Pope to Reintroduce Latin into the Novus Ordo and Move the "Sign of Peace"

[ethelzguy]

I think it’s unfortunate that some of these “leaks” occur.

Consider all the harsh rhetoric right here at CAF during the last week as a result of “leaks”.

 

[Brendan]

I skipped quickly through this long thread to see if there were other reports to substantiate the OP’s … but there were none.

This was posted as a news item on another forum, and it urges caution that the report was not able to be substantiated with Panorama.

Yes Joy, the fact that it is a study was in the very title of the article in the OP.

 

[anamchara]

I skipped quickly through this long thread to see if there were other reports to substantiate the OP’s … but there were none.

This was posted as a news item on another forum, and it urges caution that the report was not able to be substantiated with Panorama.

Thanks Joysong you saved me time reading through this thread. I just saw the title and thought wow the title of this thread deceiving.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The article was from a blog site, not a reputable news service.

The statement was a red flag for me.

The Rite of Mass could change.** According to some leaks, **Benedict XVI has give the Congregation for Divine Worship the task of studying some modifications in the liturgy.

According to some leaks. In other words, the writer could very well have made the story up.

Like JReducation said, unless priest are taught to be fluent in Latin, most will merely read the words, but they will be thinking the prayers in their own tongue.

Jim

 

[Joysong]

Brendan:

Yes Joy, the fact that it is a study was in the very title of the article in the OP.

However, the thread “title” and the responses within the thread all seem to point to it being imminent. The OP might have worded the title accordingly. He stated: “According to the Italian weekly Panorama, the Pope intends to replace the vernacular consecration with the original Latin.” This is not the reality. Coming from Fr. Z’s blog rather than a news source, the article was understandably biased.

Perhaps the OP should have stated,
“Pope Calls for Study on… etc.”

 

[anamchara]

However, the thread “title” and the responses within the thread all seem to point to it being imminent. The OP might have worded the title accordingly. He stated: “According to the Italian weekly Panorama, the Pope intends to replace the vernacular consecration with the original Latin.” This is not the reality. Coming from Fr. Z’s blog rather than a news source, the article was understandably biased.

Perhaps the OP should have stated,
“Pope Calls for Study on… etc.”

Well stated.

 

[Dauphin]

However, the thread “title” and the responses within the thread all seem to point to it being imminent. The OP might have worded the title accordingly. He stated: “According to the Italian weekly Panorama, the Pope intends to replace the vernacular consecration with the original Latin.” This is not the reality. Coming from Fr. Z’s blog rather than a news source, the article was understandably biased.

Perhaps the OP should have stated,
“Pope Calls for Study on… etc.”

No, that is the reality. That’s exactly what the article from Panorama says.

I quoted what the article said. I made it clear that it was according to Panorama.

 

[benedictgal]

Actually, regarding the Sing of Peace, the online magazine, Chiesa, which has proven to be quite accurate, notes this in its article on the Neocat liturgy:

(T)hey (the Neocatechumenal Movement) can exchange the sign of peace before the offertory instead of before communion. But it must be noted that the latter arrangement is already used in the Ambrosian rite in the archdiocese of Milan. And in the near future, it could also be introduced into the Roman rite, according to what Benedict XVI himself foreshadowed in the post-synodal exhortation on the Eucharist, “Sacramentum Caritatis.”

Furthermore, it makes a reference to Sacramentum Caritatis, written by Pope Benedict XVI, which notes:

Even so, during the Synod of Bishops there was discussion about the appropriateness of greater restraint in this gesture, which can be exaggerated and cause a certain distraction in the assembly just before the reception of Communion.

He also touched upon the issue of Latin in this same document:

The Latin language

1. None of the above observations should cast doubt upon the importance of such large-scale liturgies. I am thinking here particularly of celebrations at international gatherings, which nowadays are held with greater frequency. The most should be made of these occasions. In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, ***with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, it is fitting that such liturgies be celebrated in Latin. ***Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church’s tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)

While this section speaks in terms of large-scale Masses, there is already the Benedictine shift to a wider-scale us of Latin. This is actually consistent with what Paronama reported. The problem is that those who doubt what the Holy Father is doing may not have actually taken the time to read his prior words on the subject to see that these writings are the shape of things to come.

 

[Joysong]

Much of this desired change back to latin is simply wishful thinking and hopeful anticipation. I remember how long it took to implement the M.P. on the TLM, and in fact, it is still in scant use today in spite of the Pope’s M.P.

I don’t have a problem with latin liturgies, but I would be greatly disappointed in light of something wisely understood and taught by St. Paul:
1 Cor. 14:14, “For if I pray in a tongue [such as latin], my spirit prays, but my understanding is without fruit.”

Studies of prayer remind us that our mental makeup is *triune,*consisting of intellect (understanding), memory (with imagination), and will. The only part of my being that is capable of prayer in latin is the will, and the other two faculties are void because the ‘understanding is without fruit.’

St. Teresa of Avila lamented this condition when her prayer was not able to be fully active in ALL of her faculties. I truly would join her sentiments if I were required to pray in latin. This would be taking a step backward from all that has been done to bring us forward to the use of vernacular.

However, I do agree that this would be especially beneficial in an international setting.

 

[japhy]

Coming from Fr. Z’s blog rather than a news source, the article was understandably biased. Perhaps the OP should have stated, “Pope Calls for Study on… etc.”

The O.P. (Dauphin) pasted something from Fr. Z’s blog; Dauphon prefaced it with a brief commentary.

The part that was pasted was taken verbatim from Fr. Z’s blog. Fr. Z did not write a SINGLE WORD OF THE ARTICLE. He merely emphasized things and added his commentary. Thus, Fr. Z’s “bias” (?) cannot be to blame for the title of “Benedict changes the Mass again – a study of the new liturgy entrusted to the Congregation for Divine Worship”. The article is not from his blog, it is from some Italian periodical.

I agree that Dauphin’s thread title is misleading and inaccurate. It could have been fixed with a ? at the end, really. But could we take the meta-discussion somewhere else?

 

[japhy]

Much of this desired change back to latin is simply wishful thinking and hopeful anticipation.

The same thing could be said for the vernacular, Communion in he hand, etc.

I remember how long it took to implement the M.P. on the TLM, and in fact, it is still in scant use today in spite of the Pope’s M.P.

I would say it’s partly due to stubbornness from bishops, ignorance (that’s not a bad word, by the way) on the part of the faithful (many of who just don’t about this), and also genuine lack of interest from some of the faithful (who don’t want it). Where there is interest and support from the bishop, the only holdup is finding a priest who is capable, and they do exist!

I don’t have a problem with latin liturgies, but I would be greatly disappointed in light of something wisely understood and taught by St. Paul: 1 Cor. 14:14, “For if I pray in a tongue [such as latin], my spirit prays, but my understanding is without fruit.”

How do you know the Apostle was speaking about typical languages like Latin, Greek, Hebrew, etc.? Perhaps he was talking of so-called “angelic” tongues. Regardless, he is referring to speaking something and simply not knowing what he is saying (he is praying without understanding).

As has been said over and over again, praying parts of the Mass in Latin is not a matter of not understanding what you’re saying. If you understand the English, you’ll understand the Latin, because in most cases, you’ve simply been praying a translation. If you were to put the Our Father and the Pater Noster side by side, it wouldn’t take very long at all to realize what the Latin says.

St. Teresa of Avila lamented this condition when her prayer was not able to be fully active in ALL of her faculties.

Would you mind supplying a reference? I’m not very familiar with St. Teresa.

I truly would join her sentiments if I were required to pray in latin. This would be taking a step backward from all that has been done to bring us forward to the use of vernacular.

No, actually, since we’ve been praying in the vernacular for so long, we can’t use the excuse that we don’t know what we’re praying (unless we admit that even the vernacular hasn’t helped us!). Therefore, to re-introduce Latin into the liturgy will enrich our participation, because it will be more manifestly universal and we’ll know what we’re saying (which is often the argument about the pre-V2 Mass: no one knew what they were saying… well, now you DO).

 

[benedictgal]

Perhaps it would help those who have issues about Latin to actually prepare for the Mass by reading the prayers beforehand. Then, when it comes time for the Eucharistic Prayer, you can follow along with your heart. It is just as bad to have your face buried in your Missal, especially when the Eucharistic Prayer is proclaimed in your language. What’s the excuse there?

Latin is the default language of the Church. The vernacular is the option. Pope Benedict is simply trying to get that point across.

 

[Brendan]

Perhaps it would help those who have issues about Latin to actually prepare for the Mass by reading the prayers beforehand. Then, when it comes time for the Eucharistic Prayer, you can follow along with your heart. It is just as bad to have your face buried in your Missal, especially when the Eucharistic Prayer is proclaimed in your language. What’s the excuse there?

Latin is the default language of the Church. The vernacular is the option. Pope Benedict is simply trying to get that point across.

Really, the faithful have no need to ‘follow’ the Eucharistic Prayer. It’s a converstation between Christ and the Father.

All we really need to know are the Elevations, so we can Adore, and offer ourselves as a personal sacrifice to the Father, along with (but distinct from) the Sacrifice that Christ makes via the priest.

 

[benedictgal]

Really, the faithful have no need to ‘follow’ the Eucharistic Prayer. It’s a converstation between Christ and the Father.

All we really need to know are the Elevations, so we can Adore, and offer ourselves as a personal sacrifice to the Father, along with (but distinct from) the Sacrifice that Christ makes via the priest.

That is so very true. A priest friend of mine said that it’s really sad to see many people with their heads buried in their missalettes instead of focusing on prayer and adoration during the Consecration.

Now, regarding “demanding” that the parish offering the EF provide catechesis is actually a little silly, as well. With the EWTN website and other competent Catholic websites (like the FSSP) around, all one has to do is some research. One can even purchase a 1962 Missal (with the Holy Father’s MP) to follow along. If one is adept at using the computer and posting, then, one can certainly find the necessary resources for the EF.

 

[JReducation]

I don’t believe there is anything wrong with following the mass in Latin, Coratian, Spanish or whatever language. I’ve lived in several countries and had to follow the mass using a missal until I learned the language well enough where I could understand without needing to read along.

When I came to the mainland for the first time in the 1970s I had to follow along in a missal until I mastered the English of the mass, which was very different from the English that I had studied in school.

What I see as the issue in this thread is that there is an apriori assumption that this is a done deal. I believe that with all things in the Church, we should wait and see what happens.

If the Pope has asked the experts on liturgy to study the possibility of some changes and has made some suggestions, we just have to wait and see what they come up with. It is not always safe to assume that the Pope’s suggestion is going to be implemented as he suggested it. The commission may come back with alternatives.

I would encourage patience and wait and see. Don’t count the chickens before they hatch.

JR

 

[benedictgal]

I don’t believe there is anything wrong with following the mass in Latin, Coratian, Spanish or whatever language. I’ve lived in several countries and had to follow the mass using a missal until I learned the language well enough where I could understand without needing to read along.

When I came to the mainland for the first time in the 1970s I had to follow along in a missal until I mastered the English of the mass, which was very different from the English that I had studied in school.

What I see as the issue in this thread is that there is an apriori assumption that this is a done deal. I believe that with all things in the Church, we should wait and see what happens.

If the Pope has asked the experts on liturgy to study the possibility of some changes and has made some suggestions, we just have to wait and see what they come up with. It is not always safe to assume that the Pope’s suggestion is going to be implemented as he suggested it. The commission may come back with alternatives.

I would encourage patience and wait and see. Don’t count the chickens before they hatch.

JR

I don’t think you read my previous post carefully. This is what I said:

It is just as bad to have your face buried in your Missal, especially when the Eucharistic Prayer is proclaimed in your language.

Having to follow along, especially if the words spoken are in your native language, doesn’t make much sense. You’ve got your face buried in the missal.

Furthermore, I also don’t think that you noted what I also said in my previous post where Benedict has already stated that for international languages, Latin should be used. This is the first step of things to come.

In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, it is fitting that such liturgies be celebrated in Latin. Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church’s tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)

Cardinal Arinze and the secretary for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments have been in unity with the Holy Father on many issues. In fact, in his own book, "Celebrating the Eucharist:, Cardinal Arinze makes many of the points that Pope Benedict has raised. I doubt that there will be any serious deviations from what the Holy Father has already indicated.

 

[Lovemyfaith]

Don’t count the chickens before they hatch.

:yup:

 

[Lovemyfaith]

I would encourage patience and wait and see. Don’t count the chickens before they hatch.

:yup:

 

[Jeanette_L]

Having to follow along, especially if the words spoken are in your native language, doesn’t make much sense. You’ve got your face buried in the missal.

.

May I add a little insight into why someone might want to follow along in their missal?

I know that you are very well versed in the liturgy, it seems to be a particular passion for you, which is truly wonderful. I’m pretty certain that you have it memorized forward and backward, and that I admire.

I’m not sure if you are aware that not everyone is so disposed to this kind of attention to detail. Many people you see struggling are even very new to the faith and find the flow of the mass very difficult to follow and understand, even when it is done in the vernacular.

It is only charitable to allow people to move in the experience of the mass in a way that is beneficial to them, which may mean following along in the missal until such a time as they understand its flow and can participate without stress, with comfort and eventually real understanding, so they can be true participants in the offering and worship.

Just my thoughts! As a fairly new Catholic, I still like to follow the missal. It never occured to me that there may be people around me judging this as inappropriate, I sure hope their focus is not on me.

 

[JReducation]

I don’t think you read my previous post carefully. This is what I said:

Having to follow along, especially if the words spoken are in your native language, doesn’t make much sense. You’ve got your face buried in the missal.

Furthermore, I also don’t think that you noted what I also said in my previous post where Benedict has already stated that for international languages, Latin should be used. This is the first step of things to come.

Cardinal Arinze and the secretary for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments have been in unity with the Holy Father on many issues. In fact, in his own book, "Celebrating the Eucharist:, Cardinal Arinze makes many of the points that Pope Benedict has raised. I doubt that there will be any serious deviations from what the Holy Father has already indicated.

I was not disagreeing with Benedictgal. I was simply sharing an experience of my own. Sometimes we have to be practical.

English is not my native language. Of the languages that I speak, English presents the greatest difficulty, especially when writing it.

When I came to the mainland I had learned English in school. But textbook languages and the actual language of the people are not the same. I had to follow along with a missal until I felt comfortable enough with the language to follow along without a missal.

Why did I follow with a missal? Because I wanted to be part of the liturgy. That’s all.

I hope this is clearer.

JR