Mexicans Fill Pews, Even as Church Is Slow to Adapt

[Elizabeth502]

The immigrants I have met have tried hard to learn English because it is essential to them getting good jobs to provide for their families.

Guess we have different experiences. It is not my experience either with regard to church or with regard to education.

Pro-tip, English is an official language of the Philippines and it is really easy to find a school that offers it. The fact that they will leave if there isn’t a Spanish Mass is an argument for Spanish masses.

This is true, about Filipinos and their education. However, it does not explain why:

(1) Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese immigrants who are Catholic do not stop going to Mass when they can’t find a Mass in their native language, even if they are not very literate in English. They get what’s going on at Mass. What it can prevent them from doing is joining in English responsorials or singing English hymns. It is simply a fact that one prays privately always, and responds interiorly at Mass, in whatever language is native to that person. One does not need a Mass in one’s native language to accomplish this. God’s hearing us, always, whether those prayers are orally recited or privately offered.

(2) English-speaking visitors to countries in Europe do not necessarily absent themselves from Masses when they can’t find an English Mass.

(3) A non-immigrant Catholic whose parish offers English and Latin Masses, is not permitted to skip Sunday Mass entirely if he or she misses all the scheduled English Masses for that day, on the excuse that this parishioner “doesn’t understand Latin” (yet).

A think a better interim solution is to supplement what Spanish Masses are offered with Spanish-translation missals and hymnals, so that no parishioner will be affected by a closed or reduced-service parish. At the moment, the former is somewhat of a moot point until the New Missal takes effect this fall.

I do not think “the answer” is to try to provide more Spanish Masses than the Church can reasonably provide. I think the Church should do its best, but concentrate on encouraging literacy in what is still the universal language of business: English. As I said, not all will agree, but since education is my profession, I consider education, with the fluency that that requires, essential to social justice for immigrants. I think literacy outreach is fundamental to honest social justice, and I have always worked for that when it comes to the black community as well (where often the main guardian in a single-guardian household is not well educated). I.m.o., the Catholic Church should be a leader in this effort, precisely because of the social justice mandate.

 

[Tigg]

The fact that they will leave if there isn’t a Spanish Mass is an argument for Spanish masses.

I’m sorry - I do not at all agree and would say this is confirmation of very poor catechesis or lack of faith. When we visited Europe, we heard Mass in German, including the homily, and altho we had no clue what was being said, nor could we sing any of the hymns, we were still able to participate in offering praise and worship to God by joining ourselves with the Sacrifice of our Lord to His Father. Both individual and collective adoration, contrition, petition and thanksgiving are the ends of the Mass and attending the Sunday liturgy is a serious obligation.

Which brings us to the point of personal responsibility and the willingness, or lack thereof, to conform to the country one is living in. If we are so closed within ourselves and our own culture - one poster used the word “insulate” to correctly describe it - how does that work to promote Christian unity and break down barriers?

 

[pnewton]

Universal Latin is not a panacea for multiple cultures. There still will be Masses in English or Spanish, even if Latin only is used. The homily, music, announcements, readings, still will be in one language another.

 

[Dreadnought]

I kind of have a hard time with the Church in America being so excited about Mexican immigrants. In Mexico they were Catholic and here they’re Catholic. The Church’s enthusiasm is on the verge of pandering. How many archbishops break out their highschool Spanish during the annual appeal?

Speaking as someone who is a member of a Polish National Church, the language divide can really tear apart a Church to the point of schism, not faith, but language. In my Church there are constant English v. Polish arguments and the Church doesn’t seem to help or care as long as the receipts look good. It doesn’t help that the Archdiocese decided that our parish should be merged with several other parishes while other parishes with Latin-American populations are not being affected by any closings.

However, despite the special attention of the Church to Latin-American immigrants, I see the same thing happening with Spanish Masses. The same divide. The same pattern.

I might be sounding like the “prodigal son’s” brother, but the Church really has to do something to retain both immigrant Catholics and American-born Catholics. The Church might need to adapt, but it isn’t toward any single group. We can’t be relying on immigration to maintain numbers.

The solution is simple. Return Latin to the liturgy of the Latin Church. Then whether you’re at Mass in Warsaw, Dublin, Madison or Buenos Aires the liturgy will be the exact same.

 

[Dreadnought]

The homily

Not a part of the Mass.

music

Available in Latin (which is superior for music anyway…).

announcements

Not a part of the Mass.

readings.

At the Latin Mass, such readings are given before the celebrant’s homily and therefore not a part of the Mass.

 

[Lujack]

Not a part of the Mass.

The homily is actually a part of the Mass. Its in fact required on Sundays and solemnities.

Available in Latin (which is superior for music anyway…).

Not a part of the Mass.

At the Latin Mass, such readings are given before the celebrant’s homily and therefore not a part of the Mass.

Again, the homily is a part of the Mass. But regardless, how do you explain ethnic parishes in the United States during the early part of the 20th century? Everything was in Latin, but the Italians had ethnic parishes, as did the Poles, various Slav groups, and sometimes even the Germans and the French. So clearly Latin alone cannot eliminate certain differences.

Also, the Latin translations have to be put into somebody’s language.

 

[pnewton]

Not a part of the Mass.

Available in Latin (which is superior for music anyway…).

Not a part of the Mass.

At the Latin Mass, such readings are given before the celebrant’s homily and therefore not a part of the Mass.

Yes, at Mass they are given before the homily, but all are a part of the Mass, the first part, the Liturgy of the Word. In any case that does not matter. We still have them, regardless of when they occur and will be in some language.

 

[irishpatrick]

Didn’t seem like Latin prevented ethnic churches in the US (then again it might have been because of extreme persecution by “real” Americans that they huddled together to support each other).

.

This comment is simply unfair. Wanting everyone to share the faith together under one universal language is NOT racist as you seem to feel. When Latin was the language of the Mass people had to learn at least a little latin in order to follow the liturgy and back then Masses in the local venacular were not allowed. That meant, back then, that it did not matter where a person came from or what language they spoke…it illiminated many human differences during Mass.

 

[Lujack]

This comment is simply unfair. Wanting everyone to share the faith together under one universal language is NOT racist as you seem to feel. When Latin was the language of the Mass people had to learn at least a little latin in order to follow the liturgy and back then Masses in the local venacular were not allowed. That meant, back then, that it did not matter where a person came from or what language they spoke…it illiminated many human differences during Mass.

I don’t think you understood that posters comment-I think they were suggesting that part of the reason for ethnic parishes was that immigrants in the early part of the 20th century were persecuted and thus huddled in ethnic communities, and that is fairly accurate.

 

[PaulinVA]

Which brings us to the point of personal responsibility and the willingness, or lack thereof, to conform to the country one is living in. If we are so closed within ourselves and our own culture - one poster used the word “insulate” to correctly describe it - how does that work to promote Christian unity and break down barriers?

I admire people who are bilingual. Immigrants certainly have something over most anglos born in the US - they are much more adventurous and “international” if you will.

That said, I think it’s presumptuous of immigrants to expect the native population to cater to their needs. Yes, we are the Church. But, come on. Make an effort to become part of* our* culture and learn our language. That would make it easier to provide the services you demand.

 

[Brendan]

Please take no offense at this, I do not undestand why the many Catholic churches in the USA have so many different ethinic Masses (polish, spanish, etc.). Would it not just be much more simpler and more direct to return to latin Mass for all Catholic churches throughout the world? Language is a barrier…think of the Tower of Babylon…

When I was young, the parish my father went to when he was a teen (and the one my grandmother still went to) was half Irish, half Hispanic.

It really didn’t matter because the Mass was in Latin and the readings and the homily was in both English and Spanish.

When Vatican II came along, the pastor there just contintued to say the ‘New Mass’ in Latin, even still ad orientum, and give the homily in both English and Spanish.

That was how I learned how to say and pray the Mass in Latin. On quite a lot of Sundays (especially as my grandmother aged), we would pick her up and take her to Mass.

That parish didn’t have the ‘balkanization’ problems that a lot of parishes now have.

 

[Brendan]

Again, the homily is a part of the Mass. But regardless, how do you explain ethnic parishes in the United States during the early part of the 20th century? Everything was in Latin, but the Italians had ethnic parishes, as did the Poles, various Slav groups, and sometimes even the Germans and the French. So clearly Latin alone cannot eliminate certain differences.

Correct, to confess your sins, you needed a priest who spoke your language, but that was not necessary for the Mass itself.

Also, the Latin translations have to be put into somebody’s language.

Which were readily available, even back then.

 

[Dreadnought]

The homily is actually a part of the Mass. Its in fact required on Sundays and solemnities.

Again, the homily is a part of the Mass.

Then I stand corrected. I had always thought that the homily constituted a “break” in the liturgy.

But regardless, how do you explain ethnic parishes in the United States during the early part of the 20th century? Everything was in Latin, but the Italians had ethnic parishes, as did the Poles, various Slav groups, and sometimes even the Germans and the French. So clearly Latin alone cannot eliminate certain differences.

These differences had no bearing whatsoever on the liturgy, which as you said, was in Latin. Rather these were matters of the community its self. The difference between an Irish parish and an Italian parish in 20th century America was the difference in what Paddy Quinn’s family ate on Monday and what Eugene Castelle’s family ate and in what language they talked over dinner.

So yes you could still go to Mass in Warsaw or Buenas Aires and it would be the same. The community would be different, but what do you expect?

Also, the Latin translations have to be put into somebody’s language.

Learn Latin. Honestly… it really does not take much to understand what "Introíbo ad altáre Dei" means.

 

[pnewton]

Learn Latin. Honestly… it really does not take much to understand what "Introíbo ad altáre Dei" means.

In reference to** this** thread, it would be just as easy to say that we should learn Spanish, or learn English. At least that way only half the people would have to learn a new language.

 

[Dreadnought]

In reference to** this** thread, it would be just as easy to say that we should learn Spanish, or learn English. At least that way only half the people would have to learn a new language.

Big difference being that Latin is the official language of our Church which had seen continuous use as a sacred language for over a millennia-and-a-half and Spanish and English are mutable, vulgar tongues that tend to change every day.

Also, Latin is a common part of the western world’s heritage. If a Mexican and a German can say they have anything in common, it is that Latin was a fundamental part of their respective cultures at one point.

 

[pnewton]

Big difference being that Latin is the official language of our Church which had seen continuous use as a sacred language for over a millennia-and-a-half and Spanish and English are mutable, vulgar tongues that tend to change every day.

I understand that, but that is not the topic here. Yes, vulgar tongues can change, yet the Catholic Church still uses them in Mass. Thus, we have the Mass translated into the vernacular, both Spanish and English. This is done specifically so that everyone does not have to learn Latin, especially conversational Latin. It is also why we translate Scriptures into the vernacular so everyone need not learn Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek.

 

[Brendan]

Then I stand corrected. I had always thought that the homily constituted a “break” in the liturgy…

You are also correct. But it’s a required break in the Liturgy

 

[Brendan]

In reference to** this** thread, it would be just as easy to say that we should learn Spanish, or learn English. At least that way only half the people would have to learn a new language.

But the difference is that Vatican II required us, as the faithful, to learn sufficent Latin so that we could say or chant all the parts of the Mass that pertain to us.

The Church has not given such a requirement for English or Spanish.

And, as to your point about only one half having to learn a language, Pope John XXIII addressed that in Veterum Sapientia

Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.

We should learn Latin precisely so that one half of the parish is not favored above the other.

I used to travel globally for work, and I was quite grateful that I learned sufficent Latin at my grandmother’s parish (post Vatican II even) that I could go anywhere in the world and give full vocal participation at Mass. It it is likewise a welcoming act for the foreign visitors we might encounter to use a common, impartial language when they come among us.

 

[catsrus]

Would it not just be much more simpler and more direct to return to latin Mass for all Catholic churches throughout the world? Language is a barrier…think of the Tower of Babylon.

Amen.
And, hopefully, we are verrry slowly, but surely, headed back in that direction.
The Latin is unity!

 

[pnewton]

But the difference is that Vatican II required us, as the faithful, to learn sufficent Latin so that we could say or chant all the parts of the Mass that pertain to us.

I am not talking about learning to pronounce a few phrases in Latin. But did you notice that that phase begins with the word “nevertheless”?
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.

That is right before:

In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and “the common prayer,” but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to tho norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution

Article 36 applies to that part where the bishops have authority.

I am not suggesting that we do not use Latin, by no means. I am only saying that using Latin or not does not address the pastoral needs of a bilingual parish, except as but one tool that can be used at times. There is not directive as mentioned earlier that everyone learn Latin, only that people know enough to participate in the responses.

I bet everyone here know the Kyrie, that does not mean that you know Greek, or that you should study it.