|
Post by homeschooldad on Aug 9, 2023 21:30:07 GMT
Sometimes I get the impression that a lot of animus towards the TLM is really thinly veiled hostility towards European and European-adjacent heritage and culture (there's another word for that), with the TLM being a particularly explicit (and, to them, obnoxious) exemplar of it. Some seem to be dreaming of a day, far in the future, when Europeanness will just vanish into the mists of time and Latin will become what, say, Aramaic is today, a largely forgotten and utterly irrelevant language. For some people with negative impressions of European colonial rule, I can understand them having that attitude. However, just because somebody doesn't like TLM (or OF or charismatic Mass or whatever), they shouldn't automatically get to do away with it if others find it fruitful. I'll just echo what Bishop Sheen said (sorry, I don't have a citation), perhaps the Byzantine Rite is more suited for Africa and Asia. Heaven knows there's a lot of noise and expressiveness, and many cultures like that sort of thing. Sedate, ethereal, cerebral European-rooted forms of worship might not be for everyone, but that's not to say that they should be suppressed for those who do prefer them.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Aug 9, 2023 21:34:51 GMT
i studied Latin at secondary school but it had little bearing on my decision to attend TLMs when possible. I currently attend a Novus ordo Mass where all the sung parts are in Latin - only the readings, homily, and Canon are in English - most of the ordinary and some of the propers and in Latin. Basically, you just pick up over time the Latin parts. I learned how to sing the creed, the Gloria, the sanctus, etc. in Latin by osmosis after attending this Mass for months. I already knew the Pater noster. You just pick it up over time. If you think about it, those who grew up attending the TLM would likely have picked up a lot of it growing up. It is not difficult at all. If you know the basic Latin propers and can follow along with a missal it is no problem. That's what I did. The first time I ever went to the TLM, I had very little knowledge of Latin, and I was totally bewildered. I'd assisted at the Latin Novus Ordo from time to time (two-hour drive from my home), and had a paperback Latin-English Novus Ordo missal and followed along with the responses as best I could. At my first TLM, though, I confusedly flipped through an old, yellowed Tridentine missal my father had gotten at some estate sale, wondered "hey, when do we get to respond?", and I walked away saying "was that Mass?". But I returned, and returned again, and continued to go back, and over time, I came to understand the responses, as you say, by osmosis.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Aug 10, 2023 3:46:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Aug 10, 2023 15:33:11 GMT
Sometimes I get the impression that a lot of animus towards the TLM is really thinly veiled hostility towards European and European-adjacent heritage and culture (there's another word for that), with the TLM being a particularly explicit (and, to them, obnoxious) exemplar of it. Some seem to be dreaming of a day, far in the future, when Europeanness will just vanish into the mists of time and Latin will become what, say, Aramaic is today, a largely forgotten and utterly irrelevant language. I find this attitude quite confusing. It seems to me that lots of Americans cannot simply say they're American. They have to say, for example, I'm American-German. They seem to want to clearly acknowledge their European ancestry but simultaneously object to anything European.
It seems rather facile to reject Latin because it originated in Europe. Follow that through to its logical conclusion and most Americans would have to give up their first, or only, language, namely English. Perhaps Americans don't consider English in the same light, i.e. a European language. My broter, a resident of Australia, tells me more and more Australians are claiming they speak Australian when in fact what they are speaking is English.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Aug 10, 2023 16:07:10 GMT
Many US people likewise consider US English language to be "speaking American".
The persons to whom HSD refers would tend to be the more progressive, often older US Catholics who associate Latin with elitism and European colonialism/ control. They usually have strong ideas about a culture's use of its own language conveying some sort of power, identity, beauty etc and/ or that it's super important for people to hear and understand all the words said at Mass in their own languages.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Aug 10, 2023 16:27:50 GMT
Many US people likewise consider US English language to be "speaking American". The persons to whom HSD refers would tend to be the more progressive, often older US Catholics who associate Latin with elitism and European colonialism/ control. They usually have strong ideas about a culture's use of its own language conveying some sort of power, identity, beauty etc and/ or that it's super important for people to hear and understand all the words said at Mass in their own languages. You correctly note the mindset to which I refer, however, I had in mind not older US Catholics, but more advocates for the Global South and its "peripheries". For such folks, Latin is a strange, obscure dialect that they couldn't possibly learn or relate to (never mind that many of them speak English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese, all languages with deep Latin roots, especially the latter three), and which is from a Europe with which they have nothing in common, culturally, socially, ethnically, or otherwise. And when it comes to religion, supposedly, that lack of commonality is a deal-killer. The "older US Catholics" with whom I've spoken about "old liturgy versus new" are more of the "traumatized because the 'old Church' was oppressive" mindset, had to abstain from meat every Friday, had to wear veils to Mass, had to wear "Marylike" fashions, bad confessional experiences, and so on. I don't think they're at all animated by an opposition to Eurocentrism or overbearing colonialism, to them, that would be "somebody else's circus and somebody else's monkeys", they might be sympathetic to those who do make this objection, but it wouldn't be top-of-mind for them. You'll never meet a giddier, gushier, more enthusiastic "spirit of Vatican II" adherent than someone who is over 75-80 years of age (and they're dying out, a generation ago, they existed in droves). Many of those who are younger, and didn't grow up in such a fever swamp, are recognizing that in many ways, the baby got thrown out with the bathwater, and simply seek to restore what was lost.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Aug 10, 2023 16:30:33 GMT
If somebody doesn't like Latin Mass, they should go to the Mass they prefer. I'm fine with that. Just don't try to do away with the Mass I prefer, which would include the TLM.
And knock it off with the "evil trads coming to get u" stereotypes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2023 22:54:07 GMT
Homeschooldad, we have an issue at our parish with older progressives.
It is our worth noting that our diocese has a strong progressive wing. Under Cardinal Williams, Archbishop from 1979-2005, this group's demands were accommodated somewhat but the overall perception was that the diocese was orthodox and conservative. Under Cardinal Dew, Archbishop from 2005-2023, a man who went to seminary in the 1960s, the progressive wing was at the fore and Cardinal Dew supported such initiatives as having "lay pastoral leaders" (no such position exists in canon law), usually women in their 60s, who run the parish in equal collaboration with the priest. At some parishes, these "lay pastoral leaders" even process in after the crucifer alongside (not even behind) the priest.
Now, under Archbishop Paul Martin, Archbishop since May 2023, who was born after Vatican II, we see a shift back to orthodox Catholicism.
Cardinal Dew was not a blindly liberal progressive. On the contrary, although he promoted the progressive wing of the diocese and generally promoted some progressive understandings of doctrine, he was (is) a deeply spiritual man who homilies are always rooted in faith, the scriptures, and the tradition of the Church. He is a very good man and despite disagreements with his understanding of some doctrines, he was definitely orthodox when it came to most issues - the main controversy was his view on the liturgy and on communion for the divorced and remarried, the latter of which he had promoted as early as 2005.
The concept of the lay pastoral leader has had a very negative impact on aspects of the life of our diocese because it has clericalised the laity. We are moving away from this, but it is difficult because this position was entrenched for 18 years.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Aug 11, 2023 9:07:24 GMT
'Day of the Evil Trads' coming soon to the nearest Multiplex near you. Buy your Coca-Cola for a low, low price of £666 per litre before entering the cryp..er, movie.
'Watch as our heroes deal with the punishing sonic damage of Latin chant.'
'Look on in horror as a writhing mass are killed at the Mass when they cannot negotiate the altar rails and stand up quickly enough and a mob of people all fall down like an economy during a pandemic as they trip and slide everywhere.'
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Aug 13, 2023 12:56:40 GMT
You can't do that when reading Scriptures in Latin, or even listening to a sermon doing the same.
That's why even those who were used to it had to have both in the vernacular and still wanted translations of the Mass.
|
|