Why Latin?

[clem456]

In addition to this, the Catholic faith is a historical faith. As a matter of historical fact, Latin was used throughout the Western Church from about 400 until 1965. Many of us like the feeling that we are closely tied to our Catholic foreruners and to the historical Church. I believe maintaining that tie is also theologically important, not just personally edifying. One way to maintain the historical continuity and to help people appreciate the historical depth of our Faith is through the use of Latin.

I do not attend the EF Mass, only Novus Ordo. However, I must say that I find it extremely edifying when certain parts of the Mass are in Latin, even if it is just the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei. I also like when the Kyrie is in Greek. There’s just something mysterious and cool about saying it the exact same way that, say, St. Augustine or St. Patrick said it.

This is the same reason that I have memorized sometimes and recite the basic prayers of our faith in Latin. My Irish Catholic ancestors said the “Ave Maria’s” not their “Hail Mary’s.” I like to be able to imagine that I am praying along with them.

I have found that most people who are put off by the use of a little Latin in the Mass are people who don’t know or care much about history. They are “now” people for whom the great history of the Church has little relevance and who don’t like feeling “tied to the past.”

I care passionately about history, or rather I value the living Tradition and traditions of the Church. I personally like when certain parts of the Mass are in traditional languages.

However, the Mass transcends language. What is great for me may be an impediment or distraction for others. Language is a practical matter.

 

[ProVobis]

I do not attend the EF Mass, only Novus Ordo. However, I must say that I find it extremely edifying when certain parts of the Mass are in Latin, even if it is just the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei. I also like when the Kyrie is in Greek. There’s just something mysterious and cool about saying it the exact same way that, say, St. Augustine or St. Patrick said it.

Change of code has a purpose and is generally valued for its effects. Shakespeare did it (“Et tu Brute”) and so did I when writing or enhancing computer programs. Even the US dollar bill and many seals have Latin phrases. I can easily understand why Jubilate Deo, for example, was pushed by the Vatican for every parish to use, though there seemed to be heavy opposition against it. I can offer only one reason for this opposition: arrogance.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Change of code has a purpose and is generally valued for its effects. Shakespeare did it (“Et tu Brute”) and so did I when writing or enhancing computer programs. Even the US dollar bill and many seals have Latin phrases. I can easily understand why Jubilate Deo, for example, was pushed by the Vatican for every parish to use, though there seemed to be heavy opposition against it. I can offer only one reason for this opposition: arrogance.

I think accusing everybody opposed to it of arrogance is a bit of a stretch. You just don’t know their reasons, and really, people don’t have to give one. Just accept the fact that not everyone thinks like you do and do not label them if they don’t. It is what it is.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

And I’m not sure the Church has any official position on the use of screens. I would be interested to see a thread on that.

They are used at the papal Masses and other liturgies, both in Rome and abroad, in order to facilitate the participation of those who are attending.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Originally Posted by ProVobis
/…/ I can easily understand why Jubilate Deo, for example, was pushed by the Vatican for every parish to use, though there seemed to be heavy opposition against it. I can offer only one reason for this opposition: arrogance.

I think accusing everybody opposed to it of arrogance is a bit of a stretch. You just don’t know their reasons, and really, people don’t have to give one. Just accept the fact that not everyone thinks like you do and do not label them if they don’t. It is what it is.

I also take grave exception to this sweeping allegation against a broad swath of ecclesiastics and, most especially, against members of the hierarchy. What you allege is defamatory against the bishops and the pastors. To say their decisions and priorities on implementation of liturgical reform on an issue such as Jubilate Deo were based solely on arrogance. That is rude in the extreme.

 

[ProVobis]

I also take grave exception to this sweeping allegation against a broad swath of ecclesiastics and, most especially, against members of the hierarchy.

I thought each parish already had free copies of Jubilate Deo, distributed by the hierarchy.

 

[ProVobis]

You know, whenever I see these Latin-bashing threads come up, I’m reminded of what liturgist Dom Guaranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France, wrote in 1840:

“Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the hearts of all the enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond among Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit. . . . The spirit of rebellion which drives them to confide the universal prayer to the idiom of each people, of each province, of each century, has for the rest produced its fruits, and the reformed themselves constantly perceive that the Catholic people, in spite of their Latin prayers, relish better and accomplish with more zeal the duties of the cult than most do the Protestant people. At every hour of the day, divine worship takes place in Catholic churches. The faithful Catholic, who assists, leaves his mother tongue at the door. Apart form the sermons, he hears nothing but mysterious words which, even so, are not heard in the most solemn moment of the Canon of the Mass. Nevertheless, this mystery charms him in such a way that he is not jealous of the lot of the Protestant, even though the ear of the latter doesn’t hear a single sound without perceiving its meaning .… . . . We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in ever destroying it, it would be well on the way to victory. Exposed to profane gaze, like a virgin who has been violated, from that moment on the Liturgy has lost much of its sacred character, and very soon people find that it is not worthwhile putting aside one’s work or pleasure in order to go and listen to what is being said in the way one speaks on the marketplace. . . .”

 

[HelenRose]

You know, whenever I see these Latin-bashing threads come up, I’m reminded of what liturgist Dom Guaranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France, wrote in 1840:

I never thought of it in these terms. Of course. A language unites people.
I have thought about how wonderful it is that I can go any where in the world and hear “Ave Maria” sung and feel so at home. Of course, it is the language. Thank you.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

You know, whenever I see these Latin-bashing threads come up, I’m reminded of what liturgist Dom Guaranger, founder of the Benedictine Congregation of France, wrote in 1840:

“Enemies of Rome”? But the Catholic Church extends far beyond Rome.

 

[ProVobis]

“Enemies of Rome”? But the Catholic Church extends far beyond Rome.

Must be arrogance on my part.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I understand about 1/3 of English derives from Latin. I’m sure it’s much greater in the Romance languages.

If I am an English speaker in the British Isles, the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, I will be able to understand the Mass. If I go to, or live in any other country, I won’t. Even in much of the West, including places like Norway where (I’m told) almost everybody can speak English, I won’t.

I understand the use of Latin was largely due to the facts that a) a lot of people understood Latin a few centuries ago, almost anywhere in Europe, and b) people could learn enough of the prayers to know what they were saying or hearing no matter where they were.

Perhaps in this age of nationalism that’s no longer desired. But one does wonder. If, as some say, the Church in the U.S. is going to become majority Hispanic, am I going to understand what’s going on even less than I would if it was in Latin?

 

[ProVobis]

I understand about 1/3 of English derives from Latin. .

Depends on how you break it down. English is Germanic based, but the majority of multi-syllable words are Latin derived. Of the 500 most spoken words, 400 are single-syllable. At least according to one of the books I mentioned.

If I am an English speaker in the British Isles, the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, I will be able to understand the Mass.

See, this is one of the criticisms of the new English translation, that it differs in meaning from one English-speaking country to another. I can sort of vouch for that, as I grew up in a UK environment and the nuns dropped me THREE whole grade levels so I could catch up in US English. True story. I imagine US citizens moving to the UK have a difficult time after a while as well.

I understand the use of Latin was largely due to the facts that a) a lot of people understood Latin a few centuries ago, almost anywhere in Europe, and b) people could learn enough of the prayers to know what they were saying or hearing no matter where they were.

If that’s the case, those lot of people must have been better educated in grammar and inflection, which I seriously doubt.

Perhaps in this age of nationalism that’s no longer desired. But one does wonder. If, as some say, the Church in the U.S. is going to become majority Hispanic, am I going to understand what’s going on even less than I would if it was in Latin?

I don’t speak Spanish, but I’m able to understand what needs to be understood at a Spanish Mass. The Latin helps bigtime.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Must be arrogance on my part.

Of course the Roman Rite has every reason to be in Latin. But no reason to force it on all peoples.

 

[ProVobis]

Of course the Roman Rite has every reason to be in Latin. But no reason to force it on all peoples.

When you’re sitting at Mass with ALL peoples of the world, or you don’t know who’s sitting out there, do you have any other suggestions?

BTW, most of the EF is said silently so you’re not forced to hear much. You watch and pray contemplatively.

 

[RyanBlack]

When you’re sitting at Mass with ALL peoples of the world, or you don’t know who’s sitting out there, do you have any other suggestions?

BTW, most of the EF is said silently so you’re not forced to hear much. You watch and pray contemplatively.

Latin has never been the language of a number ritual Churches that are in fact Catholic. Those Churches neither desire nor need to use Latin.

 

[ProVobis]

Latin has never been the language of a number ritual Churches that are in fact Catholic.

Okay so what language would you say these rites if your congregation consisted of all peoples, excluding no one?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Latin has never been the language of a number ritual Churches that are in fact Catholic. Those Churches neither desire nor need to use Latin.

Very true. And I would add, sadly, they have that sentiment for very understandable reasons.

 

[drforjc]

Very true. And I would add, sadly, they have that sentiment for very understandable reasons.

It seems to me the OP was referring to the Latin rite from the way she asked the question.

Certainly other liturgical rites ought to be use their respective liturgical languages and the Latin rite ought to use (at least some, per SC) Latin.

 

[RyanBlack]

Okay so what language would you say these rites if your congregation consisted of all peoples, excluding no one?

In the Eastern Churches, there is a very ancient tradition of using a variety of languages, based on locale. I see no good reason for us to deviate from this tradition. Are you suggesting otherwise, and if so, would you have Eastern Churches use Latin, in spite of the fact that they have never done so in the past?

 

[ProVobis]

In the Eastern Churches, there is a very ancient tradition of using a variety of languages, based on locale. I see no good reason for us to deviate from this tradition. Are you suggesting otherwise, and if so, would you have Eastern Churches use Latin, in spite of the fact that they have never done so in the past?

No, I didn’t say that. I think I’m going to leave the thread as people seem to misread my posts. Or better yet, start another thread and slam English as the prime language of miscommunication.