Why so much oppostion to the "L" word (latin)

[KaneKatholic]

I am seriously considering switching parishes and just recently i went to my first ever Holy Mass in the extraordinary form.I told my parish’s assistant pator (he tends to be more open to tradition than the pastor himself) seemed to subtly frown upon it and my tradtional views. he seemed to imediatly get on the defensive when i mentioned it… (now he was aware of my traditional prefrences.) he began into his whole thing (for lack of a better term) about how it(the church) will never return to that (latin)then he hinted that the EF sugessted a God that is untouchable and far off (“transcendant view” were his exact words)
I love the Latin and all of the rich tradition of our church I personally believe that the EF expresses more physically what happens spiritually in both masses I jus prefer latin incense etc… now dont get me wrong I love the holy mass (Both EQUAL forms) and i wish that one day they can be held up equally together as two alternates vs. others in the church that want it to die (or at least be pushed aside as a relic) iam an altar server and once when i suggested wearing a surplice to my pastor he immediatly said “NO!” but its not just the “no” that upset me because he is the boss and his word is last when it comes to things like that but its what he said following the no that saddened me " we arent going BACK to THAT" as if it were a disease or something. i belong to very liberal parish when it comes down to liturgy (even in some cses politics you wont believe how many Obama ’ 08 tee shirts ive seen ) but thats another disscussion for another day. my question is why… when iwas a child (Born after’65)
my church did things differently alot of hings were left over from the change and i saw a hint of the traditions of the faith and it marveled me.
as the years progressed and the pastors changed it (my parish) grew further and further away from what it was. i have seen some horror stories in other parishes worse off than mine. this other one for instance had some sort of african ritual prayer service (pouring water in a bowl honorng the winds of the north south east and west)
and at my confirmation there was liturgical dance (IN THE LITURGY mind you)
as i said when i began typing was that i am really considering changing parishes to this other one that as EF of the holy mass and also i like the way they do the OF also. (i like both forms BUT when the OF is done in respect to the traditions)
a question i find myself raising the question of why?..Why is it that traditional things are treated with so much opposition within mother church at times ?why in my parish does my priest seem to almosr detest the “old ways”(for lack of a better term)
(another example is when i suggested kneeling for communion to my pastor he outright condemned it and said (we are being sent out so we should be standing)(I still do it anyway when he isnt serving mass)…why so much opposition to the “L” word?

 

[Wesley7]

why so much oppostion to the “L” word (latin)

Probably because Latin is not part of the ‘Lingua Franca’ of Slavonic,Greek,or Russian culture.

Latin; like English, is a Western language.

 

[TrueLight]

I am seriously considering switching parishes and just recently i went to my first ever Holy Mass in the extraordinary form.I told my parish’s assistant pator (he tends to be more open to tradition than the pastor himself) seemed to subtly frown upon it and my tradtional views. he seemed to imediatly get on the defensive when i mentioned it… (now he was aware of my traditional prefrences.) he began into his whole thing (for lack of a better term) about how it(the church) will never return to that (latin)then he hinted that the EF sugessted a God that is untouchable and far off (“transcendant view” were his exact words)
I love the Latin and all of the rich tradition of our church I personally believe that the EF expresses more physically what happens spiritually in both masses I jus prefer latin incense etc… now dont get me wrong I love the holy mass (Both EQUAL forms) and i wish that one day they can be held up equally together as two alternates vs. others in the church that want it to die (or at least be pushed aside as a relic) iam an altar server and once when i suggested wearing a surplice to my pastor he immediatly said “NO!” but its not just the “no” that upset me because he is the boss and his word is last when it comes to things like that but its what he said following the no that saddened me " we arent going BACK to THAT" as if it were a disease or something. i belong to very liberal parish when it comes down to liturgy (even in some cses politics you wont believe how many Obama ’ 08 tee shirts ive seen ) but thats another disscussion for another day. my question is why… when iwas a child (Born after’65)
my church did things differently alot of hings were left over from the change and i saw a hint of the traditions of the faith and it marveled me.
as the years progressed and the pastors changed it (my parish) grew further and further away from what it was. i have seen some horror stories in other parishes worse off than mine. this other one for instance had some sort of african ritual prayer service (pouring water in a bowl honorng the winds of the north south east and west)
and at my confirmation there was liturgical dance (IN THE LITURGY mind you)
as i said when i began typing was that i am really considering changing parishes to this other one that as EF of the holy mass and also i like the way they do the OF also. (i like both forms BUT when the OF is done in respect to the traditions)
a question i find myself raising the question of why?..Why is it that traditional things are treated with so much opposition within mother church at times ?why in my parish does my priest seem to almosr detest the “old ways”(for lack of a better term)
(another example is when i suggested kneeling for communion to my pastor he outright condemned it and said (we are being sent out so we should be standing)(I still do it anyway when he isnt serving mass)…why so much opposition to the “L” word?

Because unfortunately, some people have bought into the propaganda, the hype, that in the days when the Latin mass was norm, people had no relationship with God and had no idea what was going on during mass.

I have been going to Latin mass for four months and I understand so much of what is going on. Not to mention, there are English-Latin missals.

I can’t understand how someone can attend the same mass for 20 years and have no idea of what is happening. I think that’s just false propaganda.

Also, I have never felt such a connection with God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit since I started attending mass. And since I have been mostly attending the EF…hmm… I guess the distant God theory is false as well.

 

[TrentCath]

I am seriously considering switching parishes and just recently i went to my first ever Holy Mass in the extraordinary form.I told my parish’s assistant pator (he tends to be more open to tradition than the pastor himself) seemed to subtly frown upon it and my tradtional views. he seemed to imediatly get on the defensive when i mentioned it… (now he was aware of my traditional prefrences.) he began into his whole thing (for lack of a better term) about how it(the church) will never return to that (latin)then he hinted that the EF sugessted a God that is untouchable and far off (“transcendant view” were his exact words)
I love the Latin and all of the rich tradition of our church I personally believe that the EF expresses more physically what happens spiritually in both masses I jus prefer latin incense etc… now dont get me wrong I love the holy mass (Both EQUAL forms) and i wish that one day they can be held up equally together as two alternates vs. others in the church that want it to die (or at least be pushed aside as a relic) iam an altar server and once when i suggested wearing a surplice to my pastor he immediatly said “NO!” but its not just the “no” that upset me because he is the boss and his word is last when it comes to things like that but its what he said following the no that saddened me " we arent going BACK to THAT" as if it were a disease or something. i belong to very liberal parish when it comes down to liturgy (even in some cses politics you wont believe how many Obama ’ 08 tee shirts ive seen ) but thats another disscussion for another day. my question is why… when iwas a child (Born after’65)
my church did things differently alot of hings were left over from the change and i saw a hint of the traditions of the faith and it marveled me.
as the years progressed and the pastors changed it (my parish) grew further and further away from what it was. i have seen some horror stories in other parishes worse off than mine. this other one for instance had some sort of african ritual prayer service (pouring water in a bowl honorng the winds of the north south east and west)
and at my confirmation there was liturgical dance (IN THE LITURGY mind you)
as i said when i began typing was that i am really considering changing parishes to this other one that as EF of the holy mass and also i like the way they do the OF also. (i like both forms BUT when the OF is done in respect to the traditions)
a question i find myself raising the question of why?..Why is it that traditional things are treated with so much opposition within mother church at times ?why in my parish does my priest seem to almosr detest the “old ways”(for lack of a better term)
(another example is when i suggested kneeling for communion to my pastor he outright condemned it and said (we are being sent out so we should be standing)(I still do it anyway when he isnt serving mass)…why so much opposition to the “L” word?

Because Modernism detests the Catholic Faith and the ‘Old’ way of doing things most clearly reflect that faith so Modernists strive against the Mass of Ages and all these societies that offer it. And because Modernism has infected so many in the church, many priests, bishops and even Cardinals oppose the Mass of Ages and belittle those that seek it while continuing to seek ‘new’ and ‘modern’ way of doing things, ways that inevitably lead to disaster and endanger souls.

The Encyclical of Pope St Pius X, ‘PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS’ (On the doctrines of the modernists) which can be seen here is good reading on the subject, even if it is a little hard to understand.

 

[CB_Catholic]

I am seriously considering switching parishes and just recently i went to my first ever Holy Mass in the extraordinary form.I told my parish’s assistant pator (he tends to be more open to tradition than the pastor himself) seemed to subtly frown upon it and my tradtional views. he seemed to imediatly get on the defensive when i mentioned it… (now he was aware of my traditional prefrences.) he began into his whole thing (for lack of a better term) about how it(the church) will never return to that (latin)then he hinted that the EF sugessted a God that is untouchable and far off (“transcendant view” were his exact words)
I love the Latin and all of the rich tradition of our church I personally believe that the EF expresses more physically what happens spiritually in both masses I jus prefer latin incense etc… now dont get me wrong I love the holy mass (Both EQUAL forms) and i wish that one day they can be held up equally together as two alternates vs. others in the church that want it to die (or at least be pushed aside as a relic) iam an altar server and once when i suggested wearing a surplice to my pastor he immediatly said “NO!” but its not just the “no” that upset me because he is the boss and his word is last when it comes to things like that but its what he said following the no that saddened me " we arent going BACK to THAT" as if it were a disease or something. i belong to very liberal parish when it comes down to liturgy (even in some cses politics you wont believe how many Obama ’ 08 tee shirts ive seen ) but thats another disscussion for another day. my question is why… when iwas a child (Born after’65)
my church did things differently alot of hings were left over from the change and i saw a hint of the traditions of the faith and it marveled me.
as the years progressed and the pastors changed it (my parish) grew further and further away from what it was. i have seen some horror stories in other parishes worse off than mine. this other one for instance had some sort of african ritual prayer service (pouring water in a bowl honorng the winds of the north south east and west)
and at my confirmation there was liturgical dance (IN THE LITURGY mind you)
as i said when i began typing was that i am really considering changing parishes to this other one that as EF of the holy mass and also i like the way they do the OF also. (i like both forms BUT when the OF is done in respect to the traditions)
a question i find myself raising the question of why?..Why is it that traditional things are treated with so much opposition within mother church at times ?why in my parish does my priest seem to almosr detest the “old ways”(for lack of a better term)
(another example is when i suggested kneeling for communion to my pastor he outright condemned it and said (we are being sent out so we should be standing)(I still do it anyway when he isnt serving mass)…why so much opposition to the “L” word?

I don’t think any one here should attempt to speak for your priest or your parish. I think if you want to know reasons, you need to ask the people involved.
But nonetheless, people here will attempt to give you an answer, but their guess is as good as anybody’s. They don’t really know, and there are probably as many reasons as there are people. Anything else is speculation.

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t think any one here should attempt to speak for your priest or your parish. I think if you want to know reasons, you need to ask the people involved.
But nonetheless, people here will attempt to give you an answer, but their guess is as good as anybody’s. They don’t really know, and there are probably as many reasons as there are people. Anything else is speculation.

I don’t think anyone is speaking for the priest or parish. The title of the thread is “Why so much opposition to the L Word”. We are responding in general.

When people post on a board, they are mostly giving their opinions anyway. That’s what a forum is.

 

[TrentCath]

I don’t think any one here should attempt to speak for your priest or your parish. I think if you want to know reasons, you need to ask the people involved.
But nonetheless, people here will attempt to give you an answer, but their guess is as good as anybody’s. They don’t really know, and there are probably as many reasons as there are people. Anything else is speculation.

Just for public record, I should point that my post should be taken as a general answer. I clearly cannot see into the mind of your priest nor am I attempting to speak on his behalf I can merely point out why so many oppose the Mass of Ages and those who are attached to it.

 

[TrentCath]

I don’t think anyone is speaking for the priest or parish. The title of the thread is “Why so much opposition to the L Word”. We are responding in general.

When people post on a board, they are mostly giving their opinions anyway. That’s what a forum is.

Amen

 

[TrueLight]

Amen

I think we were both posting pretty much the same thing at the same time…

 

[TrentCath]

I think we were both posting pretty much the same thing at the same time…

Yeah sorry about that

 

[BigDave31]

I am a convert as of 6 years ago. While I would not want to see the church make any changes to doctrine etc. The truth the catholic church holds to has never changed since the beginnig. This is why I c ame to believe that the catholic church is the true church that Jesus founded. However I speak english. I am, also older. If I came to mass and found them speaking in latin I am not sure that I would have ever returned. It is hard enough to follow new teachings and new experiences in worship and at the same time follow it all in a language I do n ot know or understand. And since the churches are caled to preach the gospel and make converts is it not much better to preach and worship in a language people can understa:shrug:nd???

 

[TrueLight]

I am a convert as of 6 years ago. While I would not want to see the church make any changes to doctrine etc. The truth the catholic church holds to has never changed since the beginnig. This is why I c ame to believe that the catholic church is the true church that Jesus founded. However I speak english. I am, also older. If I came to mass and found them speaking in latin I am not sure that I would have ever returned. It is hard enough to follow new teachings and new experiences in worship and at the same time follow it all in a language I do n ot know or understand. And since the churches are caled to preach the gospel and make converts is it not much better to preach and worship in a language people can understa:shrug:nd???

Hi BigDave,

The homily is in the vernacular. And all the EF’s I have been through re-read the Epistles and the Gospel in the vernacular.

But the form you choose, is your choice.

 

[Zhenia]

I am a convert as of 6 years ago. While I would not want to see the church make any changes to doctrine etc. The truth the catholic church holds to has never changed since the beginnig. This is why I c ame to believe that the catholic church is the true church that Jesus founded. However I speak english. I am, also older. If I came to mass and found them speaking in latin I am not sure that I would have ever returned. It is hard enough to follow new teachings and new experiences in worship and at the same time follow it all in a language I do n ot know or understand. And since the churches are caled to preach the gospel and make converts is it not much better to preach and worship in a language people can understa:shrug:nd???

The English is on the other side of the missal, you never did need to know Latin to follow it (though I have to admit, 3 years of Latin in public school did help me, lol).

The Eastern Orthodox Liturgy I go to is entirely in Old Church Slavonic, yet I have no trouble keeping up. After all, as with the Tridentine Mass, the English is on the other side of the page!

 

[TrentCath]

I am a convert as of 6 years ago. **Congrats, I’m a convert of a year ago though I was converting so to speak, for 3 years or so **While I would not want to see the church make any changes to doctrine etc. The truth the catholic church holds to has never changed since the beginnig. This is why I c ame to believe that the catholic church is the true church that Jesus founded. However I speak english. I am, also older. If I came to mass and found them speaking in latin I am not sure that I would have ever returned. It is hard enough to follow new teachings and new experiences in worship and at the same time follow it all in a language I do n ot know or understand. And since the churches are caled to preach the gospel and make converts is it not much better to preach and worship in a language people can understa:shrug:nd???

I’ve encountered this argument before. First off its important to note that the difference between the so called ‘Extraordinary Form’ and ‘Ordinary Form’ is far more extensive than just the fact that one is in latin and the other is not. There is in fact a Latin missal of the Ordinary which I have attended.

What Differentiates the two is the fundamental differences in the missal, whereas in one the priest continously genuflects, makes the sign of the cross over himself, the congregation and in the rubrics (some 52 times) and confesses his sins not once but twice (and in masses I’ve been too so does the Altar Server) in the other the priest genuflects maybe once or twice, makes the sign of the cross at most 5 times and confesses his sins once together with the congregation (whereas in the Extraordinary Form the congregation confess their sins seperately).The main reason people drawn to the ‘Extraordinary Form’ are drawn to it is not because it is said in latin but because of the Extraordinary Reverence it demonstrates and engenders in both the priest that celebrates it and those that assist at it.

Secondly I believe that the extraordinary reverence would make much more of an impact than the fact that everything is done in the vernacular, this was most certainly the case for me.

Lastly preaching is done in the vernacular and in the Masses I attend when there is to be a homily, the priest goes to the trouble of reading both the Epistle and Gospel again in the vernacular so that everyone can understand.

I would also point out that the church used Latin in its liturgy since the very beginning and continuded doing so during the middle ages, the renaissance, the 17th,18th, 19th and 20th century right up until the second Vatican Council (which did not believe or not ask for Latin to be scrapped as the language of the Catholic Church). To suggest that the church could not or did not convery and preach to people as it should have because it used Latin in its liturgy rather than the vernacular is directly contrary to our professed belief that the Catholic Church is the One true church of Christ. (Not that I believe you are saying this) Also to be frank the church managed to convert whole civilisations and continents whilst using Latin but these days struggles to keep catholic countries catholic let alone convert anyone.

 

[TrueLight]

) Also to be frank the church managed to convert whole civilisations and continents whilst using Latin but these days struggles to keep catholic countries catholic let alone convert anyone.

That is a good point. Anyone care to explain why Latin was perfectly fine back then but not for now? Is it just a matter of people not being used to it? Is it because of the me generation? Is it because human beings have become less spiritual?

 

[ProVobis]

And since the churches are caled to preach the gospel and make converts is it not much better to preach and worship in a language people can understa:shrug:nd???

An interesting thing happened at the EF I attended last Sunday. Just before the final “Dominus vobiscum” the priest mentioned something that was supposed to take place immediately after Mass in English. But everyone just looked puzzled. It turned out everyone is so used to the Latin no one understood him in English.

Just so you don’t call this an abuse, he frequently signals for the congregation to stand, sit, or rise. Although sometimes he inserts an English command, I think he finds his gestures to work better.

By the way, the gospel is generally read in English after it’s read in Latin. Personally I think the two readings of the same gospel added understanding.

 

[lion001]

Thank
Good

————————————
T3 flat irons

Babyliss flat irons

 

[christosdavid]

That is a good point. Anyone care to explain why Latin was perfectly fine back then but not for now? Is it just a matter of people not being used to it? Is it because of the me generation? Is it because human beings have become less spiritual?

Latin has a very long history of changing. The Latin which Ive heard is woefully pronounced, but that has been a problem since late antiquity.

Classical and Ecclesiastical latin is different, plus from about the 5th C on, places like Gaul had their Latin mixed with Frank = French

In Italy, Ecclesiastical latin is very similar to italian, soft c etc.

One of the biggest difficulties of the Vatican council was that being only in Latin, the bishops had to contend with all the pronunciations of the world.

Also, Latin used to be the scholars language at university. Used for a considerable legnth of time. To say we are less scholarly now because we dont use Latin is more obviously untrue.

The Latin couldnt keep up, it is an ancient language. There are no ways of inventing new words that can become part of the real development of hte language (although the translation of Harry Potter in Latin tries)

Furthermore, true spirituality relies on the Holy Spirit and his Graces, the language is irrelevant. No-one suggests that the Greek church was less spiritual because of not using Latin.

Most of all, Jesus, the Apostles and early church probably didnt speak much latin either. The international language when they werent speaking Aramaic or reading classical Hebrew was most likely koine Greek (contra Mel Gibson’s passion)

Reading through the conciliar documents from V2 is very entertaining from a modern Latin perspective. names that are Latinized to fit etc.

So, I dont think that its possible to assume a lesser spirituality (that probably comes under spiritual arrogance) It is all of Grace.

St. Augustine of Hippo (a real latin speaker/ teacher) quotes Paul to say whatever we have is from God, so why do we boast as if it we our own?

 

[ProVobis]

Latin has a very long history of changing.

As opposed to English which only has a short history of changing?

Latin used to be the scholars language at university. Used for a considerable legnth of time.

Still is; in fact I heard it’s the third most popular “foreign” language studied in the U.S. universities. Not so much in the U.K. universities; no shocker there.

Most of all, Jesus, the Apostles and early church probably didnt speak much latin either.

Wasn’t one of them a tax collector who needed to know some Roman law? But even if they didn’t speak much Latin, the inscription on the cross was written in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. Not English.

The Latin couldnt keep up, it is an ancient language. There are no ways of inventing new words that can become part of the real development of hte language

That’s quite a claim, considering that half of the English vocabulary has Latin roots.

 

[zab]

That is a good point. Anyone care to explain why Latin was perfectly fine back then but not for now? Is it just a matter of people not being used to it? Is it because of the me generation? Is it because human beings have become less spiritual?

I think back then most people just accepted it. I don’t recall having any difficulty understanding what was going on as a child. Love and reverence for God can be recognized in any language. And singing and praying in Latin enhanced that Mystery. However, I appreciated it when the Mass began to be offered in a language that I could better understand while still having an appreciation for the mysterious beauty of the Latin chants, prayers and hymns. I like it when we sing/recite the Kyrie in Greek, and the Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei and Pater Noster in Latin during Advent and Lent, but I am ready to go back to English during Ordinary Time. I think that now that we are used to haveing Mass celebrated in the vernacular it is more difficult for some to go back to. Priests would have to learn to say the Mass in Latin all over again. And many parishioners did not grow up learning the prayers in Latin so it is more difficult for them as well as new converts. Having an appreciation for the Mass in the vernacular is not a sign of being less spiritual than those who prefer the Latin Mass.