[Apologetics] Latin to be heard at all Masses?

[Art Kelly]

Dianne is correct that the "Wikipedia is not necessarily a reliable source of accurate information," since anyone can post in it.  
 
For instance, I noticed a significant mistake relating to Social Security (which I did not have time to stop and correct. I'll check and see if someone else has fixed it) and another mistake relating to the TV show, Boston Legal (which I did fix.  A disreputable character in a couple of the episodes was some kind of minster. He wore blue, if that means anything, and some kind of non-Roman collar. The Wikipedia referred to him as a priest and I changed it to minister.)
 
The Wikipedia can be used as a source, but only in conjunction with other sources.
 
In regard to the use of Latin in the current rite of the Mass, someone by the name of Gregory posted a comment on this item in the Catholic Word News site at
http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=59474
 
"We Novo Ordo people will gladly accept Latin in our Liturgy....as soon as the Tridentine folks accept guitars and tambourines in their liturgy!! Tit-for-tat! Even for even! Then everyone's liturgy can be 'enriched' by the other!" 

Art
--- On Sat, 7/5/08, Dianne Dawson <rcdianne at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Dianne Dawson <rcdianne at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Apologetics] Latin to be heard at all Masses?
To: "Stephen Korsman" <skorsman at theotokos.co.za>, apologetics at gathman.org
Date: Saturday, July 5, 2008, 4:40 PM





Regardless of whether or not Jesus spoke Aramaic,  the official language of the Church is Latin.  The Vatican II document SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM is very specific that we are supposed to know our parts of the Mass in Latin.

CONSTITUTION ON THE SACRED LITURGY 
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM 

36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.


(From article 54)

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.
Even though the Constitution allows for the use of the vernacular it is adamant that its use be limited.  This, as well as the other Vatican II documents, have been either ignored or perverted in the intervening years.  The Holy Father is simply leading the Church into compliance with the Vatican II documents.




Even though Wikipedia is not necessarily a reliable source of accurate information, there is an interesting article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

Dianne

 



Like a deer that longs for running waters so my soul longs for you, O God.
Ps 42:1
 
 



----- Original Message ----
From: Stephen Korsman <skorsman at theotokos.co.za>
To: apologetics at gathman.org
Sent: Friday, July 4, 2008 8:54:41 AM
Subject: [Apologetics] Latin to be heard at all Masses?

Hi

My comment: This is maybe going a bit far.  Using Aramaic or Greek, as some do, is fine - those were respectively the languages spoken by Christ and written in the New Testament.  Latin is sacred because it was once the vernacular and got stuck there.  If English has died out in 5000 years time to the extent that Latin has today, would the Pope insist that the consecration be done in English?  Would it become a small-t-tradition?

For the other reason - appeasing the multis and silencing the liberals, it's a good idea.

God bless,
Stephen
  




Latin to be heard at all Masses?
via blogs.telegraph.co.uk Blog Listings on 7/4/08

Here is a gripping rumour (hat tip: Father Z). Pope Benedict may require priests to say the words of consecration in Latin at all Masses, including those celebrated in the vernacular.

His intention would be to sidestep a long-running controversy over the consecration of the wine - Christ's blood, Catholics believe. In the current English translation, this includes the phrase "...which will be shed for you and for all men, so that sins may be forgiven". But the original Latin (based on the Greek of Matthew and Mark) says pro multis, the plain reading of which is "for many". Wikipedia has a good account of the furious arguments that the translation of these words into many languages has provoked.

It boils down to this: did Christ die for all men, or for many? Rome's latest ruling is that "for all" is not a literal translation of pro multis, but rather an "explanation" of the Gospel account. Catholic teaching is that Christ died for all mankind without exception, though not everyone is saved as a result.

If the words of the consecration are always spoken in Latin in the Roman Rite, then although the problem does not go away it is at least removed from the Eucharistic prayer. As I say, it's just a rumour, but it strikes me as a neat solution. Liberals won't agree, needless to say, because it will mean hearing the dreaded Latin language at even the dreariest Tabletista liturgy. 

What a lovely thought.






      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gathman.org/pipermail/apologetics/attachments/20080705/781b45fc/attachment.html>