Lessons from Descartes on the value of Latin liturgy

[JimG]

Latin was once the universal language of the Mass. It was also the universal language of the university. In the linked article below, Anne Maloney notes that at one time, one could hear the same Mass anywhere in the world. No more.

A few excerpts:

“Before 1968, Catholics traveled the world and found the Latin Mass everywhere they went. No doubt, when those Catholics heard the Latin, the churches they visited became little oases of comfort and familiarity.”

As for the university:

“Never has a student worried that something valuable has been tossed aside in this democratizing of wisdom. They are blithely confident in their own collective ability to think as well and deeply as anyone else—their classmates, me, Rene Descartes. It is an awkward space in the classroom, because I know what they seem incapable of knowing: they aren’t nearly as bright as they think they are.”

She doesn’t quite argue for a return to Latin in the Mass. But she has few a thoughts about making some modest moves in that direction.

Lessons from Descartes on the value of Latin Liturgy.

 

[ProVobis]

Good article, Jim.

 

[Neofight]

Latin was once the universal language of the Mass. It was also the universal language of the university. In the linked article below, Anne Maloney notes that at one time, one could hear the same Mass anywhere in the world. No more.

A few excerpts:

“Before 1968, Catholics traveled the world and found the Latin Mass everywhere they went. No doubt, when those Catholics heard the Latin, the churches they visited became little oases of comfort and familiarity.”

As for the university:

“Never has a student worried that something valuable has been tossed aside in this democratizing of wisdom. They are blithely confident in their own collective ability to think as well and deeply as anyone else—their classmates, me, Rene Descartes. It is an awkward space in the classroom, because I know what they seem incapable of knowing: they aren’t nearly as bright as they think they are.”

She doesn’t quite argue for a return to Latin in the Mass. But she has few a thoughts about making some modest moves in that direction.

Lessons from Descartes on the value of Latin Liturgy.

Interesting piece. But, the universal language of the Mass is the language of the heart, so like those at pentecost, regardless of what tongue we speak, through the understanding of the language of the heart, the Mass still is the same everywhere it’s celebrated.

 

[ProVobis]

But it doesn’t mean the Tower of Babel can’t or hasn’t returned.

As Dom Gueranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France, predicted:

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. . . .”

 

[pianistclare]

Interesting piece. But, the universal language of the Mass is the language of the heart, so like those at pentecost, regardless of what tongue we speak, through the understanding of the language of the heart, the Mass still is the same everywhere it’s celebrated.

Yes.

 

[awsiukiewicz]

Interesting piece. But, the universal language of the Mass is the language of the heart, so like those at pentecost, regardless of what tongue we speak, through the understanding of the language of the heart, the Mass still is the same everywhere it’s celebrated.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

But it doesn’t mean the Tower of Babel can’t or hasn’t returned.

As Dom Gueranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France, predicted:

Quote:
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. . . .”

Orthodoxy has always held its liturgy in the vernacular, and it has not lost any of its sacred character.

 

[awsiukiewicz]

No doubt the validity of Mass is not affected by the Liturgy being celebrated in the vernacular…no one including myself disputes this. I don’t believe the intent of the opening thread even remotely suggested otherwise. my intuition is that comments defending the venacular are unessecery. it seems to me that more often individuals feel they need to defend what need not be defended. I prefer the Latin Liturgy but this doesn’t mean I font acknowledge the other. I with all respect suggest if only for self edification one avail oneself of the commentary of the late Dr Dietrich von Hildbrand on the beauty of the Latin Liturgy.

 

[ProVobis]

Orthodoxy has always held its liturgy in the vernacular

So has Protestantism, which today claims over 30,000 denominations, and all with a different perception of the faith. (Or should I say distortion?)

“Modern languages are liable to change, and no single one of them is superior to the others in authority. Thus if the truths of the Catholic Church were entrusted to an unspecified number of them, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifested to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision. There would, moreover, be no language which could serve as a common and constant norm by which to gauge the exact meaning of other renderings.” - Veterum Sapientia

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

So has Protestantism, which today claims over 30,000 denominations, and all with a different perception of the faith. (Or should I say distortion?)

“Modern languages are liable to change, and no single one of them is superior to the others in authority. Thus if the truths of the Catholic Church were entrusted to an unspecified number of them, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifested to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision. There would, moreover, be no language which could serve as a common and constant norm by which to gauge the exact meaning of other renderings.” - Veterum Sapientia

I read your citation as somewhat Orwellian in spirit, right out of “1984:” essentially, it is necessary to control language in order to control belief (and by definition, controlling thought). That ship has long ago sailed. I would much rather attend Mass in the spirit of “active participation” than “hearing Mass,” as was the term of art when I was growing up.

 

[JimG]

I read your citation as somewhat Orwellian in spirit, right out of “1984:” essentially, it is necessary to control language in order to control belief (and by definition, controlling thought). That ship has long ago sailed. I would much rather attend Mass in the spirit of “active participation” than “hearing Mass,” as was the term of art when I was growing up.

This puts me in mind of a pre-Vatican II liturgical movement, in which the term “active participation” was used frequently, and active participation in the Mass was urged upon all. What it meant back then was that one should pay attention to what is going on in the Mass, particularly by following along in the missal rather than engaging in private devotions such as the rosary. I recall when the Mass began to be said in English I was discussing it with a coworker, and he commented that it was fine with him—he could daydream distractedly whether it was in English or Latin, which meant the level of “active participation” was about the same either way.

 

[ProVobis]

I would much rather attend Mass in the spirit of “active participation” …

Depends on what your meanings are for actuosa participatio as opposed to activa participatio, which they’ve rendered as “active participation” in both cases. Neither translation is wrong but St. John XXIII couldn’t have been more right in precision of the Latin. You know, hic, hoc, haec? Orwellian, really?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Depends on what your meanings are for actuosa participatio as opposed to activa participatio, which they’ve rendered as “active participation” in both cases. Neither translation is wrong but St. John XXIII couldn’t have been more right in precision of the Latin. You know, hic, hoc, haec? Orwellian, really?

Well Sacrosanctum Concilium makes it quite clear:
*14. /…/ In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else /…/

1. With zeal and patience, pastors of souls must promote the liturgical instruction of the faithful, and also their active participation in the liturgy both internally and externally, taking into account their age and condition, their way of life, and standard of religious culture. By so doing, pastors will be fulfilling one of the chief duties of a faithful dispenser of the mysteries of God; and in this matter they must lead their flock not only in word but also by example.
2. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes.
3. The revision of the liturgical books must carefully attend to the provision of rubrics also for the people’s parts.
4. The Church, therefore, earnestly desires that Christ’s faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators; on the contrary, through a good understanding of the rites and prayers they should take part in the sacred action conscious of what they are doing, with devotion and full collaboration. They should be instructed by God’s word and be nourished at the table of the Lord’s body; they should give thanks to God; by offering the Immaculate Victim, not only through the hands of the priest, but also with him, they should learn also to offer themselves; through Christ the Mediator [38], they should be drawn day by day into ever more perfect union with God and with each other, so that finally God may be all in all.
5. The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved.

For this purpose the rites are to be simplified, due care being taken to preserve their substance; elements which, with the passage of time, came to be duplicated, or were added with but little advantage, are now to be discarded; other elements which have suffered injury through accidents of history are now to be restored to the vigor which they had in the days of the holy Fathers, as may seem useful or necessary.

1. The treasures of the bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God’s word. In this way a more representative portion of the holy scriptures will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years.
2. The sacramentals are to undergo a revision which takes into account the primary principle of enabling the faithful to participate intelligently, actively, and easily; the circumstances of our own days must also be considered.
3. The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care. Choirs must be diligently promoted, especially in cathedral churches; but bishops and other pastors of souls must be at pains to ensure that, whenever the sacred action is to be celebrated with song, the whole body of the faithful may be able to contribute that active participation which is rightly theirs, as laid down in Art. 28 and 30.*
   We thank God for the gift of the Council.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I would much rather attend Mass in the spirit of “active participation” than “hearing Mass,” as was the term of art when I was growing up.

Indeed. As befits a member of the liturgical assembly, actively and dynamically part of the liturgical synaxis as opposed to simply “hearing”.

 

[ProVobis]

No doubt the validity of Mass is not affected by the Liturgy being celebrated in the vernacular…no one including myself disputes this.

No, but that didn’t stop the traditionalists and linguists from publishing papers discrediting the “more understandable” vernacular consecration narrative - claiming that the “for all” did in fact alter the words and significantly changed the meaning per De Defectibus. Amplified for the world to hear. And it wasn’t only in the English.

I suppose it’s a moot point now since 2011 but it does show meanings and thought patterns can be changed through translations. And the ordinary churchgoer just accepts what’s given to him and is none the wiser.

 

[kdbueno]

Latin mass considers according to the fact that reality is based on the property of the divine Christ.

 

[JimG]

Descartes, or course, would not favor the use of Latin in the liturgy or in the university. Anne Maloney, in her article, does not seem to favor a complete or exclusive return to Latin, either. But she does say that

“If we are to maintain the humility that is the necessary condition of worship and of learning, we have to find a way to remind ourselves that the liturgy is an act of sacrifice and worship, not a get-together to feel good about our faith. It may well be that a return to Latin would remind us all that what is going on at Mass is something not of this world, something much more profound than anything else happening in our lives. If we do not (and I do not think we will) witness a complete return to Latin in the liturgy, then we have to find another way to communicate this truth in as many parishes as possible.”

If we can find a way to accomplish that, the language use will not be particularly critical.

 

[otjm]

Descartes, or course, would not favor the use of Latin in the liturgy or in the university. Anne Maloney, in her article, does not seem to favor a complete or exclusive return to Latin, either. But she does say that

“If we are to maintain the humility that is the necessary condition of worship and of learning, we have to find a way to remind ourselves that the liturgy is an act of sacrifice and worship, not a get-together to feel good about our faith. It may well be that a return to Latin would remind us all that what is going on at Mass is something not of this world, something much more profound than anything else happening in our lives. If we do not (and I do not think we will) witness a complete return to Latin in the liturgy, then we have to find another way to communicate this truth in as many parishes as possible.”

If we can find a way to accomplish that, the language use will not be particularly critical.

One might consider that catechesis would be more appropriate than worrying about how much Latin is or is not in the Mass.

Christ seemed to manage without resorting to either the language of commerce (Greek) or the language of the conqueror (Latin). As the church spread, Greek was used in some areas; in others, native languages. And eventually as Rome expanded throughout what is now the west and north of the continent, and as Constantine sided with the Church, Latin became the language - one widely understood. Then as time passed, the various areas tended to a solidification of language even though the Church language might not be part of the common person’s tongue - especially in the West.

For all the Latinists who seem sure that the use of Latin will strengthen the faith of the pew warmers, at least in the US the evidence is to the contrary as it is a minor part of a minor part. And the gradual reduction in attendance, blamed on liturgy and ignoring the fact that the mainline Protestant organizations have had an equal, if not greater loss of attendance, likewise seems to dismiss or outright refuse to acknowledge that society as a whole has become rougher, more uncouth, and in a serious moral decline. And the two generations who had at best minimal catechesis have contributed to the outflow.

As noted often, there is no sin that is not attractive, and the sins promoted by the secular world are a siren song to many. In less than 20 years my parish has lost two pastors to sexual abuse issues.

And yet, we are a parish with 24/7/363 perpetual adoration, and we have had 4 priests, 1 sister professed and another not yet at perpetual vows, 2 deacons and one current seminarian come from this parish. That, and we built the first Catholic grade school in the state a few years ago, and it is thriving. Latin does not seem to be the issue, as it is rarely heard.

And (gasp!) we have Mass ad populum, only occasional incense, one pastor, one deacon, and EMHC’s - 2 Host and 4 Cup on Sunday Masses.

So Anne, not to disparage your concerns, but an active, vibrant prayer life of the parish seems to be more to the point.