Would you support the Traditional Latin Mass in the vernacular?

[archangel04]

Thanks, old top - looking forward to it mightily

Fascinating - I wonder how much of this I shall feel if I get to attend my first EF Mass. I know it will only help to increase my reverence and deepen my sense of true Catholic tradition, but as for helping instill a greater reverence for the OF - didn’t think about that.

Yeah I was surprised as well, I didn’t even think about it until all of a sudden it hit me during an EF mass. If this will be your first time, I recommend just watching and if you can follow along the missal than great, but if your like me you will get lost trying to follow along. Once you get the hang of it, you will see how it all just falls in place. Watching videos of the EF really helps as well.

Good luck and let us know how it goes.

 

[Hesychios]

De gustibus non est disputandum.

However, the precision of the language is most important in the integrity of the TLM or Traditional Mass or any Mass for that matter.

Actually, it seems that a lack of precision in Latin has been the source of some theological problems, at least that is what I am being told in the Eastern Catholic section of CAF.

If that is so, then the whole ‘precision of Latin’ argument is just a popular myth.

In any case, what does it matter how precise the prayers are if the people only understand them in translation? It is the precision of the translation that is then critical. And for those who claim to understand Latin it is the precision of their training and the person’s associated learning ability that are critical, and that is a highly variable and inconsistent commodity across any community.

So, for example, if the only language I know is Swahili, and I attend an EF liturgy, the only way I will understand it (Lex Orandi - Lex Credendi) is if I am given a translation of the Mass to follow OR I am given good training in ecclesiastical Latin and pass the course.

 

[stevusmagnus]

The VCII Fathers only foresaw modest changes to the 1962 Missal.

The travesty that was later given to us was the sole work of Abp. Bugnini who was later dismissed from his post and sent to Iran by Paul VI for suspicion of being a Freemason.

Paul VI rejected some of Bugnini’s most egregious requests (eliminate the Roman Canon) but still approved the rest of the NO.

Then you have the ICEL tragedy and later tragedies allowed by Paul VI (CITH) and later JPII (girl altar boys) and you have your modern American guitar Mass.

 

[ProVobis]

If that is so, then the whole ‘precision of Latin’ argument is just a popular myth.

Those aren’t my words or my opinion. You need to read Veterum Sapientia, written by Pope John XXIII, where he “defines” the role of Latin in the Church.

adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html

In any case, what does it matter how precise the prayers are if the people only understand them in translation?

That’s like saying people can’t understand π unless you tell them it’s approximately 3.14 or 3.141593 or however “precise” you want to be. They may think they understand it but aside from the fact that they may be able to solve an immediate problem, they really have no idea what it is or how to derive other principles of math. A lot of things are lost in translations and, unfortunately, a lot of truths are as well.

And I know this from translating languages, computer languages, and mathematical coordinate systems.

 

[Bluegoat]

Those aren’t my words or my opinion. You need to read Veterum Sapientia, written by Pope John XXIII, where he “defines” the role of Latin in the Church.

adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html

That’s like saying people can’t understand π unless you tell them it’s approximately 3.14 or 3.141593 or however “precise” you want to be. They may think they understand it but aside from the fact that they may be able to solve an immediate problem, they really have no idea what it is or how to derive other principles of math. A lot of things are lost in translations and, unfortunately, a lot of truths are as well.

And I know this from translating languages, computer languages, and mathematical coordinate systems.

I think that the argument that Hesychios is making is rather different. It is true that the Wrstern Church has used Latin for a long time, including for theological reasoning, and continuing to use it allows it to have a certain continuity of thought. However, it is pretty much universally considered a poor language for philosophy; this is after all the language that had to invent a word for “being” because it never arose naturally. And Latin’s lack of precision was responsible for a number of theological controversies in the past, and perhaps even some current ones. Greek was the language for philosophy in the ancient world, and German is probably the best bet in the modern era.

And you have not really answered his point about most who “learn” the Latin Mass simply learn a translation. I have (or had, alas) enough Latin that as a student I read in a class Anselm’s Proslogion, among other things, and I was still at that point very much dependent on what other people, or my dictionary, told me about the subtleties of a given word or phrase. I can think the Mass in Latin, but what it means to me is what I understand in English. I doubt many Mass-goers will have as much Latin as I do. How is it better to read or memorize a translation from a missal than to hear that translation spoken by the priest, from the POV of the comprehension of the individual in the pew? It has been asserted repeatedly in this thread that he will somehow be better off in his theological understanding, but I don’t see how. It still depends on a good translation and solid theological teaching in one’s native language.

 

[gilisme]

No. How could any sane person wish to mess up “The most beautiful prayer this side od Heaven” (Fr. Faber)

Pax et Bonum
Gil

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I voted “no.”

If I were to go to a Traditional Mass, I’d want it in Latin. If I want the vernacular, I’ll stick with the Mass I know about.

Alan

 

[ProVobis]

I can think the Mass in Latin, but what it means to me is what I understand in English. I doubt many Mass-goers will have as much Latin as I do. How is it better to read or memorize a translation from a missal than to hear that translation spoken by the priest, from the POV of the comprehension of the individual in the pew? It has been asserted repeatedly in this thread that he will somehow be better off in his theological understanding, but I don’t see how. It still depends on a good translation and solid theological teaching in one’s native language.

If you want to look at it that way, there are between 5000 and 10000 languages and 6 billion vernaculars in the world. How is the Vatican supposed to decide and authenticize whether each one would understand π better as 3.141593 or 3.14 or 3.0? And since they’d be comprising the truth, it’s all matter of degree of misunderstanding and/or mistranslating, isn’t it?

Let’s look at it another way. The U.S. Constitution with the Bill of Rights was written in 1776 Legal English. What if Congress decided tomorrow that this wasn’t good enough, that it needs to be translated for each and everyone in his/her own vernacular? That would be absurd, wouldn’t it? Doesn’t it make more sense for us to strongly encourage everyone to learn enough English so at least he or she would understand the Constitution? Or for any law, for that matter? People are still bound to follow the law, so it behooves them to know the law in the language it was written, I would think. Jurors don’t exactly look forward to hearing translators and interpreters for the witnesses when there are other signals and behavior that they tend to focus on. My step brother who works in court as a translator could talk to you all day about that.

To me that seems to be the same thing in the Mass. I’m like you, I try to think Latin but I’m always looking for English (or Polish, if that’s available) clues in case of doubts. The vernacular helps me understand the Latin better so I’ll agree with you that it has benefits, but the vernaculars are still training wheels. And there’s much more to the bike than training wheels, right? They relaxed a lot of rules since Vatican II; however, the Latin requirement/encouragement is one I wish they hadn’t because now everything’s gone Babel and too relaxed.

 

[Hesychios]

It seems to me that some formally approved translation the people themselves could recite together and understand at the same time would be preferable to the poly-variety of unapproved translations going on in peoples heads.

In any case, we should consider what is already the situation with the majority of Masses in the world today. The cat is out of the bag, so to say, the vernacular is out there already and there is really no likelihood of getting the overall population to understand how it can be important to give up a Mass they can readily understand for one in an archaic language. They can be given the option, but forcing it on a billion people would probably be a pastoral faux pas.

So I would put the OP question another way: I wonder how many Catholics would approve of gradually adapting the OF to match the EF rubrics, even if there is no current plan to eliminate the vernacular?

 

[Lycorth]

So I would put the OP question another way: I wonder how many Catholics would approve of gradually adapting the OF to match the EF rubrics, even if there is no current plan to eliminate the vernacular?

A fine question; I’d certainly support that.

What so many comments on this thread reveal is that too many pro-TLM Catholics don’t understand that the beauty, theology, and efficacy of the Traditional Mass isn’t simply about the use of Latin.

 

[ProVobis]

They can be given the option, but forcing it on a billion people would probably be a pastoral faux pas.

Isn’t that exactly what they’re doing with the new English translation?

The Latin isn’t forced. The Latin is the truth and it has always been there, whether we choose to see it or undermine it or not. The translations are forced. Some would rather to do their own and they have a perfect right to do it (in their minds, anyway.) Or they can choose to go back to the Latin. There is no such thing as an infallible translation.

We can go down the list of what’s been translated into English (starting with the “Et cum spiritu tuo” and “Habemus ad Dominum”) and I’ll bet I can stir up a controversy with every line. Is this what Mass should be all about? We didn’t seem to be so fired up about translations before the vernacular come about and people still seemed to have understood not only the Mass better but one another better than they do today.

 

[Bluegoat]

Isn’t that exactly what they’re doing with the new English translation?

The Latin isn’t forced. The Latin is the truth and it has always been there, whether we choose to see it or undermine it or not.

Um, no, it hasn’t.

And no language captures God’s truth as he is in himself. You are making an idol of a language it seems to me.

 

[Timothysis]

You are making an idol of a language it seems to me.

I seem to remember someone else saying that before!!!

 

[Hesychios]

Isn’t that exactly what they’re doing with the new English translation?

What !?!

Have they changed it again? !

I lived through the first time. By my own estimation I have attended nearly 700 Latin Masses, and I remember the chaotic effects implementing the New Mass had on our parish when I was young

I think the poverty of the ICEL translation was a tragedy as well, but this (in a convoluted sort of way) just goes to demonstrate the dangers of allowing the general population to translate the prayers of the liturgy on their own, because even the so-called “experts” working together as a team have had a tough time of doing it well. How does the average Joe Sixpack manage it on his own?

People around here complain of the catechesis problems in the Catholic church (and some seem ignorant of the fact that this is not just a post Vat II problem, but goes way back), but don’t see that the Mass has been woefully deficient as a catechetical instrument.

Which is the whole point of our discussion, isn’t it?

What’s the point of having correct theology expressed in prayer except that people learn from the prayers of the Mass, directly or subliminally. If the prayers are not directly understandable, the people will not learn (and possibly remain at an infantile level of understanding), if the prayers (and hymns, as sung prayer) are not crafted well in the language, people will learn insufficiently, or even wrongly. This will happen either directly or subliminally, or possibly a little of both.

This happens to be one of the issues with the Creed. The Latin translation has been deficient in expressing the content of the original Nicea-Constantinopolitan Creed. And so we see a divergence in Christian traditions over something which was supposed to be so basic and fundamental to both.

The Latin isn’t forced. The Latin is the truth and it has always been there,

Again, not so. This is only your perspective.

The same high degree of thought that has gone into the Latin translation of the Mass can be given to any translation, and the same types and numbers of defficiencies the Latin has been subject to are a danger to any translation.

A church of a billion people has the resources to make good translations in many languages, as many different liturgical texts as it has of approved biblical texts, to reach the majority of the world’s people with Truth.

whether we choose to see it or undermine it or not. The translations are forced.

And you would have us do this ourselves, in our own heads?

 

[Hesychios]

And no language captures God’s truth as he is in himself.

This is very true. We need to remember that.

You are making an idol of a language it seems to me.

There is always that danger.

I think that this is the same type of phenomena we see with the KJV1611 crowd.

 

[Aramis]

I think that this is the same type of phenomena we see with the KJV1611 crowd.

And the Muslims.

Language and culture intertwine strongly. Where the slavonic is the church language, the uniformity of culture is astonishing; the differences are so small that most westerners can’t see them, despite the clear-to-them differences between the various ethnic groups in, say, Carpethia, like Hutsul, Lemko, and Boyko… each defined as much by the linguistic difference as the cultural.

 

[ProVobis]

From the Baltimore Catechism:

**
Q. 566. Why does the Church use the Latin language instead of the national language of its children?

A. The Church uses the Latin language instead of the national language of its children:

To avoid the danger of changing any part of its teaching in using different languages;

That all its rulers may be perfectly united and understood in their communications;

To show that the Church is not an institute of any particular nation, but the guide of all nations.**

 

[ProVobis]

A church of a billion people has the resources to make good translations in many languages, as many different liturgical texts as it has of approved biblical texts, to reach the majority of the world’s people with Truth.

Sounds like a very self-serving argument to me. I’m not even bothering to read or respond to the rest of your post for this reason.

 

[Shiranui117]

I’m going to stick my neck out here and vote “yes,” but on several conditions.

1: As others have suggested before, get rid of the thou’s and thee’s and dost’s and whatnot; it connects people more to the liturgy when the translation uses modern mannerisms of speech in the vernacular.

2: This may be tricky to implement, but I would actually suggest that the children first learn the Traditional Mass in their own language, and then as they grow older, start introducing them more to the TLM, if the TLM would to retake dominance. My rationale for this is: When you have children, you don’t start off teaching them the whole version of grace before eating meals. Instead, you start small, teaching them, "Lord, thank you for this food, aaaaaamen! " It would be a similar concept to that. I know they already have children’s liturgies in some parishes, in simpler language so they can follow along and know what’s going on. By teaching the children first simpler versions of the “Traditional Vernacular Mass,” you can then start to step them up from first that, to the full version of the TVM, and then start to translate into Latin as they get older and older. This way, people will eventually start to think the Mass in Latin, and the transition is comfortable and much more natural; it’ll also keep the kids more entertained than just sticking them into a Mass they can’t understand.

 

[ProVobis]

VENERABLE LANGUAGES

The Church has ever held the literary evidences of this wisdom in the highest esteem. She values especially the **Greek and Latin languages **in which wisdom itself is cloaked, as it were, in a vesture of gold. She has likewise welcomed the use of other venerable languages, which flourished in the East. For these too have had no little influence on the progress of humanity and civilization. By their use in sacred liturgies and in versions of Holy Scripture, they have remained in force in certain regions even to the present day, bearing constant witness to the living voice of antiquity.

A PRIMARY PLACE

But amid this variety of languages a primary place must surely be given to that language which had its origins in Latium, and later proved so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity throughout the West.

And since **in God’s special Providence **this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire–and that for so many centuries–it also became the righful language of the Apostolic See.(3) Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.

THE NATURE OF LATIN

Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor anyone nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.

Nor must we overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin’s formal structure. Its “concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity” makes for** singular clarity and impressiveness of expression. **

PRESERVATION OF LATIN BY THE HOLY SEE

For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority “as the splendid vesture ofher heavenly doctrine and sacred laws.” (4) She further requires her sacred ministers to use it, for by so doing they are the better able, wherever they may be, to acquaint themselves with the mind of the Holy See on any matter, and communicate the more easily with Rome and with one another.

Thus the “knowledge and use of this language,” (5) so intimately bound up with the Church’s life, “is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons.” (6) These are the words of Our Predecessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church’s nature. “For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time, of its very nature requires a language which is** universal**,** immutable**, and non vernacular.” (7)

    - Pope John XXIII in Veterum Sapientia

bolchazy.com/al/pope.htm