Question About The Latin Mass

[NonNovi]

I forget, does the laity say the great amen during a Tridentine liturgy? 

I had to look up what "the great amen" is... Even in the Novus Ordo we don't stress that very much here, but apparently in English there are several musical ways to sing amen at that moment. In Dutch we call it simply the acclamation (to the concluding doxology).

 

In the EF the priest says Per ipsum et cum ipso... in silence. He concludes out loud with Per omnia saecula saeculorum. The laity answers amen. So I guess we do say what you call "the great amen".

 

So Nihil, we do have to say it as amen is the proper response to every per omnia saecula saeculorum.

Edited January 11, 2013 by NonNovi

[Nihil Obstat]

So Nihil, we do have to say it as amen is the proper response to every per omnia saecula saeculorum.

 

In the usus antiquior, a lay response is not necessary or expected. As I said, it is not wrong, but it is also not necessary. As far as I understand these things.

[Mary+Immaculate<3]

Just a little thought I wanted to share. I was contemplating once that, when we go forth to receive Communion at the altar rail (for those churches that have it), it is like we are kneeling before the Gates of Heaven begging for a taste of what it will be like. Christ comes to us and shows us what Heaven will be like, eternal union with Him.

[i<3franciscans]

I went to Latin Mass for the first time on Christmas (I was recruited to sing with the choir) and I was so lost the whole time! I think it was a High Mass (There is such a thing right?) and basically the only thing I knew was not to say Amen when receiving. But I did end up liking Latin Mass more than I thought I would... 

Edited January 11, 2013 by i<3franciscans

[Nihil Obstat]

I went to Latin Mass for the first time on Christmas (I was recruited to sing with the choir) and I was so lost the whole time! I think it was a High Mass (There is such a thing right?) and basically the only thing I knew was not to say Amen when receiving. But I did end up liking Latin Mass more than I thought I would... 

 

There is a Low Mass, High Mass, and Solemn High Mass. :) A Solemn High Mass will have the priest plus an ordained deacon and subdeacon.

There is also a Solemn Pontifical Mass, when it is celebrated by a bishop. It is rather complex, and I have not been fortunate enough to see one in person yet.

[PhuturePriest]

I went to Latin Mass for the first time on Christmas (I was recruited to sing with the choir) and I was so lost the whole time! I think it was a High Mass (There is such a thing right?) and basically the only thing I knew was not to say Amen when receiving. But I did end up liking Latin Mass more than I thought I would... 

 

I've only been to one Latin Mass in my life. I'm going to a friend's wedding in April, and it's going to be a full Latin wedding Mass. Apparently those take like, two hours.

[Nihil Obstat]

That is what Katy and I are doing this summer. :proud:

 

[NonNovi]

I went to Latin Mass for the first time on Christmas  and I was so lost the whole time!

Yeah, the EF asks some effort, you actively have to learn what every part is. That's what makes it so much more interesting. Keep going, you'll get the hang of it ;)

 

There is also a Solemn Pontifical Mass, when it is celebrated by a bishop. It is rather complex, and I have not been fortunate enough to see one in person yet.

A bishop can also celebrate like he is just a priest. I've seen a Pontifical High Mass, it's awesome. I've also seen a Pontifical Novus Ordo High Mass in Latin. Also awesome.

 

In the usus antiquior, a lay response is not necessary or expected. As I said, it is not wrong, but it is also not necessary. As far as I understand these things.

There always should be an altar server when celebrating Mass. He represents the laity and has to say the answers. So actually answers are  necessary, but not by the people. (of course, in some cases priests say a private Mass without anybody present and answer themselves, but that's not what the Missal prescribes)

[Nihil Obstat]

There always should be an altar server when celebrating Mass. He represents the laity and has to say the answers. So actually answers are  necessary, but not by the people. (of course, in some cases priests say a private Mass without anybody present and answer themselves, but that's not what the Missal prescribes)

 

Yes, I should have said congregational response. But that is what I meant.

[Apotheoun]

I really do not like the restriction of the congregations responses to the server, and the Church Fathers would have found that idea to be highly irregular.

[Nihil Obstat]

I really do not like the restriction of the congregations responses to the server, and the Church Fathers would have found that idea to be highly irregular.

 

Well it is not a mandated thing. I think calling it a restriction is not necessarily correct. More like a custom.

I actually prefer when the congregation joins in the responses.

[Laudate_Dominum]

This is highly irregular!!

[Apotheoun]

Well it is not a mandated thing. I think calling it a restriction is not necessarily correct. More like a custom.

I actually prefer when the congregation joins in the responses.

 

It is a Late Medieval custom, because you have councils and bishops even in the early Middle Ages saying that at least two "viri ieiuni" at a minimum must be present during the liturgy (see Joseph Jungmann's reference in his book "The Mass of the Roman Rite" to Bishop Thorlak of Iceland's penitential written in the mid-12th century). In fact, a Synod in Paris (A.D. 829) said that private masses were a practice that had arisen through "partim incuria" and "partim avaritia."

 

I also prefer congregational singing of the responses because the liturgy is formulated as a true interaction and cooperation between the priest and the lay faithful.

 

After Vatican II all that really was necessary was an attempt to get the people to sing their portions of the liturgy. There was no need for a liturgical commission, nor did the Roman Missal need a complete overhaul.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Fidei Defensor]

It is a Late Medieval custom, because you have councils and bishops even in the early Middle Ages saying that at least two "viri ieiuni" at a minimum being present during the liturgy (see Joseph Jungmann's reference in his book "The Mass of the Roman Rite" to Bishop Thorlak of Iceland's penitential written in the mid-12th century).

 

I also prefer congregational singing of the responses because the liturgy is formulated as a true interaction and cooperation between the priest and the lay faithful.

 

After Vatican II all that really was necessary was an attempt to get the people to sing their portions of the liturgy.  There was no need for a liturgical commission, nor did the Roman Missal need a complete overhaul.

 

Thanks for your opinion. However, the Roman Church has its own traditions just as the Eastern Church does. I could call the Eastern Liturgies a big smelly pile of fluffy poo, but I don't. Because 1) It's none of my business, and 2) who the hell cares?

[Apotheoun]

Thanks for your opinion. However, the Roman Church has its own traditions just as the Eastern Church does. I could call the Eastern Liturgies a big smelly pile of fluffy poo, but I don't. Because 1) It's none of my business, and 2) who the hell cares?

 

That is why I only referenced Western sources.  The Roman Church does have an ancient tradition, but of course private masses and the like are not ancient.