Latin and You. Wherein Fr. Z Rants

  • Thread starter Thread starter yankeesouth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Young man”? Why thank you, at age 60, I take that as a compliment 😉
 
I usually have to go to a KofC meeting to get called that these days (but it’s happened at my Cadillac club, too . . .)

🤣:crazy_face::roll_eyes:

hawk
 
The Latin-loving Catholics are outbreeding other Catholics by about 2:1.
Only a matter of time…
 
Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but you’re assuming that those children will remain true to the Church.

I hope they do. But a lot of excellent Catholic parents who do everything right in their child-rearing will be the ones requesting prayer for their sons and daughters who have rejected the faith, either for a Protestant or some other “church,” or for no belief at all. :cry:
 
They do many times come back and are the stronger ones in the faith.
 
The Latin-loving Catholics are outbreeding other Catholics by about 2:1.
Only a matter of time…
Do you have statistics?

Anecdotally speaking, the average family size in my parish is very high. Not a word of Latin spoken.
 
I think that data is inherently skewed.

TLM is naturally a smaller group which by choice prefers TLM.

The NOM group is anyone else who claims to be Catholic.
 
The idea that you can only have Mass in Latin, is something out of the Middle Ages.
Did you know?
  • The Latin language was consecrated at the Passion by its mystic inscription on the Cross .
    *“From the first four centuries, no liturgy can be shown to be composed in any other language other than the three languages from the inscription on the Cross.” (Gihr)
    *Christ Himself prayed in non-vernacular ancient Hebrew, used almost exclusively in rabbinical temple worship.
  • The Latin language…has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic see, the mother and teacher of all Churches .” – Pope St John XXIII, Veterum Sapientia, 1962.
  • The Latin language was sanctified by the usage of nearly 2000 years, and it was most closely interwoven with the primitive Roman Catholic liturgy ( Gihr ).
 
The Latin language was consecrated at the Passion by its mystic inscription on the Cross
////

Because Hebrew, Greek and Latin where the languages understood by the people in that area at that time. It doesn’t mean that the liturgy today should be exclusively in Latin,
The Latin language…has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic see, the mother and teacher of all Churches Pope St John XXIII .”
Because the Church held onto the power structure of separating the hierarchy, from the people. During St Teresa of Avila’s time in Spain, Scripture was only allowed to be translated into Classical Latin. This means, even St Teresa could not read Sacred Scripture, because she could not understand classical Latin, which was kept in the Priesthood. Keep in mind, it was Pope John XIII who called Vatican II and it’s from there that the Mass was brought back to the people.
The Latin language was sanctified by the usage of nearly 2000 years, and it was most closely interwoven with the primitive Roman Catholic liturgy
Nonsense. The Early Church didn’t use Latin exclusively, but mostly the vernacular which was Aramaic and Greek. It wasn’t until the Church expanded West to places where Latin was the common language, that it’s use became more prominent. Latin is a language, period. There is nothing sacred about it as a language.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Is Latin in the title?
It is the Roman Catholic Church. Not the Roman (Se habla Latin) Catholic Church.
 
It is the Roman Catholic Church. Not the Roman (Se habla Latin) Catholic Church.
Which is of the Latin rite.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09022a.htm
“The Latin Church is simply that vast portion of the Catholic body which obeys the Latin patriarch, which submits to the pope, not only in papal, but also in patriarchal matters. It is thus distinguished from the Eastern Churches (whether Catholic or Schismatic), which represent the other four patriarchates(Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem), and any fractions broken away from them. The Latin patriarchate has always been considerably the largest.”
 
Last edited:
I have no issue with the idea that Latin has been sanctified by the Church, but I’m sure it’s not true that all early liturgy was in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin… you’re forgetting Syriac / Aramaic.
 
I have no issue with the idea that Latin has been sanctified by the Church, but I’m sure it’s not true that all early liturgy was in Hebrew, Greek, or Latin… you’re forgetting Syriac / Aramaic.
I have no issue with “sanctified” (whatever that means in this context). I do have a problem with the suggestion that Latin prayers are more powerful, or that God somehow prefers Latin over other languages. I think that kind of thinking strays far too close to magical thinking.
 
I do have a problem with the suggestion that Latin prayers are more powerful, or that God somehow prefers Latin over other languages. I think that kind of thinking strays far too close to magical thinking.
I tend to think people who get really excited over Latin do so because it’s way to make it clear that they are Team Traditionalist. It’s a form of tribal signaling.

Not that there is anything wrong with Latin or favoring historical forms of prayer, but the idea that a prayer is somehow better or more effective because it’s Latin is kinda silly.
 
From your link:
  • Prayer in Latin is a prayer in union with the rest of the Church in the same universal language she has prayed in since her inception.
  • It is fitting that a universal (“catholic”) Church should pray in a universal language.
  • The Latin language unifies all under one tongue thereby countering the havoc from the tower of Babel, and in a practical way it continues the gift of Pentecost by enabling people from all nations to understand and pray together in una voce (one voice) universally.
  • It unites all Catholics together with their spiritual patrimony, as they pray the same prayers in the same language as the Saints have from the catacombs and throughout history.
The Catholic Church is universal, not because the people are united in their use of the Latin language and Latin patrimony, but because we share one faith, in spite of differences in language, culture, theology and liturgy. Uniformity is not necessary for a universal Church as long as we have unity of faith. The saints throughout history have worshiped in Greek, Aramaic, Slavonic, Ge’ez, Armenian, Arabic, Syriac, Coptic and numerous other languages. Saint Cyril made the translation of the liturgical texts from Greek to Old Slavonic his life’s work. Saints have lived and died, never having heard a word of Latin uttered, let alone prayed in it. The liturgies of the East have never been prayed in Latin, except as a curiosity, perhaps.

Yes, the patrimony of the Latin Church is important and the Latin language worthy of respect and retention, but these arguments do not ring true to one who has experience with the truly universal nature of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
 
Last edited:
Because Hebrew, Greek and Latin where the languages understood by the people in that area at that time. It doesn’t mean that the liturgy today should be exclusively in Latin,
Interestingly, there is a lonng very long tradition dating back to the ancient Jews of praying in ancient Hebrew, which was a language used exclusively in Jewish temple worship. This was how Jesus prayed. The Catholic Church took up this same mantle with sacred Latin and continued praying in this language for well over 1000 years after the language dropped out of any normal linguistic talk. Far from a weakness, as these popes and Saints have explained, it is this language’s greatest strength. A sacred language enables the faithful to pray in a language they only use for holy things, rather than the language people use in ordinary chatter, gossip, and swearing. The precision and meaning of the language also remains in tact.
 
Because the Church held onto the power structure of separating the hierarchy, from the people.
…the Mass was brought back to the people.
The primary purpose of holy Mass stems from the virtue of religion to give to God something owed to him, something holy and pure. Mass itself is a sacrifice. This reality is unquestionably the purpose for holy Mass one when reads the teachings over the 2000 year tradition of the Church. People are not the purpose, the focus, but instead are able to participate–how?–by means of uniting their wills with what is taking place, which mystically is infinitely greater than anything else they can do on earth because of the power of this holy Sacrifice.

This of course is a separate topic, but I suggest reading more on catholic.com as to why the Scriptures were preserved in Latin, and how this dead language was used to ensure the correct meaning and understanding. Catholics in those days knew and believed the faith well and even to a far greater extent than Catholics today, as research studies have continually shown. Preserving the little ones from false teachings, heresies, and scandals weighed heavily in the eyes of the Church from her Apostolic origins and continued for century after century.

Believe me, I heard the same narratives from Protestant histories back when I was Protestant, but I found by digging deep into history, there was so much more there than what was presented at the surface.

The new well researched documentary currently on Vimeo called Luter also presents many valuable insights into Protestantism and its origins. Have you seen this yet?
 
Last edited:
Saints have lived and died, never having heard a word of Latin uttered, let alone prayed in it. The liturgies of the East have never been prayed in Latin, except as a curiosity, perhaps.

Yes, the patrimony of the Latin Church is important and the Latin language worthy of respect and retention, but these arguments do not ring true to one who has experience with the truly universal nature of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Indeed those teachings stem not from individual opinion but from solemn teachings of popes and the tradition of the Catholic Church. How then can we reconcile these realities with your keen observance? Latin is not absolutely necessary for salvation, but undeniably and especially for Latin Rite Catholics it has many great benefits to them. One does not have to believe in the Divine Mercy Chaplet in order to be saved, and one can even get to heaven without ever praying a Rosary, especially if he is from a rite that does not have the holy Rosary as part of its patrimony. Nevertheless, if one were to say that since in the eastern rites they do not have a Rosary that we do not need it in the west or that it is not important or even that it is not extremely powerful, then he would no doubt be missing out.

Yes, the language is truly universal because the papacy is universal. Eastern rite Catholics on special occasions have absolutely entered into Latin prayers as a sign of their unity with the universal Catholic Church under the Apostolic See of Peter, “the mother and teacher of all Churches.” If one is in a different rite, he has special means in that rite to use to attain his salvation. We as Latin Rite Catholics are abundantly blessed with our traditions and by embracing them and sharing them are able to grow in these special graces and spread the word to others to help them do so as well. God bless the Latin Rite Church and her sacred language and devotions alike. And may God bless you as well.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top