What if the only change had been the language?

Gracious of you and warmly accepted. :tiphat:

“We would rather have the Tridentine Mass in the Vernacular and facing the people, than the Novus Ordo Mass in Latin and facing the altar.” Marcel Lefebvre.

There is a LOT more to it than the Latin, the Latin is just one simple issue- accurately translated that is, not ICEL wreckovated as the English translations exist now.

Ken

Maybe that’s what will organically develop: The TLM said audibly in the vernacular. Let’s keep ad orientum, though, please, even our high church anglican brethren kept this.

I might be able to open up to the Proper Prayers in the local vernacular for Low Masses, but I must admit I shudder everytime I hear the words of Consecration spoken aloud. There are some prayers that are meant to be sotto voce and the Canon is one of them.

Not picking on you specifically:) but I could just scream when I hear questions about proper translations the last 40 years. We ALREADY had them. I still have my beloved Mass missal from 50 years ago with perfectly good translations. We knew the Latin, reading it every day, and we knew the English, it was right on the page. This is just one of the frustrations about the current situation with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

“Can be” spoken sotto voce. Doesn’t have to be. It falls within the competence of the Church to alter it.

And if they’d simply switched to SAYING the vernacular of the Tridentine Mass, we probably wouldn’t have problems like we’re having today.

If we had a TLM in the vernacular, we’d just be like the Anglicans. I think we should need keep latin, we need a universal language. I dont understand what the big deal is about taking a year of latin. If Jews study Hebrew for their bat mitzvah’s, and Muslims study arabic to read the Quaran, why cant Catholics just learn some latin? Its not that hard, especially if youre a romance based language like French or Italian, even English, though Germanic, is still influenced heavily by latin through French. In any case, we should keep the latin, its whut makes it Catholic. Plus, if they put all the chant in the vernacular and it wouldnt have the same effect. Chant in certain languages sound bad n cheesy. I think chant in English sounds a little cheezy :shrug: We should keep the latin, otherwise all that good gregorian chant would be pushed aside, which is what happened after V2. It makes sense if youre going to being singing the introit n graduale in latin to also be prayed/said by the priest in latin. Iono, in my opinion, once we go to vernacular, u dont see too many people using gregorian chant. We need to bring back the liber usualis or something. Latin! Latin! Latin! If Jews can learn Hebrew, Muslims arabic, then Catholics can learn some latin.

And so what are Greek, Slavonic, Syriac, and Aramaic languages and liturgies? Chopped liver?

The real question is DOES Latin convey the faith etc. better than any other language? If it does, then the faith if merely Latin and not Catholic.

**In any case, we should keep the latin, its whut makes it Catholic. **

Then, as I’ve just said, this means the faith is only Latin and not Catholic.

**Plus, if they put all the chant in the vernacular and it wouldnt have the same effect. Chant in certain languages sound bad n cheesy. I think chant in English sounds a little cheezy **

I can refer you to all sorts of books where not only Gregorian, but the other Chants of the Church–Greek, Russian, Ukrainian, Byzatine to name just a few–have been successfully adapted to English and other languages as well.

BTW–I have a master’s in music, so I know what I’m talking about.

Such vernacular chants would be devised, not developed over the centuries under the guidance of the Holy Ghost. Why is it that today so many people seek to make every artificial?

The fact is, there is absolutely no reason why the Mass of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church should be in any language but Latin, the official language of the Church. People forget that Latin is a sacred language, by the very fact that it is accepted by the Church as Her chosen tongue.

In Veterum Sapientia Blessed John XXIII teaches us:

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.

thats great, but those’d prbably be best used in a byzantine catholic mass, or ukrainian catholic etc. I’d prefer to hear gregorian chant sung at a Latin rite mass. They call it the traditional latin mass for a reason, n they should keep it that way. the epistle readings and gospel readings are reread in the vernacular before the homily anyways so who cares?

The Ruthenian DL uses “On in substance with”… far more intelligible than “one in being with” for me.

But the ICEL has moved at a snail’s pace.

For me, hearing the consecration is edifying. Understanding the liturgy is vital.

I suspect the lack of reverence (Which, BTW, I have seen almost none of in Alaska) has less to do with the liturgy & changes and more to do with the lack of traditionalism in the US culture overall.

Alaska, surprisingly, has a HIGH level of traditionalism socially. (Hippyism was never really popular, Eco-guerillas still aren’t, politically moderate, and a bastion of Russian Orthodoxy.) That cultural conservatism has washed over into the burgeoning catholic parishes. The TLM is not offered under Indult locally, but there is a “TLM Parish” not affiliated with the Archdiocese of Anchorage (according to both the Vicar General and the Archdiocesan website). Many Alaskan parishes are growing. And not, from what I can see, from the OCA/RO.

I know that many feel the vernacular is vital in their becoming Catholic; I’ve heard enough recent converts say that they’d considered becoming Catholic, but that Latin had turned them off, sending them to Episcopal or Lutheran parishes.

Even the majority of Lutheran Masses are quite reverent locally.

[sign]That’s MY rant! Always was. And I
wasn’t even Catholic
when the changes were instituted![/sign]

Here, here! :clapping:

Exactly. I was one of the first who actually wanted some English in the Mass having read those beautiful English prayers in the old Missal. But seeing how they botched it up royally (but what else do you expect out of a committee?) I now happen to be very opposed to any vernacular in the Mass.

BTW–I have a master’s in music, so I know what I’m talking about.

In other words, you don’t have to listen to it?

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

I wish I did not agree with you here because there SHOULD be no real problem with the vernacular – but as you note: there IS!

The first document of the Second Vatican Council, *Sacrosanctum concilium, *asked that pastors teach the people the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin. I do my bit: my sixth grade CCD class gets the Our Father, Hail Mary, and Glory be in Latin. It isn’t much, but it’s a start.

take the word “consubstantial,” for example.

Don’t know what you’re talking about. I never learned the Nicene Creed in English. Besides, you should be pushing the “for many” in the Consecration first before showing people how the vernacular can work to everyone’s satisfaction.

I’ve read through Sacrosanctum Concilium but can’t find anything that says pastors are asked to teach the people the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin. Can you refer me to the particular paragraph you get that from?

    1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
  1. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

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.