Pope: Mass in vernacular helps people understand God, live the faith

[ProVobis]

As I have said before, sometimes when something is understood in the head, it sometimes travels to the heart.

I don’t know. I think the best teachers use non-verbal tools like chalkboards, illustrations, drawing in the sand (like Christ ) to make their points or to explain things. I had a Spanish speaker as my nuclear physics instructor so I think I know what I’m talking about.

 

[Tom_Baum]

It wouldn’t be unprecedented. The Poles formed their own Polish National Catholic Church because, according to reports, they weren’t allowed to teach Polish in the schools.

There were also reports that the whole uprising in Ukraine started when their legislators voted to have Russian as the official language there.

So, yes, national languages or loss of them do motivate people.

My comment was concerning the vernacular at Mass and people understanding what was said at Mass since the words were spoken in a language that they understood and these examples of yours seem to have absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote, can you explain?

That’s what happens when you remove all the non-verbal communication at Mass.

Have you read that article yet?

I don’t know what you are speaking about here either and just what is “that article” that you are talking about?

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t know what you are speaking about here either and just what is “that article” that you are talking about?

lmschairman.org/search/label/Death%20of%20the%20Reform%20of%20the%20Reform

 

[OraLabora]

I guess one could use the same argument for “Kyrie eleison.” Someone can say it should have been translated to “Domine, miserere” but perhaps there was a subtle change of meaning they weren’t going to mess with. Or perhaps they just wanted to retain some Greek in the liturgy, I don’t know.

They did change it for many of the responses to the preces in the Monastic and Roman Offices (but kept the Kyrie for some others).

For Mass, it probably has more to do with the patrimony of music attached to the Kyrie.

 

[ProVobis]

Good point about the music. It’s amazing the amount of beautiful music that has been inspired by the Latin Mass, music that transcends borders and cultures. How could this possibly have been a barrier to the faith?

 

[Pulvis]

You wrote, “As I said in an earlier post, much of this debate is driven by an anthropocentric perspective.”

This is your opinion and you are entitled to it but it seems to me that with many, questioning things and at least wanting what they hear to be in their language to give them at least a chance of understanding it, rather than looking at things from an “anthropocentric perspective” are looking at it from a “God-centered perspective”.

Anthropocentric: adjective

1. regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
2. assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
3. viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and values.

God created each and every one of us as individuals and many have brains that function, why shouldn’t we use our God-given abilities?

It is my opinion that God did NOT send the higher-ups to lord it over the others.

Didn’t Jesus even say something concerning how some want to “lord it” over others?

I do NOT think that the “peasants” were as simple-minded as some seem to think but I do think that some, if not most, of the “peasants” were quite busy with just staying alive just as many on this planet even today are in like circumstances.

Concerning, “Nor debate issues on forums as opposed to talking to likeminded parishioners.”.

They might not have had “forums” on the “internet” but there must have been some who were not “likeminded”, which can be looked at from different perspectives, since one of the things that happened was the Reformation and I would venture to say that there were probably others that were not “likeminded”.

Well yes, there were many who were "not likeminded ", Luther, Calvin, Zwinglii, Smyth, et al. And they also did not want a central authority lording over them. They also had a brain and, in there opinion, God given abilities to reason for themselves. Has not worked out to well. And the Church’s attempt to simplify and update the Mass has not worked out to well either, if the actual number of regular Mass goers from numerous polls are acurate. Look, i am not a theologian. I am simply a Catholic who has been watching the situation in the Church decline for my 60 years, and it makes me sad.
It does not have to be this way. But simplifying and modernization has not worked. And there is empirical evidence from studies of young Catholics that shows a desire to be taught the entire Faith, not just the Cliff Notes version so popular in most parishes now. The youth seem to know when what they are being taught is just a small part of The Faith. And what would be better to turn the Church, and this world, around than giving the Catholic youth the entirety of the Faith?

 

[OraLabora]

And the Church’s attempt to simplify and update the Mass has not worked out to well either, if the actual number of regular Mass goers from numerous polls are acurate. Look, i am not a theologian. I am simply a Catholic who has been watching the situation in the Church decline for my 60 years, and it makes me sad.

I think overall the simplification was good, and to me makes the Mass more approachable, even in Latin. Maybe especially in Latin. Nothing will make one learn the rudiments of Church Latin faster than active involvement in the Mass by reading and responding in Latin. I admit I am lukewarm to the EF Mass, but I wish that the OF Mass were done with greater care. To the extent that I can, I do something about it by singing Gregorian chant in a schola that uses it liturgically, and exclusively in the OF.

However one has to be careful to not fall into the post hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy that the Church’s decline is as a result of the new Mass.

To illustrate: my wife is an Evangelical Anglican. The Anglicans too had their “Westminster II”, with the Book of Alternative Services vs the traditional Book of Common Prayer. In spite of that their church is still in decline in N. America. In fact in my wife’s parish, the more modern Evangelical BAS side is doing better than the BCP traditional side, by a wide margin (the pastor is Evangelical though he does his best to give the traditional Anglicans their “EF” with an early-morning service but with no music). Other mainstream Protestants have also declined.

Which Protestant communities are thriving? The modern Evangelicals/Pentecostals, and clearly they’ve departed from tradition by a wide margin, and are innovating.

So I don’t buy all this “the new Mass cause the Church to go into decline” argument.

Let the new Mass live. Just don’t take away my Gregorian chant!

In fact make efforts to revive it.

 

[ProVobis]

I think overall the simplification was good

Yes, but someone has to tell me how offering options to recite the confiteor or introit, multiple unprinted prefaces and four EP in multiple languages, some of which still have the “for all” in the consecration, etc. simplifies the Mass. If anything it gave parish committees more work and more control over the prayers of the liturgy itself. . Someone should go to a Spanish Mass to see what I’m talking about. The Gloria is totally rewritten, the Creed is often skipped. Lots of adlibbing by the priest though. I still can’t figure it out.

Compare that with the straightforward prayers of the Latin Mass. No options, one language, no adlibbing. Mystery intact.

Just don’t take away my Gregorian chant!

In fact make efforts to revive it.

True that. I just came back from it.

 

[on_the_hill]

Coincidentally, I was thinking about this yesterday. As the priest read through the communion prayers, I wondered, ‘Did all of this used to be in Latin? How on earth did anyone know what was going on?’

I can’t imagine trying to get anyone under the age of 70 into church if it were all done in a language no one understood. Maybe we’d all use phone apps to translate it for us.

I haven’t read through all the posts, but…if the Mass were still in Latin there would be millions fewer Catholics in church anymore.

The whole crux of the experience would be, “I have no idea what’s being said; I’m here because God will punish me if I’m not.”

 

[on_the_hill]

However one has to be careful to not fall into the post hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy that the Church’s decline is as a result of the new Mass.

Because we know it was the feminization that did it.

 

[on_the_hill]

It wouldn’t be unprecedented. The Poles formed their own Polish National Catholic Church because, according to reports, they weren’t allowed to teach Polish in the schools.

I thought it had its start in Northeast Pennsylvania over a property dispute between local churches and the Vatican.

From Wikipedia:
During the late 19th century many Polish immigrants to the U.S. became dismayed with the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. The U.S. Church had no Polish bishops and few Polish priests, and would not allow the Polish language to be taught in parish schools. The mainly ethnic Irish and German bishops helped establish hundreds of parishes for Poles, but priests were usually unable to speak Polish, and the new immigrants had poor or limited English. There were also disputes over who owned church property, particularly in Buffalo, New York and Scranton, Pennsylvania, with the parishioners demanding greater control. Although the majority of Polish-Americans remained with the Roman Catholic Church, where bilingual Polish-American priests and bishops were eventually ordained, many Polish-Americans in the meantime came to believe that these conditions were a manifestation of “political and social exploitation of the Polish people.”

---

Interestingly, my grandparents attended Catholic school in Pittsburgh in the 1900s-1910s and they were taught Polish before they were taught English. (My parents attended the same school in the 1930s-40s and they too were taught Polish.)

My guess is that the Pittsburgh Polish parishes ignored the rules about language classes.

 

[ProVobis]

I thought it had its start in Northeast Pennsylvania over a property dispute between local churches and the Vatican.

From Wikipedia:
During the late 19th century many Polish immigrants to the U.S. became dismayed with the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. The U.S. Church had no Polish bishops and few Polish priests, and would not allow the Polish language to be taught in parish schools. The mainly ethnic Irish and German bishops helped establish hundreds of parishes for Poles, but priests were usually unable to speak Polish, and the new immigrants had poor or limited English. There were also disputes over who owned church property, particularly in Buffalo, New York and Scranton, Pennsylvania, with the parishioners demanding greater control. Although the majority of Polish-Americans remained with the Roman Catholic Church, where bilingual Polish-American priests and bishops were eventually ordained, many Polish-Americans in the meantime came to believe that these conditions were a manifestation of “political and social exploitation of the Polish people.”

---

Interestingly, my grandparents attended Catholic school in Pittsburgh in the 1900s-1910s and they were taught Polish before they were taught English. (My parents attended the same school in the 1930s-40s and they too were taught Polish.)

My guess is that the Pittsburgh Polish parishes ignored the rules about language classes.

Thanks for the article. I read (perhaps in NOR) that at one point, something like 70% of the immigrant Poles returned to Poland.

I am of Polish-born parents myself and I know that they, especially my dad, had big problems with English. Of course they weren’t exposed to it until in their late 20’s in the U.K.

But that’s another thing. Although it is true that English is the second (or third) most spoken language, the majority speak it as a 2nd or 3rd language, which means they probably don’t speak it 24/7. Most know enough to do business in or make friends with, but that’s about it. Not trying to prove anything but just saying two people speaking English don’t necessarily understand each other.

 

[ProVobis]

How on earth did anyone know what was going on?’

Because it was more than Latin. It was watching the priest praying to God, not the people, using genuflections, signs of cross, perhaps incense, bows, and silence. It was more than verbal; in fact people heard very little during the canon.

Perhaps this analogy. My cat doesn’t speak English but she understands when I open a can of catfood what is going on.

 

[Brendan]

Coincidentally, I was thinking about this yesterday. As the priest read through the communion prayers, I wondered, ‘Did all of this used to be in Latin? How on earth did anyone know what was going on?’

It generally was not a problem.

I’ll give you a bit of personal history here.

When I was growing up, my grandmother went to a parish that was about 1/2 Irish and 1/2 Hispanic.

No one had a big problem with it, as the Mass was in Latin, everybody worshiped together, the priest gave the homily in both English and Spanish.

Along came approval to use the vernacular. Well, this parish priest just started saying the new Mass in Latin, just like he did before. Homily (and now Readings) in both languages.

And THAT was the Mass I went to most Sundays, as my parents would often pick up my grandmother and we would go to her Church.

So the Mass I grew up with was the Ordinary Form in Latin. I had no difficulty picking up what was going on.

Carry forward to about 10 years ago. At that time, and for about 2 years, I was in a job that was mostly international travel. One week in Seoul, the next in Sao Paulo type thing. One thing that I would do was to see out the Latin Mass in the each place I visited. It allowed me to pray the Mass along with my fellow Catholics, no matter what language was commonly spoken in that area.

And that is why, in my opinion, that Vatican II specified that the faithful should learn the Mass responses in Latin. So that we are not tied to the egoism of a particular language. So that when visitors come, our message to them is not “You will worship in OUR language, whether you understand it or not”. Rather, the message is “Come, let us worship together in the language that we share”

 

[on_the_hill]

Because it was more than Latin. It was watching the priest praying to God, not the people, using genuflections, signs of cross, perhaps incense, bows, and silence. It was more than verbal

We do that now, don’t we?

One week in Seoul, the next in Sao Paulo type thing. One thing that I would do was to see out the Latin Mass in the each place I visited. It allowed me to pray the Mass along with my fellow Catholics, no matter what language was commonly spoken in that area.

And that is why, in my opinion, that Vatican II specified that the faithful should learn the Mass responses in Latin. So that we are not tied to the egoism of a particular language. So that when visitors come, our message to them is not “You will worship in OUR language, whether you understand it or not”. Rather, the message is “Come, let us worship together in the language that we share”

Valid point. One aspect of Catholicism that I like is how no matter where you are in the world, the Mass is the Mass. Mostly. Basically. I think so. But being united by language would certainly strengthen that universal family connection. On the other hand, I truly enjoy, from different aspects, being able to fully understand and comprehend the prayers, which would be less likely in a Latin Mass, unless I was fluent in Latin.

After four years of high school Latin, I can honestly say I know essentially no Latin at all.

 

[OraLabora]

Because we know it was the feminization that did it.

Indeed

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

One aspect of Catholicism that I like is how no matter where you are in the world, the Mass is the Mass. Mostly. Basically. I think so. But being united by language would certainly strengthen that universal family connection. On the other hand, I truly enjoy, from different aspects, being able to fully understand and comprehend the prayers, which would be less likely in a Latin Mass, unless I was fluent in Latin.

After four years of high school Latin, I can honestly say I know essentially no Latin at all.

I’ve been involved in organizing a World Oblate’s Congress in Rome. The first two congresses, we had the Mass in a different major language every day (one day was Latin). On the feedback forms about half the people complained that they didn’t understand a thing and that we should consider doing it all in Latin next time.

So that’s what we did for the third congress.

On the feedback forms after the third congress, about half the people complained that they didn’t understand a thing…

Personally I preferred the Latin though the schola (which I didn’t participate in as I was running workshops and leading bus tours) was pretty awful. That might have been what turned folks off. At the previous congress I did sing on an ad-hoc schola for the Latin day and our leader (an Irish monk) did a super job of whipping us up into shape.

But that just goes to show, you can please some of the people some of the time, but all of the people none of the time.

I definitely think all in Latin has its place at major international events like this. And some Latin to connect with tradition especially for the ordinary, at your typical Sunday parish Mass.

 

[Stephen_says]

Because we know it was the feminization that did it.

You know, I hear this all the time and I don’t think I quite understand it. Can someone explain this in more detail? This is a serious question, not a troll. Is it just a criticism to the more active roll women now play in ministries, or is there a deeper theological or philosophical argument?

 

[ProVobis]

We do that now, don’t we?

To some extent.

But the whole idea was to dismantle the entire Old Mass, the Latin text and non-verbal aspects. Nothing very constructive about that.

Read Part V:

lmschairman.org/search/label/Death%20of%20the%20Reform%20of%20the%20Reform

Thankfully, Popes John Paul and Benedict restored the Missal before it was dismantled.

 

[Pulvis]

I think overall the simplification was good, and to me makes the Mass more approachable, even in Latin. Maybe especially in Latin. Nothing will make one learn the rudiments of Church Latin faster than active involvement in the Mass by reading and responding in Latin. I admit I am lukewarm to the EF Mass, but I wish that the OF Mass were done with greater care. To the extent that I can, I do something about it by singing Gregorian chant in a schola that uses it liturgically, and exclusively in the OF.

However one has to be careful to not fall into the post hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy that the Church’s decline is as a result of the new Mass.

To illustrate: my wife is an Evangelical Anglican. The Anglicans too had their “Westminster II”, with the Book of Alternative Services vs the traditional Book of Common Prayer. In spite of that their church is still in decline in N. America. In fact in my wife’s parish, the more modern Evangelical BAS side is doing better than the BCP traditional side, by a wide margin (the pastor is Evangelical though he does his best to give the traditional Anglicans their “EF” with an early-morning service but with no music). Other mainstream Protestants have also declined.

Which Protestant communities are thriving? The modern Evangelicals/Pentecostals, and clearly they’ve departed from tradition by a wide margin, and are innovating.

So I don’t buy all this “the new Mass cause the Church to go into decline” argument.

Let the new Mass live. Just don’t take away my Gregorian chant!

In fact make efforts to revive it.

I do not believe that I blamed the Novus Ordo for the decline per se. I believe that what was finally codified in 1969 was the result of many factors both within and without the Church. The general decline has many causes, and the way the Mass was changed played a part. Had the Mass been organically developed following the declarations of S C., i do not believe we would be discussing this.

As to evangelicals growing in great numbers, i believe if you boil down those numbers and peel back the veneer, you will fimd these are mostly the new phenomenon of the non denomination mega churches that offer people a very happy clappy environment with a little gospel thrown in. The south is full of them, there are 5 within 10 miles of my home, and they are stealing parishoners from many mainstream prot churches. The mainline churches are scrambling to keep bodies in the pews. Again, anthropocentric worship where feeling good is the primary focus. I am born and raised southern and have been watching this play out over the past 10 years. Rick Warren started this with his saddleback church. Numbers do not equate with believers.
Pope Benedict XVI predicted a smaller remnant Church. I believe that was prophetic.

 

[OraLabora]

I do not believe that I blamed the Novus Ordo for the decline per se. I believe that what was finally codified in 1969 was the result of many factors both within and without the Church. The general decline has many causes, and the way the Mass was changed played a part. Had the Mass been organically developed following the declarations of S C., i do not believe we would be discussing this.

Well, the thing is, the OF did come out of the declarations of SC. The problem is that many people took licence with that. The OF can be and is celebrated as SC intended. I’d invite anyone to come to the monastery I’m associated with as oblate, and tell me what they find wrong with their OF Mass. They won’t find much.

-Pride of place to Gregorian chant? Check. Propers and ordinary every day.
-Pipe organ for music? Check, used (or not used) as appropriate and according to rubrics.
-Following rubrics? Check. Every liturgical “i” is dotted and “t” crossed.
-Incense? Check, again when appropriate (Sundays and feasts).
-Plainchant? Check; what’s not in Latin/Greek Gregorian chant is in French plainchant.
-Reverence? Check; the Mass is done at an appropriate pace (neither too fast nor too slow).
-Sacred silence? Check, after the readings, homily, communion, before, and after Mass.

The problem is not the way the Mass changed, it is the way Mass is executed. When it is executed according to SC and the rubrics in the Missal, it is just fine.

Imagine for a moment if the EF were the only form, under the present clergy. What would incline us to believe that they’d be any more obedient to the EF rubrics than they are to the OF rubrics? Disobedient clergy is disobedient clergy.

As to evangelicals growing in great numbers, i believe if you boil down those numbers and peel back the veneer, you will fimd these are mostly the new phenomenon of the non denomination mega churches that offer people a very happy clappy environment with a little gospel thrown in. The south is full of them, there are 5 within 10 miles of my home, and they are stealing parishoners from many mainstream prot churches. The mainline churches are scrambling to keep bodies in the pews. Again, anthropocentric worship where feeling good is the primary focus. I am born and raised southern and have been watching this play out over the past 10 years. Rick Warren started this with his saddleback church. Numbers do not equate with believers.
Pope Benedict XVI predicted a smaller remnant Church. I believe that was prophetic.

I can’t say I’ve analyzed the causes, but I do wonder if it’s because evangelicals engage more with other members, and make newcomers feel surrounded by warmth and friendliness. As Catholics, we need to engage more with both the liturgy and the other parishioners; there’s not much of that where I live.

But honestly, I don’t see how either a rapidly muttered EF low Mass where everyone is saying their Rosary was any more reverent than some of the lax liturgy we see in the OF Mass, and how it would help Catholics and newcomers engage with the liturgy and other parishioners any more than they do now (which is not enough).

I’m reading a great book about the liturgy (OF) by a Belgian author. It explains in great detail the rich symbolism in every liturgical moment of the OF Mass including the gestures, but also how the effect is often spoiled by poor interpretation by careless clergy (the author is himself a priest).

For those who can handle French the book is “L’intelligence de la liturgie” by Paul de Clerck. Reading it, one realizes that the OF Mass captures what SC intended, but that it’s in the execution and excessive and often illicit liturgical licence that things often fall apart.