My experience of hybrids (the technical term is "macaronic") is that they tend to be very joyful, sometimes even rollicking. In dulci iubilo is an example. I would take into account when considering the Ordinary.

I've never been to a Mass that was mostly not in English, but had a tiny bit of English thrown in here and there. OTOH, I have been to a lot of Masses in English, with bits of Spanish or Latin thrown in. I've also been to fully-bilingual (English-Spanish) Masses.

My feelings are:

- Fully Bilingual (two vernaculars) -- this can work, but is very difficult to pull of in a way that makes much sense. Of the hundreds of such Masses I have attended, probably only a handful were particularly successful.

- Dominant Vernacular with secondary vernacular -- I always feel weird about this. Since I have always been a part of the dominant vernacular, I can't know how it feels. Does it feels inclusive? Welcoming? Pandering? Pointless? I get the sense that people planning these liturgies are usually dominant-vernacular speakers, and it makes them feel good to include the secondary vernacular. It feels multicultural and exotic and inclusive. I'm not sure if these are good reasons to do something.

- Vernacular with some ritual Latin (or Greek) thrown in -- This usually manifests in one or two Ordinary movements being done in Latin: Agnus Dei, Sanctus, or Kyrie (Greek). Kyrie makes the most sense... it was in a foreign language in the Latin Mass, why not keep it in a foreign language in the English Mass? I don't know why people like chanting the Latin Agnus Dei so much, but people do. Part of me feels like this is good, as it serves as a reminder that the normative text for the rite is Latin.

In fact I think this is why MJO is right and sensible, from his POV, to dislike mixed-language liturgy. In Anglicanism, and so therefore in the Anglican Ordinariate, the normative text is English. In the "normal" OF, English is a gloss on the Latin. Letting the Latin show-through makes some sense there. But in an Anglican rite, you are basically smashing two liturgical texts together.

- Then there are Vernacular Masses with some Latin music -- motets and/or hymns. A Latin motet in a vernacular Mass communicates (to me, anyway) that understanding the text of the motet is not important. It is just sound. Latin hymns that actually get used in English Masses (Adeste Fidelis, Veni Veni Emmanuel, Salve Regina, O Sanctissima, etc) tend to have a certain nostalgia factor. I'm not sure if nostalgia is a good criteria for selecting music.

- Latin as an ornament. An English Gloria with a Latin descant, etc. This seems like abusing the language a bit, just for the sake of a musical effect.

The last time I was at Notre Dame de Paris, the lections and spoken ritual parts were in French, the Ordinary was in Latin and the choir sang two English motets. It was great because all the texts were presented in a translation.

My unabashed preference is for the traditional liturgy, so with the exception of a motet (since we have Anglican ones, for example, we might as well use them) and hymns (De musica sacra is a later law, and merely law), I prefer every ritual word and chant from the aspersion to the Marian anthem, to be in Latin. I am placated in the new form when the Ordinary and even Propers are in Latin.

What’s weirder is using a minority vernacular... We have Spanish Mass once a month sponsored by “Latinos for Christ” and a religious congregation from Spain that has its American house in Steubenville. The vernacular approved for the USA is Mexican, even though these sisters are Spanish and the LFC members hail from all over Latin America (there are two missals, correct?). The rest of us speak English, and it is a case where the recent development of Latin being a unifier is a very good thing.

Adam, your dominant vernacular with a bit of a secondary tongue thrown in makes me cringe... I get that impression too from the powers that be.

A community in Georgia made up literally of Anglos and Hispanics built a church together. They could not compromise on the languages shown in the artwork ( English or Spanish) so the architect suggested Latin in the church. And that is what it is.

And they said Latin was useless.....

Adam, I know!

provided that people are provided a translation in a worship aid. If it's not, he is correct in that it communicates that the text is not important.

I would never communicate that. However, I might communicate that I think the congregation is so well-informed that it knows the text already.

Oops: that is a digression. Back to multi-vernacular Masses...

I am pretty well informed. However I would not necessarily understand the text of a Latin motet sung by a choir.

So, I hate announcements during Mass, but our music director tries to solve your problem by saying that the schola is going to sing ___, and then reads the English translation aloud before we begin.

I would never communicate that. However, I might communicate that I think the congregation is so well-informed that it knows the text already.

Well, I left out the part where I would encourage all the school children to learn Latin, so that a good portion of the community is able to comprehend it without a translation provided. But in the meantime...

Information overload is a problem there. Putting all that service info in the bulletin, amid a jumble of other distracting material, is not helpful.

If you can't make the music program a sheet by itself (maybe a half-sheet), then you can devote the whole front page of the bulletin to it.

As for microphone announcements, they are tacky, and I would rather not do them, but they do wake people up and get them to pick up the hymn book.

Oops: sorry again, off-topic.

Nice service folder, Bruce!
Very nice!
Smartly done!

We once had a wedding couple who requested the ICEL Gloria sung alternating with polyphony, so we did the Victoria Mode IV Gloria in Latin alternating with the Missal Gloria. It seemed a bit odd and I've never repeated it.