Fear of Latin?

[Brendan]

JKirkLVNV:

I I see no point in going back to having to follow the Mass in a book (“my” parts in the Mass are something I’ve memorized, rather quickly for someone who is alledgedly intellectually "lazy, and I’ve never had to follow the Mass in the missal) and I want to understand and to pray the Mass. This I do best in English, my vernacular. It has nothing to do with laziness. You ought to be ashamed.

You are missing one great point about having a knowledge of the Mass in Latin.

It serves to welcome the stranger.

I know, I’ve been there.

What does your parish offer for the visiting Korean or German? How do you intend to have them participate?

If we all learn the Mass in our own vernacular and in Latin, it gives all Catholics worldwide a common language to pray together in.

I’ve been able to actively, verbally participate in Masses worldwide, because I can sometimes find a Latin Mass.

And I’m sure there are many visitors to the US or other English speaking countries who would rather participate verbally in Mass.

And ideal case would be for each parish to have one Latin Mass on Sunday. In that way, we can welcome those whose language is NOT English, but would still like to pray as a community.

Is that not what Christ calls us to do? To be welcoming of the stranger in our midst?

 

[Brendan]

I guess in many ways, I was luckier than most and had post-VII Latin Mass exposure.

My father loved the Church he grew up going to and we would occasionally go back there for Mass.

It in the early 70’s and the vernacular Mass was really starting to kick off, but this parish was half anglophone and half Hispanic. So they just continued doing the Latin (NO) Mass, so that all could participate. There would be a short homily in both langagues.

The current Church in the US now seemsmore comfortable with segragated Masses; the anglophones have their Mass and the Hispanics have theirs, the Vietnamese have theirs and so do the Koreans.

We don’t worship together as a single Church.

And that is rather sad.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

srp643:

You are, in fact, criticizing Papal directives on this matter. I also LOVE the Pauline Mass IN THE VERNACULAR, and I also LOVE the Pian Mass IN LATIN. They are not mutually exclusive. We can celebrate and love BOTH. You’re trying to wish away those that love either the Latin mass or having Latin in parts of the NO. In your specific case, it appears it is not about laziness but fear. Based on my experiences with other Catholics, however, I make a general observation (only my humble opinion brother) that it is more about laziness than fear (of course there are always exceptions to general observations, that goes without saying). Many people appear to be content understanding 90% of the NO Mass and not understanding the Latin prayers, which is again, IMO pathetic and wrong. Shall we all just understand and pray 90% of the Lord’s prayer? How about 87% of the Hail Mary?

Learning Latin is hard and takes time. It’s inconvenient. But it is hugely beneficial for a variety of reasons. Would a musician not learn to read sheet music? RIGHT NOW, IN THIS MOMENT, LATIN IS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. Your appear to be repudiating that fact and consequently are being disrespectful to Rome and other Catholics. If you are knowledgeable about Latin, great, then be a leader and help others learn it as the Popes have consistently implored us to do so.

You are directly accusing me of criticising a papal directive. Where have I done so? Where have I said that the Popes or the Council had no business in requesting that we learn Latin? I simply said that I doubted (and I do doubt it) that we are going to see a huge return of Latin to the Pauline Rite in most cases because the popes are realists. I did not, anywhere in this thread, criticize the pope (not that there are not people on this thread who don’t, usually “traditionalists” dumping on the post-conciliar popes), nor denigrate his or any of his predecessors directives. I don’t believe that I have even implicitly encouraged anyone to disobey the current Holy Father’s request (not directive, REQUEST) that we learn some of the more important prayers in Latin or the Council’s directive. The OP asked about why people fear Latin, and that’s bascially all I’ve addressed, other than to offer my opinion as to the amount of Latin that will be integrated into the Pauline Rite. Unless you can show where I either implicitly or explicitly denied or refused a papal directive, then I don’t believe I deserve such charges from you.

Your ramblings about “90% of the Lord’s Prayer” and “87% of the Hail Mary” makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and I don’t begin to know how to address them. I will address this, however:

“RIGHT NOW, IN THIS MOMENT, LATIN IS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. Your appear to be repudiating that fact and consequently are being disrespectful to Rome and other Catholics. If you are knowledgeable about Latin, great, then be a leader and help others learn it as the Popes have consistently implored us to do so.”

I know that Latin is the official toungue of Holy Mother Church. I’ve never “repudiated” that. You’ve read into my postings something that simply isn’t there (you’ve misunderstood, apparently). I’ve never denied the importance of Latin in the Church’s intellectual, theological, or liturgical history, nor said that it should be abandoned. So I fail to see how I am being disrespectful to the Holy See or to other Catholics. I merely answered the OP’s question and I responded to YOUR assertion about laziness on the part of your fellow Christians (most don’t even KNOW that Latin is encouraged).

You’re being somewhat overly dramatic, as well. We’ve been asked to learn some Latin, for some of the more important prayers, we haven’t been implored by anyone, pope or otherwise. You’re engaging in base, jingoistic demogogary (from the greek) to try and imply otherwise.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Brendan:

You are missing one great point about having a knowledge of the Mass in Latin.

It serves to welcome the stranger.

I know, I’ve been there.

What does your parish offer for the visiting Korean or German? How do you intend to have them participate?

If we all learn the Mass in our own vernacular and in Latin, it gives all Catholics worldwide a common language to pray together in.

I’ve been able to actively, verbally participate in Masses worldwide, because I can sometimes find a Latin Mass.

And I’m sure there are many visitors to the US or other English speaking countries who would rather participate verbally in Mass.

And ideal case would be for each parish to have one Latin Mass on Sunday. In that way, we can welcome those whose language is NOT English, but would still like to pray as a community.

Is that not what Christ calls us to do? To be welcoming of the stranger in our midst?

And I do not deny that. I, too, have been in the position of not knowing precisely the exact words that were being spoken in the Mass (my Spanish is not so fantastic that I catch every word, but I almost always derive a “sense” of what’s being said, because I know enough of the language and because I’m familiar with the Mass). I would assert that that familiarity with the Mass would be what would welcome the Korean or the German in our midst (as well, even if they are in a situation where they don’t understand every word, in addition to the welcoming attitudes of the locals.

I think the use of Latin in the Mass for large international gatherings is very important, ie, televised Papal masses, World Youth Day, the times when the College of Cardinals meet, when the Synods meet. My greatest concern is not Latin in these contexts. My greatest concern is Latin in the basic parish, just your basic Sunday or daily Mass. Yes, I think it would be grand if each parish had one mass offered in Latin for those who are attaced to it, maybe the TLM even for those who yearn for it.

All I’ve stated in this thread is that I don’t believe Latin will become more incorporated into the Pauline Rite (where part is done in the vernacular and part in Latin, unless it’s the “choral” parts) and that I don’t believe that the Holy Father would force the issue because it’s just such a thing that would cause deeper ruptures in the Church (hence the phrase “not heal one schism by initiating another”). I said I prefer the Mass in the vernacular, but that I wasn’t afraid of Latin. I clarified again that it isn’t a fear of LATIN, but of the Mass I love CHANGING. I haven’t “dissed” Latin, and I certainly haven’t now nor have I ever spoken disrespectfully of the Holy Father or any of his predecessors.

 

[GoLatin]

JKirkLVNV:

I’m NOT criticizing a papal directive. I obey the Holy Father. I was addressing YOUR critique that anyone’s lack of enthusiasm had to do with laziness. It has far more to do with many other things than with laziness. Your assertion that it is laziness (I refer you to your post) is what is wrong and I call on you, in the spirit of fraternal correction, to apologize. Your assertion is simply dismissive, simply a way of shunting aside what might be legitimate concerns, and fails to address the very real fear that some have that the Mass they love is about to be tampered with. I’ve always supported a broader application of the Indult OUT OF A SENSE OF EMPATHY, because I know precisely how I would feel if they started mucking about with, started changing “MY” Mass, the Mass that has always been offered for as long as I’ve been a Catholic. I assumed that this is how many if not most Catholics felt when the Pian Mass was eclipsed BY that Pauline Mass, and so I’ve been sympathetic. That sympathy, that EMPATHY, however, has never been returned by ANY “traditionalist” or advocate for the Pian Mass on these forums, who heap nothing but scorn on the Pauline Mass. It goes FAR deeper for many of us than laziness and to suggest that that is what it is is insulting. You do me a unkindness and a diservice, which I do not deserve. I’ve been a faithful Catholic for almost as long as YOU’VE been alive, not a perfect one, but an obedient one. It is simplistic to accuse me of laziness.

To the OP, yes, it’s fear, but not fear of Latin…it’s fear of an alteration of something that’s LOVED. TRY AND GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEADS! Some of us love the Pauline Mass, IN THE VERNACULAR.

JKirkLVNV:

I consider myself a “traditionalist” and an advocate for the Pian Mass. My personal preference would be for the Pian Mass to be the normative Rite of Mass. But it is not.

Last year, I met a Priest(in full union with Rome throughout his entire Priesthood) who says the Pian Mass exclusively. He has never once celebrated the Pauline(or “Novus Ordo”) Mass. He was asked if he thought that the Novus Ordo Mass is valid. Father replied that of course it’s valid, the Church cannot approve an invalid Rite of Mass.

The Novus Ordo is a valid and approved Rite of Mass!

I would like to let you know that I am returning that sympathy and empathy to you, that you mention in your message above.

I have met people who think that the Novus Ordo Mass itself is a sacrilege. They mean the actual Novus Ordo Mass, not just the ways some Priests celebrate it(and these abuses are sacrileges!).

So you have my sympathy and empathy.

I am sorry about the people who seem to have hatred for the Pauline Mass.

 

[palmas85]

Walking_Home:

There are some in the Church today that have been taught that any tradition associated with the pre VatII Church is to be discarded.

Sad but very very true inded.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

GoLatin:

JKirkLVNV:

I consider myself a “traditionalist” and an advocate for the Pian Mass. My personal preference would be for the Pian Mass to be the normative Rite of Mass. But it is not.

Last year, I met a Priest(in full union with Rome throughout his entire Priesthood) who says the Pian Mass exclusively. He has never once celebrated the Pauline(or “Novus Ordo”) Mass. He was asked if he thought that the Novus Ordo Mass is valid. Father replied that of course it’s valid, the Church cannot approve an invalid Rite of Mass.

The Novus Ordo is a valid and approved Rite of Mass!

I would like to let you know that I am returning that sympathy and empathy to you, that you mention in your message above.

I have met people who think that the Novus Ordo Mass itself is a sacrilege. They mean the actual Novus Ordo Mass, not just the ways some Priests celebrate it(and these abuses are sacrileges!).

So you have my sympathy and empathy.

I am sorry about the people who seem to have hatred for the Pauline Mass.

Thank you, Go Latin. I truly appreciate that. I am heartsick at the way people treat the Mass, both those who “celebrate” it with abuses and those who heap contempt on it. I get really sensitive about it. I don’t want it to change, I just want it offered according to the rubrics, with reverence, and I just want it to be honored by all Catholics. I doubt I’ll get my way, though. At any rate, you are most kind.

 

[srp643]

JKirkLVNV:

You are directly accusing me of criticising a papal directive. Where have I done so? Where have I said that the Popes or the Council had no business in requesting that we learn Latin? I simply said that I doubted (and I do doubt it) that we are going to see a huge return of Latin to the Pauline Rite in most cases because the popes are realists. I did not, anywhere in this thread, criticize the pope (not that there are not people on this thread who don’t, usually “traditionalists” dumping on the post-conciliar popes), nor denigrate his or any of his predecessors directives. I don’t believe that I have even implicitly encouraged anyone to disobey the current Holy Father’s request (not directive, REQUEST) that we learn some of the more important prayers in Latin or the Council’s directive. The OP asked about why people fear Latin, and that’s bascially all I’ve addressed, other than to offer my opinion as to the amount of Latin that will be integrated into the Pauline Rite. Unless you can show where I either implicitly or explicitly denied or refused a papal directive, then I don’t believe I deserve such charges from you.

Your ramblings about “90% of the Lord’s Prayer” and “87% of the Hail Mary” makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and I don’t begin to know how to address them. I will address this, however:

“RIGHT NOW, IN THIS MOMENT, LATIN IS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. Your appear to be repudiating that fact and consequently are being disrespectful to Rome and other Catholics. If you are knowledgeable about Latin, great, then be a leader and help others learn it as the Popes have consistently implored us to do so.”

I know that Latin is the official toungue of Holy Mother Church. I’ve never “repudiated” that. You’ve read into my postings something that simply isn’t there (you’ve misunderstood, apparently). I’ve never denied the importance of Latin in the Church’s intellectual, theological, or liturgical history, nor said that it should be abandoned. So I fail to see how I am being disrespectful to the Holy See or to other Catholics. I merely answered the OP’s question and I responded to YOUR assertion about laziness on the part of your fellow Christians (most don’t even KNOW that Latin is encouraged).

You’re being somewhat overly dramatic, as well. We’ve been asked to learn some Latin, for some of the more important prayers, we haven’t been implored by anyone, pope or otherwise. You’re engaging in base, jingoistic demogogary (from the greek) to try and imply otherwise.

I don’t even know where to begin with your sad commentary. You make this sound like I’m saying you personally are lazy when I never said that. I think you are too close to this issue and are overly fearful of some potential changes that may occur to the Mass. I’m older than you may realize and as a Catholic brother, i’m suggesting you just take a deep breath and trust in the Lord. Others may benefit from more Latin in the Mass, so be more selfless and Christ like. Let Rome decide. They’ve already decided Latin is still the official language, so don’t resist it, embrace it, learn it, love it. And encourage others to do so as I am doing. Your resistance appears selfish, not selfless. Maybe the NO Mass will stay exactly as is, not for us to decide but we do know Rome encourages the speaking of Latin everywhere.

What don’t you get about understanding and praying the ENTIRE Mass? This is elementary. If something is choral or read, whether it is in Latin or English, it is still nevertheless part of the Mass and deserves, in fact requires, our full understanding and participation. The Mass is the most beautiful prayer my friend, and all of it is important, not just the 90% in English. We have to pray the whole Mass and not ignore certain parts because it is too inconvenient or for whatever “excuse” we have.

If you have been “scorned” for love of the NO, that’s sad but don’t try to lump me in with those who have hurt you. As for fraternal correction, I think you have it backwards. I’ll take my chances by encouraging others to follow Papal directives.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

srp643:

I don’t even know where to begin with your sad commentary. You make this sound like I’m saying you personally are lazy when I never said that. I think you are too close to this issue and are overly fearful of some potential changes that may occur to the Mass. I’m older than you may realize and as a Catholic brother, i’m suggesting you just take a deep breath and trust in the Lord. Others may benefit from more Latin in the Mass, so be more selfless and Christ like. Let Rome decide. They’ve already decided Latin is still the official language, so don’t resist it, embrace it, learn it, love it. And encourage others to do so as I am doing. Your resistance appears selfish, not selfless. Maybe the NO Mass will stay exactly as is, not for us to decide but we do know Rome encourages the speaking of Latin everywhere.

What don’t you get about understanding and praying the ENTIRE Mass? This is elementary. If something is choral or read, whether it is in Latin or English, it is still nevertheless part of the Mass and deserves, in fact requires, our full understanding and participation. The Mass is the most beautiful prayer my friend, and all of it is important, not just the 90% in English. We have to pray the whole Mass and not ignore certain parts because it is too inconvenient or for whatever “excuse” we have.

If you have been “scorned” for love of the NO, that’s sad but don’t try to lump me in with those who have hurt you. As for fraternal correction, I think you have it backwards. I’ll take my chances by encouraging others to follow Papal directives.

You’ve either read none of my posts or you’ve read them in a way that entirely misses my meaning or anything I’ve said. You’ve understood nothing, esp. if you think I’ve encourage people to ignore papal directives. I’ve attempted to explain, you refuse to understand. So I give up. “Do as I do.” Wow.

 

[srp643]

JKirkLVNV:

You’ve either read none of my posts or you’ve read them in a way that entirely misses my meaning or anything I’ve said. You’ve understood nothing, esp. if you think I’ve encourage people to ignore papal directives. I’ve attempted to explain, you refuse to understand. So I give up. “Do as I do.” Wow.

Likewise, I’ve attempted to explain but you cannot understand anything I’ve said. Mindboggling. The Church needs more leaders, not followers. All I’m trying to do here is encourage others to get off their duff (you may recall I said in my original post I am as guilty as anyone on this front) and learn some Latin, especially prayers and relevant parts of the Mass. I never insinuated or said people should not go to the NO. It is a fact that parts of many NO Masses are in Latin. It is galactically disrespectful and irresponsible to resist this type of effort in light of what actually occurs at the Mass and what the Popes have encouraged. Wake up brother.

 

[AJV]

srp643:

I’m sorry you feel that way but I cannot feel ashamed for following our Pope’s instructions and glorifying our Lord in traditional ways. You should feel ashamed for blatantly criticizing Papal directives. You’re on shaky ground here brother. Most of the NO masses I attend still have Latin and to suggest we should not make an effort to understand and even participate in those sections of the Mass is absolutely pathetic and wrong.

As some on this forum will tell you, participation doesn’t always mean saying Mass responses out loud

 

[srp643]

AJV:

As some on this forum will tell you, participation doesn’t always mean saying Mass responses out loud

Agreed but we still need to at least understand what is being prayed.

 

[srp643]

Brendan:

Oh, I understand that Pope Paul promulgated a valid Mass, and one that can be said entirely in the vernacular.

I don’t see where either he or any of his sucessors removed the obligation for the faithful to know thier parts of the Mass in Latin that was articulated in SC 54.

And if it hasn’t been removed, there are an awful lot of DRE’s in the world who aren’t teaching in accord with Vatican II.

Interesting point Brendan. Wasn’t aware of SC 54. Do you have a link?

 

[gelsbern]

adoremus.org/SacrosanctumConcilium.html#anchor15171283

Also I couldn’t help but bold a few things.

1. In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and “the common prayer,” but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to tho norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.

Nevertheless 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.

And wherever a more extended use of the mother tongue within the Mass appears desirable, the regulation laid down in Art. 40 of this Constitution is to be observed.

36.** 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.**

1. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the Liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended**. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives**, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

1. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.

1. In some places and circumstances, however, an even more radical adaptation of the Liturgy is needed, and this entails greater difficulties. Wherefore:

1) The competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, must, in this matter, carefully and prudently consider which elements from the traditions and culture of individual peoples might appropriately be admitted into Divine Worship. Adaptations which are judged to be useful or necessary should when be submitted to the Apostolic See, by whose consent they may be introduced.

2) To ensure that adaptations may be made with all the circumspection which they demand, the Apostolic See will grant power to this same territorial ecclesiastical authority to permit and to direct, as the case requires, the necessary preliminary experiments over a determined period of time among certain groups suited for the purpose.

3) Because liturgical laws often involve special difficulties with respect to adaptation, particularly in mission lands, men who are experts in these matters must be employed to formulate them.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

1. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.
   You’re right, that’s very interesting. It’s seems that “the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority” aforementioned have determined “to what extent” and had their decision “approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See.”

The use of the vernacular was hardly something that the bishops attempted to sneak past the Holy See. And I bet you that our bishops (I say “our bishops,” because with respect, Deacon, I fail to see what dog you have in this particular race) are going to continue to determine “to what extent the vernacular language is to be used” and that their decisions will continue to be ratified by the Holy See. There seems to be a question over the translations, but I seem to remember the Holy Father (the reigning Holy Father) commending and encouraging Vox Clara in their attempts to provide clearer and truer translations (after the Holy See had sent back their proposed updatings…I don’t deny that there appears to be a problem with the translations).

 

[davy39]

snoopy:

I love the English mass. I remember the latin mass as a child and I had no idea what they were saying. Now I feel so much more a part of it. I pray the mass stays in the vernacular.

I agree with you. I was an altar server, we responded to the priest in Latin, and had no idea of what we were saying. I don’t think many of the people did, either. Blame it on lack of instruction or whatever, but thats the way it was.

 

[srp643]

adoremus.org/SacrosanctumConcilium.html#anchor15171283

Also I couldn’t help but bold a few things.

Great stuff Deacon, thank you. This makes it even clearer to me.

Dominus tecum.

 

[gelsbern]

JKirkLVNV:

…(I say “our bishops,” because with respect, Deacon, I fail to see what dog you have in this particular race)…

Well I am going to try to answer that. Please bear with me on this short detour from the topic.

The dog I have in the race is just because I am out of union with Rome right now, it doesn’t mean that there isn’t a desire to have that change.

So the actions and issues of Rome in where you see me respond or take an interest in, are the very issues that keep me separated at the moment.

There are some issues over which I can see dropping and submitting myself to Rome. (married men becoming priests being the main one) but there are other things I could NOT submit to. Altar girls, EMHCs, Lay Ministers, and parish administrators who are not priests just to name a few. Most of all through, it is the Liturgy of the Mass which is supposed to be the UNIVERSAL prayer of the church. It has been watered down so much so that all but a couple of references to the sacrifice that it is remain, it has demoted the priest to simply a prayer leader instead of the one offering the sacrifice to God on behalf of the people, and it has opened the door for irreverant innovations that do not belong in the catholic church.

Due to my holding to Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi (the rule of prayer is the rule of belief) if what is prayed in the catholic church today is what is believed, then I really cannot see myself being part of it.

Do I think the Novus Ordo is invalid, I don’t know. The church prior to Vatican II would have said no, the church after Vatican II says yes. So for me it comes to a decision, do I go with what was taught for 1,965 years, or go with what has been taught for 41? For me, the jury is still out.

Now I see many potential changes that may happen coming down the line, and I pray every day for Rome, for the Pope that they will do what is right to restore what the church was prior to Vatican II. That doesn’t mean that they have to discard the new Mass, but they do have to make it clearer in it’s prayers so that it truly reflects what catholics believe. The Mass should show the world what catholics believe If they achieve that, then I’ll follow my dog across the Tiber.

Now I hope we can get back to the topic as I don’t want to be caught hijacking my own thread.

 

[QUICUMQUE_VULT]

Excellent post explaining your position Deacon.
Godspeed and Bless your Journey

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I started singing in our school’s Catholic Choir at age 10. The first year, we sang in Latin. The next year, Latin. The third year, mostly Latin, some English, the fourth year mostly English, some Latin.

Now I had Sisters of Mercy for instructors and they knew their stuff and made us learn. I can tell you that not only did I know what my responses (in Latin ) MEANT, to me they were beautiful. The richness of the Latin Mass texts and the Psalms and hymns had a transcendent beauty that compares with the richness and beauty of the language of Shakespeare. Is it “harder” to understand Shakespeare 's “tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow creeps in this petty pace” speech than the contemporary “Life’s a beach and then you die?” Yes, it is. So what? Sometimes we need to “stretch” ourselves a little.

I believe our Pope Benedict has said something to the effect that “truth is not voted by the majority”.

Whether an majority like, or dislike, the Latin mass–or for that matter, the Pauline Mass–has nothing to do with whether each is a TRUE MASS, now does it?

I would no more seek to deprive JK of his right to attend a beautiful reverent Pauline Mass that HE would seek to deprive ME of my right to attend a Latin Mass, I believe.

This is my opinion, duly noted.
IF I want to go to a Pauline Mass because I feel I understand it better and my goal is to please the Lord with understanding, that is a GOOD reason to go.

IF I want to go to a Pauline Mass because I hate, loathe and detest Latin, and I use the Mass as a “weapon” to cast aspersions on “Latin-lovers”. . .that is probably NOT a good reason to go. Not because the MASS is wrong. . .but because my ATTITUDE is wrong.

Ditto for those wanting to go to a Latin Mass, because THEY understand IT better, and their goal is to please the Lord with understanding.

DITTO WRONG if they want to go to a Latin Mass because they hate, loathe and detest the “new” Mass and want to use the Latin Mass as a “weapon” to cast aspersions on “spirit of Vatican II’ites”. Again, it is not the MASS which is wrong, but my ATTITUDE.

So. . .does this summarize things, more or less, and can we agree that we do not need to fear Latin–OR the vernacular–but only to fear the devil trying to sow division and doubt?