Use of Latin

[presbyter]

Let's ask the question then......

Here's a well-known 14th century prayer (by Pope Innocent VI possibly) - and a textual variant upon it.

Ave verum corpus natum de Maria Virgine.
vere passum immolatum in cruce pro homine:
cuius latum perforatum fluxit aqua et sanguine:
esto nobis praegustatum mortis in examine.
O Iesu dulcis! O Iesu pie! O Iesu fili Mariae

Ave, verum corpus natum de Maria Virgine:
vere passum, immolatum in cruce pro homine:
cuius latus perforatum unda fluxit et sanguine:
esto nobis praegustatum,in mortis examine.

Both the plainsong and several choral settings are well known.

So....... before you go and look up any translation .....

If you sing this at Mass - what are you doing mentally when you sing it?

If you listen to this at Mass - what are you doing mentally when you listen?

Is there any difference in your interior activity if you listen to this on CD or sing it as part of a concert?

The previous point about trying to make the Latin, as it were, your "first language" is a cogent one, I think. But as most of us cannot do this, I'd be interested in the answers to the questions.

[presbyter]

P.S. If your answer is "I'm trying to spot the medieval acrostic" then your mind is on the Times Crossword and not the Mass!

[Reginald]

I took the test cold and sang along in my mind to the (half-remembered) tune we used when I was in the VI Form. I don't think I consciously 'translated' the text at all until I got to the 2nd line as I just intuitively know the meaning of the first line. Even in the lines where I don't know the exact meaning of the words I have a sense of a sacrifice on the cross for men/man? I know that something's been pierced and that there's blood and water flowing, line four doesn't mean much to me but I'm fairly comfortable with Jesus being sweet, merciful perhaps (at this point I started thinking of the Salve Regina) and the son of Mary.

I'm no Latinist, but the half of me that doesn't teach R.E. is a language teacher so that may skew how I read the text. The language teacher in me is very comfortable with teaching students to sense the gist of something rather than attempting to understand every word - and I think I've got most of the gist. I suspect that had I spent the last 33 years attending Mass with a parallel Latin/English Missal I would probably have a very large passive vocabulary of words that I knew the meaning of without being able to use them.

Moreover, when I was doing my PGCE many many moons ago we were told what a tiny percentage of communication happens through the words used (as little as 6-7% according to some, more according to others) the rest is down to non-verbal cues, intonation, body language etc. The biggest obstacle that I come across in the day job are those who say "I can't understand that" and who are mentally closed to the possibility of understanding a foreign language. You don't need to be Einstein to intuit that 'le parking' might have something to do with parking and that 'le porc' might just be a type of meat that oinked in a previous existence!

Singing the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin is a different thing again. Because I can sing/say all of those prayers and responses off by heart in English, I don't have to think actively of their meaning in either Latin or English as I already know what state of mind or emotions belongs with that moment in time - the great joys come when you do think actively about them and come to a new understanding or greater insight. I think that's what I like about the occasional use of Latin, I stop taking the meaning for granted and am trying to engage with the text at a deeper level - perhaps a subtle shade of meaning suggested by a cognate word?

[docmattc]

My essential point though is that the 'casual' singer with little knowledge of Latin who is not carefully taken through every nuance of phrasing and inflection in the music and text during rehearsal or through prior study is by definition unlikely to pay much more than general attention to the actual meaning of what is sung. Such a singer - and listener - is likely to be just wafted along by the undulations of the melody............. Even when the text is closely studied; if you are not a trained Latin scholar you will surely end up mentally translating (or having translated for you) the passages into English; in which case the precise meaning will depend on the nature of the translation.

I'm not convinced that "The man on the Clapham omnibus" in the third pew in the north aisle will be bothering to try and translate anything that a choir might sing in Latin - plainsong or polyphony. True - the undulations of the melody ( a "holy noise"? ) might waft him along into a personal moment of contemplative mental prayer but the rest is, in my opinion, overly optimistic at best and more likely chimerical.

Like presbyter, I'm not convinced either. I understand that 50% of the population has a reading age below that expected for GCSE, and one quote from the BBC stated that the average reading age in Britain is equal to that of a well educated 9 year old.
Without wishing to patronise "The man on the Clapham omnibus", I think its easy to forget that most of us who contribute here have above average literacy, and have the confidence with language to attempt translation (sometimes even without thinking). For some of our parishioners this isn't the case, and pastorally we need to bear this in mind.

[gwyn]

. . . one quote from the BBC . . .

Hmm! One eyebrow quizzically raised
The BBC reports Papal gatherings of a hundred or so thousand as "tens of thousands", gatherings of over a million as " a few hundred thousand".

The BBC has an agenda when it presents quotes and statistics, as yet I'm not sure what it is.

There was a time when, for me at least, its news reporting was credible.
Ho-hum!

[Reginald]

docmattc is right to raise the issue of literacy, but in and of itself literacy is a challenge and not an obstacle. Yes we probably are a more literate bunch than the average gentleperson on the Clapham omnibus, but really that means that we will just do things in different ways. Those with lower literacy tend to develop good memories as one of their coping strategies and as such I don't see a problem with using odd bits of Latin that won't change in any of our lifetimes - the problem comes from the fact that for the last 40 years we've scrupulously ignored much of what Sacrosanctum Concilium had to say, and so find ourselves faced with going through the same pain-barrier (in reverse) that the Church passed through 40 years ago.

Objectively a bigger problem for those with low literacy levels will be the poor proclamation of the readings in many Masses. It's alright for me following in my missal where I can re-insert the dropped commas and so forth - what chance for the chap or chapess who can't and so gets the half-sense of something read in English?

[Benevenio]

"Qui missus es sanare contritos corde: Kyrie, eleison…
…"You were sent to heal the contrite of heart", might not that add a little more encouragement to the person praying the text to be so disposed?

Not really.

All that this would make me do is to wonder whether or not my heart can be contrite, or whether it required a conscious decision - ie use of the brain. I'd then go on to question whether this Latin text in fact was rooted in an era when there was less scientific knowledge and wonder if they actually believed then that the heart did anything other than pump blood; did they believe it controlled emotion, for example? Or, was it a more figurative use of heart, meaning 'centrally', 'to my core' rather than reference to a physical organ?

And then I should wonder about the etymology of contrite, and, if I were to realise that it comes from conterere - to grind, to bruise - I would then ask myself whether Liturgiam Authenticam rules should prefer us to use "the bruised of heart"… or to think "Qui missus es": perhaps that should be "you who were sent" and perhaps I might even wish that I had listened more clodely to the Latin master all those years ago.

And why did they never translate the Greek Kyrie eleison into the Latin equivalent - could it not be done? Is the Greek expressing something that simply cannot be expressed in the other tongue? If so, what?

And by the time I had wandered through all that, everyone else would already be well past the end of the Gloria…

[Merseysider]

And there's still the unsanswered question: Why do you want to pray in Latin? If it's simply a question of personal preference then go ahead. And I would ask those who feel they can we pray in second language to remember those of us who can't.

I have massive problems understanding the Liturgy in English – I'm sure I'd never grasp it in Latin.

I was recently explaining Bernadette Farrell's "Unless A Grain of Wheat" to a group of primary school children – it took ages to work through the refrain alone. Now, how would I explain that biblical text if it was in Latin to begin with – and why should I have to try?

And I'm rather unsure about using – as happens in one or two places – Latin people's texts (Sanctus etc) in response to an English narrative spoken by the priest.

There have been many debates about the use of Latin on this message board. And, while I can appreciate individual preferences, I cannot think of one reason for promoting it.

[asb]

And I'm rather unsure about using – as happens in one or two places – Latin people's texts (Sanctus etc) in response to an English narrative spoken by the priest.

There have been many debates about the use of Latin on this message board. And, while I can appreciate individual preferences, I cannot think of one reason for promoting it.

I can:-

SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM
Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy
Second Vatican Council

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.

[Merseysider]

But that's a rather bald statement – it doesn't explain why.
How does the promotion of Latin assist our spiritual growth?
How does it assist us in spreading the word?
I've been asking the question for years – still no answer.

[Reginald]

Have to agree with asb.

At the end of the day we belong to a liturgical church and cannot therefore do with the liturgy of the Church what might be possible/advisable in the CofE or Methodist church etc. The Liturgy belongs properly to the Church and our task is to nurture it and pass it faithfully to future generations. Whether I want to learn/sing the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin or not is immaterial - it is required of us.

I'm not suggesting banishing the vernacular, but we really need to address the issue of why anybody who wants to sing a chant or two in Latin is looked on with such suspicion in certain quarters (not on this site I hasten to add!). Praying in a 2nd language isn't easy, and perhaps that's why the Council Fathers laid such great stress on liturgical catechesis for both the clergy and the laity - and there's not too much of that going on is there?

[presbyter]

"Qui missus es": perhaps that should be "you who were sent"

I don't think we will get "you who" (Yoo Hoo!)

and probably will not get "with you all" (Southern United States "y'all" [almost 'yawl'])

Isn't our liturgical language (English or Latin) an intimate dialogue between lovers? I don't think we need to try to enter into too much post-Enlightenment rationalisation about it, let alone the language games of English philosophy.

If I use the phrase "My heart bleeds for you", for example, we all know that is not to be taken literally but we do know what it means.

(Well, one could apply it literally to Christ's crucifixion.)

[presbyter]

And, while I can appreciate individual preferences, I cannot think of one reason for promoting it.

Not even a teansey-weansey bit for the sake of preservation of a little of our heritage? Even Christopher Walker has used a little Latin in a few compositions. [...... remembers conducting Laudate, laudate Dominum... at the NEC Jubilee 2000 Mass]

[Merseysider]

I love Latin and chant and will happily warble my way through Cum Jubilo and De Angelis while bobbing my rubber duck. As far as I'm concerned we can sing every single note in Latin.

But the congregations I work with – admittedly, near their 80s than their 40s – aren't easily persuaded.

Yes, ASB, you're right about the Vatican directive – but that still doesn't explain why.

[Dot]

Whilst the dialogue continues on Latin II I’m still mulling over things on this thread. Why does this Latin thing inflame passions? I'm not about to answer that question, but I shall ramble through my thoughts.

My first reaction to this thread was that it’s all too cognitive. There’s a lot of irony in the arguments about the need to be faithful to the Latin text and a word here or there making a difference, followed by a literal analysis being dismissed because, in English, we don’t always use our language literally!

My second thought was to try the Ave Verum question set by Presbyter. I generally find tests set by Presbyter a little scary, so I may provide a partial answer only, which throws up yet more questions. Here goes.
The meaning of the first three lines is fairly apparent (to me with O level Latin and no scholarship). The fourth one alluded me, so I looked it up. There is variety in the interpretation!
From:
”Be for us a foretaste of death and judgement”
to:
”Be for us a foretaste of heaven, during our final trial,” more reminiscent of the words of “O Sacrum Convivium”
I remain uncertain of the meaning. By the way, did Byrd add the lines “Miserere mei”?

I first came across Ave Verum in a liturgical setting (Anglican) through the music of Byrd. The music and words together are much greater than the sum of the parts. I react to it as a liturgical piece, not a performance.

My third thought is by way of comparison. Consider what we sang in our parish during Communion at Mass on Sunday: Taizé “O Christe Domine Jesu.” In case you don’t know it, a 4 part choir (plus assembly, if they choose to) sings the words “O Christe Domine Jesu” as an ostinato while, at times, a cantor superimposes the words of a psalm in English. There is a choice of 3 or 4 psalms. The ostinato was effective and covered the action of the Communion procession. When the cantor sang the words of Psalm 22 and 33 (and perhaps 24 and 84 too – I didn’t take them in) they were familiar but they didn’t “speak” as they do in (to my mind, better) settings we employ as Responsorial Psalms (Does anyone else think that Jacques Berthier has the strangest way with the cantor’s melodic line?).

My conclusion: you can have all the right words, but if they’re not married to the right music they will not speak clearly. Latin has its ambiguities, so does English. Let’s hope the new translations are comfortable on the ear and the heart/mind/soul, amenable to setting to music, as well as faithful to the meaning of the text. Let’s not get too worked up about continuing to use some Latin, and let us continue to use great music.

Dot

P.S. I am looking for a faithful translation of O Sacrum Convivium. Can anyone guide me?