I had long assumed that the vernacular had won the battle of the masses, indeed I have written a post to that effect some tin ago. But it seems that I wrote off the the Latin mass beloved of Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh and the Farm Street crowd too quickly and it has still got some life left in it. It remains a minority taste, of course, but it is not yet out on its feet. The strongest argument in favour of the vernacular is that people can understand what they are saying, but what value can we attach to this observation? One could also argue that the more we say, for example, the Hail Mary the less attention we pay to the words.
True, what you say about the vernacular. But what I always felt about the Latin mass was that one could go into a Church anywhere in the world and feel immediately at home. Anyway, in my missal the latin was printed on one side and English on the other so no reason not to understand.
ReplyDeleteYour point is well taken; it's just a pity I lost it! Before I slink back into my corner, suitably chastised, I would just like to make two observations:
ReplyDelete1 My Latin master always used to say that if one could understand the Latin, it was almost certainly of poor quality, probably of medieval provenance.
2 With the exception of the gospel itself, We would more gainfully be employed in meditating on other matters
Even supposing I could remember what my fine point was I'm a bit too tired this evening to repeat it! But I have just thought, regarding the Hail Mary, that when we used to say the Rosary it all became just a jumbled garble with no meaning at all.
ReplyDelete