Did we confuse Pope Paul's liturgical reform?

  • Thread starter Thread starter latingirl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

latingirl

Guest
I was speaking with a friend online and talking about how Pope Paul VI wanted to maintain reverence, Latin and chant at Mass, citing a book called “Fidelity and Relevance” complied from his speeches. My friend said that this notion was absurd and sent me a document in which Pope Paul VI, loosely paraphrased, basically says: “So what if we’ve lost Latin and chant at Mass, at least we are accessing the people. You need to learn to give some things up for the greater good.” - this being said in one of his general audiences.

This statement has a tone that completely contradicts what I have read so far from Pope Paul VI. And it contradicts the Second Vatican Council documents. By the way, this friend of mine was trying to indicate that my traditional viewpoints were wrong, saying that Pope Paul VI actually intended to drop Latin and chant. Why would he want to drop these things after explicitly stating they were to be kept. What gives?
 
latingirl said:
I was speaking with a friend online and talking about how Pope Paul VI wanted to maintain reverence, Latin and chant at Mass, citing a book called “Fidelity and Relevance” complied from his speeches. My friend said that this notion was absurd and sent me a document in which Pope Paul VI, loosely paraphrased, basically says: “So what if we’ve lost Latin and chant at Mass, at least we are accessing the people. You need to learn to give some things up for the greater good.” - this being said in one of his general audiences.

This statement has a tone that completely contradicts what I have read so far from Pope Paul VI. And it contradicts the Second Vatican Council documents. By the way, this friend of mine was trying to indicate that my traditional viewpoints were wrong, saying that Pope Paul VI actually intended to drop Latin and chant. Why would he want to drop these things after explicitly stating they were to be kept. What gives?
Click to expand...
It sounds like what gives is someone trying to quote out of context, or misquote, or quote from unreliable sources in order to support their premise.

Without being too picky or pointed, you might ask your friend if they can source the document; and then you may wish (or not wish) to read it. Keep in mind that not everything which is said is truthful - and a good amount of what is written might charitably be described as fiction. Being highly curious (as opposed to snide or cynical or skeptical) may go a long way in finding out exactly where that alleged quote came from. I only suggest that because people who may have an agenda can be a bit prickly when their source is questioned.

It is not unknown that people on both ends of the spectrum can be prone to proof texting, misquoting, and outright lying. I do not suggest your friend is doing so, but I would suspect that someone “up the line” may have done so. That does not sound like the Paul 6th I remember, who was a rather astute individual, and a Canon lawyer.
 
latingirl said:
I was speaking with a friend online and talking about how Pope Paul VI wanted to maintain reverence, Latin and chant at Mass, citing a book called “Fidelity and Relevance” complied from his speeches. My friend said that this notion was absurd and sent me a document in which Pope Paul VI, loosely paraphrased, basically says: “So what if we’ve lost Latin and chant at Mass, at least we are accessing the people. You need to learn to give some things up for the greater good.” - this being said in one of his general audiences.

This statement has a tone that completely contradicts what I have read so far from Pope Paul VI. And it contradicts the Second Vatican Council documents. By the way, this friend of mine was trying to indicate that my traditional viewpoints were wrong, saying that Pope Paul VI actually intended to drop Latin and chant. Why would he want to drop these things after explicitly stating they were to be kept. What gives?
Click to expand...
Sounds like your friend is quoting out of context. Ask for the exact source and read it yourself. Personally, I don’t think it is true. Linus2nd
 
otjm said:
It sounds like what gives is someone trying to quote out of context, or misquote, or quote from unreliable sources in order to support their premise.

Without being too picky or pointed, you might ask your friend if they can source the document; and then you may wish (or not wish) to read it. Keep in mind that not everything which is said is truthful - and a good amount of what is written might charitably be described as fiction. Being highly curious (as opposed to snide or cynical or skeptical) may go a long way in finding out exactly where that alleged quote came from. I only suggest that because people who may have an agenda can be a bit prickly when their source is questioned.

It is not unknown that people on both ends of the spectrum can be prone to proof texting, misquoting, and outright lying. I do not suggest your friend is doing so, but I would suspect that someone “up the line” may have done so. That does not sound like the Paul 6th I remember, who was a rather astute individual, and a Canon lawyer.
Click to expand...
See that’s what made me suspicious. This person I was talking to is known for trying to discredit traditional Catholics. It is a pet peeve of mine when sometimes I just want to have a conversation and it automatically turns into an argument against “trads”. I know my quote was correct because I had the book right in front of me. I will see if I can track down the source of his quote.
 
Oh my God, I looked it up it’s true.

//]It is here that the greatest newness is going to be noticed, the newness of language. No longer Latin, but the spoken language will be the principal language of the Mass. The introduction of the vernacular will certainly be a great sacrifice for those who know the beauty, the power and the expressive sacrality of Latin. We are parting with the speech of the Christian centuries; we are becoming like profane intruders in the literary preserve of sacred utterance. We will lose a great part of that stupendous and incomparable artistic and spiritual thing, the Gregorian chant.
  1. We have reason indeed for regret, reason almost for bewilderment. What can we put in the place of that language of the angels? We are giving up something of priceless worth. But why? What is more precious than these loftiest of our Church’s values?
  2. The answer will seem banal, prosaic. Yet it is a good answer, because it is human, because it is apostolic.
  3. Understanding of prayer is worth more than the silken garments in which it is royally dressed. Participation by the people is worth more—particularly participation by modern people, so fond of plain language which is easily understood and converted into everyday speech.//
How can he say these losses are a good thing!!! Did he forsee how getting rid of Latin actually segregated the Church and alienated other rites of the Church who believe in firm liturgy?

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6691126.HTM

However then at the end he says we’re not letting go of Latin.

//But, in any case, the new rite of the Mass provides that the faithful “should be able to sing together, in Latin, at least the parts of the Ordinary of the Mass, especially the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, the Our Father” (Sacrosanctum Concilium n. 19).
  1. But, let us bear this well in mind, for our counsel and our comfort: the Latin language will not thereby disappear. It will continue to be the noble language of the Holy See’s official acts; it will remain as the means of teaching in ecclesiastical studies and as the key to the patrimony of our religious, historical and human culture. If possible, it will reflourish in splendor.//
But that is exactly what happened. They let go of Latin. They axed it! I hear more beautiful chants in movies and on you tube than I do in church. What is going on? Maybe I shouldn’t look into this sad part of church history?
 
latingirl said:
That’s it, I’m going Eastern.
Click to expand...
First of all Latin is not dead in the Church. I know of several scholas in my country still chanting it as well as numerous monasteries. That said, remember that the Eastern Churches are largely culturally homogenious. The Western Chuch no longer is. It is no longer entirely rooted in European culture. It is now truly universal: european, African, Asian, etc. Many of those cultures have absolutely no roots in Latin. The Church needs to adjust to these realities in order to evangelize all peoples, including Westeners who are no longer receiving Latin as part of a classical education.
 
OraLabora said:
First of all Latin is not dead in the Church. I know of several scholas in my country still chanting it as well as numerous monasteries. That said, remember that the Eastern Churches are largely culturally homogenious. The Western Chuch no longer is. It is no longer entirely rooted in European culture. It is now truly universal: european, African, Asian, etc. Many of those cultures have absolutely no roots in Latin. The Church needs to adjust to these realities in order to evangelize all peoples, including Westeners who are no longer receiving Latin as part of a classical education.
Click to expand...
You are right, we did need to change some things to receive different people from different cultures but getting rid of our heritage and our identity as Roman Catholics hurt us more than helped. Let me clarify I know the Church itself has not cast her heritage aside but sometimes, especially in places is the US, it seems like it. There seems to be no Catholic savor.

There are many young Catholics like me who never hear a word of Latin spoken in church, We never hear beautiful chants. It starts to make us feel banal and assimilated. We live in a noisy world that demands banality and ugliness and then go to a parish which is just the same. This is how we loose faith. We say “what’s the point?” When the Mass becomes too much like the outside world, faith and fidelity suffer. When we stop behaving as if we are at the Lamb’s High Feast, we stop believing in it.
 
OraLabora said:
… including Westeners who are no longer receiving Latin as part of a classical education.
Click to expand...
Or not much of anything else, judging by their low reading and math scores. 😦

Do they even teach English grammar anymore?
 
ProVobis said:
Perhaps he knew the internet and the EF were coming? 🙂
Click to expand...
I don’t know. Sometimes I think that maybe they took all this stuff away from us so that we would realize how important it really is? You know, so we would no longer take it for granted? Maybe we are in a “Lent” where we have given up fine things so that later on, when “Easter” comes we can come back to them and truly be thankful?
 
latingirl said:
That’s it, I’m going Eastern.
Click to expand...
Eastern Catholic churches use the vernacular as the norm.

Pope Paul VI did give more in the part you did not post: 12. If the divine Latin language kept us apart from the children, from youth, from the world of labor and of affairs, if it were a dark screen, not a clear window, would it be right for us fishers of souls to maintain it as the exclusive language of prayer and religious intercourse? What did St. Paul have to say about that? Read chapter 14 of the first letter to the Corinthians: “In Church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue” (I Corinthians 14:19).
Code: 
 13. St. Augustine seems to be commenting on this when he says, "Have no fear of     teachers, so long as all are instructed" (P.L. 38, 228, Serm. 37; cf. also Serm. 229,     p. 1371). But, in any case, the new rite of the Mass provides that the faithful     "should be able to sing together, in Latin, at least the parts of the Ordinary of the     Mass, especially the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, the Our Father" (Sacrosanctum     Concilium n. 19).
 
And let’s not forget:
In April 1974 Pope Paul VI sent to every bishop in the world a booklet of some of the simplest selections of Gregorian Chant, much of it drawn from the Graduale Romanum. This booklet, called Jubilate Deo, was intended as a “minimum repertoire of Gregorian chant”. It is, in other words, an official Latin “core repertoire” for the Roman Rite. It was prepared, the Pope said, in order “to make it easier for Christians to achieve **unity and spiritual harmony **with their brothers and with the living tradition of the past. Hence it is that those who are trying to improve the quality of congregational singing cannot refuse Gregorian chant the place which is due to it” (Voluntati Obsequens).
Click to expand...
Pope Paul VI gave permission for the selections in Jubilate Deo to be freely reprinted. The booklet was accompanied by a letter in which the Holy Father made this request of the bishops:
Click to expand...
“Would you therefore, in collaboration with the competent diocesan and national agencies for the liturgy, sacred music and catechetics, decide on the best ways of teaching the faithful the Latin chants of Jubilate Deo and of having them sing them…. You will thus be performing a new service for the Church in the domain of liturgical renewal” (Voluntati Obsequens).
Click to expand...
Jubilate Deo contains simple chant settings in Latin of the parts of the Ordinary of the Mass: Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation, Agnus Dei. It also provides musical settings for the dialogues between priest and people, such as before the Preface, and the Ite Missa est, the response to the Prayer of the Faithful, and others.
Click to expand...
An, expanded edition of Jubilate Deo was later issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1987.
Click to expand...
adoremus.org/JubilateDeo.html
 
ProVobis said:
I don’t think tonnes is in their vernacular though. 🙂

If I remember right, a tonne is slightly heavier than a (U.S.) ton?
Click to expand...
🙂 240 pounds heavier in fact - which makes the sarcasm of my statement all the more sarcastic…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top