Cardinal Castrillon's comment is not remotely dispositive, even in his capacity as head of the PCED. There were and are ways to turn it into something dispositive. Those ways, which are not mysterious or magical, have yet to be used and, at this juncture, the likelihood that they might be used is fast receding.

Btw, I should note that I long recommended, before the issuance of SP, that the Mass in the EF be regularly offered (on each Sunday) in at least one church in a deanery (vicariate forane), at least for a period of a few years to determine if there is interest sufficient to sustain it. Then again, I also think that we should dispense with urban and suburban single-parish rectories and have all the priests of a deanery live together in a house of religion, as it were, for the deanery.

Ahem.

In the case of a church with multiple Masses in multiple languages, having an EF instead of one of those will actually serve people who speak both languages. Speaking of unity, it's interesting that in churches that have the EF, I've seen a mix of ethnicity, but in churches that have multiple vernacular language liturgies, it's a complete split.

A Latin OF would accomplish the same goal

A Latin OF Mass would certainly help. I don't know that it would be able to replace the EF in the affections of people attached to that form, however a Latin OF would certainly bring the two forms closer together.

It's my long-held conviction that if the EF Latin Mass is instituted in a parish setting, it ought to be celebrated according to the directives of De Musica Sacra, and the people taught to say and sing in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them.

If the EF Latin Mass is celebrated according to the prescriptions of De Musica Sacra, and a vibrant participation of the faithful encouraged, very few would be able to tell the difference between the OF Latin Mass and an EF Latin Mass.

Too often, I'm afraid, the EF Latin Mass is celebrated according to the limited preconciliar experience of those involved without any reference to the Church's documents and the often stated desires of the preconciliar Popes.

Julie, what you describe is what I have termed the error of "Nostalianism". Ignore Vatican II, Pius XII, Pius X, because it's not what I remember from when I was a kid in the '40s.

Trading land for cash.

That's about right, Chonak. It's been my experience over several decades with the TLM that there is not much awareness of the liturgical norms governing the use of the EF among TLM music people, the most recent and exhaustive of which is the 1958 Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy, De Musica Sacra.

De Musica Sacra, in keeping with the repeated instructions of Popes Pius X, XI and XII, taught that the congregation be taught to sing and say in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them. The popes used pretty tough language to get the point across. They did not want the people to be like this at the celebration of the preconciliar Latin Mass:

“. . . detached and silent spectators”—-Pope Pius XI, Divini cultus

“. . . .outsiders or mute onlookers”—-Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei

“. . . strangers”—-Pope Pius XII, De musica sacra

“. . . mute spectators”—-Pope Pius XII, De musica sacra

“. . . dumb and idle spectators”—-Pope Pius XII, Musicae sacrae disciplina

However, and I hate to say this so bluntly, at many TLM venues the above is what you'll find because there is, in many places, no effort or desire to include the PIP's in the liturgy.

There are two familiar TLM models which each attract a certain population: 1) the circa 1950's model which is popular in rural areas: silent, passive congregation with a girls' choir singing Baby Jesus hymns two octaves above middle C, and 2) the Mass-as-concert model which is popular in urban areas: silent, aristocratic congregation with a professional all-male schola singing the chants and professional choir singing polyphonic motets and Masses embellished with grand organ processionals.

Again, and I hate to be blunt, but it's little wonder neither of these models is very popular in your average OF parishes. If, instead there was more of an effort to implement the degrees of participation mandated in De Musica Sacra, perhaps there wouldn't be so much animus among the people and clergy to the Latin Mass, and I know there is animus because I have been on the receiving end of it many times.

I'm not trying to knock these paradigms; they may have a real value somewhere, esp. the second paradigm which I think perhaps should be available in at least one parish in every diocese because it is so beautiful.

However, for your average parish the Latin Mass might have far more appeal if the liturgy was comparable to many of the OF Mass programs I see described on this forum all the time and which I like to call the "populist" model: vernacular standard congregational hymns at entrance and recessional, Gregorian chant masses from the Kyriale that the people are encouraged to sing, GR propers by a mixed schola (men and women) and a polyphonic motet or two.

This model of the Latin Mass is instantly accessible to most OF Catholics, and I see that all the time at our Missa Cantata. Newcomers arrive and take our handout and have no problem following.

Sorry for the long lecture, but if the EF Latin Mass is to survive, I'm absolutely convinced that the "populist" paradigm is the missing link, the middle way to bridge the two forms of the Roman rite; the first two models are just too far removed from the typical Catholic's experience.

My former EF Parish (www.windsorlatinmass.org) certainly sings with gusto!

Mass VIII? Roof blown off!
Credo III? You can hear it down the road!
Deo Gartias at the end of Mass? They know 'em all!

They'll also sing vernacular hymns, the dialogue responses, and Masses XVII, XVIII, XI, IX, and I to some degree.

Thank you so much, Adam, and I'd love to visit your liturgy and many others who've listed their programs here.

When we first started doing the music at our chapel, our pastor gave us a video of a High Mass at an Anglican-use parish in Texas, and we used that for inspiration as well as watching many videos of French traditional Catholics celebrating the Sung Mass. Also, for years we've studied the Sunday music programs at the Windsor Latin Mass website and used their suggestions countless times.

Actually, being on this forum for a few years now has been a very important influence. I see all the time many EF and OF musicians who share basically the same liturgical/musical philosophy and whose music programs are very similar, and I think it's a very good practice for EF musicians to stay in the loop, so to speak, and try to stay within the general ballpark of musical practice here on the forum.

That is the tremendous value of this forum: to demonstrate that, as Pope Benedict said in SP, there

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture.

I think it's our duty as church musicians to keep seeking ways in the practical order to reconcile the two forms of the Roman rite and foster the "mutual enrichment" which Pope Benedict called for in SP. A few years ago it was considered taboo to mention the concept of "mutual enrichment" between the two forms, but maybe it's time to bring that idea more into the open. It's like the old saying, if you don't hang together, you're going to hang separately, and it's true.

At the end of SP which I was just re-reading, Pope Benedict asked us all to widen our hearts (2 Cor 6:11-13) and this especially gave me pause on this feast of Pentecost:

Let us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows.

I can't help but think the loosy-goosiness of current liturgical practice, with its over-arching philosophy of "well, that's the way we do it HERE, at St MakingItUpAsWeGoAlong encourages the outlook of those 60 old people.

Yes. I will say, that between our parish and the one I mentioned, I don't think there's a ton of ideological difference; They aren't waving banners and dancing around or anything like that. They basically have an organist and sing four traditional hymns at mass.

But what you say is still true; They sing at least one hymn in POLISH each week; we don't. We sing in LATIN. They don't sing in Latin. We do "traditional music," but it's not the SAME TITLES of "traditional music" that they do. On and on.

And you're right. It's silliness either way.

That seems like a very good, balanced letter. Hope this all works out.

Update: The New York Times has today published an article and a blog post on the recent events at Holy Innocents:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/28/nyregion/church-of-the-holy-innocents-home-of-the-citys-only-daily-latin-mass-might-close.html

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/defending-devotees-of-the-latin-mass-in-new-york/

And now an article in the National Catholic Register:

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/traditional-catholics-perplexed-over-n.y.-parishs-rumored-closing/