Ok, I've been to some Catholic churches on special occasions, and when it is time to celebrate Mass they use Latin. Why is it so? Can't another language be used apart from Latin? Must it be Latin?


Bloodykiller/bloodkiller, keneking and other Catholics in the house should help clarify us.

Catholics celebrate mass in any language bro, French, Spanish, Yoruba, Igbo, etc

@3Dee, are you such of what you're saying? Because is never celebrated in my language despite that majority of the congregation are locals and don't understand a bit of Latin.

IdisuleOurOwn:
Ok, I've been to some Catholic churches on special occasions, and when it is time to celebrate Mass they use Latin. Why is it so? Can't another language be used apart from Latin? Must it be Latin?


Bloodykiller/bloodkiller, keneking and other Catholics in the house should help clarify us.

yes you're right

Catholic Church is also said in English but the main language or official language is Latin
the ancient Catholic Roman Church used Latin to celebrate the mass because the official language of the Romans was Latin that's why some Catholic symbols are from Latin words e.g IHS, etc.
the Anglican church official language is English because of it's origin in England that's why it's called church of England

IdisuleOurOwn:
@3Dee, are you such of what you're saying? Because is never celebrated in my language despite that majority of the congregation are locals and don't understand a bit of Latin.

I once attended a Yoruba Parish at badagri. Mass was celebrated in Yoruba.

It has been said that the use of any language in itself was immaterial, but in its consequences, or in view of the commands of the Church, it is by no means immaterial. The Church has wisely ordered the Latin tongue only to be used in the Mass and in the administration of the Sacraments, for several reasons. 1. Latin was the language used by St. Peter when he first said Mass at Rome. It was the language in which that Prince of the Apostles drew up the Liturgy which, together with the knowledge of the Gospel, he or his successors the Popes imparted to the different peoples of Italy, France, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, England, Ireland, Scotland, Germany, Hungary, and Poland. 2. From the time of the Apostles down, Latin has invariably been used at the altar through the western parts of Christendom, though their inhabitants very frequently did not understand the language. The Catholic Church, through an aversion to innovations, carefully continues to celebrate her Liturgy in that same tongue which apostolic men and saints have used for a similar purpose during more than eighteen centuries. 3. Unchangeable dogmas require an unchangeable language. The Catholic Church cannot change, because it is the Church of God, Who is unchangeable; consequently the language of the Church must also be unchangeable. 4. Mass is said in Latin because a universal Church requires a universal language. The Catholic Church is the same in every clime, in every nation, and consequently its language must be always and everywhere the same, to secure uniformity in her service. 5. Variety of languages is a punishment, a consequence of sin; it was inflicted by God that the human race might be dispersed over the face of the earth. The holy Church, the immaculate Spouse of Jesus Christ, has been established for the express purpose of destroying sin and uniting all mankind; consequently she must everywhere speak the same language. 6. It is a fact well known that the meaning of the words is changed in the course of time by everyday usage. Words which once had a good meaning are now used in a vulgar or ludicrous sense. The Church, enlightened by the Holy Ghost, has chosen a language which is not liable to such changes. The sermons and instructions, and in short everything that is addressed directly to the people, are all in the language of the country; even the prayers of the Mass are translated in almost every Catholic prayerbook, so that there can be no disadvantage to the Catholic worshipper in the fact that the Mass is celebrated in the Latin tongue; especially as the pastors of the Church are very careful to comply with the injunctions of the Council of Trent, to instruct their flocks on the nature of that great Sacrifice, and to explain to them in what manner they should accompany the officiating priest with prayers and devotions best adapted to every portion of the Mass. In the second place, faithful Catholics know well that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the self-same sacrifice that Jesus Christ offered to His Father on the Cross, because both the Priest and the Victim are the same; their faith in the Real Presence is abundantly sufficient to enkindle devotion in their hearts, and to excite in their souls appropriate acts of adoration, thanksgiving and repentance, though they may not understand the prayers which the priest is uttering. For this reason it is that the faithful, pressed by different wants, go to the adorable mysteries of the Mass, never thinking of the language in which they are celebrated. Some, moved by the force of calamities, hasten thither to lay their sorrows at the feet of Jesus. Others go to ask for some grace and special mercy, knowing that the heavenly Father can refuse nothing to His Son. Many feel constrained to fly thither to proclaim their gratitude, and to pour forth the love of a thankful heart, knowing that there is nothing so worthy of being offered to God as the sacred Body and Blood of the eternal Victim. More press forward to give glory to God and to honor His saints, for in the celebration of these mysteries of love alone can we pay worthy homage to His adorable Majesty, while we bear witness to our reverence for those who served Him. Lastly, men hasten to Mass on the wings of charity and compassion, for it is there that they can hope to obtain salvation for the living and rest for the dead. Thus to the thirsty pilgrims through the rocks of the desert do the fountains of water appear. Thus do the generation of those who seek justice received benediction from the Lord and mercy from God their Savior.

^^^^^I don't agree with the above. What's the sense in Priests saying some words in Latin when Majority of the People for which these words are Uttered understand nothing of it? It makes zero sense.

Reyginus:
^^^^^I don't agree with the above. What's the sense in Priests saying some words in Latin when Majority of the People for which these words are Uttered understand nothing of it? It makes zero sense.

Who told you that majority of the congregation do not understand the Latin prayers chanted at Mass? They do. When you've been exposed to something for some 5-6 years it automatically becomes a reflex action.

Besides that, the lay faithful are usually given comprehensive catechism on the entire gamuts of the Church as part of accreditation process before the Sacraments can be administered - and this catechism encompasses the memorization of the Gregorian chants.

Latin is the official language of the Catholic Church as Arabic is to Islam. It's also a moribund language as I suppose you already know, and basically the Gregorian Chants recited at Mass are one of the very few channels employed to prevent the language from fizzling out completely.

And Idisuleourown, I think you might have laid your question on with a trowel because it is demonstrably atypical for Mass to be celebrated in Latin every Sunday. It's usually either on the first or last Sunday of the month alone. The rest of the Masses in the month are celebrated in English and other local dialects.

darkenedrebel:


Who told you that majority of the congregation do not understand the Latin prayers chanted at Mass? They do. When you've been exposed to something for some 5-6 years it automatically becomes a reflex action.

Besides that, the lay faithful are usually given comprehensive catechism on the entire gamuts of the Church as part of accreditation process before the Sacraments can be administered - and this catechism encompasses the memorization of the Gregorian chants.

Latin is the official language of the Catholic Church as Arabic is to Islam. It's also a moribund language as I suppose you already know, and basically the Gregorian Chants recited at Mass are one of the very few channels employed to prevent the language from fizzling out completely.

And Idisuleourown, I think you might have laid your question on with a trowel because it is demonstrably atypical for Mass to be celebrated in Latin every Sunday. It's usually either on the first or last Sunday of the month alone. The rest of the Masses in the month are celebrated in English and other local dialects.

So which is better? English or Latin for mass?

Empredboy:

It has been said that the use of any language in itself was immaterial,
but in its consequences, or in view of the commands of the Church, it is by
no means immaterial. The Church has wisely ordered the Latin tongue only
to be used in the Mass and in the administration of the Sacraments, for
several reasons.
1. Latin was the language used by St. Peter when he first said Mass at
Rome. It was the language in which that Prince of the Apostles drew up
the Liturgy which, together with the knowledge of the Gospel, he or his
successors the Popes imparted to the different peoples of Italy, France,
Belgium, Spain, Portugal, England, Ireland, Scotland, Germany, Hungary,
and Poland.
2. From the time of the Apostles down, Latin has invariably been used at
the altar through the western parts of Christendom, though their
inhabitants very frequently did not understand the language. The
Catholic Church, through an aversion to innovations, carefully continues
to celebrate her Liturgy in that same tongue which apostolic men and
saints have used for a similar purpose during more than eighteen
centuries.
3. Unchangeable dogmas require an unchangeable language. The Catholic
Church cannot change, because it is the Church of God, Who is
unchangeable; consequently the language of the Church must also be
unchangeable.
4. Mass is said in Latin because a universal Church requires a universal
language. The Catholic Church is the same in every clime, in every
nation, and consequently its language must be always and everywhere
the same, to secure uniformity in her service.
5. Variety of languages is a punishment, a consequence of sin; it was
inflicted by God that the human race might be dispersed over the face
of the earth. The holy Church, the immaculate Spouse of Jesus Christ,
has been established for the express purpose of destroying sin and
uniting all mankind; consequently she must everywhere speak the same
language.
6. It is a fact well known that the meaning of the words is changed in the
course of time by everyday usage. Words which once had a good
meaning are now used in a vulgar or ludicrous sense. The Church,
enlightened by the Holy Ghost, has chosen a language which is not
liable to such changes. The sermons and instructions, and in short
everything that is addressed directly to the people, are all in the
language of the country; even the prayers of the Mass are translated in
almost every Catholic prayerbook, so that there can be no disadvantage
to the Catholic worshipper in the fact that the Mass is celebrated in the
Latin tongue; especially as the pastors of the Church are very careful to
comply with the injunctions of the Council of Trent, to instruct their
flocks on the nature of that great Sacrifice, and to explain to them in
what manner they should accompany the officiating priest with prayers
and devotions best adapted to every portion of the Mass.
In the second place, faithful Catholics know well that the Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass is the self-same sacrifice that Jesus Christ offered to His
Father on the Cross, because both the Priest and the Victim are the
same; their faith in the Real Presence is abundantly sufficient to
enkindle devotion in their hearts, and to excite in their souls appropriate
acts of adoration, thanksgiving and repentance, though they may not
understand the prayers which the priest is uttering. For this reason it is
that the faithful, pressed by different wants, go to the adorable
mysteries of the Mass, never thinking of the language in which they are
celebrated. Some, moved by the force of calamities, hasten thither to
lay their sorrows at the feet of Jesus. Others go to ask for some grace
and special mercy, knowing that the heavenly Father can refuse nothing
to His Son. Many feel constrained to fly thither to proclaim their
gratitude, and to pour forth the love of a thankful heart, knowing that
there is nothing so worthy of being offered to God as the sacred Body
and Blood of the eternal Victim. More press forward to give glory to God
and to honor His saints, for in the celebration of these mysteries of love
alone can we pay worthy homage to His adorable Majesty, while we
bear witness to our reverence for those who served Him.
Lastly, men hasten to Mass on the wings of charity and compassion, for
it is there that they can hope to obtain salvation for the living and rest
for the dead. Thus to the thirsty pilgrims through the rocks of the desert
do the fountains of water appear. Thus do the generation of those who
seek justice received benediction from the Lord and mercy from God
their Savior.

Thank you very much. I grew up on the Novus Ordo Mass, which I now believe is valid but theologically deficient and infinitely inferior to the Traditional Latin Mass. Never been to a TLM before as there is no canonical priests celebrating it in my country. As I now largely sympathise with Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of St Pius X, I plan to assist a TLM anytime soon at an SSPX chapel. I have read Pope St Pius V's Quo Primum on the Latin Mass and was left wondering what the inventors of the New Mass were up to. Thank you Benedict XVI for Summorum Pontificum. May the Immaculate Heart of Mary triumph against the "mother of all heresies"-modernism.

Reyginus:
So which is better? English or Latin for mass?

When a Mass is celebrated in Latin, the homily and liturgy of the word are recited in the English language. In Nigerian Catholic churches Latin is used only when these particular prayers are recited: Kyrie Eleison(Lord have mercy), the Gloria(Glory in the highest), the Credo(I believe), the Pater Noster(Our Father) and the Agnus Dei(Lamb Of God)

Asides from the aforementioned every other prayer is said/sung in English or in local dialect, except of course if it's a Mass celebrated within the walls of Vatican.

My point is there is no need deciding which is the better of the two as both languages compliment each other perfectly, plus Latin is only infused in the celebration of Mass once in every month.

darkenedrebel:


When a Mass is celebrated in Latin, the homily and liturgy of the word are recited in the English language. In Nigerian Catholic churches Latin is used only when these particular prayers are recited: Kyrie Eleison(Lord have mercy), the Gloria(Glory in the highest), the Credo(I believe), the Pater Noster(Our Father) and the Agnus Dei(Lamb Of God)

Asides from the aforementioned every other prayer is said/sung in English or in local dialect, except of course if it's a Mass celebrated within the walls of Vatican.

My point is there is no need deciding which is the better of the two as both languages compliment each other perfectly, plus Latin is only infused in the celebration of Mass once in every month.

Of course there's a need. Communication. There'd be no mass if there's no communion of the faithfuls and there's no communion of the faithfuls when there's a hindrance in communication. Do you disagree with this?

Reyginus:
Of course there's a need. Communication. There'd be no mass if there's no communion of the faithfuls and there's no communion of the faithfuls when there's a hindrance in communication. Do you disagree with this?

Are you sure you read my first comment on this thread?

I said majority of the lay faithful can fluently chant the Latin prayers because of the catechism that they had received before the sacrament of the Eucharist was conferred on them.
There are also usually pamphlets on the Church's pews. These pamphlets have the English translations and are placed side-by-side with the Latin wordings for easy following during the course of the Mass.

I also said that Latin Masses are celebrated only once in every month and even then the homilies and other liturgical activities are recited in English and local dialect. What possible harm could be done if something is done only once in a month?

I also made it clear that Latin is the official language of the Catholic Church, thus making chanting it or not a non-negotiable topic. And that's because it is an integral part of the Roman Catholic culture and tradition, and I can matter-of-factly tell you that 98% percent of the Nigerian Catholic population love to recite the Latin Chants.

Pay a visit to a Catholic Church on the first Sunday of any month and see how spirits are lifted when the Kyrie Eleison is accompanied with the mellifluous tunes of the piano.

We Catholics are not complaining, so I absolutely see no reason why the Protestant lot should.

darkenedrebel:


Are you sure you read my first comment on this thread?

I said majority of the lay faithful can fluently chant the Latin prayers because of the catechism that they had received before the sacrament of the Eucharist was conferred on them.
There are also usually pamphlets pews where the English translations are placed side-by-side with the Latin wordings for easy following during the course of the Mass.

I also said that Latin Masses are celebrated only once in every month and even then the homilies and other liturgical activities are recited in English and local dialect. What possible harm could be done if something is done only once in a month?

I also made it clear that Latin is the official language of the Catholic Church, thus making chanting it or not a non-negotiable topic. And that's because it is part of the Roman Catholic culture and I can matter-of-factly tell you that 98% percent of the Church's population in Nigeria love to recite the Latin Chants.

Pay a visit to a Catholic Church on the first Sunday Of the month and see how spirits are lifted when the Kyrie Eleison is accompanied with the mellifluous tunes of the piano.

We Catholics are not complaining, so I see no reason why the Protestant lot should.

Of course I read it. I was born in a Catholic home too. My contention is which is better. Is that a wrong question to ask?

Reyginus:
Of course I read it. I was born in a Catholic home too. My contention is which is better. Is that a wrong question to ask?

It's not a wrong question to ask, except I had already given an answer to the question in the second comment that I made on this thread.


This was where I answered your question:-

darkenedrebel:

My point is there is no need deciding which is the better of the two as both languages compliment each other perfectly, plus Latin is only infused in the celebration of Mass once in every month

darkenedrebel:


It's not a wrong question to ask, except I had already given an answer to the question in the second comment that I made on this thread.


This was where I answered your question:-

And I say there's a need. Saying there's no need for deciding which is better also suggests no need was necessary in the use of Latin.

And what do you mean by complement each other? If there's a lingual franca, what's the point in using another language understood by only a few?

Reyginus:
And I say there's a need

While the English Language's grammar and vocabulary are of Proto-Germanic provenance, a significant portion of the English vocabulary comes from Romance and Latinate sources. So yes, since you are so keen on knowing which is the better of the two then I'd say Latin, simply because it is richer in vocab and many English words have Latin roots.

Saying there's no need for deciding which is better also suggests no need was necessary in the use of Latin

I thought I told you that Latin is a moribund language? I also stated that entrenching the Gregorian Chants in the order of the Mass are one of the ways that the Church employs in preventing the language from dying off completely. These and many other reasons are why the usage of Latin is essential and necessary.

And to rebut your claim that there is the need to decide which is the better of the two I'd like you to know that because two things are used in tandem does not always mean that they have to be juxtaposed to determine which is better. Why must they be compared and contrasted? and why can't they just be used synchronously?

You insisting that they must be compared to determine which is superior is you narrowing it down to only two possibilities without the option of a third scenario[harmony and coalition], and that line of argument[false dichotomy] is choplogical.

And what do you mean by complement each other?

By that I mean that they synchronize perfectly well during Masses. It's just like when you're using English and Pidgin English interchangeably in a conversation with a friend. Do I have to spell out everything for you?

If there's a lingual franca, what's the point in using another language understood by only a few?

I already told you majority of the lay faithful can recite the Gregorian chants offhandedly, so what is the word 'few' still doing in your sentences?

MAJORITY is the operative word here, or has Merriam Webster declared the word 'majority' to mean 'few'?. Brain-feed me.

darkenedrebel:


While the English Language's grammar and vocabulary are of Proto-Germanic provenance, a significant portion of the English vocabulary comes from Romance and Latinate sources. So yes, since you are so keen on knowing which is the better of the two then I'd say Latin, simply because it is richer in vocab and many English words have Latin roots.



I thought I told you that Latin is a moribund language? I also stated that entrenching the Gregorian Chants in the order or the Mass are one of the ways that the Church employs in preventing the language from dying off completely. These and many other reasons are why the usage of Latin is essential and necessary.

And to rebut your claim that there is the need to decide which is the better of the two I'd like you to know that because two things are being used in tandem does not mean they have to be juxtaposed to determine which is better. Why must they be compared and contrasted? can't they just be used harmoniously?

You insisting that they must be compared to determine which is superior is you narrowing it down to only two possibilities without the option of third scenario[harmony and coalition], and that line of argument[false dichotomy] is choplogical.



By that I mean that they synchronize perfectly well during Masses. It's just like when you're using English and Pidgin English interchangeably in a conversation with a friend. Do I have to spell out everything for you?



I already told you majority of the lay faithful can recite the Gregorian chants offhandedly, so what is the word 'few' still doing in your sentences?

MAJORITY is the operative word here, or has Merriam Webster declared the word 'majority' to mean 'few'?. Brain-feed me.

But your Latin would have worked in your analogy if we are a bilingual nation. Had it been our argument was the completeness and perfection of Languages my German derived language would have been easily trounced.

No. It's not really necessary to juxtapose two things when there's no basis and value for comparison. As long as there exists a basis and value, comparison becomes necessary.

It's simply the value of what is good and evil. The value of the greater good. In essence, if in the course of supposed harmony, the intended meaning is lost, then there's no harmony.

If it happens to be so, then we contrast with another option. And I don't see the preservation of moribund languages in the loss of harmony. The greater good is not the preservation of harmony here but understanding.

Which is more important? To preserve a language or to understand fully the worship of God in operation?

It doesn't also fit the example of any dialogue with your friend. My first point again. Your friend understands Pidgin and English on almost equal scale.

In this case, nobody knows what 'come' means in Latin. It doesn't fit. Majority of the faithfuls I know know nothing of what they are reciting. Some may be aware of what that sentence translates in English but the individual words, everyone I've met know nothing.

What's the difference between these crammed words, which individual words they don't understand, and the cramming of the Arabic Koran by Muslim kids around here? I see similarities. Racial Conquest. Neocolonialism.

Reyginus:
But your Latin would have worked in your analogy if we are a bilingual nation

It worked perfectly because we are talking about the Church here and not a bilingual nation or any nation at all.

Had it been our argument was the completeness and perfection of Languages my German derived language would have been easily trounced

Then what is the argument about? Whether or not majority of the congregation understand the Gregorian Chants that are sung at mass? If yes then I have already had that extensively delineated in my previous comments on this thread.

No. It's not really necessary to juxtapose two things when there's no basis and value for comparison. As long as there exists a basis and value comparison becomes necessary

The only basis for comparison here, which is whether or not majority of the congregation understand the Gregorian chants is completely namby-pamby because I have already explained to the nth degree that as a matter of fact majority of the lay faithful have an out-and-out knowledge of the Gregorian chants. You are just reiterating the same thing ad nauseam.

It's simply the value of what is good and evil. The value of the greater good. In essence, if in the course of supposed harmony, the intended meaning is lost, then there's no harmony

But that's not the case in this scenario. Let's not skirt around counterfactuals and focus on what is real. And what is real here is that majority of the lay faithful understand the Gregorian chants and the meaning and harmony is not lost either. I implore you to pay a visit to a Catholic church this Sunday and tell me if you sense dissonance during the course of the Mass.

If it happens to be so, then we contrast with the another option. And I don't see the preservation of moribund languages in the loss of harmony

But harmony is not lost. I am sure you haven't been to a Catholic Church in a long time and these are merely a priori assumptions. Didn't they teach you in school to avoid argumentum ad ignoratiam like the plague? Visit a Catholic church as I recommended earlier and have a feel of it rather than coming to conclusions built solely on imaginative theses.

Which is more important? To preserve a language or to understand fully the worship of God in operation?

Good grief!! How many times will I reiterate the same thing?

It doesn't also fit the example of any dialogue with your friend

It does actually. I only was trying to let you know that Latin and English can be coalesced during the celebration of the Mass just as English and Pidgin English can be used together in informal conversations.

My first point again. Your friend understand Pidgin and English on almost equal scale

Except you do not need to understand Latin in toto to be an active participant during the Mass. All you need to learn and perhaps commit to memory are the prayers that are usually chanted in Latin, and these prayers are only five in number as I have stated earlier{The Kyrie Eleison, The Gloria, The Credo, The Pater Noster and the Agnus Dei].
Those having difficulty in memorizing it have pamphlets to guide them through. It’s not brain surgery or rocket science.

In this case, nobody knows what 'come' means in Latin. It doesn't fit. Majority of the faithfuls I know know nothing of what they are reciting

By majority you mean the 3 or 4 Catholics you've encountered?. Unless you've met up to 50 Catholics then it is nothing but a hasty generalization and cannot be considered to be a 'majority'.

They may be aware of what that sentence translates in English but the individual words, everyone I've met know nothing

So they have to know the individual words before their prayers can reach the Heavens? Hahahahaha
You're just clutching at straws here.

Since you've bowled me a googly, I would like to enact the burden of proof reversal here by asking you to prove to me beyond reasonable doubt that not knowing the meaning of some individual words in the prayers said in Latin is any different from not knowing the individual meaning of some words in prayers that are recited in English?

As you know there is the ten to one possibility that a large percentage of a congregation of worshipers would at some point in time come across some unfamiliar vocabulary when prayers are recited in English.
Unless you're trying to tell me that it is possible for everyone, or should I say the hoi poilloi in a congregation of some 3,000 worshipers to know the individual word meaning of all the prayers that are recited in English?

Debunk.

What's the difference between these crammed words

There is a vast difference between cramming and memorization.

which individual words they don't understand

As I pointedly stated earlier, you do not have to be able to define the words individually. All that is required is you understanding the general idea of the sentence or group of sentences.

Even you cannot perfectly state the definitions of all the words you used in your last post on this thread. The best way to learn and understand language is inductively and perhaps abductively, not deductively. Otherwise you would be visiting your dictionary after reading every two or three sentences especially if what you're reading is very tortuous.

and the cramming of the Arabic Koran by Muslim kids around here? I see similarities

Stop mixing unrelated things up. I put it to you: why do pastors in Pentecostal churches begin rattling off some incoherent mumbo-jumbo all in the name of speaking in tongues, leaving the congregation puzzled and confused? Isn't the congregation supposed to be carried along?

Debunk.

Racial Conquest. Neocolonialism

You're just a propagandist that likes to read meanings into cut-and-dried situations. How does reciting Latin at Masses construe to Neocolonialism?
Is Latin even the official language of any country as we speak? The answer to that question is no, so what country is neo-colonializing us especially when the language in question is not even the official language of any country at the moment.

Going by your warped logic every Church-goer in Nigeria is a mindless drone under the subtle influence of Britain, after all we use their language in our place of worship and almost 90% of the prayers we recite are in English.
Hello, Mr Perksniffian, do you not realize that you’ve been replying my posts on this thread in ‘ENGLISH’? Can you now see how very lopsided your contention is?

Hosea 4:6 says and I quote: 'My people perish for lack of knowledge'

Let me brain-feed you pro bono using reductionism to facilitate comprehension: The Old Testament foreshadowed the rising of a 'new Jerusalem'. . . you would know this if you read your Bible. And don't forget Christ handed Peter the keys to the church when he said: 'upon you I shall build my church'. Did you hear that? He said 'his church shall be built UPON Peter'.
Do you know where Peter was buried? That's right, he was buried in the Vatican City {specifically beneath the grounds of the place now known as St. Peter's Basilica}.

The ‘new Jerusalem’ that Christ was talking about is ‘Rome’. And it makes sense because apart from the fact that Peter died and was buried in Rome, the jihad waged by the Moslems would have made it impossible for Christianity’s seat of power to be situated in Jerusalem. I hope you can now see how Latin came into the picture and why it is a non-negotiable tradition that cannot be pigeon-holed simply because some misguided propagandist called ‘Reyginus’ cannot see the woods for the trees or appreciate Art in its choicest form.

darkenedrebel:






The only basis for comparison here, which is whether or not majority of the congregation understand the Gregorian chants is completely namby-pamby because I have already explained to the nth degree that as a matter of fact majority of the lay faithful have an out-and-out knowledge of the Gregorian chants. You are just reiterating the same thing ad nauseam.



But that's not the case in this scenario. Let's not skirt around counterfactuals and focus on what is real. And what is real here is that majority of the lay faithful understand the Gregorian chants and the meaning and harmony is not lost either. I implore you to pay a visit to a Catholic church this Sunday and tell me if you sense dissonance during the course of the Mass.



But harmony is not lost. I am sure you haven't been to a Catholic Church in a long time and these are merely a priori assumptions. Didn't they teach you in school to avoid argumentum ad ignoratiam like the plague? Visit a Catholic church as I recommended earlier and have a feel of it rather than coming to conclusions built solely on imaginative theses.



Good grief!! How many times will I reiterate the same thing?



It does actually. I only was trying to let you know that Latin and English can be coalesced during the celebration of the Mass just as English and Pidgin English can be used together in informal conversations.



Except you do not need to understand Latin in toto to be an active participant during the Mass. All you need to learn and perhaps commit to memory are the prayers that are usually chanted in Latin, and these prayers are only five in number as I have stated earlier{The Kyrie Eleison, The Gloria, The Credo, The Pater Noster and the Agnus Dei].
Those having difficulty in memorizing it have pamphlets to guide them through. It’s not brain surgery or rocket science.



By majority you mean the 3 or 4 Catholics you've encountered?. Unless you've met up to 50 Catholics then it is nothing but a hasty generalization and cannot be considered to be a 'majority'.



So they have to know the individual words before their prayers can reach the Heavens? Hahahahaha
You're just clutching at straws here.

Since you've bowled me a googly, I would like to enact the burden of proof reversal here by asking you to prove to me beyond reasonable doubt that not knowing the meaning of some individual words in the prayers said in Latin is any different from not knowing the individual meaning of some words in prayers that are recited in English?

As you know there is the ten to one possibility that a large percentage of a congregation of worshipers would at some point in time come across some unfamiliar vocabulary when prayers are recited in English.
Unless you're trying to tell me that it is possible for everyone, or should I say the hoi poilloi in a congregation of some 3,000 worshipers to know the individual word meaning of all the prayers that are recited in English?

Debunk.



There is a vast difference between cramming and memorization.



As I pointedly stated earlier, you do not have to be able to define the words individually. All that is required is you understanding the general idea of the sentence or group of sentences.

Even you cannot perfectly state the definitions of all the words you used in your last post on this thread. The best way to learn and understand language is inductively and perhaps abductively, not deductively. Otherwise you would be visiting your dictionary after reading every two or three sentences especially if what you're reading is very tortuous.



Stop mixing unrelated things up. I put it to you: why do pastors in Pentecostal churches begin rattling off some incoherent mumbo-jumbo all in the name of speaking in tongues, leaving the congregation puzzled and confused? Isn't the congregation supposed to be carried along?

Debunk.



You're just a propagandist that likes to read meanings into cut-and-dried situations. How does reciting Latin at Masses construe to Neocolonialism?
Is Latin even the official language of any country as we speak? The answer to that question is no, so what country is neo-colonializing us especially when the language in question is not even the official language of any country at the moment.

Going by your warped logic every Church-goer in Nigeria is a mindless drone under the subtle influence of Britain, after all we use their language in our place of worship and almost 90% of the prayers we recite are in English.
Hello, Mr Perksniffian, do you not realize that you’ve been replying my posts on this thread in ‘ENGLISH’? Can you now see how very lopsided your contention is?

Hosea 4:6 says and I quote: 'My people perish for lack of knowledge'

Let me brain-feed you pro bono using reductionism to facilitate comprehension: The Old Testament foreshadowed the rising of a 'new Jerusalem'. . . you would know this if you read your Bible. And don't forget Christ handed Peter the keys to the church when he said: 'upon you I shall build my church'. Did you hear that? He said 'his church shall be built UPON Peter'.
Do you know where Peter was buried? That's right, he was buried in the Vatican City {specifically beneath the grounds of the place now known as St. Peter's Basilica}.

The ‘new Jerusalem’ that Christ was talking about is ‘Rome’. And it makes sense because apart from the fact that Peter died and was buried in Rome, the jihad waged by the Moslems would have made it impossible for Christianity’s seat of power to be situated in Jerusalem. I hope you can now see how Latin came into the picture and why it is a non-negotiable tradition that cannot be pigeon-holed simply because some misguided propagandist called ‘Reyginus’ cannot see the woods for the trees or appreciate Art in its choicest form.

Wow! Let's break it before things are mixed up.

First point:

'It worked perfectly because we are talking about the Church here and not a bilingual nation or any nation at all'.


You used a conversation between friends with aid of a language they both perfectly understand—that is, Pidgin and English.

In the catholic church, mass is said in the language the natives and citizens speak. Nigerians can understand both Pidgin and English.

But how did they come about this? Sense experience. From childhood they've heard seniors speaking it and in schools the lectures are given in English Language.

Nigeria's Lingual Franca is not Latin. Nigerian catholics are not taught Latin. Nigerian Catholic Kids are not taught Latin in Catechism classes.

So how does the analogy of Pidgin and English Language use by a Nigerian Catholic capture the Prefect picture of the Native Language blended with Latin?

Once we are done with the above we tackle the next point:

'Then what is the argument about? Whether or not majority of the congregation understand the Gregorian Chants that are sung at mass? If yes then I have already had that extensively delineated in my previous comments on this thread'.

Papist:

Thank you very much. I grew up on the Novus Ordo Mass, which I now believe is valid but theologically deficient and infinitely inferior to the Traditional Latin Mass. Never been to a TLM before as there is no canonical priests celebrating it in my country. As I now largely sympathise with Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of St Pius X, I plan to assist a TLM anytime soon at an SSPX chapel. I have read Pope St Pius V's Quo Primum on the Latin Mass and was left wondering what the inventors of the New Mass were up to. Thank you Benedict XVI for Summorum Pontificum. May the Immaculate Heart of Mary triumph against the "mother of all heresies"-modernism.

be carefull with dat plan

Papist:

Thank you very much. I grew up on the Novus Ordo Mass, which I now believe is valid but theologically deficient and infinitely inferior to the Traditional Latin Mass. Never been to a TLM before as there is no canonical priests celebrating it in my country. As I now largely sympathise with Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of St Pius X, I plan to assist a TLM anytime soon at an SSPX chapel. I have read Pope St Pius V's Quo Primum on the Latin Mass and was left wondering what the inventors of the New Mass were up to. Thank you Benedict XVI for Summorum Pontificum. May the Immaculate Heart of Mary triumph against the "mother of all heresies"-modernism.

It is nt possible 4 one mass to b infinitely superior to another. the mass no matter d rite is d sacrifice of Christ and is always infinitely good, it may be a pontifical latin mass or even a irreverent novus ordo by a sinful priest, if we have form, matter intention then it is d mass and is infinitely good.