Q:  Is it mandatory to chant the Sanctus and Agnus Dei during Lent or Advent? Our music director does this even though almost no one in the congregation does; I don’t think many of us know Latin well enough.

A:  No, it’s not mandatory. Many places do it, but no Latin is ever required. GIRM 41 recommends that people learn how to sing the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer in Latin, but many churches sing the Sanctus and Agnus Dei instead.

Q:  Is the pall required to cover the chalice? According to GIRM 118 (C ) it only says if appropriate.  GIRM 142 mentions the pall again. When does the GIRM envision it to be appropriate since the paten already covers the chalice.

A:  As you can plainly see from the places you cite, the use of the pall is not obligatory.  The GIRM does not call for the paten to cover the chalice. It may, but that’s not obligatory either.

Q:  How do you have Triduum services without any persons to baptize?

A:  There’s no change to Holy Thursday or Good Friday.  For the Easter Vigil, look in the Missal at number 42. It invites you to skip to number 54. Go forward from there.

Q:  When you receive the question about number of times a lay person/deacon can receive Communion on a given day, what is your typical answer? Is it something like:  Normally once, but he/she may receive Communion again if at a different Mass and not receiving Communion out of superstitious reasons or a kind of scrupulosity?

Some other circumstances:

• Do you think it is appropriate for a lay person /deacon who takes Holy Communion from Mass and leads a “Communion service” at a nursing home to receive Communion again prior to distributing Communion to the gathered group of people?  While he/she has already received at Mass, is the sign value/example of receiving Holy Communion with this gathered community greater than the concern about # of times and the fact that it is not during the celebration of the Eucharist?
• If a deacon preaches at three Masses because there is only one deacon in the parish, is it appropriate for a deacon to receive Communion a third time?
• Also, can a musician who plays at three Masses receive at each of those Masses with those gathered? In these types of circumstances, lay leaders of Communion services, deacons, and parish musicians are serving in a liturgical leadership role. Would there be any room for a broader interpretation of Canon 917?

Thanks for your thoughts on this!

A:  Your question veers into canon law, where I always get a little nervous. I can follow the liturgical documents, but a canonist should weigh in on this one.

This much I can tell you – the liturgical documents on distributing communion outside mass do not presume that the presider receives. This can be seen even in the rite of matrimony outside mass. I suppose the presider could receive, but the rubrics do not ask him to.

So, I’d say that someone who receives communion at mass and also leads a communion service need not receive the second time, and probably shouldn’t.

Regarding a deacon preaching at all three masses (or a musician singing or playing), I’d say yes he/she should receive communion all three times. I can’t back that up with any legislation. But the experience of Sunday mass is unique for each congregation. And the prayers of the mass – especially the prayer after communion – presume that everyone here is receiving communion.

Q:  It has always been my understanding the the three celebrations – Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and the Easter Vigil – are considered one liturgy, thus the presider should be the same throughout. I was looking for rubrics or directions that would say that, but I can’t find anything. Can you please comment or point me in the right direction?

A:  There’s no such rule. The liturgies really are independent. They have some logical and theological flow, but there’s no problem with using different presiders during the Triduum.

I just wanted to thank you for the wonderful overview of the Spanish Missals in the Worship November 2015 edition. I was able to get my hands on the Mexican Missal and even an Ecuadorian one which proved invaluable serving the Latino community.

A:  You are welcome.  Here is the Worship Magazine article:  “The Amen Corner: Misal Romano: A Tale of Two Translations.”

Q:  You do not usually go to movies, but you did last week. What did you see?

A:  Concussion.

I had a pass. One of the questions I carry with me when I enter a cinema is, “How will the Catholic Church be portrayed in this film?” The scene at mass shows an arrangement of ministers that would never take place (priest standing at the altar with arms extended while the choir sings the gospel acclamation). But in the end, I was amazed that the Catholic Church came out looking so positive. The doctor is a sincere man of faith, and his faith clearly drives the integrity of his work. It’s the only film I’ve seen where science and faith go hand in hand, and where coroners, Catholics, and even Congress come out looking better than the NFL.

Q:  I attended one of your workshop last year. A point you made close the end of your talk.  If I understood you correctly the oil of catechumen is not allowed on Vigil Saturday.

A:  That’s correct. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (then the National Conference of Catholic Bishops) passed particular law some years ago forbidding the use of the oil of catechumens during the preparation rites on Holy Saturday and during the baptisms of the Easter Vigil.  So even though the Roman Missal tells the priest when to anoint with the oil of catechumens, the particular law in the US overrides that rubric.  It should have been clarified before the missal went to press, but it wasn’t.  

Q:  I have a question for you regarding something you wrote in an article about the Sprinkling Rite for Pastoral Liturgy.  In it, (in the section on the Easter Vigil) you said:

“After all have professed their faith, the priest sprinkles them with water. Some parishes improvise with the ritual at this point, inviting the faithful to the font to sign themselves with water.  This may strengthen the connection between the professed renewal and the renewing powers of the waters of Baptism.”

Our parish has been doing this for somewhere around twenty years. Actually, what we do is have everyone go to the font and start by having the priest bless the first person, and then each person blesses the person behind them. It is a special tradition with a lot of meaning for everyone. The problem is that we have a new pastor who said the only way we can continue to do this is if we can find something “from a competent authority” that says that this is an option. What he wants (and I am sure does not exist) is something in the rubric somewhere that says it is an approved practice. I’ve started going through the liturgical documents in the hope that I can find something that indicates there is some flexibility here. I was hoping, since you mentioned this practice specifically in your article, that you might know of something in the Church documents that says that this is liturgically correct.  Please let me know if you know of anything. I really appreciate your insight.

Thank you very much!

A:  You won’t find it in a document. The part that is hard to defend is having each person put water on the next person. There’s really no liturgical precedent for that. But having everybody come to the font to sign themselves is not much different from the custom when people enter the church and sign themselves with blessed water, as endorsed by the Ceremonial of Bishops 110.

There’s no document containing this as an option at this point of the Vigil, but logically, the results are the same whether the priest sprinkles water on the people or the people sign themselves with water from the font. It’s like the difference between baptism by immersion and baptism by pouring. One brings the person to the water, the other brings water to the person.