They were participating. You seem to think that they weren’t, you tell me.
And now we digress into the usual spat.
I enjoy attending my hippie OF Mass. It suits me I have attended the EF Mass; however, there wasn’t enough organ music for me! Nothing like a stirring rendition of Let There Be Peace On Earth
I think a few here are genuinely misunderstanding the entire point of my post of questions.
I think you over estimate how much a commoner would have understood Latin. I doubt an Englishman in 1600 spoke or understood anymore Latin than the average American today.
By hearing, understanding, and speaking it liturgically pre-V2…? I could be wrong, but I would presume most commoners would have understood Latin in the context of the liturgy.
I personally believe that God speaks all languages and doesn’t really fault us if we don’t speak Latin learn Latin, or hear the Mass in Latin. Just as He would not fault us for it not being in Aramaic.
Things evolve. It’s people who are reluctant to adapt. The prayers are the same, the Scripture is the same. The sacrifice is the same.’
These threads never amount to anything but a show of hands.
Unsubscribing. I’m on the way to daily Mass.
Wait, you think that the average person in let’s say Europe from AD 800 (Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire) to AD 1536 (Henry VIII and the dissolution of the monasteries, and the "new religion’ of protestantism) was speaking Latin, if not reading and writing?
Yes, the average person could understand many Latin words, especially in countries like France and what became Italy, and in Spain, because of the many cognates. But did they SPEAK Latin, as in while tilling the soil greeting the passersby with “Ave, Petrus. Quo vadis?” NOT SO.
You might want to do a little reading up on the history of Christianity especially with regard to Europe approximately 500 -1500 AD.
Who said anything about reading and writing?
Exactly! How much more in the Liturgy?
“Commoners” i.e. Catholics would certainly have memorized the Pater, Ave, Credo, and the few responses of the Mass. They would have an understanding of the Mass itself through the teachings of their parish priests or any monks, itinerant friars, etc as well as their own lord or the prime landowner and his family, and any possible schooling available (which differed according to country and century).
I said, SPEAKING if not reading and writing, meaning to make it clear that the average person was not ‘literate’.
Literacy has nothing to do with speaking.
That is what I just SAID.
What does that have to do with understanding, hearing, and speaking Latin in the Liturgy?
Let me get this clear. Are you claiming that the ‘average person’ could understand some at least of the Latin liturgy even if he or she could not read or write Latin?
If you are saying that, I agree with you to an extent. I believe that the sense of the liturgy, that is, the understanding of the offering, the understanding of certain words such as “Dominus/i” for Lord, or “peccata/peccatoribus” for sin, 'Oremus" for 'let us pray" was understood, not because the people were using Latin in their common speech, but because through decades and centuries of Catholic Mass and Catholic understanding passed on from priest to people, and family to family, made it so.
However, that does not mean that the average person could for example ‘hear’ the Roman canon word for word and ‘translate’ the Latin into English, French, or German. But they didn’t ‘have to’. They understood that the words were sacred, that it was a prayer of offering of a sacrifice, that the postures, vestments, actions, and words, even if imperfectly heard or understood, were understood in their hearts through all those actions.
I don’t mind which form of Mass is celebrated as long as it’s celebrated with reverence and dignity. Out of preference it would be the Ordinariate Use (Divine Worship) as that’s the language and style I remember from when I was younger.
Perfect! 100% agreed! Well said.
Lay people didn’t have to speak a single Latin syllable to assist at Latin Mass for the vast majority of its history.
The Dialogue Mass was a 20th Century innovation, and was never universally offered. The usual situation was for the altar servers to do the responses, not the faithful.
I’m up for that
I like the OF in Latin, with the Priest facing Ad Orientem. To me, it gives the best of both worlds, is extremely reverent, yet I don’t have to worry about people turning and staring at me when my kids make peeps or move around like kids. The only problem is that it’s difficult to find a parish that does this. I am lucky that in Houston there is one, and another that celebrates the OF in Latin (but Versus Populum).