Latin returning to Mass

[JKirkLVNV]

Lux_et_veritas:

In my mind, the most charitable thing to do for Catholics is to offer, within each vicariate of each diocese, at least one Novus Ordo in Latin, celebrated with the kind of reservedness seen in the TLM. It doesn’t have to be ad orientem, but in Latin and reserved. People should not have to drive an hour to experience a reserved liturgy, especially since the Pope’s have requested that some Latin be used in liturgies. And, I’ll admit, Latin is not a requirement for the traditional experience, but from what I’ve seen in my area, more young people are attracted to it than older, nostaligic folk.

.

Yes, that would probably be best. In fairness, 2 things: my parish celebrates the Pauline Rite in English with the reserve of which you speak. Also, my posts concern the retention of the vernacular. I would be content with the translation of the TLM into the vernacular, if I could hear the canon.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

Ace86:

Have you read the documents of V2 that pertain to worship in the Latin Rite? You should have some humility in regards to what the Church teaches. Look I would rejoice if my priest at the beginning and at the end of Mass turned toward the Crucifix and said," In Nomine Pater, et Filius, et Sanctus Spiritus’. Shame if you don’t know what that means.

Thank you for calling me to humility.
I do accept what the Church teaches and I know that the Church likes Latin and the Pope is recommending it for everyone.
I just don’t care for it’s use in the Liturgy - and I don’t see the point of it. Maybe as I read through the rest of the posts someone will explain to me why Latin is ‘better’ than English.
Furthermore, I am not ignorant of Latin - I just don’t think God really cares if we speak Latin or not - especially if we’re thinking in English anyway and have to translate " In Nomine Pater, et Filius, et Sanctus Spiritus" into “In the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit”.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Joe Gloor:

I say the sign of the cross in the vernacular - do you say it in Latin?

Probably more often as not: Yes. Yes I do.

In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.

tee

 

[Joe_Gloor]

-----------------------------

Let us pray for the day, when we can go across town to Mass and hear the same words, across the state, to what ever state, what ever country, and hear the same words, without inovations or misinterpretations.

If that makes you feel better, pray for it.

I’m not for ‘inovations’ - but I think misinterpretations will occur much more readily when each person does his own, rather than the official interpretation of the Church.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

palmas85:

I have no objection to the use of the vernacular at all. I merely pointed out that no one on this forum has ever come up with a reason more compelling than I want it that way. I have yet to see anyone give a good reason for it thats all.

Here’s what I think is one good reason;
When the participants of a Mass - that is the Laity, can understand the words of the Consecration, they are more likely to believe that the “Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity” of Jesus is in the Eucharist.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

palmas85:

It is indeed strange then that the Mass survived all those years when I guess by your definition, no one could understand it.

I suggest it survived because Christ said it would - not because it’s in Latin.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

palmas85:

Does the fact that the Mass is in the vernacular change what the beliefs are and what the religion really is??

And likewise, does the fact that the Mass is in Latin change what the beliefs are and what the religion really is?

 

[MrS]

Joe Gloor:

Here’s what I think is one good reason;
When the participants of a Mass - that is the Laity, can understand the words of the Consecration, they are more likely to believe that the “Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity” of Jesus is in the Eucharist.

nope…

you are encouraging the laity to “do it on their own”

The real “when” is "When the participants of a Mass are properly catechised by an orthodox priest, backed by an orthodox bishop, backed by continuous instruction and disipline by the bishop of Rome.

B16 is now the best hope we have, followed closely by an ever increasing number of strong seminarians, priests, and new bishops.

Truly the Church will become smaller and stronger.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

palmas85:

I often ponder what would have happened to the faith through those many years if people had the same attitude as you and many others do. Would it have survived and grown and developed as it did ? Or would it have fallen by the wayside as did thousands of cults? Makes you wonder doesn’t it?

Attitude?
I can guarantee that the Faith will survive - regardless of whatever innovations occur. Well, I can’t, but Jesus did so that’s as good a guarantee as you’ll get.
If you are wondering about that, you can desist.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

slewi:

Yeah, we’ve always done it that way, it’s a little thing called tradition. About 60% of our faith is made up of it.

S

Cute.
I think your mistaking tradition for Tradition.
The spoken lanuage is not a Tradition of God, but of men.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

Probably more often as not: Yes. Yes I do.

In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.

tee

That’s cool. What language do you genuflect in?

 

[arieh0310]

Joe Gloor:

I say the sign of the cross in the vernacular - do you say it in Latin?
I’m not recommending throwing the baby out with the bathwater, I’m only saying that Latin is neither asthetically pleasing or transcendant for me.
Nor am I recommending:
Priest - “Body of Christ”
Me - “I can dig it!”

I do both. When I pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet in the morning I do the Signum Crucis, Ave Maria, and Pater Noster in Latin; not because I think it holier that English but so that I can memorize and internalize them. The rest of the day I am doin’ the vernacular.

Let me explain what I mean by transcendent a little more. In early Christianity, as I am sure you already know, there were 5 primary Sees (Rome, Constnatinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem). Out of these five Sees you have Greek, Aramaic, and Latin which are still today as the primary languages of the various rites within Catholicism. Using an ancient language for me helps to bring to my mind the fact that our faith is historic, that this is the language that Peter and Paul probably used in Rome (many of the words used may have been apostolic in origin), this is the language of the Roman martyrs and 19 centuries of Western Christianity. What better way (besides the Eucharist) to express the communion of saints. Why toss Latin aside simply because it may take newcomers some time to learn?

 

[Joe_Gloor]

MrS:

The real “when” is "When the participants of a Mass are properly catechised by an orthodox priest, backed by an orthodox bishop, backed by continuous instruction and disipline by the bishop of Rome.

Not if the instruction is in Latin…

 

[Joe_Gloor]

arieh0310:

I do both. When I pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet in the morning I do the Signum Crucis, Ave Maria, and Pater Noster in Latin; not because I think it holier that English but so that I can memorize and internalize them. The rest of the day I am doin’ the vernacular.

Let me explain what I mean by transcendent a little more. In early Christianity, as I am sure you already know, there were 5 primary Sees (Rome, Constnatinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem). Out of these five Sees you have Greek, Aramaic, and Latin which are still today as the primary languages of the various rites within Catholicism. Using an ancient language for me helps to bring to my mind the fact that our faith is historic, that this is the language that Peter and Paul probably used in Rome (many of the words used may have been apostolic in origin), this is the language of the Roman martyrs and 19 centuries of Western Christianity. What better way (besides the Eucharist) to express the communion of saints. Why toss Latin aside simply because it may take newcomers some time to learn?

I think it’s wonderful that you know the prayers in Latin - and I know the Pope is recommending it.
As for the historical transcendency of the Church, I don’t need Latin for that, but I’m glad it helps you.
The only reason to ‘toss Latin aside’ (which I am not recommending) for newcomers, is that they might not take the time and not join at all.
Do we want those lazy people in the “Smaller, Stronger Church?”
I do.

 

[AJV]

palmas85:

Yes I would, and I’ll tell you why. If you don’t trust the Priest, who is offering in the place of Christ the sacrifice of the Mass, who can you trust? Now, am I naive enough to believe that there have never been abuses in a traditional mass? No , I’m not. I know there have been. But I would still place my trust in the Church and in the Priest. If I don’t trust him to do the right thing, I shouldn’t be there. Cut and dried, very simple.

I was an altar boy for a number of years. Maybe our Parish was different, I don’t know, but Father made sure we knew the prayers as well as our responses. We were drilled on them over and over, and even had little cards ready just in case. I never heard a Priest deliberately say the wrong prayers, although they were said very low, and the altar cards had the prayers on them just in case he forgot.

I know that Luther made a big deal out of priests in Rome saying things like “Bread thou art and bread thou shall remain” during the consecration. I think it well to remember that Luther did have an agenda, was not the most stable of people by most accounts, and could very well have exagerrated if not outright lied on the subject.

In any event, yes, I would trust the priest until he showed me I should or could not any longer give him that trust.

Actually Luther didn’t figure into my question at all. But now that you mentioned it I do remember hearing that tale (about Luther) before…

My point merely was- the TLM is not popular (sorry can’tthink of another word) right now and so the priests who say it most likely are the ones who love it. Imagine if it was made mandatory for the whole Church…including the many priests who commit the abuses seen so often on this forum? Not all of them are going to pack their backs and leave? And then what happens if the same mindset that makes them abuse the NO causes them to omit the consecration or other prayers. If its said sotto voce how will you know its even done? That’s all that occurred to me.

 

[arieh0310]

Joe Gloor:

The only reason to ‘toss Latin aside’ (which I am not recommending) for newcomers, is that they might not take the time and not join at all.
Do we want those lazy people in the “Smaller, Stronger Church?”
I do.

Unlike Protestant services, the mass isn’t primarily for evangelization but worship. I highly doubt that some vernacular Scripture readings, a 5-10 minute homily, and some prayers are going to suck many people in. However, in this overly banalized and secularized society a little ancient tradition couldn’t hurt.

 

[AJV]

Dr. Bombay:

Kirk, perhaps you can help me. I’ve heard the phrase, “eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father” probably thousands of times. And I still don’t understand it. Maybe I’m the only dope that attends the English Mass that doesn’t get it. Please expound on this puzzling (to me) turn of phrase.

Do you mean to say that you don’t understand this but understand et ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula. Deum de Deo, Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, genitum non factum, consubstantialem Patri, per quem omnia facta sunt ?

You are one strange person Dr. B.!

Here’s a word for you to ponder that I saw after a long time, on the the EC forum:

Homoousios
It may solve your problem

 

[AJV]

arieh0310:

Unlike Protestant services, the mass isn’t primarily for evangelization but worship. I highly doubt that some vernacular Scripture readings, a 5-10 minute homily, and some prayers are going to suck many people in. However, in this overly banalized and secularized society a little ancient tradition couldn’t hurt.

Then you would be suprised by how many people have first seen the Mass and then been attracted to the Faith. Not everyone makes the intellectual journey or has someone to explain the Catholic faith to them.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

arieh0310:

Unlike Protestant services, the mass isn’t primarily for evangelization but worship. I highly doubt that some vernacular Scripture readings, a 5-10 minute homily, and some prayers are going to suck many people in. However, in this overly banalized and secularized society a little ancient tradition couldn’t hurt.

I’m not saying that the Mass will evangelize newcomers.
If they come to Mass, though, they are probably looking into Catholicism, don’t you think?
Possibly the “beauty” of a TLM is just what they need, but I think it’s much more likely that in this “banalized and secularized society”, Latin is likely to go over their heads and and cause them to seek elsewhere.
(Banalized? You just made that word up.)

 

[tee_eff_em]

Joe Gloor:

That’s cool. What language do you genuflect in?

D’uh! Body Language! :bounce:


tee