Posted on 04/24/2008 7:55:25 PM PDT by markomalley
There is an interesting development in the matter of Summorum Pontificum and the use of the vernacular in celebrations of the TLM.
The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei reponded to a questions proposed concerning Art. 6.
The questions were: "Can readings be given in the vernacular in the context of the Liturgy? Does Article 6 uphold the practice of duplicating the readings reading them in the context of the Liturgy in Latin, then before a homily in the vernacular, or does it allow them to be read from the Altar in the vernacular?
Also, can local editions of the Missal that refer back to the 1962 Missal could be used for this purpose (i.e. the one that came out in the US in early 1964. For example, a Missal faithful to the rubrics of the 1962 Missal, but with a vernacular proper. This was given approval for use in the US by the Holy See.
The responses:
1. Article 6 of the Motu Proprio summorum Pontificum forsees the possibility of proclaiming the readings in the vernacular without having to proclaim them first in Latin.
2. The readings may be proclaimed in English according to translations approved for liturgical use by the Holy See and the Bishops of the United States.
I remember when the text of Summorum Pontificum was issued, I suggested that Art. 6 did in fact bear the interpretation that vernacular readings could be used instead of Latin. Lot’s of people pretty much freaked out and did everything but promise to dig up my mortal remains, try me and throw me in a river.
It seems I was right after all.
Don’t get me wrong: I do NOT think that what is permitted here should be imposed on congregations. That would be a terrible idea, if people didn’t want such a thing. However, Summorum Pontificum permits this, according to the PCED. I can think of some occasions when I might be good to do. I bet you can too.
I know that this is sort of "inside baseball" for those who are not aficionados of the extraordinary form, but I think that this could be a wonderful development applicable to most parishes (at least IMHO). Shows a nice merger of the two rites that the Holy Father was desirous of. (Of course, there will be those who disagree)
Glad we have a blogger like Fr. Z. to keep us up to date on these things.
I attend a low mass once during the week. I’m still new, and so very clueless. But, the readings are all in Latin. It’s an FSSP order, so I doubt they will change it. I bring my Magnificat and read the NO Mass from there (until I get a real Missal).
You might want to print a copy of the above letter. They might not be aware of the licitness of doing the readings in the vernacular, as defined by Ecclesia Dei.
I don’t know concerning the Mass that Patriotic1 attended, but at least here Fr. Terra does it all in Latin then rereads the Gospel reading in English prior to the Homily. I don’t see a reason to change this since all readings and prayers in English are provided on handouts prior to the beginning of Mass. It is very easy to follow along after one attends Low or High Mass after a few times. If the local Latin Mass Community does not provide then this then request that they start and even help start it.
“Of course, there will be those who disagree”
Pretty much all traditional orders will. This just confirms what supporters of the ‘62 feared that the SP would be used as a tool to alter the ‘62 into the ‘70. There is a ‘65 hybrid that rumors are that some Bishops who out right opposed to the Latin Mass may try to force Latin Mass Communities to use. So what was the purpose of the SP again?
The FSSP Mass I attended for quite some time had readings in both Latin and the vernacular. One several occasions,however, when the readings were particularly long (if memory serves) the presiding priest would read Latin at the altar while another priest would stand nearby and read in the vernacular. It seemed a bit odd in a way, but it never took anything away from the Mass.
I have read that is the way it is done in France. Another priests does the Readings in French and at much louder voice. It doesn’t bother me since I follow along in the handout and the red book. It just takes few times of attending to stop feeling awkward, but reading some of the comments on Fr. Z’s blog evidently some priest think most people are to stupid to learn and some cases they would be right. We do live in an anti-intellect time period. Its not just the US many other countries people are hostile to learning another language other than the native. I can understand people fearing the TLM if there was no handouts, but that shouldn’t be an issue in today’s time unless we are talking about a 3rd world mission. My understanding of the use of the vernacular was to compensate for the high illiteracy and even the deterioration of education in some areas, aka stop teaching Latin and so forth.
SP is widely viewed as a starting point. There was already an organic reform of the Mass going on until VatII so rudely interrupted it, and many good things had come out of this. The vernacular was being introduced in various parts, on an experimental basis, and certain things, such as the sung Our Father, were also being tried out. The liturgical reform had also done things like revive the Easter Vigil (which had simply fallen out of use and wasn’t even known to most people at the time it was reintroduced).
I doubt that bishops opposed to the Latin Mass would bother with the 1965 missal because if they were opposed, it would do little to make them feel any better. The 1965 missal really wasn’t bad at all; personally, I think they should take away the Novus Ordo and replace it with the 1965 missal! Heck, even the hybrid vernacular form that was in place for a couple of years (1968-70?) prior to the Novus Ordo would have been acceptable. But believe me, bishops who hate the old Mass wouldn’t be happy about any of those.
It’s not just the Latin they hate. It’s the Mass itself, and that was certainly retained in the 1965 missal and it wasn’t even entirely lost in the 1968-70 English version. If you offered to do the entire thing translated into the vernacular, that wouldn’t keep them happy, because they simply don’t like that Mass itself and what it expresses and what it is.
bumpus ad summum
I don’t see a reason to change this practice either, and in fact I doubt many priests who are disposed to saying the EF will proclaim the readings only in the vernacular.
I am certain that the priest who says the TLM at the Mass I attend will not be doing so.
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.