Why not both? Well… you have to have a tabernacle to have an adoration chapel, because a monstrance isn’t used to reserve more than one host. The tabernacle and the monstrance can be in the same chapel, sure, but you have to have both.
That’s what I meant.
24 or so, depending on how you count them.Out of interest, what are the 24 vernacular liturgical languages approved in Chicago?
I don’t know…from my viewpoint, I consider it far more important that any person could walk in and understand Catholic Worship off the street than that I could go to some foreign country and attend Mass in the same language as I do at home. :idea:There is one simple answer to all of this confusion…just stick with latin.
One universal Church, one Liturgical language, One Sacrifice of the Mass.
Just sayin.
Only one “English” vernacular translation is allowed in the Latin Rite and that one is the one with the Recognitio from Rome. The mass translation is to be used with the exact wording as given in the official text.
You miss my point. By keeping Latin as the primary language, mis interpretations are eliminated. Certain aspects of the Mass should be in the venacular of the region in which Holy Mass is being offered. But if you read Sacrosactum Concilium, “The use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rite, except where a particular law might indicate otherwise” (SC, No 36, Paragraph 1).
Maybe I’m misinterpreting you here but does that mean every diocese needs to have all 500 vernaculars available for every local and visitor? I don’t think that would be very cost effective. At some point it seems every Catholic will be exposed to some language which is foreign to him/her. Might as well be Latin, which would be the common denominator of all Catholics. He may not understand it but understanding is not as important as believing, IMO. Most scientists don’t understand gravity but certainly they all believe it.
I understand your argument. I simply disagree with the premise. Nothing personal, just a difference in opinion. Pax Christi
How would you know it’s Catholic then? I recently attended a Vietnamese wedding thinking all along it was Catholic. And I wasn’t the only one. I later found out it was Baptist. Most embarrassing since the bridegroom as it turned out was very anti-Catholic.
There a quite a few Eastern liturgies as well.
I can honestly attest that, as a convert, if my first mass experience was a Tridentine mass, my reaction would have been, “Omg so cool.” I was actually expecting Latin, and looking forward to it. Instead, my reaction was, “Okay, Baptist service with a little formality.”
I’m also a convert from Protestantism, and I my experience has been similar. Definitely expected more Latin, more solemnity, really disappointed with the Roman Liturgy as it exists in most parishes I’ve been to.
The use of national language is a positive…I went to parochial school , I went to Catholic education at Boston I know my Latin , it’s Beaty cannot be denied, but in this century to be Catholic…in its broad sense is the language of the people, a retreat to the past…would create a semantic ghetto , we would become a fossil…how many people who might be interested in Catholocism would retreat if we said let us go back to the old ways and impose Latin universally …it would devestate us…I am thankful we have Latin masses for those who desire this , but to attempt now to walk backwards and retreat to it…we must look forward on this issue…not back…in fact I think it would also push out Catholics in our American churches…Latin is not far from us…but it is not a thing we can universally return to…I love Latin but we cannot make it a Liturgical / Sacramental/ Theological …“Linus Blanket” and think it would magically cause all our problems disappear … it is utopian thinking not practical…My 2 cents…pax
That is correct. Where did ProVobis state anything to the contrary?
Other than allowing for idioms.
Yes, they’re probably mainly Roman Rite; it is less likely other Latin rites are used. Nevertheless, they don’t all have to be in English
It might prove a little confusing for the vast majority of Catholics that understand very little Latin.There is one simple answer to all of this confusion…just stick with latin.
One universal Church, one Liturgical language, One Sacrifice of the Mass.
Like math and science, we don’t have to understand, we just have to believe. No one understands gravity either but it’s become the necessary basis of many theories. 2000 years of using an unchanging language which has practically defined Roman Catholicism should mean something to all Catholics, even if they’re just exposed to a Sanctus or a Gloria in Latin going forward. How can it be confusing if everyone uses the exact same prayer? Seems as if it’s more confusing if every country uses its own standards for prayers, just like its weights and measures and spellings.
This same statement could be said exactly as you have it even if everyone babbled in their own prayers and the whole thing was chaos, much less the simpler concept of a translation. The Church has recognized the advantage of having our intellect and understanding engaged during worship. I am not trying to say the vernacular is better than Latin, as that is a complex question. I am only saying that the idea that the vernacular is more confusing doesn’t ring true to me.