Dom Hugh Somerville Knapman OSB on the new Mass


Mass as envisaged by the new Missal

As argued in an earlier post, some of the changes introduced in practice are not even required by the modern Missal, such as facing the people during the Eucharistic Prayer. Nor is Communion in the Hand. The modern Missal assumes that the priest is facing East, and that Communion is on the tongue. There was of course permission given for the option to face the people, and a limited indult for Communion in the hand. Both have had dire consequences for the worthy celebration of the modern liturgy, and are foreign even to the new Mass. The failure here is in the pastors not in the Church herself.


This is not actually mandated by the new Mass

Some have a clear idea of the remedy for liturgical abuse and poor attendance at Mass. (…) The first step surely is to celebrate the liturgy according to the rubrics laid down by the Church, to do in fact as the Church intends to do.

Read the full post by Dom Hugh Somerville Knapman OSB here.

PDF Booklet • Christmas Midnight Mass (36 pages)

From http://www.ccwatershed.org:

We can pretend we don’t care about what other choirs are doing—but it’s a lie. Let’s be honest: We music directors always want to see what other groups are singing, and from which scores. Feel free to download our Midnight Mass booklet:

* *  PDF Download • Midnight Mass Booklet (36 pages)

It looks so simple when placed in a booklet like that…but it has taken us a while to learn all that music. Rehearsal videos for all the music can be found here—for each individual voice!

Latin Mass Directory – United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland

From the Association for Latin Liturgy website:

Entries are arranged in alphabetical order of English counties, but with the Greater London section placed at the beginning; Scotland and Ireland are at the end. We include all churches which we have been informed use Latin in the current Ordinary Form of the Mass.
The Directory may be viewed here or downloaded here.

The accuracy of the Directory depends upon reports by users. Please send these to enquiries@latin-liturgy.org

A few words about language…

And finally allow me to say just a few words about language. Here again there are two points to consider, which between them open the possibility of a whole range of varying decisions and practice. On one hand, using the magnificent terminology of Hellenistic culture, the Roman Canon calls the action of the Mass rationabile obsequium—an action of the word, an action in which spirit and reason play their part. The Word of God wants to speak to man, wants to be understood and answered by him. That is why in Rome, in about the third century, when Greek was no longer generally understood, they made the transition from Greek, which had hitherto been used in the Eucharist, to Latin. But there is also a second point. The Church later hesitated to make use of the developing national languages of Europe in the liturgy, first of all, because for a long time they had not attained the literary level or the unity of usage that would have permitted a common celebration of the Eucharist over a wide area; but then also because she was opposed to anything that would give a national identity to this mystery, because she wanted to express in the language, too, the inclusive character that reaches out beyond the boundaries of place and time. She was able to keep on with Latin as the common liturgical language because she knew that, while it is, in the Eucharist, also a matter of comprehensibility, yet it is more than comprehensibility—that this demands a greater, more mature, and more inclusive understanding than that of mere comprehension: she knew that, here, the heart must also understand.
After what we have said, use of the vernacular is in principle justified. It would be a danger only if it were to drag the Eucharist back into the realm of national culture. It would be a danger only if we were to push our translation to the point where only what was immediately comprehensible or, even, obvious in everyday terms remained. In any such translation you would have to omit more and more, until the essential meaning disappeared. Because things are as they are, we should gratefully accept both: the normal form of Eucharist is in the vernacular, but we should not on that account forget to pray it, to love it, in the common language of the Church over the centuries, so that in this unsettled and changeable world, in which the nations are forever meeting and mingling with each other, we are still able ever and again to worship together and, in that language, to praise the living God together. Here too, we should rise above a fruitless dispute and become one in the multiplicity the Lord has given us; one in recognizing and in loving the understanding and comprehensibility but also the inclusiveness that transcends the rationality of what is immediately understood.

(Joseph Ratzinger – Theology of the Liturgy – Ignatius Press)

Intervista a don Federico Bortoli

Un sacerdote, don Federico Bortoli, compie lo studio più approfondito su come si è arrivati a concedere la distribuzione della comunione in mano che Paolo VI e la maggioranza dei vescovi bocciò. Anzitutto con un indulto che doveva essere rivolto solo a quelle diocesi dove si commettevano abusi. Ma poi la “moda” è dilagata. Resta il fatto che la ricezione della comunione in ginocchio e in bocca sia legge universale della Chiesa, la forma consuetudinaria attuale sia solo frutto di una concessione.

Intervista completa di Luisella Scrosati a don Federico Bortoli qui.