![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jul. 9th, 2007
Jul. 9th, 2007 02:27 pm
Veterus Ordo
I really wish more media outlets would learn to distinguish "Latin mass" from "Tridentine mass". The novelty of Benny 16's Summorum Pontificum is not that it allows the mass to be said in Latin; this has been possible all along. It's that it allows the Latin mass that our grandparents grew up with to be said without special permission. You see, Vatican II didn't just change the language of the mass, it changed the whole text of the liturgy: What prayers were included, the congregation's responses, and on and on. Older Catholics could always request the performance of Novus Ordo Latin masses, but they weren't the same as the masses they grew up with. Furthermore, even before these changes were made, the Tridentine mass was being performed in languages other than English. Nevertheless, a priest still needed special permission to perform a Tridentine mass regardless whether it was in English, Latin, Kikongo, or whatever.
Incidentally, it's up to the bishop of each diocese to decide whether to grant permission for performance of the Tridentine mass, so actual practice varies a lot in the USA and worldwide. In Chicago, Tridentine masses have been available for almost 20 years now at the parish of St. John Cantius in Ukrainian Village, so the effect of the Pope's letter will probably be minor. Perhaps the media coverage will prompt a few more nostalgic parishioners to seek out this parish, but I suspect anyone with more than a passing interest knew about it already.
I overheard some kids on the el over the weekend discussing the change and calling it "a step backward". "I think what people want is for them to be more progressive." I wonder about that. If you're really interested in progressive Christianity, why would you turn to the church whose name is byword for backwardness and ossification? I'm curious what a brand analyst would say if hired to advise the RCC. I suspect he'd see more value in playing up the ties to tradition; after all, that's what makes this denomination unique in a sea of johnny-come-lately sects and congregations.
Incidentally, it's up to the bishop of each diocese to decide whether to grant permission for performance of the Tridentine mass, so actual practice varies a lot in the USA and worldwide. In Chicago, Tridentine masses have been available for almost 20 years now at the parish of St. John Cantius in Ukrainian Village, so the effect of the Pope's letter will probably be minor. Perhaps the media coverage will prompt a few more nostalgic parishioners to seek out this parish, but I suspect anyone with more than a passing interest knew about it already.
I overheard some kids on the el over the weekend discussing the change and calling it "a step backward". "I think what people want is for them to be more progressive." I wonder about that. If you're really interested in progressive Christianity, why would you turn to the church whose name is byword for backwardness and ossification? I'm curious what a brand analyst would say if hired to advise the RCC. I suspect he'd see more value in playing up the ties to tradition; after all, that's what makes this denomination unique in a sea of johnny-come-lately sects and congregations.