How should the OF be celebrated?

[triumphguy]

But in 1974 was it the laity’s fault that propagation of Latin didn’t take place?

See now I know this I’m going to find the texts for the prayers and teach my kids.

All it takes for me to want to do some things is to know that I ought to do some things.

For example: In order to ride a motorbike I had to pass a test. So I wanted to pass the test.

 

[ProVobis]

I said that back in post 19.

Yes you did. It was too late for me to delete the post when I found your post. Sorry.

I was, however, trying to draw a timeline and in my later post (#36) should have noted that Veterum Sapientia, which firmly expressed no vernacular in 1962, went to an all-vernacular in 1969, then settled with Voluntati Obsequens in 1974.

 

[ProVobis]

And all the more reason to have it in the sacral language instead of the vulgar! Preserve our Greek remnant! I would also have quite liked if they retained the “sabaoth” of the Sanctus instead of translating it. It is good to have that remnant as well, I think.

Indeed. Sabaoth is still a very powerful and meaningful expression, which the Church has tried to preserve since the first century. Dominus Deus Sabaoth, beautiful and perfect.

 

[japhy]

But in 1974 was it the laity’s fault that propagation of Latin didn’t take place?

No, it wasn’t the laity’s fault. It was the fault of bishops and priests and catechists, etc., who failed to act.

 

[superamazingman]

And which parts of the mass pertain to them in Latin if the vernacular is used?

Hmmm… it’s so obvious, some are missing the this:

The council wanted everyone to know the parts of the Mass in Latin, because it did not intend for the entire Mass to always be in the vernacular.

It’s so obvious! Otherwise, it wouldn’t insist that the people know it in latin!

 

[Brendan]

Hmmm… it’s so obvious, some are missing the this:

The council wanted everyone to know the parts of the Mass in Latin, because it did not intend for the entire Mass to always be in the vernacular.

It’s so obvious! Otherwise, it wouldn’t insist that the people know it in latin!

Or, as Pope Benedict noted, in Sacramentum Caritas

1. None of the above observations should cast doubt upon the importance of such large-scale liturgies. I am thinking here particularly of celebrations at international gatherings, which nowadays are held with greater frequency. The most should be made of these occasions. In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, it is fitting that such liturgies be celebrated in Latin. Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church’s tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung. Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)

When you have people from multiple nations and languages at Mass, it is more fitting that it be done in Latin.

I saw this when I was growing up. The parish my grandmother went to was about half Hispanic and half Irish\German. Before Vatican II, the Mass was in Latin and the priest would give a homily in both Spanish and English.

Along comes Vatican II and the Mass reforms. So what the pastor do. He says the ‘new’ Mass in Latin with a homily in Spanish and English.

Nowadays, the immigrant parishes have become Balkanized. You effectively have two parishes sharing the same building. The Hispanics go to a Spainish Mass, the Irish\Germans\Poles\Italians go to an English Mass, and never the two shall meet.

I learned the Latin responses in the Ordinary Form becuase we often took grandma to Mass. When I was doing global travel for work, I was often in a foreign country on Sundays. My choices were to attend a Mass in the local language and sit their like a bump on a log ( which makes you wonder if that was what Vatican II intented for active and conscience participation)

Or, I could email the local chancellory and find out when\where a Mass in Latin was being offered. In that way, I could pray and respond along with my fellow Catholics, all of us in the same language. I have been to such Masses in Germany, France, Netherlands, Korea, Brazil etc…

For us locally, being able to say our parts of the Mass in Latin allows us to be welcoming of the visitor. Instead of effectively saying to them “We’re going to pray in English, if you don’t know English, well…tough luck”. Yep great way of being charitable.

What Pope Benedict is asking, as did Blessed John XXIIII, is to use a common language to pray when attendees are from different countries, different language groups.

 

[paperwight66]

I love the sound of the whole parish singing Tantum Ergo or Agnus Dei, don’t misunderstand me, but I can’t see why someone in a foreign country can’t just follow along in English, when the Mass is in a ‘foreign’ vernacular. You know more-or-less where the Mass has got to, surely. For instance, at the Sanctus, you can hear the dialogue with short sentences, so you can deduce that what follows is the Sanctus. Same with ‘Lord, i am not worthy’. How does having it in Latin help? There’s still going to be a problem with the readings and sermon.

When I’m at Mass in Spain. I just whisper in English if I can’t get my tongue round the Spanish quick enough.

The basic structure of the Mass stays the same, so why is it impossible to imagine it in English (or whatever).

 

[ProVobis]

How does having it in Latin help?

So the responses can be uniform in a multi-lingual community without prejudice to a specific vernacular?

As far as the sermons are concerned, just follow his tones, just’s all I can say. That’s what infants and pets do.

 

[superamazingman]

As far as the sermons are concerned, just follow his tones, just’s all I can say. That’s what infants and pets do.

 

[Brendan]

. How does having it in Latin help?

Pope John XXIII on the subject

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 favor anyone nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.

Veterum sapientia 1962

If anything, the whole document ought to shed some light on the role of Latin in the eyes of the pope of Vatican II

 

[Brendan]

And as far as the Readings, those I read before coming to Mass.

 

[NorthTexan88]

I hope the pope’s call for better unity in the U.S church encourages the use of more Latin.
At our parish we have essentially 2 separate parishes, one Spanish and one English and the two Dnt really mix. Havin one common language wud help I wud imagine.

 

[liturgyluver]

I love the sound of the whole parish singing Tantum Ergo or Agnus Dei, don’t misunderstand me, but I can’t see why someone in a foreign country can’t just follow along in English, when the Mass is in a ‘foreign’ vernacular. You know more-or-less where the Mass has got to, surely. For instance, at the Sanctus, you can hear the dialogue with short sentences, so you can deduce that what follows is the Sanctus. Same with ‘Lord, i am not worthy’. How does having it in Latin help? There’s still going to be a problem with the readings and sermon.

When I’m at Mass in Spain. I just whisper in English if I can’t get my tongue round the Spanish quick enough.

The basic structure of the Mass stays the same, so why is it impossible to imagine it in English (or whatever).

I would agree with this. One of the great things about the Catholic Church is its uniformity in terms of liturgy, so wherever I travel in Europe I can follow exactly what is happening, and, like you, I say the common parts of the mass quietly in English. And with a lectionary it is possible to follow the readings if there are no translations available (though most Cathedrals now print these in several languages)

Whilst I think it’s important the Latin is not lost in the liturgy, I think the argument that is sometimes given around comprehension to the masses to support this is a weak one. These days most Catholics will not know Latin so having the mass in Latin would simply mean that the majority of the congregation would not understand it, rather than a minority if its done in one vernacular.

Interestingly, travel round Europe today, almost everyone (Germans, Spanish, Italian, Swiss, Dutch, Scandanavians, Poles, Czechs, Croations) converses in English with each other if they want to be understood, much to the chagrin of the French.

In multi-cultural London, you see very few non-English speakers at any Latin masses: people either seek out their own vernaculars or increasingly come along to the English masses. It’s really not that hard!

 

[ProVobis]

It’s really not that hard!

I beg to differ. Even though most of them speak some English, the Poles and the Hispanics and others in the U.S. are very insistent on having an entire Mass without the English and have persuaded their bishops to set up the many non-English Masses we now have. They hear enough English in their everyday work environments and from the talking heads on TV. Many of them don’t need to struggle with it at Mass.

 

[liturgyluver]

I beg to differ. Even though most of them speak some English, the Poles and the Hispanics and others in the U.S. are very insistent on having an entire Mass without the English and have persuaded their bishops to set up the many non-English Masses we now have. They hear enough English in their everyday work environments and from the talking heads on TV. Many of them don’t need to struggle with it at Mass.

Things are obviously different in the US.

The point for this thread is that they are asking for vernacular masses rather than Latin ones.

 

[ProVobis]

Things are obviously different in the US.

The point for this thread is that they are asking for vernacular masses rather than Latin ones.

But that’s just it.

I came upon an interesting article in the New Oxford Review. There seems to be two schools of thought concerning culture. Does culture determine the market or does the market determine the culture? An interesting question and I suppose the answer lies somewhere in between. But one only has to look at the Anglican liturgy and the culture it has rested in for the past few hundred years? How many vernaculars has it created, for example? Do the Poles request this liturgy in Polish? Not too many that I know. Now why is that? Probably because the Anglicans are very protective of their liturgy and the words must be just right. Unfortunately there aren’t any countries where Latin is so strong an influence that they would be protective of anything in Latin. So naturally the vernacular sells better. But it’s also more divisive and separate cultures are formed, IMO. This can be at least remedied to some extent by having certain parts of the Mass in a neutral language, as the Church prescribes, and everyone could at least recognize some of the Mass, especially when they attend a Mass in one of the other 500 vernaculars that it’s allowed.

 

[liturgyluver]

But that’s just it.

I came upon an interesting article in the New Oxford Review. There seems to be two schools of thought concerning culture. Does culture determine the market or does the market determine the culture? An interesting question and I suppose the answer lies somewhere in between. But one only has to look at the Anglican liturgy and the culture it has rested in for the past few hundred years? How many vernaculars has it created, for example? Do the Poles request this liturgy in Polish? Not too many that I know. Now why is that? Probably because the Anglophones are very protective of their liturgy. Unfortunately there aren’t any countries where Latin is so strong an influence that they would be protective of anything in Latin. So naturally the vernacular sells better. But it’s also more divisive and separate cultures are formed, IMO. This can be at least remedied to some extent by having certain parts of the Mass in a neutral language, as the Church prescribes, and everyone could at least recognize some of the Mass, especially when they attend a Mass in one of the other 500 vernaculars that it’s allowed.

The intersting thing is that it wasn’t the Anglophones who pushed for vernacular liturgy. The Liturgical movement actually started in mainland Europe - In France, Germany, Holland. Austria, and Spain. Even after the Second World War the Catholic Church in England had refused to be influenced by the movement and this position only began to change in the mid 1950s - much later than other European countries.

I am not sure I understand the point you are making about Anglican Liturgy. If you are asking how many languages the BCP was translated into - the answer is at least 80.

Having said that I agree that having common parts of the mass in Latin is a laudable aim. But to suggest it creates separate cultures that will automatically be remedied by using a language that very few know - well I am sorry but we have to agree to differ.

 

[ProVobis]

Having said that I agree that having common parts of the mass in Latin is a laudable aim. But to suggest it creates separate cultures that will automatically be remedied by using a language that very few know - well I am sorry but we have to agree to differ.

No, I didn’t suggest that. I would suggest if anything Latin would create some common culture, even if in tiny parts of the Mass. After all Ecclesiastical Latin is a language the Church has designed for its worship and documents and the Mass was written most carefully in Latin. And if it’s used, people will at least recognize it. As it is, 99%+ have absolutely no exposure to it, so how do you expect them to know? All they hear are translations.

And perhaps my BCP analogy was poor. Let’s go with Shakespeare then. Having studied him, one has to at least sense he chose his words well. There is poetry and beauty in those words any English major loves to death. In fact, he’s probably memorized a ton of Shakespearean phrases. But is someone reading someone else’s translation of it in Chinese left with the greatest appreciation of Shakespeare? I certainly wouldn’t be getting the full Shakespeare if I heard it in Polish. Sure one can follow and enjoy the plot or the acting in the translation but is Shakespeare just about plots? We can get plots from Cliff’s Notes if that’s all we read Shakespeare for. I’m afraid we just have to study the English of that period to fully grasp Shakespeare, and that was my point.

 

[curlycool89]

And perhaps my BCP analogy was poor. Let’s go with Shakespeare then. Having studied him, one has to at least sense he chose his words well. There is poetry and beauty in those words any English major loves to death. In fact, he’s probably memorized a ton of Shakespearean phrases. But is someone reading someone else’s translation of it in Chinese left with the greatest appreciation of Shakespeare? I certainly wouldn’t be getting the full Shakespeare if I heard it in Polish. Sure one can follow and enjoy the plot or the acting in the translation but is Shakespeare just about plots? We can get plots from Cliff’s Notes if that’s all we read Shakespeare for. I’m afraid we just have to study the English of that period to fully grasp Shakespeare, and that was my point.

Well, from that point of view we’ll never perfectly understand what Jesus was saying unless we find it in the original Aramaic. And we’ll never understand the New Testament unless we look at it in Koine Greek, and the OT unless we look at it in ancient Hebrew.

I’m not exactly sure where Latin is suppose to come in here.

 

[japhy]

Well, from that point of view we’ll never perfectly understand what Jesus was saying unless we find it in the original Aramaic. And we’ll never understand the New Testament unless we look at it in Koine Greek, and the OT unless we look at it in ancient Hebrew.

In a sense, that is true. There is plenty of word-play in the Scriptures which does not come across without explanatory notes in a translation. Take Jeremiah 1:11-12, for example:

The word of the LORD came to me with the question: “What do you see, Jeremiah?”
“I see a branch of an almond (šā·qêḏ) tree,” I replied.
Then the LORD said to me: “Well have you seen, for I am watching (šō·qêḏ) to fulfill my word.”