Latin: Divisive or Unitive

[Urn]

You don’t consider it unifying that we have a common language? That even if you have 20 languages present, saying the Lord’s Prayer in Latin allows everyone to recite it in the same language even if they have to read it?

There is no “unifying” language across the entire Church. I suppose you could make that claim for the Latin Rite but even then you’re in essence saying “OK, we’re going to pick a single language in which to celebrate the Mass based on historical factors. Unfortunately it’s not a language ANY of you natively speak.”

The result would not be “unifying.” Many would pull away from the celebration of the Mass – either physically by not attending or by praying the Rosary, reading or daydreaming during Mass.

In practical terms if you wanted to pick a single language in which to celebrate the Mass (not that doing so would be a good idea), English would probably be the best practical choice woldwide.

 

[ProVobis]

In practical terms if you wanted to pick a single language in which to celebrate the Mass (not that doing so would be a good idea), English would probably be the best practical choice.

No, that would be Spanish, much more frequently spoken among Catholics.

We seem to have division even without the pure Latin being introduced.

 

[Cat]

Cat, I do know what I am saying because I am no stranger to Latin. I am no expert in it though, but I certainly know when I pray the Hail Mary privately in Latin what I am saying, or when I recite the Apostles Creed, or the Our Father.

You don’t need to pray in Latin to give no thought to your prayers. Reciting them in English can be just as mindless an act.

When I took Latin in high school, I was amazed to find out how many English words derive from Latin. In fact, it is often easy to figure out what a Latin word means because it often times resembles its English equivalent.

I don’t believe I ever wrote that Latin would make praying better. If I did say that, I was thinking of an instance such as WYD when you have people from many different cultures and countries gathered together, it would be a good expression of the unity in the Church for everyone to pray some prayers in the common language of the Church.

There is nothing wrong with praying in English, so please do not think I am against it.

This is just my opinion which isn’t going to make a bit of difference in the Church since I have yet to receive a phone call, or an email, from the Holy Father asking me what I think. I’m not trying to get you to agree with me.

Very kind post. Thank you for making it clear that this is your opinion.

 

[JustaServant]

Allow me to quote Bishop J.C. Hedley in his book The Holy Eucharist:

www23.us.archive.org/stream/h…0hedl_djvu.txt

One of the most striking features of the Western
Mass is the use of the Latin tongue. This usage, as it
need not be said, is derived from the Church of Rome,
the mistress, and, to a large extent, the founder of the
Churches of the West…
To any one who looks calmly at this question, it will
appear evident that the use of one unchanging and uni-
versal language in the Liturgy was a moral necessity, if
there was such a thing as one universal Church.
The forms and prayers of the Liturgy are intimately con-
nected with the Faith. Just as the Church’s canons
and definitions must be expressed in an official language
that must remain the same through all the alterations of
written and spoken tongues that time may bring about
or diversity of nationality develop, so her liturgy, which
embodies great dogmatic truths that every age and
country must acknowledge and make use of day by
day, must be expressed in an idiom which will not be
exposed to the danger and inconveniences of perpetual
change.
Had the Church from the beginning adopted
the principle of a vernacular Liturgy for each nation or
people, one of two things would, by this time, have
happened in eveiy case; either the original liturgical
forms would be as obsolete and as difficult for the
people to follow as the English of Alfred or the French
of the early Normans, or else there would have had to
be alterations and adaptations in every century. Now
it would have been morally impossible thus to keep the
liturgical prayers on a level with the changing and de-
veloping language of the peoples of Europe. The task
would have been too vast, and too hard to organise.
Misunderstanding, heterodoxy, heresy, arising from the
incompetence or the wilfulness of translators and adap-
tors, would have taxed the vigilance of the Church’s
pastors to such an extent that disaster would only have
been averted by a standing miracle.
The spirit of nationalism, which must always be one of the dangers
against which the one universal Church has to contend,
would have found in the manipulation of a vernacular
liturgy endless opportunities for loosening the bonds of
unity. As it is, the Latin unites the Western Church
together in one Catholic body with a union which is
that of a family or a household. Every Catholic is at
home in every Catholic Church of the world. More-
over, the Latin keeps the whole Church in union with the
See of Rome, the source and principle of Catholic unity.
The grand dogmas on which the Liturgy rests, and
which are interwoven in its very substance, remain for
all generations in that form of sacred words which the
teaching Church has authorised. Unity of belief and
fixity of expression must always be found together.

Emphasis mine.

 

[Cat]

You don’t consider it unifying that we have a common language? That even if you have 20 languages present, saying the Lord’s Prayer in Latin allows everyone to recite it in the same language even if they have to read it?

Unity comes from our baptism, not from using a common language. I Corinthians 12:13 makes it clear that “by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”

Reciting one language is “unison,” not “unity” or “unifying.”

When we pray, the Holy Spirit prays for us in groans and “words” that we can’t hear or understand. So no matter what languages we all pray in, we are “one” because of the work of the Holy Spirit.

Corrie ten Boom wrote a book about her experiences in Ravensbruck concentration camp (she and her sister were arrested for giving shelter to Jews). In Chapter 13 of the book, she describes a prayer meeting in Barracks 28: “A single meeting might include a recital of the Magnificat in Latin by a group of Roman Catholics, a whispered hymn by some Lutherans, and a sotto-voce chant by Eastern Orthodox women. With each moment, the crowd around us would swell…at last…I would open the Bible. Because only the Hollanders could understand the Dutch text, we would translate aloud in German. And then we would hear the life-giving words passed back along the aisles in French, Polish, Russian, Czech, back into Dutch. These were little previews of heaven…”

You see, these Christian women were One in Christ, not because of a language. In fact, their languages were all different. They were One in Christ because the Holy Spirit was in them, helping them to love and support each other in the worst circumstances imaginable. And other women were attracted to the Christians because of the love and light that shone strong from these Christians.

Non-Christians and fallen-away Christians may or may not be attracted back to Christ by human practices like Latin, vernacular, chant, or rock music. But according to the Word of God, they WILL be attracted back to Christ by our active love for one another.

 

[Magnanimous]

In practical terms if you wanted to pick a single language in which to celebrate the Mass (not that doing so would be a good idea), English would probably be the best practical choice woldwide.

The majority of Latin Catholics are Spanish speakers, so I don’t see how English would be a practical choice…

In my opinion, and not that it doesn’t have the support of the Saints, scripture, history, Church documents, etc. In the Liturgical worship of the Church, everything we offer God should be “elevated”, from the clothing we use( nice vestements for clergy), the music, the atmosphere, our posture, speech turns into song, and even the language. Latin here, fits that role. Something that always gets thrown around to undermine the use of Latin is that Latin at its introduction was the vernacular, that is only partially true, the Latin being used in Liturgy was very different from the vernacular being used in everyday life in Rome, it’s akin to using Shakespearean English at Mass in modern day America. The early Christians understood this, they knew that in the public worship of God, just like how the Jews had been using Hebrew in the Temple, we couldn’t just use the everyday language.

In fact it almost seems to be innate to the Human person to use something above the everyday speech when worshiping the Divine, why else would many of the world religions, have a “Sacred Language”?

 

[Holly3278]

I believe that it is unitive personally. I mean, it would especially be so if all Catholics knew Latin and/or Greek. Then you could understand Mass no matter where you went in the world!

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Unity comes from our baptism, not from using a common language. I Corinthians 12:13 makes it clear that “by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”

I think that about says it all.

 

[Magnanimous]

Unity comes from our baptism, not from using a common language. I Corinthians 12:13 makes it clear that “by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”

Reciting one language is “unison,” not “unity” or “unifying.”

When we pray, the Holy Spirit prays for us in groans and “words” that we can’t hear or understand. So no matter what languages we all pray in, we are “one” because of the work of the Holy Spirit.

Corrie ten Boom wrote a book about her experiences in Ravensbruck concentration camp (she and her sister were arrested for giving shelter to Jews). In Chapter 13 of the book, she describes a prayer meeting in Barracks 28: “A single meeting might include a recital of the Magnificat in Latin by a group of Roman Catholics, a whispered hymn by some Lutherans, and a sotto-voce chant by Eastern Orthodox women. With each moment, the crowd around us would swell…at last…I would open the Bible. Because only the Hollanders could understand the Dutch text, we would translate aloud in German. And then we would hear the life-giving words passed back along the aisles in French, Polish, Russian, Czech, back into Dutch. These were little previews of heaven…”

You see, these Christian women were One in Christ, not because of a language. In fact, their languages were all different. They were One in Christ because the Holy Spirit was in them, helping them to love and support each other in the worst circumstances imaginable. And other women were attracted to the Christians because of the love and light that shone strong from these Christians.

Non-Christians and fallen-away Christians may or may not be attracted back to Christ by human practices like Latin, vernacular, chant, or rock music. But according to the Word of God, they WILL be attracted back to Christ by our active love for one another.

While this is true, it would be wrong to think that this means that the material and physical aspects of our Faith and Worship aren’t important.

 

[Cat]

While this is true, it would be wrong to think that this means that the material and physical aspects of our Faith and Worship aren’t important.

I agree.

But perhaps on CAF, discussion about liturgical language seems to occur more frequently than discussion about methods to show practical love to our fellow Christians.
We are “out of balance.” Or perhaps we are just bolder to speak of such things online than we would be in real life.

I’ve asked several others, and I’ll ask again–would more Latin in the Mass compel us to perform acts of charity for our Christian brothers and sisters? Does the Holy Spirit use Latin rather than the vernacular to “stir us up” to good works?

I think that for some Christians, the Holy Spirit is able to use Latin to guide them into good works and service to others, and for other Christians, the Holy Spirit is able to use their vernacular. Perhaps this is why many bishops and priests are not in a hurry to implement the use of more Latin in the OF Mass–they find that the vernacular gets results.

 

[Khalid]

It is unitive, by definition, as it is one, and unites, as we are united to Christ in the Church. One Church, one baptism, one God in Trinity, one liturgy. (For the Latin rite, at least.)

 

[ProVobis]

Fr Z: GUEST RANT: Many languages for Mass and fake “unity”

 

[ProVobis]

“Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the hearts of all the enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond among Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit. . . . The spirit of rebellion which drives them to confide the universal prayer to the idiom of each people, of each province, of each century, has for the rest produced its fruits, and the reformed themselves constantly perceive that the Catholic people, in spite of their Latin prayers, relish better and accomplish with more zeal the duties of the cult than most do the Protestant people. At every hour of the day, divine worship takes place in Catholic churches. The faithful Catholic, who assists, leaves his mother tongue at the door. Apart form the sermons, he hears nothing but mysterious words which, even so, are not heard in the most solemn moment of the Canon of the Mass. Nevertheless, this mystery charms him in such a way that he is not jealous of the lot of the Protestant, even though the ear of the latter doesn’t hear a single sound without perceiving its meaning .… . . . We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in ever destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace. . . .”

~ Dom Prosper Guéranger

 

[Urn]

No, that would be Spanish, much more frequently spoken among Catholics.

We seem to have division even without the pure Latin being introduced.

No. While I agree that there are more Catholics who are native speakers of Spanish than any other language, I suspect worldwide there are more Catholics who have a working knowledge of English than any other language.

Yes, there is a great deal of division.

 

[Urn]

Just imagine this hypothetical for a moment:

What if the average Catholic could easily follow the Mass in Latin without a missalette yet most required one when the Mass was celebrated in their vernacular? (yes, I know…)

What if so many people couldn’t follow the Mass in their vernacular so they prayed the Rosary during the Mass rather than try to follow it?

NOW imagine how the pro-Latin individuals would react to the arguments that would be put forth by the pro-vernaculars – arguments many pro-Latin individuals already use today:

• There is no problem with using a missal – it doesn’t get in the way.
• What’s the problem with praying the Rosary during the Mass?

Missalettes DO get in the way for many. There IS a problem with ignoring the Mass and praying the Rosary instead.

 

[Urn]

It is unitive, by definition, as it is one, and unites, as we are united to Christ in the Church. One Church, one baptism, one God in Trinity, one liturgy. (For the Latin rite, at least.)

Don’t tell that to the “uniates.”

 

[vames]

I think that for some Christians, the Holy Spirit is able to use Latin to guide them into good works and service to others, and for other Christians, the Holy Spirit is able to use their vernacular. Perhaps this is why many bishops and priests are not in a hurry to implement the use of more Latin in the OF Mass–they find that the vernacular gets results.

That’s right.

“Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened” and “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst” don’t mention anything about God requiring to be worshipped only in a certain language. The descent of the Holy Spirit described in Acts, when “each one heard their own language being spoken”, tells us that all languages of the earth are good and each nation is called to know and worship God in their native languages. One thing that I loved about the Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI was his care to address people in various languages, not only at the Urbi et Orbi addresses. It wasn’t populism or “look at me, I’m a polyglote”, but an expression of the universality of Catholicism, which implies the respect for all the languages spoken by Catholics. The readings at the papal Masses, pronounced in various languages, including Latin, have the same meaning. The site Vatican.va can be read in 8 languages; @Pontifex (twitter) sends his messages in 9 languages.

For Westerners, Latin can be indeed unitive, because it is the traditional language of the Latin Rite: when one hears “Agnus Dei”, this instantly translates as “Western Catholic culture”. But the world is bigger. When one hears “Santa Maria de Guadalupe”, this instantly translates as “Latin American Catholic culture”. Imposing now the exclusive use of Latin would be nothing but a new expression of the old Eurocentrism. It’s too late to dream about Latin (I mean Masses exclusively in Latin) as an unifier for all the Catholic world, including Asia, Africa and Latin America.

A poster said: “everything we offer God should be “elevated”, from the clothing we use( nice vestements for clergy), the music, the atmosphere, our posture, speech turns into song, and even the language”. But all languages, as man-made creations, are equal, as all nations are equal in the eyes of our Creator. Latin is no more “elevated” than Polish or German; it can’t be opposed to other languages as gold can be opposed to plastic. If we say that Latin is a superior language, then we must infer that Maronite Catholics or Coptic Catholics worship God in an inferior way.

 

[Brendan]

Imposing now the exclusive use of Latin would be nothing but a new expression of the old Eurocentrism. It’s too late to dream about Latin (I mean Masses exclusively in Latin) as an unifier for all the Catholic world, including Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Interestly enough, I used to travel for business to Asia ( Korea, Japan) quite often for business (Europe, Mexico and South America as well).

There were years when I would get of a plane from Korea, spend a few days at home, and be off to Sao Paulo or Munich.

One great thing was that I could always find a Mass (OF) in Latin.

In that way, could ‘fully and conscienciously’ participate in Mass without having to learn all the Mass responses in a dozen languages.

So yes, Asia most certainly offers the Mass in Latin, and in just about every city an American would commonly hear of.

Most recently, I go to Africa just about every summer. Our parish has a ‘sister’ parish in Tanzania. English and Swahili are the most common languages there, but the bishop still offers the Mass in Latin regularly, and makes sure his seminarians know how to as well ( as commanded by +Benedict in Sacrementum Caritas)

None of them consider it to be ‘Eurocentrism’ but ‘Catholic’ in the true, universal, sense

I also remember visting a school. When I joined the high school aged girls for their Rosary, they switched from Swahili to Latin, so they are doing a MUCH better job training their kids than we do.

 

[ProVobis]

No. While I agree that there are more Catholics who are native speakers of Spanish than any other language, I suspect worldwide there are more Catholics who have a working knowledge of English than any other language.

So you think by sticking native-speakers of other languages in an English Mass just because they know enough English to make their living, that would be the “best practical choice”? Not one touch of arrogance there.

 

[Brendan]

I suppose because of my international experiences, I am a BIG proponent of Catholics doing what Vatican II called for, that is learning the common reponses to the Mass in Latin.

I know it made me feel welcome when I could pray with my fellow Catholic together, giving the same responses.

My dismay is that I am seeing a lot of poster here with the attitude that welcoming a foreign visitor pretty much involves communicating to them that

1. We can’t be bothered to learn the common language that the Church asks us to learn
2. If you want to pray with us, do it in OUR language or just sit there and try and figure it out yourself.

Neither seem to be the response that Christ and His Church seem to ask for.