Latin and You. Wherein Fr. Z Rants

[Shasta-Rose]

Latin’s a bear! We have a half-dozen (at most) different forms of a single verb, but Latin would have 26 or so, and you just have to memorize all of these verbs, which change with number, person, gender, mood, time, tense, voice, and probably other things.

I remember my second Reconciliation. It was one of those “Light’s On For You” evenings, and I went to a strange priest, and before he forgave me and gave me my penance, he gave me several (it seemed) pages of Latin, rattled off fluently without pauses to grope for a word. I was very impressed! My hat’s off to those who can master Latin, especially an adult out of school who would have the time and inclination to sit and study long enough to learn it.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

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.

When I read some of the comments you can almost hear a distaste or a “making fun” of Latin, which doesn’t make sense if one truly understands that we are the “Latin rite”, so I believe part of what you are seeing happening here on this thread, the much resistance, is the fear of “the difficulty” of learning something new. Something seen frequenty as people get older.

As humans we can become comfortable where we are, even if the learning of something new might be better or at least in some ways be helpful to us.

 

[OraLabora]

When I read some of the comments you can almost hear a distaste or a “making fun” of Latin

No. What you are reading is distaste for, and making fun of, some of the absurd claims made about Latin, such as the “devil hates Latin”, when some of the vilest acts ever perpetrated by one human being on another were ordered in Latin (e.g. Herod, Nero, etc.). It borders on, if not idolatry, at least superstition.

It’s a language, period. Some beautiful sacred works were composed in Latin, and it is praiseworthy to preserve them and use them in their appropriate place, the liturgy.

But the bottom line is that we must covert ourselves to and seek communion with Christ in our lives. It is much more likely to happen if we are to understand our lessons from the Gospel.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

No. What you are reading is distaste for, and making fun of, some of the absurd claims made about Latin, such as the “devil hates Latin”,.

This is a phrase that has been spoken, not just by anonymous people here on CAF, but by priests and other Catholic theolgians. IMHO, it is the unity he hates and also the effort to draw closer to God that happens when one at least tries to pray in Latin. Sometimes our prayers can become very rote and easy. Adding some Latin might require a little more thinking or concentrating.

when some of the vilest acts ever perpetrated by one human being on another were ordered in Latin (e.g. Herod, Nero, etc.).

At that time Latin was not the official language of the Church, though was in a process of developing… Even today though, the Blessed name of our Lord is used during many vile acts, but it still remains the Blessed name of our Lord.

It borders on, if not idolatry,

One can prefer and believe in the importance of something and it not be an idol.

It’s a language, period. Some beautiful sacred works were composed in Latin,

" All the official documents of the Church, Encyclicals, Bulls, Briefs, institutions of bishops, replies from the Roman Congregations, acts of provincial councils, are written in Latin. Within recent years, however, solemn Apostolic letters addressed to one or other nation have been in their own tongue, and various diplomatic documents have been drawn up in French or in Italian."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09019a.htm

But the bottom line is that we must covert ourselves to and seek communion with Christ in our lives. It is much more likely to happen if we are to understand our lessons from the Gospel.

I completely agree. We are to draw closer to Christ and yes, we definitely need to understand what we are reading. I don’t think anyone is implying that we should not.

God bless.

 

[Salibi]

is the unity he hates and also the effort to draw closer to God that happens when one at least tries to pray in Latin.

Hello MagdalenaRita,

I hope you are not offended by our tone on this thread, and please don’t construe anything here as a personal attack! As Ora said, our criticism is directed at the article, not at you, nor the Latin language.

The fact is, some of us Eastern Catholics find it offensive when a Latin espouses ideas as outlined in the article prayinglatin posted, and statements like this tend to be more than a bit alienating. It’s as if you’re telling us that unity with the Church can only be completed by use of Latin, which is, while a venerable language, simply not the liturgical language of the East. And it’s also as if you’re telling us that we’re some sort of bizarre pseudo-Orthodox groups that do not use Latin yet are tolerated by Rome. This is not true- we are Catholics like you, but not Roman.

While of course we’re not accusing you, saying that Latin has the magical ability to make the Devil crap his pants is indeed superstitious nonsense. I can assure you that a demon would be just as easily repelled by a Hail Mary in Arabic or English as in Latin. Putting faith in the words of the prayer and the language rather than the saint or the God it invokes is indeed idolatry of a language.

The thing is, the East has had a tough time getting Latins, well, off our backs, to put it nicely, and we don’t appreciate articles like this which I’m thoroughly convinced was written by someone who does not even know what an Eastern Catholic is.

I hope this clarifies the reaction of us Easterners on this thread. As I said, it’s not about Latin, it’s about the unseemly attempts to have it used in places where it has no right to be, and about attributing magical powers to prayers in it.

As a side note, I think I should point out that the problem of the liturgical language not being a spoken language in the West is not one faced in some Eastern Churches. I’m Maronite, and my liturgical language is Syriac; I can understand it because my native language is derived from it, whereas in the West you guys apparently can’t understand Latin without some study.

Hope this helps you understand our point of view.

Peace.

 

[OraLabora]

Sometimes our prayers can become very rote and easy. Adding some Latin might require a little more thinking or concentrating.

I’ve been praying the Liturgy of the Hours, both in monastic and secular flavours, in Latin for the past 17 years. Every. Single. Day.

I also sing in a Gregorian schola and attend Mass where the propers and ordinary are in Gregorian chant.

I still think it’s nonsense to claim that the devil hates Latin. The devil is quite capable of using Latin just like any other language, to hoodwink us. Proof here on CAF on the division that surface every time the topic of Latin is brought up.

Even today though, the Blessed name of our Lord is used during many vile acts, but it still remains the Blessed name of our Lord.

Latin is not the blessed name of Our Lord. He hears His name called by anyone who cries out to him in his or her own language, and responds. What’s important is to pray, not the language you use. I pray in Latin because 1) I like it, and 2) it keeps my Latin reading skills sharp for sight-reading musical scores in the schola. When I’m traveling, I happily pray the LOTH in French; for Latin I use a Latin-French antiphonary, because my understanding of Latin is far from perfect even if I can read and pronounce it fluently. There’s 150 psalms in the psalter. That’s a lot of Latin to learn.

" All the official documents of the Church Encyclicals, Bulls…are written in Latin.

I am well aware of that. It doesn’t make Latin sacred. It makes it an expedient tool for a universal Church that has to deal with a multitude of languages.

It’s as if you’re telling us that unity with the Church can only be completed by use of Latin, which is, while a venerable language, simply not the liturgical language of the East.

I agree completely. I think the problem comes because a lot of people confuse unity with uniformity. As the Church reaches out farther and wider, the unity can only be maintained by embracing the other cultures that join her. That includes their languages. I can manage Latin easily because my mother tongue is French. For a Korean, or Chinese, it might not be so easy.

That said I do love Latin, I love to pray in Latin because I love the musicality of it. The Gregorian tones are marvellously adapted to scripture in Latin. In French, the Gregorian tones are very difficult to replicate and many efforts come off somewhat clunky, so French psalmody for the LOTH has tended to drift off in other directions. To be honest, the Latin is way easier, which is why I use it, plus it sounds better. I’ve prayed the LOTH in Italian while at Sant’ Anselmo in Rome, on Gregorian tones, and it works much better than French.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I’ve been praying the Liturgy of the Hours, both in monastic and secular flavours, in Latin for the past 17 years. Every. Single. Day.

I also sing in a Gregorian schola and attend Mass where the propers and ordinary are in Gregorian chant.

I pray in Latin because 1) I like it, and 2) it keeps my Latin reading skills sharp for sight-reading musical scores in the schola.

When I’m traveling, I happily pray the LOTH in French; for Latin I use a Latin-French antiphonary, because my understanding of Latin is far from perfect even if I can read and pronounce it fluently

That is all very awesome. Sounds like you have a great prayer life. Not everyone can say all that. There are many people out there who do not or can not do all that. Many people might not realize the importance or the history of Latin in the Church.
Someone else might read that article and be encouraged to learn just a prayer or two in Latin.

That is what I feel the point of the article is, to encourage those who do not have that type of prayer life to drawer closer to God and perhaps grow toward even just a part of that type of prayer life that you have.

It makes it an expedient tool for a universal Church that has to deal with a multitude of languages.

It’s as if you’re telling us that unity with the Church can only be completed by use of Latin, which is, while a venerable language, simply not the liturgical language of the East.

Which brings us back to unity. I don’t think I have heard anyone say, “it is the only way to have unity” but one way that the Church has used over the years.

 

[CRV]

When I read some of the comments you can almost hear a distaste or a “making fun” of Latin,

I too picked up on this “undercurrent”. If someone fervently believes Latin is better than vernacular for whatever reason, and I too have read various articles online by priests and academics that it is , including why they believe the liturgy should be in Latin, that is their opinion and they are entitled to it without being derided for it, and the last time I read up about it derision is also a sin.
I don’t think it is right to make fun of others, or their opinions, but to be respectful whether we agree with that person or not.
I’m bowing out of this thread as a result.

God bless us all.

 

[Salibi]

Sure, and I’ve no problem with using it. It’s the Latin Church’s liturgical language, after all, they’ve a right to use it. The key is not to bat the Easterners over the head with it.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The key is not to bat the Easterners over the head with it.

I don’t think I have heard anyone do that nor did I see it anywhere in the article from Father Z.

 

[Salibi]

I think this conversation has moved far from the OP’s article (which I haven’t even read) and is a bit more general than that.

Feel free to flag if you find this off-topic.

 

[babochka]

Salibi:

The key is not to bat the Easterners over the head with it.

I don’t think I have heard anyone do that nor did I see it anywhere in the article from Father Z.

You’re right. It was not present in Father Z’s article, which was fine . I was responding to the article posted later by Prayinglatin.

Father Z’s article focused on the historical, theological, and liturgical importance of Latin to the Latin Rite. This does affect the church as a whole because the Latin Rite is by far the largest and most influential Church worldwide.

The problem comes in when the arguments used for preserving Latin Rite are expanded to apply to the universal Church. The unspoken implication is that our own traditions, which have never included Latin, are inferior and a sign of disunity. If Latin is a sign of unity in the universal Church, then it follows that those who have never used Latin in their worship are somehow serving disunity, rather than unity. It ignores the reality of the universal Church and discounts the historical, theological, and liturgical significance of the entire Christian East.

Latin has, in fact, been a source of disunity in the church in the situation with the filioque. The Greek misunderstanding of Latin the subtleties of the Latin language that led to the inclusion of the filioque was a significant factor in the great schism and continues to be a factor in disunity to this day. Don’t get me wrong. I am not objecting to the Latin Church’s inclusion of the filioque, nor its authority to add the filioque, but if the Latin church had just stuck with the original Greek, the problem would not exist .

 

[prayinglatin]

Jesus didn’t specify what language to use when praying and he probably said this in Aramaic, in order for those listening to understand.

The point is, Jesus taught us how to pray and never specified the language to be used.

1. How do you know what Jesus taught? The Scriptures do not contain everything He taught according to the same Scriptures: John 21:25 “But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.”
2. Who said Jesus had to Himself teach something for us to do it? That is not even a teaching in Protestantism. They believe the teachings of St Paul, Peter, James, etc in the other letters of Scripture as well. Catholics we believe that Jesus gave to the Church authority to teach. Here is the key: the only thing we are saying is that the Church has taught that Latin is a sacred language and thereby very powerful and has many benefits. That’s it.
3. Who said anyone was saying it was a requirement for salvation to pray in Latin? No more than to pray the holy Rosary. They help us.

 

[prayinglatin]

You ascribe magical powers to Latin? You need to look into what the Church says about superstition.

Do you believe when the priest says that magical words “This is my Body” that the most unfathomably powerful thing in the universe takes place and the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity then takes possession of that priest who then says in the person of Christ those words and transforms that bread into the actual Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ? If you believe this as well as the other sacraments which take place by matter and form (certain precise words being spoken) then how hard is it to accent to the teachings of the Church regarding her language being “consecrated” (made holy) and that it thereby has a special spiritual power attached to the language? If accenting to the Church’s authoritative teaching regarding her language is superstitious, then how much more would believing her teachings concerning her very sacraments themselves?

 

[prayinglatin]

aughter. Did you know that the Devil is especially afraid of the Latin language? And that prayers said in Latin are magically more effective? … Did you also know that praying in Latin unites Catholics with their heritage ?

Salibi,

You do not mock and disagree with me, nor with this site, but with the popes themselves who taught these things explicitly. https://www.prayinglatin.com/papal-teachings-on-latin/

You laugh at and mock Pope Benedict XVI who said, "Latin … not only guarantees continuity with our roots but continues to be as relevant as ever for strengthening the bonds of unity of the faith in the communion of the Church.”

You laugh and mock Pope St John XXIII who solemnly proclaimed in his Apostolic Constitution, " “The Latin language ‘ can be called truly catholic .’ It has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic See , the mother and teacher of all Churches, and must be esteemed ‘ a treasure … of incomparable worth. ‘ … It is also a most effective bond, binding the Church of today with that of the past and of the future in wonderful continuity .”
… and when he said, " “ [Latin] exercises, matures and perfects the principal faculties of mind and spirit"

You laugh and mock Paul VI who called it, “the richest treasury of piety”

Likewise, John Paul II, “Latin … through its dignified character elicit a profound sense of the Eucharistic Mystery ” and We exhort you all to lift up high the torch of Latin which is even today a bond of unity among peoples of all nations.”

Not to mention Pius XI, "the Church… requires by its own nature a universal language, unchangeable, not that of the common people. “

And Pius XII, " “The use of the Latin language prevailing in a great part of the Church affords at once an imposing sign of unity and an effective safeguard against the corruption of true doctrine .”

and finally you laugh and mock the now deceased holy Fr Gabriel Amorth who performed over 700,000 exorcisms and attested to Latin’s power of driving away evil and the devil’s horror, as well as the holy bishop Gemma and countless others with first hand knowledge of evil who attest to this fact.

One must take great pause before ever mocking something holy. In Scripture, the executioners of our Blessed Lord mocked Him when they spat on Him, crowned Him with thorns and blasphemed His holy Name. You can also read about what happened to the children who mocked the holy prophet Elias in 2 Kings 2:23-24. Mocking the sacred is something very serious, and never something to be taken lightly.

Kyrie Eleison

 

[OraLabora]

Kyrie Eleison

Greek!

Do you believe when the priest says that magical words “This is my Body” that the most unfathomably powerful thing in the universe takes place and the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity then takes possession of that priest who then says in the person of Christ those words and transforms that bread into the actual Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ? If you believe this as well as the other sacraments which take place by matter and form (certain precise words being spoken) then how hard is it to accent to the teachings of the Church regarding her language being “consecrated” (made holy) and that it thereby has a special spiritual power attached to the language? If accenting to the Church’s authoritative teaching regarding her language is superstitious, then how much more would believing her teachings concerning her very sacraments themselves?

Are you really comparing the Latin language to the most Holy of Holies, the Eucharist??? Moreover the Eucharist is most assuredly not “magic”. It isn’t some form of conjuring. It is a mystery. Mystery does not equate magic. And it is a sacrament. Latin is not a sacrament. It is a language.

I honestly think you need to find a good orthodox spiritual director and have a long talk with him.

I’m all for preservation of Latin in the Church and in liturgy; it’s part of our patrimony, but it certainly isn’t magic.

 

[prayinglatin]

RE: that speech promoting Greek, there are different opinions by liturgical scholars, but many of them attest to the fact that Christians did in fact pray in Latin in the early Church from the beginning and that the 3 sacred languages on the Cross were always such. Even if the proposition were true that Latin was not used until the 4th century–ignoring the plentitude of evidence to the contrary–that would not change the fact that it was used by the west from that point unquestionably for her entire existence as her one and only sacred language, even when the language fell out of use everywhere. That the Saints prayed the public liturgy as well as their private devotions in this language. That they taught heathens to do the same. And that the Church has honored and defined this language as consecrated, holy, and set aside for the specialized prayer to Almighty God.

As has been rightly stated, “sacred time, sacred space, sacred language, and sacred music” remain necessary elements in the exercise of religious rites.

 

[prayinglatin]

Greek!

Amen, one of the 3 sacred languages on the holy Cross!

Are you really comparing the Latin language to the most Holy of Holies, the Eucharist???

No, that is a poor straw man. Please read and re-read the post carefully so it will hopefully make more sense. It is the use of words themselves being compared. A priest speaks the words “This is my Body” and something unfathomable takes place. A priest says the words “I absolve you…” “ego te absolvo…”, and ones sins are then actually forgiven. A priest says the words “ego te baptiso” while pouring water, and a soul is thus born again. Or even when a priest blesses an object, unquestionably from that moment forward that object is blessed and made holy.

From the traditional ordination rite: “consecrate and sanctify these hands, through our unction and Thy blessing, that whatsoever things they shall bless, they may be blessed, and whatsoever things they may consecrate, they may be consecrated and made holy, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

If it is not superstitious to believe these teachings of the Church, then it is not superstitious to believe the Church’s teaching that a language itself can likewise be something blessed and sacred.

 

[OraLabora]

A priest speaks the words “This is my Body” and something unfathomable takes place. A priest says the words “I absolve you…” “ ego te absolvo …”, and ones sins are then actually forgiven.

Yes. In any approved translation. This is the current teaching of the Church. The teaching that matters.

Latin does not confer sacramental Grace. Christ does.

 

[prayinglatin]

I honestly think you need to find a good orthodox spiritual director and have a long talk with him.

If anyone’s spiritual director is opposed to the Church’s teachings and tradition on Latin, then consider finding a new one. “orthodoxy” means following all of the Church’s traditional teachings. Not just the ones he agrees with or only those that were created 50 years ago.

“What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.” Pope Benedict XVI

“What Catholics once were, we are. If we are wrong, then Catholics through the ages have been wrong. We are what you once were. We believe what you once believed. We worship as you once worshipped. If we are wrong now, you were wrong then. If you were right then, we are right now.” - Robert De Piante