Why shouldn't Catholics learn Latin?

[estesbob]

Look. All I’m saying, is that people make it out to be so impossible and ridiculous to learn Latin. Yet the Moslems learn Arabic, the Hindus learn Sanskrit, the Jews learn Hebrew. So why, especially if we are the one true religion with God on our side p), is it so impossible for us?

Sic iustus quam puteus operor vos lego Latin?

 

[LilyM]

Look. All I’m saying, is that people make it out to be so impossible and ridiculous to learn Latin. Yet the Moslems learn Arabic, the Hindus learn Sanskrit, the Jews learn Hebrew. So why, especially if we are the one true religion with God on our side p), is it so impossible for us?

They’re just like Catholics - some do learn these languages, plenty don’t (being too poor for schooling of any kind and whatnot).

Classic example in scripture - Jesus on the cross quoting the psalm (‘Eloi Eloi lama sabacthani’) in Hebrew. People overhear him, obviously not knowing Hebrew don’t know what he’s saying and think he’s calling on Elijah instead.

I hope those that don’t aren’t made to feel lesser or inferior, or that knowledge of these languages is essential (even if it may be desirable) for practice of their faith. It’s not like St Peter knew any Latin, chances are he knew little to no Hebrew either!

 

[jean8]

I have never head anyone say they “can’t” learn Latin but most certainly did not even when the Mass was only in Latin.

In the end it probably comes down to time. People would rather pray, read the Bible, etc. etc. etc. than learn to read Latin when the benefits of doing so are rather limited for most people.

I don’t see why it would be difficult to learn the Mass in Latin.
Do they provide a Prayer Book to follow? Or a Missal In English and Latin so a person is aware of what is being said?

God bless,
jean

 

[bkovacs]

I learned Latin in my 4 year in the Semnary back in the mid 60s. To be honest , having spent time in mexico every year for the last 20 or so years, I wish I had learned Sapanish instead

On the serious side with the Mass in the vernacular there is no compelling reason for a catholic to learn Latin.

On the serious side to. Muslims are required to know Arabic as well as their native tongue, and since Islam is growing at a rapid rate. Those who were once Roman Catholics who are converting to Islam, are learning compulsory Arabic just to read the and pray the Quran. So shouldn’t Rome make it compulsory that Catholics learn Latin to pray and celebrate Mass in Latin. Are the Muslims whining that they shouldn’t have to learn Arabic. I seriously doubt it.

 

[CatholicGeorge]

IAnd it doesn’t require learning the entire language! Just learning the standard prayers of the Mass. It really isn’t as hard as people make it out to be.

Exactly. I once attended a Mass in Polish, and on another occasion in Vietnamese. I had absolutely no problem following the Mass and praying along because, guess what, the structure is the same. Assuming we’re talking about Latin use in the current rite, as opposed to the Tridentine rite (which I’m not opposed to), we don’t need to “learn” Latin, we just need to pay attention. The Latin will come. With a little humility and willingness to struggle, I would find, at least for myself, that I would slowly begin to recite, “Credo”, and “Pater Noster” and “Sanctus”, which, along with the “Angus Dei” I already know because we have, in our parish, sung them in Latin. I don’t need to know what they say because I know the text of the Creed, the Our Father, the Holy, Holy, Holy and the Lamb of God, and I know where they are in the Liturgy, so when I get to them, and I hear the words in another language, (Polish, Vietnamese or Latin) I’m pretty sure I know what they’re saying, even if I have to recite in English under my breath.

There are, however plenty of good reasons to learn Latin, and the author of the quote above listed some good ones. And my own is simply that it helps me with my English since so much of our language derives it’s meaning from it.

Pax Christi!

 

[aingil]

I learned latin in high school, I know enough to follow along and get the gist of what is being said at mass. That being said. Latin does not make you holier. As people have already said, you can go to a latin mass and get the what is going on even if you don’t know latin. If I was to recommend Catholics do something more to further their faith it would not be learning latin.

Learning to evangelize, reading more books, praying more, talking other Catholics more, getting excited about the faith more…those are the things that Catholics need. There is a reason that Peter Kreeft remarked that it is a sad state of affairs when the zeal of the saints more closely resembles evengelical protestants then it does many Catholics. It bothers me that many of the posts in these forums are about latin and traditional liturgy and lamenting Vatican II. I understand that those are important issues, but they are not the most important. Souls are, and learning latin is not going to save them.

St John Vianney almost failed seminary because he could not learn latin and the theology courses that were taught in it. Yet his holiness changed France. What are we doing to become saints like that?

 

[EpiskoposEridos]

…]
4) You don’t ever have to worry about mistranslations (“for many” and “for all” comes to mind).
…]

Well, it isn’t as simple as it seems. The problem is that Latin does not use definite articles. So multi (which I think from memory is in another case, but I have quoted the nominative as the standard form) could be interpreted either as “many” or “the many”. In the latter case, the word “all” would be more or less synonymous. I would personally, as a professional translator, have used either “many” or “the many”; in such cases of ambiguity the normal thing to do would be to ask the client. So if I were commissioned by the Catholic Church to translate the mass, I would ask whichever person or body had organized the job to explain the doctrine in that regard and translate accordingly. Luckily, I didn’t get the job.

 

[thunderballs75]

I learned latin in high school, I know enough to follow along and get the gist of what is being said at mass. That being said. Latin does not make you holier. As people have already said, you can go to a latin mass and get the what is going on even if you don’t know latin. If I was to recommend Catholics do something more to further their faith it would not be learning latin.

Learning to evangelize, reading more books, praying more, talking other Catholics more, getting excited about the faith more…those are the things that Catholics need. There is a reason that Peter Kreeft remarked that it is a sad state of affairs when the zeal of the saints more closely resembles evengelical protestants then it does many Catholics. It bothers me that many of the posts in these forums are about latin and traditional liturgy and lamenting Vatican II. I understand that those are important issues, but they are not the most important. Souls are, and learning latin is not going to save them.

St John Vianney almost failed seminary because he could not learn latin and the theology courses that were taught in it. Yet his holiness changed France. What are we doing to become saints like that?

Do you honestly think more souls have been saved since we introduced the vernacular? Do you honestly believe more people believe in the real presence? The four last things? That the Catholic Church is the one true Church? That Jesus Christ is the saviour? Do you honestly believe that this is more common and understood than before? The traditional liturgy and Latin have made me much more grounded in the Faith. I think it is something which encourages you to grow in your faith, not the opposite.

 

[LilyM]

Do you honestly think more souls have been saved since we introduced the vernacular? Do you honestly believe more people believe in the real presence? The four last things? That the Catholic Church is the one true Church? That Jesus Christ is the saviour? Do you honestly believe that this is more common and understood than before? The traditional liturgy and Latin have made me much more grounded in the Faith. I think it is something which encourages you to grow in your faith, not the opposite.

Do you think people who knew the Latin Mass were any more likely to believe in all (or indeed any) of these things? It sure didn’t help Henry VIII, Luther, Calvin or any of their first generation of followers … to name but a handful …

 

[thunderballs75]

Do you think people who knew the Latin Mass were any more likely to believe in all (or indeed any) of these things? It sure didn’t help Henry VIII, Luther, Calvin or any of their first generation of followers … to name but a handful …

I would be willing to bet my house on it that if you took a typical OF Mass and a typical EF Mass, took a poll of the laity present, that the ones at the EF go to confession more often, understand the sacraments better, and pray more often. No offense to anybody who goes to the OF.

 

[LilyM]

I would be willing to bet my house on it that if you took a typical OF Mass and a typical EF Mass, took a poll of the laity present, that the ones at the EF go to confession more often, understand the sacraments better, and pray more often. No offense to anybody who goes to the OF.

Now yes, but ‘twerent’ always so. And it happens now because it’s a conscious choice of many to connect the dots in terms of ALL the ‘traditional’ (meaning they are sometimes all given that label) aspects of Catholic practice - frequent confession, lots of formal catechesis, and Latin.

Tomorrow if the Pope decided to do away with the OF and allow only the EF you’d find what you had in the 50s - congregations varying enormously in their rates of knowledge, understanding and frequenting of the sacraments.

Not to mention - St Bernadette didn’t even know what the words ‘Immaculate Conception’ meant, let alone about that doctrine or many others. And if she could SAY the responses of a Latin Mass she certainly would have severely limited understanding of what they meant. Didn’t stop her from being a good Catholic.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Also…in the past, at least Catholics knew it was a SIN to leave Catholicism and become a heretical protestant…now it seems to be the “cool” thing to do…if you don’t agree, just leave!!! Don’t want to follow the Church’s teachings on birth control, abortion, cohabitation, etc…don’t worry, just leave…that is the attitude today. At least in the past, sin was something spoken about every Sunday from the Ambo…people lived the faith…they followed the teachings of The Church…and while there were those that ignored The Church and left it, it was in very, very small numbers…because they understood it was a Mortal Sin to do such. Now we live in a society of “if it makes you feel good” why not do it.

Do you honestly think more souls have been saved since we introduced the vernacular? Do you honestly believe more people believe in the real presence? The four last things? That the Catholic Church is the one true Church? That Jesus Christ is the saviour? Do you honestly believe that this is more common and understood than before? The traditional liturgy and Latin have made me much more grounded in the Faith. I think it is something which encourages you to grow in your faith, not the opposite.

 

[LilyM]

Also…in the past, at least Catholics knew it was a SIN to leave Catholicism and become a heretical protestant…now it seems to be the “cool” thing to do…if you don’t agree, just leave!!! Don’t want to follow the Church’s teachings on birth control, abortion, cohabitation, etc…don’t worry, just leave…that is the attitude today. At least in the past, sin was something spoken about every Sunday from the Ambo…people lived the faith…they followed the teachings of The Church…and while there were those that ignored The Church and left it, it was in very, very small numbers…because they understood it was a Mortal Sin to do such. Now we live in a society of “if it makes you feel good” why not do it.

Really? Henry VIII, Luther, Calvin and that huge percentage of the Christians of their day who followed them into Protestantism, having each and every one been well-brought up Catholics, KNEW that it was a mortal sin to leave the Church, did they? Gimme a break.

 

[michaeldaniels]

I guess you either purposely skipped over the part that said “very small numbers”…or just did not comprehend what I was trying to say…either way, your point is moot…and for the record, Henry VIII, Luther, and Calvin are prime examples of the wanna be Catholics we have in our Church today…good riddance!!!

Really? Henry VIII, Luther, Calvin and that huge percentage of the Christians of their day who followed them into Protestantism, having each and every one been well-brought up Catholics, KNEW that it was a mortal sin to leave the Church, did they? Gimme a break.

 

[LilyM]

I guess you either purposely skipped over the part that said “very small numbers”…or just did not comprehend what I was trying to say…either way, your point is moot…and for the record, Henry VIII, Luther, and Calvin are prime examples of the wanna be Catholics we have in our Church today…good riddance!!!

Small numbers? Seriously, we’re probably talking about a good quarter or third of all Catholics alive at the time, leaving the church over about a seventy-year span.

Having, for the most part, had every advantage, catechetically liturgically and sacramentally speaking, that any Catholic could wish for.

So no, it’s not a moot point at all that so many of them, so well catechised, so well served in terms of liturgy and sacraments, having upped and turned tail so suddenly.

And it’s hardly a ringing endorsement of the Latin that the Church used at the time - if anything, the sudden change among Protestants to a vernacular liturgy shows it was a major point of disconnect.

 

[thunderballs75]

Small numbers? Seriously, we’re probably talking about a good quarter or third of all Catholics alive at the time, leaving the church over about a seventy-year span.

Having, for the most part, had every advantage, catechetically liturgically and sacramentally speaking, that any Catholic could wish for.

So no, it’s not a moot point at all that so many of them, so well catechised, so well served in terms of liturgy and sacraments, having upped and turned tail so suddenly…

I have to disagree. Don’t get me wrong, I am a very devout Catholic. But the Church was very corrupt during this time. Most bishops and even popes were more concerned with their secular desires than the salvation of souls. At this time the Church had many privileges such as land and levying taxes. Many priests were also more concerned with these things. The original reason Martin Luther did what he did was due to corruption if we remember correctly? We also have to remember that the homily was way less important than it is now. Often times we have the people disobeying the Church, such as the pogroms against Jews. So although we know that the Church had greater power during these times, I think it is a misconception that they were seriously more concerned with catechesis. It was only after the counter-reformation these things started getting better, and many of the clergy were more concerned with spiritual matters.

And yes, you are right to remember that it was the protestants who introduced the vernacular.

 

[jenmaris2]

I have to disagree. Latin is useful in that:

1. It keeps a standard for the Church in general.
2. You can pray the same exact Mass everywhere, be it Europe, North/South America, Asia, Africa, Australia, etc.
3. Communities aren’t separated by English, Spanish, or Vietnamese Mass-goers as it is here, and consequently we are never separated by racial lines.
4. You don’t ever have to worry about mistranslations (“for many” and “for all” comes to mind).
5. It emphasizes the unity and universality of the Church.
6. We can continue the traditions of our ancestors for nearly 1500 years!

And it doesn’t require learning the entire language! Just learning the standard prayers of the Mass. It really isn’t as hard as people make it out to be.

I agree with thunderballs75 - besides for reasons of universality of the church, also that with Latin one can easily understand other languages from which they are derived. I would recommend the lay Catholics to learn it voluntarily so that we can feel and witness the fraternity wherever we attend Mass. It takes a firm intention, though.
Mass in Latin is among other things - I think - what brings people from all over the world gather in Rome during Easter, Christmas celebrations. Someone mentioned about websites where you can learn it. Mind your telling us here?

I wonder though, whether there’s anyone who aspires to master Aramaic - Jesus’ language??
Can anyone tell something about it?

 

[aingil]

Do you honestly think more souls have been saved since we introduced the vernacular? Do you honestly believe more people believe in the real presence? The four last things? That the Catholic Church is the one true Church? That Jesus Christ is the saviour? Do you honestly believe that this is more common and understood than before? The traditional liturgy and Latin have made me much more grounded in the Faith. I think it is something which encourages you to grow in your faith, not the opposite.

Why you think that the Church had Vatican II? The faith of the laity was not where it should be. It’s not like the vernacular was introduce and boom Catholics suddenly decided to jump off the deep end. The fact that so many problems immediately erupted after the council shows that the council was needed, not that it caused the problems. The church felt the need to have Vatican II for a reason…and pretty much like many of the other councils there was massive fall out directly following it. Vatican II is not that old and people need to let it take effect.

This is not an argument about whether EF or OF is better (which is an overhashed argument imho, besides you don’t need to know latin to go to an EF mass) , but about whether spending time learning latin is something that would better the faith of Catholics today…right now. For specific people it might be a good thing, if not just for the discipline that learning a language teaches you. But to recommend that all Catholics learn latin is not necessary or beneficial to all.

 

[1way]

I always hear that one of the main reasons some Catholics are opposed to the Latin Mass (or at least prefer English) is because they say that they can’t learn Latin. But I ask, why not? I was 15 when I learned the Latin Mass and its prayers, and it wasn’t that hard for me. It just takes a little faith and effort. My other example is to look at the Muslims. They are often willing to learn at least the basic prayers and words of Arabic in order to read the Quran. And there are more Muslims than there are Latin Rite Catholics. Why then can’t we learn a small amount of Latin to have the great gift of praying the Mass together, be it Hispanic, White, Black, Asian, etc.? Just a thought. I know that Latin is not going to become universal again, but this is why I think it isn’t impossible. What do you think?

Whats the difference? Does God reject a heartfelt prayer because it was offered to The Throne in the wrong language?

I remember clearly during the change over to english that the strong feeling among most of my friends and the Parish Priests was that the change was an excellent move. Those that wanted Latin were able to read the Latin as they celebrated… or continue to attend the Latin Mass.
Locally, if enough people today want Latin I am sure that there are Parish Priests open to accommodating. If not, following in Latin is still the alternative.
I think that communication between God and man is tough enough without forcibly throwing a foreign language into the mix… even more so now that 50 years have passed… Kind of like trying to unscramble eggs.

If Latin is your first choice I am sure there is a way… Without turning the clock back 50 years for most of the rest of the faithful. It would be more of a distraction than anything …IMHO

Spanish speaking Catholics in this country have no problem creating an atmosphere where they can worship within the cultural norms that they prefer.
Greeks and Russians do it as well … When I lived in Pittsburgh I attended a Mass in Polish (it was the home parish of Bobby Vinton … The Polish Prince )

as I said … Whats the difference?
“Man looks on the externals, God looks on the heart.”

 

[michaeldaniels]

That is your perception on it…personally, I think you are way, way off

Why you think that the Church had Vatican II? The faith of the laity was not where it should be. It’s not like the vernacular was introduce and boom Catholics suddenly decided to jump off the deep end. The fact that so many problems immediately erupted after the council shows that the council was needed, not that it caused the problems. The church felt the need to have Vatican II for a reason…and pretty much like many of the other councils there was massive fall out directly following it. Vatican II is not that old and people need to let it take effect.

.