The Sacred Latin
Language
The use of
liturgical Latin has several benefits for conveying certain truths about the
Mass, most importantly its sacredness, and accurate theological language. There
are other benefits as well. For one, it unified the Western Church. When I was
Eastern Orthodox, I once walked into a Greek Orthodox church and the priest
asked me, “I see you here often”, he put his hands in the air, “what, are you
someone’s girlfriend here or something!” Unlike the Eastern Churches which to
this day have a strong element of ethnic quibbling, the West in general had no such
malady. Since at least the third century the Latin Church has been united in
its liturgical worship.
We hear much talk
about immigration these days, yet, can one deny the disunity caused by a
liturgy in the vernacular for immigrants? The fact remains that when a person immigrates
into a country a huge void is left open for the immigrant attending Mass in a
foreign language. “The Mass in the vernacular alienates in a certain way every
immigrant who does not speak the vernacular in which the Mass is said.”[1]
Latin preserves this unity where anyone can go anyplace in the world and fully
participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In addition, the useful aspect
of the vernacular had long been addressed with the use of dual language Missals
where Latin was on one side of the page and the vernacular on the other. I can
tell you by personal experience that It doesn’t take long for someone attending
the Traditional Latin Mass on a regular basis to learn the Latin text and its
meaning.
Another benefit is,
“Latin possesses in the eyes of the faithful a certain sacredness, due in no
small part to its withdrawal from daily life and from the ordinary conversation
of the man on the street.”[2]
It must be said that vernacular languages spoken every day tend to change and
develop causing issues of theological inaccuracy. Latin is a very stable
language that retains the same theological meaning in every age. This was the
reason that in the document on the liturgy the Council Fathers first stressed
the importance of retaining the primary place of Latin in the Mass. Unfortunately,
as we know from experience when you leave the door cracked open an unwanted
guest will eventually walk through it. It is my proposal that Latin be the
exclusive language of the Mass in the Roman Rite by reason of its sacredness,
its theological accuracy, its unifying element, its consistency and its ability
to bring forth an environment of prayerful meditation.
The Influence
of Ecumenism and Community Orientation
"The path
opened up by the Council will surely bring a radical change in the very
appearance of traditional liturgical assemblies,"[3]
The liturgical reformers stressed the need to make the Mass more acceptable to
those outside the Church in its appearance. This mentality came from the new
ecumenism established during the Council. Ecumenism in practice seeks not to discuss
or point out differences between the theologies of Catholic and non-Catholic sects
but instead looks only for commonalities. The Council Fathers thought it would
be a good idea when putting together the schema on ecumenism, to refrain from
mandating in the document that one must be a member of the Catholic Church. Joseph
Ratzinger, later to be Pope Benedict XVI testified to the fact that the schema
on ecumenism was deliberately changed to remove all talk of membership in the
Church. Ratzinger stated, “…the decision was taken to avoid this controversial
term. The new text describes the relationship between Church and non-Catholic
Christians without speaking of “membership.” [4]
This type of ecumenical mentality also crept into the forming of the new
liturgy. It is a fact that many liturgical revisions revolved around this new ecumenism.
One of the most
famous changes were those of the General Intercessions of Good Friday. There
were many changes that severely reduced the majesty of the Catholic Church as
being the one true Church to which all others must come into communion.
Likewise, the language emphasizing the Church’s dominion over temporal powers
was done away with. The changes included Intercession 1 with the removal of
“subjecting principalities and powers” to the Church. Intercession VII was no
longer called ‘For the Unity of the Church,’ but, “For Unity Among Christians.”
The text was also changed so that it no longer referred to “heretics” and
“schismatics” but to “all our brothers and sisters who share our faith in
Christ.” [5]
The most heartless and uncharitable removal, in my opinion, were the prayers
for the conversion of the Jewish people, which were completely removed. Where
once the Church prayed “that they may come to the knowledge of Jesus Christ our
Lord” it now only prays “That they may continue to
grow in the love of his name. And in faithfulness to his covenant.” How much
vaguer can you get? Finally, Intercession IX no longer prays for the “conversion
of unbelievers”, but only in a general manner “for those who do not believe in
Christ.”
These changes and
others to the prayer structure of the liturgy have had a profound theological
effect of watering down the importance of the Catholic Church in its
evangelical mission. It makes it appear as if the Catholic Church were just one
among many “Christian” churches. It has also decreased the sacredness of its
liturgical prayers which should inspire holiness and zeal in the faithful. It
is important also to examine the very nature of the prayers. The Mass is not
just the Canon surrounded by some random prayers to accompany the consecration. There
are two values of the Mass, the first being of intrinsic value, the sacrifice
and presence of Christ, and the extrinsic value, the prayers, and gestures surrounding
it. “The intrinsic value of any valid Mass is infinite since it is Christ, Who
is infinite…However the extrinsic value of the Mass is finite. This is so
because man, a finite creature, is incapable of receiving infinite effects.”[6]
Thus these accompanying prayers of the Mass can hold a different measure of
fruits based on the nature of the prayers. It can be argued then that by
changing the prayers or reducing the prayers which contain petitions based on the
centrality of sacrifice we can reduce the fruits derived from them. “What the
prayers ask for determines the fruits that will be derived. The very nature of
the prayers and gestures that comprise the rite constitute the foundation for
the value of the ritual and therefore determine whether one ritual is more efficacious
or valuable than another.”[7]
This impact of
ecumenism was to be felt across the entire spectrum of the Mass. This was in my
opinion partially a result of the allowed non-Catholic “observers” during the
liturgical meetings beginning with General Meeting VII between October 6-14 of
1966. Bugnini overjoyed at the idea wrote, “…finally, the presence of the
observers, which was a pledge of ever closer links and collaboration between
the Churches.”, and in the preparation and discussion of the schemas he wrote,
“There was a pervasive sense of profound brotherhood, especially due to the
presence of the observers…”[8]
To what extent these observers played is debated, but changes to the various
texts of the liturgical prayers which softened the Church’s stance towards
evangelizing those outside the Church as well her sacrificial references must
have been related to some extent.
I think it is
important to look at some other changes that occurred in the Mass to get a
sense of what theological elements need to be restored. Based on the extrinsic
value of the prayers, one of the most significant changes was the elimination of
the entrance prayers at the foot of the altar and the elimination or severe
reduction of the Offertory prayers such as, the Suscipe Sancte Pater,
the Deus qui Humanae, the Offerimus Tibi, the Veni
Sanctificator, the Lavabo (Ps.25), and the Suscipe Sancta
Trinitas. This greatly reduced the sacrificial element in the
liturgical prayer structure. These Offertory prayers were developed organically
over the course of centuries. These valuable petitions also oriented the
faithful as to what was coming in the consecration.
“Indeed, these intentions
take a quality of expression beyond even the mentality of the priest by
invoking the memory of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ: the Passion
confers on those intentions a considerable right to be considered by God as of
sovereign importance. From the moment we mix our intentions into the Passion of
Christ, the Passion valorizes them to the maximum of what they can hold of
value before God, and they are presented to the eternal mercy by the very One
who tore from God’s Mercy the gesture of absolute pardon with regard to
original sin. The intention laid on the paten therefore holds an authority of
intercession which no human word could bestow.”[9]
I also believe
that the many options in the Paul VI Mass are cause for inconsistency in
theological accuracy, such as the options for the Eucharistic Prayer, the Confiteor
and the readings. With these options along with the vernacular, it is almost
impossible to engage in a liturgy in another language. Repetition in prayer and
Scripture reading was long held to be of great spiritual benefit for the
faithful. These changes also affected the readings of the liturgical calendar
which were traditionally repeated yearly and helped the faithful to engage more
fully in the Church’s liturgical feasts. It can be argued that the three-year
cycle is too long and does not provide the consistency needed to instill in the
faithful the Scripture passages traditionally related to the calendar.
Finally, I want to
look at the reorientation of the priest, which was never referred to in the
Council documents. Along with the general theological reorientation came
another negative consequence, that of turning the priest toward the people to elevate
the importance of the community. I won’t elaborate on this extensively since it
has been discussed ad-nauseum in many books and articles. Suffice it to say
that the celebration of the liturgy ad-orientum, is the practice of all
the liturgies of the Church East and West, except for the general practice of
the Novus Ordo. The idea of the entire community facing east towards the altar worshipping
God together with the priest awaiting the coming of Christ is a general
theological element of all liturgical rites and this should be restored in the Novus
Ordo without delay.
The Reality of
Sacrifice
When Catholic
theologians refer to the nature of something, they should be using the term in
a very specific manner. The nature of something refers to what “it is” in its
very essence. Without getting into technical terms, Pope Pius XII in his
encyclical Mediator Dei explained in laymen’s terms what the essence of
the Mass is, “the august sacrifice of the altar.” More specifically, Christ
present “at the august sacrifice of the altar both in the person of His
minister and above all under the eucharistic species.”[10]
As we know all of the sacrifices of the Old Testament were ordained by God in
preparation for the perfect sacrifice of His only Begotten Son on the cross. Christ
through His incarnation became the prefect sacrifice through which it is
possible for all men to be reconciled with God. Christ instituted the perpetual
celebration of His sacrifice at the Last Supper. The great liturgical
theologian Fr. Nicholas Ghir explains,
“The Last Supper was not
merely a communion celebration, but also a sacrificial celebration; for
"after partaking of the figurative lamb," our Lord, by His creative
omnipotent word, changed the earthly elements of bread and wine into His holy
Body and divine Blood, that is, He placed His Body and His Blood in the
sacramental state of sacrifice, offered Himself thus to His Father and then
gave His Body and His Blood offered in sacrifice to His disciples as food and
drink.”[11]
As we enter the
church whenever we attend the Mass, we should have this reality at the very
forefront of our minds. It should be this orientation of the personhood of
Christ and His sacrifice that lead us in all our actions during the liturgy
including our interior disposition, our prayer, and our physical actions. There
is the theological reason that Catholics have used the term, “The Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass” to describe the liturgy. We must realize that we are participating
in the very same sacrifice that Christ made on the cross over 2000 years ago,
in a non-bloody manner. We often misinterpret the word “memorial” when referring
to the Mass. Most people have an image of simply remembering what Jesus did on
the cross. This is not what “memorial” means! The reality is that this
“memorial” is much more than a simple remembrance, “the Eucharist is a true
memorial of Calvary because it makes sacramentally present the unique
historical death of Jesus in its ontological reality. It makes present the
priest and victim of the sacrifice in the very act by which Jesus offered
Himself in his unique death.”[12]
This ontological reality is a very concrete objective reality that expresses
Christ’s presence in a very profound manner. Jesus being ontologically present
means that He is present in all His being, even transcending time and space regarding
His sacrifice on the cross. Are Catholics in the average parish today preparing
themselves to go to Calvary on Sunday and receive the complete person of Jesus
Christ in the Eucharist? Do we place ourselves at the foot of the cross with
Our Lady and Saint John?
We must also ask
ourselves what the purpose of our attending this Holy Sacrifice means for us in
our relationship to God. As we know, the very sacrifice of Christ is what
allows us to have a filial relationship with God. His sacrifice is the gateway
to salvation and ultimately to the Beatific Vision. Most miss the centrality of
the majesty of God in this sacrifice. “The principal purpose of the Eucharistic
Sacrifice is to render to God due worship of adoration and thanksgiving, of
propitiation and petition...”[13]
This is the basic foundational element of worship, giving glory and honor which
is due to God. The reality of incarnation and sacrifice of Christ ‘The God-Man’
being the central element elevates this act of worship since it is a perfect
and unblemished Sacrifice. Fulton Sheen offers us a deeper understanding of the
idea of sacrifice,
“A temple without an altar
of sacrifice is non-existent among primitive peoples and is meaningless among
Christians. And so, in the Catholic Church the altar, and not the pulpit or the
choir or the organ, is the center of worship, for there is re-enacted the
memorial of His Passion. Its value does not depend on him who says it, or on
him who hears it; it depends on Him who is the One High Priest and Victim,
Jesus Christ our Lord.”[14]
Graces Obtained
All the Sacraments
are made possible only through Christ’s incarnation, and He alone instituted
all seven of them.[15]
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist,
however, have a special and specific role to play in the life of the Church and
that of the believer. It is the primary source of grace to which man is unified
to the Holy Trinity. As one worthily worships God and receives the Holy
Eucharist one becomes deified or made more holy through the grace provided
therein. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is thus an essential means not only for
our proper worship that is due to God and our salvation but also a foretaste of
heaven here on earth. This ontological reality is not found in any other
liturgical function in the Church, and it is non-existent outside the sacramental
structure of the Church.
It is through this
Holy Sacrifice that we obtain special graces. Every moment of our existence
depends on God and God alone. Every “good” that we do is done with His grace.
The Mass strengthens us and allows us to unite ourselves to Christ in a unique
manner. We receive tremendous spiritual graces such as sorrow for sin, the
ability to overcome temptation and the nurturing of the gifts of the Holy
Spirit. It gives us the grace to become saints. We receive special blessings
and we participate in the Church’s mission to evangelize lost souls. The Mass
also can bring material blessings such as the health of our bodies, avoiding
war, famine and other pestilences. We receive more graces than we can imagine
by reverently participating at each Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. St Bernard of
Clairvaux once wrote, “More is gained by a single Mass, than by distributing
all of your goods to the poor, or going to pilgrimages to all of the most holy
shrines in the world.” For this reason, we should be demanding that the Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass is celebrated with all due reverence in our local parishes. If it
is not, it's our obligation to try and rectify the problem in whatever capacity
we possess.
The Dying,
Death and those in Purgatory
The effects of the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass extends beyond our visible world. Do we ever think to
pray for those souls close to death or those suffering the pains of Purgatory
while we are at Mass? If you have in your possession any of the traditional
prayer books or missals, they all contain prayers that you can pray before,
during and after the Mass. If you notice, there are always prayers to obtain
graces for those that will die that day, prayers for the dead, and for those
souls in purgatory. The Mass merits grace for those souls as well as those
attending. During the Mass, we petition God that we and others may have a holy
and peaceful death. We also can obtain graces to shorten our time in Purgatory
or avoid it altogether. One priest I had a conversation with pointed out the
vast difference in a funeral Mass between the Tridentine Rite and the Novus
Ordo Rite. The Tridentine Rite focuses on obtaining graces for the soul of the
departed to shorten that person’s time in purgatory. The funeral Mass is not
primarily to celebrate the life of the departed as it so often seems to be in
the Novus Ordo. The funeral Mass is not be mistaken for a wake! We should see
the focus as being on the penitential and sacrificial element of the liturgy,
which has the power to absolve sins and make reparation for sin.
There is Only
One Mass!
As a dear priestly
friend of mine has repeatedly told me, there are two miracles that take place
at every Mass. The first is that at the consecration, the wine and bread become
the Precious Body and Blood of Christ and that the accidents or appearance of
the bread and wine remain. These miracles are what is known as
Transubstantiation. We still see the appearances of bread and wine, which
should not remain once their substance is changed, but Christ is now truly
present in Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. This reality is an important reason
why the religious services of other religions cannot be pleasing to God. It is
why ours is so sacred. Christ Himself instituted the Eucharist and He is
present “truly and substantially”. Can the worshipping of false “gods” be
pleasing to God? Can a man-made liturgical service which denies this
ontological reality be pleasing to God? St. Paul clearly states that partaking
in other religious ceremonies is, “the table of devils.” (1 Cor 10) This is not
meant to insult the faith of others, but to bring forth the truth so that
others may share in true worship as God desires for all men. False religions
are not from God and they all to a different degree insult God. The Eucharist is
a miracle of God uniquely uniting Himself with mankind. There are no
substitutes for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. When we are at Mass, we should
put ourselves at the foot of the cross with Our Blessed Mother, the angels, and
the Saints. We should treat it is as the highest treasure, a true pearl
of great price.
To Improve or
Reinstate?
In closing I
believe that we must call for action concerning how we engage in the Mass. I
personally believe due to the reasons I listed above, that the implementation
of the Novus Ordo was a mistake. I believe that we have before us two options.
First, we can seek to improve the Novus Ordo by adding back in the prayers that
were removed and change the structure of it to contain more elements of the
Traditional Latin Mass. This would in effect re-orient the Mass to its proper
sacrificial focus. The second option is to return to the Traditional Latin
Mass. The largest growth in church attendance is demonstrated in the many
parishes that are dedicated to the Extraordinary Form. Personally, I think by
the time you get done renovating the Novus Ordo you may as well reinstate the
Traditional Latin Mass. Perhaps the prior can lead to the latter?
[1]
Rev. James W. Jackson, FSSP, Nothing Superfluous (Redbrush 2016) P309
[2]
Ibid 307
[3] Annibale
Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 (Liturgical Press, 1990) P42
[4]
Joseph Ratzinger, Theological Highlights of Vatican II (Paulist Press,
1966) P104
[5] Annibale
Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy
1948-1975 (Liturgical Press, 1990) P119
[6]
Fr. Chad Ripperger, Ph.D., Topics on
Tradition (Sensus Traditionis Press 2013) P114
[7]
Ibid 127
[8] Annibale
Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy
1948-1975 (Liturgical Press, 1990)P 155, 157
[9]
Bernard-Marie De Chivre, O.P., The Mass
of Saint Pius V (STAS Editions 2010) P72-73
[10] Pope
Pius XII, Mediator Dei 1947, Para20
[12]
Monsignor Anthony LaFemina. STL., JCD, Eucharist and Covenant in John’s Last
Supper Account, (New Hope Publications 2011)
[13] Rev.
Dr. Nicholas Ghir, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Sixth Edition 1897)
P175
[14]
Fulton Sheen, Calvary and the Cross, (
[15]
The Council of Trent, On the Sacraments, First Decree Canon I
Matthew J. Bellisario
Comments
Post a Comment