Out of the mouths of babes ...

[Calum Cille]

It's very clear from your last message that you're limited to thinking of the issue in terms of either-or.

Not at all. Do it. Enjoy. Whatever floats your boat, zings your strings and put the sting in your sling.

How's that supposed to be an answer?

So, if you weren’t fluent, how would you understand all those eucharistic prayers, collects and prefaces which are used?

You'd read the translation in the book just like they all do with the liturgy of the word in the vernacular anyway!

I’m just picturing the scene on Everton Brow tomorrow morning if Graeme, our PP, announced we were having Mass in Latin.

So much for not being either-or. That didn't last long.

But if Latin is to be fostered everywhere then many of us would be excluded from worship at the drop of a hat.

Could you explain that baffling assertion? And why at the drop of a hat?

Because those of us who don’t speak it wouldn’t understand it. And, therefore wouldn't be able to take part.

Why not? You'd read the translation in the book just like they all do with the liturgy of the word in the vernacular anyway!

No smaller, if the same practice was occurring elsewhere, in which case no parishioner would have a refuge from it.

So we’d have to put up, shut up or get out?

Isn't that what happened at Vatican II to the traditionals? Yes, you put up with it because you've been intolerant and exclusive up until now and it's time that excluding treatment is named and shamed and dealt with.

So how could you "enjoy singing ... heaps of the ordinaries from memory" if Latin is so inaccessible to you?

I learned it parrot-fashion as a child. Don’t know what it mean but love the music and the sound of the words.

The very sound you would deny others elsewhere in the liturgy. I learned the Our Father in English parrot fashion. However, I had to taught about what it meant. Apart from that phenomenon, how can you not know what "benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, hosanna in excelsis" means? Don't you know the vernacular?

No one suggested that a whole Latin mass be held "simply so" foreigners felt welcome and nobody suggested the welcoming of foreigners as a major argument for the use of Latin.

But did I misread your statement that Latin “facilitates visiting groups of people who would otherwise feel a bit lost or excluded should the local community normally recite this kind of thing at mass: Zèzus aymàta uskitchinwàk uneyotiwàl k'tèmanguèlminè.”?

Yes, why? Wouldn't anyone who knew the mass in Latin feel facilitated by Latin when the alternative was Zèzus aymàta uskitchinwàk uneyotiwàl k'tèmanguèlminè?

Leaving behind a generation of linguistically appreciative and/or tolerant individuals who can see value in all the reasons for retaining Latin in the liturgy? I would like to see such an enlightened generation arise.

Then, please God, take me before it happens.

Let it not be said that Nick Baty was ever linguistically appreciatve and/or tolerant and enlightened.

Let's put it more simply. Noone is suggesting that those of you who love Latin shouldn't be able to celebrate in that language. Enjoy. On the other hand, I can go to Mass in English whenever I like – several times a day if I wish. And I shall continue to so do.

So much for not being either-or - again. The views of Peter Hitchens come to mind.

[Nick Baty]

How's that supposed to be an answer?

Because I am not saying “either-or”. I am saying let’s have both. Do it if you want to. My only diagreement is your assertion that everyone should in order to help a few people who might occasionally be at a non-English Mass!

You'd read the translation in the book just like they all do with the liturgy of the word in the vernacular anyway!

Not if they have mics and good readers they don’t. Why would one read it in a book? I have occasionally enjoyed Spanish movies with subtitles (I am half Spanish) but I’d much rather hear what the actors are saying.

Yes, you put up with it because you've been intolerant and exclusive up until now and it's time that excluding treatment is named and shamed and dealt with.

You see me as intolerant. But I’m not. Very happy for Latin speakers to celebrate the liturgy in the language they love. What is there to object to? But, repeating what I said above, and in numerous others place, my diagreement is your assertion that everyone should.

how can you not know what "benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, hosanna in excelsis" means?

But why do I need to know when I can sing it in English?

Wouldn't anyone who knew the mass in Latin feel facilitated by Latin when the alternative was Zèzus aymàta uskitchinwàk uneyotiwàl k'tèmanguèlminè?

But, repeating myself again, that argument is in favour of the few who might occasionally be somewhere where English is not spoken. How many people might that be? And how often? I am never likely to hear the words you quote – so why do I need to know the Latin for them?

So much for not being either-or - again. The views of Peter Hitchens come to mind.

Doesn’t he like Latin either?

[Calum Cille]

:D It's not often that we can catch you out!

What happens when you don't catch me out?

Presumably, the Latin translations of originals - Arameic, Greek, etc - was accurate in the first place and our vernacular translations also capture the essence of the originals... whatever 'accurate' means in terms of translation. If it isn't accurate, why are we Catholics so wedded to it as a basis for our vernacular translations?

Because its not most often a question of accuracy so much as a question of interpretation when you move from one language to another. A lot of translators are called interpreters, which makes a lot of sense.

Gaelic: "tha mi air mo dhòigh." English: "I'm very happy" or "I'm really pleased" or "I'm overjoyed"? Which emphasis do I take in translation? I can't translate the Gaelic literally into English as it would make no sense.

Catholic scholarship appreciates the choices which tradition has taken and the nuances and emphases of meaning which descend from tradition and produce the Roman inculturation of scripture and prayer. Even when you, for example, translate a scriptural psalm from Hebrew, you are encouraged to examine how this Hebrew scripture was received in the tradition. For example, if two translations are possible, which one was the one most commonly taken by the tradition? Even if liturgical texts quote Hebrew or Greek scripture or allude to it, the Latin may be taking specific translation options here, here and there. You have to ask yourself why that translation option was taken and whether or not you should go for another translation option for a modern vernacular translation. In other words, the Latin allows you to be guided by your forbears in what the traditional emphases have always been. A lot of the liturgy is not Greek or Hebrew in origin as far as the specific words are concerned but are fairly original Latin compositions and, in that case, we really are "wedded to it as a basis for our vernacular translations".

[Calum Cille]

How's that supposed to be an answer?

Because I am not saying “either-or”.

Yes, you are, you're saying either you get to go to a mass in Latin or you get to go to a mass in English and never the twain shall meet. It's so divisive.

My only diagreement is your assertion that everyone should in order to help a few people who might occasionally be at a non-English Mass!

Rome is asking you to learn the stuff and all you can think is, "no, it might help a few people who might occasionally be at a non-English mass"!

You'd read the translation in the book just like they all do with the liturgy of the word in the vernacular anyway!

Not if they have mics and good readers they don’t.

You really do give the impression of living in a little world of your own. I can think of lots of parishes where, as soon as whoever it is steps up to the ambo, the heads go down into the mass leaflets.

Why would one read it in a book?

Because they're all educated and literate and this is a visual culture.

Yes, you put up with it because you've been intolerant and exclusive up until now and it's time that excluding treatment is named and shamed and dealt with.

You see me as intolerant. But I’m not.

You've made it clear that you won't tolerate Latin at your mass unless it's a bit of choral work or whatever. That's de facto intolerance.

But, repeating what I said above, and in numerous others place, my diagreement is your assertion that everyone should.

I assert it because I agree with the authoritative church documents which assert it. Your disagreement with them is perhaps more significant than your disagreement with me.

how can you not know what "benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, hosanna in excelsis" means?

But why do I need to know when I can sing it in English?

Because you're not an individual, you're part of a body, and you don't own yourself, you were bought at a price and it isn't all about you, there are others and other concerns than yours to worry about too and because the Church says so?

... why do I need to know the Latin for them?

You don't, you should know it anyway, and one of the many benefits of knowing it go to 'them'. Oh, the old "I don't need to" argument again.

The views of Peter Hitchens come to mind.

Doesn’t he like Latin either?

You might like to check him out on Youtube and suss out whether any of the views he criticises relate to any of yours!

[Nick Baty]

Yes, you are, you're saying either you get to go to a mass in Latin or you get to go to a mass in English and never the twain shall meet. It's so divisive. !

No I’m not. I’m saying you’re free to go to Mass in Latin and/or in English and so am I. That is not divisive.

Rome is asking you to learn the stuff and all you can think is, "no, it might help a few people who might occasionally be at a non-English mass"!

Nope. Wrong again. I am saying that your assertion that we should all learn Latin simply to help the few who might occasionally attend Mass in a foreign language is not a good enough reason for us all to so do!

You really do give the impression of living in a little world of your own. I can think of lots of parishes where, as soon as whoever it is steps up to the ambo, the heads go down into the mass leaflets.

Yes, in our little world we don’t have mass leaflets. And I’m not sure where the nearest is that does have them. Doubtless you’ll be able to tell me the exact numbers and locations.

Why would one read it in a book? Because they're all educated and literate and this is a visual culture.

No point training the readers then.

You've made it clear that you won't tolerate Latin at your mass unless it's a bit of choral work or whatever

No I haven’t. I have made it clear that I have no desire to attend a Latin Mass. As a parish musician, of course, I might have to. If that’s what the community desires I’d have to get on with it.

You don't, you should know it anyway

Because?

This isn't such a tricky concept: I am one of the many people who doesn't go to Mass in Latin and has no desire to so do. It's as simple as that.

[Calum Cille]

Yes, you are, you're saying either you get to go to a mass in Latin or you get to go to a mass in English and never the twain shall meet. It's so divisive. !

No I’m not. I’m saying you’re free to go to Mass in Latin and/or in English and so am I. That is not divisive.

Yes, it is, principally because, by providing such an either-or choice on any given Sunday, you divide one community into two in one fell swoop - into Latin lovers and vernacular lovers - and that goes against the mass being a sign of unity.

I am saying that your assertion that we should all learn Latin simply to help the few who might occasionally attend Mass in a foreign language is not a good enough reason for us all to so do!

No one has said we should all learn Latin "simply to" help a few people. How many times do you have to hear this for it to sink in?

Why would one read it in a book?

Because they're all educated and literate and this is a visual culture.

No point training the readers then.

What happens when they run out of leaflets then?

You've made it clear that you won't tolerate Latin at your mass unless it's a bit of choral work or whatever

No I haven’t. I have made it clear that I have no desire to attend a Latin Mass. As a parish musician, of course, I might have to. If that’s what the community desires I’d have to get on with it.

The point is not that you don't want to go to a Latin mass but that you won't tolerate a certain degree or frequency of use of Latin at the mass in the vernacular that you would go to.

You don't, you should know it anyway

Because?

Because the authoritative documents say you should and because of the good reasons they have for telling you you should.

This isn't such a tricky concept: ... It's as simple as that.

Yes, as simple as being extremely divisive by advocating virtually no Latin at your local mass.

[Nick Baty]

No one has said we should all learn Latin "simply to" help a few people. How many times do you have to hear this for it to sink in?

Apologies. I've got a bit stuck with your statement that Latin “facilitates visiting groups of people who would otherwise feel a bit lost or excluded should the local community normally recite this kind of thing at mass: Zèzus aymàta uskitchinwàk uneyotiwàl k'tèmanguèlminè.” I thought you meant it.

What happens when they run out of leaflets then?

We don't have leaflets to run out of!

The point is not that you don't want to go to a Latin mass but that you don't want a certain degree or frequency of use of Latin at the vernacular mass you would go to.

I wouldn't be going there is it was a Latin Mass so my wishes have absolutely no effect on which language is used in the liturgy.

Yes, as simple as being extremely divisive by advocating virtually no Latin at your local mass.

I am advocating nothing. I have no say in the matter.

[Calum Cille]

No one has said we should all learn Latin "simply to" help a few people. How many times do you have to hear this for it to sink in?

Apologies. I've got a bit stuck with your statement that Latin “facilitates visiting groups of people who would otherwise feel a bit lost or excluded should the local community normally recite this kind of thing at mass: Zèzus aymàta uskitchinwàk uneyotiwàl k'tèmanguèlminè.” I thought you meant it.

Apologies. I got a bit stuck with your statement "why ask us all to use Latin on a regular basis simply to make life easier for the few who might occasionally attend Mass in a foreign language", which I never said.

What happens when they run out of leaflets then?

We don't have leaflets to run out of!

I was discussing readers in general, not simply the readers in your little world, Nick, since you used the words, "So, if you weren’t fluent, how would you understand all those eucharistic prayers, collects and prefaces which are used?"

The point is not that you don't want to go to a Latin mass but that you don't want a certain degree or frequency of use of Latin at the vernacular mass you would go to.

I wouldn't be going there is it was a Latin Mass so my wishes have absolutely no effect on which language is used in the liturgy.

Nick, I'm talking about the vernacular mass you would go to, not the mass in latin that you wouldn't go to. In light of the sentence immediately prior to this one, you might like to reformulate your reply.

Yes, as simple as being extremely divisive by advocating virtually no Latin at your local mass.

I am advocating nothing. I have no say in the matter.

Whether you have a say in the matter or not, the following quotations are tantamount to you advocating virtually no Latin at any particular mass, bearing in mind one possible definition of the verb "advocate" (to speak, plead, or argue in favor of).

Change the rest [of the liturgy] into [Latin] words we don't know and we may as well give up!
Why on earth should I spend many years learning a language to celebrate a liturgy which is available in English?
Just objecting to your proposition that we should all be able to [say the mass in Latin].
I am biased against the view that we should all be able to do it.

[Nick Baty]

I got a bit stuck with your statement "why ask us all to use Latin on a regular basis simply to make life easier for the few who might occasionally attend Mass in a foreign language", which I never said.

Good. So that's one reason fewer for encouraging us all to celebrate Mass in Latin.

I was discussing readers in general, not simply the readers in your little world, Nick, since you used the words, "So, if you weren’t fluent, how would you how would you understand all those eucharistic prayers, collects and prefaces which are used?"

And as, in your world (much larger than mine, I understand) you would have run out of leaflets, then those of us who don't understand what's being said would not be able to turn to the leaflets which you propose as a solution!

The point is not that you don't want to go to a Latin mass but that you don't want a certain degree or frequency of use of Latin at the vernacular mass you would go to.

Interesting as I didn't say that. But, there again, this discussion has not been about Latin at a vernacular Mass – it's been about your assertion that we should all be used to celebrating Mass in Latin. Now I can think of just one reason for so doing – because you enjoy it. Noone can argue with that. You like Latin. I don't! What on earth is there to disagree about? Still, I've only said it about 30 times. Might as well give up.

[Southern Comfort]

For heaven's sake, people!

In a parish north of the border, a priest wears a cassock. Therefore all priests are assumed to wear cassocks. And, furthermore, it's the Catholic thing to do. I fear the words "your little world" are apt to rebound. The fact is that the vast majority of priests not only do not wear cassocks but do not even possess them.

Some here think that everyone should have access to Latin, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it's the Catholic thing to do. The problem is that there are large parts of the Catholic world where no one has had access to it for a considerable period of time, and wouldn't know what to do with it if they had it. Therefore having access to Latin would be meaningless.

And, as others have pointed out, Latin is not the only language in our liturgy; nor is Greek, come to that. Alleluia and Amen, to give only two examples, are neither Latin nor Greek, except by appropriation. I wonder what the many Catholics around the world (think Eastern-rite Catholics) who have never had Latin as part of their culture would make of all this. The idea that Catholic culture is exclusively Western and Latin-based is merely another manifestation of a "little world".

I have heard the word "logic" used, when what is actually meant seems to be argumentative disputatiousness. It's time to stop wasting bandwidth, folks, and move on to something more productive.

[Calum Cille]

In a parish north of the border, a priest wears a cassock. Therefore all priests are assumed to wear cassocks. And, furthermore, it's the Catholic thing to do. I fear the words "your little world" are apt to rebound. The fact is that the vast majority of priests not only do not wear cassocks but do not even possess them.

I wouldn't know, since I don't make any of the assumptions that you have just stated. You would have to reword them to make them conform closely to what I have actually stated rather than parody and misrepresent what I have actually stated. Certainly, it is patently obvious that wearing a cassock is a Catholic thing to do, just as wearing a kilt is a Scottish thing to do, although neither are exclusively so. Neither you nor Nick Baty demonstrate any real intellectual connection with the point of the cassock example, for whatever reason.

Some here think that everyone should have access to Latin, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it's the Catholic thing to do. The problem is that there are large parts of the Catholic world where no one has had access to it for a considerable period of time, and wouldn't know what to do with it if they had it. Therefore having access to Latin would be meaningless.

In Scotland, a number of parishes have had no access to Latin for a considerable period of time. Were it to be reintroduced, as part of Scottish ecclesiastical heritage, I believe they would get on with it much as they have got on with the new translation, as long as it was reintroduced gradually. Music could play a helpful role in its reintroduction.

And, as others have pointed out, Latin is not the only language in our liturgy; nor is Greek, come to that. Alleluia and Amen, to give only two examples, are neither Latin nor Greek, except by appropriation.

I fail to see any great import to the discussion of the use of Latin by the drawing of attention to such minutiae. There are a number of loanwords heard in the Latin liturgy which come from several other languages, eg, 'gladius' from Gaulish. It would be impractical to suggest a list of all this pedantic detail every time we assert that Latin is the fundamental language of the Roman rite. Likewise, it would usually contribute little but pedantry to draw our attention to the fact that the vernacular is not the only language in the modern translated liturgy every time we speak of it, merely on account of the retention of words such as alleluia and amen from the Latin text in the vernacular text.

I wonder what the many Catholics around the world (think Eastern-rite Catholics) who have never had Latin as part of their culture would make of all this.

It's not their heritage, nor I am addressing them.

The idea that Catholic culture is exclusively Western and Latin-based is merely another manifestation of a "little world".

Only if addressing the Society of Saint Gregory is a little world, its focus being on what happens in the British Isles, and its membership bearing not a little connection to that geographical area. However, the little world referred to by me here specifically is that of the character who fails to acknowledge general realities and posits realities which are parochial in attempts to derail any confirmation of general realities.

I have heard the word "logic" used, when what is actually meant seems to be argumentative disputatiousness.

The case could be made that you have just been indulging in such yourself. And your quotable evidence for the alleged meaning of "logic" is? Because I can certainly go through the context of when it was used with you in order to demonstrate that your assertion is false.

It's time to stop wasting bandwidth, folks, and move on to something more productive.

Prove it a waste of bandwidth, why don't you, and then say that. I'm afraid I have no other productive input to make on any other thread right now, whether more or less productive than this input. Perhaps you could propose something more productive, and then we can all judge for ourselves how productive that would be in comparison to this thread.

[Calum Cille]

I got a bit stuck with your statement "why ask us all to use Latin on a regular basis simply to make life easier for the few who might occasionally attend Mass in a foreign language", which I never said.

Good. So that's one reason fewer for encouraging us all to celebrate Mass in Latin.

Rubbish. That's a non sequitur.

I was discussing readers in general, not simply the readers in your little world, Nick, since you used the words, "So, if you weren’t fluent, how would you how would you understand all those eucharistic prayers, collects and prefaces which are used?"

And as, in your world (much larger than mine, I understand) you would have run out of leaflets, then those of us who don't understand what's being said would not be able to turn to the leaflets which you propose as a solution!

In my world, which is larger than my own parish, which I rarely refer to in this argument, unlike you, because I'm discussing latin in the mass in general, that's the (rare) situation where you turn to the vernacular for any parts of the mass that people don't already know.

The point is not that you don't want to go to a Latin mass but that you don't want a certain degree or frequency of use of Latin at the vernacular mass you would go to.

Interesting as I didn't say that.

I refer you to the quotations of your statements in my previous message.

But, there again, this discussion has not been about Latin at a vernacular Mass – it's been about your assertion that we should all be used to celebrating Mass in Latin.

Perhaps not for you, because you are either-or. It has been about Latin at a vernacular mass for me. In order to have Latin at a vernacular mass, it logically follows that we must be capable of saying mass in Latin.

Now I can think of just one reason for so doing – because you enjoy it.

Nazard has thought of a lot more. Perhaps you should start either reading his messages or remembering them, then you might be able to think of more reasons.

You think I might go to a mass in Latin in order to "enjoy it". You say of mass in the vernacular, 'many of us love it'. You are projecting. I don't have your mentality, I come from a different direction and experience. I don't have your approach to liturgy. I don't go to mass in Latin to indulge myself for the 'enjoyment' of it or for the 'fun' of it, or to enjoy mass in Gaelic or English, or even the music. Even were I to "enjoy" mass in Latin, (like what, a pizza? a film?), I would do so no more than I would enjoy a mass in Gaelic or English.

[Nick Baty]

No point in trying to discuss with you, CC.
Be gone and enjoy (or not) your Mass in Latin or Gaelic or whatever it is today.
I'll go hunting for some cassocked clergy in an attempt to widen my life experience!

[Peter Jones]

No point in trying to discuss...........

..........anything much these days in this Forum. Perhaps it's time to close it down.

[docmattc]

No point in trying to discuss...........

..........anything much these days in this Forum. Perhaps it's time to close it down.

I agree Fr Peter. There was a time when this forum was a useful resource and support for ordinary parish musicians (while still making us all think). I fear the very people that the forum could best serve have been driven off by what its become.