What is the point of using Latin?

[Carl_Van]

Hello all, sorry for my late coming into this conversation, I would just like to express a couple of things that come to mind as I read this thread.

There seems to be a sort of thinking in many places these days (and this has been around for quite some time) that is not in line with the mind of the Church. One facet of this is a false conception of the liturgy as something that we create to our “tastes”. I would highly recommend a reading of “The Spirit of the Liturgy” by Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) as it addresses this mindset very clearly. The liturgy is the Divine worship of Almighty God, in the Mass, it is Jesus Christ Himself (in the person of the priest, who acts “in persona Christi”) who offers the merits of His life, death and resurrection to the Eternal Father, for our redemption and for all graces and blessings, it is then, not some kind of merely human construct. We then should not be asking ourselves “what suits my taste”, but “what gives the most glory and honor to Almighty God, and is the most authentic expression of His liturgy”.

With this in mind, I believe that Latin is the authentic language for the liturgy in the Latin Rite. This has been declared by Popes, Church Councils and Saints throughout the ages, denial of this is simply not Catholic. Liturgy is something we must seek to rise up and connect with, not pull down to the level of our mundane thinking. I might also add that those who seek to strip the liturgy completely of Latin, do so in direct defiance of the Second Vatican Council, which declared “Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, chapter 1, 36:1) . I have fallen in love with the Latin liturgy ever since I started attending liturgies that have included Latin and Gregorian Chant. God has graced me with a pretty good ability to pick up the Latin language, even though I have very poor academic skills (I was unable to complete even high school). If we seek the Heart of God, than we will have His help to learn how to give Him the greatest glory!

JMJ
Carl Vanderwouden

 

[GloriousOrder]

Do you honestly think St Thomas and St Dominic were not well able to communicate effectively in their vernacular languages as well as Latin? That Latin was anything other than a second language for them, that their respective vernaculars (Italian and Spanish) were not their first languages?

St Teresa of Avila was perfectly well able to write in her vernacular language of Spanish - as far as I know she never wrote in Latin. And her contribution to Catholic scholarship in the area of mysticism was not impaired one iota by the fact that she did so.

Frankly, saying that we can communicate with or understand the saints better by knowing or using Latin is as illogical as saying that we can communicate with or understand Christ or God the Father better by knowing or using Latin. Surely too many completely illiterate peasants such as Joan of Arc have become saints for us to hold such a snobbish and wrongheaded idea.

The saints, like Christ and God the Father in whose presence they are happily residing, totally transcend mundanities such as time, place AND language.

My friend, you don’t need to get so exasperated! The reason I brought up Dominic and Thomas is specifically because they spoke Spanish and Italian respectively. St. Joan probably spoke French exclusively. That is entirely my point: despite them speaking three different languages, and we here speaking a fourth language (English), our unity with them is in Latin. Obviously they are glorified in Heaven with the Holy Immortal One, but they are human beings. It seems there is more a mystical connection with Latin, since all these diverse saints from many lands and tongues were unified in that.

We don’t speak 16th century northern-Spanish dialects, and St. Ignatius of Loyola did not speak 21st century North American English. I am referring to the common, emotional, fraternal bond which Latin extends across the centuries, not something infantile like “they can’t understand us 'cos they’re not English”. It’s about the intensity of united worship across the centuries, in one language.

 

[Layman]

I attend and sing at TLMs. The more you learn about the old rite and Gregorian chant, it would seem almost comical that it was as good as banned in 1970, if I wasn’t a Roman Catholic.

It’s not essential to the Mass that the congregation understands every word. Neither is even the presence of a congregation.

 

[LilyM]

My friend, you don’t need to get so exasperated! The reason I brought up Dominic and Thomas is specifically because they spoke Spanish and Italian respectively. St. Joan probably spoke French exclusively. That is entirely my point: despite them speaking three different languages, and we here speaking a fourth language (English), our unity with them is in Latin. Obviously they are glorified in Heaven with the Holy Immortal One, but they are human beings. It seems there is more a mystical connection with Latin, since all these diverse saints from many lands and tongues were unified in that.

We don’t speak 16th century northern-Spanish dialects, and St. Ignatius of Loyola did not speak 21st century North American English. I am referring to the common, emotional, fraternal bond which Latin extends across the centuries, not something infantile like “they can’t understand us 'cos they’re not English”. It’s about the intensity of united worship across the centuries, in one language.

How can you say with a straight face that Latin is our link with St Joan when she never spoke a word of it? ‘United worship’? Simple fact is she probably didn’t worship as we do. She certainly didn’t attend the TLM for starters. She may, for all we know, have attended one of the forms of worship banned by St Pius V, and thus we may have no link of that kind to her.

And even assuming she did - how is ‘common worship’ in Latin our link with St Peter? St Paul? The Blessed Virgin? The first three centuries or so of Christians? None of them worshipped in Latin, their worship would probably have differed in other important ways from the TLM or any form that we use today as well. It’s a mighty thin argument at best

Our link with Sts Thomas, Dominic, Joan, Peter et al is soul-to-soul, as fellow members of the Body of Christ, as fellow human beings. It has nothing to do with language at all, be it Latin or any other.

 

[StTommyMore]

How can you say with a straight face that Latin is our link with St Joan when she never spoke a word of it? ‘United worship’? Simple fact is she probably didn’t worship as we do. She certainly didn’t attend the TLM for starters. She may, for all we know, have attended one of the forms of worship banned by St Pius V, and thus we may have no link of that kind to her.

And even assuming she did - how is ‘common worship’ in Latin our link with St Peter? St Paul? The Blessed Virgin? The first three centuries or so of Christians? None of them worshipped in Latin, their worship would probably have differed in other important ways from the TLM or any form that we use today as well. It’s a mighty thin argument at best

Our link with Sts Thomas, Dominic, Joan, Peter et al is soul-to-soul, as fellow members of the Body of Christ, as fellow human beings. It has nothing to do with language at all, be it Latin or any other.

 

[GloriousOrder]

How can you say with a straight face that Latin is our link with St Joan when she never spoke a word of it? ‘United worship’? Simple fact is she probably didn’t worship as we do. She certainly didn’t attend the TLM for starters. She may, for all we know, have attended one of the forms of worship banned by St Pius V, and thus we may have no link of that kind to her.

And even assuming she did - how is ‘common worship’ in Latin our link with St Peter? St Paul? The Blessed Virgin? The first three centuries or so of Christians? None of them worshipped in Latin, their worship would probably have differed in other important ways from the TLM or any form that we use today as well. It’s a mighty thin argument at best

Our link with Sts Thomas, Dominic, Joan, Peter et al is soul-to-soul, as fellow members of the Body of Christ, as fellow human beings. It has nothing to do with language at all, be it Latin or any other.

Well then, in that case it seems that we should be happy with the vernacular Mass. This thread has changed my mind several times already. Thank God for free will. Please forgive me for my ignorance! I must be baptised before I start talking about the faith.

 

[StTommyMore]

Well then, in that case it seems that we should be happy with the vernacular Mass. This thread has changed my mind several times already. Thank God for free will. Please forgive me for my ignorance! I must be baptised before I start talking about the faith.

The key to remember is that the Mass is ultimately about God, and not about us. What this means is that we should not refuse a Mass, any Mass, based exclusively on our own tastes. Do I love the Latin Mass? YES! But at the same time, if I am in a situation where no EF is available, I attend an OF Mass with a spirit of reverence. I truly do wish that certain things would be less common, which I will not get into for fear of derailing the thread, but I have to remind myself that these things do not invalidate the Mass. We must all avoid trying to make issues of individual piety as mandates for the whole of the Church. There are lots of things the individual can do to preserve Latin in the liturgy. First remember that the Mass is not the only form of the Liturgy. WHen you pray the Liturgy of the Hours, pray in Latin. If your parish does not offer the EF, or even the OF in Latin, let your priest know that you would be interested, and volunteer to be an altar server (if male). Instead of bemoaning the rarity of the EF, take steps to increase its use.

 

[Elijah_Baley]

Latin is hardly necessary for theological works, I think, though an authoritative translation of a final draft is a good idea.

As for Latin in the liturgy, there can be no substitute. Unity, unity, unity. I relish the idea of being able to go anywhere in the world and still participate in Mass. I don’t have to know how to pronounce Spanish to participate in Mexico or what lines through letters signify to follow along in Polish. I can live the Mass I’ve practiced every Sunday no matter where I go in the world.

Someone must have mentioned this before. I don’t care. It bears repeating.

Unity!

 

[LilyM]

Well then, in that case it seems that we should be happy with the vernacular Mass. This thread has changed my mind several times already. Thank God for free will. Please forgive me for my ignorance! I must be baptised before I start talking about the faith.

There’s plenty of argument for both points of view, hence the Church neither requiring Latin be used in each and every Mass nor permitting it to slip completely out of use in the Liturgy.

It is the beauty of our faith that we have always, from the year dot, had multiple liturgies (among our Eastern Catholic brothers at least).

Furthermore, for all the unseemly squabbling, it must be remembered that the form of the liturgy is a matter of discipline rather than dogma, and as liable to change as any other discipline of the Church. And nothing wrong with that.

If we wanted to be really ‘authentic’ and ‘unchanging’ and ‘unified with centuries of Christians’ we should all use Aramaic and great big rounds of unleavened bread (liable to tons of crumbs) as Our Lord almost certainly did.

Not to mention there’d be no Creed, no prayers of the faithful. In fact no Gospels either, they weren’t written for some decades after the first Mass (the Last Supper)

 

[StTommyMore]

Latin is hardly necessary for theological works, I think, though an authoritative translation of a final draft is a good idea.

As for Latin in the liturgy, there can be no substitute. Unity, unity, unity. I relish the idea of being able to go anywhere in the world and still participate in Mass. I don’t have to know how to pronounce Spanish to participate in Mexico or what lines through letters signify to follow along in Polish. I can live the Mass I’ve practiced every Sunday no matter where I go in the world.

Someone must have mentioned this before. I don’t care. It bears repeating.

Unity!

The unity in the Liturgy comes not from the language, but from the Eucharist. If one does not need to pronounce the words in Latin to participate, which is true, then neither do they need to pronounce the Polish, Spanish, French, or whatever. Your argument is faulty in that it is not God-centered, but self-centered. To be honest, your argument is based not on God at all, but your own ability to participate in the way you want. I am not saying Latin should be abandoned, but your argument is not a very strong one. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point, so if I am, please let me know and clarify.

 

[the_phoenix]

Frankly, saying that we can communicate with or understand the saints better by knowing or using Latin is as illogical as saying that we can communicate with or understand Christ or God the Father better by knowing or using Latin.

Okay, then you’re welcome to call me illogical if you like, because I came to understand God the Father better precisely through the Latin Mass.

Native English speaker and cradle Catholic here. Grew up through adulthood hearing the Mass in English. Understood all right about Jesus being present at the Mass through the Consecration and the Sacrament of Holy Communion and hearing His words in Gospel stories. Sensed the Holy Spirit at times during Mass, for example when the priest gave a particularly awesome sermon or homily.

But God the Father? The concept of God the Father’s presence at Mass totally went over my head, I totally missed it for years and years while hearing the Mass in English. Despite repeated prayers starting out with "Heavenly Father … " … and despite saying the “Our Father” how many hundreds of times.

Then one day while attending the Latin Mass, it finally hit me. The priest was facing the altar praying, leading the people in prayer. And all of a sudden I got this powerful sense of God the Father running towards us, running towards the priest to give him a hug, running towards everyone in the church to give us all a hug!

So you’re telling me that the rest of you native English speakers have been aware of the presence of God the Father at Mass, without having to learn about it at the Latin Mass?

Looks to me like God blesses us in different ways, teaches us in different ways, gives gifts in different ways, depending on how He created us each one as a unique individual.

PAX ET BONUM,

~~ the phoenix

 

[StTommyMore]

Okay, then you’re welcome to call me illogical if you like, because I came to understand God the Father better precisely through the Latin Mass.

Native English speaker and cradle Catholic here. Grew up through adulthood hearing the Mass in English. Understood all right about Jesus being present at the Mass through the Consecration and the Sacrament of Holy Communion and hearing His words in Gospel stories. Sensed the Holy Spirit at times during Mass, for example when the priest gave a particularly awesome sermon or homily.

But God the Father? The concept of God the Father’s presence at Mass totally went over my head, I totally missed it for years and years while hearing the Mass in English. Despite repeated prayers starting out with "Heavenly Father … " … and despite saying the “Our Father” how many hundreds of times.

Then one day while attending the Latin Mass, it finally hit me. The priest was facing the altar praying, leading the people in prayer. And all of a sudden I got this powerful sense of God the Father running towards us, running towards the priest to give him a hug, running towards everyone in the church to give us all a hug!

So you’re telling me that the rest of you native English speakers have been aware of the presence of God the Father at Mass, without having to learn about it at the Latin Mass?

Looks to me like God blesses us in different ways, teaches us in different ways, gives gifts in different ways, depending on how He created us as each one as a unique individual.

PAX ET BONUM,

~~ the phoenix

This has less to do with Latin, and more to do with ad orientum as opposed to versus populi. But I get your point. Both the OF and the EF have their respective strengths and weaknesses, which is why I attend both.

 

[LilyM]

Okay, then you’re welcome to call me illogical if you like, because I came to understand God the Father better precisely through the Latin Mass.

Native English speaker and cradle Catholic here. Grew up through adulthood hearing the Mass in English. Understood all right about Jesus being present at the Mass through the Consecration and the Sacrament of Holy Communion and hearing His words in Gospel stories. Sensed the Holy Spirit at times during Mass, for example when the priest gave a particularly awesome sermon or homily.

But God the Father? The concept of God the Father’s presence at Mass totally went over my head, I totally missed it for years and years while hearing the Mass in English. Despite repeated prayers starting out with "Heavenly Father … " … and despite saying the “Our Father” how many hundreds of times.

Then one day while attending the Latin Mass, it finally hit me. The priest was facing the altar praying, leading the people in prayer. And all of a sudden I got this powerful sense of God the Father running towards us, running towards the priest to give him a hug, running towards everyone in the church to give us all a hug!

So you’re telling me that the rest of you native English speakers have been aware of the presence of God the Father at Mass, without having to learn about it at the Latin Mass?

Looks to me like God blesses us in different ways, teaches us in different ways, gives gifts in different ways, depending on how He created us as each one as a unique individual.

PAX ET BONUM,

~~ the phoenix

Beautiful story. Misses the point.

It’s certainly a good argument for ad orientem (the posture of the priest facing liturgical east rather than facing the people). It doesn’t seem at all an argument for Latin. I would bet if the priest had adopted the same posture whilst saying the prayers in English it would’ve been a similar sort of ‘a-ha’ moment for you.

You’re right, we all come to the Father in different ways. Personally I have a fantastic relationship with my earthly father, and a few other father figures in my life. I tend to relate to God the Father, even during Mass, in terms of these earthly relationships.

I can imagine God the Father standing beside me at Mass as my earthly father so often did when I was young. Perhaps teaching me to pray as my earthly father did. Or else presiding over the sacrifice, which the angels take to His altar in heaven (in the words of the EP), much as my priest does over the earthly Eucharist.

 

[the_phoenix]

StTommyMore and LilyM:

You both make an excellent clarification about the posture of the priest being related to my “aha moment.” If I’m lumping in Latin as a language with “ad orientem” it’s because I’ve never experienced “ad orientem” at an English-language Mass. So to me it falls under “the use of Latin” … that said, I can certainly understand your reasoning.

And thanks for sharing your appreciation of God the Father at Mass, LilyM.

What I don’t get is why all the quibbling over what language the Mass is in? Why not let people attend Mass in Latin or the vernacular as they prefer and provide for both in a spirit of charity?

Personally, I wouldn’t mind attending the Mass in Spanish … in fact I’ve done so while traveling through Spain. I also attended the Latin Mass in Spain … the homily was in Spanish of course. While visiting the Fatima Shrine in Portugal, I attended the Mass in Portuguese, where I learned how beautiful Jesus’ name sounds in that language … also attended a Byzantine Rite Mass in whatever language they use, and it was beautiful too.

As a language major and professional translator, I speak, read and write several languages with varying degrees of fluency. That said, I would be just fine also with hearing the Mass in a language that I don’t speak and in fact would think it was Really Cool.

I personally think too many people get timid about things like “what page are we on in the missal”?

Anyways, please pardon my rambling.

 

[Layman]

This makes me giggle.

Roman Catholic Church;

Latin Rite;
*
[thinks]*

[thinks]

I know, let’s have it in German!

Cripes.

• All those translations of the Missal now essential.
• All those beautiful hymns gone.
• What a blow to practical unity of worship.
• What a shame to drop a simple language that can’t easily attract vulgar connotations.
• What a pity for English-speaking Catholics to be deprived of a language made for singing (all those words ending in ‘ay’, ‘ee’ and ‘oom’).
• All those beautiful prayers dropped.

Still, makes for an interesting voyage of discovery for the ‘children of the revolutionaries’.

 

[TRAD1936]

How can you say with a straight face that Latin is our link with St Joan when she never spoke a word of it? ‘United worship’? Simple fact is she probably didn’t worship as we do. She certainly didn’t attend the TLM for starters. She may, for all we know, have attended one of the forms of worship banned by St Pius V, and thus we may have no link of that kind to her.

And even assuming she did - how is ‘common worship’ in Latin our link with St Peter? St Paul? The Blessed Virgin? **The first three centuries or so of Christians? None of them worshipped in Latin, **their worship would probably have differed in other important ways from the TLM or any form that we use today as well. It’s a mighty thin argument at best

Our link with Sts Thomas, Dominic, Joan, Peter et al is soul-to-soul, as fellow members of the Body of Christ, as fellow human beings. It has nothing to do with language at all, be it Latin or any other.

None of the faithful in the first three centuries of the Church worshipped in Latin? None of them?. That is really quite a statement. I would have thought at least some of them did.

 

[Geremia]

How can you say with a straight face that Latin is our link with St Joan when she never spoke a word of it?

How do you know? “In the West, for example, in Italy, in Germany, in Spain, in France, in England, Latin was at all times the liturgical language.” (fn. #1 of "The Language Used in the Celebration of the Holy Mass"The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass). Why would you say that after 19 years of being a pious Catholic, St. Joan of Arc “never spoke a word of it?”

If ‘United worship’? Simple fact is she probably didn’t worship as we do. She certainly didn’t attend the TLM for starters.

Maybe not in the form we know it today, but the mass she attended—if it was Catholic at all—was certainly in Latin.

She may, for all we know, have attended one of the forms of worship banned by St Pius V

So basically she could’ve attended a non-Catholic mass? Sure, anything’s possible, but considering she’s a saint, isn’t that very unlikely?

, and thus we may have no link of that kind to her.

And even assuming she did - how is ‘common worship’ in Latin our link with St Peter? St Paul? The Blessed Virgin? The first three centuries or so of Christians? None of them worshipped in Latin, their worship would probably have differed in other important ways from the TLM or any form that we use today as well.

Can you please give citations supporting that all these people (except perhaps Mother Mary) did not celebrate mass in Latin? St. Peter and St. Paul certainly knew Latin

Also, how would you explain this (fn. 2 of Gihr)?:

Opponents of the Latin language of worship were, as a rule, heretics, schismatics and rationalistic Catholics; for example, the Albigensians, the so-called Reformers, the Jansenists, the Gallicans, the Josephites, the so-called German and the Old Catholics.

And the Council of Trent sess. 22, can. 9. (which some seem to ignore when interpreting Vatican II’s Sacrasanctum Concilium, which did not say masses should be 100% in the vernacular; it said, rather, e.g., in §36.1: “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”):

On not celebrating the Mass every where in the vulgar tongue; the mysteries of the Mass to be explained to the people.

Although the mass contains great instruction for the faithful people, nevertheless, it has not seemed expedient to the Fathers, that it should be every where celebrated in the vulgar tongue. Wherefore, the ancient usage of each church, and the rite approved of by the holy Roman Church, the mother and mistress of all churches, being in each place retained; and, that the sheep of Christ may not suffer hunger, nor the little ones ask for bread, and there be none to break it unto them, the holy Synod charges pastors, and all who have the cure of souls, that they frequently, during the celebration of mass, expound either by themselves, or others, some portion of those things which are read at mass, and that, amongst the rest, they explain some mystery of this most holy sacrifice, especially on the Lord’s days and festivals.

…]

CANON IX.–If any one saith, that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; or, that the mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue only; or, that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the chalice, for that it is contrary to the institution of Christ; let him be anathema.

It’s a mighty thin argument at best

Our link with Sts Thomas, Dominic, Joan, Peter et al is soul-to-soul, as fellow members of the Body of Christ, as fellow human beings.

Not as baptized Catholics?

It has nothing to do with language at all, be it Latin or any other.

Would you disagree with Pope John XXIII that Latin “proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe” (Veterum Sapientia)? If not, then why, if promoted and taught, could Latin not be a bond of unity for us, too?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Neither is even the presence of a congregation.

Then why are we under the pain of sin to attend Mass if we aren’t essential?

 

[Geremia]

And then, as now, the translations can’t always translate properly. Do you really think less was lost by the translation of the Latin Vulgate into the English Douay-Rheims Bible than into the English Jerusalem or New American Bibles? I seriously doubt that 17th-century English was any better a vehicle for capturing the meaning of 4th-century Latin than 20th-century English. Yet those who are less-than-proficient in Latin equally relied on each of these imperfect translations.

Actually, English that lacks the distinction between 2nd person “you” (plural) and “you” (singular, or “thou” in pre-modern English), e.g., will not translate as well Latin or any other language that does make such a distinction (tu vs. vos in Latin). Would you not agree that, e.g., modern Italian, because of its proximity to Latin in terms of vocabulary yet somewhat less so in terms of grammar, would translate Latin better than English?

 

[ProVobis]

As a language major and professional translator, I speak, read and write several languages with varying degrees of fluency. That said, I would be just fine also with hearing the Mass in a language that I don’t speak and in fact would think it was Really Cool.

So is it safe to say that without the Latin, we wouldn’t have the Romance languages and half of today’s English?

It seems as if people who live in the West should be most appreciative of the Latin. And not only in the liturgy either.