Latin NO

[Our_Refuge]

=LilyM;3794996]The Church, during and after Vatican 2, has seen the preservation of Latin in the Mass (yes, even in the NO) as being extremely important, for lots of very good reasons.

It’s been the lingua franca of our liturgy for over 1,500 years, it is an unchanging languge, it makes the Mass the same and equally understandable in every country and every ethnic group without the possible complications of bad translation,

for example. Some of the clergy and laity take the opinion of the Council Fathers on this matter to heart.

Interesting. So why have it in the vernacular?

**We as laity are so important to the Mass **that there cannot even BE a Mass without at least one lay person present

.
Sorry, not true. You are not that important.

So when the priest, representing our bridegroom, **doesn’t even acknowledge **us by facing towards us, then yes it can lead to feeling ‘shut out’,

Do you really need to be acknowledged? God knows you are there.

But a heck of a lot of them certainly enjoyed it (even excessively) when it came, didn’t they - to the point where many don’t want even now with all the problems to return to how it was.

What "problems’?

 

[LilyM]

Interesting. So why have it in the vernacular?

Because there are very good reasons for vernacular too - for starters very few people these days are have learned Latin, or indeed any language other than their vernacular (especially in certain countries like America). And though the Church hierarchy may still use it, most of them aren’t too au fait with it either. They need to translate their documents into vernacular.
.

Sorry, not true. You are not that important.

As an individual sinful human, no - as part of the Body and Bride of Christ you and I are extremely important. Like I said, no laity no Mass (at least in the NO). That’s not my opinion, that’s Canon Law, check it out if you don’t believe me.

Do you really need to be acknowledged? God knows you are there.

If I walk into church to get married I’m sure my groom knows I’m there too, but if he spent almost the whole time with his back to me while talking to his father - on my behalf as well as his own, mind - I’d find it disconcerting to say the least … of course a bride at her wedding wants acknowledgment!

What "problems’?

You saying there aren’t any problems with the NO? Most TLM supporters are more than happy to point out that there are scads of them, thought I’d save you the trouble by acknowledging as much myself.

 

[Our_Refuge]

=LilyM;3800162]

As an individual sinful human, no - as part of the Body and Bride of Christ you and I are extremely important. Like I said,** no laity no Mass** (at least in the NO). That’s not my opinion, that’s Canon Law, check it out if you don’t believe me.

Mass can be celebrated without the laity.
General Instructions
254. Mass should not be celebrated without a minister or at least one of the faithful, except for a just and reasonable cause. In this case, the greetings, the introductory or explanatory remarks (monitiones), and the blessing at the end of Mass are omitted.

 

[AJV]

As an individual sinful human, no - as part of the Body and Bride of Christ you and I are extremely important. Like I said, no laity no Mass (at least in the NO). That’s not my opinion, that’s Canon Law, check it out if you don’t believe me.

I wouldn’t say that there’s **no **Mass. Canon Law used to be even stricter- the 1983 Code (c.906) reduces the cause to be “just and reasonable” instead of “grave” as it used to be. The church admits the *validity *of Masses celebrated solitaria. It may not be ideal but it’s not invalid.