Though I love the Latin Rite, Vatican II never intended, through the addition of “mother tongues”, the post Vatican II abuses of the Liturgy which by their nature lowered our sacred understanding of what is happening at Holy Mass. They wanted greater participation!
From Sacrosanctum concilium 48 - The Church, therefore, earnestly desires that Christ’s faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators; on the contrary, through a good understanding of the rites and prayers they should take part in the sacred action conscious of what they are doing, with devotion and full collaboration.
The beauty of using the Latin language is that it allows us to pray as one. As I finished the Camino and assisted at the Pilgrim Mass in St James’ Compostela, I was so very happy that parts of the Mass, usually those where everyone responded, were in Latin. As we prayed in Latin all sense of this or that nation is dissolved and we are simply, Catholic.
What the Church should not go back to is a Mass where some people choose to pray the Rosary in the midst of Mass because they don’t know what is going on.
Great points! This seems to be one of the biggest points of contention in the modern Church, especially between traditionalists and the majority of Catholics. I think (and I intend to write another article specifically addressing this point in the future) that what Benedict XVI called the "hermeneutic of rupture" is frankly rampant in the Church, and that most Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo, even many who are otherwise very devout and orthodox, would to some extent believe that Vatican II was a correction, not merely a development, of the pre-conciliar Church, and that the Novus Ordo similarly corrected the Latin Mass. I have seen many people online who claim that Latin, ad orientem posture, only priests distributing the Eucharist, etc. are elitist, superstitious, legalistic... It seems that many believe the Protestant reformers were right after all, and thus our liturgy should resemble the Lutheran service, as it very much does. This, however, contradicts Church teaching, now and forever. I especially appreciate Benedict's idea that the parts of the Mass which are said by the people should be in Latin and that the laity should be taught what they mean - for the very purpose of greater participation.
I’m organizing a men’s retreat this month and we have three prominent languages at our parish. I asked the French African men’s choir if they could do the mass parts in Latin, so everyone could pray together.
Kaleb,
Though I love the Latin Rite, Vatican II never intended, through the addition of “mother tongues”, the post Vatican II abuses of the Liturgy which by their nature lowered our sacred understanding of what is happening at Holy Mass. They wanted greater participation!
From Sacrosanctum concilium 48 - The Church, therefore, earnestly desires that Christ’s faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators; on the contrary, through a good understanding of the rites and prayers they should take part in the sacred action conscious of what they are doing, with devotion and full collaboration.
The beauty of using the Latin language is that it allows us to pray as one. As I finished the Camino and assisted at the Pilgrim Mass in St James’ Compostela, I was so very happy that parts of the Mass, usually those where everyone responded, were in Latin. As we prayed in Latin all sense of this or that nation is dissolved and we are simply, Catholic.
What the Church should not go back to is a Mass where some people choose to pray the Rosary in the midst of Mass because they don’t know what is going on.
Great and thoughtful article! Thanks!
Great points! This seems to be one of the biggest points of contention in the modern Church, especially between traditionalists and the majority of Catholics. I think (and I intend to write another article specifically addressing this point in the future) that what Benedict XVI called the "hermeneutic of rupture" is frankly rampant in the Church, and that most Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo, even many who are otherwise very devout and orthodox, would to some extent believe that Vatican II was a correction, not merely a development, of the pre-conciliar Church, and that the Novus Ordo similarly corrected the Latin Mass. I have seen many people online who claim that Latin, ad orientem posture, only priests distributing the Eucharist, etc. are elitist, superstitious, legalistic... It seems that many believe the Protestant reformers were right after all, and thus our liturgy should resemble the Lutheran service, as it very much does. This, however, contradicts Church teaching, now and forever. I especially appreciate Benedict's idea that the parts of the Mass which are said by the people should be in Latin and that the laity should be taught what they mean - for the very purpose of greater participation.
God bless!
I’m organizing a men’s retreat this month and we have three prominent languages at our parish. I asked the French African men’s choir if they could do the mass parts in Latin, so everyone could pray together.