From a reader:
I am considering starting an EF daily Mass in my parish. I am considering offering it as per usual with the exeption of using the vernacular for the propers (introit, collect, gradual, communion, post communion) and the readings. I once read that Bishop ___ thought such an EF would be permissible. I am interested in what you and readers interested in the EF think about this; specifically, is it permissible and if so, advisable?
It is NOT permissible to do the Propers in English.
I suppose you could request an indult for this from the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, but I doubt it would be given.
Concerning readings in the vernacular, there is disagreement about the permissibility of having the readings only in English, rather than in Latin first and then read at the pulpit in English.
In my opinion, even if we attain clarity about the matter, and it turns out that it is permissible, it is NOT advisable to do readings in English only. I cannot get behind the idea. Read the readings in English prior to the sermon.
Moreover, you can supply people with “worship aids” that have translations of the the whole Mass. You can also urge people to obtain and bring their own hand-missals.
Leave the liturgical readings in Latin. That is the most inclusive approach it you have a congregation in which there are more than one language represented.
The proclamation of Holy Scripture during the the Church’s sacred liturgy is not primarily a didactic act. It isn’t just a “teaching moment”. It is symbolic as well. The Epistle is proclaimed in the liturgical South (the right side of the altar), which represents the land of the converted. The Gospel is proclaimed to the liturgical North, the land of the yet-to-be converted. The proclamation of the Word of God in the language of the Church points to Christ as Word, and we are members of Christ’s Body, the Church.
Loading ...
Around the time Paul the sixth wrote about smoke of satan and no more changes the laity are confused, he also wrote on how the mass was to be celebrated. First he wanted the Mass offered in Latin at the very least once a month in each parish, more often if possible. He also wanted most Masses with the priest using the vernacular and the people responding in Latin. Pity it never caught on.
The best way to assist at Mass if you want to specifically follow all the prayers and readings is just to get good with the hand missal. Once you do this, there is no other method that could work as well and you would see how counterproductive it would be to try to “vernacularize” parts of the Mass to make it easier to follow along with. Get good with your missal and you don’t even want to have the priest repeat the readings in the vernacular because you have them all right in front of you!
That said, if the permission was ever given, a priest could get his hands on the 1964 Missal (not a Editio Typica but an edition of the 1962). I have a Benzinger one and it seems to me that all they did was vernacularize some of the ordinary parts the ’62 and the readings. I also have the little lectionary that was printed along side the missal. It doesn’t look like it was set up to be a vernacular Epistolarium/Evangelarium, but maybe it was.
What about at low Mass? There, you can vernacular hymns, why could you not have vernacular propers? Please explain why this cannot be done.
Vernacular hymns at a Low Mass? I’ve never experienced that.
The Propers of the Mass in essence are scripture readings. Summorum Pontificum says that scripture readings may be done in the vernacular, and that at low mass they may be given in the vernacular without being done in Latin first.
The Roman Missal published in 1964(which IS the 1962 Missal approved for use in the United States) is the Mass celebrated as the person writing Fr. Z describes. I do think the PCED would allow it’s use.
I think there is merit to it’s use, because I think that Latin can keep people from the Extraordinary Form, where the Rite itself may be very attractive.
THIS openess to the vernacular could be the MUTUAL enrichment. Not the RITE, the Language.
Please someone explain how to obtain and use a hand missal. I haven’t seen one for fifty years and don’t know where to get or what to get. Thanks.
Baronius Press. Purchase the Roman Missal 1962. HERE
Once you are familiar with the Rite of Mass, you will pick up on visual cues that tell you where you are at in the order of mass. Pray the mass using the Missal. The Missal in your hand will have a translation of the mass the priest is offering at the altar. Pray the Mass with the priest….
Recently I was wondering if, as the priest said Mass in Latin, a reader could at the same time read the translation aloud. I dismissed the idea as really wacky and liberal and disruptive – but this would allow the priest to say the Mass as he ought, and still allow the laity to know what was being said. Sometimes I think the laity is so weakened that any spoon-feeding might help.
I know so many who attend the Tridentine Mass without benefit of a personal Missal and they miss so much of what Jesus Christ is asking the Father for us. The prayers are so beautiful, edifying and teach one so thoroughly about the true nature of acceptable prayer. A close relative of mine who attends with me is so lost by the Missal and the flipping back and forth, that he refuses to use one. Such chagrin because I realize what he is missing, but many do this!
How about a sheet of the day’s prayers? The Mass Propers don’t necessarily have to be read by the congregant at the exact time of the prayer, but making the translation available is better than nothing. The next step could be the ‘program’ or the ‘order of service’ where the prayers are inserted into a boilerplate order of Mass along with congregational responses.
Hmmm. Interesting…you see this was the very situation that the Church was trying to combat in the 50s: stone stillness of attendees who would not avail themselves to learn what the Mass prayers were. It all got derailed into hollow participation and teaching prayer badly.
Late for heaven: EWTN catalogue has em, http://www.ewtnreligiouscatalogue.com/1962+DAILY+MISSAL+-+BLACK+LEATHER/cid=31/page_no=1/edp_no=15666/shop.axd/ProductDetails
as well as many Catholic bookshops.
greasemonkey said, “The Propers of the Mass in essence are scripture readings. Summorum Pontificum says that scripture readings may be done in the vernacular, and that at low mass they may be given in the vernacular without being done in Latin first.”
S.P. does not</b. say that. It says, "Art. 6. In Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, the readings may be given in the vernacular, using editions recognised by the Apostolic See." The "readings" refer to the epistle and the gospel not the Propers or anything else.
sorry for typo on syntax above.
S.P. does not</b. say that. It says, "Art. 6. In Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, the readings may be given in the vernacular, using editions recognised by the Apostolic See." The "readings" refer to the epistle and the gospel not the Propers or anything else.
Did it again due to my ineptitude and fat fingers. This is the last attempt.
greasemonkey said, “The Propers of the Mass in essence are scripture readings. Summorum Pontificum says that scripture readings may be done in the vernacular, and that at low mass they may be given in the vernacular without being done in Latin first.”
S.P. does not say that. It says, “Art. 6. In Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, the readings may be given in the vernacular, using editions recognised by the Apostolic See.” The “readings” refer to the epistle and the gospel not the Propers or anything else.
Great site for printing out propers sheets for the congregation: maternalheart dot org slash propers dot html.
BaroniusPress dot com for you daily missal
Since there always seems to be a lot of laywomen in search of active participation, perhaps they could be in charge of printing out the Latin-English propers each Sunday (or even for daily Mass) and placing them next to a stack of red missals at traditional Latin Masses.
Also, the “Google” search engine is a fantastic tool to find these resources.
Late for heaven, there are at least two Latin-English missals available for the TLM/EF Mass:
One is published by Baronius Press: HERE
Another is by Angelus Press: HERE
For the Ordinary Form/Novus Ordo:
There is a Latin-English Missal co-published by Scepter and Midwest Theological Society: HERE
YOU are interpreting what “readings” are. I am opining that readings are in fact readings from scripture. YOU are saying that that excludes parts of the proper that are readings from scripture and limiting that to the epistle and gospel. I’m simply claiming that a broader approach to “readings from scripture” could be taken that might include all the readings from scripture.
I’m not saying that it should be done at all places and times. i’m merely indicating that this may be licit and have a value.
TLM priests read the Latin Epistle and Gospel, at the proper time, and then again in English, either at the pulpitum in the sanctuary, in wreckovated churches, or in the old-fashioned ones away from the sanctuary, which is technically a suspension of the Mass.
Why the priest takes off the maniple and in the States, sometimes puts on the biretta is to show this to reading of the English to be outside the Mass . The propers are ALWAYS in Latin. Why a good Baronius Missal is a nice thing to have. Priests trained at St. John Cantius in Chicago are good at these things, but I do not know if the priests in my diocese who do these things well learned the rubrics there or elsewhere.
“Moreover, you can supply people with ‘worship aids’ that have translations of the the whole Mass.”
Laudamus Te magazine (disclaimer: I am the editor) was designed to meet the need for helpful hand missals for the Extraordinary Form Mass. We are aiming very high: our mission is to bear witness to the sublime beauty of the ancient Latin liturgy, to foster renewed devotion to its merits, and to aid the faithful in entering more deeply into its sacramental mysteries. To that end we are printing daily EF propers in Latin and English, with morning/evening prayers drawn from the Divine Office and the writings of the saints, devotional essays spanning the 2,000 year history of the Church, beautiful sacred illustrations–artists Daniel Mitsui and Matthew Alderman appear regularly in our pages–poetry, chant, and more.
Our premier issue Advent 2012 shipped mid-November and the Christmastide edition is on its way to the printer. We’re always looking for feedback to make Laudamus Te even better. To see a sample of our work, visit laudamus-te.com
Father Gregory: I’m not sure I follow you. Could you explain what connection or relation you are seeing between hymns, which are not part of the Mass, and the propers which are part of Mass?
I have seen this done three ways. The first being that while the priest reads the readings in Latin in a low voice, a lector reads them in the vernacular to the people – I didn’t care for this at all. The second was the priest reading the readings in the vernacular right before the homily. Thirdly, I’ve seen no vernacular readings – the congregation is expected to have a hand-missal to follow the readings.
An awful translation but interesting nonetheless:
“…must we conclude that it was necessary to keep all these things without change? The Council, with prudence and moderation, answered in the negative. Something had to be reformed and recovered.
It is clear that the first part of the Mass, made to teach the faithful and make them express their faith, needed to achieve these ends more clearly and, to some extent, more intelligibly. In my humble opinion, two reforms in this direction seemed useful: firstly, those of the rites of this first part, and some translations in vernacular.
Make the priest to approach the faithful, to communicate with them, to pray and sing with them, to be, therefore, at the pulpit, saying in their language the prayers, the readings of the Epistle and the Gospel, let the priest sing the divine traditional melodies of the Kyrie, the Gloria and the Credo with the faithful. So many happy reforms that make this part of the Mass find its real purpose. Let this didactic part of the Mass to be ordered according to sung Masses on Sunday, so that this Mass can be the model according to which the rites of other masses will be adapted.”
Msgr. Marcel Lefebvre, Perspectives conciliaires entre la troisième et la quatrième session, published in Itinéraires, June 6th 1965. Original in French: http://lacriseintegriste.typepad.fr/weblog/1965/06/article-de-mgr-lefebvre-dans-itin%C3%A9raires.html
wolfeken said, ” . . . printing out the Latin-English propers each Sunday (or even for daily Mass) and placing them next to a stack of red missals at traditional Latin Masses.”
Here is one good website for the TLM/EF Propers and readings:
http://missale.heliohost.org/
Una Voce Orange County used to provide printed Propers; I’m not sure if they still do.
At risk of causing a slight derailment, I find it funny that one would try to put the TLM in the vernacular when I’ve seen an OF mass (with an almost exclusively young (18-21) congregation) said almost entirely in Latin! [Which is how it ought to be celebrated.]
Well, what I meant was, that since at a low Mass you cannot sing the Latin propers or ordinary, but can sing hymns in the vernacular, could you not sing metrical versions of the propers in English, or even chant versions thereof? If we sang Immaculate Mary on Dec. 8 as an entrance song, could we not, at a low Mass, sing the proper introit in English?
Greasemonkey says: “The Roman Missal published in 1964(which IS the 1962 Missal approved for use in the United States) is the Mass celebrated as the person writing Fr. Z describes. I do think the PCED would allow it’s use.”
I’m not so sure that’s the case, Greasemonkey. You have to be careful with anything published around that time, because the changes were just beginning. The Motu Proprio says that the Extraordinary form is to be celebrated according to the liturgical books in force in 1962, but from September 1964 the first aspects of the Council with regard to liturgy (“Inter Oecumenici” – 26th September 1964) began to be implemented, so that for example among the more notable changes the psalm Judica me was omitted, and the formula for distributing Holy Communion was shortened, and various rubrics were altered, such as the 5 signs of the Cross in the Canon. Also, permission was given for the vernacular in the propers i.e. Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Offertory, Sanctus and Agnus Dei. As Fr. Z points out above, if a Missal contains this then it is not valid for the TLM.
However a Missal printed in the earlier part of 1964, prior to September, would in all liklelihood just be the 1962 book, which would be o.k.
Wow , Fr. Z. a simple explanation and quite an enlightenment for me. I was always confused by “ad-orientem”, when the actual altar did not face east. Now that you said about the right side of the altar is “liturgical south” it finally cleared up my simple little mind (at least on this subject).
Yes, there is the beauty of the Latin (which being a “dead” language) that can never change and in this way the readings of the Epistle and Gospel will ALWAYS remain the same. Whereas when done in the vernacular it is subject to constant change and interpretation. Latin, the official language of the Church, so that the exact same words are read world-wide in a show of Liturgical Unity of the ONE TRUE CHURCH.
As one lay man devoted to the traditional mass, this type of celebration would INFURIATE me. I would be beside myself with anger that some rogue priest would so debase the glorious traditional latin mass by failing to speak the proper prayers in the language of our holy mother the Church.
Therese:
et al
No “disclaimer” needed by me. I received my first copy last week. It is, indeed, an excellent source for following the EF Mass and other prayers and meditations. I highly recommend it.
The Missal I refer to (1964) IS the 1962 Missal with English Proper and Latin Ordinary. It is not the later one with changes.
I own them both. I am emersed in this stuff.
greasemonkey,
Article 6 of Summorum Pontificum certainly permits the reading of the Epistle and Gospel in the vernacular, after they have been read liturgically in Latin at the altar.
That this is the Church’s interpretation of this article is borne out by the following paragraph of Universae Ecclesiae (as approved subsequently by Pope Benedict):
26. As foreseen by article 6 of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, the readings of the Holy Mass of the Missal of 1962 can be proclaimed either solely in the Latin language, or in Latin followed by the vernacular or, in Low Masses, solely in the vernacular.
Plainly, the phrase “in Latin followed by the vernacular” followed by “or, in Low Masses, solely in the vernacular” makes it clear that in sung Masses it is not permitted to read the Epistle and Gospel solely in the vernacular, omitting their reading in Latin.
And, and in any case, the is no authoritative precedent for the term “readings” in this context including anything other than the Epistle and Gospel. The introit, collects, antiphons, etc. are always referred to as “propers” not as readings.
Surely, the Church’s own interpretation of her instructions should be followed faithfully. Unfortunately, every liturgical abuse probably starts with good intentions and some individual’s belief that he can do it better by deciding for himself how to interpret liturgical norms and rubrics.
We have no vernacular readings. For those who don’t have a missal, Father provides the Propers courtesy of Una Voce along with the red books. Our pastor doesn’t think there is a need to re-read the Epistle and Gospel in English, because we have all just read it. Deo Gratias! He thinks we are literate.
We have 2000 years of saints who didn’t have the vernacular. It’s just this gravitational pull down the slippery slope of the easy life. Millions of people of all ages zealously learn how to use the most complex electronic gadgets these days but wine and whimper at what is considered to be the insurmountable task of having to silently read a short passage from the scriptures along side of the Latin.
greasemonkey: yes, I get you insofar as your own missal goes. However what you have is clearly a 1962 missal while what the querist in the post refers to is some sort of hybridisation using the 62 rite and rubrics but vernacular propers a la the 64/65 changes. Such a rite never in fact existed, and would hardly be approved.
PS to above post
By “it” in “I highly recommend it” I meant, and should have added, the LAUDAMUS TE magazine (for those of you who didn’t read “therese’s post above.
Late for heaven, here’s a one stop shopping place for hand missals of all kinds and sizes, from children’s missals and inexpensive missalettes (like the ones seen stacked with the Une Voce propers at most TLMs) to thin Sunday-only missals to thick daily missals:
http://www.fraternitypublications.com/hand-missals.html
Incidentally, the Una Voce propers–files for printing the ubiquitous 4-page Sunday leaflets–are found at http://uvoc.org/Propers.html. Though the last year shown there is 2011, the propers for a given Sunday are the same every year. Like many others, my TLM community makes these available for every Sunday Mass.
Finally, the Saint John Fisher Missale site makes the propers available in an alternative (and beautiful) format: http://musicasacra.com/sjfm/
When I say “Rite” I am referring to the mechanics…. the Ritual.
The 1964 Missal contains the Ritus servandus, de defectibus, and all of the material including the MP of John XXIII in the front of it. It is the 1962 Missal with an English proper.
I do think that the current legislation allows for the Epistle, Gradual and Gospel to be spoken in English or the vernacular at a low Mass. I also think we shoot ourselves in the foot in terms of making the EF Mass more accessible to the general population of Catholics who would love it if there was more vernacular. I have come to the conclusion that the 1965 Missal that was a hybrid of vernacular and Latin did it the wrong way. My prayer is that one day the EF Mass of 1962 would allow for vernacular as an option for all the changing parts of the Mass, Introit, Collect, Readings, Offertory Antiphon, Secret, Preface, Communion Antiphon and Post Communion Prayer. All the fixed prayers would be mandated in Latin, no vernacular option. If this were possible today, I think the EF Mass would truly give the OF Mass a run for its money, so to speak.
@greasemonkey: not all of the propers are actually quotations from Holy Scripture; a fair number of them are non-scriptural texts, sometimes ancient, approved by the Church (e.g. the “Gaudeamus omnes in Domino…” introits for many saints’ feasts). Also, it’s clear from the rubrics of the missal that the propers are simply not “readings” in the sense that the Epistle and Gospel are, as Henry Edwards has pointed out; for example, they are chanted by the choir at a High Mass while the sacred ministers are saying completely different prayers. That’s quite distinct from what happens at the Epistle and Gospel.
ppb: “Also, it’s clear from the rubrics of the missal that the propers are simply not “readings” …”
When a question like this comes up, the comments often suggest that some priests nowadays are celebrating the TLM without having studied its rubrics, perhaps not even having ever read them. Of course, they are printed only in Latin in the 1962 Missale Romanum, but a English translation of the rubrics is available at fraternitypublications.com, along with the FSSP Ordo that contains an English translation of the equally vital Ritus Servandus (“The Rite to be Observed”) from the Missale. For a total of $20, these Ordo and Rubrics booklets might make a good Christmas present for priests who need them.
Late for heaven says: Please someone explain how to obtain and use a hand missal. I haven’t seen one for fifty years and don’t know where to get or what to get.
Here are two modern and very popular editions:
Angelus Press 1962 Missal
Baronius Press 1962 Missal
I have used traditional missals since the late 1950s. The Angelus Press 1962 Missal is the finest that I’ve ever seen or used. Others hold the same about the Baronius Press 1962 Missal. Either way, one will get a very complete quality missal that is a joy to own and that will last several lifetimes.
There are also some very good on-line resources for each day’s complete liturgy. Here is a website for the daily liturgy in Latin and English.
After one has the liturgy in hand, from missal or from website, one may try following the liturgy during the daily Masses shown at Christ the King Church.
With respect to the issue of this thread, I am of the opinion that great insult to the integrity of the Extraordinary Form Mass is made whenever it is arrogantly assumed that its liturgy must be watered downed and dumbed down for a modern congregation, one that some priest obviously thinks is too stupid to understand what presumably less educated people have had no problem understanding for at least 15 centuries before the liturgy was destroyed after Vatican II. Doing the Propers in vernacular is an obvious ploy to sneak innovations to the EF. I would leave any parish where such abuses are tolerated and encouraged by its clergy or congregation. I abhor this attempt to corrupt the purity of the Extraordinary Form Mass.
Many of you all place a very high priority on the Language of the rite. I don’t think it’s the be all end all of what the EF is all about. I’m not against it, but I think the Rite itself is the jewel in the crown of the EF, and more folks would value that form of the mass IF there were more vernacular in it…..
One of the many reasons I attend the TLM/EF Mass is to hear the Latin – both spoken and sung.
The Latin Mass has produced thousands of saints from all over the globe. That’s good enough for me!
As someone mentioned above, when the Latin is translated into the vernacular, the words are no longer as clear and succinct as they were in the original Latin. Translations often bring about incorrect translation, which breeds misunderstanding of doctrine. That should be obvious to the OF/Novus Ordo attendees and the myriad bad translations suffered there over the last 40 years! It is also one reason why the Church still publishes its documents in Latin.
I think that greasemonkey makes a good point in terms of the notion of mutual enrichment. And there would be some potential as far as Low Mass, keeping solemn Missa Cantata with Latin propers and readings in vernacular after being chanted in Latin. At the same time I get Fr. Z’s point that the propers and readings in Latin is both proclamation and effective, and adheres to the unity of the Church. It’s an interesting question, no doubt.
Have heard the Gospel chanted (in English) at NO Mass and I think it really elevates it.
I should add also that I have a background in rudimentary Italian, and took a total of only two semesters worth of very beginning Latin in college, and am able very often to reach an organic comprehension of the readings in Latin, though I do not “know” every single word. Sometimes it is just one or two single words in the Gospel and I can identify the passage on my own. I suspect it would be similar for Spanish speakers, with just a little background, not extensive. There are so many roots in English words that this can often tip off as well. But it’s true, if there were no worship aids or missals then it would be a different story. I have found as well that the ordinary prayers in Latin take on new meaning to me. Sometimes hearing something differently adds a freshness. It’s not something we generally want to take on, but the foreignness of another language is a chance to start anew and gives us a basis to ponder things a while longer than we might with a surface comprehension. There is a lot to be said for that process. Americans do not go through that as we have no geographical necessity to adapt to languages used around our borders, by and large, but there is a lot to be said for that process, spiritually.
Greasemonkey, the time of Vatican II was the time to make appropriate changes in the mass, instead of the insane level and kinds of changes that were made.. If we had continued to use the text of the mass as it was, but to say some parts in the vernacular, perhaps to have the canon out loud, but still ad orientem, of course, I think this would have been well accepted by most. But after what happened, a large number of people are traumatized. Even those who didn’t live through it, when they find the old mass and compare it to what they have experienced previously, are traumatized by their sense of having been deluded and cheated. (I am not saying that any celebration of the Novus Ordo would do that, but certainly what many Catholics have now grown up with did cheat them.) So now the people who are devoted to the EF mostly do not want to see ANY change in it, or in the way it is celebrated. I think the consensus is to leave it as it is for a long time yet, and hope that it has an effect on the way the Novus Ordo is celebrated.
The Eastern rites after V2 put their rites into the vernacular, with some parts still in their liturgical languages (Greek, Arabic, Church Slavonic) which would be the equivalent of putting the EF into English with some parts still in Latin. They also opened the Royal Doors in the iconostasis during the anaphora, which I think would be the equivalent of having the canon said aloud. (The iconstasis, and in some groups an additional curtain drawn, are I think a spatial equivalent of the silent canon, that represented the idea that these words are so holy that they have to be set apart, that they are spoken by the priest to God, as when the high priest in the temple entered the Holy of Holies. I am still contemplating this; it sounds right but I am having trouble participating interiorly with something I am only reading and not also hearing. I am willing to accept that this is my limitation but I do think some other people share this limitation. The change the Eastern Churches made seemed to work well without profaning the holiness of the anaphora so I wonder if the Western Church could have changed just that much. But, it seems, at least not now.) And it seems to me that the only people who could know what might be appropriate changes, would be people really steeped in the EF, saturated with it. You wouldn’t want people with a mostly Novus Ordo sensibility (such as I probably still am) deciding what changes should be made.
By the way, yard sales, thrift stores, used book stores, and auctions, are good sources for missals. At one point I had 5 of them, but I have since given some away. I had a couple of them for over 30 years before I ever had the opportunity to use one of them at a mass!
Susan Peterson
I did not say, nor did I intend to imply that Latin in the EF should be abolished or that Latin as out liturgical language is not significant. Also worth mentioning, I did not imply that the Rite should change. I love ad orientam, I think it’s the perfect posture to take in the liturgy. I also adore the silent canon. I was not speaking about changes that should be imposed on any of us who love the EF. I was speaking about a possible option to draw people in to the mystery of the liturgy who find Latin a stumbling block, not an either or ultimatum.
When the Pope speaks of a mutual enrichment what does he mean? What does he mean for us? It’s certainly a challenge. If he meant to imply a one way street then I don’t think he would have used the word mutual.
I understand the fears…..
BE NOT AFRAID.
I’m with you, Fr. Z. Not only would I leave out all vernacular in the Mass, but I would extend some Latin into the sermon as well. And when they televise the Papal Masses, cut off that narrator who breaks into the Latin. It’s beautiful and perfect the way it is.
Thanks, Bea. I’ll pass your kind words along. ;-)
Eulogos wrote: “Now the people who are devoted to the EF mostly do not want to see ANY change in it, or in the way it is celebrated. I think the consensus is to leave it as it is for a long time yet, and hope that it has an effect on the way the Novus Ordo is celebrated. ”
I was baptized in the EF and raised in the OF, as were most of my friends. We do not want to see alteration of any sort with the Old Mass–tinkering, tinkering, tinkering is what drove us away from the OF in the first place. (And yes, please, esp. for those of us who do not have access to the EF and feel positively starved, could we somehow arrange to pull the plug on narrators of Papal Masses…)
I’m not sure why there’s so much confusion on this very simple point:
1. At non-low Masses, the readings must be proclaimed in the Latin.
2. At low Masses, the readings may be proclaimed in the vernacular instead of in Latin.
I would disagree with Southern Orders in that the Gradual is not one of the readings–only the Epistle and Gospel are. Once you include the Gradual, why not the Alleluia/Tract? And then why not the Introit, Offertory, and Communion? The reason is that the readings come from the lectionary, and all those other things come from the gradual.
In practice, I have only ever seen the Epistle and Gospel read in the vernacular at Low Mass, and only at one parish (my own).
To JuliaSaysPax saying, “I’ve seen an OF mass […] said almost entirely in Latin!” Fr. Z responded, “Which is how it ought to be celebrated.” My most common experience (outside the English-speaking world) is the OF sung entirely in Latin, except for the Lessons, spoken in the local vernacular alone. Is that unusual? Or (im)permissible?
At Low Mass, may the Last Gospel be in the vernacular? What about the introductions to the readings?
For a moment to compare secular and sacred: for those who could not certainly follow a sung work, there were libretti – and then came the technical possibility of providing a written simultaneous translation analogous to film subtitles.
Would there be a liturgical analogue possible that was permissible and not too fraught with dangers of abuse?
This (on YouTube) – following a peformance by ear and its actual medieval manuscript source note-for-note by eye – is fascinating and a very valuable development for museums, but anything of the sort would be too massively distracting in liturgical practice:
Mapping Cyprus- Paul Van Nevel present the first Karaoke?
(the ‘karaoké’ is misleading, at least insofar as I do not hear anyone singing along…).
Thanks for all the links to the sites for the Propers and the Liturgical calendars. I have copied them all out and am going to disseminate to some friends and family.
Wow. LiveMass gives an excellent opportunity to any priest studying how to offer Mass, and of course allowing anyone to unite themselves to a Mass. [One’s daily offering should include uniting oneself to Masses offered that day, what a great way to make your day most efficacious!]
And Henry Edwards deserves that Star! Right on target, friend!
frdanbecker, not sure you got the answer to your question but this is from Instruction Universae Ecclesia, PCED, dated 30 April 2011:
“26. As foreseen by article 6 of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, the readings of the Holy Mass of the Missal of 1962 can be proclaimed either solely in the Latin language, or in Latin followed by the vernacular or, in Low Masses, solely in the vernacular.”
http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/cedinsumpon.HTM
“readings” refers to the epistle and the gospel.
So, Latin must/must be used to proclaim the epistle and the gospel except in a Low Mass when they may/may be proclaimed solely in the vernacular. Personally, I have never observed the readings proclaimed solely in the vernacular in a Low Mass. They have always been said in Latin at the altar – “epistle side” then “gospel side” – and then sometimes in English at the ambo prior to the priest’s homily.
Not sure about the “Last Gospel”. Seems to me that since it wasn’t addressed by SA or the UA documents that it should be said in Latin only as the norm.
sic “UA” = “UE”
Apologies. My posts above were redundant. The Chicken had already responded likewise.