Would you support the Traditional Latin Mass in the vernacular?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lycorth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seamus_L said:
NO, and I suspect very few actual Traditional Catholics voted yes.
Click to expand...
I suspect even fewer if you were to use FSSP-, SSPX-, ICRSS-only churchgoers in your survey.

And if it tells you anything, St. John Cantius offers classes in Latin and Greek and not only traditionalists are enrolled. Some love the Latin OF as well as the EF apparently.
 
I said no, although it might be a good way to first learn what is being said in english, then hear it said in latin. Though I can always read alongside the prayers from my 1962 missal.
 
Interesting, I would have thought the pole would have leaned more toward Pro. Interesting though.
 
ProVobis said:
I don’t think the Vatican has the resources or cost justification right now to maintain and authenticize many hundred vernaculars of the EF as they do with the OF. The translations in the missals aren’t official and do vary. They do serve as a good guide and sell the different missals but I don’t think they were ever intended to replace the Latin. Besides much of the Traditional Mass is inaudible to make it necessary to vernacularize for most in church anyway.

Some EF’s have the readings in the vernacular to save time, I guess, but I’m not sure this is a better idea than of leaving the Latin in at the readings and have the readings in vernacular at the sermon instead.

Also keep in mind every effort to vernacularize the Traditional Mass failed in the 60’s. For many different reasons, none of the versions was sustainable worldwide. However, I have heard the Anglican Use Rite is an acceptable Mass for those who insist on having a Traditional Mass in English today.
Click to expand...
I have compared many translations of the traditional mass in english and found very few differences between them. If the Knott Missal is the basis of what is used in both the Anglican use pastoral provision and the Antiochian Western rite Vicariate Orthodox “Liturgy of St Gregory” how difficult could it be to make it official ?

No need to reinvent the wheel. Western rite orthodox simply follow their traditional liturgy, they dont make things up no need to worry about all these heresyes or mistakes for them…

the inclination to rebel does not exist.
 
a common language, Latin, stresses the Catholicity/Universality of our Faith.
 
Chris_McAvoy said:
I have compared many translations of the traditional mass in english and found very few differences between them.
Click to expand...
Those vernacular readings at the EF don’t match any of what my missals say. They’re paraphrased beyond belief. Active voice turns to passive voice. Subjects turn to objects. Some words and ideas are skipped altogether. Some other ideas are inserted. And not only the readings. The lyrics of some chants are mixed up. And I bet if you had 10 Latin students try to translate the commons, you’d get 10 different versions. Not my idea of preserving the integrity of the TLM.

Like the Italians say, “traduttore, traditore” (translator, traitor)
 
Those vernacular readings at the EF don’t match any of what my missals say.
Click to expand...
Which readings are you referring to? I do not understand.

Speaking of translations I am referring to the ordinary prayers of the “the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful” the typical skeleton you encounter, not all the propers chants, epistles, gospels, collects that go over it…but most of them seem to be accurate as well.

Has anyone here you found the 1582/1610 douay rheims bible translation significantly flawed as well? particularly the new testament.

The sole problem I have had with translations of ancient latin elements of the liturgy into english are the hymns for processions, hymns for the divine office and the sequence/prose that comes after an alleluia (most of which were never translated).

I would agree that there has been too much paraphrasing done of latin hymns by John Mason Neale for instance, these 19th century translations are rarely literal translations. However, I would say at least half are very good paraphrases that miss almost nothing important, the other half that make up new ideas and leave out old ones do indeed need to be fixed, which is my current goal. I use other peoples more accurate translations or translate them myself (a time consuming, yet worthwhile task).

Here is an example of a translation which appears to be to be perfect.

These are the suffrages from vespers, which we have evidence of being used in vespers as early as the 6th century within the latin church. Dearest brethren I would be most thankful if you would please share with me any serious or even minor errors within this particular translation. As you can see I am fond of litanies due to my eastern liturgical experiences, I would not know how to pray without them.
V. I said : Lord, be merciful unto me.
R. Heal my soul, for I have sinned
against thee.

V. Ego dixi : Dómine, miserére mei.
R. Sana ánimam meam quia peccávi tibi.
V. Turn thee again, O Lord, at the last.
R. And be gracious unto thy servants.

V. Convértere, Dómine, úsquequo?
R. Et deprecábilis esto super servos tuos.
V. Let thy merciful kindness, O Lord,
be upon us.
R. Like as we do put our trust in thee.

V. Fiat misericórdiá tua, Dómine,
super nos.
R. Quemádmodum sperávimus in te.
V. Endue thy ministers with righteous-
ness.
R. And make thy chosen people joyful.

V. Sacerdótes tui induántur justítiam.

R. Et sancti tui exsúltent.
V. Let us pray for our most blessed
Pope/Patriarch N.
R. The Lord preserve him and keep him
alive, that he may be blessed upon
earth ; and deliver not thou him into
the will of his enemies.

V. Orémus pro beatíssimo Papa nostro N.
R. Dóminus consérvet eum, et vivíficet
eum, et beátum fáciat eum in terra,
et non tradat eum in ánimam
inimicórum ejus.
V. Let us pray for our Bishop N.
R. May he stand firm, and feed his flock;
in thy strength, O Lord, and in the
majesty of thy Name.

V. Orémus et pro Antístite nostro N.
R. Stet et pascat in fortitúdine tua,
Dómine, in sublimitáte nóminis tui.
V. O Lord, save the king.
R. And mercifully hear us,
when we call upon thee.

V. Dómine, salvum fac regem.
R. Et exáudi nos in die, qua
invocavérimus te.
V. O Lord, save thy people,
and bless thine inheritance.
R. Govern them, and lift them up
for ever.

V. Salvum fac pópulum tuum,
Dómine, et bénedic hereditáti tuæ.
R. Et rege eos, et extólle illos usque in
ætérnum.
V. O think upon thy congregation.
R. Whom thou hast purchased, and
redeemed of old.

V. Meménto Congregatiónis tuæ.
R. Quam possedísti ab inítio.
I sometimes wonder if within the latin church rite people are making a hobby out of argueing over who has the “true” translation and “true” liturgy.

I am a perfectionist for accurate translations, despite trying not to be, and other than certain hymns I have yet to understand peoples complaints about their inaccuracy/lack of authenticity. This will be my last post about this topic, though I will observe the responses.
 
Decent, but there are always nits to pick, some greater and some lesser. E.g.:
V. Let thy merciful kindness, O Lord,
be upon us.
R. Like as we do put our trust in thee.

V. Fiat misericórdiá tua, Dómine,
super nos.
R. Quemádmodum sperávimus in te.
“Speravimus” is decidedly in the perfect tense, and should have been rendered “we hoped” or “we trusted.”
 
choy said:
how does using a dead language where 99% of lay people do not understand, stress universality?
Click to expand...
Because no matter where you are in the world, so long as you have a missal in your language, you will be able to understand and follow the Mass.
 
I could tolerate this better than the novous ordo except I would want parts retained in latin like the roman canon. Also you do know the old roman calendar would have to be restored, which IMHO is not a bad thing.
Lycorth said:
I have wondered about this myself, and I have seen a few posts on this forum basically expressing similar ideas.

Essentially, would you support the Traditional Latin Mass being merely translated into the vernacular and this being used to replace the current OF?

I know this isn’t an option that is on the table at the Vatican (to the best of my knowledge) and that other conditions may apply (essentially, this is another “new” Mass form, etc), but on its face, what do you think of it? Personally, I think it would be a great idea to retain all the traditional rubrics, forms, and reverences of the TLM, down to the littlest and seemingly least, and merely say the entire Mass in the vernacular; those who cannot abide hearing the Mass in a language they do not understand will have that problem averted, and those of us who prefer the traditional reverential practices and forms will have our concerns met.

Optionally, what about music? What about using traditional hymns of the sort that we use at most OF Masses now (excepting those Masses that are intentionally vulgar) in place of Gregorian chant and motets? Personally, I prefer chant and motets; I can’t sing and I don’t like lip-synching or trying to fake singing as I cannot carry a tune in a bucket and am not at all comfortable with it, and being a Medievalist I simply adore such ancient music, but that’s just me. Many people seem to like being able to sing out and praise God in song (my wife is one such person), and a vernacular TLM that included hymns wherever possible could also appeal to those who want to sing out and might be uncomfortable at a Mass where they had no singing to offer.

Also, might the TLM in the vernacular help to encourage Catholics to want the actual TLM at their parishes? If Catholics become accustomed to the form of the TLM in their native tongue, the transition to Latin might be an entirely smaller leap than going straight from the Of to the TLM. Of course, plenty of Catholics do that these days, anyway; I know I’d have very little trouble with it personally. But, again, that’s just me.

There are a dozen threads dealing with the differences between the Mass of Paul VI and the Traditional Latin Mass. I don’t want this thread to be just another one of those. Why on earth Vatican II did not just require the TLM to be said in the vernacular instead of building a whole new Mass is beyond me, but that, too, is a discussion for another thread (or dozen threads). I’m more interested in just one topic that doesn’t seem to be discussed much - replacing the current OF with the TLM in the vernacular.
Click to expand...
 
choy said:
how does using a dead language where 99% of lay people do not understand, stress universality?
Click to expand...
The “dead” language has converted many to Catholicism since the 3rd century. They tried killing this “dead” language 40 years ago but how do you kill the Latin alphabet and all the Latin stems in all the Western vocabularies? How do you kill half of the chemical periodic chart of the elements? How do you kill all the anatomical identifications? How do you kill the basis behind Western law and civilization? And more important how do you kill the language which has been responsible for not only flourishing the main liturgy of the West but also inspiring so much music, art, science, and other disciplines?

Lay people understand more than you give them credit for. They’re just been conditioned to shut off anything that is not immediately recognizable to them. But if you give them incentive enough, they’ll memorize the entire Latin Mass. Not that it’s necessary but just trying to drive home a point.
 
Chris_McAvoy said:
I am a perfectionist for accurate translations, despite trying not to be, and other than certain hymns I have yet to understand peoples complaints about their inaccuracy/lack of authenticity.
Click to expand...
The term “accurate translation,” especially where absolute truth is concerned, is an oxymoron as far as I’m concerned. No such thing. Even in the English language most synonyms have subtle differences (for example, presume and assume) so how can translations between two languages be totally accurate? Translations can be good approximations, like π = 3.141593, but you don’t use translations to define the mathematical truth in this case, which is π. So you leave π in the general equations.
 
I think half the people here would be better off using hebrew…or koine greek.
Many greek orthodox complain about the errors of latin translations from the greek ironically…It never ends.
 
Chris_McAvoy said:
I think half the people here would be better off using hebrew…or koine greek.
Click to expand...
Not a bad idea (I myself am studying Scriptural Greek) but many won’t learn a language (or expand their personal vocabularies) even if they have to use an alphabet that they’re used to. What makes you think they’re willing to learn other alphabets or learn how to read bottom to top, right to left? 🙂
 
Nowhere_Man said:
Because no matter where you are in the world, so long as you have a missal in your language, you will be able to understand and follow the Mass.
Click to expand...
thats a flawed argument
so anything can be considered universal as long as you have a translation document with you? and it kind of counters what happened during Pentecost when the Apostles proclaimed the Good News, and the people in Jerusalem heard it in their own native tongue
 
ProVobis said:
The “dead” language has converted many to Catholicism since the 3rd century. They tried killing this “dead” language 40 years ago but how do you kill the Latin alphabet and all the Latin stems in all the Western vocabularies? How do you kill half of the chemical periodic chart of the elements? How do you kill all the anatomical identifications? How do you kill the basis behind Western law and civilization? And more important how do you kill the language which has been responsible for not only flourishing the main liturgy of the West but also inspiring so much music, art, science, and other disciplines?

Lay people understand more than you give them credit for. They’re just been conditioned to shut off anything that is not immediately recognizable to them. But if you give them incentive enough, they’ll memorize the entire Latin Mass. Not that it’s necessary but just trying to drive home a point.
Click to expand...
weird, i thought people convert to Catholicism because they heard the Good News and believed. apparently it was all about Latin 🤷

the language has evolved. not just because you have remnants of it doesn’t mean its the same language. language has nothing to do with the universality of the Church. i’m sure the Eastern Churches for one would agree. or are we to think that the Church is only Latin? also, i’m curious for those pushing for a single language, what do they think of Pentecost? by the power of the Holy Spirit, people heard the Gospel in their own native tongue, and believed and converted. nowhere were the people forced to speak Aramaic or Greek just to receive the Gospel. the Holy Spirit made it possible that they are received in their own native tongue
 
choy said:
thats a flawed argument
so anything can be considered universal as long as you have a translation document with you? and it kind of counters what happened during Pentecost when the Apostles proclaimed the Good News, and the people in Jerusalem heard it in their own native tongue
Click to expand...
The Mass being exactly the same, even the language regardless of where you are, isn’t universal? It’s not like its an extreme endeavor for people to follow along in the Missal. And Pentecost is irrelevant because most people are not blessed with the Gifts of Tongues and Interpretation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top