At Rorate I read some Q&A with Card. Roche of the Roman Dicastery tasked with liturgical issues, including persecuted the people who desire the Traditional Latin Mass. It’s not just about the form of Mass, it’s about the people… they don’t like the people.
In the interview Card. Roche said something that caught my attention. Do you read anything contradictory in this? Emphases mine.
For very good reasons, the Church, through conciliar legislation, decided to move away from what had become an overly elaborate form of celebrating the Mass.
When I was at school, I used to serve Mass, and the priest would say to me: “Remember, boy, it’s 20 minutes, amice to amice.” What he meant was that as soon as he put the amice [liturgical vestment] around his neck, I was to start counting the minutes until he took it off at the end of Mass. If, by chance, he reached the last Gospel by 15 minutes, I had to pull the back of his chasuble. It was a sort of scruple, I suppose, but something very different from what people experience in the Extraordinary Form today.
Very different from what people experience in the TLM today. Exactly.
On the one hand he said that the TLM was “overly elaborate”. On the other hand it could be said in 15-20 minutes. But it’s overly elaborate? One can surmise from this that that priest, whom Roche used as a negative example, was a massive liturgical abuser of the older rite. So the Rite he perhaps thinks of as the older, Traditional Rite, is not a good example. His thoughts are based on abuse, rather than proper use.
I don’t think that I could, even with my experience and speed, say Mass in 15 minutes. Even omitting the Dies Irae in a daily Requiem I don’t think I could do one in 20 and actually do everything. I am having a hard time getting my mind around what Roche said.
Okay, there’s another thing I didn’t quite get (and comments):
One of the things that has been very interesting to me is observing this situation worldwide. [Funny, that. Given that the TLM was “worldwide”.] The numbers devoted to the Traditional Latin Mass are, in reality, quite small, but some of the groups are quite clamorous. They are more noticeable because they make their voices heard. [I thought this was the age of “walking together”.]
So, they make their voices known. That’s good right? I think there is even a canon in Canon Law about that (cf. can. 212).
Oh yes… there is this.
In the lectionary from the Novus Ordo, there is a three-year cycle for Sundays and a two-year cycle for weekday readings. There is a much lower percentage of scriptural readings in the 1962 missal than there are in the newer missal.
There might be a lower percentage of total Scripture, but there is a vastly lower percentage of people hearing any readings in the Novus Ordo these days. So, how is that working out? Not only, ask people what the readings were as they are walking out of your average suburban church. The annual repetition of a core selection of pericopes helped to assure that Mass going Catholics – and so many more went to Mass – remembered and were, therefore, affected by what they heard. Am I wrong?
There’s a little more:
What interests me is why people get hot under the collar[that’s not dismissive] about others celebrating the Tridentine Mass. I think this has been a mistake. Bishop Wheeler, of the Diocese of Leeds, insisted that a Holy Mass be celebrated in Latin according to the Novus Ordo at least once every Sunday in every deanery. That showed considerable wisdom. [IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT LATIN.]
[…]
I often hear people say, “Cardinal Roche is against the Latin Mass.” Well, if they only knew that most days I celebrate Mass in Latin because it is the common language for all of us here. It is the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin. I was trained as an altar boy until the age of 20, serving the Tridentine Form.
Apparently his exposure to the Tridentine Form was… well… not what we have today. What did he say”
“something very different from what people experience in the Extraordinary Form today.”
Maybe, rather than crush out what is going on today, it should be given a try?
Loading ...
Stigmatist and victim soul Marie-Julie Jahenny (to whom was given the ‘Purple’ Scapular of Benediction & Protection) received numerous messages from our Lord and Lady and this poor, blind, deaf, dumb, crippled, suffering & beautiful soul is held as one of the Church’s greatest mystics and who enjoyed full approbation from her bishop; and reported the following from our Lord in 1902:
“I give you a warning. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to re-make
according to their ideas, and under the influence of the enemy of souls, a Mass that contains words which are odious in My Sight.
When the fatal hour arrives where the faith of my priest is put to the test, it will be these texts
that will be celebrated [in this period of the persecution], when the enemies of the Faith and of Holy Religion will impose their formulas … sealed with the words of the abyss. Unfortunately, … [many of my holy priests] will accept it.”
Unbeknownst to many, the Novus Ordo’s Offertory is fashioned directly from (and maintains unmistakeable proximity to) the Babylonian Talmud’s ‘Berakhot’ table blessing prayers for bread & wine, and this repulsive book — the “classic of hate-literature directed against Jesus with an intensity and perversity perhaps never equalled” — contains the most vile blasphemies against our Lord and Lady.
I would draw Roche’s attention, and his Cohort’s (before it’s too late) to the following:
“Saul, Saul. Why do you persecute Me ?”
It seems to me that if rushing through Mass is a criticism of the traditional Mass, it can also happen in the Novus Ordo. The almost exclusive use of Eucharistic Prayer 2, the skipping of the Confiteor and instead using the combined confession/Kyrie form at the beginning, using the Apostles Creed instead of the Nicene on Sundays. I could go on.
Basically, no matter what rite of mass a priest uses it can be abused. That is not the fault of the traditional mass itself. In fact the TLM being more fixed in format is less likely to be abused since there are so few choices.
My family used to run the Boilermaker 15k in Utica, New York. We had to attend Saturday vigil Mass to fulfill our obligation. One year, we saw a church that had people standing outside with the doors open, beyond standing room only.
The entire English Mass, including homily, collection, and Eucharist took 17 minutes.
I wonder what Bishop Butterpants would have to say about this…
Cardinal Roche invokes the great non-sequitur that I have heard countless times from old timers who claim that there was a need to reform the traditional Latin Mass: In the old days the priest rushed through the Mass therefore the Mass was in need of being dumbed down and Protestantized.
In my parish, you started as an altar boy in seventh grade, but were only allowed to serve at daily Mass, which was at 7 AM. I lived about a mile away and walked to church every day I was assigned (we got a week at a time, rotating among several altar boys). Anyway, Mass started at 7 AM and we were done at 7:30. And it was in Latin, and pre-Vatican II.
The Catholic church I go to now adds at least fifteen minutes to the Novus Ordo by incessant singing. I’m convinced that the focus on singing is solely because they don’t want anyone praying, especially during and after the distribution of communion.
I heard Fr. Ripperger saying that it used to be said “maniple to maniple, 30 mins.” That’s much more acceptable. He was explaining how some NO priests feel the need to offer the NO very slowly and devoutly, always good. But if they then learn the TLM they bring this habit with them.
It’s the old, classic, triple formula for rejecting something with a long history:
1) I know all about it because I was (very badly) trained in it
2) The old way is too complicated (learning hard hurt head)
3) We do so much more (superficially) now, instead of less (with far greater depth)
All emotionally charged by the sneaking suspicion that maybe, just maybe, if what we’re doing is inadequate, we might have to both answer for it, which is scary, and fix it, which is difficult.
I listen to Cardinal Dolan’s morning Mass on most weekdays since most local parishes don’t have a Mass time that fits into a 9-5er’s work schedule….that aside, if the number of communicants isn’t large, he is often done saying Mass within 20 minutes. I will say, other criticisms aside, it doesn’t seem to be offered sloppily or irreverently, just expediently.
I attend an SSPX mission chapel in the Boise, ID area. We have had various Society priests say Mass. Even the fastest ones don’t go under 30 minutes for a daily Low Mass with no homily. Once you factor in Communion and the cleaning of the vessels, then it’s not possible to speed that up much. Roche’s priest must have been omitting things.
I remember, in my youth, the daily Mass (Vetus Ordo) used to take no more than half an hour. People used to be able to go to Mass on their way to work.
Years later (1977) I was doing a 30-40 minute commute to my 8:30 job. I found a 7 a.m. daily Mass at a local parish and decided to begin attending there. That lasted for just one Mass. The attendees were mostly retired folks who had no concern for time, and the Mass dragged on and on. After 40 minutes, with no end in sight (not even Communion yet), I had to leave and go to work.
More people would attend the TLM if it were more readily available!
I just don’t understand how Cardinal Roche and like minded hierarchy don’t understand that they are interfering with the Holy Ghost.
Just started Dr K’s latest – “Close the Workshop”
Thank you Fr Z for the heads up. It’s my first Dr K book.
I attended a NO Mass this morning. Very devoted Mexican Priest. But…
Guitar. During the Eucharistic prayer ( a version I’ve never heard before ) the priest held a microphone in his left hand.
I think Dr K is spot on. Not salvageable.
When I was at my undergrad, the 7AM parish NO Mass (offered by a Jesuit), was would clock between 7 and 11 minutes consistently.
As liturgy, both the NO and TLM are rather snappy in terms of how they move along. The choose your own adventure that is the NO really does lead towards a focus on chronos time rather than entering into kairos time and the eschatological action. As much as I don’t like the hymn sandwich structure of the NO (chiefly because truncating hymns ALWAYS results in an incomplete theological message being presented, and typically one sings ditties or religious music rather than liturgical music anyway), the tendancy for the NO to become about kairos time might just be an exhasperation from the TLM as there is a gap between TLM and how the Eastern Rites deal with questions of time in the liturgy (ie look at how the epliclesis is treated between west and east).
When I read the original last night (in CH) I immediately heard echoes of the (highly enlightened) Cardinal Prefect’s previous statements on Traditionis
CustodesPerditores:2021 – “The promotion of the antecedent liturgy has been curtailed but does not characterise discrimination.”
2025 – “”it is good that people want to be part of the Church… There is nothing wrong with attending the Mass celebrated with the 1962 missal”
-and-
2021 – “The challenge is to get on with it without licking one’s wounds when no one has been injured.”
2025 – “some of the groups are quite clamorous”… “if they only knew that most days I celebrate Mass in Latin”
He certainly is a master of condescension – not to say prevarication!
I do admit to being completely baffled by one statement: “What interests me is why people get hot under the collar about others celebrating the Tridentine Mass” Is that a misquote, or is he really expressing “interest” in this peculiar phenomenon of (unnamed) “people” persecuting the Traddies? Wherever would he have gotten that idea? Who could have gotten said “people” riled-up?
It will take a lot more Rochean “happy gas” to make me take that one at face value!
As an old guy who was an altar boy before the NO, I agree that the Mass needed reform in the 50s and 60s. I distinctly remember as a new server being admonished by the curate to say the prayers faster. My elder brother matter of factly and kindly helped by telling me to “just mumble it. He (the priest) can’t tell the difference.” Daily Mass never went over 30 minutes and 20 was the norm. Our pastor was an auxiliary bishop and Pontifical Solemn High Mass started at 10:15 and with Benediction was over and the congregation out the door by 11:20 – 11:25 so the 11:30 Mass could start on time.
Did you ever watch the JFK Requiem? It was just like so many masses and funerals I remember from my youth. Cardinal Cushing spoke at lightening speed – to a kid it was mumbling though he did appear to actually say everything when you follow the text. In any event too often Masses and devotions were rote, speedy and mindless. That was the reality. The reforms missed the mark but reform was needed. The VO has been well served by the NO silliness. It made the VO wonderful in practice as a reaction to the happy clappy crappy stuff. The VO has improved the NO generally. Perhaps all is not yet lost.
An interesting article and the Cardinal reveals more than he may have intended. First his statement: “From a very early age, I had an inkling that I had a vocation. Whenever I went to Mass, I felt a deep sense of happiness. Back in the 1950s…” He goes on to say he served Mass almost every day from the time of his FHC. All because of being inspired by and drawn to the Vetus Ordo! How many 7 year olds, or any grade or high school aged childen feel such attraction today with the Novus Ordo? Second, “I would never have thought of synodality in the way it has now been conceived because of Pope Francis.” Really, I have read that same statement from other bishops and theologians, doesn’t that tell us something that No One was talking about “Synodality” prior to Pope Francis? I am a parish priest and have NEVER had a parishioner ask about it, and with few exceptions that seems to be the experience everywhere. Thirdly, “The numbers devoted to the Traditional Latin Mass are, in reality, quite small, but some of the groups are quite clamorous. They are more noticeable because they make their voices heard.” The Cardinal sounds like Prof. Henry Higgins in Pygmalion, “they are quite clamorous.” So they are small in number, but these Tradies dare to make their voices heard? Where is the “accompaniment’ or ‘dialogue’ or ‘listening’ or Gospel? No, His Eminence revealed much more than he realized.
Although I remember a priest at a Catholic college I attended doing daily Mass sometimes in 15 minutes with a brief homily, I have been to reverent daily Novus Ordo Masses that have lasted twenty minutes. As another poster said that timeline varies depending upon the attendance.
The parish I regularly attend does a 6:25 am daily Mass and a 5:30 PM daily Mass. It is also close to a business district and draws several Catholics both on their way to work and on the way home. On holy days of obligation this parish offers a 12:10 PM Mass so Catholics can attend during their lunch break from work. When I go (I am not a regular daily Mass attendee) thirty minutes is about normal and it’s a decent cross section of the population. The parish closest to where I live does a 9 am daily Mass and it’s mostly retirees because those with 9-to-5 jobs are already at their workplace.
The cardinal is a gnostic. He somehow has secret knowledge that tells him the spiritual effect of this rite or that rite on people he has never met. He just makes stuff up. I attended a TLM offered by a small but well respected schismatic group which reconciled with the local diocese 14 or so years ago. We were promised a diocesan TLM in the reconciliation agreement. When I asked our priest about this a couple of years ago, he replied that agreements mean nothing to this crew.
By the way, the diocese had assumed that all members of this group were disgruntled cradle Catholics. They had made no plans about what to with the many converts that worshipped at that TLM. The resulting diocesan masses are doing quite well.
Twenty minutes, amice to amice? That can’t have been very reverent, let alone prayerful. How would that even be possible without omitting things? A TLM (Low Mass, no homily) can be done reverently and without rushing things in about 30 minutes and I’m fine with that, to me it doesn’t need to be a drawn out affair.
What I also don’t get is how it is possible to do an NO in twenty minutes, even when using EP2 (which I detest) and replacing the Confiteor with a Kyrie litany. Readings take time and so does the Prayer of the Faithful (which is, more often than not, too long anyway).
I think it would be hilarious if Father wrote a piece in which he applies the good Cardinal’s fallacies to the NO.
“The cardinal is a gnostic” Indeed… if only we knew what he H.E. knows, all would be sweetness and light!
If the Cardinal thinks the VO is overly elaborate, can we admit the NO is inefficient thereby making it unnecessarily longer than it needs to be? In the VO, the priest does all the readings from the altar. In the NO, we have to wait for various lay readers to approach, bow, read, bow again, and sit down. On Sundays, there are ofter 2 lay readers taking turns AND a third person from the choir leading the Responsorial Psalm. Then there’s the inefficient Communion line where EVERYONE goes up to receive or get a blessing one at a time as opposed to an altar rail where people are lined up and ready to receive.
The priests at my NO Mass almost always use EP2 & skip the Confiteor, probably to save time, yet Mass can still run over a hour easily.