www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West The so-called Tridentine Latin Mass

Luckily for me, I have a copy of the altar edition - and it cost me a good deal less than what Amazon is asking. Someone could make money by doing a reprint (although a good binding will be unavoidably expensive).

By the way, "even unto the God of my joy and gladness" is not an accurate translation of "ad Deum qui laetificat juventutem meam"!

Fr. Serge

To the tune of 'Bicycle Built for Two':

Father, Father, give me your blessing do...

(Some fun for Bright Week.)


There is a reprint of the 1958 altar edition. Drawbacks: no ribbon markers (IIRC) and a big one, the rubrics are printed in black, making it easy to mix them up with the text (!), so the priest has to go through it and underline or highlight them.


I know. Not the worst paraphrase in the world though. At least Coverdale (who did a translation of the Roman Canon as well as what became the Book of Common Prayer's psalter) and Cranmer got pro multis right as indeed Greek and Slavonic do.

From the people that I've talked to about the "Old Mass," they want it in Latin. They don't want the Tridentine Rite in English, Spanish, Tagalog, etc...

I've never heard of anyone pining for the Gregorian Mass in the vernacular. It seems that they believe that God hears prayers better in Latin.

it bothers me when certain Catholics think the difference between the Tridentine mass vs. Paul VI mass is the Latin. It is obvious they have never witnessed the Tridentine mass. adding to this, hardly any priests(ewtn being an exception for example) are celebrating the Paul VI mass according to what Vatican II documents perscribed, it said to keep Latin ! but Latin has being erased and kicked to the curb, instead its ok to have masses in every language BUT LATIN ! and this is a great shame. it is supposed to be the Roman rite ! i dont think anyone argues that the mass could be in vernacular but why cant there be room for Latin? even a liturgy mixing latin and vernacular, Latin for parts such as the gloria, agnus dei, pater noster, etc. and other prayers in english. its not that difficult. instead of having seperate masses for english mass, spanish mass, chinese mass, tagalog mass, why have one mass in english and latin? Latin atleast protected the mass from the likes of "Bishops conferences" from modernizing the translation. it even protected the mass from certain heresy creeping in.

this being said, there are differences between both rites. both are valid. but its time to give the advantage to the Tridentine rite because one thing in how its formated is that it protects the mass from all the wacky innovations tha may enter, because it infact is a "rite." wheras the mass of paul vi may have good intentions and all the major divine elements for it to even be considered a valid liturgy, it is too loose, and allows for too much innovation. this is what it all comes down too. I pray Pope Benedict XVI sees this !

for any eastern catholics, of every particular church, or rite, we should be concerned not only with our own issues, but the issues of the overwelmingly major Catholic rite-church we are in union with. this is because eventually it will hit home too. as eastern catholics we are going to look very odd and "archaic" if we dont "update" our churches to be on par with the majority. it could happen very easily. this seems to be the history of the church as a whole, from arianism, iconoclasm, to protestantism, now modernism and relativism, we all have to face the same issues in our catholic church.

Very good points Mateusz. I long for the day when the Paul VI mass and any mass in the vernacular, are just historical footnotes. The Eastern Rite churches have been spared much of the irreverence that has infected the Latin Rite, but people need to be more vigilent than ever.

Any Mass in the vernacular should be just an historical footnote? And why, pray, is that? If you wish to be consistent, you might adopt the position that the Mass should be celebrated exclusively in some language that no one knows and which everyone is forbidden to learn, lest they might understand what is being said!

For that matter, the Bible should also, by the same logic, be available, if at all, only in some impenetrable and utterly inaccessible language.

As to whether there are people who want the Tridentine Mass in languages other than Latin - printing statistics suggest that this is indeed the case. The English Missal was reprinted only three or four years ago, and is already out of print again (I trust that the next reprint will consider such things as restoring the two-color printing for the altar edition, and bringing the whole book up to the 1962 Latin missal).

Reminds me of a conversation I had a few years ago with a priest somewhat older than I am. The question of concelebration arose, and he insisted that "of course" concelebration could never be tolerated in the Tridentine Mass. I pointed out that he had done this "heinous" act himself on at least one occasion, and he was quite stunned - although he acknowledged the truth of it.

Let's not be foolish. Nothing at all prevents a vernacular celebration from being edifying, dignified, beautiful, and traditional. Notice that I am not in the least arguing in favor of a prohibition of Latin - simply that Latin should not again be imposed (it was only about ten years before Vatican II that a priest in France was suspended for life - for the dreadful crime of having celebrated Mass in French).

Fr. Serge

That statement is not entirely accurate. Lefebvre, the archbishop who founded the schismatic Society of Saint Pius X said on several occasions that he would much rather say a Tridentine in the vernacular than a Pauline in Latin. He himself said Mass in the vernacular on several occasions while celebrating the 1967 missal which was more similar to the Tridentine than the current missal. I personaly know several traditionalists who would also not mind the Tridentine in the vernacular.

How would you know if my statement was accurate or not?

Have you talked to the people that I've talked to?

Do you know Fr. Bob from St. Louis?

Uh, sorry I did not mean to offend you and no I do not know Fr. Bob from St. Louis and no I probably have not talked to the people you know since I live in a different state. All I was saying is that not all traditionalists are opposed to the vernacular, the Tridentine in particular. Again I apologize for offending you, I guess I won't be posting my opinion on this forum again.

Whoa!

Don't take what I wrote personally.

I don't get offended easily, I was just having a little bit of fun.

I don't know of any Traditionalists who want the Mass of St. Gregory the Great in the vernacular. I do know of one guy who wonders why we need the Novus Ordo, "Why can't we just do the Old Mass in English?" he says.

I apologize for the tone of my post.

I forgot to include my tell-tale smileys on that one.

Sorry.

Fr Serge

I was only referring to the Latin Rite not the Eastern.

Dear Laurence,

I'm puzzled. Why should it be horrific to hold a Roman Mass in a vernacular language, but not horrific to hold an Eastern Liturgy in a vernacular language?

Fr. Serge

Fr Serge

I didn't use the word horrific to describe the new mass. But to answer your questions. In the Latin Rite, speaking for myself and most of those in my circle of friends, we tend to associate mass in the vernacular, both consciously and unconsciously, with various abuses, irreverence and the catastrophic decline in faith experienced by the Roman Catholic Church during the last 40+ years. On the other hand, we regard the Latin Tridentine Mass as the epitome of sacredness, beauty and tradition. I've watched the reaction of both lapsed Catholics and those who have never attended a Latin Mass, when they hear the Latin and it's just magical. In fairness, some of the new masses I've attended, that were conducted by priests from Opus Dei were quite reverrent, but still just not the same.

As for the Eastern Rite (I attended DL at a Ukrainian Catholic church Sat-Sun) obviously it's not part of the tradition.

You did not use the word horrific; I did. But you did use the word "magical". This term is not normally associated with Catholic worship.

Christus Resurrexit!

Fr. Serge