Traditional Latin Mass in New Hampshire

Perhaps you saw this AP story – I’m quoted in it. I spent a fair amount of time on the phone with the reporter, and rather enjoyed explaining what to him is surely a convoluted and enigmatic topic. It’s always interesting to see how my input get used in the final story, and what from me gets quoted.

The challenge for the reporter is to explain in great brevitiy what would require three times the length (or ten times) to nuance it properly. I think he did OK.

Of course the Mass dates to the first century with the Last Supper, not to the 15th century. But the story is not entirely wrong in naming the 15th century. The reporter asked me if the old rite dates to the 15th century, and I said that as a matter of fact, that is precisely the century I would name for when it had pretty much arrived at its stable form. I had in mind the point made by Joseph Ratzinger that the old rite is not “Tridentine” in the way the new rite is “Pauline,” for Paul VI approved a quite new rite, whereas the 1570 missal for the most part codified what was in 15th century manuscripts. (Ratzinger of course was making a larger point about continuity and rupture which I won’t go into here.) One thing would have saved it for the reporter’s wording. Instead of “…the services, which date to the 15th century, this: “… the services, whose external ritual and ceremonial essentially dates to the 15th century.”

Not sure why the reporter named the maniple, of all the things characteristic of the overly complicated old Latin Mass. That didn’t come from me. I thought of mentioning to him, but elected not to, the 20+ blessings of the bread and wine by the priest in the Eucharistic Prayer, now reduced to one. That, or any number of other things, could have been used to describe the old unreformed rite.

Of course Vatican II didn’t “largely phase out Latin Masses.” One could always do the new rite in Latin, and still can. I wrote all this in an email. But this is a news story, not a graduate paper, and I think the story is close enough for the author’s purposes. The effect of Vatican II (how it got implemented, what some think was really intended, blah blah blah and I’m not going into that here either), was that Latin Mass pretty well went away in the experience of Catholics.

“Like a medieval opera” – you know, that’s not a bad characterization. It is true that opera began in the Baroque era and didn’t yet exist in the Middle Ages. But again, this is a news story – and colorful images oftentimes use poetic license rather than scientific accuracy. And Sister Sullivan would not be making a historical blunder at all if she is referring to any opera from the last couple hundred years set in a medieval era, such as e.g. Tannhäuser.

Bishop Peter Libasci offered his reasons for encouraging the old rite. I’ll let you look at that and comment if you wish.

awr

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, is a monk of St. John's Abbey. He teaches liturgy, liturgical music, and Gregorian chant at St. John's University School of Theology-Seminary. He is widely published and frequently presents across the country on liturgy and music. He is the author of Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations, and of Responsorial Psalms for Weekday Mass: Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter. He does priestly ministry at the neighboring community of Benedictine sisters in St. Joseph.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

29 responses to “Traditional Latin Mass in New Hampshire”

  1. Peter Kwasniewski

    Blessed be God that a stable place has been appointed for Catholics in this part of New England.

    “Not sure why the reporter named the maniple, of all the things characteristic of the overly complicated old Latin Mass.” — My children’s experience, growing up, is that the old Mass always gave (and still gives) them plenty to look at, think about, and pray from, whereas they complain that the new Mass is too quick and simple.

    There’s a reason the old Mass is making a comeback. It would be good for readers of PrayTell to acknowledge it graciously and make room for it, in the big tent.

    I do appreciate your point, Fr. Ruff, that the 1570 Missal was hardly “new.”

    Reply
  2. Karl Liam Saur

    I have a general rule of thumb not to be quoted in any news article. I had a terrible experience as an EIC of a journal 30 years ago this very summer, as two authors I was in the process of publishing were nominated to high national office, and my words got scrambled by the reporter who, while not ill-meaning, didn’t really understand that subject matter area he was working in.

    Ever since then, I realize that, even if reporters are trying to portray your work in a flattering way, they can seriously muck it up. And heaven help you if they want to portray you in a negative light.

    The old rule of thumb remains prudent: your name should appear in the news three times: at your birth, your marriage, and your death. And that’s it.

    Reply
  3. Jan Larson

    Not sure that “everybody knew” Latin back in the day. I’ll wager most of today’s clergy who are Latin Mass enthusiasts don’t know Latin. And not sure what it means to say “Latin served as a unifying force for the Church.” A common unintelligible language encountered wherever one might travel would seem a cosmetic mark of unity at best.

    Reply
    1. Charles Day

      @Jan Larson:
      I am not at all a fan of the Latin Mass, and I grew up with it and had 3 years of Latin in high school. But if it was universally used in the Church it would be unifying in the sense that the language of the Mass would the same in all of Europe, in all of Africa, in North and South America, and Asia. That part wouldn’t be entirely bad.

      But the truth is Latin was only ever the language of the Mass because of the political power of Rome, and not because of some inherent beauty or reverence which is what people often claim. Today, thanks to the many conquests of Great Britain where ‘the sun never sat on the Empire’, you can make a pretty good argument that English is essentially the new Latin.

      Reply
      1. Vic Romero

        @Charles Day:
        “English is essentially the new Latin” ?!

        I bet you–despite the widespread use of English worldwide–more persons attend a Spanish-language Mass than Mass in English. There may be more English speakers on earth, but I bet there are more Spanish-speaking Mass goers. Just a hunch.

      2. Paul Inwood

        @Vic Romero:

        You may be right one day, but I suspect not yet.. It was because they knew that English is in fact the new Latin that the CDW produced the ill-starred Liturgiam Authenticam.

      3. Charles Day

        @Vic Romero:
        I am not advocating for English as a replacement for Latin. Just observing that the reason Latin was ever a universal language was more the result of political and economic power than anything inherently religious. In the same way, as a result of conquests in the 18th and 19th centuries by England, and in the 20th century by the USA, and economically by both countries since the end of WWII, English rules. It just does. In a way, it makes an argument for Mass in the vernacular as a way of preserving local culture.

  4. Joseph Burgio

    Always glad to hear that you have the opportunity to educate. Bishop Libasci is correct. There are people looking for the Latin Mass. But I have to disagree that people who never experienced it are going to be touched by it. And I wonder if perhaps these might be the same people who complain if they have to “press 1 for English”. And what about “full, conscious, active participation”? It is a source of sadness for me that 50 years after Vatican II this has not been universally achieved. In my current situation, as an itinerant organist, I play primarily in Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Episcopal churches. That “full, conscious, active participation” is the norm in non-Catholic churches. I don’t always encounter it in the Roman Catholic church. And yes, I do know that it is possible to participate in an interior fashion. But I am convinced that the Latin Mass is not the answer.

    Reply
  5. Steven Surrency

    Joseph,

    I am one of those people who have been touched by the older rite though I never experienced it in my youth. I agree that the old mass isn’t the answer to a widespread problem, but I know a number of people who are moved by its mysticism, it’s choreography, and it’s rich symbolism. I am not at all arguing that it’s superior to the newer rite. I’m simply stating that it does touch people in a unique way. While I agree that the old rite’s emphasis and ecclesiology can skew and distort our newer, better understanding of liturgy and doctrine, I also agree with Pope Benedict that “what was once sacred cannot suddenly become forbidden” (or something like that). So I agree with the good bishop on the possibility of the old mass’s limited role. That said, my experience of these EF dedicated parishes has often proven that many of the people who have a special attachment to the old liturgy often have a backward-looking reverence for the 1950’s and would indeed be annoyed by pressing one for English.

    Reply
  6. Jack Wayne

    I think “overly complicated” is in the eye of the beholder. For the priest, the EF is much more complicated, but I’d argue that it is actually easier for the laity to follow when compared to an OF being celebrated in Latin or another foreign language because the ordinary is almost always the same. I recall a local parish that tried to have weekday Masses (OF) in Latin, and the biggest complaint people had was that they couldn’t follow along in the booklets due to not knowing what options the priest was going to choose in advance.

    The EF is somewhat bewildering at first, but surprisingly easy to follow and internalize once you’ve been to it a few times. One of the things I didn’t expect to happen in my years attending the EF was the sense of ownership I’ve gained of the texts of the Mass, because I always know what will happen and don’t have to wait and see what the celebrant feels like doing. I simply don’t have that sense at the OF. In terms of being included, it’s a different feeling to be “in on it” and know exactly what will happen, versus being along for the ride and waiting to see what has been chosen for you to react to. Sure, there aren’t that many options, and after a long enough time one can be familiar with all of them and have no problem reacting to them comfortably, but you still aren’t really part of the in-crowd.

    Reply
  7. Jordan Zarembo

    Father, thank you for your assessment. I consider it quite balanced.

    You were cited in the article,

    “The desire often overlaps with other conservative trends such as homeschooling, Ruff said, but some parishioners like it “for aesthetic reasons, or find it spiritually calming and beautiful and don’t necessarily have other attendant agendas.”

    I truly want to believe what you have said Father about the number of people who attend Tridentine liturgy “and don’t necessarily have other attendant agendas.” I believe that this type of Tridentine adherent is become less and less common. Non-ideological congregants were, in my opinion, ironically more common in the indult years than after 2007. Now I’ve found that after Summorum pontificum integrist/ultramontane Catholics have latched onto Tridentine worship. I sense this is because the reformed liturgy is young and still taking form, while the Tridentine liturgy is calcified and therefore erroneously reflective of a non-errant catechism, belief and faith. This calcification often overlooks the riches of the documents of Vatican II, but fundamentalists are often wary of new and currently debated conciliar theology.

    A nascent Tridentine fundamentalism in belief and culture has definitely alienated myself from their ranks. I suspect I am not the only layperson or clergy who has likewise been alienated.

    Reply
    1. Jack Wayne

      @Jordan Zarembo:
      Jordan, I would really hope that you find your way back to the EF, particularly because it shouldn’t become the sole domain of ideologically conservative Catholics. It belongs to anyone for whom it resonates with.

      I have noticed a similar pattern in some of the people drawn to the EF. The folks from the indult years often act more like ordinary Catholics (the really nutty ones wouldn’t bother with “insult” Masses or “NewChurch” EF Masses where the priest might give hosts from the tabernacle that were consecrated at the OF). There seems to be a new segment of people that might be termed very conservative. They are generally warmer to the OF than the older EF Catholics, but seem to like how the EF is more symbolic of staunch conservative Catholicism. People who don’t like the EF don’t help discourage this, unfortunately.

      There is also a segment of people who love the EF, but also participate in the OF Masses as lectors/EMHCs etc. I bet they are most perplexing to those who stand staunchly on one side or another.

      Reply
      1. Jordan Zarembo

        @Jack Wayne:

        Jack: “Jordan, I would really hope that you find your way back to the EF, particularly because it shouldn’t become the sole domain of ideologically conservative Catholics. It belongs to anyone for whom it resonates with.”

        I have some ways to go before I return to Latin Mass, even occasionally. I’ve been working through Kübler-Ross two (anger) for quite some time now. An aim of my Kübler work is to attend Latin Mass in peace with myself and my brothers and sisters. Inside myself, I rail at the “fundamentalists” for their hostile takeover of Tridentine liturgical culture and observance. I now realize that Tridentine fundamentalism will never again re-admit a more moderate community (which, as you well note Jack, a more moderate community had often existed under the indult)..

        Part of fundamentalism is the abject fear that one is not “doing things right”. A ~400 year old calcified and superseded liturgy lends itself quite well to a well worn practice of “belief” and “faith” where an imagined infallible method to salvation exists. More mature Catholics can tolerate, or even enjoy, that the reformed liturgy has certainly not arrived at the end of a very young volatility. Also, Liturgical volatility is largely advanced by laypeople and their experiences.

  8. Brian Duffy

    In addition to this new parish in Nashua, the CMRI, a sedevacantist society, dedicated a Latin chapel in Salem, NH back in March.

    Does this mean that the Granite State is on its way to being a bastion of Live Free or Die Latinity?

    Reply
    1. Karl Liam Saur

      @Brian Duffy:
      New Hampshire is tied for least religious state, and in second place for highest proportion of “Nones”.

      Reply
      1. Brian Duffy

        @Karl Liam Saur:

        Everyone here is affected by the old New England non-conformity even the Greek old calendarists.

    2. Jim McKay

      @Brian Duffy:

      Maybe.

      Or the two events are linked. Not necessarily cause and effect, but the sedevacantist liturgy may have prompted some to seek out a regular Tridentine liturgy which in turn promoted the bishop’s action.

      Reply
  9. Lee Bacchi

    Reformed rites of VII “making the church more relevant” — so tired of hearing that. The full, conscious and active participation of the assembly is the reason for the reforms.

    No mention that the Tridentine Rite is the Extraordinary Form, and the Pauline rite is the Ordinary Form. I think that should have been stressed.

    Reply
    1. Bryan Walsh

      @Lee Bacchi:
      SC, Para. 1: “This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; TO ADAPT MORE SUITABLY TO THE NEEDS OF OUR OWN TIMES; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy.”

      Reply
      1. Lee Bacchi

        @Bryan Walsh:
        I like the phrase from the document, I dislike for the word relevant. Too many folks regard it as a “jargon” word and use it disparagingly, as if it meant superficial and unnecessary. What is absolutely amazing, of course, is that the suitable adaptation was made by ressourcement to the past.

      2. Bryan Walsh

        @Lee Bacchi:
        Agree with you on those counts. Not only does it make it absolutely amazing, but also such that the adaptation through ressourcement was not anachronistic, thanks to the advent and embrace of historical-critical methods in theology.

  10. Vic Romero

    One way to describe two groups of people — without using labels, which would take away from open thinking — may be the following:

    Group A
    They have seen (heard, experienced) the truth, the real thing, the authentic It; they want to preserve or go back to it; and they feel sure.

    Group B
    They find themselves continually learning elements of the truth and realize they are on a journey of discovery.

    Reply
  11. Todd Orbitz

    I have attended both rites my whole life. I was born in 1970, and my Pastor (who had stability) simply refused to offer the Pauline Rite. He had been the roomate of the Archbishop when in the seminary, and he was seemingly left alone as a result.

    Every Sunday the Principal Mass was his. The other two curates however were cutting edge guitar Mass types where communion would be passed around in wicker baskets for self-communication. It was something.

    Over the years, I would identify several different groups whom the Pian Rite attracted.

    1. First and most obviously, the followers of Lefebvre. Their Seminary was based in Ridgefield, Connecticut at that time, and while irregular, there were no excommunications.

    2. In the 1970’s and early 80’s, I would say there were two types of typical Catholics who were attracted to the Pian Rite. a.) The ones who were bitter that the Council ever happened, and b.) the ones who just wanted the Mass they had always had.

    3. By the late 80’s and 1990’s, there were at least three new generations that became attracted to the EF/Pian Rite. They were a.) Those who saw the EF as a way to display a certain socio-political/religious affectation of what they thought Catholicism “should be”; and, b.) those who appreciated the drama of the liturgy and that it formed the generations before them; and, c.) a certain part of the gay community was attracted to it.

    4. By the late 90’s through the first decade of the Millennium, one could see two new groups in new generation who was attracted to the EF. a.) The first were those who had spent a considerable amount of time reading, researching, understanding the theology behind the EF, and consciously choosing it. They would likely say that they felt it allowed them to better enter into the worship due to God. I would call this group the “New Liturgical Movement” (typified by that web site). They were the ones who really cheerleaded (sic) the whole process of its restoration when SP was released. (cont.)

    Reply
  12. Todd Orbitz

    4. (cont.) Then there were b.) those who simply stumbled into it and were taken by the beauty they saw. (Believe it or not, there is a significant group of millennials that fall right into this category.)

    Now, I would say that all these groups still exist, though in varying numbers. And we are now on the cusp of a new generation beginning to attend.

    One thing clearly differentiates the EF though – the demographics of it. Now, I am limiting myself to describing what I encounter in the US and London, but I have found that near major metropolitan areas, it usually attracts what I find to be the most integrated and widely diverse populations out there. (Please note: I still regularly attend both rites, so I am familiar with OF). Additionally, with the EF it is not unusual to find fairly large families attending it. It is clear that over time, even if those families were to have a 50% defection rate that the numbers attending the EF will grow. And I am willing to bet that they will grow faster and produce more vocations (as a percentage) than a typical American parish.

    I am not calling this good or bad, but simply a reality. Will this change the daily reality of the typical American Parish in my lifetime? No. But it will in my children’s – probably most likely with respect to the ars celebrandi in the OF.

    Reply
  13. Jack Wayne

    I’d just like to +1 Todd Orbitz’s post, for being probably the fairest and most realistic picture of who has been attracted to the EF over the years. My involvement with the EF isn’t nearly as long, but I’ve seen almost everyone described. The only thing I would add is that those who see it as a “way to display a certain socio-political/religious affectation of what they thought Catholicism ‘should be'” are very much growing in my neck of the woods today. I’m very much in the fourth category – I’d read a great deal about the EF and found it appealing, but was also taken aback by it in a way I didn’t expect when I finally had the opportunity to attend one.

    Reply
  14. Richard Malcolm

    Brian Duffy : In addition to this new parish in Nashua, the CMRI, a sedevacantist society, dedicated a Latin chapel in Salem, NH back in March.

    Given how these things have played out so often in other dioceses, one does wonder if, in fact, these two developments are not unconnected with each other. As the old saying goes: The surest way to get your bishop to approve a TLM is to get an SSPX or sedevacantist chapel to set up shop in your town first.

    Of course, it could be a coincidence. The present ordinary seems like a tolerant and generous prelate. Either way, I am glad that the sedes do not have a monopoly on traditional Latin Rite liturgy in New Hampshire now.

    Reply
  15. Richard Malcolm

    I’m late in coming across this post, and I am sure the conversation has since long moved on. I do not have the time to come here very often any longer. But just in case…

    I thought it was a rather poorly written article, but not unduly worse than the norm for a story on the Church. I also did not think that you were to blame for that, Fr. Ruff.

    That said, one minor nitpick – well, actually, a twofold nitpick – of what you *do* say:

    Of course Vatican II didn’t “largely phase out Latin Masses.” One could always do the new rite in Latin, and still can. I wrote all this in an email.

    1. One *could* celebrate the Pauline Missal in Latin, its (canonically) normative language – in theory. And that is true today, too. In actual practice, such a thing became rarer than hen’s teeth, and for good reason: the priests who dared try it on any level in the early years of the Reform’s implementation typically found themselves paying severe ecclesiastical prices for doing so. It’s not so well known now, but there were more than a few pastors like Msgr Joseph Manns in Baltimore, or Msgr Vincent Kearny in Kansas City, who found themselves without pastoral assignments for making the attempt. In Baltimore alone, Cdl. Shehan forced early retirement on some twenty percent of his priests in 1967-69 for various forms of resistance to the changes underway (not just liturgical changes).

    Today, one can find a very small smattering of places where Latin is used in large part or completely in the celebration of the Pauline Missal (and not just at the London Oratory). But for most priests, it’s probably easier and less stressful to do a TLM if one really wants a Mass in Latin.

    2. The other way in which this phrase can be understood is in regards to the old 1962 Missal, which *did* disappear (even in its 1965-67 forms) for all intents and purposes in 99.99% of the Church post-1969. I won’t reopen any cans of worms here save to say that if the old Mass was not *abrogated* (pace BXVI), it certainly was *obrogated.*

    Reply
  16. Richard Malcolm

    P.S. As a final comment, I join Jack Wayne in giving a +1 to Todd Orbitz’s observations, which strike me as reasonably accurate glosses on who was attracted to the TLM at different points in time, and what it looks like demographically now.

    There are exceptions here and there, but I am consistently struck by how young the age curve skews around the U.S. It is not uncommon to find TLM parishes or even just regular diocesan TLM’s where half or more of the attendees are under 18. It is also now becoming a more racially diverse pool than it once was; and it has always been rather diverse in terms of class in most places. This will not make the TLM/EF anything close to dominant by mid-century in the U.S., the starting base being too tiny (in France and a few other parts of Europe it might be a different story, but mainly due to the utter collapse of the diocesan Church), but it does ensure that it will grow at a reasonably healthy rate, as attendance continues to decline in most parishes as the Baby Boomers disappear from the scene, especially in the Northeast and Midwest.

    Reply
  17. Brian Duffy

    California is the place for Latin liturgy amongst Episcopalians. The Church of The Advent in San Francisco and S. Thomas, Hollywood offer the Holy Communion according to the Latin version of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. English lections are used in place of Latin.

    A Latin Evensong according to the 1662 or even earlier prayer book is celebrated at Stanford University, in their lovely chapel, a few times a year. English also is used for the lections.

    Now, if only an Orthodox group would serve the Divine Liturgy according to the putative Latin translation of Desiderius Erasmus the esoteric ecclesiastical scene would be all the more enchanting.

    Reply

Posted

in

by

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading