Liturgy with little Vernacular with Latin?

What would have happened if the 2nd Vatican Council never introduced Novus Ordo mass and used the Tridentine mass and in certain places used little vernacular in them where Latin is not popular like India, China (difficult to understand) . I am not against Latin , It’s difficult for me , but I love it and I also love Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, Syriac, Slovene language.
I was reading in Wiki about the Latin Mass and I saw this
In most countries, the Tridentine Mass was celebrated only in Latin. However, there are exceptions. In early seventeenth century China, Jesuit missionaries secured permission from Pope Paul V to celebrate the Catholic Mass in Chinese, part of an effort to adapt their work to Chinese cultural norms and conditions.
What are your views on this point.

I think we would’ve been much better off had the only change to the mass at Vatican II have been to directly translate the mass into the vernacular, and then allow the mass to be offered everywhere in both the vernacular and in latin.
However this is only my personal (probably unpopular) opinion.

8 Likes

I wouldn’t have any problem with that. I would like to have seen just a translation into the vernacular as an option.

1 Like

ok, Thanks for answering

The Ordinariate mass is about the closest that I have seen and is my absolute favorite of the Roman Rite, however it is not a direct translation.

2 Likes

I believe the Ordinariate mass is Anglican or protestant. And Can you please explain What is the Ordinariate mass ?
Peace

It is a Catholic variation of a High Anglican mass which itself was originally derived from the EF mass.
Which is why I said it was the closest I’ve seen to the EF mass in the vernacular, it is far closer to the EF compared to the NO IMHO, however it definitely isn’t a direct translation.

On a side note a few years back I believe Cardinal Sarah pointed towards the mass of the Ordinariate as a model towards which the NO should aspire.

To my understanding the Ordinariate itself was formed to allow Anglo-Catholics to come fully into the Catholic Church while allowing them to retain their specific flavor of Catholicism.

Here is a link to the Wikipedia for the Ordinariate which can probably explain better than I can:

1 Like

Yes, sorry I hadn’t thought of that.

NO=Novus Ordo or Ordinary Form

EF=Extraordinary Form or Tridentine Mass

As an aside I really don’t understand why anyone dislikes the terminology of Novus Ordo, after all it is named as such by Vatican II, I don’t mind calling it the Ordinary Form at all it’s just that I’m so used to typing out the abbreviation NO for shorthand on these forums, perhaps the intent of the poster is what makes the difference?

1 Like

I don’t entirely agree with you but you are absolutely right that of all the changes to the liturgy, the translation was the least of the problems.

1 Like

Nor do I. No one objects to Vetus Ordo. But there is a certain sort of person who likes to read insults into places where they do not exist.

2 Likes

Exactly, idkw.

Probably because of a long list of people who actually do intend insult. Obviously not everyone, but enough to make it an issue.

3 Likes

Id be very surprised. Im a traditionalist and mix in a great many traditionalist circles in England, France, Spain and Benelux. Novus Ordo is just a term without pejorative connotations.

It is however true that we find the term “extraordinary form” somewhat derogatory, so we tend to avoid its corollary “ordinary form.” These two terms are loaded with the thinking of thec hermeneutic of continuity which many traditionalists regard as a misconception.

1 Like

I find that odd. I was under the impression that Benedict XVI, who I understand first used the term, was regarded as quite traditional. Hence why a large percentage of people who regularly discuss the matter use EF and OF after the terms he used.

Well of course we were all pleased that he liberated the traditional Mass. But that doesn’t mean we were all delighted by his thinking. If you were falsely imprisoned and you were liberated on compassionate grounds, you would be glad to be out of prison but indignant that you had not been exonerated.

1 Like

Not in particular, no. Im sorry you thought so.

I am not sure that “liberated” is quite the right term, since he was simply making it clear that the previous form had not actually been abrogated and was still a valid form of the Mass.

So what would you have had him do? Abrogate the form of the Mass that was promulgated after (not by) the Council? Was this somehow in error? As in the Church was teaching error?

Well that is disputed. It was the term that BXVI adopted but it is a loaded and somewhat offensive term to use when the argument is being advanced that the two Ordones, vetus and novus, are supposed to be equally valid . A bit like if someone were to use “ordinary skin colour” as a term.

Supposed? Speaking of loaded terms…

1 Like

That is the supposition of the Vatican; but the terms ordinary and extraordinary imply that the traditional Mass is in a position of inferiority.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.