We Changed the Church and Regret It

[malphono]

malphono,

Do you happen to know if there is an evening EF Sunday Mass here in the city?

Not to my knowledge. Sorry.

 

[Layman]

I don’t see how hard it could be. Martin Luther is a priest using Latin liturgy, to name one. People make stuff up more because they don’t fully understand the language. The Latin is unchanging, yes. But people’s understanding of the same word still varies because they have to translate it into their own language in their own Missal to understand. So it doesn’t matter if the words of the liturgy is unchanging, people still would not understand it and in an effort to do so, would have to translate it. So would you rather have an official translation approved by the Church or thousands or unofficial translations?

If the Latin text remains the same, across time and across nations, then local interpretation may vary, but the text will not. So any error in one place or time can be corrected later. Because the text remains the same.

**If priests only learn the sacraments in their own language, then that continuity is lost. Already we have little and not so little local variations going on, as reported in these forums. **

Priests and laity are not masters or owners of the Mass. The Mass is not entertainment for the congregation, nor are they its focus. It’s purpose is to propitiate God, to praise him, to thank him for benefits given and to thereby gain graces. We are just its temporary custodians.

 

[ProVobis]

The Latin is unchanging, yes. But people’s understanding of the same word still varies because they have to translate it into their own language in their own Missal to understand.

So how was it that for the better part of the sixteen hundred years or so, people were able to understand the Mass in a non-vernacular language without handmissals and attended enthusiastically?

What about many of those who “understand” their own Hebrew, Sanskrit, Arabic, etc worship services for that matter? They seem to be okay with worshipping in a language other than their own vernacular.

Besides, it is not necessary to be 100% fluent in a language in order to understand what’s taking place. (Ever been to an Italian opera?) What is important is that you at least recognize the worship service as your own. And the only way you will be able to recognize it is with exposure. All vernacular can’t give you that Latin exposure.

Reread Pope John’s Veterum Sapientia. It has a lot of truths in it.

 

[ConstantineTG]

All of them ?

How many of them have gone beyond the borders of where their official language is spoken, or some language that is a derivative of their original language? You can argue that the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church has only one language. Then again, is there a Syro-Malankara beyond India or beyond Indian people? Unlike Roman Catholicism which is literally in every country in the world, every culture, most of the Eastern Churches never go far beyond their own borders as they were quickly limited by the advancing Islamic territory in the East, and the growing Roman Church in the west.

 

[ConstantineTG]

So how was it that for a large part of the sixteen hundred years or so, people were able to understand the Mass in a non-vernacular language without handmissals?

1600 years or so? The Roman Church never ventured beyond Europe 'til the 1500s if I’m not mistaken.

What about many of those who “understand” their own Hebrew, Sanskrit, Arabic, etc worship services for that matter? They seem to be okay with worshipping in a language other than their own vernacular.

People in close proximity to one another always has a rough understanding of the other nearby language because thats how languages evolve. I don’t understand Indonesian and Malay, but I can certainly pick up a few words just because they are in common to what we have. Go back a few hundred years and the languages are closer than where they are now.

Besides, it is not necessary to be 100% fluent in a language in order to understand what’s taking place. (Ever been to an Italian opera?) What is important is that you at least recognize the worship service as your own. And the only way you will be able to recognize it is with exposure. All vernacular can’t give you that Latin exposure.

No I’ve never been to an Italian Opera. First, its Italian, second its an opera.
I’d give you another example. When I was much younger Dragon Ball Z was already popular in the Philippines, even before it was popular in the US. We watched the locally translated shows on TV (which was in english) but eventually we got our hands on the movies on VHS from Japan. It was all in Japanese. Sure, I understand whats going on. Goku turns Super Saiyan, they beat each other up. I know the names of the moves in Japanese. But you know what, until the Americans got hold of the licensing of the show and started coming up with subtitles and dubs of the show, I never understood completely. Its one think to understand whats going on. Its another to appreciate whats going on.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If the Latin text remains the same, across time and across nations, then local interpretation may vary, but the text will not. So any error in one place or time can be corrected later. Because the text remains the same.

And the same reasoning can be said of official vernacular translations. Isn’t that whats being introduced next year? There was something wrong with the translation so they’re fixing it.

**If priests only learn the sacraments in their own language, then that continuity is lost. Already we have little and not so little local variations going on, as reported in these forums. **

Not really. The priests are our soldiers in the trenches, the lieutenants in the field. Its the responsibility of the Bishops, who are our generals, to keep the Latin and to understand it faithfully. If priests learn only the vernacular then there is nothing lost there since its been handed down by Bishops who understand it.

Priests and laity are not masters or owners of the Mass. The Mass is not entertainment for the congregation, nor are they its focus. It’s purpose is to propitiate God, to praise him, to thank him for benefits given and to thereby gain graces. We are just its temporary custodians.

The Mass is for us. It brings the sacrifice of Christ to us so that we may be a part of it. What else is the purpose of perpetuating the Eternal Sacrifice if not to bring the sinners today to the salvation achieved in Calvary 2000 years ago?

 

[Crimsonflyboy]

I have to wonder if we should have started the revolution at all.

Revolutions are never a good thing. They tend to flip society on it’s head. They strength of the Catholic Church is it’s strong hierarchy. Jesus gave us the Papacy in order to lead the church and the Papacy is vital. Revolutions mean to undermine authority, including the Pope.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Yes, but when the architecture of the church doesn’t lend itself very well to the EF (no communion rails or communion kneelers), no kneelers in the pews, a square altar, etc. you have to admit a certain bias against the EF, no?

Maybe…although I haven’t seen on without kneelers in the pews so I’m confused on that one. Although I have to say…the ugly architecture of the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s is not only a Catholic thing…right? I see so many ugly buildings from that era…period. Well…ugly to me IMHO.

 

[At_Trent]

How many of them have gone beyond the borders of where their official language is spoken, or some language that is a derivative of their original language? You can argue that the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church has only one language. Then again, is there a Syro-Malankara beyond India or beyond Indian people? Unlike Roman Catholicism which is literally in every country in the world, every culture, most of the Eastern Churches never go far beyond their own borders as they were quickly limited by the advancing Islamic territory in the East, and the growing Roman Church in the west.

Well, then if it’s that simple, why don’t they all just switch to Latin and join us ? Then all the Catholic churches would be more united in offering prayer to God, in the truly universal, catholic, language ? Missals for the Latin impaired of course.

Tear down those borders, accept the papacy, unite as one as never in history, and ask our Protestant brothers in Christ to join us in dealing Islam a decisive blow that will again defeat their war against Christianity.

Imagine it. All Christians united in His Name as He intended. All submitting to the Bishop of Rome, heir to the throne of Peter, and therefore showing Satan and his minions the greatest display of Glory to Christ the King in history. An insurmountable realization of Christ’s will thrust into the face of the evil threat to the Church He willed.

All the Eastern churches can keep their Rites and traditions of course

 

[Layman]

And the same reasoning can be said of official vernacular translations. Isn’t that whats being introduced next year? There was something wrong with the translation so they’re fixing it.

If the old Latin text was kept, then we wouldn’t be having to change the Missal at all. It’s the standard the translations are being made from. So stick the source instead of the commentary. It’s the height of folly in engineering to ‘re-invent the wheel’.

I await the day when some key phrase in the vernacular New Mass acquires vulgar connotations through our mass media. Then the folly of dumping a sacred language will be visible even to the most ardent progressive.

Not really. The priests are our soldiers in the trenches, the lieutenants in the field. Its the responsibility of the Bishops, who are our generals, to keep the Latin and to understand it faithfully. If priests learn only the vernacular then there is nothing lost there since its been handed down by Bishops who understand it.

Our priests become bishops in time. Even the current generation are allowing dancing at Mass, in South America. Others are defiant of the Holy Father. They can’t be relied on in this matter.

The Mass is for us. It brings the sacrifice of Christ to us so that we may be a part of it. What else is the purpose of perpetuating the Eternal Sacrifice if not to bring the sinners today to the salvation achieved in Calvary 2000 years ago?

A Mass can be said without a congregation. Therefore, it is not essential to it.

The idea that, further, the laity must be able to hear and understand every word, is a delusion. The Mass is said by the priest and oriented towards God, for our benefit. It is not directed towards us, like a school lecture, though it has didactic elements e.g. the readings and sermon.

 

[ProVobis]

If priests learn only the vernacular then there is nothing lost there since its been handed down by Bishops who understand it.

But by propagating phrases like “one in being with the Father” there is much lost since this is not only not understandable but it’s not the truth either. And there are other examples of this. Canon 249 says priests must be Latin-literate. The all-vernacular certainly won’t encourage more priests to conform with canon law.

 

[CradleCath]

If the old Latin text was kept, then we wouldn’t be having to change the Missal at all. It’s the standard the translations are being made from. So stick the source instead of the commentary. It’s the height of folly in engineering to ‘re-invent the wheel’.

I await the day when some key phrase in the vernacular New Mass acquires vulgar connotations through our mass media. Then the folly of dumping a sacred language will be visible even to the most ardent progressive.

Our priests become bishops in time. Even the current generation are allowing dancing at Mass, in South America. Others are defiant of the Holy Father. They can’t be relied on in this matter.

**A Mass can be said without a congregation. Therefore, it is not essential to it. **
The idea that, further, the laity must be able to hear and understand every word, is a delusion. The Mass is said by the priest and oriented towards God, for our benefit. It is not directed towards us, like a school lecture, though it has didactic elements e.g. the readings and sermon.

Thank you, THANK YOU, Laymen. I’ve been wanting to say that for ages & just haven’t had time.

 

[edwest2]

It is very sad to read the debate over personal taste.

There are places where the priest sets up an altar on the lowered back door of a pickup truck in a field. Our reverence toward God is not dependent on fancy Churches or architecture. I’m not saying they should be discarded or are not important.

Again, the changes were not even suggested by Vatican II.

God bless,
Ed

 

[HCC]

It is very sad to read the debate over personal taste.

There are places where the priest sets up an altar on the lowered back door of a pickup truck in a field. Our reverence toward God is not dependent on fancy Churches or architecture. I’m not saying they should be discarded or are not important.

Again, the changes were not even suggested by Vatican II.

God bless,
Ed

Dear edwest2,

You are referring to military chaplains and that is a very good example of an extraordinary circumstance. The circumstances surrounding the exemption given to military chaplains, in special time of war, is hardly applicable to a normal church experience.

 

[wisdomseeker]

It is very sad to read the debate over personal taste.

There are places where the priest sets up an altar on the lowered back door of a pickup truck in a field. Our reverence toward God is not dependent on fancy Churches or architecture. I’m not saying they should be discarded or are not important.

Again, the changes were not even suggested by Vatican II.

God bless,
Ed

just imagine if the Mass would be just a matter of personal taste to everyone of us. where would God be in all of this?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Well, then if it’s that simple, why don’t they all just switch to Latin and join us ? Then all the Catholic churches would be more united in offering prayer to God, in the truly universal, catholic, language ? Missals for the Latin impaired of course.

Scripture would point out that Jesus commanded the Apostles to make disciples of all nations. And this began immediately after Pentecost when the Apostels were heard speaking in different languages. It was never meant from the beginning of Christianity that Christianity be in one language. Jesus himself probably preached in at least 2 languages, Aramaic and Greek.

Tear down those borders, accept the papacy, unite as one as never in history, and ask our Protestant brothers in Christ to join us in dealing Islam a decisive blow that will again defeat their war against Christianity.

Eastern Catholics do accept the Papacy, I wonder how Latin gets into that equation?

Imagine it. All Christians united in His Name as He intended. All submitting to the Bishop of Rome, heir to the throne of Peter, and therefore showing Satan and his minions the greatest display of Glory to Christ the King in history. An insurmountable realization of Christ’s will thrust into the face of the evil threat to the Church He willed.

All the Eastern churches can keep their Rites and traditions of course

We are united in Faith, not language. Its faith that unites us. If we think its language, then we got it all wrong.

 

[ConstantineTG]

But by propagating phrases like “one in being with the Father” there is much lost since this is not only not understandable but it’s not the truth either. And there are other examples of this. Canon 249 says priests must be Latin-literate. The all-vernacular certainly won’t encourage more priests to conform with canon law.

Then its not the preist’s fault because that translation is approved by Rome. Its not as bad as if the priest said it in Latin, and the people made their own guesses what the Priest said. Latin to English Missals are mostly unofficial and thus the danger of a bad translation exists. What value is the correct word in Latin if the people understand it to be a different word anyway?

 

[archangel04]

Well, then if it’s that simple, why don’t they all just switch to Latin and join us ? Then all the Catholic churches would be more united in offering prayer to God, in the truly universal, catholic, language ? Missals for the Latin impaired of course.

Tear down those borders, accept the papacy, unite as one as never in history, and ask our Protestant brothers in Christ to join us in dealing Islam a decisive blow that will again defeat their war against Christianity.

Imagine it. All Christians united in His Name as He intended. All submitting to the Bishop of Rome, heir to the throne of Peter, and therefore showing Satan and his minions the greatest display of Glory to Christ the King in history. An insurmountable realization of Christ’s will thrust into the face of the evil threat to the Church He willed.

All the Eastern churches can keep their Rites and traditions of course

Ha ha I love it Too bad some here will see this as intolerant of you for now “sugar-coating” it lol.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If the old Latin text was kept, then we wouldn’t be having to change the Missal at all. It’s the standard the translations are being made from. So stick the source instead of the commentary. It’s the height of folly in engineering to ‘re-invent the wheel’.

But the old Latin do change. Its not like they haven’t touched the Liturgy for hundreds or thousands of years. Also a Missal is only as good as the translator. I’d rather have translations from the Church, right or wrong, than from a non-Church source.

I await the day when some key phrase in the vernacular New Mass acquires vulgar connotations through our mass media. Then the folly of dumping a sacred language will be visible even to the most ardent progressive.

Even with old, dead languages, translators couldn’t agree all the time what the proper translation is. Also, the context is lost a lot sometimes. In Bible study we learn that some words that seem to be straight to the point, become a big matter of contention today because even after an accurate translation, the context itself is lost on us.

Our priests become bishops in time. Even the current generation are allowing dancing at Mass, in South America. Others are defiant of the Holy Father. They can’t be relied on in this matter.

I leave it to the Holy Spirit to give us Bishops and a Pope that will guide us. If we can’t rely on them, how can we rely on the Church?

A Mass can be said without a congregation. Therefore, it is not essential to it.

My point was the form of Mass is for the people on earth. Even if a priest says a private Mass, it is for the people of this earth. Christ’s sacrifice is for us, to bring us back to God.

The idea that, further, the laity must be able to hear and understand every word, is a delusion. The Mass is said by the priest and oriented towards God, for our benefit. It is not directed towards us, like a school lecture, though it has didactic elements e.g. the readings and sermon.

We are a part of it. We’re not spectators to a show. Christ invites us to take part.

 

[Layman]

But the old Latin do change. Its not like they haven’t touched the Liturgy for hundreds or thousands of years. Also a Missal is only as good as the translator. I’d rather have translations from the Church, right or wrong, than from a non-Church source.

Latin, as a ‘dead’ language, does not change. Our vernacular acquires vulgar connotations all the time, especially in these ‘tolerant’ times. Learn Latin yourself and you need no translation. Priests do this. Schoolchildren used to. Thus the faith is preserved for the next generation, intact.

Even with old, dead languages, translators couldn’t agree all the time what the proper translation is. Also, the context is lost a lot sometimes. In Bible study we learn that some words that seem to be straight to the point, become a big matter of contention today because even after an accurate translation, the context itself is lost on us.

See above.

I leave it to the Holy Spirit to give us Bishops and a Pope that will guide us. If we can’t rely on them, how can we rely on the Church?

The Holy Spirit is used to excuse what Men want, these days. Bishops are men. Men make mistakes. The Holy Spirit may also simply be giving we mortals what we’ve wanted for hundreds of years: modernism, an updated faith, to teach us a lesson. Also, free will is involved. The hierarchy has decided to go down this road. The faith will remain. Solemn worship will be preserved here and there. Whatever is not godly will perish in time. And thus, I hope, the Church wil be inoculated against modernism and experimentation for two hundred years.

My point was the form of Mass is for the people on earth. Even if a priest says a private Mass, it is for the people of this earth. Christ’s sacrifice is for us, to bring us back to God.
We are a part of it. We’re not spectators to a show. Christ invites us to take part.

It’s said on our behalf, but we are not its focus. With ad-orientem, lay lectors, EMHCs, the vernacular and ‘the People’s Mass’ the laity might think their presence is essential. It simply isn’t. It’s an offering made by the priest, for his intention. Do you agree that a valid Mass can be said without a congregation?