Latin returning to Mass

[palmas85]

JKirkLVNV:

There was a time when people COULD understand Latin. You asked for a possible reason for the vernacular Mass. I provided you with one from my perspective.

Probably the only time when most people understood Latin was during the days of the Roman empire which ended a long long time ago. During the Middle Ages the well educated and the Clergy could read and wrote in Latin but I doubt the vast majority of the people did. Ditto for the time period from the Middle Ages until the 1960’s. The plain truth is most people, and. most Catholics, did not speak or understand Latin for probably around 1600 years or so. Yet the faith survived in spite of that. Not only survived but prospered and spread throughout the world.

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?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

palmas85:

No skin off my nose at all, and for that matter Kirk, I attend both types of masses. Regularly. I just found it somewhat disconcerting that you would not be a Catholic if your first Mass had been a Traditional Mass. My first mass was a Traditional Mass and I stuck around. Maybe there is somthing wrong with me, but I don’t have to understand everything completely in order to accept it as the word of God. While the sacrifice of the Mass is the center it is not by any means the entire faith or even close to it… To break it down to the apparent proposition of my favorite Mass or nothing is pretty bad. And yes, that goes both ways.

One question though. Why wouldn’t you have gone back to learn more?

Let me try to clarify: My point was this: if the first Mass I attended had been the TLM that I DID attend, then I probably would not have investigated Catholicism. This isn’t a indictment of the TLM in general. If I had attended another one, I might well have stuck around and investigated Catholicism. As it was, the Pauline Mass that I attended, in English, in a monastic setting, was what lured me (finally) into the Catholic Church. So, no one should have read what I said as being “my favorite mass or nothing.” And yes, I think it is helpful, evangelistically, to have the vernacular Mass. As to your question, it probably wouldn’t have occured to me to go back and learn more. That’s just the difference in YOUR experience and MY experience. You’re obviously holier than I am, since you don’t have to understand in order to believe (FYI, there’s lot’s I don’t understand and cannot compass in my mind, but to which I submit and believe. I was speaking of understanding a language, understanding what was being said). And I’m assuming I don’t need to explain that it is this type of attitude that pretty much ensures that I won’t be attending another Mass in Latin, outside of a funeral or a wedding. You Lat(name removed by moderator)hiles seem to go out of your way to assure that people like me don’t want to check out a Latin Mass.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

tee_eff_em:

But how will the congregations at those Masses have become familiar with the Normative Latin Mass, if its use will have been reserved to those occassions?

tee

Sorry, I should have said I hope they get some kind of seperate administration. I meant for the Church at large.

 

[AJV]

Rand Al'Thor:

Peace be with you!

That’s not true in the least. Since Latin is a dead language, the words and their meanings cannot change. All of the Vatican’s official documents (yes, that includes the DOGMAS) are written IN LATIN.

Yes, but nowdays they usually transalte it into Latin instead of writing it in it…
Rand Al'Thor:

We keep hearing stories on here about priests changing words of the Mass or even the consecration to suit their own theology (if the words are doctored with it could even effect the validity of the consecration). hat can’t be done if certain parts of the Mass are in Latin.

Why ever not? The best bit is that if they did change it, most people wouldn’t spot it (unless they troubled to learn the Latin, of course).

 

[palmas85]

JKirkLVNV:

Let me try to clarify: My point was this: if the first Mass I attended had been the TLM that I DID attend, then I probably would not have investigated Catholicism. This isn’t a indictment of the TLM in general. If I had attended another one, I might well have stuck around and investigated Catholicism. As it was, the Pauline Mass that I attended, in English, in a monastic setting, was what lured me (finally) into the Catholic Church. So, no one should have read what I said as being “my favorite mass or nothing.” And yes, I think it is helpful, evangelistically, to have the vernacular Mass. As to your question, it probably wouldn’t have occured to me to go back and learn more. That’s just the difference in YOUR experience and MY experience. You’re obviously holier than I am, since you don’t have to understand in order to believe (FYI, there’s lot’s I don’t understand and cannot compass in my mind, but to which I submit and believe. I was speaking of understanding a language). And I’m assuming I don’t need to explain that it is this type of attitude that pretty much ensures that I won’t be attending another Mass in Latin, outside of a funeral or a wedding. You Lat(name removed by moderator)hiles seem to go out of your way to assure that people like me don’t want to check out a Latin Mass.

You always get so defensive on this subject. I’ve read a lot of your posts, and I nelieve that you are a very good man. But you have a great deal of hostility and antagonism towards the Traditional Mass and almost as much against the use of Latin in the Novus Ordo, which by the way can be done completely in Latin, with the readings in the vernacular of course I have never been able to understand this hostility that you have. It seems at times almost to border on a smoldering hatred.

No Kirk, I am not holier than you, and have never said or intimated that I was. But I don’t need to hear the words of the consecration to know that it has taken place. I trust the Priest enough to believe that he will say the correct prayers.

What will you do if the Holy Father decides that the Latin Rite will be done wholly in Latin with the Kyrie in Greek, with only the readings in the vernacular, the way it is in the current Missal of the Latin Rite?

 

[AJV]

palmas85:

But I don’t need to hear the words of the consecration to know that it has taken place. I trust the Priest enough to believe that he will say the correct prayers.

Palmas85, just one question…suppose the Holy Father reinstated the TLM as the normative rite of the Latin Church. Would you still trust the fact that at any mass you attend the priest will say the correct prayer?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

palmas85:

You always get so defensive on this subject. I’ve read a lot of your posts, and I nelieve that you are a very good man. But you have a great deal of hostility and antagonism towards the Traditional Mass** Not so. I cannot help, but feel a sense of grievance for those who say,“I’ve yet to hear a reason for the vernacular other than 'that’s what I like” when I know that you and I have discussed this and I haven’t said it’s just “what I like.” **and almost as much against the use of Latin in the Novus Ordo, which by the way can be done completely in Latin, with the readings in the vernacular of course **Again, not so, if there are people who want it and have enough support for it that they are able to persuade their bishop to provide for it, I think that they should have it. However, I don’t think it should come to replace the Pauline Rite in the vernacular. **I have never been able to understand this hostility that you have. It seems at times almost to border on a smoldering hatred. **I don’t hate Latin, I don’t hate the TLM, I don’t hate (smoldering or otherwise) anyone who wants either of those things. I’m simply sick of the running down of the Pauline Rite, or the constant questioning of the use of the vernacular (which Cardinal Arinze has said won’t be going anywhere). I’m sick of reading things written by the likes of the superior for the SSPX in Britain, who said that the Pauline Rite (the “NO”) would disappear when they had their way and the Church had come around and they were back in and the TLM was placed on equal footing with the Pauline Rite (almost gleefully, triumphally). Why should I welcome such as this? **

No Kirk, I am not holier than you, and have never said or intimated that I was. **On the contrary, let me point out to you where you did just that: “I don’t have to understand everything completely in order to accept it as the word of God,” implying that I did (I was talking about a language). Also, “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.” Again, I was talking about understanding a language, not a Mystery of the Faith. **

What will you do if the Holy Father decides that the Latin Rite will be done wholly in Latin with the Kyrie in Greek, with only the readings in the vernacular, the way it is in the current Missal of the Latin Rite? **Well, I don’t think I will need to worry about it. I don’t think it’s going to happen (Cardinal Arinze doesn’t seem to think it’s going to, either. I’ll answer you though: I would seek out a Anglican Use parish (which I think will be on the increase) or I would simply put up with it. I would probably join an orgainization for the preservation of the Mass in the vernacular, just like there are org. for those who want to see it promoted in Latin. But I wouldn’t leave the Church. And this again goes to my point on attitude: you seem to assume that I would. **

 

[Dr.Bombay]

JKirkLVNV:

So the congregation can understand it? So that it resonates in their minds and in their hearts, sinks in and bears fruit?

I’m all for the Latin Mass for those who want it, but I know that the words of the Mass in English (my vernacular) resonate with me the rest of the day after I’ve assisted at the Mass.

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.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Well, I don’t think I will need to worry about it. I don’t think it’s going to happen (Cardinal Arinze doesn’t seem to think it’s going to, either. I’ll answer you though: I would seek out a Anglican Use parish (which I think will be on the increase) or I would simply put up with it. I would probably join an orgainization for the preservation of the Mass in the vernacular, just like there are org. for those who want to see it promoted in Latin. But I wouldn’t leave the Church. And this again goes to my point on attitude: you seem to assume that I would.

Oh, Kirk. Do you honestly anticipate anyone would start an organization to preserve the dreck that the ICEL has produced?

I can just imagine…The Vulgar Mass Society. Our motto: At least you can understand us when we’re making a mockery of the Holy Sacrifice!

 

[JKirkLVNV]

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.

Sigh

Not the point. You’re speaking of it as “penetrating” those mysteries. I haven’t penetrated them, either. We could spend the rest of our lives and not penetrate them. I’m talking about understanding the words. Be truthful: you knew that’s what I mean, didn’t you?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Dr. Bombay:

Oh, Kirk. Do you honestly anticipate anyone would start an organization to preserve the dreck that the ICEL has produced?

I can just imagine…The Vulgar Mass Society. Our motto: At least you can understand us when we’re making a mockery of the Holy Sacrifice!

No, but I think there would be a movement to retain the vernacular Mass.

Do you really think this is going to be an issue?

 

[arieh0310]

JKirkLVNV:

Originally Posted by 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”

Sigh

Not the point. You’re speaking of it as “penetrating” those mysteries. I haven’t penetrated them, either. We could spend the rest of our lives and not penetrate them. I’m talking about understanding the words. Be truthful: you knew that’s what I mean, didn’t you?

Et ex Patre natum ante omina saecula. Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero. Genitum, not factum, consubstantialem Patri

Ya know Kirk, it only took a month of solid study to memorize and know the Credo. Now when I participate in the chanting of the Credo in Latin I actually know what is being said. Latin is not that hard, I am not that smart, it just takes effort.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Et ex Patre natum ante omina saecula. Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero. Genitum, not factum, consubstantialem Patri

Ya know Kirk, it only took a month of solid study to memorize and know the Credo. Now when I participate in the chanting of the Credo in Latin I actually know what is being said. Latin is not that hard, I am not that smart, it just takes effort.

You’re not understanding and I’m evidently not being clear. There is something to the Mass being in the language of the people who hear it, who assist AT it.

I AM fairly smart. I’ve taken Latin (12 hours in college), I can recognize roots, I teach them to my kids. I’m interested in language. I listen to Gregorian chant. I don’t hate Latin. I just want the Mass to be comprehensible to the people (and comprehensible means no silent canon).

You know, you’re all welcome to advocate for the Latin Mass, just stop running down the vernacular Mass. That’s the only dog I’ve got in this race. Latin isn’t more holy (granted, it’s static, not fluid, so it can’t be messed with much), it isn’t more sacral. Palmas asked, “I have yet to see anyone give a good reason for it that’s all,” speaking of the vernacular Mass. I attempted to give a reason for it. I made the statement that if the first TLM I attended had been my first Mass, I probably wouldn’t have become Catholic. Either accidentally or deliberately, he read something into that I didn’t mean. I responded. I hope you people get your Mass in Latin, either the TLM or the Pauline Rite. Just get off the vernacular Mass. You’d probably have more Catholics supporting your efforts if you stopped running down the Pauline Mass in the vernacular.

As for the attitude thing I’m talking about? “it just takes effort.” Must mean I’m lazy, huh? Jeez, you people should hear yourselves.

 

[SnorterLuster]

JKirkLVNV:

You’re not understanding and I’m evidently not being clear. There is something to the Mass being in the language of the people who hear it, who assist AT it.

I AM fairly smart. I’ve taken Latin (12 hours in college), I can recognize roots, I teach them to my kids. I’m interested in language. I listen to Gregorian chant. I don’t hate Latin. I just want the Mass to be comprehensible to the people (and comprehensible means no silent canon).

You know, you’re all welcome to advocate for the Latin Mass, just stop running down the vernacular Mass. That’s the only dog I’ve got in this race. Latin isn’t more holy (granted, it’s static, not fluid, so it can’t be messed with much), it isn’t more sacral. Palmas asked, “I have yet to see anyone give a good reason for it that’s all,” speaking of the vernacular Mass. I attempted to give a reason for it. I made the statement that if the first TLM I attended had been my first Mass, I probably wouldn’t have become Catholic. Either accidentally or deliberately, he read something into that I didn’t mean. I responded. I hope you people get your Mass in Latin, either the TLM or the Pauline Rite. Just get off the vernacular Mass. You’d probably have more Catholics supporting your efforts if you stopped running down the Pauline Mass in the vernacular.

As for the attitude thing I’m talking about? “it just takes effort.” Must mean I’m lazy, huh? Jeez, you people should hear yourselves.

Kirk, I got to admire you and your defense of the Pauline Mass. Although normally I go only to a TLM mass, your devotion to the modern mass is admirable. Just offer your frustrations up and you will spend less time in purgatory than the rest of us.

 

[palmas85]

AJV:

Palmas85, just one question…suppose the Holy Father reinstated the TLM as the normative rite of the Latin Church. Would you still trust the fact that at any mass you attend the priest will say the correct prayer?

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.

 

[arieh0310]

JKirkLVNV:

You’re not understanding and I’m evidently not being clear. There is something to the Mass being in the language of the people who hear it, who assist AT it.

As for the attitude thing I’m talking about? “it just takes effort.” Must mean I’m lazy, huh? Jeez, you people should hear yourselves.

First off Kirk, if you took “it just takes effort” as directed to you I apologize (but honestly you seem to get offended quickly). I was more referring to the objection that “common folk” won’t know what the heck is going on and wander down to the local vernacular Protestant church to find a worship service they can understand. (that is a gross paraphrase)

By the way, I have never attacked the Pauline mass. I really do prefer the Pauline mass over the TLM when it is done right. If the Council and every post-Conciliar pope has recommended that Latin and chant be retained in the mass why is it that in my Archdiocese of over 850,000 Catholics you only have one Latin NO and one TLM (the TLM is in the middle of nowhere)? That is what drives me nuts, not the vernacular (it should be retained in the readings and intentions) but the almost total disappearance of Latin and chant.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Palmas: I apologize for getting testy, but either you read what I said incorrectly or I did not convey what I meant. Either way, peace be with you (sorry, sorry! Pax vobiscum).

 

[Dr.Bombay]

JKirkLVNV:

Sigh

Not the point. You’re speaking of it as “penetrating” those mysteries. I haven’t penetrated them, either. We could spend the rest of our lives and not penetrate them. I’m talking about understanding the words. Be truthful: you knew that’s what I mean, didn’t you?

Darn. I was really looking forward to you explaining “begotten, not made.”

You are a constant source of disappointment to me, Kirk. :nope:

 

[palmas85]

JKirkLVNV:

You’re not understanding and I’m evidently not being clear. There is something to the Mass being in the language of the people who hear it, who assist AT it.

I AM fairly smart. I’ve taken Latin (12 hours in college), I can recognize roots, I teach them to my kids. I’m interested in language. I listen to Gregorian chant. I don’t hate Latin. I just want the Mass to be comprehensible to the people (and comprehensible means no silent canon).

You know, you’re all welcome to advocate for the Latin Mass, just stop running down the vernacular Mass. That’s the only dog I’ve got in this race. Latin isn’t more holy (granted, it’s static, not fluid, so it can’t be messed with much), it isn’t more sacral. Palmas asked, “I have yet to see anyone give a good reason for it that’s all,” speaking of the vernacular Mass. I attempted to give a reason for it. I made the statement that if the first TLM I attended had been my first Mass, I probably wouldn’t have become Catholic. Either accidentally or deliberately, he read something into that I didn’t mean. I responded. I hope you people get your Mass in Latin, either the TLM or the Pauline Rite. Just get off the vernacular Mass. You’d probably have more Catholics supporting your efforts if you stopped running down the Pauline Mass in the vernacular.

As for the attitude thing I’m talking about? “it just takes effort.” Must mean I’m lazy, huh? Jeez, you people should hear yourselves.

You know Kirk, I have never run down the Pauline Mass. I have vented on some of the grotesque things that happen at them from time to time, but I have never trashed the Mass. I suffered through years of abuses that I saw at virtually every Mass at which my good friends the Sisters of the Most Precious Blood :bigyikes: and their Liberation Theology Loving partners the Jesuits, (Big organization, I’m only speaking about a small group in South Texas) handled, but I never left the Church and stayed faithful to the Holy Father. I still attend the Pauline Mass almost every day.

The language doesn’t matter so much to me. I just don’t understand why it means so much to you.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

arieh0310:

First off Kirk, if you took “it just takes effort” as directed to you I apologize (but honestly you seem to get offended quickly). I was more referring to the objection that “common folk” won’t know what the heck is going on and wander down to the local vernacular Protestant church to find a worship service they can understand. (that is a gross paraphrase)

By the way, I have never attacked the Pauline mass. I really do prefer the Pauline mass over the TLM when it is done right. If the Council and every post-Conciliar pope has recommended that Latin and chant be retained in the mass why is it that in my Archdiocese of over 850,000 Catholics you only have one Latin NO and one TLM (the TLM is in the middle of nowhere)? BUT how many people want it?!?!? Should it be there for 10? 20? 100? How many have to want it? I live in a huge diocese as well, I never hear about it. And we have an SSPX chapel! That is what drives me nuts, not the vernacular (it should be retained in the readings and intentions I passionately disagree! I can see the Kyrie in Greek, the Gloria, the Sanctus, the Mysterium Fidei, the Amen, and the Agnus Dei in Latin, but MOST of the Mass should be understandable. A mass with the readings and the intentions in the vernacular, but the rest in Latin is a LATIN MASS!) but the almost total disappearance of Latin and chant.

It becomes extremely wearing to have the Mass you love constantly denigrated, compared with ill-favor, etc. It’s kind of like dumping on a beloved grandmother. I don’t dump on other people’s grams, I don’t expect mine to be dumped on either.