Should we pray in Latin?

[JimR-OCDS]

The Holy Spirit will lead us to where He can feed us, nothing more.

When we take the reigns in our own hands and try all kinds of literal gymnastics, we’re left high and dry and eventually give up.

The Holy Spirit often lets a person who is following their own will, hit bottom before He begins to pull them out. The person needs to be humble enough to know that God doesn’t care about human language, only where the heart is.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The Holy Spirit will lead us to where He can feed us, nothing more.

and perhaps praying in Latin is where the Holy Spirit will feed some of us. It isn’t a matter of whether or not God cares about the language but what God may use to draw someone closer to Him.

Learning Latin prayers has nothing to do with gymnastics or being left high and dry or hitting bottom.

It is about what God is calling someone to do. How and what God may use in a person’s life is not the same as another person.

With all due respect, there is a bit of a persecution complex among some of the more traditionalist posters in this thread that doesn’t seem to be reflected in reality.

In all charity, we are all Catholics and this is a typical pattern of discouragement in threads when Latin is mentioned.

We see this dynamic play out whenever a “traditional” practice comes up. Someone will ask “should I veil at Mass?” and the response will be “sure, if you want to. Just remember it’s an optional thing and women who choose not to aren’t somehow lesser Catholics.” And then a few people who identity as “traditionalists” will misread that answer as “veiling is dumb” and get all offended.

So, veiling is a whole other topic and I have been in those threads before and have even had private messages from posters telling me their not so charitable thoughts on veiling, what women look like in them and why they should not wear them, so we will definitely have to agree to disagree there.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Hmm, a Catholic mentions he would like to learn Latin and pray some prayers in Latin and other Catholics discourage him. What is wrong with this picture?

No one is discouraging him. People are just cautioning him not to think that Latin has some innate power. I think almost everyone in the thread has said some variation on “but if you want to, by all means, do it.” If someone feels Latin puts them in a more reverent state of mind, great. Pray in Latin all day.

With all due respect, there is a bit of a persecution complex among some of the more traditionalist posters in this thread that doesn’t seem to be reflected in reality. No one is saying “don’t pray in Latin, Latin is stupid, traditional prayers are superstitious” or anything even remotely along those lines.

We see this dynamic play out whenever a “traditional” practice comes up. Someone will ask “should I veil at Mass?” and the response will be “sure, if you want to. Just remember it’s an optional thing and women who choose not to aren’t somehow lesser Catholics.” And then a few people who identity as “traditionalists” will misread that answer as “veiling is dumb” and get all offended.

 

[DuskWind]

I recently learned the Hail Mary in Latin, and now whenever I say the Rosary, I chant every Hail Mary Gregorian style in Latin. I decided to do this because of an experience I had with Our Lady, and I wanted to show my appreciation and do something special for Her in return. I’m planning to learn the Our Father in Latin as well.

Latin as the Language of the Church:

Amid this variety of languages, a primary place must surely be given to that language which had its origins in Latium and later proved so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity throughout the West.

And since in God’s special Providence, this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire - and that for so many centuries - it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See. Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.

Of its very nature, Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.

Nor must we overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin formal structure. Its “concise varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity” makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.

For these reasons, the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy to be used in the exercise of its teaching authority " as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws." She further requires her sacred ministers to use it, for by so doing they are better able, wherever they may be, to acquaint themselves with the mind of the Holy See on any matter, and communicate the more easily with Rome and with one another.

Thus the “knowledge and use of this language,” so intimately bound up with the Church’s life, “is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons.” These are the words of our predecessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church’s nature. “For the Church precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of it’s very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”

…to be continued due to character limit

 

[DuskWind]

Since “every Church must assemble round the Roman Church,” and since the Supreme Pontiffs have “true episcopal power, ordinary and immediate, over each and every Church and each and every Pastor, as well as over the faithful” of every rite and language, it seems particularly desirable that the instrument of mutual communication be uniform and universal, especially between the Apostolic See and the Churches which use the same Latin rite.

When, therefore, the Roman Pontiffs wish to instruct the Catholic world, or when the Congregations of the Roman Curia handle matters or draw up decrees which concern the whole body of the faithful, they invariably make use of Latin, for this is a maternal voice acceptable to countless nations.

Furthermore, the Church’s language must be not only universal but also immutable. Modern languages are liable to change, and no single one of them is superior to the others in authority. Thus if the truths of the Catholic Church were entrusted to an unspecified number of them, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifested to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision. There would, moreover, be no language which could serve as a common and constant norm by which to gauge the exact meaning of other renderings.

But Latin is indeed such a language. It is set and unchanging. It has long ceased to be affected by those alterations in the meaning of words which are the normal result of daily, popular use. Certain Latin words, it is true, acquired new meanings as Christian teaching developed and needed to be explained and defended, but these new meanings have long since become accepted and firmly established.

Finally, the Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord. It is altogether fitting, therefore, that the language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular.

In addition, the Latin language “can be called truly Catholic.” It has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic See, the mother and teacher of all Churches
and must be esteemed “a treasure … of incomparable worth.” It is a general passport to the proper understanding of the Christian writers of antiquity and the documents of the Church’s teaching. It is also a most effective bond, binding the Church of today with that of the past and of the future in wonderful continuity…

• Pope St. John XXIII (1881 - 1963)
  Apostolic Reign (1958 - 1963)

I’ve also heard that Latin is more effective during the Rite of Exorcism - perhaps because of it’s connection to the authority of the Catholic Church in being its official language, and perhaps because of its consecration through constant use by the Holy See as stated above - I don’t know. It’s just a speculation on my part.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

have even had private messages from posters telling me their not so charitable thoughts on veiling, what women look like in them and why they should not wear them, so we will definitely have to agree to disagree there.

Sound like uncharitable, judgmental jerks. I certainly wouldn’t defend them or anyone who tries to shame someone for some traditional practice.

 

[phil19034]

The Devil doesn’t hate Latin, he hates the devotion a person has to God in prayer

Often a person who learns prayer in Latin is taking the time in a devote manor. But this is essentially the beginning level of prayer

People who advance through contemplation as given by grace from God, don’t need words, just being in HIs presence is all that is desired.

Jim - did you actually read what I said? If you did, you would see that we are essentially saying the same thing.

Praying in Latin (or another liturgical language that is not your first language) is just like singing a prayer.

The old saying that singing a prayer is like saying it twice. Praying with a liturgical language, one that you learned solely for the purposes of prayer, is similar.

 

[phil19034]

Do I think water is Holy in and of itself because I believe in Baptism?

Was this directed to me? Because water isn’t not holy. But Holy Water (which is when the water has been blessed by a priest) is holy.

 

[phil19034]

anon72678967:

I’m not saying the language is Holy, in and of itself.

Then what are you saying? Is an Our Father in Latin more “powerful” than an Our Father in Portuguese, assuming both are said with the same degree of sincerity and devotion? If so, why?

By the way, I’m genuinely asking to try to understand your position. I’m not attacking you.

In theory yes, it is.

But NOT because of the Latin. It’s because one has taken the time to learn a foreign language for the purpose of prayers.

I’m a native English speaker. If I learned to pray in Portuguese for strictly religious purposes (let’s say I’m a priest or deacon or I want to pray the rosary in common with a bunch of Portuguese speakers) then my prayers in Portuguese would be more efficacious than my prayers in English because I took the time to learn the Portuguese version for pious reasons.

Why? Because I learned another language for the sole purpose of prayer to God.

However, if I learned Portuguese for secular reasons and then simply could pray it in, then no, it’s not more efficacious.

In other words, people who grew up speaking Latin did not have more efficatus prayers than someone speaking another language.

But today, when someone learns Latin for pious reasons, then their prayers are more efficacious in Latin.

NOTE: however, if they learn latin for self-righthouse reasons or pray in Latin for self-righteous reasons, then any extra graces they would get are lost. Also, if they learned Latin for just a good grade in school, then there most likely wouldn’t be any extra graces either.

The point is: why did you learn to pray in Latin (or any other language that is not your own) and why are you doing it? If you did it out of love for God? Or did you do it pride? If you did/do it out of love for God, then those prayers are more efficacious.

I pray I’m making sense.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

Was this directed to me? Because water isn’t not holy. But Holy Water (which is when the water has been blessed by a priest) is holy.

Yes. (and anyone else who thinks that I think Latin is holy, in and of itself) What I was saying is that just as I don’t think that water is Holy, in and of itself just because it’s used in Baptism; so too do I not think that Latin is holy in and of itself, but rather it is Holy language for reasons that I’m trying to formulate into an argument and haven’t yet.

That I agree with.

Have you read any of my posts explaining why prayer in Latin is more efficacious (provided that it’s done out of love for God and not pride)?

BTW - I was NOT implying that you believe something incorrect. I was implying that you need to be careful on which words you choose to explain this, as you don’t want someone to think you are being superstitious (which is what has happened)

 

[phil19034]

but rather it is Holy language for reasons that I’m trying to formulate into an argument and haven’t yet.

Latin is a “Holy Language”

But the word holy is not adjective in this case. The noun is “holy language.”

In regards to Latin the term “holy language” is a synonym for “liturgical language.”

A “liturgical language” is the original language that liturgical prayers (the Mass / Divine Liturgy / Divine Office, etc) are written in.

“Holy language” can also refer to the language in which the Holy Scriptures were written in. Latin doesn’t meet this definition. But it a “Liturgical language”, and a synonym for “liturgical language” is both “holy language” and “sacred language.”

Jewish scholars do a great job of explaining this in regards to Hebrew.

God Bless

 

[phil19034]

Yes, now I want to jettison the everything Latin-related in Church History and just choose a cool sounding language, and learn it purely for religious reasons; because apparently that’s all that’s needed to make a language Holy.

Sorry to be flippant about this but that’s pretty much all I’m gleaning from your arguments.

No. That’s not what I said. I said that’s what makes praying in a different language more efficacious.

Latin is holy because the Roman Rite Mass & Roman Rite Divine Office are both written in Latin.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Read the following:

None of that is even remotely close to “Latin is dumb, don’t learn Latin, praying in Latin is wrong” or whatever you’re hearing. I’m at a loss as to why people keep pretending anyone is telling the OP that praying in Latin, or having an interest in the language, is wrong somehow. All anyone is doing is cautioning the OP against falling into superstitious thinking that his prayers will somehow be turbocharged just because they’re in Latin.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Why? Because I learned another language for the sole purpose of prayer to God.

I agree completely, because in this case what is “elevating” the prayer is the effort and devotion it took to learn, not some magical quality in the language itself.

 

[Irishmom2]

Give me one good reason why I shouldn’t mute you?

Why should I listen to you if you’re not going make an effort to listen to me, or any other Traditional Catholic for that reason?

Do you always mute people you disagree with?

Everyone is listening. You are just unhappy that people are not agreeing with your view of things. You seem to want to bring others in to make some kind of point for you.

It won’t matter. You need to calm down because you are working yourself into a tizzy because you won’t accept that not everyone sees things the way you do.

 

[Irishmom2]

Yes. What do you call it?

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Give me one good reason why I shouldn’t mute you?

Because I’m a delight.

Why should I listen to you if you’re not going make an effort to understand to me, or any other Traditional Catholic for that matter? If you have no qualms about dismissing any Traditional Catholic’s love for Ecclesial Latin as “superstition,” “magic,” or “idolatry,” why should any of us put up with you?

Seriously, I’m baffled as to why you’re this upset. You’re getting so worked up you’re not reading carefully. Who here has said there is anything wrong with loving Latin? You’re so eager to demonstrate that you are Team Traditionalist that you’re tilting at windmills. No one here is attacking you. Some of the things that seem to be riling you up really are very innocuous.

 

[phil19034]

Then why bother with Latin at all? Why not just jettison all of it? (I’m not saying we should, obviously.)

Because the Holy Mass (Roman Rite) is written in Latin. The prayers are perfect in Latin. In the vernacular languages the prayers are translations, and they don’t always get the original meaning 100% correct.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

Personally, I think it largely comes down to how well you understand Latin. If you don’t understand Latin well, I don’t think there’s much benefit in using it for prayer. If you do understand it well, I think using if for prayer can be beneficial.

I have a pretty good understanding of Latin, so I enjoy reading Latin prayers. I like thinking about the grammar and learning new vocabulary. It helps me to engage more deeply with the text. It may sound odd to treat prayer as unseen translation/grammatical analysis, but it works for me.

I’ve tried using prayers in Greek from the New Testament, but my Greek unfortunately isn’t good enough these days, so I just find myself a bit frustrated and baffled! I gain about as much from trying to use prayers in Greek as I would from trying to use prayers in Romanian or Swedish.

The bottom line is that you can pray in Latin if you want to, but it’s not better in any way than praying in any other language.

 

[Irishmom2]

So if I come across a practice you’re doing and call it “idolatrous,” and “magical,” and “superstitious,” something “the Roman Pagans did” and that God is going to punish you by handing you over to it until you “hit bottom.” That just me “disagreeing” with you and not something you have any right to be angry over?

I don’t let anonymous people on the internet bother me the way you do. Yes, I will ignore what people say before I get as angry about everything as you are doing on this thread and others.