How refreshing that so many of the folks beyond the Tiber like things like they were, rather than like TEC hopes they will become.

At one point I actually subscribed to US News and World Report. I wish I still did so I would have a chance to cancel my subscription and let them know why.  This article reads as if it was written by a college sophomore whose grasp of religion, and Catholicism in particular, is informed by nothing more than vague prejudices. 

Hateful anti-woman Pope Benedict seeking to impose his conservatism on a liberal progressive world.  Sure, that’s exactly the conventional media narrative to shoehorn this “story” into. 

Any subscribers out there willing to cancel this rag?

This report really is so irritating.  I imagine it would have Terry Mattingley tearing his hair out.  First of all, there is the statement that young priests want a diminished role for women.  Good journalism cites sources or quotes people.  Here there is none.  So how can we trust the report?  Secondly, the report says that in 2003, 40 percent of Roman Catholics said they had attended church in the past week, down from 74 percent in 1958).  OK but where does this sample come from?  Globally? In the US?  Western Europe?  Who organised the sample? Does it take into account that over large swathes of the Third World Catholics are lucky if a priest calls by for Mass once a month?  Finally, and this is what really lights my fuse, once more a journalist has forced everything into the straitjacket of conservative vs. liberal in the Catholic Church.  They seem INCAPABLE of realising that it is not that simple.  For example, that people can want greater dignity in the Mass without being crusty old reactionary misogynists.

Liberal media bias aside, *IF* the basics are true (a desire for a more structured, contemplative worship style), that’s really interesting information.  Now that we’ve finally integrated contemporary Christian arts, screens, video clips and the like into worship, along comes another generation that might want something different.  OR, the blending of an ancient style with modern understandings of communication.

I’m certainly finding that at our place.  Younger couples are starting to ask about more structure and such in worship.  Sunday we offered an adult affirmation of baptism, including the lutheran questions such as, “Do you renounce the devil and all his empty promises?”  A lot of positive feedback from our 20 something members.

MD Brian

“The traditional Latin mass simply excels at conveying the majesty and mystery of God.”  How many of those who extol the dignity and beauty of the Tridentine mass actually remember the conduct of the average pre-Vatican II parish mass?  The Sunday high mass and requiem masses were normally, though by no means invariably, carried out in a dignified manner, but the bulk of the low and weekday masses were rushed through at a rate that would, I hope, appall the majority of those who look for the rite’s re-instatement.  It was as though there was a prize for those who completed the service within 20 minutes.  Those past a certain age will remember the backs-to-the-congregation “secrets” and the speedy mumblings of substantial portions of the canon, not to mention the numerous, rapidly-executed hand gestures.  Beauty and dignity were not adjectives much associated with your average Tridentine mass.  A general idea may be gained from a comment made to me in the mid-60’s by a Church of England dignitary, who referred to the Anglo-Papalist clergy of his archdeaconry as the “crouch and mutter brigade” on account of the “Roman” manner in they conducted the prayer of consecration - normally the complete Latin canon, inserted into the BCP liturgy.

Oddly enough, for all the orthodox dogma the most abbreviated and downright kooky liturgies I’ve ever seen have been at Catholic parishes.  Same for the architecture.

ps forgot to mention the customary inflectionless jumble of the rapidly chanted Last Gospel (“In principio erat verbo”).

Its not the language.  Latin can be used in the Novus Ordo as well.  Its the wording of the liturgy and how well it expresses the faith.  In this respect the Tridentine Rite is indeed vastly superior to the N/O.  However did anyone think that they were going to actually improve on a 1500 year old liturgical rite that had developed slowly and organicly over centuries in the space of a year with one that was cooked up by some Vatican committee run by wanna be Episcopalians (and at least one actual Anglican)?  As an expression of the ancient and apostolic faith the N/O is hopelessly flawed and inferior to that which it was intended to replace.  It has undoubtedly contributed to all of the other madness evident in the western church.

Lex Orandi Lex Credendi

I wasn’t there so I can’t confirm Lapinbizarre’s take on things, but that is certainly what I have heard about the good old days. The fact is the newrite - the Mass of Paul VI - can be celebrated with great dignity and reverence, just as the Mass of Pius V - the “Tridentine” - could be said mechanically.  There are some language problems in the new liturgy, both in the Latin and in the English translation, but the heart filled with love for the Lord will pray well in any approved liturgy.

“the heart filled with love for the Lord will pray well in any approved liturgy.”
That’s certainly true. One can grit one’s teeth and worship in spite of insipid guitar “praise” music, banal homiletics, liturgical dance etc…
The point here is that there is a rich 2000 year Catholic liturgical tradition that was thrown overboard in the 60s and 70s and replaced with the reigning aesthetic of the day (bell bottoms, tie-die, shag carpeting etc…) The idea that we should live with that aesthetic disaster is ridiculous (almost as ridiculous as the idea that you grow congregations by offering weak tea reflections of the popular culture - U2charist anybody?) 
You grouchy old people who dislike the Latin Mass will not be precluded from attending happy clappy NO clown masses if you prefer (95%+ masses will continue to be NO). Rather this development is to offer the choice of the traditional mass to those who want it. Speaking as a 20 something who has (with rare exceptions attending liturgically-mature, spiritually-grounded services with Orthodox friends) known only happy clappy worship, I can’t wait!

Lapinbizarre: Many thanks for your comment #5—-a healthy corrective to ill-informed romanticism about pre-Vatican II Roman Catholicism.

I’m glad the Vatican is once again making the Latin Mass available to those who want it. Suppressing the Latin Mass during the 1960s caused needless pain and disillusionment. It should have remained available.

PS to #11: I am in Lapinbizarre’s debt for the phrase “Crouch-and-Mutter Brigade” [#5].

It is a wonderful expression, which is why it stuck with me this past 40 years.  The same man taught me “Get the behind me Satan - and push”.  That’s archdeacons for you.  The medieval University of Paris supposedly held a disputation as to whether or not it is possible for an archdeacon to achieve salvation - the answer, it is said, was “No”.

Agree with you totally on the suppression of the Tridentine rite, but those not around back then cannot realize how casually irreverent the method of its celebration often seemed, at least to one accustomed to the C of E services of that date.  The person I best remember galloping through the Tridentine rite, the RC chaplain at my undergraduate school (the above-mentioned archdeacon was Anglican chaplain) was the man for whom “The Hobbit” was supposedly written, the elder son of J.R.R. Tolkien.

Time to quit rambling.

I agree with Irenaeus, and in connection with that, my wife and I pray the Anglican Rosary.  We too prefer a return to the traditional Anglican Use.

Lapinbizarre
I’ve seen Catholic priests (In Jacksonville) rush through the mass so that from the processional in to the processional out it took less than 35 minutes.  Now that is just—weird and wrong, and—did I say weird?

Cennydd
In the last few years I’ve discovered the Chaplet of Divine Mercy (EWTN 3:00PM eastern) that I find to be just wonderful.  Even my wife likes it, and she has real problems with the Mariology of the Roman Church and thus views the traditional rosary with suspicion.
But the Chaplet works for her.

Doggone it!!! I just learned to half-way follow Masses in Spanish, now I have to learn another language!! Wonder if they can do that Latin Mass in English sometimes ^_^?

In faith, Dave
Viva Texas

The big advantage of the “crouch and mutter” style, is that the believer is actually free to worship with very little distraction.  So much better than the happy clappy style where one really needs ear protectors and perhaps blinders.  The bigger advantage of the old style is that the priest seems to be actually praying to God, rather than being an actor on a stage spouting carefully read or memorized words while all the while looking at the people in a “how am I doing” sort of way.  I sometimes think they should be wearing one of those “how’s my driving?” signs with a 1-800 number.  Unfortunately I have had too much experience with a egotistical celebrant who sooms much more interested in kudos from the populace than even appearing to be addressing God.  Huge lack of humility before the Almighty!

I’ll give it one more shot.  You people bemoaning the romanticizing of the tridentine mass even though you have clear memories of having seen it “mumbled” and “rushed through” are completely missing the point.  Either you guys attended your last mass back in the 70s and are simply assuming that the NO mass is presented with greater reverence than the tridentine mass, or you’re being disingenuous. 

Your random NO mass is no less likely to be butchered, abbreviated, mumbled through, meandered through, deviated from, insipified (is that even a word?) than the tridentine mass (even if you remember being bored at mass back when you were in short pants in the 50s). In fact, the vernacular allows dingbat priests to deviate more easily and readily from the liturgy, which many older “hip” priests do with great abandon (thankfully their time seems to be passing). 

In response to people requesting Mozart in place of John Denver you people trot out the argument that you remember some pretty half-assed Mozart concerts (disregarding the 40 years of half-assed John Denver concerts that took their place).

50 years from now the 60’s generation will be long gone and, with its proponents passing, the NO will hopefully not linger much longer.

As a followup, Mozart done right is sublime. John Denver done right, is still John Denver.  =)

Cabbages - I’m not bemoaning anything - it’s of passing interest only to me whether the bishop of Rome celebrates the Tridentine mass or the Black one - I’m just pointing out how things were in the “old days”.

“You fill up my Senses”
vs
“Jesu, Joy of Man’s desiring”
hmmm, which to choose? (Yes, I know the second is NOT Mozart!)

Ann r and Cabbages, you guys are a little scary. I’m still a new Catholic, and didn’t know it made that much difference whether the Mass is in Latin or English (or Spanish, as about half our Masses are). I look around on the internet (google “tridentine mass”) and I see people who apparently think God’s native language is Latin and Satan’s native language is anything else. Christians threatening mayhem and damnation over one language or the other, or with looooooong laundry lists of reasons why one or the other is the ONLY way to go. Yeah, scary!

Me, I like my Mass in English, simply because I don’t have to be concentrating on the words so much, looking back and forth from one page of the missal to the other, and worrying about keeping up. I can get by in Spanish and suppose I can learn enough Latin. But the Mass is for prayer, instruction, and common worship and not, actually, for beauty or tradition; within that context, English or Latin, Mozart or John Denver, beautiful or contemporary, are fine with me. Anybody can mess up a Mass if he wants to, or do it right if he wants to, no? So, does it really matter that much???????

I’m glad it’s going to be more available, just so people can more easily have their preference. I really think that’s all God cares about too.

In faith, Dave
Viva Texas

“Christians threatening mayhem and damnation over one language or the other, or with looooooong laundry lists of reasons why one or the other is the ONLY way to go. Yeah, scary!” Um, okay then. Where did anything I write say that?
Interesting thing about masses in english, spanish, dutch etc… 50 years ago EVERY catholic in the world was experiencing, and with the slightest effort, understanding the same mass.  Short of introducing Esperanto you will never attain the universalism or unity of the latin mass.  Don’t progressives like that kind of thing any more?
How gracious of you to allow that it’s okay if people who are turned off by happy clappy clown masses are offered a sacred liturgy.  Mighty darn big of you!

Back in the day, when the Mass was in Latin, every school child was required to take Latin.  I don’t think understanding the text was that much in question (even though there were differences in pronunciation between ‘school Latin’ and ‘Church Latin’).  I never attended a Latin Mass that I can remember, but I have a Latin missal from my mom, and she says she never had any trouble following along.

As to the music, shoot, man, I learned to play guitar from the folk-choir leader at St. Judes, Tequesta, FL back in the late ‘70s, and eventually took over the ministry from her.  I made it a point, however, to never use ‘pop’ songs no matter how spiritual they may seem, but only used music by Christians written for Christ—such as St. Louis Jesuits, Carey Landry (if he’s not singing them, his songs are pretty good), Monks of the Weston Priory, etc. and even some non-Catholic songs by Karen Lafferty, Maranatha! Music’s Praise series, etc.  I never heard a word of complaint, even from the priest, who complimented my choices on many occasions.

But not all the folk choir leaders felt the same, for example, one of my best friends at another church liked “Annie’s Song” and used it for communion meditation many times.

the ‘wink’ above should be a ‘close parenthesis’. The emoticon codes sometimes overlap punctuation. lol

Both to be avoided if possible, CStan.  The Tridentine mass can be uplifting if beautifully, or even just conscientiously done.  The old 30-minute dash - “Father-has-fasted-for-six-hours-and-wants-his-breakfast-NOW” mass was neither of these.  Mozart & Haydn are wonderful when properly performed, g-dawful when they’re not.  Both must have a good (& I mean GOOD) choir & soloists (esp. soprano & bass) and good, small orchestra.  When push comes to shove, I’ll take John Denver over badly-performed Mozart any day.  Plainchant is a decent substitute to use at a missa cantata - so that it’s sung “sharply” and not in a sloppy, drawling fashion, and preferably not with organ accompanyment, plus the congregation can participate, just as the Merbecke settings, written for the 1549 Prayer Book, work well with Cranmer-texted BCP services.

You’re absolutely right.  The point I was trying to make was the sheer impossibility of doing this sort of thing routinely at the parish level.  Frankly, I suspect that lack of musical talent would render it all-but-impossible at the cathedral level level in many dioceses.  I’m with you on this one.

Dave Pierce -

Relax. Catholic in-fighting over the liturgy is intense and eternal. It took my years to realize that the spikiest anglo-catholic can’t hold a candle to Catholics in this regard.  Also, the internet is replete with anything you ever wanted to read. Google: sedevacantist for an evening’s entertainment. Or read Amy Welborn, Mark Shea, and other responsible Catholic apologists for… well, responsible Catholicism.

For my money, you are perfectly on target with your comments. Well, I might rule out the John Denver.  It’s true that people who care know what’s going on in whatever language. I like English, and would like to hear the Tridentine liturgy in English. The collects are said to be beautifully constructed spiritually, intellectually, and poetically (which might not translate, of course).  On the other hand, the real issue is reverence, awe and mystery, and good theology, not Latin. 

And for the record, the shortest Eucharistic liturgy I ever attended was 14 minutes, and that was with sermon (it was a one sentence jobber: the Good News today is that the Kingdom of God is among us, and that we are it’s vanguard). The Mass was me and the priest and it was in an Episcopal parish.

There is an authentic, good Elizabethan English translation of the mass - probably Sarum rather than Tridentine - in, of all places, Foxe’s “Acts and Monuments” (a.k.a “Book of Martyrs”).  Cannot now give a citation, having disposed of my copy years back.  Mine was the three volume folio edition of 1640 or ‘41, but the translation appears in some if not all of the early editions, in the form of the Latin text with parallel English translation.  There are many very seriously polemical side-notes and glosses, but Foxe’s actual translation is an accurate one into authentic Elizabethan English and would, I’m sure, interest some who take issue with modern English versions.

The “Celtic Orthodox Church” has a translation of one of the oldest complete missals (the Stowe/Lorrha Missal) on their library website. It dates back to before the 900’s in the British Isles and is quite amazing to read over. It’s long, though.

http://celtic.deers-cry.com/library/

Peace
Jim Elliott