P
ProVobis
Guest
- Veterum Sapientia, the Apostolic Constitution of Pope John XXIII, the same Pope who promulgated the 1962 Missal and convened Vatican II.
- Status
F
floresco
Guest
The theology behind any Catholic Mass is the same. We only have one Eucharistic theology. I just think that the words of the EF express it better. I don’t see how me having an opinion on this would be offensive to people who have other opinions. It does not offend me that not everyone agrees with me.One who espouses the Latin OF and all the theology behind it MIGHT find it offensive. Jussssst sayin’.
As far as preferences go, de gustibus non est disputandum. But it seems that the products should be more concrete. A non-existing form vs a generic form is hardly a fair comparison.
P
ProVobis
Guest
But the Latin words of the EP(1) and the EF Canon are the same. Oh…never mind.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
The idea I was trying to get across is that the Mass began in the vernacular, then it got enshrined in Latin, where I think it should remain, the point being that the language is dead, which cements meanings into place, but I think it is only natural that it now, reverts back to its natural state, which is the vernacular. If anyone visited here from another planet, they would think it quite odd that the most important thing we do here on the earth, we do in a language that few people understand. If that somehow adds to its value, it is lost on me. For me, incense, the content of the prayers themselves, the decorum, the priestly vestments, the ceremony, the polyphony, the solemn manner of the priest and servers, the reverence of the people, are all enough to impress upon me that no ordinary thing is taking place, and the the Mighty, Immortal, Incomprehensible One, is being worshiped, praised, implored and celebrated, without the need for a language that serves not the reason for language, that is, to communicate, but only serves for the most part as another form of incense to add to the mystery and otherworldliness of the ritual. The Mass being first and foremost a celebration of Love, and the role of the laity and the priesthood being first and foremost raising their hearts and minds in love, worship and praise for the One who is Love, and who loved us to the death, I think it is only fitting that the words we use be not only special (that would be Latin, or carefully crafted English) but meaningful to all who participate (that would be the carefully crafted English, but not Latin). I use the term carefully crafted English, because I have no problem with using English in a more poetic form, and/or a more prayerful form, than common everyday English, so long as there is no doctrinal error introduced, as is the case with some modern Catholic hymns in English. And if a few terms are introduced that are not readily grasped by all, such as consubstantial, realizing that it is a whole lot easier to learn a few terms in one’s own language, than an entire language.
I would not abandon the Latin Mass. It is too beautiful to abandon, and it has a perfect expression in the Vatican which represents Catholics the world over. The Pope’s Mass is everyone’s Mass, not just the Italians’ Mass I am sure that our new Pope is getting up to speed on the Latin Mass, a Mass only recently begun use in Argentina. Now, for the big surprise. I would endorse the Latin Mass if only the Catholic Church would train all its people in Church Latin. I went to school in the fifties; No Catholic grade school that I know of taught Latin. Latin first appeared in Catholic high school. Why? My guess is to get as many boys on the road to the priesthood as possible, with other excuses as well, such as, Latin being the basis for legal and medical terms, and Latin being good training in logic, and grammatical construction-- I can’t recall all the reasons they gave us, but I think it had more to do with the priesthood than anything else. I wonder if they stopped teaching Latin in Catholic high schools after Vatican II?
In any event, if we all learned Latin, I can see what you’re saying. We would be like the Jews who pray in Hebrew. Jews teach their boys Hebrew for their Bar Mitzvah and for taking part in temple services, and to some extent they teach their girls, but they are not allowed to lead the prayers in regular services. Jewish boys may only know it by heart, like I did when I learned the Suscipiat as an altar boy, I don’t know, but its a start. But where is there any encouragement for the general Catholic population to learn Latin, even in the days when the Mass was in Latin. It makes me wonder, too, why so many prayers are said silently. Did that occur because no one could understand anyway? The Mass of St. James called for quite a bit of prayer out loud and quite a bit of response by the people. Also, observe how much of what is said quietly in the EF is spoken aloud in the NO. Why? Probably because it can be understood and therefore it is edifying to the people to be spoken aloud.
When all is said and done, I guess all that I am saying is that for me it would be well received if the EF were in my native tongue. I like the EF’s approach to the Mass more than the NO, which I pray almost exclusively because that is virtually all that is available. I like the focus on the Sacrifice, more so than on the communal aspects of the NO. I like the idea of the priest and people both facing God (Tabernacle) and the priest as it were mediating in the place of Christ (alter Christi) for us. I like the reverence facilitated by the reception of the Holy Eucharist on the tongue, kneeling at the altar rail. At one church where I attend, sometimes the priest saying a Novus Ordo Mass will call the people up to the altar rail at communion time and distribute communion the old way. I like that.
So, because I like the form of the EF more so than the NO, and because I like the vernacular more than the Latin, except for commonly known prayers: Kyrie (which is Greek), Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Pater Noster, it would be a blessing for me to see the EF in English. And don’t get me wrong; like you, I feel that some prayers are better to remain in silence, but not necessarily to the extent of the current EF. I’m no expert in any of this, but it seems a lot of the conventions that crept into the Mass are of human origin and not supernatural origin. If an esoteric language were all that important, why not create one from scratch, a perfect prayer language, one that is for the sole intended use of worship, instead of using a language that had been used in many profane ways for centuries before the Church sanctified it? That’s all. It will be interesting to see how the Spirit leads.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
Well, I wouldn’t call it a willy-nilly translation, just a non-literal method of translation that the Church later regretted and is which is why we now have a more literal translation.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
This is why it is best to have the “Master” text in Latin, which is not prone to corruption. But working off that, I can see Bible or Mass in every language on earth. Periodically, they might have to be modified from time to time due to language corruptions, but that could be dealt with largely by each group of users, subject to final Vatican approval. Isn’t that what we presently do with the Bible; it is in every language on earth. How many people would read the Bible if it were only in Latin, or in Latin, Greek and Hebrew? Again, so long as meaning is memorialized in Latin, no problem.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
You make me feel like saying, why have words at all! but I know you are being sincere in your explanation of why it doesn’t bother you that you don’t know what the priest is saying. Yes, I know some major parts of the EF Mass, but at some Masses the priest goes on considerably longer with silent prayers. I am not familiar enough with the EF to know why the prayers differ in length so much at times, but I would sure like to know and follow what the priest is saying. I can stay home and say my rosary. I want to participate in the particular action of the moment, not just raise my heart in independent prayer to God, not that that isn’t a worthy thing to do. There surely is a quality of mystery about the Mass, but I don’t think it should be in what is being prayed by the priest. That does not make sense.No I don’t use a missal in at the EF. Of the 300 people there the last time I attended mass at an FSSP parish, probably less to 15 people were using a missal. I don’t speak Latin, but I know enough that between it and the gestures of the priest to know precisely where we are. I also know what the prayers are so I doubt that I or anyone else not using a missal would consider ourselves in the dark.
What I mean by English being distracting is that it allows the secular to more easily invade my prayer. When the mass is in Latin it allows me to focus on interior joining of my prayer with that of the priest. Its really more that verbal language processing can be difficult for me. Latin and the liturgy become almost a symbolic language that are intimately tied to me prayer life. Just like math has it’s own language and symbols I find that the language and symbols of the EF more precisely express the meaning and purpose of the mass to me. Obviously not the same for everyone, but it is true for how I am wired.
As for what I am focussed on when “something big isn’t happening”? Its the mass so there is always something big going on. That’s the mystery of the mass. But taking your example (i.e. when there’s inaudible prayers, etc) that’s easy; prayer.
U
Usige
Guest
Don’t get me wrong. Just because I don’t use a missal in mass doesn’t mean that I have no idea what is being said. I generally read the readings, collect, introit, secret, etc. before mass. Even when I go to the OF I read the Gospel, first and second reading, and propers before hand. When each part of the mass happens I recall that specific portion of the mass.
My problem is not with words per se but rather with auditory short term memory. Because of that my brain latches onto individual English words that I have to reassemble into phrases. I know Latin as phrases more than individual words so in my head something like ‘dominus vobiscum’ is not two words but a single symboligical constant in my head. It still translates to the idea behind “the lord be with you” but the Latin short cuts that reassembly. Given that I think in symbols and pictures more than words the Latin short cut makes more sense in that I’m not running behind translating English into a picture or symbol in my head. So in some ways the words are less important than the idea associated with those words. (Sorry for the digression into the messy inner workings of my brain
)During any silent prayers I am not lifting up some unrelated prayer, I am joining my prayers to those of the priest. During the consecration I use the same prayers in both the EF and OF because they are the same sacrifice. When I said the mass is a mystery I didn’t mean because of the silent prayers, but rather that in do not see the mass as multiple events seperated by less important things. Instead the Mass is a single mysterious event in which sin, redemption, love, and sacrifice are all tied to a single thing.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
Mass is a never ending challenge to enter more fully into the worship and love of God.Don’t get me wrong. Just because I don’t use a missal in mass doesn’t mean that I have no idea what is being said. I generally read the readings, collect, introit, secret, etc. before mass. Even when I go to the OF I read the Gospel, first and second reading, and propers before hand. When each part of the mass happens I recall that specific portion of the mass.
My problem is not with words per se but rather with auditory short term memory. Because of that my brain latches onto individual English words that I have to reassemble into phrases. I know Latin as phrases more than individual words so in my head something like ‘dominus vobiscum’ is not two words but a single symboligical constant in my head. It still translates to the idea behind “the lord be with you” but the Latin short cuts that reassembly. Given that I think in symbols and pictures more than words the Latin short cut makes more sense in that I’m not running behind translating English into a picture or symbol in my head. So in some ways the words are less important than the idea associated with those words. (Sorry for the digression into the messy inner workings of my brain
During any silent prayers I am not lifting up some unrelated prayer, I am joining my prayers to those of the priest. During the consecration I use the same prayers in both the EF and OF because they are the same sacrifice. When I said the mass is a mystery I didn’t mean because of the silent prayers, but rather that in do not see the mass as multiple events seperated by less important things. Instead the Mass is a single mysterious event in which sin, redemption, love, and sacrifice are all tied to a single thing.
G
gjpayne
Guest
Whatever you want to call the ICEL’s 1970s era translation, what I really was referring to was the ad libbing by the priests in my diocese who felt they had carte blanche to change the words and add and drop things, willy-nilly. They were able to change it because the mass was in a language they could understand, I doubt that they could have ad-libbed in Latin.
One of the benefits of the new translation is that it has forced them all to go back to reading out of the missal, and to use the actual words of the Mass. Time will tell if they decide to stray off the page again, my guess is that once they more or less have the 3rd edition translation memorized, they will likely go-a-wandering once again.
What I wouldn’t want is for priests to be allowed to use English for the EF without a uniform approved translation. What a mess that would be, if everyone just came up with their own! And even if there was an approved translation, would it just be a matter of time before priests ad-libbed on that one, too?
P
ProVobis
Guest
They debated that translation too, since the Lord IS already with you. I think it’s one of only a few translations that makes the understood indicative a needless subjunctive.
AFAIK, the committee wanted to change that to “May the spirit of the Lord be with you/And also with you.” which would have made more theological sense but they decided to keep the old Anglican “The Lord be with you.” This, however, seemingly contradicts the indicative in the translated Hail Mary “The Lord IS with you.”
Your other points well-taken.
P
ProVobis
Guest
It is, but how many people know that when they only hear the translation? In their heads, the “Master” is the translation itself, and in some cases, a translation of a translation. This can and does lead to the improper understanding of the texts. Where’s the authenticity and authoritativeness of any translation, which at best is an educated guess?
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
Yes, the rubrics of the NO are very loose compared to the EF, so it does seem to invite looseness in its implementation. I don’t know how much wiggle room the Church allows priests in the words of the Mass, but there was none in the Latin Rite. Yes, a uniform approved translation would be needed. IMO, there should be one for the EF now; why should the faithful be at the mercy of the missal publishers? Speaking of messes, haven’t we already seen quite a mess post Vatican II with all the experimentation and little attempt to stick to the advice and spirit of the Vatican II documents themselves. We are learning that too much wiggle room can have unpleasant results, not that anything that Vatican II documents say is in error. It’s comforting to have strict rubrics and I think we will see a continuing trend in that direction as long as there are evidences of unhealthy abuses of more liberal rules.
P
ProVobis
Guest
You’re right. There was no encouragement to learn Latin, outside of the Mass anyway. Even Cicero has been put on the back-burner, so to speak. But you want to remove even the little Latin that we have left? Did you happen to note how long it took them to figure out that the (previous) Pope was resigning, because he stated it in Latin? That’s sad.
U
Usige
Guest
Almost makes me think we should do what our Jewish brothers do, but instead of Hebrew schoolwe should have Latin school. Need to ask father at the FSSP parish if he already does something like that
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
Haha So true. But I do NOT want to do away with the little Latin we have left. If anything, I want it to grow. One way that would help it to grow would be an EF in the vernacular. Then everyone could more easily appreciate the beauty of the Latin EF; they certainly don’t learn to appreciate it through the Novus Ordo. With better education, in seminaries and outside seminaries, more people could be brought into the Latin Rite, but as it is, it attracts few, and most of those are old-timers, a dying breed. If you don’t want the Latin Rite to die, as did the language itself, then support the EF in one’s native tongue. Onve people become reacquainted with the EF in their own language, they will realize what they are giving up in the NO, not that it is any less authentic.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
I think you’re begging the issue. The Church encourages Catholics to read the Bible, yet it is chock full of pitfalls and opportunities for misinterpretation. On balance, it is better for Catholics to read Scriptures, and I submit for the same reason, it is more edifying than not for Catholics to pray the Mass in their own language.
Have we put everyone to sleep in this thread yet? 
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
I don’t think that the universe would blow up if the EF was done in English.
I don’t think it is impossible for Catholic liturgical geniuses to come up with a accurate as possible Latin to English translation.
The real problem is that the EF lovers are afraid of the demise of Latin and the OF lovers are afraid of a superior liturgy!
Why is it an impossible notion to dream of a fantastic English liturgy?
Is Latin the ONLY language on planet Earth that is capable of supporting a fantastic liturgy?
Could God compose a fantastic English liturgy?
Do the seraphim in Heaven speak Latin when they praise God?
What language is used when they do liturgy in heaven?
And greatest horror of all horrors–what if this pope or a future pope gets rid of everything in the past and comes out with a new–possibly hybrid liturgy–something like say the 1965 missal?
Would the Catholic Church be able to withstand the gates of hell?
I think the answer is that our understanding of liturgy did not end once and forever with TLM.
I think the Holy Spirit can and still does lead us into all truth and to better and better liturgy.
Is that the truth?
Is wanting all that is great about TLM in English a sin?
Is wanting a liturgy that wonderful in English a sin?
Sometimes I think that OF lovers and EF lovers are both haters of anything in between or anything that would combine the best aspects of both.
It isn’t tough being an EF lover or an OF lover–the tough thing is being for a liturgy that would be better than both of them.
P.S. There is Catholic liturgy other than the EF or the OF. Those masses are done everyday all around the world and the Earth still keeps going around the sun.
Change in liturgy does not mean the end of the world!
I don’t think it is impossible for Catholic liturgical geniuses to come up with a accurate as possible Latin to English translation.
The real problem is that the EF lovers are afraid of the demise of Latin and the OF lovers are afraid of a superior liturgy!
Why is it an impossible notion to dream of a fantastic English liturgy?
Is Latin the ONLY language on planet Earth that is capable of supporting a fantastic liturgy?
Could God compose a fantastic English liturgy?
Do the seraphim in Heaven speak Latin when they praise God?
What language is used when they do liturgy in heaven?
And greatest horror of all horrors–what if this pope or a future pope gets rid of everything in the past and comes out with a new–possibly hybrid liturgy–something like say the 1965 missal?
Would the Catholic Church be able to withstand the gates of hell?
I think the answer is that our understanding of liturgy did not end once and forever with TLM.
I think the Holy Spirit can and still does lead us into all truth and to better and better liturgy.
Is that the truth?
Is wanting all that is great about TLM in English a sin?
Is wanting a liturgy that wonderful in English a sin?
Sometimes I think that OF lovers and EF lovers are both haters of anything in between or anything that would combine the best aspects of both.
It isn’t tough being an EF lover or an OF lover–the tough thing is being for a liturgy that would be better than both of them.
P.S. There is Catholic liturgy other than the EF or the OF. Those masses are done everyday all around the world and the Earth still keeps going around the sun.
Change in liturgy does not mean the end of the world!
P
ProVobis
Guest
P
ProVobis
Guest
Precisely why Trent only protected the Latin Vulgate. And not in the vernacular either.
- Status