Latin Mass in Collegeville

“Let’s do Mass in Latin,” the request came from my grad class in reading church Latin. Excitement on all sides. “How about at the altar with the relics of St. Peregrine” somebody proposed, and the excitement grew. After just a bit of hesitation, I consented.

We have the full remains of the second century martyr Peregrine at an altar in our lower church. It turns out that the solemn translation of the relics to Collegeville was on May 6th, and so its anniversary on this past Tuesday was the date for our noble venture.

I thought of the ordinance of the Church of England after the break with Rome that the liturgy could only be celebrated in a language understood by the people – I’m told that high church folks in the 19th century at places like Oxford used this as a justification for liturgy in Latin in academic settings. And so it would be here – these are sharp Latin students, and they would understand and be able to pray the liturgical texts. In the course of the year we’ve memorized texts like the Pater noster in Latin, and we’ve worked through the Order of Mass and the Roman canon (EP1) as translation assignments. I was confident this would be worship “in spirit and truth.”

I had to restrain the enthusiasm of some just a bit and lay down the law that this would be a celebration according to the liturgical reforms and the Collegeville spirit of liturgical renewal. This is no pretext for preconciliar mannerisms, and we weren’t going to be liturgically “naughty,” as I put it to the class. Communion under both forms with homemade substantial bread, prayers of the faithful, congregational singing, and all the rest. Leaflet with translations of all proper texts, and no fussy neo-gothic or faux medieval fonts. I didn’t want to do all the unnecessary duplications of the optional (Per Christum Dominum nostrum) throughout the Eucharistic Prayer but was persuaded otherwise. I won’t say by whom, so as not to call undue attention to my trusty blog assistant. (He’s no Tridentist by a long shot, but one of his masters comps questions was about liturgical units, rationalistic liturgical reform, and symbolic wholeness so I just gave in.)

I wavered a bit on whom to invite to the Mass. I believe pretty strongly that the liturgy is open to all the baptized, and so I thought of inviting the entire School of Theology community and interested undergrads. But I didn’t want this to be a show at the county fair either, so we came to the agreement that under the circumstances this would be a liturgy for students of Latin.

Audrey Seah, an independent study Gregorian chant student who has sung in my chant schola, sang at the introit, offertorium, and communio. Everything taken from the Common of Martyrs in the Graduale Simplex. All sang the simple Latin chant acclamations. Maybe I’m too scrupulous, but I wasn’t absolutely sure that all could sing the Memorial Acclamation melody confidently so we sang it on one pitch. We recited rather than sang the Lord’s Prayer for the same reason.

Here’s an excerpt from the leaflet. Its preparation occasioned a new liturgical axiom for me: the proportion between hours spent in leaflet layout and hours spent in actual worship should not be greater than 10:1. Oh well, it was a great weekend that got wrecked.

And so it was. I have great memories of it. And after all that time preparing the leaflet, maybe it will get re-used at what will become a regular event in future years.

Here are some photos of the space and the event. One of the ceiling bulbs had just burned out, so I was glad the acolyte set up six candles to give us more light.

awr NO 1 NO 2 NO 3 NO 4 NO 5

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, is a monk of St. John's Abbey. He teaches liturgy, liturgical music, and Gregorian chant at St. John's University School of Theology-Seminary. He is widely published and frequently presents across the country on liturgy and music. He is the author of Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations, and of Responsorial Psalms for Weekday Mass: Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter. He does priestly ministry at the neighboring community of Benedictine sisters in St. Joseph.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

27 responses to “Latin Mass in Collegeville”

  1. +1 from me. The only way I could see myself at a Latin Mass outside of Rome.

    One of our grad students wants to have a regular (weekly, I think) rosary in Latin. He asked why he had to go through the rigmarole (meaning through me) of scheduling and such. I asked him in turn if the Latin rosary was for him or for those in the community who might be interested. Because if it were the former, he can say the rosary in Latin anytime he wants and in the church anytime it’s open. But if he’s looking for like-minded souls, or even, ahem, a following, he might want to consider opening something like this to others.

    We’ll see how this turns out. I think his enthusiasm was dampened a bit when he realized he was going to need to make personal connections and such. In other words, this wasn’t going to be a priest-providing-services model, but a baptized disciple taking leadership.

  2. Fritz Bauerschmidt

    Sounds nice to me, though I bet they could have handled the sung Pater Noster. It’s actually handy to know for multilingual occasions.

  3. Jim McKay

    You used the candles for light! What a great idea.

    And “homemade substantial bread”! I’m glad there was a substance that could be transed into another!

    Sounds like a wonderful experience, but now I am left wondering about the journey of St Peregrinus to Collegeville.

  4. Brian Duffy

    Queen Elisabeth I, no mean Latin and Greek scholar herself, by letters patent gave permission for Latin and Greek services.

    Right now on eBay one can find various versions of the Latin Prayer Book.

    The Holy Communion in Latin is said to be celebrated a few times a year at Oxford. I understand that a Latin evensong will be celebrated at one of the colleges in this merry month of May.

  5. Fr. Jan Michael Joncas

    I, too, have celebrated the OF of the present Roman Rite Eucharist in Latin with interested students who were capable of making the responses in both spoken and sung forms. I confess that the readings and the Universal Prayer were proclaimed in the vernacular and I preached in English, although I felt a certain tug to preach in Latin (but I didn’t because I didn’t think the students had an oral/aural command of the language as much as they had an oral/visual engagement).

    Personally I have also wanted to celebrate according to the revised Ambrosian (in either Italian or Latin) or Mozarabic/Hispanic rites (in Latin). This is where it gets messy for me. There are examples of other (Eastern Catholic) rites (Byzantine, Maronite, Ukrainian) that my students can explore in our areas with relatively little trouble, but only the Roman Rite of the various Western Rites is available to them. I would much prefer that we actually celebrate these liturgies rather than simply read about them or “enact” them without actually praying them. I presume that I am not allowed to celebrate in these rites without special permission, but I don’t think it would be that hard to learn the Latin texts and the proper ritual from the ritual notes given in their liturgical books and from viewing the liturgy celebrated on You Tube or the equivalent.

    The struggle as I identify it is between the educatory value of celebrating in these other rites and the fear that such celebration would not be genuinely prayerful so much as a demonstration. Fr. Anthony’s celebration doesn’t seem to me to present the same dilemma since he is using an approved form of the Roman Rite. (I wonder if the same issues would arise if liturgy students wanted to celebrate using the Anglican Ordinariate form as an approved version of the Roman Rite, though they themselves [and the celebrant] were not members of the Ordinariate.)

    1. Anthony Ruff, OSB

      @Fr. Jan Michael Joncas – comment #5:
      I preached in Latin but said just a few sentences with lots of repetition of key phrases so they’d get it… “Nos omnes vocati sumus…” It was kind of fun.
      awr

      1. Henry Edwards

        @Anthony Ruff, OSB – comment #6:
        Even as one whom some may assume (most unfairly, I assure you) to be a nasty trad, I wonder which a sermon in Latin–which I’ve never heard at a traditional Latin Mass–isn’t a bit over the top. Like some kind of fetish. Even as I stop to wonder whether my own peculiar practice–of following my weekly Latin Mass on the English pages in my missal, and my multiple weekday vernacular Masses on the Latin pages–might be seen (most unfairly, I’m sure) by some as some kind of fetish.

        Obviously, I don’t think the language in which the liturgy is addressed to God is intended primarily for human understanding. For understanding–and to claim it as my own–I choose my own language.

      2. Jordan Zarembo

        @Henry Edwards – comment #13:

        Obviously, I don’t think the language in which the liturgy is addressed to God is intended primarily for human understanding. For understanding–and to claim it as my own–I choose my own language.

        From a pragmatic standpoint, almost any language, whether “living” or “dead”, can be decoded. Latin is an eminently systematic language. The grammar is complex, but its complexity is not at all arbitrary.

        Any vernacular language is as complex as Latin. Each language might display complexity in different aspects of language, such as semantics and prosody. The ability of modern linguists (e.g. Noam Chomsky) to create a uniform metalanguage which can alternately describe even distantly related language illustrates the interrelated nature of language. The idea that Latin, or Slavonic, or koine New Testament Greek cannot or must not be analyzed because all of these languages have been used to describe or worship God neglects that God has been described and worshiped in a multitude of vernaculars. If Latin is not for human understanding, then English and any vernacular are not supposed to be understood either.

        The flipside is also true: no person can claim that a language is personal if it can be distilled into well understood concepts. As you write, “[f]or understanding–and to claim it as my own–I choose my own language.” [my modification] The choice of a particular language for personal religion is not an exclusive choice simply because I can choose and reinterpret this same language.

    2. Gordon E. Truitt

      @Fr. Jan Michael Joncas – comment #5:
      Father Joncas wrote: “only the Roman Rite of the various Western Rites is available to” his students. Since the liturgy of the Latin (Roman) Church has been splintered into various forms–Mass of Paul VI in Latin or a vernacular, Mass of St. John XXIII (1962 Missale Romanum), Anglican Use (sorry, I don’t remember the correct title)–I don’t know whether “only” is any longer appropriate to describe this rite. Also, I’m unclear for myself whether this variety within one liturgical form is a good thing (breaks apart the monolithic unity once supposed of the Latin Rite) or a bad thing (makes it unclear just what the Latin Rite is). Ah, well, at least for authentic doctrine there’s still “semper et unique et ab omnibus”!

    3. @Fr. Jan Michael Joncas – comment #5:
      There’s something that makes me a little uneasy about presiding a rite one has only learnt from “ritual notes in their liturgical books and from viewing the liturgy celebrated on You Tube.” Shouldn’t presiding at a rite emerge from being formed as part of a community already celebrating it? Maybe this is me not being sufficiently OK with the modern reality of online community, and I realize it has to occur sometimes.

      1. Christopher Queen

        @Adam Booth, CSC – comment #11:
        Adam, you make a salient comment linking community and rite. This perennial, organic relationship is the very essence of tradition. The very word tradition comes from the Latin verb tradere, meaning “to hand over.” The oral and experiential aspects of tradition are vital, and have been since Our Lord walked the earth and Paul wrote letters to local Churches.

        You touch on a real problem nowadays: ritual practice and tradition. Lived tradition, such as it was, fragmented over the past 50 years. There are many reasons for this, but the liturgical background is most important.

        The 1962 Missale Romanum was cast aside in almost all places, and the 1970 Missale supplanted it. The fact that these two Missals are at least different in affect is a given. Consider also the liturgical practices and experimentation of at least the 1970s and 1980s, and you grasp more. Tradition found itself in flux.

        The recovery of tradition within the context of the current moment is difficult. This difficulty is seen through everything from documents like 2004’s Redemptionis Sacramentum to the 2010 Roman Missal in English. Summorum Pontificum is also a part of this difficult process.

        The link between tradition and community has been tested, and perhaps strained over the last decades. The chain is not broken, however, and new links are being added. The ongoing understanding of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, and indeed understandings such as the Roman Rite in its Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms, is a part of this. Tradition is not monolithic, but it is recovering its lived identity and vital connection with developed practice over millennia.

        It all comes down to faith lived and prayed in community. God is present there, as beautifully promised in the Magnificat:
        Suscépit Israël púerum suum: * recordátus misericórdiæ suæ.
        Sicut locútus est ad patres nostros: * Ábraham, et sémini ejus in sæcula.

        May God be with you!

  6. Karl Liam Saur

    Omnis homines acceptus?

  7. Jordan Zarembo

    plaudite manibus!

    Are you reciting the epistle in the final photo, Father?

    1. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
      Anthony Ruff, OSB

      @Jordan Zarembo – comment #8:
      Opening collect.
      A student, a layman, read the first reading.
      awr

  8. Peter Rehwaldt

    [The worship leaflet] preparation occasioned a new liturgical axiom for me: the proportion between hours spent in leaflet layout and hours spent in actual worship should not be greater than 10:1.

    Words to live by.

    Now if certain bishops and conference organizers would agree to this axiom, life for certain liturgical planners would be a whole lot easier.

  9. Jim McKay

    Henry Edwards : @Anthony Ruff, OSB – comment #6: Obviously, I don’t think the language in which the liturgy is addressed to God is intended primarily for human understanding.

    Hmmm. What is its purpose then?

    This is an honest question, though it seems kind of snarky when I read it. I don’t know how to rephrase it better.

    1. Henry Edwards

      @Jim McKay – comment #14:
      Jim: The sense of what I intended is that the language addressed to God is meant primarily to express worship and adoration of him, rather than our cognitive understanding of him or of our worship and adoration. At the same time, no one would claim that understanding and worship are disjoint. Though worship surely has indispensable nonverbal dimensions that transcend cognitively understood language.

      Jordan: Indeed, I think English is more complex and also in some ways more capable of eloquent expression than Latin. Which is one reason I so love the liturgy in English also, relishing particularly in the new English translation in its “interplay” with the Latin. Probably the real reason I tend to pray the Mass in a different language than that spoken by the celebrant is for the sake of my own active participation in the liturgy, taking personal possession of it, as opposed to passively listening as though I were a couch potato sitting at home watching a Mass on EWTN. (Evidently, I must be a very post Vatican II Catholic.)

  10. Brian Duffy

    Yes, of course, the sermon at a Latin service should be in the same tongue. IMHO, the sermon is an integral part of the service. (Reggie always gives his sermons in Latin.)

    Father Anthony’s approach to the sermon was excellent. Indeed this is akin to the new methods being used by the younger, more progressive Latin teachers. Basic words, gradually augmented vocabulary and constant repetition.

    I do hope he offers this service again and again.

    1. Henry Edwards

      @Brian Duffy – comment #18:
      “Yes, of course, the sermon at a Latin service should be in the same tongue”

      But only, I assume you intend, if the sermon is provided to the congregation printed in parallel Latin-English, as is the rest of the liturgy if celebrated in Latin.

  11. “The preparation occasioned a new liturgical axiom for me: the proportion between hours spent in leaflet layout and hours spent in actual worship should not be greater than 10:1. Oh well, it was a great weekend that got wrecked.”

    Having done extensive liturgy planning from both the sanctuary (as MC) and the loft (as director and asst. director) for both the OF and EF, I have found the Extraordinary Form to be much simpler to plan in almost every aspect. Certainly, I’d say it’s fair that on average, planning and preparing for an OF Mass takes at least twice as long as taking a similar planning role in an EF Mass. Simply from an organizational standpoint, I prefer the EF for this very reason. As the MC in my parish, I spend a LOT of time in communication with my pastor and the MD to prepare for Masses in a way I never need to do when preparing for the EF.

  12. Brian Duffy

    Actually I think that it should be assumed that those attending a Latin liturgy have a decent knowledge of the same tongue. I suppose a summary of the sermon in the vulgar tongue would be okay.

    Reminds me of a time I went to a Trent Mass at a local motel. Afterwards the fellow sponsoring that asked me what I did for a living. I replied that I was a Latin teacher. He immediately asked me why I would pursue such a career. It took me a minute to realize that he wasn’t joking.

  13. O pleeeeese, let’s get real.

  14. I am Head of a Church of England state school in south-east London. We teach latin to GCSE level (not sure of the US equivalent). I celebrate Mass in Latin regularly for some pupils studying it. Readings always in English.
    The different pronunciation of church Latin throws them at first but they soon get used to it. Most of the pupils are Pentecostal christians so the usual school liturgies are different enough but they ask for Latin Masses and I am happy to oblige.

  15. Tony Phillips

    Occasionally there’s a Latin Novus Ordo Mass in Ramsgate. It’s actually very instructive to witness the Montini/Bugnini rite done in Latin, ad orientem, because it allows a much clearer comparison of the older and newer rites. One thing has come clear to me: the older rite is much closer to the Mass envisioned by Vatican II than the new. And you can really feel the defects of the new rite without the distraction of the vernacular.

    I don’t see why the sermon has to be in the same language as the liturgy itself–this seems to spring from a discomfort with the fact that the desire for a sacred language is something deeply seated in the psyche. The Roman Church was far from unique in maintaining a hieratic language: the Greeks use an elevated, antique language, the Russians use Old Church Slavonic, the Ethiopians use Ge’ez. (And Prayer Book English was hardly ‘vernacular’ even in Cranmer’s day.) Nor is this phenomenon confined to Christianity: the Jews preserved Hebrew, the Hindus Vedic and Sanskrit. No doubt Fr Ruff’s students were responding to that same instinct.

    The idea that the readings need to be in English is an interesting one too. Long before Vatican II the readings came effectively came to be treated as a sort of Bible study, and were repeated again in the vernacular before the sermon. Yet surely they were not originally meant for this purpose. The reading were a sung, and sung towards the altar—in other words, they were prayers, a sort of lectio divina. In pragmatic terms, though, maybe Sacrosanctum Concilium got it right in calling for a greater variety of Scripture be included in the Mass (though the Montini rite’s elimination of so much Scripture in the Mass and vandalism of the calendar were certainly not called for by the council). Though the readings were not intended for this purpose, they had become, and remain, the only Scripture the vast majority of Catholics ever hear.

    1. Jordan Zarembo

      @Tony Phillips – comment #24:

      this seems to spring from a discomfort with the fact that the desire for a sacred language is something deeply seated in the psyche. The Roman Church was far from unique in maintaining a hieratic language: the Greeks use an elevated, antique language, the Russians use Old Church Slavonic, the Ethiopians use Ge’ez. (And Prayer Book English was hardly ‘vernacular’ even in Cranmer’s day.) Nor is this phenomenon confined to Christianity: the Jews preserved Hebrew, the Hindus Vedic and Sanskrit. No doubt Fr Ruff’s students were responding to that same instinct.

      Maybe. Or. perhaps some of the students have had contact with or speak Demotic Greek, Italian, Russian, Ukrainian, or Hindi/Urdu. The world of hieratic languages are not entirely sealed off from modern experience through vernacular “children” which have retained some of the linguistic DNA of ancient ancestors.

      Also, the question of whether Latin is hieratic is complicated by the role of Latin as the language of medieval and early modern education and diplomacy. One wonders if the Tridentine bishops retained Latin as the western rite’s liturgical language simply because Latin was the learned language of its day.

      You will not find a greater booster of Latin language worship than me. Still, vernacularization was not, and is not, a concession. The false suspension of the Latin language through Trent could not last forever, especially given the philological research of recent times. The Tridentine liturgy is not the high point of Latin literary genius, by any means.

  16. Tony Phillips : Long before Vatican II the readings came effectively came to be treated as a sort of Bible study, and were repeated again in the vernacular before the sermon. Yet surely they were not originally meant for this purpose. The reading were a sung, and sung towards the altar—in other words, they were prayers, a sort of lectio divina.

    I’m sorry, but this is simply untrue. It is clear from authors ranging from Justin Martyr to Thomas Aquinas that the scripture readings were understood as being for the purpose of instruction. They were not lectio divina. They were sung for the purpose of audibility and to this day are sung to tones that are quite distinct from prayer tones. The practice of singing them facing the altar is a peculiarity derived from the importation of Low Mass customs into High Mass.

  17. Happy to see that young people are desiring the traditions of our church. I have found the younger people and young adults have been the most supportive when we began making changes in my parish a few years ago. Now we have all the sung propers every Sunday, ad orientem at every parish Mass, and a choir that delves into the treasure of inestimable value!


Posted

in

,

by

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading