Posted on 06/26/2014 2:47:24 AM PDT by markomalley
It’s been roughly 500 years since Martin Luther introduced the language of the people to the Mass – the Divine Liturgy of the Church. 500 years since the historic language of the Western Church was purged from the worship of God’s people. As a student of history, I understand why Luther thought this was necessary. Indeed, there is goodness in hearing and understanding the Liturgy in one’s native tongue. But Luther’s experiment with language should end. It’s time to restore Latin to the Mass of the Western Church. It’s time to reintroduce the language of the Church to her people.
For those bristling at such a suggestion, I offer the following observations:
1) The Lutheran Reformers did not seek to abolish the Mass. Our confessions, contained in the Book of Concord, make this abundantly clear. These are the same confessions that every ordained Lutheran pastor swear to uphold and affirm. In other words, the Lutheran Church is a Liturgical Church and our worship is properly called the Mass.
2) Concerning matters of the faith, there was widespread ignorance among laity AND clergy during the time of the Reformation (Cf. Luther penning his Small and Large Catechisms). This, coupled with a literacy rate of ~20% (which radically changed with the introduction of the printing press), meant that the vast majority of those attending Mass had little knowledge of what was being said (by priest or people). Again, it’s no wonder Luther thought the vernacular was important.
3) While the Lutheran Church affirms sola scriptura, it does not reject Tradition or the importance of ritual. Catholicity is not adiaphara (optional/indifferent), especially with respect to worship. And nothing affirms our catholicity like the Mass. It is, I believe, THE defining characteristic of what Lutherans confess.
But why ditch the vernacular in our worship and relearn – reintroduce – and re-embrace Latin in the Mass? What possible benefits can come from such a change? I’m glad you’re curious…
1) Despite that the fact that the Lutheran Confessions affirm the Mass, many Lutheran churches today reject it altogether and embrace a worship style that is more akin to what one would find in a non-denominational church. Lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief) is absolutely true and those who reject the Mass or think they should arrogantly rewrite it based on what they think their congregation wants/needs, I believe, reject the very substance of Lutheranism. Can you imagine a contemporary Latin Mass? Neither can I. They are mutually exclusive, which is why the use of Latin in our Mass will help restore our catholicity in matters of worship, and affirm what our Confessions already do.
2) Our clergy and our people are very educated on matters of faith these days, much more than those prior to the Reformation. The Holy Scriptures, the Book of Concord, the writings of the church fathers, etc., are almost all in our native tongue. But with the expulsion of Latin, there is no longer a common language of the Church catholic. I know, very few clergy and even less laymen know Latin. But what a powerful educational tool the Church could be if it took it upon herself to educate her people in this language. As we relearn this language, some of our hymns, the assigned readings, and the sermon, could remain in the vernacular, along with a translation of the Latin in the hymnal or worship folder. But once again Christians could have a language that unites every congregation around the world – regardless of time or location.
3) Finally, re-embracing Latin in our Mass will further solidify the Lutheran Church as a communion that embraces the catholicity of the Christian faith. This embrace, I believe, will allow us to refocus our efforts on ending our schism with Rome. Sadly, most Lutherans have no desire for reconciliation with those in fellowship with the Bishop of Rome. However, this runs contrary to the intent of the Reformation and to the spirit of the Augsburg Confession. But how can our communions be reunited if our worship is so radically different? Let’s embrace the language from whence we came and in it, find a new platform for dialogue and reconciliation.
It’s time. For the sake of the church and our faith – restore Latin to the Mass.
Soli Deo Gloria
As an LCMS Lutheran who posts here on a fairly regular basis, I probably should say something about this. But I have sat here for a long time, trying to think of something to say, and there is nothing to say.
God doesn’t listen to our language; God listens to our hearts, and to Himself the Holy Spirit who prays alongside our prayers (Romans 8:26-27). If liturgizing in Latin opens your heart to God, then do it in Latin; if liturgizing in Greek or Aramaic or Russian or English or Japanese or Hindi or Spanish or Yoruba or Afrikaans or Quechua opens your heart to God, then do it in that language.
Jesus praises the scribe who brings forth out of his storehouse treasures both new and old (Matt. 15:32). It is the liturgy that ties us to the great cloud of witnesses, from St. Francis to Pope Francis, from St. Clement to Kim Clement, so that we practice, every time we engage in it, the song that is, and will forever be sung before the Throne. But we are also told more than once in the Bible to sing, not just the old songs, but new songs as well, because it is Christ who makes all things new.
Prefacing my observation with the fact that many English only speaking people are not fluent in their own language, the bilingual people that I have ever met that truly understood English learned it as children at the same time as their other language.
The fact that Latin is a dead language makes learning its nuances much harder, as there is no human context to frame it in. Your example of understanding “OK” is wrong. OK can mean many things ranging from “I'm good with that.” to “Shut up!” depending on how it is used. What you are talking about is simplistic understanding, which leads to confusion, which was supposed to be solved by using this magical dead language.
That is true from the eggs to the apples, and if you don't understand what I mean, then translate it back into Latin, and then find a vernacular definition of what that Latin phrase means.
The Introits, Collects, and Graduals of the SBH are virtually the same as those of the 1962 Missal so beloved by Latin Mass trad Catholics.
And if I ask your wife what it means, will she be able to tell me? If so, what language will she be using to tell me?
Would you say that she is better or worse at making that translation than someone who has studied Latin for 40 years and has read hundreds of Latin texts to help understand the true meaning?
Listening to the Mass in Latin over and over again for years is not immersion in Latin, it is rote memorization. No different than learning a song in German, and thinking that you really understand what the song means.
How did your wife learn what the Latin meant without using English equivalents, and once she had used those English equivalents, how was the Latin still sterile?
The author is incorrect when he states:
“Sadly, most Lutherans have no desire for reconciliation with those in fellowship with the Bishop of Rome.”
The largest Lutheran Church body in the US, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) and the church of Rome signed a “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” some years back.
My reaction (I'm Missouri Synod) is that the good reverend academic who wrote the essay has been nibbling too much on those little wafers....the one that the heroine partook of deep down in the rabbit hole in "Alice in Wonderland.
No problem in positing the idea of a Lutheran Latin Mass, or discussing and debating it. But this is one proposal that has zero chance of being fulfilled for many excellent reasons.
The writer obviously has a lot of time on his hands to explore barren, dead-end labyrinths in which no one else cares a whit to join him.
Leni/MinuteGal
I believe it was still in Greek in Byzantium well after 400AD. That said, Latin was not a mysterious language at the time, and like I said before, was well understood by all educated people. It was also the imperial language that bridged the gap between a very diverse number of languages. The continuity of that purpose no longer exists, as Latin is no longer a recognized common language.
Mystery. What happens at the Christian altar is mysterious and sacred, isn’t it? When you use ordinary, plain language, what are you are telling the congregation? That what is happening is ordinary and plain. But when you use a designated sacred language, or at least a sacred variation of a vernacular language (like King James English), you are drawing a little bit of a veil over it.
What happens shouldn't be a mystery. How it happens is the mystery. But if you want it to be a total mystery, then I would agree, no better way than to use a language that no one is going to understand. As for exalting what is being said, I've never found anything inherently vulgar about English. Word choice and structure is the key. When Christ spoke, it was in the vernacular.
Universality. Go to a Christian Church in another country. Do you understand what’s going on? Can you participate? I can. Latin forms a bridge over vastly different cultures and draws Christian communities closer together.
Sure, I'll give you universality, which isn't surprising given that it was the original reason for using Latin. However, its mainly universally unknown now and English would serve the same purpose better (as its the common language of today). That said, if you follow the order of the Mass, and understand it, you will follow it in any language. Attending Mass in Spanish, French, or Polish isn't confusing for someone who can tell you the order of Mass off the top of their head.
I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the widespread abandonment of a sacred language has made Christian congregations more modern and trendy rather than timeless, more vulgar and cheap rather than sacred, and more insulated and provincial rather than unified.
I don't think using the vernacular is causal to the fact that a deteriorating society has infected the church. Societal evils infected the church many times while Latin was the only language in use.
Since Hebrew is the language of G-d given to Jews I say if you want to talk to G-d do it in Hebrew.
Not quite.
http://www.societyholytrinity.org/rule.htm
Read Chapter VII "Parish Practice"
3. Baptize with water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and in no other name and with no other words.
4. Preside at the Holy Communion using bread and wine, leading the faithful in worship according to the orders and texts of the Church, as provided in her historic liturgy.
There is no mystery to it...Nothing magical...What is it, is 'Show Time'...
And God says, 'do not do it'...You flat out reject the instruction from the Apostle and pretend you are using a 'sacred' language...
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Oh, that's funny!!!
At the same time, Latin is never going to replace the vernacular in the Lutheran church. Nor should it. I think the author of this article is not dealing in reality.
So English becoming universally understood by the educated class throughout Christiandom is a "negative" development?
I do not agree.
Within the LCMS, liturgy - the work of worship - and (especially) reverance should be primary, not language.
That said, I do inject Latin, Greek and even some Aramaic when discussing the history of the church catholic. Being able to understand the language of the apostles and the Church fathers provides real insight into the on-going dissemination of the Gospel.
Those who do not learn from history...yada, yada, yada.
It certainly does no harm to teach (and occasionally use) the Ordinary of the Mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, and Agnus) in Latin.
Those texts should be part of folk’s liturgical vocabulary.
Right now I’m working on learning the Sanctus in Greek.
Don we now our gay apparel.
A well regulated militia being necessary ...
Oh, I agree. Knowledge of Latin is very helpful for any Christian--indeed, for any educated person who wants to understand the history of Western civilization. I am a big advocate for leaning Latin.
I'm glad our hymnal (LSB) still uses the Latin titles for parts of the Divine Service: Introit, Kyrie, Gloria in Excelsis, Sanctus, Pax Domini, Agnus Dei, Nunc Dimittis, Benedicamus. It lets people know our connectedness to the history of the church.
I often use Latin and Greek terms in Bible class (sometimes Hebrew and German, too), when it is relevant to what we are discussing. Of course, I always explain these things.
When I was a kid attending Lutheran school, and we would do Matins in chapel every week, sometimes I would look at the psalm titles in Latin in the old hymnal (TLH)--e.g., Beatus vir for Psalm 1--and I was fascinated by those words.
The altar was a very traditional Catholic one, in dark wood, against the east wall of the church, with a considerable baldacchino over it and large Crucifix veiled for Passiontide. Wow! I thought. This is more traditional than 90% of the Catholic churches in America.
Then I noticed the most interesting thing. Juxtaposed to this traditionalism was the celebrant at the altar. As with the traditional, pre-Second Vatican Council mass, he stood facing east with his back to the faithful. He was not standing in the center of the altar but on the "Gospel side" with his arms raised in the 'orans' posture. (The people were standing so it may have been the Gospel he was reading--the long one appointed for Passion Sunday.)
Interestingly, despite all this "traditionalism", he was not vested in chasuble and stole, he wasn't even wearing a cassock and surplice. He was dressed in a dark suit. I don't think he was wearing a clerical collar but a dark shirt and necktie.
I wondered if he was the pastor. In the absence of the pastor, would a layman have led worship in this manner? To my eye, it was very curious mix of "old and new."
Also, to the point of this post, bring back Latin. Begin with the Agnus Dei. It's short and to the point. Restore Greek at the Kyrie as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.