A New Reading Class in the Lives of the Saints with Veterum Sapientia Institute

Veterum Sapientia Institute is an organization which seeks to promote knowledge and study of the Latin language in accordance with both the tradition of the Church and its law, as stated in Pope St John XXIII’s Apostolic Constitution. In addition to an introductory Latin class (2nd level), I will be offering a reading class on the Lives of the Saints, focusing in part on how these lives were used in the Divine Office. We will read through passages from various periods in the original Latin version, and comment on their place in the history of this aspect of the liturgy. All VSI classes are online; the reading course will be held on Tuesdays at 7pm Eastern time. VSI is also offering another course of specific liturgical interest, on the Rituale, taught by Fr Dylan Schrader. There will also be a course on Carmina Burana taught by Dr Nancy Llewellyn, whose excellent essay about Veterum Sapientia and its fate after the Council we shared last year). Mr Sean Pilcher will have a course on the sermons of St Leo the Great, and Dr Jeremy Thompson will do an introduction to St Bernard of Clairvaux. I have known most of the staff of VSI for many years, and they are all superbly talented Latinists, very much dedicated to sharing their knowledge and passion with their students. For more information about the courses and how to enroll, visit the VSI website. You can also find more information about all its activities on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

The 60th Anniversary of Veterum Sapientia

Several years ago, the actor Bill Murray, who is a practicing Catholic, gave an interview to the British newspaper The Guardian, in which he spoke thus of the Church’s move away from the use of Latin after the Second Vatican Council.

“One new saint he does approve of is Pope John XXIII (who died in 1963). ‘I’ll buy that one, he’s my guy; an extraordinary joyous Florentine who changed the order. I’m not sure all those changes were right. … I think we lost something by losing the Latin. … ’ ”

Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons

St John XXIII was actually from a small village in Lombardy called “Under-the-Mountain (Sotto il Monte)”, near Bergamo. But far more importantly, and contrary to the popular impression evinced by Mr Murray’s words, it was never his intention that the use of Latin should diminish in the Church. Quite the contrary: it was he who issued the Church’s most definitive pronouncement on the importance of Latin, the Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia. This was promulgated by the Pope 60 years ago today, with the greatest possible solemnity, signed on the high altar of St Peter’s Basilica, on the feast of St Peter’s Chair, as his way of communicating its extraordinary importance.

The Constitution begins by outlining the many reasons why the Church has always encouraged the study and use of Latin, as one of the sacred languages which “bear constant witness to the living voice of antiquity.” Latin was “the means for the spreading of Christianity throughout the West. And since in God’s special Providence this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire… it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See.” Latin is also a bond of unity among Christians, a language which “(o)f its very nature …. is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.”

He goes on to cite an apostolic letter of Pope Pius XI, that the “ ‘knowledge and use of this language … is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons. … For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.’ ”

Latin is a universal language, “the instrument of mutual communication … between the Apostolic See and the Churches which use the same Latin rite,” and it serves this purpose admirably because it is immutable, unlike the vernacular languages, and “has long since ceased to be affected by those alterations in the meaning of words which are the normal result of daily, popular use.” The Latin language “ ‘can be called truly catholic’ ” because it has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic See, the mother and teacher of all Churches, and must be esteemed ‘a treasure … of incomparable worth.’ It is a general passport to the proper understanding of the Christian writers of antiquity and the documents of the Church’s teaching. It is also a most effective bond, binding the Church of today with that of the past and of the future in wonderful continuity.”

St John has often been misunderstood as one who wanted to uncritically open the Church up to the modern world, as if nothing but good could come from doing so. What he says about Latin in the Constitution, however, reveals this for the misrepresentation it is. It would be better to say that while he did want the Church to take what was best from the world, he was much more concerned that the world should benefit from what was best in the Church. This would, of course, include all that the Church had done for so many centuries to preserve and promote the use of Latin as the vehicle by which its spiritual patrimony was conveyed to and shared among all Her children.

After speaking therefore, of the educational value of Latin, he declares his intention and resolve to “restore this language to its position of honor, and to do all We can to promote its study and use.” And since “(t)he employment of Latin has recently been contested in many quarters … (W)e have therefore decided to issue the timely directives contained in this document, so as to ensure that (its) ancient and uninterrupted use … be maintained and, where necessary, restored.”

The Pope goes on to repeat his own words delivered three years previously to a congress of Latin scholars.

“It is a matter of regret that so many people, unaccountably dazzled by the marvelous progress of science, are taking it upon themselves to oust or restrict the study of Latin and other kindred subjects. … … Our own view is that the very contrary policy should be followed. The greatest impression is made on the mind by those things which correspond more closely to man’s nature and dignity. And therefore the greatest zeal should be shown in the acquisition of whatever educates and ennobles the mind. Otherwise poor mortal creatures may well become like the machines they build — cold, hard, and devoid of love.”

His Holiness deems this a matter of such importance that he goes on not only to command religious superiors of all kinds to promote Latin in accordance with the Holy See’s directives, but also to forbid anyone to write “against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the liturgy”, or to misrepresent “the Holy See’s will in this regard.”

It will certainly not escape the reader’s notice that these are not the words of a man too enamored with the modern world to embrace the ancient world.

The final part of Veterum Sapientia gives some practical considerations as to how Latin is to be promoted in the Church. The Pope cites the provision of the 1917 Code of Canon Law (can. 1364), that students in minor seminaries must learn both Latin and their native language well as part of their course of studies. (In those days, it was more the norm than the exception for seminarians to attend a minor seminary first, especially in Catholic countries like Italy.) Here we may note in passing that the 1983 Code of Canon Law is no less explicit on this same point, although without reference to minor seminaries. “The program of priestly formation is to provide that students not only are carefully taught their native language but also understand Latin well and have a suitable understanding of those foreign languages which seem necessary or useful for their formation or for the exercise of pastoral ministry.” (Can. 249) Pope John emphasizes that “(n)o one is to be admitted to the study of philosophy or theology except he be thoroughly grounded in (Latin) and capable of using it.”

He goes on to order that where Latin has been eclipsed in favor of other subjects in imitation of secular curricula, that it should be restored, and the subjects which had replaced it curtailed, or the course of studies otherwise adjusted as necessary to make sure that sufficient room is given to Latin. He also specifies that theology is to be taught in Latin and from Latin textbooks, as the best means “to safeguard the integrity of the Catholic faith,” and “to prune away useless verbiage.” This was regarded as a matter of such importance that he also orders professors who cannot teach in Latin should be replaced by others who can.

Although he had previous emphasized the suitability of Latin as a language for the teaching of theology, since its vocabulary is not subject to the vicissitudes of change that affect vernacular languages, at the same time, he had also emphasized its role as a bond of unity between Catholics of many different nations. In order that Latin may continue to serve as the “the Church’s living language”, the Pope also orders the creation of a Latin Academy, which would be similar in its function as the Academie Française, providing a universal reference point for the Latin expression of new concepts and things. To this day, in fact, the Vatican publishes a Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis for that very purpose.

John XXIII celebrating the Byzantine Divine Liturgy in the Sistine Chapel, for the episcopal consecration of Gabriel Coussa, who was soon after appointed pro-secretary of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches.

A paragraph is also given to the study of Greek, the language of the New Testament and so many of the most important of the Church Fathers, which in turn were among the most important sources for the scholastic theologians of the Latin-speaking Middle Ages.

Finally, the Pope commands the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and Universities “to prepare a syllabus for the teaching of Latin which all shall faithfully observe… designed to give those who follow it an adequate understanding of the language and its use.” This syllabus, known as the Ordinationes, was issued just under two months after Veterum Sapientia, and gives detailed instructions not only concerning the specific texts to be read, but the requisites of how Latin was to be taught and by whom. The first-ever English translation of them was done by Dr Nancy Llewellyn, Vice-President of the Veterum Sapientia Institute, and can be read at the following link: https://veterumsapientia.org/resources/ordinationes-eng/

A New Reading Course on Sacrosanctum Concilium with the Veterum Sapientia Institute

Next month, I will begin working with the Veterum Sapientia Institute, an organization which seeks to promote knowledge and study of the Latin language in accordance with both the tradition of the Church and its law, as stated in Pope St John XXIII’s Apostolic Constitution. In addition to an introductory Latin class, I will be offering a reading class on Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. We will read through several of the most important passages in the original Latin version, and hopefully clarify what these passages really say and intend. All VSI classes are online; the reading course will be held on Tuesdays at 7pm Eastern time, starting, appropriately, I think, on the feast of St Peter’s Chair in Rome, January 18th. VSI is also offering some other courses of specific liturgical interest, one on the hymns of the Divine Office, taught by Fr Thomas Buffer, and an introduction to the Roman Missal, taught by Dr John Pepino. There will also be a course on the reading and translating of Scholastic texts, taught by Fr Dylan Schrader, and readings in Thomas à Kempis’ The Imitation of Christ, with Dr Nancy Llewellyn. (Earlier this year, we shared Dr Llewellyn’s excellent essay about Veterum Sapientia and its fate after the Council.) I have known most of the staff of VSI for many years, and they are all superbly talented Latinists, very much dedicated to sharing their knowledge and passion with their students. For more information about the courses and how to enroll, visit the VSI website. You can also find more information about all its activities on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. I make bold to ask for a prayer or two for myself as I start in on this new endeavour.

The Life and Work of Mgr. Li Jingfeng, Bishop of Fengxiang (Part 1)

Saturday, November 17, marked the first anniversary of the death of Mgr. Li Jingfeng, Bishop of Fengxiang, a heroic confessor of the Church in China, who throughout the tribulations of his long episcopate gave a glorious witness to the Catholic faith. In tribute to his memory, we offer a brief biography and, thanks to the diligence of a Chinese reader, publish an exemplary selection of his writings for the first time in English. Requiescat in pace. (Our thanks to Zachary Thomas and Theresa Shen for sharing this with our readers.)

Biography

Msgr Li was born into a Catholic family in Gaoling County (Shaanxi) in 1922. He became a priest in 1947 and performed various duties in the diocese until he was arrested in 1959 and sentenced to forced labor, from which he was released only in 1980.

After his release, he dedicated himself to rebuilding the Catholic communities of his province of Shaanxi. In 1980, when he was secretly consecrated the bishop of Fengxiang, he became the head of a Catholic community that obstinately refused to join the “official” structures of the Church, despite the efforts of the local authorities to impose the Patriotic Association on Chinese Catholics. For this reason, the cathedral, churches, seminary, and the various organizations of his diocese remained “clandestine” for a long time, though physically visible to everyone. In 2004, at the advice of Mgr. Li Du’an, “official” bishop of Xi’an, Mgr. Li decided that, for the sake of the unity of the Church in Shaanxi, it was necessary to “surface,” i.e. to obtain from the government recognition of his episcopal rank. He obtained it, but nevertheless, always refused any membership in the Patriotic Association and any affiliation to the “official” episcopal conference. In May 2011, aged but still in good physical and intellectual health, he organized the election of his successor, thus assuring the continuity of apostolic succession in his diocese.

Letter to the General Synod

On 16 October 2012, the 13th Ordinal General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops began its first session in Rome to address themes relating to the “New Evangelization.” Beijing refused to grant the bishops of continental China permission to attend the synod. Instead, Bishop Li addressed a letter to the assembled fathers, boldly urging them to take inspiration from Chinese Catholics, whose fervor he contrasts with the “lukewarmness” and “infidelity” of Christians in the West. Here is a translation of the letter:

Most Reverend and Esteemed Fathers of the Synod, I am grateful that you are able to attend the synod and visit the tomb of St. Peter, but I am grieved that you are not able to hear any voice from the Church in China. In my desire that our voice should be heard among you and especially by our Pope Benedict XVI, I send You today this short letter.

I want to tell you that our Church in China, and especially the Christian laity, still keep the piety, faithfulness, sincerity, and devotion of the ancient Christians, even while suffering under fifty years of persecution. I also want to tell you that I am always offering prayers to the All Powerful God, that our piety, fidelity, sincerity, and our devotion can heal the lukewarmness, infidelity, and worldliness of Christians outside China, which have arisen out of an unrestrained liberty and openness. In the Year of Faith, in our discussions in the Synod you may address the reasons why our faith has remained strong in China. The reason is, as a maxim of the great Chinese philosopher Laozi says: “Prosperity is born in calamity, and calamity lies concealed in satisfaction.” In the foreign churches, the lukewarmness, infidelity, and worldliness of Christians has affected many of the clergy. But in the Chinese Church the Christian laity are more devout than the clergy. Can the piety, fidelity, sincerity, and devotion of the lay Christians of China have an effect on clergy outside China? I have found the lament of Pope Benedict XVI very moving: “As we know, in vast areas of the earth faith risks being extinguished, like a flame that is no longer fed. We are facing a profound crisis of faith, a loss of the religious sense that constitutes the greatest challenge to the church today. The renewal of faith must therefore take priority in the commitment of the entire Church in our time” (See the review “Christ to the world” vol. 59, p.167). Nevertheless, I believe that the Pope may find consolation in the faith of us, the Christians of China. I say nothing of the political situation, which is a transitory thing. (A version of the original text, which I have amended, can be found here. The Vatican’s reply can be found here.)

Latin Studies

During his ministry, Bishop Li Jingfeng promoted the study of Latin. He prepared and published a Chinese-Latin textbook Grammatica Figurificata Linguae Latinae (Second Edition May 1, 2010), which has been used to instruct seminarians and priests of his diocese. The Chinese preface to this work follows Veterum Sapientia, defending the study of Latin as a vital element in clerical formation. It notes especially the importance for the clergy of being able to read, translate, and explain classic Christian texts to lay Catholics in China:

It is common knowledge that Latin is the official language of the Church. Consider for example this statement of Pope John XXIII: ‘The Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord...The language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular. The Church’s language must be not only universal but also immutable...If the truths of the Catholic Church were entrusted to an unspecified number of them, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifested to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision’ (Veterum Sapientia). And Pope John Paul II says: ‘Countless works of the Church are written in Latin. Without a sound knowledge of Latin, it is impossible to read them directly and unearth their treasure. One has to access them through another’s translation. But the correctness of the translation is not certain.’

The Latin language itself has many features that deserve attention. ‘There can be no doubt as to the formative and educational value either of the language of the Romans or of great literature generally. It is a most effective training for the pliant minds of youth. It exercises, matures, and perfects the principal faculties of mind and spirit. It sharpens the wits and gives keenness of judgment. It helps the young mind to grasp things accurately and develop a true sense of values. It is also a means for teaching highly intelligent thought and speech’ (Veterum Sapientia). There is good reason for this. The declensions, conjugations, and grammatical structure of the Latin language are highly logical, demanding a clear mind, memory, and precise judgment, all of which are helpful to the exercise and testing of intelligence.

There is still another feature of Latin, as the Pope says: ‘Its concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.’ Thus the value and importance for Catholics to learn Latin is clear.

These facts suggest the importance of learning Latin for the clergy of China. In addition, many precious Church documents have been translated into Chinese by people outside of the Church, such as Fides quaerens intellectum by St. Anselm, Civitas Dei and the Confessiones of St. Augustine, etc. These works have all been translated into Chinese by non-Catholics, which is a great irony for our Catholic clergy! This reality should be a warning: not to learn Latin is to lag behind and remain passive. Is our Chinese Church willing to languish forever at the margins of the universal Church?

Moreover, in 2007 Pope Benedict XVI issued the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum to grant the wish of many of the faithful who ‘continued to be attached with such love and affection to the earlier liturgical forms.’ Its intention is that all priests be able to celebrate Tridentine Mass in the forma extraordinaria. This is a great challenge to every priest. Are we capable of doing it? As priests of the Church, if we are not able to celebrate the sacrifice and to venerate God in the official language of the Church, what does that say about our identity as priests! The Holy See further suggests that ‘Gregorian chant be preserved and be sung in monasteries, other religious houses and seminaries, as a special form of chanted prayer and as something of high cultural and pedagogic value’ (Voluntati Obsequens, April 1974).

Latin is not only the special language of the Church. It has also been used as an international language of science and culture by scholars up until the present day. For hundreds of years, many great works of science were published in Latin. Countless famous people such as Bacon, Newton, Descartes, Spencer, Copernicus, etc. have written in Latin. Even the doctoral dissertation of Karl Marx was written in Latin; in 1955, the Convention of Mayors of the World’s Capital Cities, held in Florence, Italy, issued its peace pact in Latin.

(Part 2 will discuss Bishop Li Jingfeng’s support of the traditional Latin liturgy.)

The Council Fathers in Support of Latin: Correcting a Narrative Bias [UPDATED]

The manipulation or distortion of truth should be opposed wherever it crops up, no matter what the source. For, as it says in a verse of Psalm 62 traditionally recited at Sunday Lauds: “The king shall rejoice in God; all who swear by him shall glory; for the mouths of liars will be stopped” — a verse that was, incidentally, expunged from Paul VI’s Liturgy of the Hours.

Anyone who has taken any trouble at all to study the history of the Second Vatican Council knows that it was an exceedingly complex event, with many currents of thoughts, extremely sharp disagreements among individuals and factions, and crafty manipulators behind the scenes, as one learns from eyewitnesses (e.g., Wiltgen, Lefebvre, Congar, de Lubac) and historians (e.g., De Mattei). It was no simple triumphal march of progressivism over the graves of obscurantists, as much as the victors wish they could rewrite the narrative by conveniently glossing over or dismissing the actual debates in the aula and the final texts of the documents, in which a conservative or traditional viewpoint is often reflected.

This is not to say that the documents are unproblematic; fifty years of hermeneutical battles have sufficiently demonstrated the contrary. It is merely to say that the popular narrative of the Council as a “new Pentecost” driven forward by a nearly unanimous groundswell of support for innovation and modernization is far indeed from the variegated and uneasy truth of things. The documents were compromises, no doubt about it; the liberals did plan to leave them behind as soon as possible, like lower stages of a Saturn V aiming for the moon; the traditional elements in the documents are, by now, almost completely buried and forgotten; the Church is plentifully reaping the destructive results of rupture and discontinuity. All this is true. But it still gives us no carte blanche for rewriting the Council itself, unless we wish to be among those whose mouths will be stopped.

Therefore, it is surprising, to say the least, to find a recent document making such claims as the following:

The great principle, established by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, according to which liturgical prayer be accommodated to the comprehension of the people so that it might be understood, required the weighty task of introducing the vernacular language into the liturgy and of preparing and approving the versions of the liturgical books, a charge that was entrusted to the Bishops.
          The Latin Church was aware of the attendant sacrifice involved in the partial loss of liturgical Latin, which had been in use throughout the world over the course of centuries. However it willingly opened the door so that these versions, as part of the rites themselves, might become the voice of the Church celebrating the divine mysteries along with the Latin language.
          At the same time, especially given the various clearly expressed views of the Council Fathers with regard to the use of the vernacular language in the liturgy, the Church was aware of the difficulties that might present themselves in this regard.
          The goal of the translation of liturgical texts and of biblical texts for the Liturgy of the Word is to announce the word of salvation to the faithful in obedience to the faith and to express the prayer of the Church to the Lord.  For this purpose it is necessary to communicate to a given people using its own language all that the Church intended to communicate to other people through the Latin language.

How curiously unlike what one discovers poring through the great big volumes that contain the speeches of the Council Fathers — all those religious superiors, bishops, archbishops, and cardinals who spoke day after day in the opening session in 1962!

When reading their speeches on the liturgy schema, one is struck by how often they return to the subject of Latin. Even after repeated requests by the moderators to stop talking about it, the subject kept popping up. Almost every speaker had an opinion and wanted to share it (each making his remarks, of course, in Latin—for the Council was the last great event at which one could sense vividly the glorious unity of a global, multi-racial Church communicating in a common mother tongue that belonged to no imperial power; this we lost as a punishment for the new tower of Babel we attempted to construct in the 1960s). Yes, it is true that a number of Council Fathers spoke out strongly in favor of greatly increasing the role of the vernacular; but they were a minority. There were many more who admitted that its use should be expanded in certain situations, while not displacing the customary Latin; and there were many besides who adamantly reaffirmed the primacy of Latin due to qualities frequently acknowledged by the Magisterium of the Church, such as its antiquity, longevity, stability, and universality.

One of the experts sitting at the Council, soaking it all in, plotting his way through the maze of opinions and endless evening gatherings, was the Jesuit theologian Henri de Lubac. He was later to acquire a reputation for conservatism, but that was only against the backdrop of the insanity that would follow. When the Council opened, he was widely seen as a progressive, even a modernist, for his laudatory book on the pseudo-mystic Teilhard de Chardin. De Lubac has left us a precious historical document, the Vatican Council Notebooks, in which he wrote down detailed notes about his experiences each day at and around the Council. The very fact that de Lubac’s progressivism inclined him to pay less attention to the boring conservatives and more attention to the exciting young Turks makes it all the more striking that he records so many (but not all of the) conciliar speeches in favor of Latin. In other words, since we know he is not attempting to push a pro-Latin agenda—if anything, the contrary is true—his testimony reliably indicates the depth of thought and sentiment on behalf of Latin among the Council Fathers. As we shall see, too, many of the Council Fathers vividly anticipated the curse of too much liturgical variety and diversity of adaptation, and pleaded in favor of liturgical unity against decentralization and the fragmentation of decisions. Their warnings went unheeded.

With this brief background to the Notebooks, let us bring before our eyes some of what de Lubac heard and recorded. (Numbers in parentheses refer to pages in the first volume of the Ignatius Press edition of Vatican Council Notebooks. I do not give the dates of the speeches here, which may be found by consulting the book; the first excerpt is from the gathering of October 23, 1962, and the last from that of November 13. De Lubac does not italicize the Latin phrases that he sprinkles throughout.)

Archbishop Armando Farès of Catanzaro and Squillace observed that this text is intended to be the “magna charta”; so it is necessary to explain the connection “inter fidem et liturgiam” [between faith and liturgy] and to pay careful attention to liturgical unity for the sake of the unity of the faith. “Sit una lingua, sc. latina” [Let there be one language, namely, Latin]. (176–77)

Cardinal Ruffini made 12 criticisms. … “Cautissime procedendum est” [it is necessary to proceed with the greatest caution {in regard to the question of Latin}]; there is great danger here, and it is not in conformity with the teachings of Pius XII. (178)

Card. Feltin: Latin remains the language of the Church. … We must extend the concessions that have already been made by the popes for the use of the vernacular languages. He suggested that we keep the missa solemnis in Latin as well as the essential formulas of the sacraments. (178)

Cardinal James L. McIntyre (Los Angeles): words of praise for Latin. It is a thing “plus quam humanum” [more than human]. He appealed to history. To attack the Latin language is in some way to impugn the immutability of dogmas. Latin is not only necessary from the ecclesiastical point of view, it is so from the scientific and civil points of view. It is the Catholic language: Protestants do not use it. “Missa debet remanere ut est” [the Mass must remain as it is]. (178–79)

Cardinal John D’Alton (Armagh, Ireland). … “Placet omnino quod dicitur de lingua latina” [I entirely approve of what has been said of the Latin language], the language of the Church; but we must resist those who would like to eliminate Latin altogether. That would cause confusion. (179)

Card. Juan Landázuri Ricketts (Lima, Peru): “in genere placet” [the schema pleases me in general]. Let us take care, however, not to favor variety too much. (179)

Card. Bacci. … The people will not understand any more in the vernacular than in Latin, because we are dealing here with mysterious things … Besides, it is enough that catechesis is in the vernacular. … Danger of disputes, of nationalism, especially in bilingual (Canada, Belgium) or trilingual (Switzerland) countries, to the great detriment of the Church. For the sacraments, one could permit some parts in the vernacular language, “probante tamen Sancta Sede” [with the Holy See’s approval, however]. Matters this serious should not be left to the bishops’ conferences. Otherwise, “magna diversitas et confusio” [great diversity and confusion], as already exists today. (184)

Alex. Gonçalves do Amara (Uberaba, Brazil): … The Mass and sacraments should be kept in Latin; the Epistle and the Gospel in the vernacular. (186)

Pietro Parente, assessor of the Holy Office. … Her acts prove that the Church is not immobile, as she is accused of being. But it is necessary to proceed “cum maxime cautela” [with the greatest caution] … Be careful of the “pericula versionum” [dangers of translation]. (186–87)

Dino Staffa, archbishop of Caesarea (Palestine), secretary of the Congregation for Studies. … To admit in principle the use of the vernacular languages is a serious matter, for it will not be possible to stop at half-measures. There is a great risk for the faith and for discipline.—At a time when the world is moving toward unity, will the Church move in the direction of diversity? … “Lingua latina integre servetur in missa” [Let Latin be preserved in full in the Mass]. (187)

Cardinal Siri. … It is necessary to soften art. 20, on adaptations; we must stave off the danger of a multiplicity of forms and deviations. … No. 24, on Latin: caute procedendum [let us proceed with caution]: let us abide by “Veterum sapientia.” (191)

Bishop M.J. Flores of Barbastro (Spain). … No. 24 [on introducing vernacular]: we should mistrust those who dare everything; beware, here as everywhere, of the “intolerantia auctoritatis” [intolerance of authority]; beware of troublemakers. Flores applied the prayer of Saint Isidore recited at the beginning of every session: that we not let ourselves be diverted from truth and justice by love for our national languages. The Ecclesia must be “una in fide, una in liturgia, una in caritate” [one in faith, one in liturgy, one in charity]. (192)

The auxiliary of Burgos (Spain) [Demetrio Mansilla Reoyo]: … No. 24: without Latin, the Mass will be even less understood. The Fathers at Trent had to react against variety; “fructus ex historia capiamus” [Let us gather the fruits of history]. (194)

[Vittorio Maria] Costantini, a Franciscan bishop: vernacular languages are constantly changing. Comments in the vernacular are sufficient. And the liturgy in the vernacular languages will not suffice to bring back our separated brethren. (194)

[Benedikt] Reetz, Benedictine abbot of Beuron. He is for an “usus moderatus linguae vulgaris” [a moderate usage of the vernacular], but he would not wish Gregorian chant to be condemned to death; he does not believe it is necessary for everyone to understand everything; the other day, I only understood one word of the Greek Mass: Amen; and yet it was of spiritual benefit. (195)

K.J. Calewaert, bishop of Gand … Latin is the best sign of unity; in conferences, pilgrimages, international meetings, it is necessary that everyone be able to chant together the Gloria, the Credo, the Salve Regina … The vernacular can be allowed for the sacraments. (195)

Dom Jean Prou, Abbot of Solesmes. … As for no. 24, it is dangerous: there is a risk of no longer being able to go back. It would be necessary to place strict limits on this [extension of the vernacular]. (195–96)

Bishop [Luigi Carlo] Borromeo (Italy): let Latin be kept, even for the sacraments. (197)

Anicet Fernández, O.P., master general: Major concordia esset si duae quaestiones distinguerentur: (a) major libertas in usu linguarum vernacularum: resp.: affirmative; (b) utrum omnes sacerdotes debeant cognoscere linguam latinam: affirmative, nam: lingua latina possidet (jus a longo tempore)—est lingua officialis—in lingua latina continentur immensi thesauri sapientiae christianae. [There would be greater agreement if two questions had been distinguished: (a) a greater freedom in the use of the vernacular languages. Response: yes. (b) Must all priests know Latin? Yes, because Latin is in place (and has been so for a long time already), it is the official language, immense treasures of Christian wisdom are contained in the Latin language.] (199)

Zacharias Rolim de Moura, bishop of Cajazeiras (Brazil). … We must avoid the multiplication of local rites. A speech in defense of Latin. Let there be no excessive innovations or exaggerations against the venerabiles traditiones [venerable traditions]. (200–1)

Joseph Melas, bishop of Nuoro (Italy): Let Latin be preserved and recommended, ut ex omni lingua et natione … latine loquantur [so that people of every language and every nation may speak Latin]. Do not scandalize the faithful by innovations. (202)

A Franciscan missionary bishop (India) [Albert Conrad De Vito]. Against the use of vernacular languages. … The divine mysteries are diminished by the use of vernacular languages. (202–3)

Another Brazilian [Carlos Eduardo de Sabóia Bandeira Melo]. Experience shows that great confusion has arisen in the last few years. Hodie lingua, cras aliud… [Today language {is changing}, tomorrow {it will be} another thing]. And the laity claim to know better than the clergy. There is no one who is incapable of understanding the Latin Mass, after some explanation. … Let us not grant anything to the bishops’ conferences: the bishop is master in his diocese; nullum moderamen, nulla jurisdictio inter episcopum et Romanum Pontificem [No intermediate body, no jurisdiction between the bishop and the Roman Pontiff]. (203)

Bishop Antonio Santin of Tireste … There is no piety or dignity in a liturgy in the vernacular language. … “Non amore novi procedamus!” [Let us not proceed from a love of novelty!] (209)

Joseph Battaglia, bishop of Faenza (Italy). … At no. 24, lingua latina “diligenter et cum amore servetur. S. Pontifex luculenter demonstravit nexum inter Ecclesiam et linguam latinam.” [Let Latin be preserved zealously and with love. The Supreme Pontiff has amply demonstrated the link between the Church and Latin.] All the children of the Church must hear the voice of their Mother, the same voice. Latin, sign of unity. Adjuro vos… [I implore you.] (209)

Archbishop Enrico Nicodemo of Bari (Italy). … Now he recommended Latin to us. (210)

A Brazilian bishop [Salomão Ferraz]. It is necessary to introduce the vernacular a little more; let this be permitted, sed nulli implacabiliter impositum [but not imposed in an implacable manner]. In the solemn offices, lingua latina adhibenda, ut officialis [Latin must be employed, as the official language]. … Do not abandon the exterior traditions, even in the vestments. (211)

An Italian bishop [Biagio D’Agostino]. … Without doubt Latin non est de essentia fidei [is not of the essence of the faith], sed: una fides, unum baptisma, una liturgia [but: {let us have} one faith, one baptism, one liturgy]. To say “catholicus sum” [I am Catholic] is to say “civis romanus sum” [I am a Roman citizen]. Let the West preserve Latin. (212)

J. B. Peruzzo, archbishop of Agrigente. Multa audivi contra sacram traditionem. Haec verba cause mihi fuerunt anxietatis et timoris. [I have heard many things against sacred tradition. Those words were for me a cause of anguish and fear.] … All those who want to diminish Latin always invoke the same reason: so that the people will understand and participate better. That is what the Augsburg Confession demanded. Now, quid evenit [What was the outcome]? Actus separationis a Sancta Matre Ecclesia [An act of separation from Holy Mother Church]. Separatio a lingua latina, per quandam inexplicabilem rationem, fere semper, etiam cum permissu Summi Pontificis [The abandonment of Latin, for some inexplicable reason, almost always, even with the permission of the Supreme Pontiff], ends up in absolute separation. (212–13)

Archbishop Peruzzo mentions the Augsburg Confession, a profession of faith written by Philip Melancthon in 1530 to present the fundamental articles of Lutheranism. In its article 24, we read: “All the ceremonies [of the Mass] must serve principally for the instruction of the people in what is necessary for them to know concerning Christ.”

Continuing with the Council Fathers:

Cardinal Spellman. Maxima prudentia et circumspectio est necessaria. De liturgismo exaggerato vitando. No. 27: cur ordinem missae recognoscere? Attendamus, ne minuatur reverentia erga SS. Sacramentum. [Very great prudence and circumspection are necessary. We must avoid an exaggerated ‘liturgism’. Why revise the ritual of the Mass? Let us be careful not to diminish reverence toward the Most Holy Sacrament.] Beware of magna confusio [great confusion]! (213)

Cardinal Godfrey, archbishop of London … No. 42: not too much of the vernacular language; risk of error in matters of faith; and if the choice is left to the bishops, erit maxima confusio [there will be great confusion]. (217)

Card. Ottaviani—no. 37: Si oportet sic recognoscere Ordinem Missae, quid manebit? Haec res sanctissima non debet mutari [If we must revise the ritual of the Mass in this way, what will remain of it? This most holy thing must not be changed] at every generation. … There is an appeal [in the schema] to the authority of Pius XII; but there is no mention of his speech to the international liturgy congress, where he said: “The Church has the grave duty to maintain firmly the unconditional usage of Latin, sine ulla remissione [without any relaxation].” (218)

Bishop Dwyer of Leeds (England): no. 37 is not clear. If every nation can change things, “non erit recognitio, sed potius destructio” [There will not be a revision, but rather, a destruction]. (220)

A Spanish bishop [Ramón Iglesias Navarri]. No change should be made to the Mass without very grave reasons. (225)

A Chinese bishop (Formosa?) [Petrus Pao-Zin Tou]. Several people are trying to introduce some beautiful novelties. Canon missae idem debet ramenere ubique terrarum, etiam quoad linguam, exceptis Pater noster et Agnus Dei [The canon of the Mass must remain the same everywhere on earth, even in what concerns the language, with the exception of the Our Father and the Lamb of God]. Ante et post canonem [before and after the Canon], preserve the ceremonies, but in various languages. (229)

Armand Farès, archbishop of Catanzaro and Squillace (Italy). Be mindful of the Council of Trent. At no. 37, do not exaggerate active participation. Ne tangatur canon missae; cf. Trent: canon est ab omni errore purum [Let the canon of the Mass not be touched; cf. Trent: the canon is free from all error]. No. 42 {on communion under both species}: no; we must not arouse the miratio populi [astonishment of the people], etc. (235–36)

Sabóia Bandeira, bishop of Palmas (Brazil). p. 177: Omnino debet remanere sicuti est. [{The Roman rite} must remain altogether as it is.] … If we touch that, everyone will propose his own change, etc. (236)

Archbishop Modrego y Casaus of Barcelona. … If the homily is well done, no need for the vernacular language at Mass. (239)

Similar points were raised when the Council Fathers discussed the Divine Office. Again, there were some in favor of dropping Latin altogether, a larger number who wanted a blend of or a choice between Latin and the vernacular (e.g., Frings, Léger, Döpfner); and a number of “hard-liners” who basically said: The Office has been in Latin and should remain in Latin, and the clergy just have to put their minds to learning it and doing it. A sampling:

Cardinal Manuel Gonçalves Cerejeira, patriarch of Lisbon: … In general law, lingua latina a clericis servari debet, quia in officio sacerdo est tanquam vox Ecclesiae. [Latin must be retained by the clerics, for in the Office the priest is, so to speak, the voice of the Church.] (258)

Cardinal Étienne Wyszyński (Warsaw). Let the emendatio not go too far: Servanda sunt monumenta antiquissimae traditionis [We must preserve these monuments of the most ancient tradition]. … Lingua latina conservanda videtur in breviario [It seems that Latin must be retained in the breviary]. A number of beautiful texts cannot be well translated. If we yield on this point, priests will lose the habit of Latin to an ever greater degree. In the name of the 64 Polish bishops: let us refrain from shortening the breviary too much (some applause) and let us keep the Latin. (258)

Cardinal William Godfrey, archbishop of Westminster. … If, in some regions, Latin is no longer much used or esteemed, that is not a reason for abandoning its use in the office: on the contrary, we must make an effort to restore it. Do not give a signum debilitatis [sign of weakness]. (259)

Card. Ant. Bacci. … Liturgical Latin is easy; the bishops have a serious obligation to take the necessary measures {in its favor}. (261)

Bishop Franić (Split, Yugoslavia). Let us not shorten the office any more. … Keep the Latin. (262)

Bishop Luigi Carli of Segni. Do not shorten the breviary: it should rather be augmented. … Therefore followed a full-scale assault on the use of the vernacular. (268–69)

Bishop Victor Costantini of Sessa Aurunca (Italy), against the vernacular. (269)

Archbishop Pierre Ngo-dinh-Thuc of Hué (Vietnam). In the name of the bishops of Vietnam. This schema proposes so many innovations that nothing of the Roman ritual will remain; this could be very harmful. De aspectu sociali, multi Patres exagerant [On the social aspect, a number of the Fathers are exaggerating]: among us, for a long time, this social aspect has been very intensive; but we still value individual piety. So much freedom requested for adaptations! In this, too, there is danger. Latin has always been the language of a minority: so the situation is not new: it has brought about unity; it must do so still. (278)

A Polish titular bishop [Franciszek Jop]. … Lingua latina magni pretii est [the Latin language is of great value]; it must remain; it is linked to the birth of our nation; the first history of Poland is in Latin, etc. … Against the growth of the powers of the episcopal conferences. (284)

What we see in de Lubac’s summaries of these interventions is just how lively was the desire of many Council Fathers to see Latin remain unimpaired in its majestic role as a source and symbol of Catholic unity and as the traditional vesture in which the sacred rites were clothed, so that they could remain the common possession of Holy Mother Church instead of the sport and prey of various national episcopacies and their linguistic and cultural agendas.

As hackneyed as the saying may be, perhaps we may be excused for invoking it: The more things change, the more they stay the same. The hopes and fears of the Council Fathers speak with exactitude to our current situation. Their repeated protests against the supposed magnum principium and its corollary of decentralization remain a matter of historical record that no one can alter.

[UPDATE - ADDENDUM 9/14/17]

It occurs to me that, given the trend of the above quotations, it would be helpful to include in this article the sections of the definitive text of Sacrosanctum Concilium that correspond to the points discussed by the Council Fathers above. It will be immediately obvious that the perspective of the pro-Latin Fathers was enshrined in the text (as even Bugnini admitted), while not, of course, excluding some introduction of the vernacular, a point on which almost no one disagreed. We might say, in retrospect, that some of the following language was meant to placate the conservatives while paving the way for a revolutionary agenda, but whatever the case may be, the pro-Latin Fathers did vote in favor of the final version of the text, evidently believing their concerns to have been adequately reflected therein.

     36. §1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
     §2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.
     §3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, §2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.
     §4. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above. 

     54. In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and “the common prayer,” but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.
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. And wherever a more extended use of the mother tongue within the Mass appears desirable, the regulation laid down in Art. 40 of this Constitution is to be observed.

     63. Because of the use of the mother tongue in the administration of the sacraments and sacramentals can often be of considerable help to the people, this use is to be extended according to the following norms:
     a) The vernacular language may be used in administering the sacraments and sacramentals, according to the norm of Art. 36.
     b) In harmony with the new edition of the Roman Ritual, particular rituals shall be prepared without delay by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, §2, of this Constitution. These rituals, which are to be adapted, also as regards the language employed, to the needs of the different regions, are to be reviewed by the Apostolic See and then introduced into the regions for which they have been prepared. But in drawing up these rituals or particular collections of rites, the instructions prefixed to the individual rites the Roman Ritual, whether they be pastoral and rubrical or whether they have special social import, shall not be omitted. 

      101. §1. In accordance with the centuries-old tradition of the Latin rite, the Latin language is to be retained by clerics in the divine office. But in individual cases the ordinary has the power of granting the use of a vernacular translation to those clerics for whom the use of Latin constitutes a grave obstacle to their praying the office properly. The vernacular version, however, must be one that is drawn up according to the provision of Art. 36.
     §2. The competent superior has the power to grant the use of the vernacular in the celebration of the divine office, even in choir, to nuns and to members of institutes dedicated to acquiring perfection, both men who are not clerics and women. The version, however, must be one that is approved.
     §3. Any cleric bound to the divine office fulfills his obligation if he prays the office in the vernacular together with a group of the faithful or with those mentioned in 52 above provided that the text of the translation is approved.

     113. Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when the divine offices are celebrated solemnly in song, with the assistance of sacred ministers and the active participation of the people.
     As regards the language to be used, the provisions of Art. 36 are to be observed; for the Mass, Art. 54; for the sacraments, Art. 63; for the divine office, Art. 101.
     114. The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care. Choirs must be diligently promoted, especially in cathedral churches; but bishops and other pastors of souls must be at pains to ensure that, whenever the sacred action is to be celebrated with song, the whole body of the faithful may be able to contribute that active participation which is rightly theirs, as laid down in Art. 28 and 30.

     116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given chief place in liturgical services.
     But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations [by chant’s chief place], so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.

I take it as a given that Gregorian chant here means what everyone understood it to mean in 1963, namely, Latin plainchant. Moreover, if the treasury of sacred music is to be preserved, this must be referring to the great body of Latin music already in existence prior to 1963; the fostering would include new compositions in Latin and the vernacular.

Veterum Sapientia Latin Conference in DC, July 31 - Aug. 6

Veterum Sapientia is proud to announce its Fourth Annual Latin Conference for priests, deacons, religious (male and female), and seminarians, hosted this year at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. from July 31 to August 6.

The program is called Veterum Sapientia after the Apostolic Constitution which Saint John XXIII signed at the high altar of St. Peter’s (Feb. 22, 1962), defending and promoting the study of Latin by seminarians.

Veterum Sapientia is intended for intermediate to advanced students of Latin, the minimum being two semesters of seminary Latin. It will also be conducted entirely in Latin. While this seems daunting, the response of participants has been overwhelming positive. Through activities, conversation, and games the full-immersion experience helps participants transition from a passive knowledge of Latin to an active command, helping one to enter into the language more completely. For priests, that means entering more deeply into Latin prayers, sacraments, and ecclesial texts, helping us “sentire cum Ecclesia.” We also use our more active command of the language to investigate the full breadth of ecclesiastical latinity: scriptural, patristic, scholastic, renaissance, liturgical, and curial.

For more information, including video testimonials and interviews about the program, as well as registration, please visit the website: https://veterumsapientia.com/.

Veterum Sapientia: A Latin Conference in DC, Aug. 2-8

This August, Catholic Univ. of America and the International Institute for Culture will host a conference called Veterum Sapientia, a week-long Latin program for Catholic priests, seminarians, and those men and women belonging to religious orders. This program seeks to respond to the call of Saint John XXIII’s Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia to revitalize the Latin language in the Catholic Church. This full-immersion (Latine tantum) program offers intensive instruction in the language to intermediate and advanced students of Latin.

Veterum Sapientia offers a unique, guided exploration of the most important categories of writing that make up the Church’s Latin patrimony, with exercises ordered toward helping participants grow in their understanding of the mechanics of the language and internalize new vocabulary through active use. Classes and related activities (e.g. meals, games, walks) will be conducted in Latin and in a combination of Latin and English, as appropriate to participants’ level of experience. Plenary class sessions and some small-group work will be devoted to reading and discussion of texts representing the major genera of Latin writing in the life of the Church: scriptural Latin, patristic Latin, liturgical Latin, scholastic Latin, ecclesiastical (curial) Latin, and Gregorian chant (hymns). In other small-group sessions, participants will be guided through active exercises in speaking and in simple writing, based on material from these representative texts. Participants will work with instructors every day, experiencing a series of plenary and small-group class sessions for a minimum total of six hours of instruction daily. Common lunches, dinners, and evening recreational activities will also be provided, offering opportunities for informal conversations in Latin. All class sessions, common meals and recreation activities will be conducted on the Catholic University of America and Theological College campuses.

Further information, including such details as tuition and lodging, can be found at the conference wesbite: https://veterumsapientia.com/.