Hostility towards Latin

[JReducation]

I’ve only had one year of college psychology but I’m guessing kids don’t carry the baggage which adults have carried all their lives and have not learned what they’re “supposed” to dislike. That’s the way some of us are programmed. I agree with you that negativity towards the language of the Church, be it Latin or Greek, doesn’t make sense, especially if we love that Church and want to fully understand the faith. I’ve even heard Protestant ministers on radio analyzing the Latin passages in Scriptures to explain the gospels.

Negativity towards Mandarin or Spanish or English is not good either but it does make sense if it threatens you in your neighborhood or your job. Kids are probably too young to feel threatened in such ways. It might even explain why there are so many younger people in attendance at the TLM as well. Just my opinion.

There is another possibility here and I believe that’s the key to where I live and minister. Our area is a tri-lingual area. I’m speaking about Americans who speak more than one language. In this area, 90% of the people under age 40 are natural born Americans, but they have maintained the mother language of their immigrant parents. It is very common to meet people who speak more than one language.

For example, in my sixth-grade R.Ed class, all the kids are children of American-born parents and the kids are American-born. But they all speak at least two languages in daily converations, even with each other. They go back and forth between English and Spanish or English and Creole. To them it’s very natural to know more than one language. The idea that I was going to teach them to pray in Latin only frightened them when they thought that I was going to make them use it exclusively. Once I said that this was not the case and explained two things: 1) It’s the official language of the Roman Church and 2) It’s good for your to know what is being said when you turn on your TV and hear the pope praying, they were OK with that. Choice was their main concern, because they are used to having a choice between English and Creole or English and Spanish.

Having grown up in a multi-lingual home, I can understand this and feel very comfortable with it. My father was an American who spoke only English and French. My mother was Isareli who spoke only Hebrew and Spanish. When they met they had to communicate. Gradually, my mother learned English and my Father learned Spanish, because it was easier than Hebrew. I was born in Italy, but spoke Spanish, Hebrew and English at home. As long as I had the choice, I was OK.

The younger generation of kids born in our metropolitan areas where there is more than one language spoken are not uncomfortable with multiple languages, uncluding Latin, as long as they have a choice. Their experience of life and the world is very different from people who are born in smaller communities of English speaking only or those who were born prior to 1970. This younger generation is comfortable with diversity. What they do not like is having something shoved down their throat. Even those who go to the EF do so because it’s a choice. If we, who are older, take away that choice from a generation that is used to choosing in matters of language and customs, then we are not wiser, just older.

I believe that it was 1975 that my community lifted a 400+ year ban on Gregorian chant. I was a very young brother. To me this was awesome. It was something new. To the older friars this was an outrage. It was novel and it was an attempt to strip us of our identity. As one brother put it, “It’s bad enough that we have to hear mass in English, now we have to sound like Benedictines!” When it was clarified that each house could choose to use Gregorian chant or leave it and to choose English or leave it, then everyone settled down.

Reasonable people are comfortable with choices.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

We have two NOR Masses and two Spanish Masses. However we have 3 priests and the TLM Mass we sometimes attend has 2 NOR Masses and a TLM Mass on Sunday AND Saturday morning, with only one priest. To me that shows a lot of dedication.

Our priest has to get a dispensation from the Bishop to say 3 Masses on one day. We have no more room to put people so unless there is some magic that I don’t know about…

 

[jewells17]

Google…“Father Donald Kloster Latin Mass Youtube”…he has a few things to say and the talks are great. Sure beats arguing over this topic…google this and listen to his talks and see what you think. His talks are wonderful and explain alot about the Tridentine Mass.

 

[ProVobis]

Having grown up in a multi-lingual home, I can understand this and feel very comfortable with it. My father was an American who spoke only English and French. My mother was Isareli who spoke only Hebrew and Spanish. When they met they had to communicate. Gradually, my mother learned English and my Father learned Spanish, because it was easier than Hebrew. I was born in Italy, but spoke Spanish, Hebrew and English at home. As long as I had the choice, I was OK.

I’m with you there. Polish and German in my house mostly as my parents spoke very little English when I was young. But what’s interesting is that my dad, having been stationed pretty much all over the world in his military days, to his death seemed to abhor English. He’d never want to go to an English Mass. I told him as he was in his last few days NOT to talk in English as we couldn’t understand him at all; stick with the Polish. At least one of us could translate it for the others or for the nurses.

The younger generation of kids born in our metropolitan areas where there is more than one language spoken are not uncomfortable with multiple languages, uncluding Latin, as long as they have a choice.

I would agree with you there. Unfortunately very few have enough exposure in Latin as it is normally not spoken anywhere or anytime at home or heard in church. So they wouldn’t even know that they have that choice. That’s what I think this discussion’s all about.

 

[JReducation]

Our priest has to get a dispensation from the Bishop to say 3 Masses on one day. We have no more room to put people so unless there is some magic that I don’t know about…

The rule is that a priest should celebrate only one mass, two if necessary. He needs permission for a third. However, Satudays and vigils of solemnities do not count. Once the evening begins this is considered a different day. If the priest celebrated the mass for Saturday mornig and then celebrate two Sunday masses on Saturday evening, they are considered different days.

It works the other way around too. If you celebrate two Sunday masses on Saturday night, then you should not celebrate a third Sunday mass on Sunday morning without the proper permission. In mission terriotories, this permission is given without having to ask every weekend. In many places in the USA, we have what are called mission parishes that are satelites of one central parish. I’m not sure how the individual bishops handle that.

I was stationed in a mission in South America. One of our brothers was a priest. He celebrated three masses on weekends, one on Saturday and two on Sundays in three different mission stations. But the bishop there simply gave blanket permission to do so provided that the superior of the house allowed it. Things get more interesting when the priest is a religious brother. Fortunately for you guys, there are not too many brother priests or priest brothers in the USA. That would really confuse you. The rules there are always subjec to the constitutions of the order and the wishes of the local superior who may or may not be a priest.

What happens there is that Canon Law says that he may celebrate two masses and a third with the permission of the bishop. But if the constitutions of the religious institute say that the superior can limit this, then the Constitutions prevail. Canon Law only trumps religious constitutions in those points where the Church has explicitly said it does. But the average person in the pew does not know this, because he does not get to read the constitutions of the religious community that serves his parish.

In some constitutions even the language of the mass is determined by the General Chapter and appoved by the Holy See. In others, it’s not mentioned. I know that in our constitutions the language is not mentioned. The only thing that is mentioned is that no brother-priest may celebrate mass without the permission of the local superior on any day of the week, not even Sunday. However, it also says that the superior shall encourage the brother-priests to attend daily mass and celebrate on Sunday. As far as the language, that’s decided by a vote of the community, not by the celebrant or the superior. You will see some houses have a daily mass in Latin, because that house has voted on it. The house may also vote to allow the superior to decide. Whatever the vote is, that is binding on the religious in that house and on the laity who attend the mass. The laity cannot ask for a mass in the language of their preference. The constitution governs the community that serves them. Many people who have religious in their parishes are not aware of this.

I know a parish run by a religious congregation, that I shall not name, that wanted the Tridentine mass. But the superior had said that no one could celebrate it. Summorum Pontificum gives superiors that authority. It was then up to the bishop to find someone to come to that parish to celebrate the EF. Ultimately, the parish is the jurisdiction of the bishop, but he (the bishop) cannot trump the religious superior. This would be suppression. The religious superior cannot allow what the chapter or the constitutions do not permit him to authorize. If you have either a religious order or a religious congregation in your parish, there has to be some kind of agreement between the major superior and the bishop. But that agreement must be within what is allowed to that religious community. It is always understood that the faithful of that parish will accept what the religious community can legitimately offer and accept what they cannot legitimately offer. This has been the practice since bishops began to ask religious to help them run parishes.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

I’m with you there. Polish and German in my house mostly as my parents spoke very little English when I was young. But what’s interesting is that my dad, having been stationed pretty much all over the world in his military days, to his death seemed to abhor English. He’d never want to go to an English Mass. I told him as he was in his last few days NOT to talk in English as we couldn’t understand him at all; stick with the Polish. At least one of us could translate it for the others or for the nurses.

I would agree with you there. Unfortunately very few have enough exposure in Latin as it is normally not spoken anywhere or anytime at home or heard in church. So they wouldn’t even know that they have that choice. That’s what I think this discussion’s all about.

This is why I said above that this discussion is getting silly. Give people a choice. Expose them to the Latin and leave it at that. Don’t campaign to make it a Latin only Church. That’s when you get the knee-jerk reaction, especially from a younger generation that is growing up in a multi-lingual society. The idea of having several languages at their disposal is not as foreign to them as it is to the older generation. The idea of having only one language imposed on them is going to get a negative reaction.

Even the Oriental Catholic hierarchy in the USA and in some parts of Europe are now allowing Divine Liturgy to be celebrated in the language of the people, for those communities where people are comfortable with it. I was very surprised to hear this. But there were several Oriental Metropolitans interviewed by Fr. Mitch Pacwa discussing this very point. They made it a point to say that they understood that the under 50 generation in Europe and in the major metro areas of the USA were multi-lingual. Some no longer speak the Eastern languages nor do they want to do so. Others have a preference for it and can speak enough to get through Divine Liturgy. They were not going to get into a power struggle with the younger generation over this. They were discussing the importance of good English translations of the Divine Liturgy.

Why we Romans get into power struggles over this is beyond me.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Vixit]

A bit off topic, but I just heard Fulton Sheen tell a story about a bunch of Protestants who asked St. Pius X to bless them. Pius refused. They said they would not leave, so he said, OK, and then blessed them with the words the priest uses when he blesses incense, “I bless you in His name, in whose honor you shall burn” He used the Latin but I didn’t catch it. Can someone help me out with the Latin version of this ‘blessing’? I thought it was funny

 

[ConstantineTG]

This is getting ridiculous. I looked up your statistics, Constantine, & you are averaging 32 posts per day. The last 60 POSTS have concerned your dislike of the use of Latin in the Mass. You do not really mention the prayers of the TLM., the ad Orientum position of the priest, the theology of Sacrifice that IS the TLM…just the language. How can a person hold such hostility toward a language.

If you do not want to attend a Mass that includes Latin, then don’t. If you are happy in your Eastern faith, I’m glad for you. If it is important to you for the Masses in the Phillipines to include the native culture, fine. But, to come onto the Traditional Catholic forum & debase the language of our Traditional Latin Mass, day after day…that isn’t right.

When did I say I dislike the Latin Mass? Do you even know if I attend Latin Mass or not? Once? Twice? Every Sunday? I never said I liked do not like Latin Mass.

The discussion is revolving around the claim that the faith can only be faithfully transmitted via Latin. My stand that Latin is not essential to it. I never said I dislike Latin nor the Latin Mass. I’d like for you to point out where I said I disliked the Latin Mass.

 

[ConstantineTG]

@Constantine_TG: You just said you sometimes preach to yourself. So, you brought it up.

You should know that the Ghana example was just that…an example! It could be China, or any other country. The point still stands. The TLM was the same, everywhere.

Replies like this tells you that your efforts in tongue-in-cheek humor has failed.

 

[Layman]

My understanding of Vat. II was that the Mass was never meant to be exclusively in the vernacular. But so it became. That there was no demand or good reason for introducing CITH, but it was introduced anyway.

Latin and the TLM would help forestall the little local variations that, in a hundred years, could lead to big divisions within the Church. Really, it’s just too sad that this simple means of helping ensure uniformity of worship has been largely dropped. Never mind the beautiful prayers and hymns that go with it.

The use of vernacular argument hinges on the congregation understanding everything that’s going on. That is not essential to the Mass. It’s not a lecture directed at them.

If you look at the sacrificial nature of the Mass, that it’s offered by the priest, and the fact that it’s supposed to proptitiate God, it’s kind of funny/sad the audience insisting they must be privy to every word and that they would be most unhappy if they weren’t. Especially as every word is printed in their language anyway in the missal.

I think that idea came about in the heat of the revolutionary 60’s: ‘power to the people’ etc. Also there was a sense that the clergy were losing the people.** A partial analogy would be a film star or a stage magician ‘revealing all’. It gets interest but the mystique is gone.**

 

[ProVobis]

This is why I said above that this discussion is getting silly. Give people a choice.

JR, I think it’s a good discussion. Given a pure choice, most won’t learn a new language or will shut their ears off any exposure to some. This is a problem in countries where there is heavy immigration, and, of course, the U.S. is one of them. Given that choice, most wouldn’t learn the language of that country unless there’s an incentive like work or career or getting friends. I know this from the circle of friends I have in the Polish community. Many of them despise English. But now the question is how do you motivate them to learn it. And is there something the Church can do to motivate them to accept its language, forget learning it, especially after so many years of unuse and suppression? Reinforcement of the vernacular just seems to harden the hearts of most.

 

[ProVobis]

Latin and the TLM would help forestall the little local variations that, in a hundred years, could lead to big divisions within the Church.

I would say “bigger” divisions within the Church. We’ve already seen problems when they try to set up Masses in those vernaculars which don’t agree with the national language. Let’s hope the Latin could at least neutralize or soften the hostile feelings among different cultures.

The rest of your post is spot on.

Excuse me for not putting up a smiley since that seems to provoke a few people.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I would say “bigger” divisions within the Church. We’ve already seen problems when they try to set up Masses in those vernaculars which don’t agree with the national language. Let’s hope the Latin could at least neutralize or soften the hostile feelings among different cultures.

The rest of your post is spot on.

Excuse me for not putting up a smiley since that seems to provoke a few people.

There were schisms and divisions even when Mass was in Latin. Most of what we have today started well before Vatican II.

 

[Layman]

Latin isn’t a panacea, either. However, reintroducing it as the sacred language would mean one less way for modernists to tinker with our religion.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Latin isn’t a panacea, either. However, reintroducing it as the sacred language would mean one less way for modernists to tinker with our religion.

Better teaching will provide that. Latin or not, if people are poorly Catechized, they will do what they want to do.

 

[Ockham]

"The Popes and Latin

In 1922, for example, Pius XI - in his document Officiorum Omnium - said: “The Church - precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure until the end of time - of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”

Quarter of a century later, his successor Pope Pius XII said in Mediator Dei: “The use of the Latin language affords at once an imposing sign of unity and an effective safeguard against the corruption of true doctrine.”

In 1962, the father of Vatican Two, Pope John XXIII, issued his encyclical Veterum Sapientia. The Pope spoke of the special value of Latin which had proved so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity and which had proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.

He continued: "Of its very nature, Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favour any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.

"Nor must we overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin’s formal structure. Its concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.

"For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws. She further requires her sacred ministers to use it, for by so doing they are the better able, wherever they may be, to acquaint themselves with the mind of the Holy See on any matter, and communicate the more easily with Rome and with one another.

“The Church - because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time - of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”

latinmassireland.org/thelatinmass/why_latin.html

 

[Ockham]

Veterum Sapientia

An Apostolic Constitution of His Holiness John XXIII
On the Promotion of the Study of Latin

February 22, 1962

latin-mass-society.org/veterum.htm

 

[JReducation]

JR, I think it’s a good discussion. Given a pure choice, most won’t learn a new language or will shut their ears off any exposure to some. This is a problem in countries where there is heavy immigration, and, of course, the U.S. is one of them. Given that choice, most wouldn’t learn the language of that country unless there’s an incentive like work or career or getting friends. I know this from the circle of friends I have in the Polish community. Many of them despise English. But now the question is how do you motivate them to learn it. And is there something the Church can do to motivate them to accept its language, forget learning it, especially after so many years of unuse and suppression? Reinforcement of the vernacular just seems to harden the hearts of most.

Maybe I was not clear. I’m not speaking about learning a language so that you can work in a country and live among its dominant population. That’s a discussion for secular people. I’m a religious. My concern is formation. As I posted above, I teach the students to pray in the four languages of our religion: English, Spanish, Creole and Latin. That’s what I mean when I say, “Give them the choice, don’t shove it down their throat.”

What people need to do to get a job in the secular world is a concern for the teacher in the school, the social worker, the sociologist and the person who deal in social ministries. I deal in the spiritual life, which includes worship. My concern is to teach people to worship and to move forward in the contemplative life using whatever tools and languages are available to them. The more that is available to them, the more that I have to teach them. It would be wrong for me to narrow it down to one language and say that they cannot make progress in the mysitical and ascetical life unless they have Latin. I can say the opposite. There are many schools of prayer, liturgy and spirituality that use Latin, therefore one should learn some so as to be able to make use of them.

I’ll give you a simple example. We teach all of our religious education classes from the Franciscan Catechism, the Franciscan Missal, the Franciscan Lectionary, the Franciscan Breviary, the Franciscan Liturgical Calendar. But that does not mean that we never expose the students to the CCC or the Roman calendar and Roman liturgical books. We give them a choice. The more that’s available, the better.

Do you see why I say that this is a silly argument? Just teach them all that is available and let them use what is best for them in their journey toward the a true life of contemplation.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[CradleCath]

I’m with you there. Polish and German in my house mostly as my parents spoke very little English when I was young. But what’s interesting is that my dad, having been stationed pretty much all over the world in his military days, to his death seemed to abhor English. He’d never want to go to an English Mass. I told him as he was in his last few days NOT to talk in English as we couldn’t understand him at all; stick with the Polish. At least one of us could translate it for the others or for the nurses.

I would agree with you there. Unfortunately very few have enough exposure in Latin as it is normally not spoken anywhere or anytime at home or heard in church. So they wouldn’t even know that they have that choice. That’s what I think this discussion’s all about.

I don’t agree that this discussion is all about a language. I think it goes deeper than that. One of my Grandfathers immigrated from Denmark, with his family, when he was 11 yrs. old. He spoke not one word of English when he came, in fact the people at Ellis Island hung a sign around his neck stating the town that he was bound for before they put him on the train…as niether he nor his family could say it for themselves. At the time he immigrated he was a Lutheran. Of course, all of the Lutheran Church’s services, in this country, were held in English. He & his parents & 11 siblings got out of the habit of attending the services & never returned to his Church or joined another, even though every one of them learned English soon after they arrived here.

On the other side of my family, my Grandfather immigrated from Germany & my Grandmother from France. Neither of them could speak English, either. The Catholic Mass was in a language they could understand & even speak in a basic way. They could ask questions of the priest, & most other Catholics. Therefore they remained Catholic & passed their faith onto the children & Grandchildren.

The Latin language is a heritage that we Catholics of the Latin rite are ENTITLED to. To throw it away, as we’ve thrown away so much of our culture, speaks of the shallowness we see everywhere in this age.
Most Catholics today know nothing of the custom of the Angelus Bells, & few have any idea what the Nuptual Blessing was: catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/prayers/view.cfm?
The Catholics of the 40’s & 50’s grew up on the story of Fatima &
acutally knew about the 11 Our Lady of Fatima statues that travel the world each year with their “custodians.” The statues are 4 feet high and weigh 40 pounds. The visits last two hours. The custodian shows a slide show of Fatima, answers questions and then prays the Rosary with the family hosting the visit. We read the Song of Bernadette & the writings of St. Alphonsus Ligouri.

To just give up on the use & understanding of Latin is just foolish & a HOSTILITY TOWARD A LANGUAGE, any language is ridiculous. Why would we hate the French Language or the Dutch. As I say, this is about far more than the Latin Language.

 

[ProVobis]

The visits last two hours. The custodian shows a slide show of Fatima, answers questions and then prays the Rosary with the family hosting the visit.

Speaking of which, what better way of praying the Rosary than with everyone together with the Pope:

youtube.com/watch?v=8wsPw-3YrMo

How could anyone be hostile to that?