What if the only change had been the language?

[mercygate]

I’ve read through Sacrosanctum Concilium but can’t find anything that says pastors are asked to teach the people the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin. Can you refer me to the particular paragraph you get that from?

1. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

Can’t go looking now, but I will. Nudge me if I forget. If I confused a post-conciliar document or instruction with SC, I’ll apologize with appropriate abjection.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Not picking on you specifically but I could just scream when I hear questions about proper translations the last 40 years. We ALREADY had them. I still have my beloved Mass missal from 50 years ago with perfectly good translations. We knew the Latin, reading it every day, and we knew the English, it was right on the page. This is just one of the frustrations about the current situation with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Mine tooooo. Me tooooo. But would it have made a differnce forty years ago if the only change had been to the language? English changes its meanings with the direction that the wind blows IMHO. But, the change to only the venacular, leaving all other things in tact is what I am asking about.

 

[KathleenElsie]

And if they’d simply switched to SAYING the vernacular of the Tridentine Mass, we probably wouldn’t have problems like we’re having today.

Just one page over. We would not even have had to purchase new books.

 

[KathleenElsie]

[sign]That’s MY rant! Always was. And I
wasn’t even Catholic
when the changes were instituted![/sign]

LOL I love the Latin. My children and grandchildren are learing Latin. I support keeping the Mass in Latin. I am a convert that had to learn the Latin and language does not come easy for me .

 

[KofC660]

While I’m not “anti-Latin”, I’m not “pro-Latin” either.

Well, I’m not against Latin for some prayers, but I’m not for Latin for ALL prayers.

For example, the Kyrie Eleison should be in Greek.

The Gloria should be in Latin.

The Sanctus should be in Latin.

The Consecration and “priestly prayers” that don’t need to be heard/understood by everyone should be in whatever language with which the priest is comfortable (Latin, Spanish, French, English, Esperanto, whatever), and the remaining prayers, readings, and whatnot of the Mass should be in “the vernacular”.

Oh, and get rid of the “table”, bring back altars, and get rid of the awful music - sing traditional Catholic hymns, led by at most an organ, and we don’t need choirs at small(er) parishes - the Mass isn’t a Broadway production.

In light of everything else, Latin or not is the LEAST of the problems with the liturgy.

 

[BobP123]

LOL I love the Latin. My children and grandchildren are learing Latin. I support keeping the Mass in Latin. I am a convert that had to learn the Latin and language does not come easy for me .

It will if you use it everyday. Even the people who attend the Mass with me aren’t versed in Latin to the point where we can speak or write in it, but we only have to learn a few Latin prayers, and even there we have a side-by-side Latin and vernacular to help us out. (And no need for committees to help us out when you have wonderful English such as “Thy”, “Thou,” “vouchsafe,” “beseech,” etc.) But to me the Latin helps me understand the vernacular better. Let them say what they want about the vernacular (and I use it too) but the Latin really needs to be there. .

 

[rtconstant]

I think that some problems might have been dodged if this had been done. It may not have stopped the SSPX from descenting as the language itself seems to have a higher importance to them. Which is Ironic as their patron saint Pius X looked favorably upon the idea of a vernacular mass.

As St. Pius X understood though timing is everything, and who knows if it would have made a difference. After all the side by side Missal is a 19th century innovation. Until Leo XIII there was a ban on translation of the Latin into the vernacular. So there was opposition to even this much until the mid and latter 1800’s. There will always be those who fight and protest anything that isn’t to their liking.

 

[thistle]

Can’t go looking now, but I will. Nudge me if I forget. If I confused a post-conciliar document or instruction with SC, I’ll apologize with appropriate abjection.

No problem. There won’t be any need to apologise. My question is one of genuine interest. I’m not anti-Latin.

 

[Philothea53]

There would be some who still think Latin is somehow holier than other languages (how the language of pagan Rome is intrinsically holy is beyond me…

The ‘holiness’ of Latin doesn’t have anything to do with it as far as I know. I believe the reason for use of Latin in the unchangeable parts of the Mass is because being a dead language it can only be translated one way, for instance the translation of … (I can’t think now of the Latin words), from their original meaning of ‘for many’ to ‘for all.’ :twocents:

 

[mercygate]

The ‘holiness’ of Latin doesn’t have anything to do with it as far as I know. I believe the reason for use of Latin in the unchangeable parts of the Mass is because being a dead language it can only be translated one way, for instance the translation of … (I can’t think now of the Latin words), from their original meaning of ‘for many’ to ‘for all.’ :twocents:

Amen to the bolded text. Latin is no “holier” than any other language – as anybody who has studied the Latin literature will tell you. And it CAN be translated in different ways – witness the English translation of the canon! – which makes your point about the immutability of a frozen canon. I don’t think a language that has acquired words for “ATM” and “personal computer” should be called “dead!”

 

[BobP123]

The necessity of Latin for the Catholic Church:

traditio.com/tradlib/latneces.txt

One of the most beautiful pieces of writing on the subject is VETERUM SAPIENTIA, written by John XXIII, the Pope who called the Second Vatican Council and whose Mass will be promoted tomorrow.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The ‘holiness’ of Latin doesn’t have anything to do with it as far as I know. I believe the reason for use of Latin in the unchangeable parts of the Mass is because being a dead language it can only be translated one way, for instance the translation of … (I can’t think now of the Latin words), from their original meaning of ‘for many’ to ‘for all.’ :twocents:

“Pro multis” is what you’re looking for.

 

[THutch04]

For me personally I really like being able to hear the Canon and take part in the responses. I don’t care much for Latin admittedly (I love Slavonic though, go figure…I just don’t care for romance type languages very much). But for me it’s not so much language as much as it is that I like being able to respond and join in the singing; even if the Mass were in English I would want to be able to recite the responses.