Mixing it up with Latin…
A dash of Latin.
Last evening I attended Mass at a Church in St. Paul I once frequented on a daily basis. It’s a lovely Church, with good priests, a devout congregation, and ample opportunity for the sacraments and Mass, as well as Perpetual Adoration.
I have become so accustomed to the Church I normally attend where the priest says Mass with his back to the people. It is a Novus Ordo parish, yet they have continually offered one or two Masses a week in Latin, and all of the Masses have never deviated from the Roman Rite through novelty or alteration.
The parish I attended last evening celebrates Mass in the vernacular - which is just fine with me. However, I have been noticing that many parishes are introducing more Latin into the liturgy - but not a lot. I think the new rubrics may call for this, or advise for this, and many good priests are doing so. Most often, it seems the use is limited to the Kyrie, the Sanctus, and the Agnus Dei.
Perhaps I’m a little too black or white about stuff, but I prefer consistentcy in liturgy. (I know the Kyrie is actually Greek and not Latin, but that has been tradition for centuries in the Latin Mass.) Sometimes I wonder if the insertion of Latin at various points in the vernacular Mass isn’t simply throwing a bone to those who want Latin back.
Mixing the liturgy up with Latin and English is disconcerting to me. Why not do either or? Does Latin make certain parts of the Mass more sacred? (Of course, it can be more accurate than the English translations at key points of the Mass.) It just seems a tad disingenuous to me, and I find it distracting. (Of course I am aware that from the beginning it was recommended that certain parts of the Novus Ordo retain the Latin, but that recommendation was rarely followed.) Nevertheless, if one is going to insert Latin, why not just do the entire Mass in Latin?
Extraordinary Ministers
(Check out Angela Messenger’spost on EMC’s.)
Since it was a daily Mass I attended and the attendance was low, the Church still used 3 Extraordinary Ministers for Communion. I wondered why they were needed at all, since most people were in line to receive from the Celebrant anyway. I received from an EM and took Communion in the hand. If I were to have received from the priest, I would receive on the tongue. I might mention, the altar server was a girl. (I know all of this is allowed, permitted, even encouraged, I’m just not comfortable with it anymore. I don’t see the reason for it.)
I think I’m so ready for the Traditional Latin Mass. At least it is consistent.
April 13th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
At the 8:30 Mass on Saturday mornings at St Anthony of Padua in northeast Minneapolis (6th & Main), we sing most of the Latin responses in Gregorian Chant.
I believe that is the far and away preferred way to participate in the celebration of the Mass.
Before Mass, we have a Holy Hour with the Divine Mercy Chaplet, a Rosary and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.
At the Basilica, occasionally the Kyrie is sung in Latin, English AND Spanish. I like it.
April 13th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
Actually, the EMOHC issue is one that has been pointedly ignored across the US. The last ruling on this was that they could only be used in extraordinary circumstances where the number of communicants was surprisingly larger than expected. They aren’t supposed to be used regularly and aren’t supposed to be in every parish for weekday Masses.
April 14th, 2007 at 11:32 am
The pic on this post is just stunning and what worship should look like. I may not be Catholic but I recognize beauty when I see it. However, we all know that having all those things of beauty does not make one devout. It helps. Just giving you a hi there, I’m still around, just going by a different name now.
April 16th, 2007 at 9:44 am
I’m curious: why would you receive in the hand from an EMOHC and on the tongue from a priest?
At this Mass, was the cup ministered to the people? If so, it would seem that the priest woud need assistance at Communion time.
April 16th, 2007 at 9:57 am
I prefer to receive communion kneeling and on the tongue from a priest or deacon. The Precious Blood was not distributed at the Mass I attended.
When I receive from a lay person, I accept the host in the hand because frequently, in my experience, the EMOHC are not experienced in distributing Communion on the tongue, and can be somewhat clumsy about it. In such a case, since a lay person is handling the host, I will do so as well by accepting communion in the hand. It is less distracting to do so. It is also a matter of convenience for both of us.