What did he say? The return of the Latin Mass
The Vatican is about to offer a special gift to the Catholic faithful: the opportunity to hear about virgin birth (etc) in pure unobstructed, untranslated Latin. I recently read about this new development regarding religious communication in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:
A Vatican official has confirmed that Pope Benedict XVI plans to loosen restrictions on celebrating the old Latin Mass, reviving a rite that was essentially swept away by the revolutionary reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos told a meeting of Latin American bishops in Brazil this week that Benedict wanted to give all Catholics greater access to the so-called Tridentine Mass because of a “new and renewed interest” in the rite.
The Tridentine Mass differs significantly from the new Mass: It is celebrated in Latin, with the priest facing the altar away from the faithful. The rank and file do not participate actively in the service.
Benedict is also acting in a bid to reach out to an ultraconservative schismatic group, the Society of St. Pius X, and bring it back into the Vatican’s fold, Castrillon Hoyos said Wednesday, according to a copy of his speech posted on the meeting’s Web site.
The late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre founded the society in 1969 in Switzerland, opposed to the liberalizing reforms of the 1962-65 Second Vatican Council, particularly its reform of the Tridentine Mass into the modern liturgy celebrated today in the vernacular.
It seems to me that, in the United States, we already have enough trouble doing things in English, things like assembling bicycles, doing our taxes and programming VCRs. But now, Catholics will again be given the chance to contemplate the highly abstract mysteries of the universe in Latin. Hey, raise your hand if you understand even a few words of spoken Latin! I’m looking . . . still looking . . .
Can you imagine the reaction if they announced that all television and radio sports events would be announced in Latin? How about new Latin versions of television soap operas? If it’s really a good idea, start putting up Latin menus at fast food restaurants. How about the signage at airports and your telephone bill? You know . . . other things that people try to understand. Pandemonium, I’d say! [Pandemonium literally means demons everywhere]. Or, perhaps, maybe people aren’t really trying to understand the things that are said at Mass.
This comeback of the Latin Mass strongly suggests that there HAS to be a God (and he/she/it must be Catholic) because no thinking person would go to all this regamarole unless, for sure, Catholicism is the genuine deal.
Secundum Dan Quayle, is mos auxilium nos rego super Latin America.
A thousand years ago, Latin was the international language. That’s why the Bible was translated into Latin in the first place. Now, the de-facto international language is English, with Spanish and Mandarin as eager contenders (based on popularity).
If the goal is to get closer to the true meaning of the Bible, wouldn’t it make more sense to do the services in Hebrew and Greek? There is a core of believers that think that the King James English variation of the Bible is the true, inspired text.
Latin is now an in-language for the Catholic Church. It is still halfheartedly used in taxonomy, just because it was (barely) still the common language when the Enlightenment flourished. But with genetic studies overturning many previously granted Latin names, the revised charts are looking less and less like Latin.
So the Catholic Church is making yet another move to segregate itself from secular society. Mr. Joe Ratzinger (a.k.a. Pope Benedict XVI) is turning out to be quite the retratrian (attempt at an adjective form of the Retro movement. Any takers?).
My motto: “Veni, vidi, vici”
It’s probably some kind of nostalgia, going back to the good old days before Luther translated the bible.
I don’t see any good reason why they should not hold a mass in Latin. Surely, this doesn’t mean that Latin will be introduced as a third language next to English and Spanish. And I wish I knew Latin, it’s useful if you want to learn Roman languages. In the part of Germany where I live, if you go to a school that leads to the degree that allows entrance to university, you usually have to choose either Latin or another second foreign language. As far as now the only foreign language that is taking over in public spaces is bad English. 
(waves hand) I understand (some) Latin
One of the beauties of the Traditional Latin Mass is that you don’t have to know Latin to understand what’s going on. You can participate in the Sacrifice of the Mass just by watching-along and praying-along. The Traditional Mass makes use of all your senses: Hearing the chant, smelling the incense, feeling asperges (sprinkled water - a reminder of baptism), seeing the actions at the altar, tasting the Lord.
The homily is in the vernacular and the readings are repeated in that language as well.
I’ve always thought Latin was a tool for the Vatican to prevent commoners from reading the Bible on their own; i.e., without a priest to give it the approved spin…er, I mean, to “guide” them. It would also prevent people from questioning troublesome passages the church didn’t want them to know about. In fact, didn’t the church make it a crime to translate the Bible into the vernacular, for just these reasons?
“Can you imagine the reaction if they announced that all television and radio sports events would be announced in Latin?”
Isn’t there a difference between entertainment and spiritual services? (insert sarcastic comment here)
__________________________________
__________________________________
I’m not a Catholic, but I respect the aspects of religion that embrace mystery and paradox. It seems when religions attempt to line up to the same standards of logic and merely impart information, they break down a bit.
There’s an awe and reverence at a typical latin mass that you’ll have a hard time finding anywhere else. It’s definitely worship…Check out http://www.cegguam.org/sacraments/tridentine.htm for links to Google video of parts of an actual latin mass.
The awe and reverence comes from having no clue about what is spoken during a Latin mass. It’s a good thing that Luther translated the Bible as it’s easier to control the masses if you keep them in the dark and are the only one who knows God’s will.
People may follow the pope like sheep, but I doubt they would be willing to take up Latin classes if he reverted to Latin as a standard language within the Catholic Church. In this case, I think, the progress is not reversible.
projektleiterin makes a great point. When I saw my first Jewish wedding (much of it in Hebrew), I felt as much awe and reverence as I did when I saw my first High Mass Catholic wedding. Ditto when I saw my first Zulu or Navaho tribal celebrations on television, and even the mating dances of various species of birds, fish or even crabs. Heck, a good sunrise probably produces more awe and reverence for more people than will a church service in Latin. After two millenia, and with the help of great architecture, I would hope the Church could figure out by now how to impress people.
Thanks, grumpy!
Last year I attended a Catholic wedding in church. I’m usually convinced that there is too much hype about weddings. Most women are more concerned about their dress and the wedding than about making their marriage work, current divorce rates are proof (I will say women here, because men don’t seem to care that much about choosing the right dress, it doesn’t mean though that they are better prepared for marriage). The insistence on traditions and a white dress at the same time is hypocritical as most are surely not virgins anymore when they marry. Many haven’t seen the inside of church for long time. Yet, the wedding was a solemn ceremony and I felt moved, despite my usual criticism.
Weddings are funny things, religiously speaking. Like so many traditions that we now associate with Christianity, weddings were big celebrations long before the Church co-opted them to enhance its own power. Like baptisms, confirmations and the Last Rites, weddings gave the Church yet another lever to control its congregants. Simply put, having a monopoly on weddings gives the Church power it would not otherwise have — perhaps one of its unstated reasons for opposing same-sex civil unions.