T
- Status
P
ProVobis
Guest
T
TimothyH
Guest
Can I go to heaven now?That would be non sequitur.
But we’ll give you extra credit for effort.
Everyone’s concern for the salvation of the souls of those who don’t speak Latin is touching. I want to personally thank anyone who took the time to learn Latin for doing the pennance of having done so, and thereby having built up what is lacking in Christ’s Body, the Church.
Please say a Pater Nostrum for me.
-Tim-
P
ProVobis
Guest
“A new Pontifical Academy for the Latin language? So it seems.”
wdtprs.com/blog/2012/08/a-new-pontifical-academy-for-the-latin-language-so-it-seems/
wdtprs.com/blog/2012/08/a-new-pontifical-academy-for-the-latin-language-so-it-seems/
O
OraLabora
Guest
Well I can pray the Pater Noster in Latin, and I can pray the Rosary. The latter I do daily. The former, I gave up. I can’t stand praying the Rosary. I pray the LOTH instead. That works for me (do I get bonus points for doing Lauds and Vespers in Latin? Maybe the time I spend doing Latin will be time off in purgatory to make up for the time I’ll spend there for not praying the Rosary).
But I don’t think any of us have the right to decide what’s good for someone else’s spiritual life… unless your his or her spiritual director. That’s my point.
And maybe our prayers should focus less on words (and the language they’re expressed in) and more on action.
C
clem456
Guest
Efficacious anyone? Anyone care to explore that?
P
ProVobis
Guest
I don’t wish to debate on individual spirituality (I can give you an earful of Sanskrit meditation mantras if you wish) or efficacy (gosh, aren’t we done with the “all” vs “many” stuff yet) here but I do take some comfort in Cardinal Arinze’s 2006 address.
You can read the rest here.
Disclaimer: yes, this is taken out of context as it is a preamble to what constitutes a proper vernacular, which I find somewhat confusing, but nevertheless I think just those two paragraphs speak volumes.
You can read the rest here.
U
una_fides
Guest
When you are merely citing the Church’s clear teaching that no one is arguing can be understood differently, I’d say you’re not in danger of anything other than upsetting the opposition. I challenge you to demonstrate how the context of the full documents in any way changes the meaning of these citations.
Perhaps you should warn Jesus and his popes who constantly cite Scripture to support their understandings. The danger is when proof-texting statements that are vague enough to have a double meaning and require an authoritative interpreter to settle the dispute and where interpreting them incorrectly could bring harm to one’s soul or others. In this case, we are reading from the clear teaching of the interpreters themselves, the popes, who are speaking in very clear and easily understood language. That’s actually one of the reasons why the Church has continually upheld Latin as its one and only official language: in order to communicate in a most clear and precise manner possible in a language whose words do not change in meaning.
U
una_fides
Guest
Thank you for citing the full text. I think this can indeed help us to determine the audience the pope had in mind regarding his comments about the benefit of learning the most common Catholic prayers in Latin. First, the pope explains the audience of the document:
“The*Compendium *of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which today, at this prayerful celebration, I have great joy in ** presenting to the Church **and to the world, can and must be a privileged means of growth in the knowledge and joyful acceptance of this divine gift.
…
Since then, there has been an ever more widespread and pressing need for a concise catechism that would contain all and only the essential, fundamental elements of Catholic faith and morals, simply expressed in a way that is clear, concise and accessible to all.
…
Hence, the need arose for an authoritative, reliable and complete text on the essential aspects of the Church’s faith, in full harmony with the * Catechism *mentioned, approved by the Pope and destined **for the whole Church. **
[note that the Latin prayers in reference are included in this Compendium for “the whole Church.”]
…
It has been just over two years since my Venerable Predecessor decided, in February 2003, on the drafting of a *Compendium *of this kind, realizing that it would be good not only for the universal and particular Churches, but also for today’s world that is thirsting for truth.
…
I feel deep joy in presenting this Compendium, which I have approved, not only to all the members of the Church - most of whose various members are represented here - but also to all of you who are taking part in this solemn meeting.”
Everything the pope says is directed to every member of the Church and he even references the “particular Churches” by name, which is a clear reference to the 22 particular eastern Churches. The pope is making his statement that learning Latin prayers in order to pray together as one Church in union with the pope benefits everyone.
I think this quote from the document does a good job explaining one of the benefits of Latin that the pope is trying to emphacize:
“Precisely in the multiplicity of languages and cultures, Latin, for so many centuries the vehicle and instrument of Christian culture, not only guarantees continuity with our roots but continues to be as relevant as ever for strengthening the bonds of unity of the faith in the communion of the Church”.
The point is that praying in Latin is beneficial to all. Regardless of whether you chose to take advantage, it still remains “a treasure of incomparable worth.”
U
una_fides
Guest
It’s apparently a well documented fact that this is the opinion of the Vatican’s chief exorcist among others. Have you researched it?
Check out his book: ignatius.com/Products/ETHS-P/an-exorcist-tells-his-story.aspx On page 77 he explains that prayers in Latin are always more effective. Again I’m just taking the Vatican’s chief exocist’s word on it. He performs exorcisms daily and has been doing this for a very long time. If you don’t believe in demons or exorcisms or the like, and/or if you just don’t like Latin, then I can understand why you would criticize this.
Your argument here is that if a pope provides a reason that something is beneficial then all other reasons that have always been upheld if they are not explicitly mentioned as well thereby cease to exist. The pope did not limit his statement in any way and the nature of the document was not one at all that had to do with Latin. The Church has already presented an apostolic constitution on the matter that has already settled the matter once and for all and that does a great job expounding upon many of the reasons why Latin is beneficial: adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html As pope Benedict constantly does, he pointed to the continuity of the Church in his explanation. This is the way to understand Church teaching. To say that any time a pope speaks that he automatically limits himself so that everything he doesn’t say is no longer true is clearly demonstrating the “break” mentality in regards to the Church, which is a modernist idea that anything prior to Vatican II doesn’t count. It was that same type of thinking that led people to conclude that since the Church hadn’t spoken out and openly re-condemned contraception *after *Vatican II that it somehow was okay despite the fact it had already been authoritatively condemned by the Church just three decades prior! vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii_en.html
U
una_fides
Guest
You don’t *have *to learn Latin to advance in the spiritual life. That is a ridiculous notion. However, Latin certainly would help as popes have said it is beneficial to all.
Our Lady didn’t encourage such an abandonment! Think of praying the rosary like a loving relationship with a spouse. At times it can be difficult and one may not feel like continuing a relationship or doing things to please their partner, but it is precisely those times that real love is defined. Love is not just a feeling. It is an act of the will. What happens when a relationship becomes difficult or one doesn’t get something out of it? Should he just give up or should he work harder? Most of the saints underwent dry spells in their spiritual lives. If one doesn’t “feel” anything from praying the rosary or praying in Latin, that doesn’t mean it’s ineffective, and in fact it could very well mean the opposite, as faithfully continuing anyway with the desire to please one’s spouse, the Holy Spirit, who makes his will known through our Lady and through his popes, can become a well spring of grace.
U
una_fides
Guest
I’m pretty sure languages aren’t divinely revealed. But regardless what if the pope were to say that the Latin language is set apart from all other languages as a sacred language with sacred attributes and benefits that no other language possesses? Would you believe him and accept it as true? What if he were to put the authority of the Church behind such teaching? Would you accept it then?
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Prooftexting never gets the point across as it is picking a choosing limited quotes from documents that support your point of view without knowing the context they are coming from or what the overall document is saying.
As for a matter of Truth, the need to learn Latin and/or pray in Latin is not one.
It is a fact that the Church (Latin Church) did not use Latin for the first couple of centuries. If it was a matter of Truth then the whole Church, not just the Latin Church, would have used it from the beginning.
M
M-Dent
Guest
My argument is stop and examine the fullness of what the Holy Father was stating. That’s it.
Latin is a treasure. I agree with the Church.
M
M-Dent
Guest
I have read the book. I did find it a compelling read. Fr. Amorth is a colorful character. Though, frankly, I am not sure who created the office “Vatican chief exorcist?”
The Diocese of Rome may have an exorcist the bishop appoints but I never heard of a bureaucratic body having an exorcist? Yet, it may solve a few problems?
U
una_fides
Guest
I’m not sure the details about his position as to how he received it or what exactly it entails other than performing regular exorcists and presumably having some sort of position as the leader or go to expert on these matters. I know he has had this position as the Vatican’s chief exorcist for the past 25 years and has treated over 70,000 cases of demonic possession. Here’s an interesting news article about him you may have seen: abcnews.go.com/Travel/chief-exorcist-rev-gabriele-amorth-devil-vatican/story?id=10073040#.UEKo_FTlvxEI have read the book. I did find it a compelling read. Fr. Amorth is a colorful character. Though, frankly, I am not sure who created the office “Vatican chief exorcist?”
The Diocese of Rome may have an exorcist the bishop appoints but I never heard of a bureaucratic body having an exorcist? Yet, it may solve a few problems?
I’m surprised that you have read the book since you had earlier called into question the legitimacy of his saying that the Latin language is more effective at driving away evil. Well either way, I guess we are at least in agreement now that his comment was not dubious right.
U
una_fides
Guest
I completely agree that we should read the whole context as that helps to bring out the pope’s intentions and meanings much more clearly than even the quotes do. Such as how I demonstrated earlier that the holy father was in fact directing his comments to all Catholics and not just those in the western Church. I don’t see anything in the context however that says or indicates that there’s no point to go any further than what was contained within that document concerning the Church’s teaching on the Latin language. Perhaps I misunderstood what you had intended to convey?
U
una_fides
Guest
If the quotes are not ripped out of context and actually mean what they say, I don’t see how prooftexting responsibly would not get a point across, especially when one provides links and references to the full documents so the quotes can be read in their full contexts. If one does not know the context or what the document is saying, then I would agree that is irresponsible prooftexting and would easily lead one into error. So yes, prooftexting does work; it just requires the inquirer to read the context of the quotes before coming to a full decision on the matter. Obviously the more the quote supports a position the more important it would be to read the context. As has already been stated repeatedly, the quotes cited on this thread and on the Praying in Latin website are not taken out of context and in fact the context of the full documents most often adds even more support than the individual quotes do. For anyone who has not yet done so, I strongly suggest reading Blessed Pope John XXIII’s Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia to better understand the context of these citations.
The fact that the entire Church, east to west, did not use Latin from the very beginning as the seeds of Christianity were being sown in no way decreases or diminishes its significance and beneficial nature to all those who employ the usage of this great treasure that unites the entire Church with its head, Christ’s Vicar on earth, who possesses universal jurisdiction over every other Church and each and every individual Catholic in the world regardless of ethnicity, liturgy, or tongue. I think you are trying to say that it’s not binding in the sense of pain of sin or something if someone does not learn Latin, and of course that is the case that it would not be sinful to not learn it! It may be a “shame” as Pope John Paul II pointed out, but it certainly would not be sinful! But it is a matter of truth concerning the things the Church has taught about this sacred language.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
P
ProVobis
Guest
Maybe the Church began using Ecclesiastical Latin because by the 3rd century Latin was no longer considered a local vernacular, among other things? Just going by the Appendix Probi.
- Status