge, a transitional missal.
I am not sure what to do with the idea that the current missal is Protestant in origin. It suggests very little familiarity with the current missal, the history of Vatican II or Protestantism, unfortunately. Anglican services have their origin in the Roman Rite. The Ordinariate has been accepted by Pope Benedict to aid in reunion with Anglicans, properly in the Roman Rite, the place of it's origin. It's as Catholic as the current missal because it's in use by Catholics, approved by the Holy See.
The Catholic faith is about loving Christ enough to inhabit less than perfect places with less than perfect people and experiences. Christ is humble, we can be humble enough to spend time with the less than polished in our personal opinion.
The readings are not in the Mass solely for the people. Nothing in the Mass is solely for the people.
Your position involves some assumptions that will not withstand scrutiny, as I discuss here:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/09/in-defense-of-preserving-readings-in.html
If you think this discussion is about snobbishness, you have utterly missed the point.
Joseph Shaw gets to the truth about Latin Mass. It is indeed a prayer, the highest form of worship. If you miss that, then you stay at the superficial level.
Are the classicists you speak of picking up the Missal to follow along or, if not, are they bothered more by the fact that much of what the priest recites is inaudible?
People who often make statements like “finally the priest is facing us”, are also the ones who appear never reading along. It’s as if they just want to show up, be spoken to rather than participate with any real effort, to say a few salutations or solemn affirmations, and pray that Mass finishes as fast as possible.
I often read both the Latin and the English translation in parallel and find more times than not the Latin words to have more depth and richness to their meaning than the vernacular translation. Why would I not want this richness when my goal is to become closer to God?
No one likes their favorite drink to be severely watered down, so why do we expect the Mass to be any different? A mana far more nutritious to the soul than any worldly food we may consume.
Old unlearned pewsitter - been to many different liturgies. Only at the traditional Latin Mass, in the silence, did I hear God speak. Deo gratias.
This is the quiet irony nobody likes to admit. For people who really know Latin, it stops being mystical incense and becomes… language. And once it’s language, all the projection collapses. You’re no longer floating in sacred fog, you’re parsing verbs. The fight isn’t really about Latin vs English. It’s about whether the liturgy is meant to mean something clearly or feel like something safely opaque. Some people don’t want the veil lifted, they want it preserved.
Actually, you're missing one hugely important point. No, two.
First, most of the Latin Mass is not even said aloud or for the attention of the people. So far from being ordered to immediate verbal comprehension, it seems designed almost to baffle it. That's because it's toward God, not toward the people. They benefit from understanding something about it, but they benefit more from being placed in a devout frame of mind.
Second, I know Latin decently enough (can read St. Thomas easily and most liturgical texts), and yet the language still has a very special quality for me. It is indeed like verbal incense, because, although there are some few Latin speakers left in the world, 99.999% of the time you will only ever hear Latin in church. It's similar to incense: some people burn it in their homes, but 99% of the time it's just burnt in church. And while some people play chant at home, where you will hear chant sung live is in church. All these things work together.
English is the vulgar tongue. But it isn't just about language with the Mass but all that has been skimmed away. My analogy is Vitamin D to 2% milk. The 'fat' if you will, has been stripped away.
A couple other reasons you could add are Latin was sanctified by being one of the three languages affixed to the Cross, and that any argument you could make for the pope and Church being based in Rome would also apply to Latin being the official language.