Thursday, April 29, 2010

Why Celebrate Mass in Latin?




Why Celebrate Mass in Latin?

By Msgr. Charles Pope



APR. 23, 2010 (http://blog.adw.org) - Today beginning at 12:30 pm here in Washington at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, a Solemn High Pontifical Mass in the Extraordinary Form will be celebrated in the Great Upper Church. For those unfamiliar with all the Church jargon of the previous sentence let me decode. The “extraordinary Form” of the Mass is the form of the Mass as it was celebrated prior to 1965 when Liturgical changes brought about the Mass as we have it today.

Prior to these changes the Mass was celebrated exclusively in Latin with only the homily (and sometimes the readings) in English or whatever the local language was. The celebrant also faced in the same direction as the people which some have wrongfully described as the priest “having his back to the people.”

To say this is a “Solemn High” Mass means that all the ceremonial options are observed. There is incense, extra candle bearers, and many of the prayers and readings of the liturgy are sung. The celebrant is also assisted by a deacon and subdeacon. To say this is a pontifical Mass means that it will be celebrated by a bishop and will include two extra deacons and an assisting priest. Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa is today’s celebrant.

For those who are unfamiliar or unappreciative with the splendor of the Latin Liturgy in this form soem questions often arise.

1. Why pray in Latin or any language unfamiliar to the language of the people who attend?

Simply put, praying in Latin is to pray in what has been a sacred language for the Church. It is a common feature of cultures down through human history that they often prayed in a language other than the language of the home and streets. To pray liturgically is to enter heaven, a world apart from the every day world. To use another and more ancient language is a common way many cultures have underscored this.

At the time of Jesus, the synagogue services and the Temple liturgy used ancient Hebrew. Jesus and his contemporaries did not speak Hebrew at home or in the streets any longer. They spoke Aramaic. But when they prayed they instinctively used the ancient prayers which were Hebrew.

In the early Church it appears that the earliest years saw the use of the Greek language for the Liturgy. It seems to have been used even though many people spoke Latin throughout the empire. But many did not think Latin was suited for the Liturgy which required a more elevated language than what most people spoke. By the 5th Century however Latin came to be introduced in the Western Empire as it became an older and more venerable language to them. Eventually Latin wholly replaced Greek in the liturgy of the Church in the Western empire (except a few remnants such as the Kyrie). It remained the language of worship until about 1965 when the local languages were allowed. However, it was not the intent of the Church that Latin should wholly disappear as it has largely done. Latin remains for the Church the official language of her worship.

So, why pray in Latin? Why not? It is for us a sacred language of worship and there is an instinct in human culture that liturgy is world apart where we enter heaven. It is not wrong to pray in the local language but, truth be told, it is not the usual practice in human history.

2. Why does the celebrant face away, or “have his back to us?”

It is really a wrongful description to say the celebrant has his back to us. What is really happening is that the celebrant and the people are all facing the same direction. They are looking toward God. On the center of every older altar was a crucifix. The priest faced it to say Mass and all the people faced it with him. He and they are turned toward the Lord.

In the ancient Church, they not only faced the cross, they also faced to the east to pray. An ancient text called the Didiscalia written about 250 AD says, Now, you ought to face to east to pray for, as you know, scripture has it, Give praise to God who ascends above the highest heavens to the east . In later centuries it was not always possible to orient the Church so that everyone could face east. But the Crucifix above the altar represented the east and the Lord. Hence everyone faced the Lord to pray.

The idea of facing each other to pray is wholly modern and was never known in the Church prior to 1965. Hence the answer is that the celebrant is facing the Lord to pray and so are we.

3. Why is so much of the Mass whispered quietly?

Not everything is whispered but the much of the Eucharistic prayer is. Historically the whispered Eucharistic prayer (or Canon) developed in monastic settings where it was not uncommon for more than one liturgy to be celebrated at the same time at various side altars. In those days priests did not concelebrate masses as they do frequently today. Each priest had to celebrate his own mass. In monasteries where numerous priest might be in residence, numerous liturgies might be celebrated at similar times. In order not to interrupt each other, the priests conducted these liturgies with a server quietly. This practice continued into modern times.

Over time this monastic silence came to be regarded as a sacred silence. The whispering of the prayers was considered a sign of the sacredness of the words which “should not” be loudly proclaimed. (There are other more complicated theological trends that swept the liturgy too complicated to go into here that also influenced the move to a more silent liturgy) At any rate, the practice of a sacred silence came to be the norm eventually even in parish churches. Hence the hushed tones were not an attempt to ignore the faithful who attended or make their participation difficult but it was associated with a holy silence. People knelt, praying as the priest prayed on their behalf.

In the past century as literacy increased among the lay faithful it became more common to provide them with books that contained the texts of the liturgy and those who could read were encouraged to follow along closely. Through the 1940s and 50s these books (called “missals”) became quite common among the laity. By the 1950s there were also some experiments with allowing the priest to have a microphone or to raise the level of his voice so the faithful could follow more easily. These “dialogue Masses” were more popular in some place than others. Sacred silence was still valued by many and adjusting to a different experience was not always embraced with the same fervor, it varied from place to place.

Today, with the return in some places to the celebration of the Old Latin Mass (called officially the “Extraordinary Form”) this sacred silence is once again in evidence. For those who are not used to it, it seems puzzling. But hopefully some of this history helps us understand it. Once again we are faced with the dilemma of how loudly the priest should pray the Canon (Eucharistic Prayer) at such Masses. There are different opinions but a fairly wide consensus that the prayer should be generally said in a very subdued voice.

7 comments:

  1. All these arguments violate the basic principles of the pedagogy of God who teaches us in the language that we understand, not the language that was spoken centuries ago.
    It also violates the principle of "As we pray, so do we believe." How can you believe something that you don't understand?
    It also violates the principle that the "canon" of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is meant to be a public proclamation of our faith, similar to the
    long teaching of Jesus to His apostles at the Last Supper. So why whisper it? To imitate the monks of old? I am old, but not that old; I am not a monk.
    Mass in Latin, following an outdated ritual, is an insult to 21st century Catholics, the Pope's permission notwithstanding. Oh, by the way, I understand Latin.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My question is,is it more important to pray all facing east or gathered around the table of sacrifice (the Altar) praying in the vernacular as Jesus and His disciples at the Last Supper when the Eucharist an the Priesthood were instituted?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bro. Carlos MacedaApril 30, 2010 at 8:17 PM

    Greetings in the name of our Lord,

    As I go to mass everyday, for the past 14 years since i became Special Minister of the Holy Communion, in our country Philippines. It's only now that i appreciate the mass which water my spiritual dryness, after reading your article.

    I have attended hundreds of mass and really appreciate the mass since it brings me closer to God. But now it would bring MORE closer to God. I have felt heaven a lot of times during the mass and each part of it, from the procession up to the final hym. Since its said out our vernacular language.

    But on the other hand also heard a special mass in latin, the more i was tranfixed with God. Problem is it's a special mass and only said on special occassion.

    Now i am with you that latin mass should be said again in all masses.
    thanks and more force of our good Lord be with you. in promoting latin mass.

    your brother in christ.
    servant to the servant of the Lord
    Bro. Carlos Maceda

    ReplyDelete
  4. I will continue to celebrate Mass in my "local language". I do not speak Latin and neither do you! If the Second Vatican Council allows us to have a Mass in a local language it is the OFFICIAL position of the Church with which we as Catholics are not allowed to disagree. Remember when a monk disagreed with the Church in the 16th century? Luther was wrong to do it and so are the people why do it now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with both sides of the issue. I am a recent convert to the Roman Catholi Church and was drawn to it because of attending a few Laint rite Masses and seeing the immense revernce that accompanied the service. I do however think that the Holy Sacrafice of the Mass should be said in the vernacular as well. Over all i feel that it is a good thing to have access to both the ancient and modern versions of the liturgy to preserve our traditional past while still moving forward into the future as a united and truly universal Church.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Personally, I LOVE the Latin Mass. If has much more meaning to me and the reverence and prayer of the Latin mass is much more detailed. I can actually feel within my soul the deep meaning of praying the mass instead of just attending mass. Not everyone likes nor understands the Latin Mass, and that's okay, but there are many who do.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The proof is in the pudding....where are the fruits of Vatican ll's NEW MASS...NO PRIESTS,NO NUNS, more immodest dress, Talking and laughing outloud incessantly, more Catholics leaving for a more PRAISE and WORSHIP Halleluia entertainment, chewing gum while receiving our Lord, flip flops, baseball caps, bold statment t-shirts, empty confessionals, empty pews, etc. etc, etc. Nothing except the Consecration is RIGHT.As far as i am concern, it may be valid, but it is ILLICTED, never should have been tampered with, because there was NOTHING wrong with the MASS in the first place!

    ReplyDelete