Praying in Latin

[clem456]

The same can be said for reading Cliff’s Notes instead of Shakespeare.

You use the word instead. I don’t think it’s an either/or proposition. How many modern people know and appreciate the content of Shakespeare, and the valuable lessons to be learned therein? So then, how best to arouse participation in Shakespeare? People need to be aroused to learn these lessons in terms they can grasp, in the station they are in right now. Reading Shakespeare au natural will hopefully follow.

They now have the third version to the consecration alone in English. Perhaps there are some things that can’t be understood better through use of a single translation?

Perhaps yes…The Mystery of Faith.

 

[una_fides]

You use the word instead. I don’t think it’s an either/or proposition. How many modern people know and appreciate the content of Shakespeare, and the valuable lessons to be learned therein? So then, how best to arouse participation in Shakespeare? People need to be aroused to learn these lessons in terms they can grasp, in the station they are in right now. Reading Shakespeare au natural will hopefully follow.

That’s what the homily is for. To explain these profound things in ways that lay people can understand and to provoke them to read some basic theology books on their own (aka cliff notes).

Latin is also able to communicate much more through its very nature as a sacred language. Words themselves only communicate so much. As far as communication in general, most of what is communicated is non-verbal and also involves tone, etc. The reverent and sacred quality to the Latin communicates the depth of God, his majesty, and his “otherness,” the fact he is so perfect and his ways are so far beyond our ways. It also communicates the spiritual nature to the mass, and the fact that much more is involved rather than just what is seen. Latin also instils the sense of tradition, that the Catholic faith has been around throughout the centuries and that this one local parish is part of a communion of saints that transcends time and space.

If someone wants understanding of the specific words that are said, they can read along in their missals just as well. There is also a more compelling reason that is communicated to read more about these prayers and figure out their meaning. Just because something is said in the vernacular doesn’t mean they are going to understand what it means anyway. Further inquiry must be made either way. While there can be benefits to the vernacular as making things easier for some people, something has been lost amidst the implementation of the reforms, as all the popes since the council have said, and as Vatican II mandated, the Latin language “must be retained” in the liturgy. The reintroduction of Latin in the liturgy will fix many of the problems that popes have been lamenting over the past 50 years.

 

[clem456]

That’s what the homily is for. To explain these profound things in ways that lay people can understand and to provoke them to read some basic theology books on their own (aka cliff notes).

 

[JReducation]

Yeah I have to agree with the pope on this one. The more priests know Latin the more they will use it, as popes have been advocating for quite some time now. If the holy father’s plan for the reform of the reform involves restoring Latin to the liturgy, as the Council required, then wouldn’t this statement make sense as helping move things in that direction?

For clarify’s sake, for whom exactly are you saying that a superficial knowledge of Latin could be detrimental?

For any student of theology. Very few priests have degrees in theology. Most priests have degrees in Divinity. It’s not the same field of study. Divinity includes courses in theology, but it’s focus is applied theology. The purpose of a Divinity Degree is to prepare the student to go into ministry. There is a heavy focus on moral theology, sacraments, scripture and a smattering of everything else.

A theology degree is an academic degree. It prepares you for the field of research, teaching, doing spiritual direction, retreat work, writing, formation work. It’s very heavy on ascetical and mystical theology, systematic theology, ecclesiology, soteriology, eschatology, patristics, sacramental theology, ancient languages, moral theology, but it’s very lite on liturgy, scripture, canon law, Church history, and spirituality. Those are separate areas of study. You attend different programs to study them and get different degrees.

The Holy Father’s statement leads the reader to think that every deacon, priest or bishop is a theologian. That’s not true. Most are not. Though, Canon Law does require that a bishop have a doctorate degree, it does not have to be in theology. It can be in a secular discipline or he can have the equivalent in courses that he’s completed over the years. In places where you need a bishop and you don’t have priests with higher theology degrees, you select them from what you have.

A theology degree does not necessarily prepare you for parish work. Most monks are theologians. Most monks are not priests and monks wouldn’t know what to do in a parish if you drew them a map, with the possible exception of Benedictines. Most Franciscans are theologians and most can’t navigate a parish. It’s not in our formation program.

Most diocesan priests are formed to navigate parishes, but not to navigate through theology. They have enough theology to preach, hear confessions and answer basic questions. That’s all they need. Think of it like studying medicine. The average parish priest is a GP.

The theologian is a specialist. He needs more than just basic Latin. Knowing the prayers of the mass and common prayers is not going to get him through theology. He must be a fluent speaker of Latin, Greek, Hebrew and some European languages as well, especially German or Spanish.

The Holy Father is right that students of theology need in depth Latin. His statement gives the impression that every priest is a student of theology. Today, there are as many lay theologians, sister theologians, brother theologians as there are priest theologians. The theologian would be in serious trouble if he only knew a few prayers in Latin.

I had to go through a four-year Latin program that required us to read, write, translate, interpret and speak Latin in order to get into the theology program.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[OraLabora]

una fides;10046607:

I fail to see the connection between the language at Mass and these issues, in fact these ills advocate for the vernacular Mass IMO.

I agree, the language of the Mass is of little relevance to the un-churching of Catholics in Western societies. All mainstream Christian Churches have been losing membership. Anglicans, Catholics, etc.

Yet the denominations that are having such rapid growth… Pentecostals, Evangelicals of various stripe, are growing by leaps and bounds in many places. Yet their services are in… the vernacular.

For religion to be able to draw us closer to God it has to be able to connect with us.

I love Latin in the liturgy and where I go to Mass it is used daily at least for the Propers and Ordinary. But the prayers and readings are in French (the local vernacular) and that’s just fine by me. A nice balance that respects tradition and patrimony but allows the people to still connect.

 

[AzrealGelert]

Please excuse my ignorance, but doesn’t this site suggest that Latin is the favoured language of the Roman Catholic Church?

Didn’t the second vatican change the mass to the common lanuage of the people in order to move away from a language few and few people were using?

If I am wrong please correct me.

 

[ProVobis]

You use the word instead. I don’t think it’s an either/or proposition. How many modern people know and appreciate the content of Shakespeare, and the valuable lessons to be learned therein?

Many of the paperbacks have tons of footnotes explaining or rephrasing many of the words of Shakespeare at the bottom of each page. That’s pretty close to having a side-by-side missal, don’t you think?

My English teachers frowned on using Cliff’s Notes, by the way. I’m not sure they still do. You’re right, you may understand the plot in a more general way through CN but you’re not really reading the poetry and words of Shakespeare.

 

[clem456]

Many of the paperbacks have tons of footnotes explaining or rephrasing many of the words of Shakespeare at the bottom of each page. That’s pretty close to having a side-by-side missal, don’t you think?

My English teachers frowned on using Cliff’s Notes, by the way. I’m not sure they still do. You’re right, you may understand the plot in a more general way through CN but you’re not really reading the poetry and words of Shakespeare.

Yes the cliff notes are not the real deal, but the analogy does break down. For the analogy to work, you would have to assume a deficiency in the vernacular at the Mass.
I suppose this is the heart of the issue.

 

[ProVobis]

I disagree with your last statement. I think we have to discern where the responsibility lies for various issues. The enemies of the Church certainly have some responsibility for cultural ills. I fail to see the connection between the language at Mass and these issues, in fact these ills advocate for the vernacular Mass IMO.

I think Dom Prosper Gueranger saw this connection:

“Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the hearts of all the enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond among Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit. . . . The spirit of rebellion which drives them to confide the universal prayer to the idiom of each people, of each province, of each century, has for the rest produced its fruits, and the reformed themselves constantly perceive that the Catholic people, in spite of their Latin prayers, relish better and accomplish with more zeal the duties of the cult than most do the Protestant people. At every hour of the day, divine worship takes place in Catholic churches. The faithful Catholic, who assists, leaves his mother tongue at the door. Apart form the sermons, he hears nothing but mysterious words which, even so, are not heard in the most solemn moment of the Canon of the Mass. Nevertheless, this mystery charms him in such a way that he is not jealous of the lot of the Protestant, even though the ear of the latter doesn’t hear a single sound without perceiving its meaning .… . . . 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. . . .”

 

[ProVobis]

Yes the cliff notes are not the real deal, but the analogy does break down. For the analogy to work, you would have to assume a deficiency in the vernacular at the Mass.
I suppose this is the heart of the issue.

Perhaps I’ve been doing too many translations between two modern languages but I believe there are always “deficiencies” in every translation, especially in translating an ancient language to the modern. You couldn’t have gotten two identical translations to the Mass; the best you could get is a consensus of opinion. In the case of the English Mass you’ve had several committees (and I’m including those of the Anglican Church as well) using different guidelines for these translations. One Pope orders dynamic translations, another Pope orders literal translations, and somewhere down the line another Pope will express another philosophy of translations. What’s the ideal?

 

[ProVobis]

Yet the denominations that are having such rapid growth… Pentecostals, Evangelicals of various stripe, are growing by leaps and bounds in many places. Yet their services are in… the vernacular.

Then what makes them unique, may I ask?

I recently attended a memorial service for my late niece at a Lutheran Church. It was practically indistinguishable from a Catholic Mass.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Please excuse my ignorance, but doesn’t this site suggest that Latin is the favoured language of the Roman Catholic Church?

Didn’t the second vatican change the mass to the common lanuage of the people in order to move away from a language few and few people were using?

If I am wrong please correct me.

Latin is the official language of the Latin rite (Western) Catholic Church. Allowing the Latin rite Mass to be said in other languages was supposed to make it more accessible.

 

[JReducation]

Please excuse my ignorance, but doesn’t this site suggest that Latin is the favoured language of the Roman Catholic Church?

Didn’t the second vatican change the mass to the common lanuage of the people in order to move away from a language few and few people were using?

If I am wrong please correct me.

In the Latin Catholic Church, the liturgy may be celebrated in the language of the people or what is also known as the local language, which traditionalists love to call the “vulgate” a term that the Church no longer uses, but that’s another thread. In any case, Latin remains the preferred language for liturgy in the Latin Church only. It was the official language of the Holy See and of all major religious orders, but that’s no longer the case.

Latin remains the liturgical language. The language of the Holy See is Italian. Religious orders may choose their official language. Spanish is the most common.

The permission to use the local language was not so that people could understand. Were this the thinking of the Council Fathers, the law would have been the same for the universal Church and it’s not. The other Catholic Churches still use ancient languages that the people no longer speak. For example, Aramaic. Chaldeans still use it, but Chaldeans don’t speak it. Like Latin Catholics, they memorize the prayers

Some of the Eastern Patriarchs are allowing the some Eastern Catholics to use the local language in the Divine Liturgy. In the USA, there are pockets of Eastern Catholics that celebrate the Divine Liturgy in English, even though they retain the ancient language as the preferred language.

The preferred language is often referred to as the language of honor or simply the official language. In certain areas of theology, you have to speak the ancient languages, because you’re dealing with writings in those languages. That’s why the pope said that it can be detrimental not to know it well.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

Latin is the official language of the Latin rite (Western) Catholic Church. Allowing the Latin rite Mass to be said in other languages was supposed to make it more accessible.

The permission was not granted for all of the Latin rites, only for the Roman Rite. The Ambrosian, Bragan, Carthusian, Dominican, Carmelite and Mozarabic rites never received permission to use the local languages. They too are Latin rites.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[clem456]

In the Latin Catholic Church, the liturgy may be celebrated in the language of the people or what is also known as the local language, which traditionalists love to call the “vulgate” a term that the Church no longer uses, but that’s another thread. In any case, Latin remains the preferred language for liturgy in the Latin Church only. It was the official language of the Holy See and of all major religious orders, but that’s no longer the case.

Latin remains the liturgical language. The language of the Holy See is Italian. Religious orders may choose their official language. Spanish is the most common.

The permission to use the local language was not so that people could understand. Were this the thinking of the Council Fathers, the law would have been the same for the universal Church and it’s not. The other Catholic Churches still use ancient languages that the people no longer speak. For example, Aramaic. Chaldeans still use it, but Chaldeans don’t speak it. Like Latin Catholics, they memorize the prayers

Some of the Eastern Patriarchs are allowing the some Eastern Catholics to use the local language in the Divine Liturgy. In the USA, there are pockets of Eastern Catholics that celebrate the Divine Liturgy in English, even though they retain the ancient language as the preferred language.

The preferred language is often referred to as the language of honor or simply the official language. In certain areas of theology, you have to speak the ancient languages, because you’re dealing with writings in those languages. That’s why the pope said that it can be detrimental not to know it well.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Is there an opinion or declaration as to the thinking behind the allowance? Does the Church see (name removed by moderator)roved understanding as an added benefit to the allowance? I and others make an assumption of intentional wisdom on the Church’s part in this, maybe that is not the case.

 

[JReducation]

Is there an opinion or declaration as to the thinking behind the allowance? Does the Church see (name removed by moderator)roved understanding as an added benefit to the allowance? I and others make an assumption of intentional wisdom on the Church’s part in this, maybe that is not the case.

The intellectual reasoning behind it was to make it more accessible to converts, especially Lutherans and High Anglicans who would nor normally use Latin, but whose liturgical customs are very close to those of the Roman Rite. That’s why it was not granted to the other Latin rites. The other Latin rites are not readily available to Lutherans and Anglican converts. How many Anglicans would there be in Spain? There is no need for the Mozarabic Rite to use English.

We also have to remember that by the 1960s, John Dewey’s industrial model of education had taken hold in the USA, Canada and most of Europe. The classics were gradually being replaced by technological courses and social sciences. Schools had dropped Latin, Greek and other ancient languages. This was not only Catholic schools, but all schools. In some schools these ancient languages were electives and in other schools they were no longer taught, nor were the concomittant literature and history that went with those languages. Even if a person was a Catholic, if you entered school after 1955, your chances of getting a classical education were slim to none. Catholic schools had to follow in order to remain competitive. Even then, they still lost students. Public schools had more resources in science and technology. These students did not have the benefit of classical languages.

There is no easy answer as to why most Catholics did not know Latin. It’s a revolution in education around the Western world.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Faithdancer]

We also have to remember that by the 1960s, John Dewey’s industrial model of education had taken hold in the USA, Canada and most of Europe. The classics were gradually being replaced by technological courses and social sciences. Schools had dropped Latin, Greek and other ancient languages. This was not only Catholic schools, but all schools. In some schools these ancient languages were electives and in other schools they were no longer taught, nor were the concomitant literature and history that went with those languages. Even if a person was a Catholic, if you entered school after 1955, your chances of getting a classical education were slim to none. Catholic schools had to follow in order to remain competitive. Even then, they still lost students. Public schools had more resources in science and technology.

True- and unfortunate, in my opinion. Modernization threw the baby out with the bathwater so that now we have students who memorize facts and formulae and the answers to state test questions but who cannot think critically, write coherently or understand fundamental logic.

There are still some Catholic and private schools which follow a classical model…precious few.

 

[JReducation]

True- and unfortunate, in my opinion. Modernization threw the baby out with the bathwater so that now we have students who memorize facts and formulae and the answers to state test questions but who cannot think critically, write coherently or understand fundamental logic.

There are still some Catholic and private schools which follow a classical model…precious few.

The best modern schools with classical education that I have ever seen was in my travels to Saudi Arabia and Ecuador, South America of all places.

Literature, math, languages, rhetoric, philosophy, natural sciences, history and ancient languages are still required courses for every high school graduate. Of course, their school year is longer and so is their day. In Ecuador the kids attend school 240 days a year. In most states in the USA it ranges from 180 to 200. In Saudi Arabia the kids attend school from 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM. In most US schools classes are from 8:00 to 2:00. When you add the number of hours, you find that we don’t have enough hours to insert technology and classics into our horarium.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[ProVobis]

In most US schools classes are from 8:00 to 2:00. When you add the number of hours, you find that we don’t have enough hours to insert technology and classics into our horarium.

Or even English, for that matter.

 

[una_fides]

All mainstream Christian Churches have been losing membership. Anglicans, Catholics, etc.

Yet the denominations that are having such rapid growth… Pentecostals, Evangelicals of various stripe, are growing by leaps and bounds in many places. Yet their services are in… the vernacular.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Actually, Catholicism took by far the largest hit in drop off of mass attendance and drop off from practicing the faith much more than any other denomination by far. Protestant denominations overall did not experience the fall out that the Catholic Church did and has experienced. In addition and with all due respect, your claim that “all mainstream Christian Churches have been losing membership” is not correct on several levels. First, Protestant sects are not “Churches.” Second, they did not lose membership in a substantial way in any way similar or comparable to the Catholic Church. And third, all the services of all the various protestant denominations are all in the vernacular and always have been, so there’s really no point being made to say that Pentecostals and Evangelicals are increasing in numbers as if that had anything to do with them using the vernacular. The Catholic Church’s masses are also virtually all in the vernacular as well now. In fact, the Catholic Church’s mass attendance dropped so substantially and has continued to drop ever since Latin was dropped from the liturgy and the sacraments and since they were made to look and feel more and more protestant in nature, thus loosing the crystal clear distinction.

The Catholic mass is substantially different in nature from a protestant service, and they should not “feel” the same when one attends. It should be unmistakably distinct and should match up to the reality that is taking place. God himself becomes present on the altar. Calvary becomes present, and we are kneeling there at the foot of the Cross, as the Son is being offered in sacrifice to the Father for our sins. Something mystical and supernatural is taking place in a way that literally nothing on earth comes in any way remotely close in comparison. When the mass loses that sense, why should people stay? They have alternatives right up the street where they can be entertained and where the official teachings (where there are any) do not require abstinence from any form of artificial contraception or divorce and remarriage, or in some cases from even having abortions or abstaining from sex before marriage. They can shop around and find the place that they prefer, with the entertainment they prefer, and the teachings they prefer, all to suit their personal interpretations and opinions. Latin makes the Catholic service markedly distinct and helps instill that sense of the sacred nature of what is taking place, that sense which makes the Catholic liturgy distinct from all the rest.