Would You Attend This Mass?

[Bayoubeefmaster]

Right now I am Parochial Vicar in my parish. Probably in a year I will be a pastor and able to make some significant liturgical choices . I would like to offer an OF liturgy that uses legitimate options that are not often used. I am interested if you would be would desire to attending this type of iturgy, and why/why not

1. No hymns: instead we chant the entrace antiphon and communion antiphon. Silence during the offertory.
2. Ad Orientem for Liturgy of the Eucharist. Liturgy of the Word facing the people, of course
3. Use of communion rail (if available) to receive kneeling, on the tongue. Otherwise kneeler for those who wish to use it when receiving
4. Chanted Latin Ordinaries (Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Agnus Dei), other prayers in vernacular
5. No communion hymn, just chant communion antiphon+ but post-communion reflection sung by choir or cantor
6. Lots of silence (offertory, communion) rather than filling those times with hymns
7. Oh and a really awesome homiily 10-15 minutes with lots of energy and hopefully inspiring

What do you think?

I’d love to see a holy solemn Mass just like this. My parish usually has reverent Masses but this would be better at least for me.

 

[liturgyluver]

And for the thousandth time I would like to reiterate that it makes no sense musically or liturgically to eliminate the Offertory chant while still using all the other chants: Introit, Psalm/Gradual, Sequence if there is one, Alleluia/Tract, and Communion. They are a package deal. Yes, I would say it is better to include just one of them (Introit for example) if that is all a parish can muster, but if a parish and its priest are prepared to sing the Propers, then sing the Propers and don’t leave one of the pieces out; that is inimical to the whole point of using them in the first place, if in fact you are going to use them.

Using all the Propers except the Offertory for “silence” would be as silly as singing a polyphonic mass by Palestrina but leaving out the Credo “because we need some silence.” Do you see now? The Offertory is not envisioned by the books or by liturgical history as being a quiet time. A slow, meditative time for the people, yes, but not quiet. The Offertory chant is very ancient and its use is completely uninterrupted in at least Western liturgy. I cannot state enough how much of a mistake it would be to have all these glorious liturgical bits and then leave out the Offertory chant.

Other than that, and the hymn thing which I have already touched on, again, I am fully in agreement with you, Father.

I have noticed though that many Parishes that have a tradition of using the Propers don’t always use the Offertory one - it seems to be the one one that is often dropped and even in musically acomplished parishes is usually replaced by an Offertory Motet. You will say this wrong perhaps, but I disagree as the GIRM makes clear that the Propers are not Propers in the sense they once were - they are simply one option among several at that point in the Mass.

 

[FrStevenJones]

I have noticed though that many Parishes that have a tradition of using the Propers don’t always use the Offertory one - it seems to be the one one that is often dropped and even in musically acomplished parishes is usually replaced by an Offertory Motet. You will say this wrong perhaps, but I disagree as the GIRM makes clear that the Propers are not Propers in the sense they once were - they are simply one option among several at that point in the Mass.

The difficulty arises because an offertory antiphon is not in the missal, while Entrance and Communion antiphons are there. Thus offertory antiphon is used infrequently, since you must go to the Graduale Romanum to find it, and on top if that it is only in Latin there.

 

[Pax2u]

Right now I am Parochial Vicar in my parish. Probably in a year I will be a pastor and able to make some significant liturgical choices . I would like to offer an OF liturgy that uses legitimate options that are not often used. I am interested if you would be would desire to attending this type of iturgy, and why/why not

1. No hymns: instead we chant the entrace antiphon and communion antiphon. Silence during the offertory.
2. Ad Orientem for Liturgy of the Eucharist. Liturgy of the Word facing the people, of course
3. Use of communion rail (if available) to receive kneeling, on the tongue. Otherwise kneeler for those who wish to use it when receiving
4. Chanted Latin Ordinaries (Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Agnus Dei), other prayers in vernacular
5. No communion hymn, just chant communion antiphon+ but post-communion reflection sung by choir or cantor
6. Lots of silence (offertory, communion) rather than filling those times with hymns
7. Oh and a really awesome homiily 10-15 minutes with lots of energy and hopefully inspiring

What do you think?

It sounds beautiful, and yes indeed, I would attend!!

 

[InLight247]

Right now I am Parochial Vicar in my parish. Probably in a year I will be a pastor and able to make some significant liturgical choices . I would like to offer an OF liturgy that uses legitimate options that are not often used. I am interested if you would be would desire to attending this type of iturgy, and why/why not

1. No hymns: instead we chant the entrace antiphon and communion antiphon. Silence during the offertory.
2. Ad Orientem for Liturgy of the Eucharist. Liturgy of the Word facing the people, of course
3. Use of communion rail (if available) to receive kneeling, on the tongue. Otherwise kneeler for those who wish to use it when receiving
4. Chanted Latin Ordinaries (Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Agnus Dei), other prayers in vernacular
5. No communion hymn, just chant communion antiphon+ but post-communion reflection sung by choir or cantor
6. Lots of silence (offertory, communion) rather than filling those times with hymns
7. Oh and a really awesome homiily 10-15 minutes with lots of energy and hopefully inspiring

What do you think?

Yes, I will attend. But would you add the St. Michael’s prayer after Mass?

 

[Brendan]

Yes, I will attend. But would you add the St. Michael’s prayer after Mass?

I would second that.

That is something that we normally do at our parish.

This past weekend, we were invited to a relative’s cottage for a family get together.

The parish we attended not only used the communion rail, but also said the St. Michael prayer at the same point our parish does ( after the Final Blessing and before the recessional hymn)

 

[corsair]

I would attend IF there were no EF Mass offered within 130 mile radius.

 

[FrStevenJones]

Yes, I will attend. But would you add the St. Michael’s prayer after Mass?

It could be done, after the dismissal.

 

[liturgyluver]

The difficulty arises because an offertory antiphon is not in the missal, while Entrance and Communion antiphons are there. Thus offertory antiphon is used infrequently, since you must go to the Graduale Romanum to find it, and on top if that it is only in Latin there.

With the greatest respect I don’t think that is relevant. The GIRM makes clear that the Missal antiphons are only there to be receited if there is no singing at that point - ie if not using one of the 4 options given in the GIRM.

 

[FrStevenJones]

With the greatest respect I don’t think that is relevant. The GIRM makes clear that the Missal antiphons are only there to be receited if there is no singing at that point - ie if not using one of the 4 options given in the GIRM.

Yet the offertory antiphon is not in the missal. So it is almost never used, because you must go to another book to find it, and that book is not in the vernacular. Singing it is a
different issue. A priest may chant whatever is in the missal, but properly speaking the sung antiphons are to be taken from the Graduale Romanum. Yet, the introit and communion antiphons are in the missal in the vernacular, so those end up being used, usually said, as intended.

 

[Marie5890]

It’s not something I would attend on a regular basis. In my parish we have a fantastic music director who knows how to enhance the worship experience with appropriate hymns.

For me, singing is a prayer. I know that the quote attributed to St Augustine of “When one sings they pray twice” is something he probably did not say, but the idea strike a cord in me. And I know that is how I experience music.

I can find great sacredness in both silence and music. For me, it’s not an either or question.

 

[Rachel126]

I would not attend it. I know some people love the extraordinary form and the Mass you describe, but other than on these forums, I haven’t met anyone in “real life” who prefers it this way. I feel more connected to God when things are done in the vernacular. Just my two cents.

 

[FrStevenJones]

I would not attend it. I know some people love the extraordinary form and the Mass you describe, but other than on these forums, I haven’t met anyone in “real life” who prefers it this way. I feel more connected to God when things are done in the vernacular. Just my two cents.

The Church has asked us to learn the ordinary parts of the mass, in Latin. Those parts are the same every week. If you learn them, and their meaning, Mass in Latin will come alive for you. This is what Vatican II asked for: Mass in Latin, with some vernacular. So the prayers that change every day can still be in the vernacular.

 

[Rachel126]

The Church has asked us to learn the ordinary parts of the mass, in Latin. Those parts are the same every week. If you learn them, and their meaning, Mass in Latin will come alive for you. This is what Vatican II asked for: Mass in Latin, with some vernacular. So the prayers that change every day can still be in the vernacular.

I guess I am confused by this. I’ve attended Mass at dozens of different churches, in several different states, over my lifetime. I’ve never heard a single part of the Mass be in Latin. Ever. (I’m in my 30’s). So I’m confused by your saying that Vatican II asked for the Mass to be in Latin with some vernacular–every church I have attended was completely in English. Are you saying all of these churches are doing it incorrectly?

 

[Marie5890]

The Church has asked us to learn the ordinary parts of the mass, in Latin. Those parts are the same every week. If you learn them, and their meaning, Mass in Latin will come alive for you. This is what Vatican II asked for: Mass in Latin, with some vernacular. So the prayers that change every day can still be in the vernacular.

We use Latin during Lent and Easter…
I wouldnt mind if we used it throughout the year. That too, I find enhances the experience.

 

[ProVobis]

I feel more connected to God when things are done in the vernacular. Just my two cents.

One would think that spaced repetitions of simple versicles like “Dominus vobiscum/Et cum spiritu tuo” could easily become the vernacular. Just as lawyers do in court with other Latin phrases. Just saying.

 

[liturgyluver]

I guess I am confused by this. I’ve attended Mass at dozens of different churches, in several different states, over my lifetime. I’ve never heard a single part of the Mass be in Latin. Ever. (I’m in my 30’s). So I’m confused by your saying that Vatican II asked for the Mass to be in Latin with some vernacular–every church I have attended was completely in English. Are you saying all of these churches are doing it incorrectly?

I don’t believe they are. The Vatican II documents talk about the preservation of Latin but in a specific context:

*36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

1. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.
2. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language*

The Bishops for the relevant Ecclesial areas have agreed with the Vatican what extent of the liturgy should be in the vernacular. Once Vatican II was operationalised, the expectation about use of Latin was adjusted to make clear that it referred to the Ordinary of the Mass. See for example Musicam Sacram (1967):

*IV. The Language To Be Used In Sung Liturgical Celebrations, And On Preserving The Heritage Of Sacred Music

1. According to the Constitution on the Liturgy, “the use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”[30]

However, since “the use of the vernacular may frequently be of great advantage to the people”[31] “it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used. Its decrees have to be approved, that is, confirmed by the Apostolic See.”[32]

In observing these norms exactly, one will therefore employ that form of participation which best matches the capabilities of each congregation.

Pastors of souls should take care that besides the vernacular “the faithful may also be able to say or sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.”[33]

1. Where the vernacular has been introduced into the celebration of Mass, the local Ordinaries will judge whether it may be opportune to preserve one or more Masses celebrated in Latin—especially sung Masses (Missae in cantu)—in certain churches, above all in large cities, where many come together with faithful of different languages.*

Thus congregations should be able to receite the Gloria, Sanctus, Agnus Dei etc to simple melodies in Latin.

 

[FrStevenJones]

I guess I am confused by this. I’ve attended Mass at dozens of different churches, in several different states, over my lifetime. I’ve never heard a single part of the Mass be in Latin. Ever. (I’m in my 30’s). So I’m confused by your saying that Vatican II asked for the Mass to be in Latin with some vernacular–every church I have attended was completely in English. Are you saying all of these churches are doing it incorrectly?

I’m saying that Sacrosactum Concilium, the Vatican II document on the liturgy, said that Latin should remain the primary language of the Mass, with some limited amount of vernacular added. So when we exclude Latin, that’s against the mind of the church at Vatican II!

 

[Marie5890]

You know, Fr., I do think this would be a great question to ask the parishoners at your parish and those in your surrounding community.

I think someone mentioned that getting feedback here may not give you the bigger glimpse. CAF does tend to draw the more conservative and traditional Catholic.

Just an observation.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m saying that Sacrosactum Concilium, the Vatican II document on the liturgy, said that Latin should remain the primary language of the Mass, with some limited amount of vernacular added. So when we exclude Latin, that’s against the mind of the church at Vatican II!

Part of the problem with the new English translation, as I see it, was that it solidified the use of the all-translated Mass, making it even more difficult to inject any Latin into the liturgy. Not only that but it reinforced the use of a single English translation throughout Anglosphere where many words and phrases don’t have quite the same meanings in the different countries. I think many of us agree that US English and UK English, for example, have notable differences. (It certainly was painfully true for me.) I think the bishops (and priests) have also tried to point that out to the Vatican. I guess my point is that we’re not really working with true vernaculars but translations into languages of some large groups. Hope that makes sense.