Tridentine trade-off?

[ProVobis]

I’ve thought the same thing on occasion but have hesitated to believe it completely. Of late though, I am starting to see the very real possibility that the above statement may very well be true. In fact, I really cannot see any other tangible, rational explanation for it.

Neither do I but to be fair, I’ve heard Protestant ministers who are/were proficient enough in the Latin and Greek to give excellent scripture sermons. And as we know Latin is taught to lawyers in many countries (including Greece, of all places), botanists, and Classics scholars. It’s unfortunate Ecclesiastical Latin is seldom taught, though, even in the Catholic schools. It was mostly Virgil in high school for me back in the 60’s. And Homer in the English classes. Go figure.

 

[OraLabora]

It’s unfortunate Ecclesiastical Latin is seldom taught, though, even in the Catholic schools.

You hit the nail right on the head as to why Latin is dying in the liturgy. We should learn the basics in our religious education classes and, where applicable, RCIA. It’s part of our patrimony. People should at least get some exposure to it.

 

[Hasire]

Really? Are you sure on that one? I mean absolutely sure?

Uh, sure.

 

[Mike30]

Uh, sure.

OK. So then all Jewish services are done in the vernacular as are Muslim services, correct?

And you never did answer my question as to where in the Vatican II documents it was stated that the Mass **should **be said in the vernacular.

Why was that?

 

[Hasire]

OK. So then all Jewish services are done in the vernacular as are Muslim services, correct?

I have not any business either with Judaism nor Islamism.

 

[Mike30]

I have not any business either with Judaism nor Islamism.

Well just so you know Jewish services are conducted in Hebrew and Muslim services in Arabic. In fact Jews and Muslims learn those languages, at least what is required for prayers and such, regardless as to the vernacular of where they are from.

Still waiting on that Vatican II document by the way that backs up your claim about the Mass…

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

so why maintain the language when nobody can understand them without burying their noses deep in their missal??

Having my nose buried in my missal has actually helped me retain a lot of what was being preached.

Can we celebrate the Tridentine Mass in the language of the people, but maintain the rituals and dignity of the Tridentine Mass? Do you think this is a possible way Mass will be celebrated in the future?

In my opinion, no! Some like Latin for the universal appeal or for other various reasons. Most don’t take into consideration that the EF has also Greek and Hebrew in it, not because they are trying to be difficult but rather because these three languages draw our attention to Calvary (Luke 23:38) which IS where we are when we attend Mass.

 

[ProVobis]

You hit the nail right on the head as to why Latin is dying in the liturgy. We should learn the basics in our religious education classes and, where applicable, RCIA. It’s part of our patrimony. People should at least get some exposure to it.

Someone told me several years ago that Credo III should be the national anthem of Catholics. We can always wish.

 

[OraLabora]

Someone told me several years ago that Credo III should be the national anthem of Catholics. We can always wish.

I like I and II better though, III is to neo-Gregorian for my tastes

 

[ProVobis]

I like I and II better though, III is to neo-Gregorian for my tastes

Perhaps I’ll twitter the Pope to see which is his favorite: Credo I aut Credo II aut Credo III.

 

[10thCrusader]

Well just so you know Jewish services are conducted in Hebrew and Muslim services in Arabic. In fact Jews and Muslims learn those languages, at least what is required for prayers and such, regardless as to the vernacular of where they are from.

Still waiting on that Vatican II document by the way that backs up your claim about the Mass…

Good luck you won’t find it in the Vatican II documents OR the post-Conciliar documents. I read them all, and it’s just not there. It only says the Mass could be celebrated in the vernacular, and that the Latin should be retained in the ordinaries.

There might be a national council or some diocesan document where they played fast and loose with Vatican II, but not any of the Universal Church documents.

 

[TimSpalding]

As per the church, Latin is one of the three sacred languages; the others being Greek and Hebrew. That’s where much of the reverence and beauty arises. Joseph Campbell pointed out that because Latin is an ancient language, it’s use acts to take us out of the worldly perspective; that is exactly the function of religion.

Latin is a language—no more no less. As a language, it can express pretty much anything, and has no essential characteristics. It’s not less “worldly” than other languages, except by a process of ignorance and mystification. Thinking it’s got some special religious properties is like when someone ignorant of Italian overhears an Italian woman tell someone to go unstop the toilet and thinks “she must be talking about love!”

If you doubt me, go read some of the savage, quotidian often blisteringly obscene lyrics of Juvenal, Martial or Catullus and tell me how holy and otherworldly Latin seems now.

 

[Mike30]

Good luck you won’t find it in the Vatican II documents OR the post-Conciliar documents. I read them all, and it’s just not there. It only says the Mass could be celebrated in the vernacular, and that the Latin should be retained in the ordinaries.

There might be a national council or some diocesan document where they played fast and loose with Vatican II, but not any of the Universal Church documents.

I know it isn’t in any of the documents. I just love to put these alleged experts who loudly proclaim that it is in them on the spot so to speak.

 

[TimSpalding]

Good luck you won’t find it in the Vatican II documents OR the post-Conciliar documents

There are quite a few such documents, as bishops’ conferences voted one by one for the vernacular and applied to Rome for permission, who granted it.

People who haven’t seriously studied the history of the council seriously often assert that the fathers did not anticipate the massive expansion of the vernacular. But the bishops at Vatican II were virtually the same ones who, a few years later, voted orwhelmingly for the vernacular in their separate bishops’ conferences across the world. Like it or not, the Council anticipated wide use of the vernacular—even in its first document—and the bishops there carried out their own intention, with the explicit agreement and approval of the Pope and Curia.

And, of course, one only gets to say “no documents” in such contexts. If one said that there are “no church documents against gay marriage,” you’d be swiftly corrected with texts from the USCCB and various curial offices. “No documents” only happens when people don’t LIKE the documents.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

I know it isn’t in any of the documents. I just love to put these alleged experts who loudly proclaim that it is in them on the spot so to speak.

There’s a lovely Christian sentiment for you.

 

[ProVobis]

If you doubt me, go read some of the savage, quotidian often blisteringly obscene lyrics of Juvenal, Martial or Catullus and tell me how holy and otherworldly Latin seems now.

Classical Latin is different from Ecclesiastical Latin, though the grammar is similar and has survived more centuries than any modern renditioning of either. If you’re suggesting it is basically a pagan language, than I would also take a look at Greek, which brought Greek Mythology to the world.

 

[ProVobis]

Like it or not, the Council anticipated wide use of the vernacular—even in its first document—and the bishops there carried out their own intention, with the explicit agreement and approval of the Pope and Curia.

That may be, but Paul VI issued Jubilate Deo for every Catholic parish a few years later. He asked the bishops to implement it into the Mass, but it was largely ignored.

 

[ProVobis]

Latin is a language—no more no less. As a language, it can express pretty much anything, and has no essential characteristics. It’s not less “worldly” than other languages, except by a process of ignorance and mystification.

Would you say the same about Old Church Slavonic?

 

[TimSpalding]

Classical Latin is different from Ecclesiastical Latin, though the grammar is similar and has survived more centuries than any modern renditioning of either. If you’re suggesting it is basically a pagan language, than I would also take a look at Greek, which brought Greek Mythology to the world.

No, I’m suggesting it’s a LANGUAGE. Languages are languages, not texts. They convey meaning. They are not themselves much more than the sum of what can and has been said and understood in them.

I’m not suggesting Latin is a pagan language. I’m suggesting it’s a language. Saying mass in Latin is not qualitatively different from saying it in Chinese, Tagalog or Sumerian. The mass is not more “elevated” because it’s in a language fewer people understand. It’s not more “holy” because a lot of Christian literature was written in it—as I noted, a lot of non-Christian literature was too, and quite effectively. You can express the mass in Latin if you want. But you can also use Latin to write punk music, passive aggressive notes to your roommate, or invoices for aluminum widgets.

FWIW, I know both Latin and Greek. Greek is the same—just a language. Greek does, however, have the advantage of being able to quote the Gospels in the original, without any danger of semantic loss through translation.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m not suggesting Latin is a pagan language. I’m suggesting it’s a language. Saying mass in Latin is not qualitatively different from saying it in Chinese, Tagalog or Sumerian.

Language differences between Latin and Greek perhaps leading to the biggest schism in the world and you’re implying one language is as good as another?