Two views?

Apart from the schismatic followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and a few young people who are nostalgic for a church they never knew, almost nobody is pressing for it.

Well there it is again: Nobody really wants a TLM, but allowing the TLM will destroy the Church. How much lead paint does one have to eat to arrive at such thinking?

"And if this is what it takes to fill our churches, so be it!"

That was Bishop Salvatore Matano of Burlington's line last night as St Joseph's Co-Cathedral was packed (with old and young... and many in mantillas) for the Vermont prelate's celebration of the "Extraordinary Rite" of the Eucharist.

From Whispers in the Loggia :)

Well i'd be counted as young (25), I like the Tridentine Use of the Roman Rite and i'm not nostalgic in the least for the Church before the council.

To be sure, i can sympathise with the first priest's reservations due to the latin mass goers he met--they didn't really want to participate in the Mass, give anything to the community but just wanted to get out ASAP. In response I would note that this is the attitude of the vast majority of N.O. parishioners as well. OTOH, perhaps these folks were just fed up with the contrived way in which 'community' is foisted upon them?

At any rate, where i go it is a different story--heaps of people help out with flowers, serving, miving the altar each week,and are genuinely friendly--there is a real community there, unlike the "People of God", or "Our Parish Community" nonsense that really gets up my goat and just makes me want ot walk out before the last blessing.

"a few young people who are nostalgic for a church they never knew"

Well nobody in there right mind could be nostalgic about the cr*p we've had to put up with instead.

The average Mass to me seems to be 45 minutes when we talk of the Ordinary form!

Fr. Hemrick's comments seem the most strange to me. For starters, I took one year of Latin, freshman year of college. Now I'm not going to be writing the Holy Father any epistles in Holy Mother Church's mother tongue, but I can read and comprehend the Latin texts of the Missal of 1962 well enough to know what is being said. And as far as the readings from scripture being in Latin, as Fr. Daly opines, perhaps Father is unaware of the common-place use of Latin-English missals? Moving on, I'm not entirely sure what Father Hemrick's comment regarding the Requiem masses has to do with anything regarding the motu proprio at all! Can we say "fallacy of ignoratio elenchi?" There I go again, showing off my unLatinized self. Last thing, regarding the Eucharistic Fast that began at midnight, the Daily Roman Missal published by the Angelus Press (so you'd assume the strictest of the strict in terms of following Traditional regulation) notes that the rules for the fast have changed since the 1962 Missal was first approved, and informs its readers that the fast is one hour prior to reception of Holy Communion. Again, the good Father's ignorance of what the motu proprio is truly promoting seems to be showing.

I have a question -- why should anyone want to go to the Divine Liturgy carrying a book which is a 'libretto'? I enjoy operas and plays in several languages because I can understand the languages -- but to have a 'libretto' in one's hand and using it is almost as bad as having 'sub-titles' in a film or the sometimes 'sur-titles' at a play or opera. It destroys the immediacy of the experience -- and at the Divine Liturgy the immediacy of the experience of God's Presence in the Scripture proclaimed and the words and actions of the clergy and the other ministers..

"It destroys the immediacy of the experience."

For you. Not for others.

I wouldn't say it 'destroys' the immediacy of the experience, but it just seems silly to have the readings in Latin. Call me crazy, but I LIKE to understand what people are saying to me. I have no fondness for the abuses that take place at Mass, or irreverence, but I do like for the Mass to be in English.

My haphazardly self-taught Latin isn't up to par yet, so I wholeheartely appreciate the missalettes that are available when I go. I like subtitles as well, for the same reason.

It seems like only yesterday that I was celebrating Mass in Latin with my back to the people.

Does that mean that he was facing his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, then?

Hemrick and Daly used to appear in our diocesan paper with some regularity. I am thankful that, mercifully, these two columns were NOT published in our latest issue. Somehow, I think it might undermine His Excellency's plan to offer a Solemn High Mass (in the extraordinary form) on the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows (Sept. 15)

Umm, when going to the Usus Antiquior Mass, i always use my missal. It has latin on one side and english on the other. I pray the prayers of the Mass in English, silently while the priest is offering the Mass in Latin. This is what St. Pius X and other popes before VII tried to encourage the people to start doing. You do not have to know the Latin at all. For a long time, I didn't..but..you pick up on it after a while. sometimes, I put the missal aside, especially during the consecraton to pray silently by myself. It isn't that difficult...try it or if you go to the Mass for the first time or for several times after it..don't worry about understanding..just pray..just take it in :)

I'm going to have to agree with Monica.

That said, I have attended a Mass in the Latin rite and it was quite spellbinding, very beautiful.

At the end of the day, however, the Novus Ordo will be as revered, as special, as moving, indeed as life changing, as we who participate in it make it.

Jeff Baker
DefendUsInBattle.org

Amen Rachel! I've been attending the TLM for about 2 years now. At first, I often felt a little lost, but praise be to God, I get to go EVERY Sunday,(practice makes perfect) and by now I am experiencing something I never could have imagined in all my years of attending the N.O. Mass-- even in the wonderful, reverently celebrated N.O. masses that I've been lucky enough to attend. If the so-called 'open-minded' people who are suspicious of the TLM were able to put aside their fears and maybe ask the Holy Spirit, and their Guardian Angel for help, they'd know what 'full and active participation' really means!
Just my 2 cents. Thank you.
DwD

Seeing as how it's mostly Catholics going to Masses in the extraordinary form, and Catholics mostly understand the order of Mass no matter what language it's in -- of course you need not bring a missal.

But then, most people going to Mass in English who understand English still seem to pick up that missal or missalette and use it during Mass. Hmmmm, why would that be? Why would my parents have felt it of paramount importance, when we were children, to have us follow along in the book from line to line, learning to read as early as possible, and from then on reading as well as hearing what was going on? Why is one of the most important First Communion gifts for any Catholic child a prayer book containing the Order of the Mass?

And why would it be the tradition in all ages that religious choirs and cantors sing the Mass parts from a book, even if they have the pieces all memorized?

Could it possibly be that, in a liturgy celebrated by a High Priest who is the Word, that the words and their correctness are just a tad important? Could it be that the heart of the Church desires both to hear and read those words, and that many may better reflect upon them in such a way?

Certainly the other senses are important, and the other ways of experiencing God. I don't mean to denigrate or deny that in any way. But as far back as such a thing became possible and affordable for devout Christians, people have indeed been carrying "a libretto" to church with them, and the great classical scholars who could converse in Latin and Greek with ease were even fonder of theirs than most people.

I don't understand all the whys and wherefores of this, but I don't have to. I just know it's the way we Catholics generally do it and have done it, and that it works.

I think the post and comments here are a bit unfair to Hemrick. He says nothing that is not true and genuinely seems to be concerned that those who will celebrate the extaordinary form will do it well.

In a broader sense, I am finding the triumphalist tones of fans of the extaordinary form and the despairing moans of some practitioners of the ordinary form most disturbing. In most places the motu proprio will have little impact. Supply of the extraordinary form will increase slightly to meet a somewhat under met demand.

I just keep focused on the only liturgical rubric that actually came from Christ: "Do this in memory of me."