Ordinary Form in Latin

[M-Dent]

Cat,

It depends on the type of piano and who is playing it. I don’t think you would have this problem with me playing.

Elton John’s Benny and the Jets is one musical thing that comes to mind immediately when I ponder a piano in a large space. The sharp attack, quick reflecting notes off a surface and deadening decay of the notes. Every instrument has it’s strength and weakness. (shrug)

There’s something to be said about the spirituality reflected in the space and acoustics in worship. It can be a great blessing. But we certainly have need for some diversity.

I started taking organ lessons three years ago, and something that I have a difficult time with is respecting the pipes. Even after I release the key, the pipe has to finish “blowing the air” through itself, so the note will continue to play. What this means to me is that I can’t play Bach on the organ the way I would play it on the piano.

I’m not very good at all this yet, and frankly, I think this kind of thing frightens many “hobby” organists like me away from playing for Mass. We know we sound sub-par compared to the career organists and that’s something that a lot of people can’t handle. I have a lot of chutzpah when it comes to music, so I’m willing to make an utter fool out of myself while I’m learning.

I’ve actually been tempted to pay for an ad in the church bulletin that says, “Brothers and Sisters in Christ, I am learning to play the organ, and it will take me many years to become an expert. Please be patient with me when I stumble over the pedals, select an irritating registration, play too loud or too soft, or miss notes, or sound muddled. Sing with me, please, because it’s discouraging to practice hymns, only to see people ignoring their hymnals and keeping their mouths closed. If you cannot sing for some reason, at least give me a smile so I know that you aren’t suffering while I play. Thank you.”

Regardless if we have differing views on instrumentation, music selection and understanding of participation in worship – I completely appreciate what you are trying to encourage and your efforts.

If you haven’t already, you should mention to your pastor how you feel. He may have a few ideas how to communicate what you may wish to parishioners?

I also appreciate what you are noting about crossing over from piano to the organ.

I am the average run of the mill musician. I developed playing guitar. I then became interested in piano and electronic keyboards {for the additional voicing’s and for more of a palette as a simple songwriter}. I am also quite passionate about recording, engineering and basically shaping sound. I have a God given ear but very human hands to produce music myself. Especially the music my imagination envisions. Ugh. Hearing a piece in one’s mind but struggling to produce it with instruments can be a source of pain.

Keep up the effort and pray for the intercession of St. Cecilia!

 

[Cat]

Cat,

Elton John’s Benny and the Jets is one musical thing that comes to mind immediately when I ponder a piano in a large space. The sharp attack, quick reflecting notes off a surface and deadening decay of the notes. Every instrument has it’s strength and weakness. (shrug)

There’s something to be said about the spirituality reflected in the space and acoustics in worship. It can be a great blessing. But we certainly have need for some diversity.

Regardless if we have differing views on instrumentation, music selection and understanding of participation in worship – I completely appreciate what you are trying to encourage and your efforts.

If you haven’t already, you should mention to your pastor how you feel. He may have a few ideas how to communicate what you may wish to parishioners?

I also appreciate what you are noting about crossing over from piano to the organ.

I am the average run of the mill musician. I developed playing guitar. I then became interested in piano and electronic keyboards {for the additional voicing’s and for more of a palette as a simple songwriter}. I am also quite passionate about recording, engineering and basically shaping sound. I have a God given ear but very human hands to produce music myself. Especially the music my imagination envisions. Ugh. Hearing a piece in one’s mind but struggling to produce it with instruments can be a source of pain.

Keep up the effort and pray for the intercession of St. Cecilia!

Thanks! Our children’s choir director at our parish always prays with the children before Mass, and asks for the intercession of St. Cecelia and St. Gregory.

 

[grobyak]

Hello all - an interesting thread, and perfect timing. I’m a transitional deacon learning both the EF and OF Masses, and am working on a paper about the potential use of Latin in the OF as a means of serving multilingual communities. My seminary offers one EF Mass on Saturday, and an OF in Latin on Thursday (Spanish on Friday, and occasional Vietnamese Mass on particular days).

I’m from a highly bilingual archdiocese and have wondered about using Latin in the OF as a means of serving bilingual communities, especially in more far-flung areas outside the urban core. I’ve learned enough Spanish to offer Mass in Spanish, but I do not foresee a homily en espanol anytime soon. I know there are many bilingual deacons who could help in this regard. However, it would seem that with a bit of training and education and appropriate resources, an OF Mass with common parts in Latin may be one means of dealing with the issue (obviously not a panacea, but perhaps worthy of some exploration). Obviously, it’s not something I want to force down anyone’s throat. But I think it’s a viable option.

I’m curious of this implementation in other parishes, either OF-Latin or EF, as a means of serving multilingual communities. Can anyone direct me to a parish in which this has been done? I’d like to conduct an interview or two with pastors who’ve trod this road.
Many thanks. God bless.

 

[ProVobis]

I would suggest contacting the St. John Cantius parish in Chicago. The EWTN priests received training there. And they also offer a Latin and Greek study program. They may have lists of parishes where the use of Latin has helped in multi-lingual parishes, which with all the parish mergers, we’re seeing more and more of.

 

[Butzi]

I would suggest contacting the St. John Cantius parish in Chicago. The EWTN priests received training there. And they also offer a Latin and Greek study program.

One of the very few places and that actually put into practice what SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM called for.

 

[phil19034]

Hello all - an interesting thread, and perfect timing. I’m a transitional deacon learning both the EF and OF Masses, and am working on a paper about the potential use of Latin in the OF as a means of serving multilingual communities. My seminary offers one EF Mass on Saturday, and an OF in Latin on Thursday (Spanish on Friday, and occasional Vietnamese Mass on particular days).

I’m from a highly bilingual archdiocese and have wondered about using Latin in the OF as a means of serving bilingual communities, especially in more far-flung areas outside the urban core. I’ve learned enough Spanish to offer Mass in Spanish, but I do not foresee a homily en espanol anytime soon. I know there are many bilingual deacons who could help in this regard. However, it would seem that with a bit of training and education and appropriate resources, an OF Mass with common parts in Latin may be one means of dealing with the issue (obviously not a panacea, but perhaps worthy of some exploration). Obviously, it’s not something I want to force down anyone’s throat. But I think it’s a viable option.

I’m curious of this implementation in other parishes, either OF-Latin or EF, as a means of serving multilingual communities. Can anyone direct me to a parish in which this has been done? I’d like to conduct an interview or two with pastors who’ve trod this road.
Many thanks. God bless.

While I do not see it often, I think Latin in the OF is a perfect way to deal with bilingual parishes. If not the whole mass in English, at least the hymn, prayers, etc. It makes everyone feel united rather than having one English hymn, then a Spanish hymn, then a Vietnamese Hymn, etc.

If bilingual parishes do have Sunday mass in different languages, that’s fine. But the use of Latin during Holy Days would be a very good idea.

 

[grobyak]

I would suggest contacting the St. John Cantius parish in Chicago. The EWTN priests received training there. And they also offer a Latin and Greek study program. They may have lists of parishes where the use of Latin has helped in multi-lingual parishes, which with all the parish mergers, we’re seeing more and more of.

Funny you should say that, ProVobis: I’m at the same seminary as the Cantius brothers, and one of the pastors is the instructor for the class in which I’m writing the paper.

 

[Generic_Name]

This! I would love to attend a OF Mass in Latin. Especially since the Church wants us to use Latin in the Liturgy anyways!

I don’t know what part of southern OH you’re in, but I was in Cincinnati yesterday and attended the OF in Latin at Old St. Mary’s. If you’re close enough, check it out.

 

[Miserissima]

I would suggest contacting the St. John Cantius parish in Chicago. The EWTN priests received training there. And they also offer a Latin and Greek study program. They may have lists of parishes where the use of Latin has helped in multi-lingual parishes, which with all the parish mergers, we’re seeing more and more of.

I may be a day late to this thread, but I’d also like to add that one may reach out to the St. Gregory Foundation for Latin Liturgy.

jhcnewman.org/Gregory.html

The St. Gregory Foundation for Latin Liturgy, established in September 1989,
seeks to promote within the Church in the United States the use of the Latin
language in the Mass of Pope Paul VI, according to the teachings of the
Second Vatican Council, in order to encourage the faithful to appreciate the
unique theological, pastoral and spiritual qualities of the Latin Mass.

Toward this end, the Foundation is devoted to the use of the great patrimony of
sacred music as envisioned by *Sacrosanctum Concilium and to the
preservation of the liturgical tradition of the Latin Rite as codified in the Missale
Romanum *of 1970.

 

[CountrySteve]

I don’t know what part of southern OH you’re in, but I was in Cincinnati yesterday and attended the OF in Latin at Old St. Mary’s. If you’re close enough, check it out.

Oh wow, thanks! I’ll have to check it out.

Pax

 

[Thomas_White]

Well, the question concerns the OF Latin Mass, with which I am unfamiliar. However, I completed twelve years of Catholic education prior to Vatican II. Every day of our eight years of elementary school, we attended the Tridentine Mass prior to the beginning of the school day. I was also an altar boy for three years. At that time, only the altar boys, or servers, spoke the Latin responses, and for the servers Mass attendance was every day. The Sunday High Mass was magnificent. While I am unfamiliar with the OF Latin Mass, I was once very familiar with the so-called 1962 EF form of the Mass.

For those of us with this experience and background, and who went on to study Latin in high school, and in my case during college as well, the 1969 Mass in the vernacular, along with its other changes, was shocking and stunning to the point of incredulity. It was astonishing. It was unbelievable. It was incomprehensible. Many older parishioners never got beyond the shock. The Mass seemed far less spiritual and in ways nearly secular, with silent prayer and contemplation replaced with what seemed in comparison more like a social gathering, what with the verbal responses by one and all and the singing and the hugging and the shaking of hands. Solemnity seemed to vanish. What had they wrought, and did they realize it?

To this day, I prefer to attend the Tridentine Mass. It is a bit different than what it really was in 1962 and in the immediately preceding years, but not by much really, the congregation reciting the Latin responses the most distracting element for me. I have known those responses and what they mean for many decades, and would be content to listen to the servers provide them. It is of the Church as I knew it and the form of the Mass I had known so well. It is simply my own personal preference.

Perhaps one had to experience this to understand it.

 

[anthonymarie]

The Oratorians used to be big into new rite Latin masses but it seems like most of their parishes have adopted an old rite mass instead since Summorum Pontificum. I think new rite Latin masses have become rarer since Summorum Pontificum since a lot of the people interested in Latin adopted the old rite given the option.

I like both although I always prefer for the readings to be in English, parishes that that have the readings in Latin and then in English kind of bug me - it feels a little like the first time it’s pure ritualism then the second time is for comprehension. My personal sentiment, I know others disagree.

 

[otjm]

Well, the question concerns the OF Latin Mass, with which I am unfamiliar. However, I completed twelve years of Catholic education prior to Vatican II. Every day of our eight years of elementary school, we attended the Tridentine Mass prior to the beginning of the school day. I was also an altar boy for three years. At that time, only the altar boys, or servers, spoke the Latin responses, and for the servers Mass attendance was every day. The Sunday High Mass was magnificent. While I am unfamiliar with the OF Latin Mass, I was once very familiar with the so-called 1962 EF form of the Mass.

For those of us with this experience and background, and who went on to study Latin in high school, and in my case during college as well, the 1969 Mass in the vernacular, along with its other changes, was shocking and stunning to the point of incredulity. It was astonishing. It was unbelievable. It was incomprehensible. Many older parishioners never got beyond the shock. The Mass seemed far less spiritual and in ways nearly secular, with silent prayer and contemplation replaced with what seemed in comparison more like a social gathering, what with the verbal responses by one and all and the singing and the hugging and the shaking of hands. Solemnity seemed to vanish. What had they wrought, and did they realize it?

To this day, I prefer to attend the Tridentine Mass. It is a bit different than what it really was in 1962 and in the immediately preceding years, but not by much really, the congregation reciting the Latin responses the most distracting element for me. I have known those responses and what they mean for many decades, and would be content to listen to the servers provide them. It is of the Church as I knew it and the form of the Mass I had known so well. It is simply my own personal preference.

Perhaps one had to experience this to understand it.

I understand your comments, and have occasionally heard others say pretty much the same thing. I also graduated from grade school prior to the start of Vatican 2, and I can say that most people I knew then took to the vernacular like a duck to water. My mother was born in 1917, and one day, about 6 or 8 years ago, I asked her what she thought about the difference in the Mass before and after. I hardly had the words out of my mouth when she said “Oh, the Mass in English! it is the best thing that ever happened.”

This was not a woman whom anyone would classify as either a liberal or as a traditional. She was someone who went to Mass daily after her retirement, and one of the hardest things for her was when I had to finally take away her car keys, as short term memory loss was causing too many problems.

Interestingly, statistically, by age range it is the older people who are the most faithful attendees of weekly Mass in the vernacular, and from apocryphal reports, it is younger people who go the EF.

 

[ProVobis]

Interestingly, statistically, by age range it is the older people who are the most faithful attendees of weekly Mass in the vernacular, and from apocryphal reports, it is younger people who go the EF.

As I see it, the one mistake educators made was in not teaching Latin early enough. High school is way too late. If kids learn Latin or even a simple “Et cum spiritu tuo” before they learn English (or Polish or Spanish, for that matter) guess what? They will probably prefer it. And they would probably get higher SAT scores as well, not to mention qualify to play Jeopardy as well.

As the mayor of London said recently, it was “absurd” that schools dropped Latin altogether.

 

[Thomas_White]

I understand your comments, and have occasionally heard others say pretty much the same thing. I also graduated from grade school prior to the start of Vatican 2, and I can say that most people I knew then took to the vernacular like a duck to water. My mother was born in 1917, and one day, about 6 or 8 years ago, I asked her what she thought about the difference in the Mass before and after. I hardly had the words out of my mouth when she said “Oh, the Mass in English! it is the best thing that ever happened.”

This was not a woman whom anyone would classify as either a liberal or as a traditional. She was someone who went to Mass daily after her retirement, and one of the hardest things for her was when I had to finally take away her car keys, as short term memory loss was causing too many problems.

Interestingly, statistically, by age range it is the older people who are the most faithful attendees of weekly Mass in the vernacular, and from apocryphal reports, it is younger people who go the EF.

Yes, I understand. This is anecdotal. From what I have observed at daily Masses, older people predominate.This is partly since, for various reasons, they have the time to do it. And of course the end of their journey is drawing closer. Most likely, it would seem local parishes, where the Mass is said in the vernacular, is far more convenient for the elderly. Also, an adjustment to a change that occurred some forty-five years ago could surely by now have occurred. I also often attend the Mass said in the vernacular as my parish Church is only a few minutes walk for me–one could hardly Park any closer during Mass. As I am retired, I often attend the daily Mass. The daily Masses are primarily attended by older people, and the experience is very much different from what occurs on Sunday mornings. There is more of a sense of the Sacred, at least for me.

At the Tridentine Mass I attend, there is no young crowd. This is not apocryphal but by personal experience and observation. But yes, others of course have their own preferences and this is entirely legitimate and as it should be. It is simply that I too have my own preferences, and they were learned in the pre-Vatican II era. I did not attend a Catholic college, though I did continue to take Latin courses. But my formal religious education (religion classes) ended upon graduation from high school. So, the pre-Vatican II Church was the Church I knew, and I knew it pretty well.

Vatican II was a sea change for me. I thought I understood what was occurring, and that I did understand it was indeed the difficulty. The Church had to some extent entered the modern world it had long resisted, and laid waste to many of its traditions. Having lived and experienced this change, I am not yet persuaded it was for the better.

 

[Thomas_White]

With reference to my comment above about the Tridentine Mass I would add the following. It might be of interest to some forum members.

The Latin versions of both the 1917 code of Canon Law and the revised 1983 code of Canon Law are the sole authorized versions. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops approved an English version of the 1983 code of Canon Law, but it is only authorized for use as a study guide and for consultation. Only the Latin text approved by the Vatican has “force of law”.

There is a good reason for it. There are many languages and many translations of the code of Canon Law, and the Vatican would obviously want to avoid the potential for error inherent in diverse translations–that is, in the vernacular. There are Canons in the revised 1983 code of Canon Law, in its English version, that differ significantly from the Latin text, and in at least a few important instances the English translation provides the precise opposite of the Latin text of the authorized code of Canon Law. And I **** know it.

It is nearly impossible to find an English translation of the official Latin version of the 1917 code of Canon Law since such a translation was never recognized. However, the validity of acts occurring prior to the promulgation of the revised 1983 code of Canon Law, which occurred at midnight of the first Sunday of Advent in 1983, are judged under the 1917 Latin code of Canon Law. Or at least they are supposed to be. There are major differences between the two codes. The earlier code was known as the Pio-Benedictine 1917 code of Canon Law, and only that specific text has force of law. The revised 1983 code of Canon Law also has a specific Latin version that is authorized and has force of law. It is known as the Johanno-Pauline 1983 code of Canon Law. And it is these Latin versions that matter when a situation involving Canon Law occurs.

There is reason to believe that in the U.S., the English translation is often effectively, but incorrectly, considered Canon Law.

 

[ProVobis]

With reference to my comment above about the Tridentine Mass I would add the following. It might be of interest to some forum members.

The Latin versions of both the 1917 code of Canon Law and the revised 1983 code of Canon Law are the sole authorized versions. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops approved an English version of the 1983 code of Canon Law, but it is only authorized for use as a study guide and for consultation. Only the Latin text approved by the Vatican has “force of law”.

There is a good reason for it. There are many languages and many translations of the code of Canon Law, and the Vatican would obviously want to avoid the potential for error inherent in diverse translations–that is, in the vernacular. There are Canons in the revised 1983 code of Canon Law, in its English version, that differ significantly from the Latin text, and in at least a few important instances the English translation provides the precise opposite of the Latin text of the authorized code of Canon Law. And I **** know it.

It is nearly impossible to find an English translation of the official Latin version of the 1917 code of Canon Law since such a translation was never recognized. However, the validity of acts occurring prior to the promulgation of the revised 1983 code of Canon Law, which occurred at midnight of the first Sunday of Advent in 1983, are judged under the 1917 Latin code of Canon Law. Or at least they are supposed to be. There are major differences between the two codes. The earlier code was known as the Pio-Benedictine 1917 code of Canon Law, and only that specific text has force of law. The revised 1983 code of Canon Law also has a specific Latin version that is authorized and has force of law. It is known as the Johanno-Pauline 1983 code of Canon Law. And it is these Latin versions that matter when a situation involving Canon Law occurs.

There is reason to believe that in the U.S., the English translation is often effectively, but incorrectly, considered Canon Law.

The same can probably be said concerning the IGMR/GIRM. Impersonal verbs such as oportet, decet, licet, placet, et al have approximate but not exact English equivalents. Where one would use “must,” another would use “should” or any one of the other English modal verbs and an extra level of ambiguity is introduced.

The loss of the subjunctive, gender relationships, and other nuances, very important in prayer and theology, are other major drawbacks of translations into English. Yet people want things in vernacular and regard all translations as gospel truths, which they find out eventually aren’t truths at all, for example, the “for all” in the Consecration among a lot of other things.

Thanks for addressing the problems with the vernacular.

 

[Cat]

The same can probably be said concerning the IGMR/GIRM. Impersonal verbs such as oportet, decet, licet, placet, et al have approximate but not exact English equivalents. Where one would use “must,” another would use “should” or any one of the other English modal verbs and an extra level of ambiguity is introduced.

The loss of the subjunctive, gender relationships, and other nuances, very important in prayer and theology, are other major drawbacks of translations into English. Yet people want things in vernacular and regard all translations as gospel truths, which they find out eventually aren’t truths at all, for example, the “for all” in the Consecration among a lot of other things.

Thanks for addressing the problems with the vernacular.

You and Thomas White do realize what you’re saying, don’t you?

What you’re saying is that Catholics can’t trust what they are hearing in their parish.

No wonder so many Catholics are non-practicing. Why should they practice something that is “translated wrong”?

Is Latin in the Mass really worth sowing the seeds of doubt among Christians? Really?!

 

[ProVobis]

Is Latin in the Mass really worth sowing the seeds of doubt among Christians? Really?!

There are over 30,000 Protestant denominations, each with their own set of translations and interpretations, and you’re blaming us for spreading seeds of doubt? Sorry, that started over 500 years ago.