T
Timothysis
Guest
I’m not trying to pick a fight, but the way I’m reading this is that latin seems to be more pleasing to your ear than anything else. Am I mistaken?
- Status
L
Lycorth
Guest
That’s something I strongly suspect, also. The universal restoration of the proper orientation of the priest is a big thing and would certainly be the catalyst for restoration of all other proper and necessary rubrics and behaviors, with the universal use of Latin among them.
It’s why I hope talk like this takes off. I am amongst those who want to see the TLM return to absolute prominence, universally. A vernacular Traditional Mass, including every last rubric and enjoined behavior of the TLM, would certainly herald a new dawn of the TLM, I’d think.
I see what you mean. Wholly understandable; your issue is with the use of the vernacular.
True, but the spring is already muddy.
The Mass hasn’t been left alone - that is the point. The Mass of Paul VI has already come and been established, and the Traditional Mass marginalized. The damage has been done, years ago.
Undoing the damage is the ultimate focus here, and if the Traditional Mass in the vernacular will help guide stubborn or timid Catholics back to the true richness of the TLM in its Latin glory, then why not at least explore the possibility?
The Mass of Paul VI in Latin is certainly preferable to the Mass of Paul VI in the vernacular, but the Traditional Mass is preferable to both by dint of its nature and form.
B
Bluegoat
Guest
I haven’t voted since I don’t have a horse in this race, but I do recall reading some official document or other which said that there will be Mass in the vernacular in the Latin rite. Which is to say, it has been decided as a matter of policy. That being the case, it seems to me to have a really good vernacular liturgy, whatever that means, is important.
I suspect that there are downsides to either the all-Latin or all-vernacular option, and I don’t think one is really more likely to be a problem than the other. There seems to me to be a tendency on the side of those who favour the vernacular to emphasize its benefits and brush off its problems, and the same with those who favour the Latin.
I also think the issue has been badly confused by historical issues. Of all the times to develop a new vernacular mass, the 60’s and 70’s had to be about the worst possible time. Some of the issues with vernacular masses come not from the nature of the vernacular itself, or from the nature of Catholic parishioners, but from the time they were developed. I think that is why the vernacular has been successful among some of the liturgical Protestants - they were developed at a time when theology and language were in a better place all round. But this is really hopeful for the Catholic vernacular Mass, because there is no reason to think that the theological fads of the 20th century will be long lived.
I suspect that there are downsides to either the all-Latin or all-vernacular option, and I don’t think one is really more likely to be a problem than the other. There seems to me to be a tendency on the side of those who favour the vernacular to emphasize its benefits and brush off its problems, and the same with those who favour the Latin.
I also think the issue has been badly confused by historical issues. Of all the times to develop a new vernacular mass, the 60’s and 70’s had to be about the worst possible time. Some of the issues with vernacular masses come not from the nature of the vernacular itself, or from the nature of Catholic parishioners, but from the time they were developed. I think that is why the vernacular has been successful among some of the liturgical Protestants - they were developed at a time when theology and language were in a better place all round. But this is really hopeful for the Catholic vernacular Mass, because there is no reason to think that the theological fads of the 20th century will be long lived.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
Don’t know if someone already mentioned this, but if it is the vernacular, it wouldn’t be the TLM, now would it?
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
Indeed.
C
crazzeto
Guest
There are welcome changes coming to Novus Ordo this year with the new Missal, to making it a far more accurate translation of the Latin Mass. I’m personally very happy about this, though I’m not sure if this is exactly what the OP is talking about. With regard to Novus Ordo in general, I realize there are many here who don’t like it, but hey… It was pulmigated by the Pope, and I’m pretty sure the mass falls under “faith & morals”. As such, I have no complaints. I would certainly love to start attending a full latin mass eventually, and certainly to learn some latin (hopefully enough to get the full experience of the mass in that language).
But as things are, I’m very happy with the way we worship. I do realize I didn’t live through the transition though, so perhaps that affects my personal perspective.
But as things are, I’m very happy with the way we worship. I do realize I didn’t live through the transition though, so perhaps that affects my personal perspective.
R
revert_jen
Guest
Had to vote no. There is no way to guarantee a faithful translation unless it is imposed from above, and then the bishops won’t like it any better than the Latin EF. So all it will do is take away the choice Catholics have of worshipping in a universal language, and won’t get people more access to the EF. Unless you are suggesting that it should completely replace the OF?
Just my :twocents:
–Jen
Just my :twocents:
–Jen
P
ProVobis
Guest
And who would translate it to everyone’s satisfaction and remain timeless?
The current language ties us Catholics to those of much earlier centuries.
Was tried around 1965. Obviously it didn’t catch on too well.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
Unless it is in French!
And it wouldn’t be that extraordinary either.
P
ProVobis
Guest
It certainly wouldn’t be ordinary.
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
Well, at least not in the U.S.It certainly wouldn’t be ordinary.
L
Lycorth
Guest
That ought to be obvious.
No argument with the second part.
As to translating - I’m sure the current Pope, if this sort of thing struck him, could see to it that a proper translation could be offered.
Well, it was the '60s. Nothing better could be expected from most folks of that era.
Times have changed, and thankfully the foolishness of the '60s-era mentality is mostly a thing of the past, if not entirely, though the Church as a whole still has yet to fully wake up from it. The Traditional Mass is seen for its beauty and worth and more people are voicing support for it. If a Traditional Mass in the vernacular failed to gain support in the past, the time may be better for it now, especially as a precursor to full-on restoration of the TLM.
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
I not sure I understand a couple of the post that are against this idea as not being able to have a good translation. In missal I have both the latin and english side by side for the EF.
so there is no need to traslate the Latin as it was done centuries ago. I would be ok with it as a tranisition back to the EF on a regular bases.
so there is no need to traslate the Latin as it was done centuries ago. I would be ok with it as a tranisition back to the EF on a regular bases.
L
Lycorth
Guest
Good point - did not consider that.
I have not had the pleasure of being able to examine a Traditional missal with the Latin on one page and the vernacular on the other. I assume that the entire Mass is translated, essentially, in this missal.
If so, the translation already exists, and the missal, authorized by the Church, is the authoritative translation. Thus, there is no real stumbling block for a vernacular Traditional Mass, at least in regards to replacing the Mass of Paul VI and opening up the way for full restoration of the TLM.
B
Bluegoat
Guest
One thing to consider here might be that the translation in the missal could be fairly workman-like, compared to what you might want for actual use. Since what is in the missal is just to help the person who is at a Latin Mass, it’s sound and beauty is not so important, just it’s accuracy. But for actual use, how it sounds and rolls off the tongue would be factors.
P
ProVobis
Guest
And then we could also have round two of a New Mass. Can we go through that again?
Remember, he who controls the language (even if inserting a Latin phrase in the Mass), he controls the theology. The Pope might get the best translator in the world but who will make anything from the translation 500 years from now?
It’s more than just a preference for whether it’s in Latin or French.
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
I think that it is a really bad idea, since it would essentially create 3 versions for Mass. A transition to Latin from that point would be less likely in my opinion.
M
malphono
Guest
Rather than being redundant, I’ll simply refer to a [post=6468988]post[/post] I made in a [thread=436106]thread[/thread] in another forum. Seems to me it bears here equally.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I have several missals and there are differences in the English. Some would have to decide on which one is closer to the Truth. If I had it my way, I’d get rid of all that English. (They’re only training wheels to me.) But I’m not the head of the Church so you can fall in love with whatever English you have to your heart’s content.
- Status