Linkages between Latin and the Mass

[trickster]

Bruce, please do not be misled by Pope John XXIII’s document, for it is pre-VII and is the opinion of one person, who happened to be Pope. However, as you may know,** no** pope may bind his successors to his theological position, which is always able to be changed.

And change it did! Please review the overwhelming support from the Councilors for vernacular change in this document.

Had Pope John not died before the Council concluded, he would most likely be in unison and agreement with these 1922 bishops, as was Pope Paul VI…

Hello Sirach2…no worries. I support the church leadership in the moving forward of the liturgical projects by such a large and stunning majority. I also don’t see anything too contradictory between the document sent to me by ProVobis and your article. As you remember John XXIIIs only point was to give direction that Latin should be sustained and then encouraged in educational institutions; it also dealt with the continuity of his predecessor’s arguements around Latin, and he probably did not feel he had any mandate to move forward on requests for venacular languages prior to the council.

I agree with you about John XXIII on supporting the decisions of the Council he created. Thank you for the posting…

Bruce

 

[trickster]

Very interesting things in here, good stuff. questions about the significance of latin in the church come up frequently here. One thing to think about as well is the significance of the Latin language in western culture in general. The culture of europe in the middle ages and into early modernity held latin in great esteem. People seem to forget that Latin was the language of the Church, scholarship, literacy of any kind, government, and high culture even. For more than a millenium in european culture to say that one was literate meant one was versed in latin as well. Sure there was pleny of vernacular litterature, but if you had something important to say it should have been in latin. When comparing themselves to neighboring cultures those of western europe referred to themselves or were referred to by others simply as “the latins”. The latin language was in european culture simply the prestige language. You know how plenty of english speakers think french sounds fancy for some reason? multiply that effect by a hundred and you have the level of importance attatched to Latin. given these things it is perfectly understandable as to why people would want to give the best to God even in their choice of language. I am not saying there is anything wrong with the vernacular, but the effect and cultural memory of hundreds of generations of people living and dying not imagining any other language spoken in the mass is bound to have a profound effect.

Thank you Rasbat, I agree with you.

Bruce

 

[ProVobis]

AWESOME youtube posting ProVobis! I loved it! The legacy, importance of Latin in the past is great, but I never thought about its role in sustaining western civilization and the languages that branched out. The fact that the real history is increased over the centuries on a compound basis is fascinating…I really like this train of thought which I have never had before.

What an innovative approach for high school students to be making movies (videos) in Latin, using the Latin language to look at contemporary life from perhaps a different lens. I appreciated the teachers reference to the relationship with Latin and indigenous peoples.

And within that approach, my mind is re-thinking the use of Latin, not in terms necessarily of the liturgy, but perhaps in terms of reflection upon the liturgy, and so forth. … Latin is perhaps not dead…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

You might also enjoy the Pope’s Latinist Msgr Gallagher’s videos.

freep.com/article/20140327/NEWS05/303270035/Pope-Michigan-Latin-twitter-tweet-Detroit-translator

youtube.com/watch?v=CiJBWewQb4o

youtube.com/watch?v=7DkrI9p4M5U

Last I checked there were 267,000 some followers.

 

[Sirach2]

Hello Sirach2…no worries. I support the church leadership in the moving forward of the liturgical projects by such a large and stunning majority. I also don’t see anything too contradictory between the document sent to me by ProVobis and your article. As you remember John XXIIIs only point was to give direction that Latin should be sustained and then encouraged in educational institutions; it also dealt with the continuity of his predecessor’s arguements around Latin, and he probably did not feel he had any mandate to move forward on requests for venacular languages prior to the council.

I agree with you about John XXIII on supporting the decisions of the Council he created. Thank you for the posting…

What Pope John believed prior to the Council, ought not to be used as a hammer to remold the Church into one’s own thinking, especially when the Councilors voted nearly unanimously to change the to the vernacular. It is controversial if anyone promotes a former encyclical with the intent to sway uneducated readers into thinking the Council had erred and the Church is wrong. That can have devastating effects of scandalizing the innocent when using untrue slants that favor one’s own opinion.

For instance, in citing SC.36-1 without the addition of SC.36-2 and 3, this presents an erroneous view that intimidates others, by quoting out of context. These should have been added to give the reader an accurate picture.

1. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.
2. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See.

In accord with SC.36-3, we find this article referenced in the Consillium established by decree.

Inter oecumenici
　
2. The Consilium, which Pope Paul VI established by the Motu Proprio Sacram Liturgiam, has promptly taken up its two appointed tasks: to carry out the directives of the Constitution and of Sacram Liturgiam and to provide the means for interpreting these documents and putting them into practice.

1. Vernacular translations of liturgical texts to be prepared in conformity with the norms of art. 36, § 3

So you can easily see, Bruce, that this gives the correct view that was intentionally left out of the post citing only portions with which the person agrees. I suggest you do a search on this member with the words Veterum Sapientia and you’ll find 158 posts. Would you say this is agenda posting? Or would you conclude that the Holy Spirit has failed to guide the Council? You may draw your own conclusions, Bruce.
I commend you for doing your own diligent homework rather than rely on internet postings that reveal half truths. .