Laudatur Iesus Christus.
The use of Latin on EWTN seems helpful and correct.
Latin is not merely a part of the “culture” of Europe. It is part of the culture of the Church. By “culture” I do not mean merely what people happen to do, but what one cultivates as proper when one gives careful thought to formation.
The Holy Spirit and the Conciliar Fathers of Vatican II taught that “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites,” (Vatican II,
Sacrosanctum Concilium, (1963), 36.) Even in the norms for adapting the Liturgy to the culture and traditions of peoples, the general restrictions are made that adaptations are to be allowed (by Rome) “so long as they harmonize with [the Liturgy’s] true and authentic spirit,” (Ibid., 37), and with care that “the substantial unity of the Roman rite is preserved,” (Ibid., 38).
When adaptations to local languages and customs are made, “[n]evertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them,” (Ibid., 54).
So, the use of Latin elements on EWTN is not “one-sided.” Rather, it is an authentic reflection of the needs of the Church and the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. Viewers are aided in learning those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which all should be able to say or sing in Latin.
Further, the unity of the Latin rite, and of the Universal Church, is aided by acknowledging that Latin is the normative language of the Liturgy and of the Magisterium. This is of great use when one is trying to understand the teachings of the Church, which may be only imperfectly reflected in translations into a given language. Considering the teachings of Christ through the “binocular vision” of both one’s mother tongue and Latin allows for insight and greater accuracy in grasping the full and authentic meaning of the gospel. (Of course a working knowledge of Greek is also a great addition – for a “tri-ocular” view on the Scriptures; but, the Magisterium through the ages is expressed in Latin and the Vulgata is a reliable guide to the meaning of the Scriptures.)
“These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will drive out demons, they will speak new languages,” (Mark (NAB) 16:17).
For one who speaks English or Cajun, etc., one of the “new languages” should be Latin. For the Church, English and Cajun are both new.
None of this is to say that Masses using approved languages and other approved variations should not be shown on EWTN, so long as an appropriate warning is given that such variations are not universally licit. (Without such a warning, the viewers might be mistakenly encouraged to import elements into their parishes which are not legitimate or organic parts of their local “culture,” and which they have no authority to incorporate into the Liturgy of the Church. In fact, now that EWTN is broadcasting the Mass around the world, such a warning about the adaptations for the U.S., which are shown, should perhaps be part of the introduction to the broadcasts.)
Nevertheless, Latin is not a “cultural adaptation;” it is the typical form of the Liturgy, an essential element of the Latin rites, and a central tool for unity in the Universal Church. Because of this, Latin should not be put on an equal footing or given “equal coverage” with particular cultural adaptations, if the interests of the Church are to be served.
Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.
John Hiner
The whole Latin thing is a very big part of European culture. So they use it.
I’d hate for someone to dismiss your ideas over a spelling error. 
Kno probblim!