Does The Church Have An Obligation To Promote The Latin Mass ?

[JReducation]

That is the point I am trying to make. When the first Missionaries came till 1970 The Mass was in Latin.

Latin is close to Spanish. You are right the translations are better than the English ones.

The point is that the indigenous people rarely speak Spanish. They live in very isolated geographical areas where Spanish is not spoken. The only time they go to the city is for market days and it’s not everyone.

The current situation in South America is very fragile right now. The indigenous people refuse to trust the mestizos and the whites. They have been abused by so many corrupt governments and corporations that they want to stay as far as possible. Acutally, all of us would want to stay away from those who have abused us, cheated us, stolen from us, and lied to us.

The Church is trying very hard to create a distance between Catholicism and oppresion and project an image of the Incarnate Christ. It’s very important to these people and very effective the way they are doing it. Why mess with something that works for the salvation of souls?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Malkin71]

The point is that the indigenous people rarely speak Spanish. They live in very isolated geographical areas where Spanish is not spoken. The only time they go to the city is for market days and it’s not everyone.

The current situation in South America is very fragile right now. The indigenous people refuse to trust the mestizos and the whites. They have been abused by so many corrupt governments and corporations that they want to stay as far as possible. Acutally, all of us would want to stay away from those who have abused us, cheated us, stolen from us, and lied to us.

The Church is trying very hard to create a distance between Catholicism and oppresion and project an image of the Incarnate Christ. It’s very important to these people and very effective the way they are doing it. Why mess with something that works for the salvation of souls?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

When the Blessed Mother appeared to St. Juan Diego. How many Aztecs were converted.
Mexico was far worse with human sacrafices. The Mass was in Latin in 1531 A.D…

 

[JReducation]

When the Blessed Mother appeared to St. Juan Diego. How many Aztecs were converted.
Mexico was far worse with human sacrafices. The Mass was in Latin in 1531 A.D…

But we’re not in 1531. We have options today and we are allowed to use them.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[CWBetts]

I think that those who want only the Latin Mass need a history lesson. The earliest Christian communities had their Eucharistic Sacrifices in not Latin, but Greek. Why was Latin adapted? It was the vernacular of the people. Now, the Latin is being displaced by the vernacular, as it should be. The Latin Mass is a beautiful sight to behold, and there are cases, such as with a multi-lingual gathering, it is actually preferred, but in most cases, the Mass should be in the language of the people. How can the faithful be edified by the reading of Scripture when the Scriptures being read are in a different language?

 

[JReducation]

I think that those who want only the Latin Mass need a history lesson. The earliest Christian communities had their Eucharistic Sacrifices in not Latin, but Greek. Why was Latin adapted? It was the vernacular of the people. Now, the Latin is being displaced by the vernacular, as it should be. The Latin Mass is a beautiful sight to behold, and there are cases, such as with a multi-lingual gathering, it is actually preferred, but in most cases, the Mass should be in the language of the people. How can the faithful be edified by the reading of Scripture when the Scriptures being read are in a different language?

In the Extraordinary Form the scriptures are read in the language of the people. The prayers are in Latin, not the scriptures. As to the use of Latin, it actually makes sense in this regard. The first Christian community was in Jerusalem and then spread through Europe. However, the patriarchate of Rome became the diocese of Peter. The languate of the patriarchate was Latin, not Greek. The Roman Church kept the Latin language as its official language to this day.

My own community uses the Oridnary Form of the liturgy in English. Sometimes we have it in Latin. We do not have the EF, except on those rare occasions when we have a visitor who celebrates it for us.

However, every document that comes from our generalate in Rome comes in Latin. Our constitutions and our rule are in Latin. And all of our correspondence with the General Council of Franciscan Ministes General is still in Latin. I believe that this is true for most international communities of men with headquarters in the Archdiocese of Rome. Latin remains the official language of these religious communnities, even though they celebrate the liturgy in many languages.

The reason I bring up our communication and our documents is to highlight the fact that Latin is alive and well in the Latin Church. Of course, we translate everything into the five languages of the Franciscan order: French, English, Spanish, Italian and German. But notice that there are no other translations allowed. So our Asian, African, Arabic and other brothers whose native language is different, have to learn one of these other languages. Usually, they translate everything to Italian or leave it in Latin, as no other language is allowed, except those six, besides Latin.

There is a Latin patrimony in the Latin Church, not only in the liturgy, but also in daily life. However, I do not want to minimize the importance and the value of using the national languages of people in the celebration of the mass and the Liturgy of the Hours. I simply wanted to point out that Latin continues to be the official language of the Patriarchate of Rome. Up until this year, the entire Western Church was part of the patriarchate of Rome. That status is still not quite clear, because the Holy Father has eliminated one of the titles of the pope: Patriarch of the West, but has preserve the Patriarch of Rome. Since the Western Church belongs to the Latin Church, I imagine that canonically, we fall under the Patriarchate of Rome and thus remain bound to use Latin for formal writing, communication and as the ordinary language of the Ordinary Form of the liturgy, even though the option to use national languages is available.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[CWBetts]

I fully realize that Latin is the official language of the Church, I was just trying to explain why I feel that clinging to Latin in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist is somewhat problematic. I still have not been to an EF Mass, so to be honest I wan’t sure what was in Latin and waht was in the vernacular. I was simply operating under the assumption that everything except the homily was in Latin. Even if it is only the prayers in Latin, in my mind it would be more edifying if I knew what I was saying, but that is just me.

 

[Joannm]

The first step is to have workshops in Parishes to teach Latin. Start by the Basic prayers, The Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be. Then teach the Confetier, Glory to God, Holy, Holy, Holy, and Lamb of God. With explaination and meaning.

In Mass keep singing the prayers in the above in Latin. Repetition is the key.

Require Latin instead of Spanish in Catholic schools.

We can’t get people to come to basic Adult classes on the faith, I really doubt they are going to come out to learn Latin. As far as teaching Lain in school instead of Spanish…I don’t know about where you live but in my area Spanish is slowly becoming a primary language. In fact, if you can speak Spanish you are in better line for certain jobs and promotions.

Also there are people, like me, who just can’t learn another language. I have tried. I took French and have used programs to learn Italian. I just don’t have an ear for it. To really learn a language you need to be able to get the chance to use it. Praying the prayers at a Latin mass is not learning or using a language, it is memorizing words. I have memorized a few prayers in Latin, but if you asked for a word or word translation I could not give it to you, and if you showed me a different prayer I would not be able to translate.

I do know a few very prestigious Catholic HS that do teach Latin, but they teach Classical Latin, not Ecclesial Latin. One even teaches Chinese which seems to be the up and coming popular language to learn, especially if on is going to be working in the area of business and finance.

 

[Malkin71]

We can’t get people to come to basic Adult classes on the faith, I really doubt they are going to come out to learn Latin. As far as teaching Lain in school instead of Spanish…I don’t know about where you live but in my area Spanish is slowly becoming a primary language. In fact, if you can speak Spanish you are in better line for certain jobs and promotions.

Also there are people, like me, who just can’t learn another language. I have tried. I took French and have used programs to learn Italian. I just don’t have an ear for it. To really learn a language you need to be able to get the chance to use it. Praying the prayers at a Latin mass is not learning or using a language, it is memorizing words. I have memorized a few prayers in Latin, but if you asked for a word or word translation I could not give it to you, and if you showed me a different prayer I would not be able to translate.

I do know a few very prestigious Catholic HS that do teach Latin, but they teach Classical Latin, not Ecclesial Latin. One even teaches Chinese which seems to be the up and coming popular language to learn, especially if on is going to be working in the area of business and finance.

I am from Pittsburgh, Pa. Here in the Oakland section of Pittsburgh, we had a Polish church givin to the Hispanics for their Mass. People were upset about it. Pittsburgh past is proud of their heritage from Europe. Our ancesters came and settled and help establish beautiful Churches, Catholic, Eastern and Orthodox, all around the city. The churches themselves are a beautiful work of art. Inside and out. When the immigrents came and and took root. They set up local ethenic clubs to teach and learn English. Guess what they learned. Now the opposite is happening. they are teaching their native languages, Slovak, Polish, Italian, Russian, etc…

If Latin is taught, other languages will came natually. When I was groing to school in the 70’s, foreign language was only in High School. When I was in grade school I was asked why are you learing Latin and the language of school? Because, the shool was associate with a ethnic Parish. In High School you had only two choices Spanish or French. I took both. Looking back I wish that I had gone to a different High Scool and learned Latin.

Truthfully there should be more learning Latin tapes, both classical and Ecclesical. There should be more of an effort for Latin not for Spanish. Also, if Spanish can get you promoted or a job. That is discrimination.

 

[Joannm]

Truthfully there should be more learning Latin tapes, both classical and Ecclesical. There should be more of an effort for Latin not for Spanish. Also, if Spanish can get you promoted or a job. That is discrimination.

Why is it discrimination? If you, in your job, will be dealing with a large number of people who only speak Spanish, then knowing Spanish will get you the job. We have parishes here with large Hispanic immigrant populations. Those who work for such parishes need to know Spanish to minister to the people. In certain businesses, knowing Spanish will get you a promotion in areas where there is a great need for people who speak Spanish. Honesty, if given the opportunity to take courses in latin or Spanish I would choose Spanish since I would have a greater opportunity to use it and it would give me an advantage in applying for certain positions. Even in our seminary Spanish is required and latin is only an elective.

 

[Malkin71]

Why is it discrimination? If you, in your job, will be dealing with a large number of people who only speak Spanish, then knowing Spanish will get you the job. We have parishes here with large Hispanic immigrant populations. Those who work for such parishes need to know Spanish to minister to the people. In certain businesses, knowing Spanish will get you a promotion in areas where there is a great need for people who speak Spanish. Honesty, if given the opportunity to take courses in latin or Spanish I would choose Spanish since I would have a greater opportunity to use it and it would give me an advantage in applying for certain positions. Even in our seminary Spanish is required and latin is only an elective.

When my ancestors came here with everyone else on the boat they learned English. They set up “Learn English” classes. They learned and assimilated. The same should be the norm today for all immigrents. If you want to help them. Help them to learn English. They need to learn it.

I think it is good to know another or multiple foreign languages. When going to a foreign country if you are planning to live there are you going to try to learn the language or refuse and make the natives adapt to yours? After a while it is not like here you will have to learn it.

I do not want this to get off topic.

 

[otjm]

The first step is to have workshops in Parishes to teach Latin. Start by the Basic prayers, The Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory Be. Then teach the Confetier, Glory to God, Holy, Holy, Holy, and Lamb of God. With explaination and meaning.

In Mass keep singing the prayers in the above in Latin. Repetition is the key.

Require Latin instead of Spanish in Catholic schools.

Simple repetition in Mass will help most people memorize the prayers by rote.

As far as requiring Latin instead of Spanish, that isn’t going to happen, not even in your dreams. Before Vatican 2 it was not the standard; any high school worth its salt had a variety of languages - Latin, Spanish, German, French, and in the one I attended, Homeric Greek. For those who wished to persue what was called a classic education, they studied Latin and Greek; many others chose to study modern languages. The likelyhood of denying high school students modern languages would be a short path to getting rid of Catholic high schools, as both parents and children often choose otherwise than the classics.

It would, however, be worthwhile to offer Latin again, as some high schools are starting to do. And having taken Greek, I would like to see a classic track offering both.

 

[CWBetts]

Simple repetition in Mass will help most people memorize the prayers by rote.

As far as requiring Latin instead of Spanish, that isn’t going to happen, not even in your dreams. Before Vatican 2 it was not the standard; any high school worth its salt had a variety of languages - Latin, Spanish, German, French, and in the one I attended, Homeric Greek. For those who wished to persue what was called a classic education, they studied Latin and Greek; many others chose to study modern languages. The likelyhood of denying high school students modern languages would be a short path to getting rid of Catholic high schools, as both parents and children often choose otherwise than the classics.

It would, however, be worthwhile to offer Latin again, as some high schools are starting to do. And having taken Greek, I would like to see a classic track offering both.

Unfortuantlely, school budgets are getting cut, and the classics and arts are the first things to go. As Glenn Holland (Richard Dreyfuss) said in Mister Holland’s Opus: “The day that the sports budget gets cut in this state, well that will be the end of Western Civilization as we know it”

 

[otjm]

This is the second time I have seen this claim made.

The Ordinary Form of the Mass is not the form of the universal Church. The universal Church has ordinary form of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, each sui juris Church within the universal Catholic Church has its own Ordinary Form.

We must remember that the Latin Catholic Church is not the universal Church, but a part of it. Just as the Maronite, Melkite, Ruthenian, Ukrainian, Chaldean, and the other Catholic Churches are a part of it.

But trying to get that point across is like trying to shove water uphill with a pitchfork. We even have Cardinals speaking as if the Roman rite was the universal Church.

 

[otjm]

So because it doesn’t say we need Latin, it means we don’t need Latin? Again, this is just a sign that people in the Church are not truly following Vatican II and what it said.

Sacrosanctum Concilium:
“Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”

Granted that Latin is used extremely little, as most Masses in the US seem to have none of it, we are not doing a very good job of follwoing what the bishops intended.

However, “preserved” also does not necessarily mean that it is manditorily to be used in some part in all OF Masses. Would that we could find some middle ground.

 

[otjm]

Yes! The Church needs to promoted Latin in the Liturgy in the Roman/Latin Rite!

The O.F. needs the Latin Language during the prayers and the Consecration.

Why? So no one attending that Mass can understand what the priest is saying? The great value of the vernacular is that people attending can hear and follow along in their own language, rather than having to simply sit there with their minds wandering, or find a translation so they can follow along. The prayers during the Consecration are said by the priest, and there is no question herein that the priest is the one who confects the Eucharist; but at the same time the prayers are the prayers of the people too.

The E.F. needs promoted by Rome ordering the Bishops to mandate training of all Priest’s and all Seminaries in the Seminarians to learn both E.F. and O.F. forms.

Again, why? There simply are not that many people who want the EF. Granted, that it is not as widely available as some would like to have it, but let’s for a minute step outside our insular world of the US; world wide, out of approximately 117,000 parishes, about one in 250 have a regular EF. That amounts to about four tenths of one percent. There simply is not anywhere near the demand for the EF that those who prefer it would have. The bishops, and the priests are responsible for the sacramental needs of their people. And the vast number of people, for all appearances, want their sacramental needs met through the OF. It is the valid, ordinary form of the sacrament of the Eucharist. I do not suggest that the OF has no need of a better translation; nor would I say that there are not other issues that could be dealt with. Even given all that, the vast majority of people want the OF and that should be the primary focus of the bishops and priests. Just as those who prefer the EF should not be denied some resolution, neither should they promote that those who prefer the OF should have to simply “lump it”.

Also Rome needs to mandate that all Catholic schools make Latin a requirement in all grades. It will help if the Pope would celebrate the E.F. in public. E.g. Midnight Mass.

Rome has absolutely no authority to tell Catholic Schools what to do; and they never did as far back as they go in the US. What may have occured centuries ago in Italy has nothing to do with today.

And as far as the issue of Midnight Mass, it has already been discussed that since he is the head of the Church, and the head of the Roman rite, it is highly unlikely he will ever do such as it is not the norm.

 

[Malkin71]

Why? So no one attending that Mass can understand what the priest is saying? The great value of the vernacular is that people attending can hear and follow along in their own language, rather than having to simply sit there with their minds wandering, or find a translation so they can follow along. The prayers during the Consecration are said by the priest, and there is no question herein that the priest is the one who confects the Eucharist; but at the same time the prayers are the prayers of the people too. Again, why? There simply are not that many people who want the EF. Granted, that it is not as widely available as some would like to have it, but let’s for a minute step outside our insular world of the US; world wide, out of approximately 117,000 parishes, about one in 250 have a regular EF. That amounts to about four tenths of one percent. There simply is not anywhere near the demand for the EF that those who prefer it would have. The bishops, and the priests are responsible for the sacramental needs of their people. And the vast number of people, for all appearances, want their sacramental needs met through the OF. It is the valid, ordinary form of the sacrament of the Eucharist. I do not suggest that the OF has no need of a better translation; nor would I say that there are not other issues that could be dealt with. Even given all that, the vast majority of people want the OF and that should be the primary focus of the bishops and priests. Just as those who prefer the EF should not be denied some resolution, neither should they promote that those who prefer the OF should have to simply “lump it”.

Rome has absolutely no authority to tell Catholic Schools what to do; and they never did as far back as they go in the US. What may have occured centuries ago in Italy has nothing to do with today.

And as far as the issue of Midnight Mass, it has already been discussed that since he is the head of the Church, and the head of the Roman rite, it is highly unlikely he will ever do such as it is not the norm.

Why is that when I went to Californina the OF Misalette was in both Spanish and English? In the EF the Latin is on the left and the English translation is on the right. The Mass has been in English and people still do not know the parts of the Mass or know what is going on. If they do they would have more respect and reverence. In the EF you know what is happening. Also, if the Mass was in Latin it would be universial. You could go to Mass anywhere in the world and know what is going on except the readings, Gospel and homily.

The reason why people don’t wan’t the EF is that the Bishops and Priests treat it like some relic from the past that should be kept deep inside a closet. The peole have been numbed by the experiments, abuses, innovations, brief in and out, progress foreward with the people OF Mass. If the OF was said with respect and reference. There would be no problem. Priests and Bishops have become more and more liberal and want to please the majority. Try to preach tradition and follow Rome a backlash will occur.

Rome does have a right to tell the church what to do. Do you want the kids to be corrupted wity some odd liberal belief? The Bishops must answer to Rome! Right now Rome is investigating the nuns orders who are straying from Church teachings. The should do the same with the schools. Do you want the kids to be corrupted wity some odd liberal belief?

Guess what if the Pope wants to celebrate Midnight Mass EF he can.

 

[otjm]

1. Why can not Rome mandate that Catholic Schools and Seminaries require that Latin is a required course? It will help them with the Sciences and Language. In the Seminary Latin will help the Seminarians studying church documents and history.

Rome may or may not have any direct authority over seminaries to require a specific course to be taught. Given that they do not approve the curiculum of anything else, that may be problematical. As to high schools, Rome has no authority over them whatsoever.

1. What is wrong requiring that the Seminaries require that both forms E.F. and O.F. be taught? There would be no excuse when the Seminarian is ordained a Priest that he can not say both forms in both Latin and English.

There is no perceived need to teach all seminarians the EF as there is nowhere near the demand. Time, space and other curiculm are also issues. It may be taught as an elective, but there is no reason to require all to learn it, neither from SP nor from any perceived need.

6.Why are so many afraid of Latin?

I do not know anyone who is afraid of Latin. It is not an issue of fear; it is an issue of no desire to have Latin. Prior to Vatican 2, extremely few people could speak Latin, as it was rarely taught as a spoken language. And there were not a whole lot more people who could read Latin and translate on the fly. Few people took any more than a couple of years of high school Latin; and fewer yet took 4 years; and of them, even fewer took Latin in college. Most people see little use in learning to parrott something in a different language that they do not understand, are not fluent (or even close to fluent) in, and do not use anywhere in their lives except perhaps during Mass in very limited circumstances. Those who used a missal pre-Vatican 2 did so because they did not know Latin; and the prevalent response is that it is so much better to hear prayers in their own language rather than to hear someone speaking a prayer in a different, unkown language and have to read the prayer in their own.

1. In the future Religious Orders may have to learn Latin and both forms.

Some may, some may not. Again, perceived need. No need, no training.

 

[Malkin71]

Rome may or may not have any direct authority over seminaries to require a specific course to be taught. Given that they do not approve the curiculum of anything else, that may be problematical. As to high schools, Rome has no authority over them whatsoever.

There is no perceived need to teach all seminarians the EF as there is nowhere near the demand. Time, space and other curiculm are also issues. It may be taught as an elective, but there is no reason to require all to learn it, neither from SP nor from any perceived need.

I do not know anyone who is afraid of Latin. It is not an issue of fear; it is an issue of no desire to have Latin. Prior to Vatican 2, extremely few people could speak Latin, as it was rarely taught as a spoken language. And there were not a whole lot more people who could read Latin and translate on the fly. Few people took any more than a couple of years of high school Latin; and fewer yet took 4 years; and of them, even fewer took Latin in college. Most people see little use in learning to parrott something in a different language that they do not understand, are not fluent (or even close to fluent) in, and do not use anywhere in their lives except perhaps during Mass in very limited circumstances. Those who used a missal pre-Vatican 2 did so because they did not know Latin; and the prevalent response is that it is so much better to hear prayers in their own language rather than to hear someone speaking a prayer in a different, unkown language and have to read the prayer in their own.

Some may, some may not. Again, perceived need. No need, no training.

The Holy See can require it to perserve the language.

I disagree if you teach the Semanarians Latin you are keeping the Language alive and it will spread. The same in the schools. Latin is still used in the sciences medical, botany and law. Also, our English language is full of latin. Understanding Latin will help to understand the English language and also help to learn and speak other languages.

The problem is in the past people have vivid memories of being drilled in Latin and being in fear of failing and being punished. Today there are tapes, cd’s, books that teach it ina different way to make it enjoyable.

 

[otjm]

Oh here we go again with that sede outfit. :banghead: To paraphrase Judge Marilyn: I wouldn’t believe them if their tongue came notarized.

That has to be an all-time classic! Thanks; I will use that (and remember you when I do)!

 

[otjm]

The Pope can go to ANY CATHOLIC CHURCH and say a EF Mass. No Bishop or Cardnial or Priest can refuse. The Pope is the head of the Holy Catholic Church! Whomever would oppose him would be disobedient! If the Holy See said that Latin must return to the schools, the Semanaries, and the Liturgy would there be an oposition? The whole problem is that Cardinals, Bishops and Priests do not listen to Rome or the Holy See unless it relates to their comfort zone. The Pope should say the Mass in EF in public to start the ball rolling and replace progressive Bishops who oppose.

Well, you are watching but not seeing; hearing but not listening. The Pope doesn’t do that because he is the Pope. As brilliant a theologian as he is, the first question you should be asking yourself is, “If he is not doing theis, why?”. It should be obvious he has his reasons.

And those resons were well set out in the post you replied to; one that you apparently skimmed over but did not read.

He is not doing so because the norm is the OF, and as head of the Church and the Roman rite, he is going to do the norm, not that which is not the norm.