Restoring a Church tradition

National Post ^ | 2007-07-10 | Michael Coren

[Clive]

-

[muawiyah]

Well, yeah, of course ~ but what would the critics say if the Catholics prayed for the conversion of the Jews to Lutheranism.

Bet that would leave them dumbfounded.

[BlessedBeGod]

Good article. Thanks for posting it.

[netmilsmom]

Great article.
Last night I hear that B16 is not allowing the TLM to be said during Easter just so that this prayer cannot be said.

Much ado over nothing.

[joseph20]

Here is what I do not understand: The Latin Mass was good enough for the last 2,000 years, so why wasn’t it good enough after Vatican II as well?

[Loyalist]

Last night I hear that B16 is not allowing the TLM to be said during Easter just so that this prayer cannot be said.

Not quite accurate--the prohibition extends to private Masses during the Paschal Triduum, but then, priests are already prohibited from celebrating private Masses during the Triduum in the ordinary rite.

Public extraordinary rite Masses were already, and will still be, celebrated, all prayers intact.

Also, the 1962 Missal removed "perfidei" (which better translates as 'faithless') from the prayer for the conversion of the Jews.

[RenegadeNC]

As I understand it, the Latin Mass was not actually instituted until sometime in the Middle Ages, Greek being the predominant language during the early years of the church. The question I have, with no disrespect intended, is this: Why perform a worship service in a language you don’t understand? At the time the Latin Mass was instituted, Latin had spread widely thru the known world. However, it is little used or known in our society today. I would think you would want to approach The Lord in a way you can actually understand and truly communicate with Him instead of reciting sounds you do not understand. There seems to be some differing ideas as to whether or not Latin is some sort of Holy language. I mean no offense by any of this...it’s simply a question.

[IrishBrigade]

Well, yeah, of course ~ but what would the critics say if the Catholics prayed for the conversion of the Jews to Lutheranism...

...I suppose you’re trying to make some point...I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt...

[NewJerseyJoe]

The great thing about a "dead" language is that the meanings of words are fixed forever. There is no further "evolution" of the language.... meaning that, in future years as vernacular languages change, no one can use the changing meanings of words as an excuse (or a back-door) to corrupt doctrine. Once folks get this idea into their heads, it's but a short step to "new translations" etc. We saw it happen with Luther, Henry VIII, and again in the 1960s. "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it."

Additionally, uniformity of language means worldwide uniformity of worship. Break it up into dozens or hundreds of vernaculars, and you no longer have "One" church, but a bunch of squabbling nationalistic or linguistic parochial groups, each with a different agenda and a different way to "worship." A new protestantism -- which is what exists now, and has existed for nearly 40 years.

> in a way you can actually understand

"The people" are not the intended audience of a valid and properly offered Mass; the Mass is a sacrifice offered to God on behalf of the people. God is the only One Who "needs to understand."

> instead of reciting sounds you do not understand.

I have no problems following in my Latin-English missal -- in fact, I've learned quite a bit of Latin, and my English vocabulary and comprehension have vastly increased as a result. All this without ever having taken a Latin class in my life. Same for my friends. Same for the 7-year-old kids. If all of these people are able to follow along, then the lack of understanding comes from those who have chosen not to understand.

[RexBeach]

Good points!

Have you ever heard a mass in Latin? It is quite beautiful.

At my parish, we have one Latin mass a month, and it is very well attended.

As for myself, hearing the mass In Latin reminds me of when I was a little boy and just learning about my faith. It is a touchstone to the past, but it is not meant as a return to the past.

We pray for ALL people, everywhere in the world; and all leaders everywhere at every mass. It is our hope and prayer that we all grow closer to God in our everyday lives and practices.

Using Latin in the mass is merely another way to approach those goals.

How’s that?

[IrishBrigade]

...your question is complex, to the extent that Catholic theology places a premium upon tradition as a means to truer understanding of Our Lord, and also to the extent that the populace should not be ignorant of the actual text of the Latin Mass, as it is immutable and not particularly difficult to learn...you mention also reciting sounds not understood...I submit that it’s no better to recite sounds that you do understand, the salient point being that mere recitation instead of involvement is the detriment to comprehension, not the matter of grammar and syntax...

[netmilsmom]

Raymond Arroyo said that the Vatican stated that so I guess he should have clarified it.

[mike182d]

As I understand it, the Latin Mass was not actually instituted until sometime in the Middle Ages, Greek being the predominant language during the early years of the church. The question I have, with no disrespect intended, is this: Why perform a worship service in a language you don’t understand? At the time the Latin Mass was instituted, Latin had spread widely thru the known world. However, it is little used or known in our society today. I would think you would want to approach The Lord in a way you can actually understand and truly communicate with Him instead of reciting sounds you do not understand. There seems to be some differing ideas as to whether or not Latin is some sort of Holy language. I mean no offense by any of this...it’s simply a question.

First, Greek is still used in the Catholic Church in some of the Eastern Rites - even Aramaic. While Greek was common throughout the Eastern rite in the Church's formative stages, Latin had become the prominent language of the Church in the 5th and 6th century. That's also the same time as the translation into the Latin vulgate.

The main problem Catholics have with Vatican II is that the Tridentine Rite didn't just "pop-up" out of nowhere. It was the fruit of 2000 years of evolution. There were modifications, to be sure, but it was the culmination of the worship of the Latin Rite over 2000 years.

Not so with the Novus Ordo.

Regarding your second question, who says no one understands Latin? When I pray to our Lord in Latin, I am very cognizant of what I am saying to him. Furthermore, simply because a prayer is in a vernacular language doesn't automatically mean its better comprehended. There are Catholics who will rattle off a rosary in English at 300 words a second and are completely oblivious to what is really being said in the actual prayers. They would have been better off just praying it in Latin anyway.

What most of the non-Catholic, and even Catholic, population fails to recognize is the importance of Tradition. If a Polish family moves to America, it would be absurd to make them forget the language of their ancestors and lose all their former traditions simply because they're in America now and no one does that. One of the most beautiful things about Latin and the Church's tradition is that it is a tradition that unites the whole of the universal Church - it transcends all nationalities and borders. When I pray in Latin, I am praying in the same tongue as St. Francis de Sales and even the great St. Augustine of Hippo. To worship Christ in the same language is one thing that unites us as a family, as the body of Christ.

Simply because some Catholics don't care or refuse to understand the language doesn't change that fact.

[RenegadeNC]

I guess I don’t see the problem with “new translations” if by that term you mean the vernacular of a certain time and place. We translate scripture into new languages all the time as missionaries continue to reach new societies with the Gospel of Christ. I don’t think they should be trying to teach those people Latin first before they can be exposed to the Word of God.
Also, keep in mind that Latin scripture was itself a “new translation” at one time, since the original Scriptures were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

>God is the only One Who “needs to understand”.
I whole-heartedly disagree with this point. Paul said he would pray with understanding. It seems to me that worship without understanding is simply ritual and noise.

>I have no problems following my Latin-English missal...
Seems to me that you’re using one of those “new translations” (English) in order to be told what the Latin means in your missal. So what’s the difference between that and just using the English translation without the Latin? It sounds like you put more importance on the “dead” language than I do.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree about this. I hope I have not offended in any way. I don’t understand your view...but that doesn’t necessarily make you wrong.
God bless.

[NewJerseyJoe]

Don't have time to address all of this now, but one thing can't wait....

>God is the only One Who “needs to understand”.
I whole-heartedly disagree with this point

Unequivocally incorrect:

[emphasis added in places]

263. Q. What is the Mass?
A. The Mass is the unbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ.

264. Q. What is a sacrifice?
A. A sacrifice is the offering of an object by a priest to God alone, and the consuming of it to acknowledge that He is the Creator and Lord of all things.

265. Q. Is the Mass the same sacrifice as that of the Cross?
A. The Mass is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross.

266. Q. How is the Mass the same sacrifice as that of the Cross?
A. The Mass is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross because the offering and the priest are the same--Christ our Blessed Lord; and the ends for which the sacrifice of the Mass is offered are the same as those of the sacrifice of the Cross.

267. Q. What were the ends for which the sacrifice of the Cross was offered?
A. The ends for which the sacrifice of the Cross was offered were: 1st, To honor and glorify God; 2d, To thank Him for all the graces bestowed on the whole world; 3d, To satisfy God's justice for the sins of men; 4th, To obtain all graces and blessings.

Nowhere in that teaching is anything resembling "The purpose of Mass is so that the people can understand." Time to review your catechism.

[milbuf]

Since I travel world wide it was always easy to attend mass anywhere,because it was in the common language of the church, in Latin. Now with mass in local language it makes it more difficult to do so. Latin makes the universal Church,one church world wide.

[Pyro7480]

Raymond Arroyo said that the Vatican stated that so I guess he should have clarified it.

There were a few misinterpretations on that program last night, that being the main one. The only kind of liturgy that has been restricted during the Triduum is the private Mass, which is not a new restriction.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Latin is the official language of the Church and you’d be surprised as to how many of the laity understand it.

[muawiyah]

What Catholics pray for is their own business, right?

If somebody doesn't want themselves prayed for, they probably ought to consider ome of the possible alternatives.

The one I propose is just one among many ~ bet it'd shake up the critics.