Latin: Divisive or Unitive

[Magnanimous]

Just look at your comment: “helping the Church be one.” Latin and Greek (with tiny exceptions) don’t play any part at all in many of histories of the different Eastern Catholic churches YET some (particularly from the West) try to sell their use as somehow being “unitive.”

I understand what you’re saying here, and I know full well that Latin isn’t the only language that played a fundamental role int eh Church’s history.

But, if any Latin advocate would correct me if I’m wrong, it has been my impression that whenever we advocate the use of Latin as the liturgical language for worship, we’re only refering to the Latin Church, not the other sui iuri Churches, they can keep their liturgical languages if they want, vernacular or not.

 

[ProVobis]

Than what, the Greek? Why not use that? You don’t know either, I’ll hazard. They’re equally tough to learn.

I think the official Church Bible is now the Nova Vulgata. I believe this has new information based on the Dead Sea scrolls and new archaelogical findings.

 

[The_Reginator]

I simply see Latin as unitive in that when it is used in all Masses throughout the world we are celebrating in the same way, in the same language.
[After a short while one picks up enough to be able to follow the Mass.]

 

[TimSpalding]

I think the official Church Bible is now the Nova Vulgata. I believe this has new information based on the Dead Sea scrolls and new archaelogical findings.

Yes, as do all decent modern Bibles. I’m not arguing it’s a bad translation. But it’s a translation. Of course, the Dead Sea Scrolls impact only a tiny part of the text, but whether you’re talking about the Dead Sea Scrolls, papyri or the manuscript tradition, you’re talking about original texts in Greek, Hebrew and a little Aramaic, not Latin. Latin is always a translation.

 

[jeannetherese]

I simply see Latin as unitive in that when it is used in all Masses throughout the world we are celebrating in the same way, in the same language.
[After a short while one picks up enough to be able to follow the Mass.]

I grew up without the Latin Mass, but knew that it had been the norm and loved the idea of being able to go to church anywhere in the world and share a common liturgical language. It seemed to me, as a child, to be a step in the wrong direction moving away from this common bond. Having a shared language seemed so catholic!
Now I am able to assist at a Latin Mass fairly regularly. With side by side missals that give both languages, it has been even easier to become comfortable with (to transition from vernacular to Latin) the Latin mass. We are blessed to have it available here!

 

[Megan7]

I realize many people don’t prefer Latin or Greek in the liturgy. Obviously, Sacrosanctum Concilium calls for it. So here’s the question is Latin or Greek unitive (helping the Church be one, etc.) or divisive (causing constant confusion and boredom, etc)?

Unitive. Thank you. God bless. Pax

 

[Urn]

Then nobody was able to follow the Mass until Vatican II. If Latinists are wrong now, then you were wrong for most of the temporal history of the Latin-rite Church.

Sadly a great many were not. Sure they tried to follow along with the missalettes, but why? Why not use the vernacular? Many gave up and simply prayed the Rosary during the Mass.

Mass in the vernacular, though in no way an inherently bad thing, has widely lead people to erroneously believe that Mass can only be about what they understand of it; what Pope Benedict called the “didactic fallacy”. It’s a bunch of kafka. Mass is an act of worship. If you don’t know what’s going on because you don’t understand the words, then you didn’t know what was going on in even your native tongue, because you were catechized with vast poorness.

Naw. You’re simply trying to justify the use of Latin. Just imagine if a missalette was required to follow the Mass in the vernacular.

Before Vatican II, one who only speaks English and one who only speaks Spanish would naturally kneel before God in the same manner with no barrier between them. Now it’s considered fortunate if they even know they’re both Catholic.

Not really, no.

What’s the point? I don’t speak Spanish, so there’s no point in me going to a Spanish Mass unless there’s no English/Latin licit Masses available for me to go to. That’s the fruit of the vernacular.

Why not? I seriously doubt you’re fluent in Latin either.

 

[ealfred]

I’m personally in favor of Latin. Having one language for mass that you can understand everywhere you go. When traveling, I is hard with each country having mass in the local language.

 

[Seamus_L]

I missed the option for Latin/Greek in the Liturgy is Divisive (Please Explain)

 

[choliks]

I think the Mass itself is unitive. I usually attend the OF Mass, but I attended an EF once. I didn’t understand the language, but I knew it’s a Catholic sacred liturgy celebrated by countless others around the world.

On the other hand, I think it’s the people’s opinions (including mine) that’re divisive.I think this is where we can learn something from religious life.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Rigth now Latin is divisive because people prefer the either the Lain Mass or the vernacular and tend to discount those who disagree ot at least take it personally.

Aside from the Kyrie I don’t think there is any more Greek in the liturgy

 

[ProVobis]

Latin is always a translation.

Cicero, whom the early Church fathers admired, isn’t a translation AFAIK. We have more than Bibles that are written in Latin.

 

[ProVobis]

Yes, as do all decent modern Bibles. I’m not arguing it’s a bad translation. But it’s a translation. Of course, the Dead Sea Scrolls impact only a tiny part of the text, but whether you’re talking about the Dead Sea Scrolls, papyri or the manuscript tradition, you’re talking about original texts in Greek, Hebrew and a little Aramaic, not Latin.

Okay, but Latin contains many nuances of that period; certainly more than any PC modern language has. It was, after all, one of the three languages of the cross and that’s an important connection the Church has made clear.

BTW, do you know for a fact that Paul’s writings to the Romans were NOT in Latin? Or the words of the Roman centurion? Or Pilate’s conversation with Christ? Why would they be in Greek? According to a PBS documentary, there were a “significant” number of Christians in Rome when Paul arrived there, and Latin (or at least Vulgar Latin) would have been spoken there.

 

[ProVobis]

Aside from the Kyrie I don’t think there is any more Greek in the liturgy

The Church wanted to preserve Greek and Hebrew in the Latin Mass. The Kyrie (and it may be argued, “Sabaoth” as well) may be small but they’re a significant part of the Latin Mass, EF or OF.

 

[BobDanners]

Whenever there is a Spanish Mass at our English parish and I see the absolute train wreck that it is where people are looking around wondering where in the Mass they are at, or the myraid of languages being said where people are confused. Where the priest is struggling with the prayers, homily and Readings…all I can say to myself is.

Whatever happened to the one universal language for the One Universal Church?

Bring back the Latin and Greek so we all can celebrate and worship together as one!

 

[Phemie]

Funny you should ask.

My mother tongue is French and I’ve been fluent in English for the past 50+ years. I’ve just returned from Europe where I attended Sunday Masses at a little church in Best, Netherlands, at San Marco in Venice and Notre Dame in Paris.

In Best, Mass was all in Dutch. Only made out a few words here and there but Mass is Mass and I could follow what was going on.

In Venice and Paris, however, the dialogue, readings and homily were in Italian and French, respectively, but the Ordinary was in Greek & Latin. These were sung Masses with Gregorian chant responses.

People who didn’t understand the vernacular could still participate in the common language of a great proportion of Catholics. It united people of many languages. Sadly, it was the first time I’d heard a Latin/Greek Ordinary in over 40 years and I couldn’t sing without a cheat sheet, which wasn’t present at the Mass in Venice. I did have one in Paris and was quite able to follow along.

Would that every parish be able to sing the the Ordinary chants from Jubilate Deo. It would make things so much easier when one goes to a parish whose vernacular isn’t one of the languages you speak.

 

[Phemie]

Whenever there is a Spanish Mass at our English parish and I see the absolute train wreck that it is where people are looking around wondering where in the Mass they are at, or the myraid of languages being said where people are confused. Where the priest is struggling with the prayers, homily and Readings…all I can say to myself is.

Whatever happened to the one universal language for the One Universal Church?

Bring back the Latin and Greek so we all can celebrate and worship together as one!

Was there ever a universal language for the One Universal Church?

 

[bcuster]

I choose Unitive because Latin is the universal language of the Church. We have a multicultural parish. When we sing Latin, all sing. In special Masses where Tagalog or Vietnamese hymn are sung, some are left out.

From browsing these forums, I see that some put the EF against the OF Mass. This should not be. The Mass is the Mass is the Mass. We now have the opportunity for both the EF and the OF. Both, not either/or

 

[ProVobis]

Just imagine if a missalette was required to follow the Mass in the vernacular.

Actually, with all the English dialects, proper names, homophones, responsorials, incoherencies, etc. it wouldn’t be a bad idea if we did use a missalette at least from time to time. Last Saturday, the priest forgot all his lines after “My peace I give you” and gave up trying to find it in the Missal. The congregation merely laughed it off and that I feel is a serious problem.

 

[ProVobis]

But, if any Latin advocate would correct me if I’m wrong, it has been my impression that whenever we advocate the use of Latin as the liturgical language for worship, we’re only refering to the Latin Church, not the other sui iuri Churches, they can keep their liturgical languages if they want, vernacular or not.

Yes, Vatican II made it clear that Latin was to be preserved in the Latin rites (and where civil law didn’t prohibit it.)