Rorate Caeli

You Report: The "Extraordinary Form" in the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, IN

The author of the following article is Fr. Michael Magiera. Ordained a priest for the FSSP in  2005,  he is currently a priest of the archdiocese of Indianapolis (on probation, pending full incardination) and Associate Pastor of Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary Church.

The Extraordinary Form of the Mass in the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, IN

The Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite of Mass, the Tridentine Mass, the Latin Mass, the “Old” Mass, the TLM (however one wishes to call it) has been celebrated openly in the Archdiocese of Indianapolis for many years. The first one took place in 1988. It started out, as many do, on an “occasional” basis, every other month, and then gradually increased in frequency. These Masses were celebrated by good, holy, gracious and generous priests. They were “older” and somewhat out of practice, but the Masses they celebrated were a beginning of something which would prove nothing less than wonderful for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis. Both “Low” Masses and, occasionally, Sung Masses (with all appropriate ceremonies) were celebrated. At first, Mass was celebrated in St. John the Evangelist Church, the “Pro Cathedral” of the Archdiocese. It then moved to St. Patrick Church where weekly attendance was about 130, and then ended up – on a permanent basis – at Our Lady Queen of the Most Holy Rosary. It has been at Holy Rosary for the past 13 years. During the St. Patrick “period,” it became an “apostolate” of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP). Henceforth, TLM = EF; Novus Ordo or “English” Mass, the Ordinary Form = OF.

In 2005, another church was designated as an FSSP “Latin Mass Apostolate.” It is Ss. Philomena and Cecilia in Brookville, IN, also in the Archdiocese. This apostolate was established IN ADDITION to the apostolate at Holy Rosary in Indianapolis proper. Traveling distance between the two churches is approximately 1.5 hours. NB., at Ss. Philomena and Cecilia, it is the EF exclusively that is celebrated there. At Holy Rosary, it is celebrated along with the OF. But at Holy Rosary, there are more EFs than OFs, eight as opposed to four. The number of EFs was higher by two at one time, but so the “EF priest” could have (most of) a day off, the Monday noon EF was replaced by Mass in the OF. After a time, it was decided to have the OF in place of the EF at noon on Fridays as well. Also, on major Holy Days, there are additional Sung EFs at 7:00 PM. Except for Christmas and Holy Week, apart from very rare occasions, there are no additional, evening OF Masses. Of course, for Christmas and for Holy Week, there is the full battery of Masses and services for each form.

There is a school adjacent to Holy Rosary, a private Catholic School known as Lumen Christi. It is a “K through 12” school and “fed” by many Indianapolis city parishes, i.e., OF parishes. The students attend Mass every day, i.e., in both forms, and the boys from that school serve Mass in both forms. The boys are well acquainted with and very much at home with the duties appropriate to both forms and, of course, with regard to the EF, they know the Latin responses. In fact, Holy Rosary is very much a “dialogue Mass” church, which means that not only the school students but also all of the faithful (of all ages) who attend the EF know and make the Latin responses – and sing them at Sung Masses. All weekend, i.e., Sunday Masses at Holy Rosary, in both forms, are Sung Masses. OF servers for Sunday Masses tend to be older, high school or college students, in addition to archdiocesan seminarians. The EF Sunday Mass servers are boys from the congregation and the ages go from eight to 18. At a typical Sunday EF, there are usually between 16 to 20 boys in the sanctuary. Most, particularly the younger ones, assist “in choir.” When the services of another priest or deacon and subdeacon can be secured, there are EF Solemn Masses as well. Each “form” has its own choir and organist. In the case of the EF, also its own schola. Attendance at the Sunday EF averages 250 and seems to be growing steadily. Also, regardless of the liturgical form of Mass, ONLY BOYS serve Mass at Holy Rosary.
The EF made its move to Holy Rosary at a time when there was a danger that the church would be closed. The additional “congregation” and the funds it brought were just what the church needed to survive. In the ensuing 13 years, the congregations for both forms have grown considerably as have the Sunday collections. Holy Rosary’s parishioners of either liturgical stripe are very generous. The church functions at a comfortable financial level, has no astronomical debt, pays its bills and operates “in the black.” This, even after a significant restoration/renovation of the entire church in 2008! This restoration attempted to recreate the Italian Romanesque church, to the extent possible (including state of the art 21st century technology), as it was in 1924. There are seven real bells in the twin towers, activated by an up to date technical system. The high altar mensa “moves” forward and backward into the reredos, accommodating itself to “ad orientem” and “ad populum” Mass celebrations. There is also a venerable pipe organ which is scheduled for renovation/replacement when funding becomes available. The church has a staff of five, including its pastor, the archdiocesan Vicar General, and its associate, an archdiocesan priest and former member of the FSSP. Holy Rosary is now no longer an FSSP apostolate.
The EF has been a very stable phenomenon for the past 10 years. At first things were difficult, of course. There were suspicions and mixed feelings. The long time parishioners saw the Latin Mass crowd as invaders and interlopers, yet realized that they would provided needed infusions of cash. The new Latin Mass people saw the long time parishioners as people to be saved and converted and sometimes, unfortunately, to be “lorded over.” The long time parishioners saw themselves as immoveable owners. The newcomers saw themselves as financial and liturgical saviors. People on both sides of the liturgical aisle left. New ones came to take their place. Others left, others came. Yet, the number of parishioners at Holy Rosary continues to grow. Many travel great distances to come to Holy Rosary, even from the adjacent diocese – and not just to the EF. Many OF faithful are so turned off by what passes for liturgy at their respective parishes that they flee to Holy Rosary where the OF is just as reverent as the EF. Each liturgical form has subtly influenced the other at Holy Rosary. OF Masses are increasingly celebrated “ad orientem” and EF parishioners appreciate the degree to which they can participate in the liturgy and decry the lack of congregational participation at EF Masses they’ve attended elsewhere. Happily, there are also many marriages and baptisms and fewer funerals than one might imagine. As is the case in many other places, though many might not wish to believe it, the EF community is quite young in terms of parishioner age. That is not to say that there are none over 50 years of age at regular Sunday Mass, but many of the EF parishioners at Holy Rosary are young families, most with several children. The OF community is a bit older than the EF, but not by much.
Though stability reigns for the most part, every so often, undercurrents make themselves known. But, for the most part, though there are still a few that don’t like the EF, a few who wish that the OF would go away and, surprisingly, a few (very few, thankfully) who are not thrilled at the idea of parish unity, the two integrated communities at Holy Rosary have achieved a high level of mutual respect and charitable cooperation. Over time, the few trouble makers still present will either leave, learn to hold their peace or go the way of all flesh.
To look at Holy Rosary through the negative lens of the above paragraph is to do it an injustice, however. There is much to be thankful for at Holy Rosary and much to admire and even regard with a sense of wonder. To be sure, this is due to the predominant evenness and basic deposit of Catholic charity on the part of the parishioners, both OF and EF. The parishioners know that there is a job to be done in today’s world. They also know, and have come to recognize more and more, that Holy Rosary, in and of itself, is quite a remarkable place. Most of the parishioners know one another, actually like one another, or are at least respectful and civil. Most think it rather fantastic that the two liturgical forms can live together under the same roof, not just coldly respectful and distant, but actually, for the most part, harmoniously and even affectionately.
This is due also, in no small part, to the pastor and his associate and also the associate’s immediate predecessor. They all three operate(d) on the premise that, at Holy Rosary, there is One Church, not two churches. The pastor, as Vicar General, ensures that the rights and dignities inherent in the EF are respected and honored and is pleased to have the EF and its parishioners as an integral part of the Holy Rosary fabric. The former associate eschewed and the present one eschews: “rad trads;” any sentiment for or tendencies toward separatism; the idea that the OF is wrong or invalid; that the EF is the only way to ensure the Church’s future. Charity, justice and, above all, orthodoxy are the marks of Holy Rosary parish. As the church is one in her faith and magisterium, so Holy Rosary is one in its support of them. Holy Rosary is unique. The parish and the archdiocese of which she is a part can both serve as models for the Church in America. The two liturgical expressions of the Roman church, both valid and each possessing its special dignity, live side by side in peace and mutual cooperation.
Though most of the faithful usually attend one form or the other, not a small number of parishioners go back and forth from one to the other. If one Mass doesn’t fit into the family weekend schedule, then the other will. The faithful at Holy Rosary, for the most part, are very flexible – more so than parishioners at most parishes today where either one form or the other is exclusively found. At Holy Rosary, the antipathy or outright hostility experienced at other churches where liturgical forms “share” facilities, or at churches where one form is dominant and the other merely tolerated, is not found. There is one ladies’ prayer group to which ladies who attend each form belong. There is one Rosary and Altar Society to which ladies from both forms belong. There is one Knights of Columbus council, not one EF council and one OF council. The Lenten Adult Educational Series is attended by the faithful who may be attached to either the OF or the EF. The altar servers from the EF readily serve at the OF and are welcome to do so without asking. It’s not quite as easy for OF boys to serve the EF, due to the complexity of the inherent operations and, of course, the Latin. But, many OF servers have learned the EF and have been welcomed, not merely tolerated.
The pastor and his associate assist each other in their liturgical duties, each one hearing confessions at “both” Masses, assisting with Holy Communion at “both” Masses, preaching at “both” Masses. Recently, the associate pastor has learned the OF and occasionally celebrates It, substituting for the pastor. Once again, since it is not the pastor’s training, and since, as Vicar General, his time is limited, it is not possible at present for the pastor to celebrate the EF as a substitute for the associate. But, if it were possible, it would happen. Does this mean that all parishioners relish this kind of flexibility? Alas no. But, all parishioners know that they are free to leave and find another parish where they “think” everything will be to their liking. Of course, it’s a fact that no such “perfect” parish, be it EF or OF, exists – anywhere. Still the more the dissatisfied people leave, the more unified, integral and comfortably charitable Holy Rosary becomes.
Earlier, Holy Rosary was termed “unique.” That’s not quite accurate. There are several successful, unified parishes in the US, among them, such shining stars as St. John Cantius in Chicago and Assumption Grotto in Detroit. It seems that the EF is successful in churches either where it is exclusive, or where the EF and OF are unified. The EF never seems to do well in places where it is merely tolerated or where it is little more than a tenant. At the same time, it could be said that when the parish or chapel is exclusively EF, there is little effort on the part of that community to fit or integrate into the greater Church. This is, of course, not definitively the case, but words like ‘divisive’, ‘separatist’ and ‘exclusive’ tend to be used to describe EF centers that are either “stand alone” or tolerated as bothersome tenants. If there were more parishes like Holy Rosary, where the word ‘divisive’ is not welcome, it’s a safe bet that the American Catholic Church would be a much happier and faithful place.
Summorum Pontificum has technically removed more restrictions on the EF than any other motu proprio to date. But, of course, as the saying goes, “the mountains are high and the king is far away.” So long as the possibility of fear or stigma remains for priests who want to learn and celebrate the EF or for seminarians who wish to learn it, so long as there is this irrational fear, distrust, distaste or downright hatred of the EF among the American episcopate, there will always be problems for the EF. Bishops should foster the celebration of the EF in their dioceses, assuring their priests that sanctions and punishments are no longer in the equation. In places where there is a need, and if the unlikely situation exists where priests are unwilling to minister to people devoted to the EF, they should be ordered by their bishop to learn and to celebrate it. Note: This writer knows of NO PLACE where this is the case. On the contrary, there are many priests and seminarians who dearly want to learn and to celebrate the EF, but still, even in this day and age, they don’t dare even express that desire in some dioceses. To use the words of the present Holy Father, to penalize the faithful devoted to this form and to persecute clergy and seminarians who are attracted to the EF and who wish to serve those deprived faithful, such an attitude is “downright indecent.”
Thanks to the genuine support of the Archbishop and his Vicar General, happily, that is not the case at Holy Rosary. It is hoped that EF communities, be they exclusive or sharers of space, read this little exposé and re-evaluate themselves vis à vis their fellow Catholics. Likewise, it is hoped that OF communities, be they exclusive or be they “landlords” to EF communities, do the same, recognizing that they have nothing to fear.
Holy Rosary’s Pastor and Associate also believe that Holy Rosary embodies what the Council Fathers truly had in mind with regard to Sacrosanctum Concilium. Regardless of form, the active participation on the part of Holy Rosary Catholics is most impressive. And since the Holy Father recognizes the need for the EF and for harmony and cooperation between the two forms, how can any layman, priest or bishop do less?
Please check out Holy Rosary’s website: holyrosaryindy.org

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's good to see that things at this particular 'unique' parish are working out for traditional liturgical practice. However, I think it's evidently from reading this article just how 'clunky' the terms 'extraordinary form' and 'ordinary form' really are in normal human communication.
J Brown

Anonymous said...

As a parishioner of Holy Rosary (EF) I'd add a few remarks:

1) the music at the EF is very, very good.

2) the EF tends to great length, sometimes as long as two hours. Somehow, babies and toddlers (mostly) manage (my squirmer being an exception).

3) the lights in the church are far too bright! Italian Romanesque, even in its modern interpretation, needs shadows. Holy Rosary is bright like an examination room. The brightness is a visual distraction during the mass.

4) after every mass there is hospitality downstairs, so if you visit, please do join for coffee and food.

David said...

As a parishioner at Holy Rosary, I feel very blessed to have both the EF and the reverent OF Masses celebrated here. There truly has been a "gravitational pull," drawing the two forms a bit closer.

For example, after the renovation our Pastor decided that the communion rail should be used at the OF Masses also. While everyone was told that they could still stand and receive in the hand at the OF Masses, it has been my experience that many (possibly the majority?) kneel and receive on the tongue, of their own choice. This is one of the few parishes where I've seen people given that choice in the OF.

There are also quite a few ocasions (including this past Sunday) where either our Pastor or Associate will preach at all of the Sunday Masses (OF and EF) using the same homily. I've never noticed any problems in their doing so. They've easily overcome the "problems" of possibly different readings at the two forms, and there don't seem to be mobs of parishioners (from either side) who reject the sermons as "too traditional," "too modern," etc.

Finally, I agree that the "dialogue" Masses have served an important function here. As someone who had never experienced a TLM until about 5 years ago, I used to believe that a person couldn't "actively participate" without doing and/or saying stuff. I know differently now, and now I quite like Masses where only the server makes the responses. But I might never have gotten to that point if I had initially rejected the EF as too passive or impersonal. (I don't know if I would have done that, but it is a possibility)

Anonymous said...

Why did the FSSP priest leave the FSSP and join the archdiocese? I don't understand why he would leave the FSSP when he was only recently ordained.

Anonymous said...

Living in Indianapolis, I would make two observations.

1) With regard to EF only parishes being exclusive or cut off from the Church, I think that there are some members of EF parishes who do all too easily forget about the Church as a whole, but I also believe that more often than not such sentiments are not feelings of exclusivity so much as those of isolation because they feel like they do not have adequate support from others in the diocese or generally feel like the redheaded stepchildren of the Church - a feeling which is only reinforced by many laymen and a majority of those in the hierarchy. In other words, EF only parishes in my experience are more often than not far more vibrantly and loyally Catholic than the vast majority of Catholic churches today and their failure, if any, to integrate or fit in within the Church is mostly the result of the apathy and/or outright hostility from the local diocese, Church hierarchy, and most of the laymen. Also, I would add that I do not think Indianapolis is immune from these problems despite any successes that may or may not have been achieved at this particular church.

2) I should also say that I have been a parishioner at Holy Rosary. However, I am not a fan of dual use parishes that share the OF and EF. I readily admit that they can be a step in the right direction and better than the current situation within the Church as a whole, but there are still problems. Holy Rosary has done fairly well, but the use of both forms has still intentionally or unintentionally caused certain issues to continually develop, which are perhaps inevitable but cause a host of problems regardless. Also, the Archdiocese of Indianapolis has its own issues, which may or may not be as 'bad' as some others, but they are present nonetheless and the overall situation within the diocese is most certainly far from ideal. Overall, as I already said, although there are many things to praise in these situations, I am still not a fan of such dual use parishes. In the end I am afraid that it will only lead to a de facto split of high church vs. low church within the Church or a traditional worship vs. contemporary worship mentality which has always led to division and serious disaster within a great number of Protestant sects. I have no idea why Catholics should somehow think it will work out differently for us. While it may be a good step in the short term, I do not see it as a serious long-term solution for the Church.

In the end whether this solution is tried now or not, it will not solve the serious problems within the Church which will eventually have to be confronted by the hierarchy sooner or later. For instance, the new hope of many is that the deep liturgical and theological issues of the modern Church can be resolved by the EF within a particular parish gradually pulling the OF into a more theologically or liturgically correct orientation. Although it may in fact have some impact in this regard, this idea does not strike me as a particularly realistic or effective solution. At some point the hierarchy is going to have to get its hands 'dirty' and confront these profoundly troubling issues head on. A stopgap is simply not going to cut it. However, I am just a layman so you can judge for yourselves. Also, I would add that I wish Holy Rosary and the diocese as a whole well despite my own reservations.

- Arthur

Anonymous said...

As someone who went to Holy Rosary for years I very much appreciate the hard work that Fr. Magiera and his predecessors have put into making that parish a spiritual oasis in this archdiocese. I still have friends there and assist at Mass there when I am in town.

That said, being familiar with life at HR, I can say that many (though I would not claim most) in the pews do not agree with Fr. Magiera's positive assessment of the dialogue Mass. Thus I offer the following not as a mean-spirited attack (as I said, there is much to like about Holy Rosary and her priests), but as the opening of debate about the dialogue mass itself.

Fr. Magiera says:
In fact, Holy Rosary is very much a “dialogue Mass” church, which means that not only the school students but also all of the faithful (of all ages) who attend the EF know and make the Latin responses – and sing them at Sung Masses.

True enough, I suppose. But what he left out is that they are ordered in no uncertain terms to do so. This is especially true at daily Mass (mostly school students), but has happened at Sunday Mass, as it did recently, when Father notices fewer people making responses or singing the Pater Noster, an exceptional practice he demands be maintained. This has been my experience in other places as well -- the dialogue is not a natural development, but a project imposed from the top.

[to be continued]

Hieronymus

Anonymous said...

[continued]

The problem with this mandated dialogue is that it falls into the same false notion of participation as the NO. Father would have been more correct to say that the congregation pronounces out loud the responses in Latin -- I would question how many are giving consideration to what those words mean. Holy Rosary has done a fine job of trying to make a Latin class available for parishioners, but this is an introductory course. Even for someone who is at a more advanced level, it is difficult to quickly read foreign words out loud AND concentrate on what they mean until you are highly familiar with the language. I have studied languages at the advanced level, including Latin. In the classroom students are often called on to read a passage in the foreign language, then to translate. As a professor once pointed out, it is most often the case that the one reading out loud is least aware of the meaning of what he just read because his concentration is on fluid pronunciation. In the dialogue one is forced to speak a response quickly, then move on to make the next one in a timely fashion with no time to work out the Latin or check the English translation. Few are able to connect the words voiced to an interior movement of devotion, and it renders impossible meditation on prayers that may be particularly striking or on the mystery of what is taking place on the altar. Instead what you get is a superficial dialogue, where one party has little clue what is being said. The focus is on pronouncing the right words at the right time. What is done as an attempt to show that full and active participation can be done in the TLM actually effects its opposite.

[to be continued]

Hieronymus

Anonymous said...

[cont]
This is not, however, a critique of the use of Latin in the Mass, but of the promotion of verbal participation at the expense of the interior. This deeper participation is one of the great strengths of the non-dialogue TLM. You can read the prayers to yourself in whatever language you feel inclined at whatever pace you are able. You can meditate on any one of the beautiful prayers that make up the older missal, or on some point of the Mass that seems particularly edifying that day. You can follow the prayers that are attached to the actions of the priest if you so desire, or follow the words more slowly as the choir sings them -- the difference here is especially striking at the point of the Sanctus, where the obligatory singing of that prayer means necessarily that one cannot pray the canon, and the same is true of the Agnus Dei. The prayers of the Mass must be skipped in order to sing your part out loud.

In sum the non-dialogue Mass enables the people to actively engage in the Eternal Sacrifice, the united prayer of the Universal Church, in a way that corresponds to their interior dispositions. The dialogue Mass demands external conformity on behalf of the people, but, as stated above, it is often had at the expense of interior engagement. This is a source of strong frustration for some at Holy Rosary who feel obligated to dialogue, but can’t understand what they are required to say. Instead they check out, read the responses, then make nasty comments about the Latin Mass to others. This is not an experience of the Mass that should be fostered.

Please, priests, consider this when debating whether to dialogue.

Hieronymus

Tom the Milkman said...

While I don't know the situation at Holy Rosary, I agree with much of what Hieronymus has said here. A wickedly important element belonging to the novus ordo missae is its inherent emphasis on narrative over and against the sacrificial action. The holy Mass is first, last, and always a Sacred ACTION. I believe the emphasis on the inverse of that fact was indeed a calculated one on the part of its inventors, hardly a mark of liturgical reform. The result is a liturgy in stasis, separated within itself from the action of sacrifice. My point is that Hieronymus goes straight to the heart of at least one of the seemingly innocuous accidentals that accompany so-called 'dual rite' churches. Even as a classical musician, I am a Catholic who vastly prefers a low mass, "the mumble of the mass", as it's lovingly called in England, over a Missa Cantata. The silent Mass illuminates the Sacrifice in ways monumental and ineffable. That being said, one can only gratefully praise Holy Rosary Church for seeking a way out of the deadly morass of the conventional novus ordo, despite the perhaps too enthusiastic nagging of the priest to create a dialogue Mass at every event. I'm interested to hear other traditionalists on these points.

M. A. said...

"In sum the non-dialogue Mass enables the people to actively engage in the Eternal Sacrifice, the united prayer of the Universal Church, in a way that corresponds to their interior dispositions. _________________

Nicely articulated, Hieronymus. You express well my own sentiments and my own experience. Dialogue Masses, I find, actually impede my interior dispositions to elevate my mind and heart to God. There is too much noise all around me.

My son attends HR once or twice a year when he has to be in the area. It is an interesting situation there.

Fingolfin said...

Arthur:

Can you specify what problems you mean when it comes to high church v.s. low church in protestant churches? The high church movement has been very positive in the liturgical life of both for example the Anglican Church and the (lutheran) church of Sweden.

Anonymous said...

Arthur:

Can you specify what problems you mean when it comes to high church v.s. low church in protestant churches? The high church movement has been very positive in the liturgical life of both for example the Anglican Church and the (lutheran) church of Sweden.
___________________________________

Let me just say that I am a supporter of the Latin Mass ( or the EF) so I would obviously not really want to dispute any possible good influences that such high church movements have had in Protestant churches. I only wished to point out the dangers associated with seemingly catering to the liturgical preferences of groups within the Church rather than simply adopting a form of worship that is objectively right and proper. The high church groups within Anglicanism may indeed be good in a way, but the split which is ever widening within Anglicanism is not good for their group as a whole - from a standpoint of their own survival as a 'church', it would be better for them to all become high church, for instance. In other words, significant divisions in basic liturgical matters can lead to division and dissent in theological matters, etc. Therefore, I would rather have the Church stay whole and united with the best and most consistenly Catholic liturgy, for instance, rather than continue to fracture as has, I think, happened for the last several decades.

- Arthur

Anonymous said...

In an archdiocese of 230,000, there are two TLM churches. One in Indianapolis, and one in Batesville (East of Indy, towards Ohio).

I do wish Bloomington/Terre Haute had a regularly offered TLM.

That said, I do like Holy Rosary, and try to attend at least twice monthly.

And, I have found Fr. Magiera to be a wonderful confessor.

Fingolfin said...

Arthur:

The difference between, let say, the Anglican Church or the scandinavian lutheran national churches 8whom have also had a high church movement) and the Catholic Church is that while theese protestant churches is bound to serve the state and therefore also the political ideas (the church of sweden, for instance, is entirely gouverned by politicians in a sort of parlament where not even the bishops have a vote) the Catholic Church has a Magesterium. And since the "traditionalist-movement" or "the new liturgical movement" is more in accordence with the teachings of the magesterium I do do think that the liturgical influence of the EF mass will also come with doctrinal. I guess you mean that while the high church movements in the protestant national churches has succeed to influence the liturgical life in their churches, they have failed to influence in other areas. That is because theese churches is bound to a protestant, not catholic, view on the faith, something that sooner or later will develop into liberal theology. So I do not think we can apply the experience of the protestant high church movement to the catholic traditionalists.

But I do understand you concern about a split in the church between two forms of liturgy. But as I see it, this is just a period of transition and in the end even the OF while change into something more in harmony with catholic, liturgical tradition and the difference between the OF and the EF will not seem as considerable as it is today.

Henry said...

I appreciate equally the "quiet mumble" of an essentially silent daily low Mass, and the glorious Missa Cantata especially on a Sunday, with everyone who wishes joining in chanting the ordinary (Kyrie, Gloria, etc.), as do most do at the TLM which I attend (including the Pater Noster, in fact).

But voluntarily. I've never heard of anyone being admonished how to "participate". Indeed, the TLM rubrics have never prescribed the manner of lay participation, and it might be said from an historical viewpoint that detailed norms for the people and their enforcement is strictly a Novus Ordo phenomenon.

Anonymous said...

I ocassionally Attend Holy Rosary Roman Catholic Church both The Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass. They are both done with reverance not far from there is another Catholic Jewel Saint Athanasius Byzantine Catholic using The Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom. Indianapolis is lucky to have these fine Churches as well as priests like MSGR Schaedel, Father Mageria and Father Sidney Sidor Of Saint Athanasius Byzantine catholic Church.

Parishioner said...

These remarks come from a parishioner of Holy Rosary who attends both forms of the Liturgy celebrated there. In both forms the Mass is celebrated with reverence, dignity and attention to the rubrics as prescribed by the Church. I am somewhat amused by the comments regarding whether the dialogue Mass is beneficial or not and whether it allows one to reach the 'height of sanctity' desired. I find it interesting too, as one who is a regular attendee (about 5 time/week) That my experience of those who choose not 'to dialogue' is different from comments made I see these folks staring blankly into space - I figure they must 1) know Latin fluently 2) be in a state of spiritual exctasy or 3) trying to figure out what they are suppose to pick up at the grocery on the way home from Mass. Otherwise most of the folks attending the Extraordinary form are actively participating in the Mass, reading and speaking the parts appropriate to them. No I don't know Latin, but I do recognize many of the words and their meaning and after a few years have become adept at pronouncing the words from memory while I read the English translation as I am speaking the Latin. I know this sounds simple to those of you more educated in high church liturgy than I. But I love the Liturgy and when it is celebrated (in either form) in the manner that it is at Holy Rosary, I am led easily into the Church's highest form of worship of God which is His Holy Sacrifice.

New Catholic said...

I have read these comments only today (!) and am astounded by the comments criticizing the dialogue Mass. It is a wonderful experience, and should be more extended in America.

Ian Clerget said...

I believe that the purpose of having multiple types of EF liturgy is to elevate the status of the "high liturgy:" the Missa Cantata. I have not yet experienced the EF, although I have chosen to do so at Holy Rosary when the time comes: I tried to today, but the schedule has changed, and I was not able to attend. I believe that having the Low Mass is equally as important as having the High Mass (or Sung Liturgy), because it is the Low Mass that makes the High Mass with all the music, and ceremony seem that much more glorious: they are opposite means to the same end: the Glory of God and the celebration of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross at Calvary.