Multi-Culture Mass... Had a blast...

[ProVobis]

Greek was actually used in the early Church.

No argument there.

 

[ProVobis]

For sure, but to suggest that the latin language was the foundation of Western civilization is a spurious argument at best.

Why the disdain for the official language of the Church? So, so typical of the 60’s.

I suggested the Catholic Church as well. You need to read the book by Dr Thomas Woods:

lewrockwell.com/woods/woods40.html

books.google.com/books?id=zVDR2ZePzvUC&dq=woods+catholic+church+civilization&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=GaUVTMbUE5CmNuap7MIL&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

and perhaps a little background:

ancienthistory.about.com/od/latinlanguage/qt/vulgarlatin.htm

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20061111_gateway-conference_en.html

adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html

 

[VetA]

The 21st century sickens me as each day draws past. Beautiful and precious traditions are destroyed by this “political correct” liberalism that makes itself more prominent every day. No matter what someone says, no matter what someone does, at least SOMEONE gives that person a trophy or a certificate just for existing, and then curses shame upon everyone that spoke the truth. We cannot deny truth, especially with religion, because if we began to view our truths of the Church as objective, we would turn into just another protestant sect. The Traditions of the Church are part of Her truths, handed down to us from the Apostles, who followed Christ, who was GOD IN FLESH. As far as I’m concerned, by tossing aside tradition for ecumenical modernity, we are tossing aside a gift from God. It’s absolutely DISGUSTING that you people are tossing these aside, and then CURSING those of us who cherish them, in order to appease your senses; to fulfill your temptations, and to please the very Satan himself whom has infiltrated the Church.

I know what you mean, but i am starting to think that these are still remnants of the mid-late 20th. from what i see of the younger [my] generation, is (i actually think my generation is split more on that later) alot of us want to return to tradition

now about the split. i think my generation is split in that about half are embracing tradition and half are embracing self-absorption and the like. i do not have any data to back up those claims but from talking to and interacting with the kids at my highschool that seems to be the general feeling.

 

[MarkThompson]

Wow. This thread is really sad. Apparently people from different cultures combined to have a Mass in which the way each of their cultures has Mass is put together and the thread devolves into a thread about why Latin would be better. Of course, there’s the usual demeaning of the way people worship God throughout different cultures. I have news for all of you, that’s how Mass is said in MANY parts of the world. Other cultures do not always view “solemn” in the same way that Western European cultures do.

There’s a million theads in which people can argue why Latin is the greatest language ever created, why hijack a thread about a simple celebration of the Church’s universality?

Correction – Latin was not created, it was inscribed by God on the Twelve Tablets and handed to Saint Romulus at the summit of the Capitoline Hill in 753 BC.

 

[choy]

However, that does not mean abandoning what the Church holds sacred. One can certainly have a multi-cultural celebration and introduce elements like the proclamation of the readings and General Intercessions in particular native languages. But, there needs to be a unifying factor. That factor should be Latin. Why do you think that the Holy Father wrote what he wrote in Sacramentum Caritatis?

you’re right, Latin is unifying. because none of the people there would understand a word. so they are all unified in being clueless

 

[damooster]

you’re right, Latin is unifying. because none of the people there would understand a word. so they are all unified in being clueless

Unified in being clueless? What do you call everyone reciting the Lord’s Prayer in multiple languages at the same time?

By having an official language, the church is unified. I’d rather learn one new language (Latin) rather than a new one every time I meet someone of a different culture.

 

[benedictgal]

What saddens me is the OP was sharing their wonderful experience of multicultural worship of the LORD and some people quickly turned this into a scornful thread.
Yes, I agree mass should be solemn and sans flashy rock bands, but still.
By the way, the mass wasn’t always in Latin, there was a time when the Latin Mass was the “Novus Ordum”. Yes, I do enjoy the Tridentine mass, but I’d rather worship with my words in a more personal way.

However, the focus of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should not be on cultural diversification. There are plenty of opportunities to do this outside of the Mass. Perhaps a party could have taken place where the various groups could set up booths to share their particular culture’s foods or traditions.

The problem that I think some people are missing here is that the Mass is not about multi-cultural experiences. Again, I refer you and everyone else to what Pope Benedict XVI wrote in Sacramentum Caritatis:

The Latin language

1. None of the above observations should cast doubt upon the importance of such large-scale liturgies. I am thinking here particularly of celebrations at international gatherings, which nowadays are held with greater frequency. The most should be made of these occasions.** In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, it is fitting that such liturgies be celebrated in Latin. **Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church’s tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung. Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)

Certainly, the readings and the general interecessions could be in whatever languages the planners of these Masses see fit, but, there needs to a unifying factor involved here. Furthermore, to encourage everyone to recite the Pater Noster in their own language seems akin to me to the Tower of Babel. We need to recite the Pater Noter in one voice. Why do you think that in these multi-lingual gatherings the Holy Father has, inclusive of the Papal Masses and the General Audiences, he has the faithful chant the Pater Noster in Latin? It’s all about unity.

 

[benedictgal]

you’re right, Latin is unifying. because none of the people there would understand a word. so they are all unified in being clueless

Then, with all due respect, if you hold that view, please tell me why the Holy Father wrote what he wrote in Sacramentum Caritatis, a document that a lot of the proponents of this Multi-Cultural Mass seem to ignore. If you hold that view, why did the Holy Father order that the Pater Noster be printed on the backs of the General Audience tickets so that they faithful could chant this prayer in one voice towards the end of the gathering? Your argument really does not make any sense. The Pater Noster in Latin is not very hard to learn, nor are the other parts of the Mass.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

You know, I fail to see how having Latin presented at various portions of the Mass where one should ‘know’ the vernacular and thus be able to follow along fairly well, thus:

Pater noster, qui es in caelus (Our Father, who art in heaven) etc.

Is any MORE 'disruptive than say going to a Spanish mass if one is non-Spanish speaking?

I mean, some seem to be all for the ‘vernacular’, right?

Now, in the Spanish Mass (or the English or the French or whatever), some would ‘object’ to having ANY other language put in, it seems. Especially Latin. How many have frothed at the mouth with “I WANT MY MASS AND I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BEING SAID, DON’T PUT IN A DUMB LANGUAGE I DON’T KNOW.”

But here comes a ‘multicultural language’ Mass with not just one (Latin) language put in, but several, and all of a sudden the same people who scream, NO LATIN, just my OWN language, are all full of hearts-and-flowers, 'this is WONDERFUL, what an exhilarating and positive experience"??? Because they don’t know at least some of the languages ANY MORE THAN THEY KNOW LATIN.

Personally I love Latin. Personally I have no objection to many languages at Mass provided that the proper formula and attention to rubrics are performed.

What I can’t understand is the person who wants NO part of LATIN but would be willing not only to have a ‘proper’ Mass with SEVERAL languages, but is even happier if the format is a jumble of people all just bleating ‘their own’ languages at the same time.

It just seems that there is no problem for them hearing another language --UNLESS IT’S LATIN. And that is illogical.

 

[choy]

Then, with all due respect, if you hold that view, please tell me why the Holy Father wrote what he wrote in Sacramentum Caritatis, a document that a lot of the proponents of this Multi-Cultural Mass seem to ignore. If you hold that view, why did the Holy Father order that the Pater Noster be printed on the backs of the General Audience tickets so that they faithful could chant this prayer in one voice towards the end of the gathering? Your argument really does not make any sense. The Pater Noster in Latin is not very hard to learn, nor are the other parts of the Mass.

if i go to the Vatican, i naturally would expect Latin in Mass, the same way i’d expect Cantonese in Hong Kong, French in France, German in Germany, etc.

no, i don’t think anything is that hard to learn if you really put effort in it. but is it necessary? no. The Lord’s Prayer is the same no matter what language it is in. besides, Latin is already a translation from its original. there’s really no greater value in it

 

[choy]

Unified in being clueless? What do you call everyone reciting the Lord’s Prayer in multiple languages at the same time?

By having an official language, the church is unified. I’d rather learn one new language (Latin) rather than a new one every time I meet someone of a different culture.

sorry, wrong again

how can Latin unify a Church that isn’t even wholly Latin in the first place? the Roman Church is Latin, but what about the 21 other Churches within the Catholic faith? all these form the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. we are not broken apart from the Byzantines and the Chaldeans and the Coptics, etc. none of them every used Latin.

 

[damooster]

sorry, wrong again

how can Latin unify a Church that isn’t even wholly Latin in the first place? the Roman Church is Latin, but what about the 21 other Churches within the Catholic faith? all these form the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. we are not broken apart from the Byzantines and the Chaldeans and the Coptics, etc. none of them every used Latin.

OK, I should have prefaced my comments by noting that I was talking about the Roman Catholic Church, but I figured everyone here was already under that assumption since we were talking about a Latin Rite Mass. I guess I have to spell things out for some.

Why didn’t you address my other comments?

Unified in being clueless? What do you call everyone reciting the Lord’s Prayer in multiple languages at the same time?

 

[benedictgal]

sorry, wrong again

how can Latin unify a Church that isn’t even wholly Latin in the first place? the Roman Church is Latin, but what about the 21 other Churches within the Catholic faith? all these form the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. we are not broken apart from the Byzantines and the Chaldeans and the Coptics, etc. none of them every used Latin.

However, the discussion here, and in most of the threads in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum, deals almost exclusively with the Latin Rite. We are not talking about the those Easter rites which make up part of the Church. In fact, the OP did not mention them. While we do recognize that they exist, for our puposes here, we are only discussing what goes on in the Latin Rite.

 

[benedictgal]

if i go to the Vatican, i naturally would expect Latin in Mass, the same way i’d expect Cantonese in Hong Kong, French in France, German in Germany, etc.

no, i don’t think anything is that hard to learn if you really put effort in it. but is it necessary? no. The Lord’s Prayer is the same no matter what language it is in. besides, Latin is already a translation from its original. there’s really no greater value in it

Sacramentum Caritatis was not meant for implementation only at the Vatican. The Holy Father addressed this document to the entire world. For you to state that you would expect Latin only at the Vatican is, with all due respect, a poor understanding of the document.

Remember, too, that the vernacular is the option, but, Latin remains the default.

 

[choy]

OK, I should have prefaced my comments by noting that I was talking about the Roman Catholic Church, but I figured everyone here was already under that assumption since we were talking about a Latin Rite Mass. I guess I have to spell things out for some.

well, a lot of people make a big fuss about how important Latin is for the Church and Liturgy, without taking into account that there are other Particular Churches with their own Liturgy that were never in Latin. it is important to insert this perspective for people to realize we’re only a part of a bigger Church, and not the entire Church itself

Why didn’t you address my other comments?

why is praying The Lord’s Prayer in Latin better than praying it in any other language. Jesus never even taught it in Latin. and that prayer was handed down to us for us to pray. so why can’t we pray it in our own language?

 

[choy]

However, the discussion here, and in most of the threads in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum, deals almost exclusively with the Latin Rite. We are not talking about the those Easter rites which make up part of the Church. In fact, the OP did not mention them. While we do recognize that they exist, for our puposes here, we are only discussing what goes on in the Latin Rite.

but when those who wish to glorify Latin speak, they speak as if Latin is the only way we can pray. reminding people that the entirety of the Church doesn’t speak Latin puts it in perspective that Latin is only a small t tradition within the Church and praying in another language is equal to praying in Latin

 

[choy]

Sacramentum Caritatis was not meant for implementation only at the Vatican. The Holy Father addressed this document to the entire world. For you to state that you would expect Latin only at the Vatican is, with all due respect, a poor understanding of the document.

Remember, too, that the vernacular is the option, but, Latin remains the default.

every bishop can implement masses in the vernacular in their archdiocese is they so please. thats what i’m trying to say

there’s nothing that says Latin is to be universally mandatory in the Roman Rite

 

[benedictgal]

well, a lot of people make a big fuss about how important Latin is for the Church and Liturgy, without taking into account that there are other Particular Churches with their own Liturgy that were never in Latin. it is important to insert this perspective for people to realize we’re only a part of a bigger Church, and not the entire Church itself

why is praying The Lord’s Prayer in Latin better than praying it in any other language. Jesus never even taught it in Latin. and that prayer was handed down to us for us to pray. so why can’t we pray it in our own language?

Well, it’s not so much a lot of people. It’s the Church that is stressing the importance of Latin. She has addressed this time and time again in her authoritative documents which, sadly, some people are either ignoring or just do not want to read.

Furthermore, we are not addressing the Eastern Rites in this topic; we are only concerned with the Latin Rite.

The argument that Jesus did not pray in Latin really does not hold much water for these purposes. He gave St. Peter and his successors, the Popes, the authority to bind and loose. The popes have already declared that Latin is the language of the Church, whether you choose to admit this or not. The Holy Father has already written in an official document that Latin is to be used in multi-lingual liturgies, again, something that you choose to ignore.

 

[choy]

Well, it’s not so much a lot of people. It’s the Church that is stressing the importance of Latin. She has addressed this time and time again in her authoritative documents which, sadly, some people are either ignoring or just do not want to read.

Furthermore, we are not addressing the Eastern Rites in this topic; we are only concerned with the Latin Rite.

The argument that Jesus did not pray in Latin really does not hold much water for these purposes. He gave St. Peter and his successors, the Popes, the authority to bind and loose. The popes have already declared that Latin is the language of the Church, whether you choose to admit this or not. The Holy Father has already written in an official document that Latin is to be used in multi-lingual liturgies, again, something that you choose to ignore.

no, you accuse people, namely bishops, that they ignore it where in fact they understand it fully and better than you and i. they have every right to use Latin or the vernacular for Liturgy in their archdiocese. never has any of these documents made Latin mandatory. yes its important, yes it is the mother tongue of our particular Church, but no it is NOT mandatory. therefore Bishops can use the local language if they please and this is not against any Church teaching

 

[benedictgal]

every bishop can implement masses in the vernacular in their archdiocese is they so please. thats what i’m trying to say

there’s nothing that says Latin is to be universally mandatory in the Roman Rite

Perhaps you have not read Sacrosanctum Concilium:

1. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

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.

1. 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. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.

1. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the Liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above.

Thus, the Council itself stated that Latin should be retained, used. It wasn’t necessarily envisioning that the entire Mass was to be celebrated in the vernacular.