Father Z: Canon 249

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ll just say this: signing a document like that without the intention to follow-through is a big problem.

The operative word here is scandal.
 
The Canon is useless as a guide for assessing language skills. Whether it means ‘good’ ‘skilled’ or ‘very skilled’ depends entirely on what you mean by those words. Fluency in a language is measured by vocabulary; understanding of grammatical structures; ability to speak and listen; translation ability into and out of your native language etc. If the Canon specified some of these Fr. Z would have a point. It doesn’t and he doesn’t.
 
What you are claiming is that because the the Canon said understand Latin very well, that it is okay for priests to have no functional ability to speak or read Latin?
 
Do most seminaries make you take at least one Latin course before ordination? At the only one I was familiar with had it as an optional elective, but not required (this would seem to violate the canon, no matter the standard used…).
 
I’ve taken Latin 1 twice. Once in highschool and once in college. And I can speak from experience that only taking 1 year of Latin will not give you much in the language. You can recognize a few words and know some background of how Latin works but it is useless beyond that. Basically, you need more than one year to even come close to what the Canon means. Regardless of whether that is fluency or basic understanding.
 
I personally think that it should absolutely be a requirement for Roman Rite Catholic Priests to at least be able to read and comprehend Latin and hold a basic conversation in Latin.

They shouldn’t absolutely have to be Latin scholars or able to write a magnum opus in Latin, but a basic understanding of it absolutely.

I honestly have a hard time seeing how someone could be both a good Priest - or ESPECIALLY a good Bishop - in the Roman Rite, yet be totally ignorant, illiterate, and unskilled in Latin.
 
ChunkMonk said:
What you are claiming is that because the the Canon said understand Latin very well, that it is okay for priests to have no functional ability to speak or read Latin?
Click to expand...
No. I am saying that in common with a huge number of statements from the Vatican the language used in the canon is unclear. Fr Z thinks he knows what it means but defines it according to his own definition of what language expertise consists of. What we need is an object description, as used in normal educational standard-setting, that accurately describes the level of expertise required. E.g: a vocabulary of X words from Y list, 80% on a standardised grammar test, understanding of a specific list of important ecclesiastical terms, 80% success in taking dictation without error etc. Without such a standard the canon can mean anything, as Fr Z.'s typically excited and extreme utterance indicates. I am saying nothing about what the standard of Latin should be. Just the whatever it is it should be clear, and testable. ‘What Fr. Z thinks’ is neither clear nor testable.
 
The Devil hates Latin.

[great fiction novel. Very Catholic]
 
Last edited:
“understanding Latin well” is sort of subjective standard. Is it complete fluency in the tongue required?

Or is it only sufficient for a seminarian to be able to read the Latin mottos on a dollar bill or a pack of cigarettes?

Or is it some other criteria in between?
 
In what world would “no functional literacy” equal “understands the language very well”?
 
If the priest were to turn to the people and say “Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,” would anyone understand it? Or would everyone just say “Et cum spiritu tuo” in unison?
 
Yes, the latter, but I’m pretty old and 2 massive years of High School Latin.
 
JimG said:
If the priest were to turn to the people and say “Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,” would anyone understand it? Or would everyone just say “Et cum spiritu tuo” in unison?
Click to expand...
Only if the people were elderly retired altar boys who remember their training.
 
I took 2 years of HS Latin and can read/understand that relatively easily
 
Spyridon said:
I personally think that it should absolutely be a requirement for Roman Rite Catholic Priests to at least be able to read and comprehend Latin and hold a basic conversation in Latin.
Click to expand...
I have two really crackerjack Latinists at my house, my 10th grader (6+ years of Latin) and my 7th grader (3+ years). They do statewide Latin competitions and have done very well–however, neither of them speaks Latin.

I suspect that conversational Latin is uncommon even among people with excellent reading comprehension/ability to translate into Latin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top