I had an interesting discussion with my children on the way home from Mass last week. We had just had our first experience of the full revised prayers of the Mass. Previously, at various parishes we attend, there has been partial introduction of the new words and they seem to favour the shorter Apostles’ Creed rather than the revised Nicene Creed.
My youngest asked why Latin was used for the Mass for so long (naturally while I was negotiating a rather awkward intersection). My answer was that when Christianity was spreading through the Roman Empire, Latin was actually the official language of the Roman empire.
Yes, but why did they keep using it? Well, partly tradition. But also because even when Latin became a ‘dead language’ not used for everyday communication, it was still the language of law and government.
But why? To guarantee consistent meaning, especially across countries where many dialects or variations of languages existed.
And so that different realms, countries and nations could communicate officially with ease and less risk of misunderstanding. Such diplomatic misunderstanding could easily lead to enmity and wars.
Also, very importantly, when a language isn’t developing through vernacular use, its vocabulary keeps its meaning over the years. For the Church, it has always been a way of guaranteeing the accuracy of the expression of its doctrines. When the meaning of words matters, it is important to have that meaning cut and dried and not subject to the vagaries of changing linguistic fashion.
So, when we begin translating that Latin version of the Mass into living languages, such as English, it is necessary to periodically review it to ensure that it is still saying what it should say. Just as we go through any important legal document periodically to make sure it is correct.
Going back to the original sources and reviewing them in the light of hundreds of years of prayerful tradition, rigorous scholarship and wisdom, is frequently the best way of renewing understanding and ensuring accuracy. Looked at in this way, the revisiting of the Latin Mass in the latest translations by the Church is not anachronistic, but rather seems very wise and full of foresight.
It ensures transcendence over the ephemeral nature of everyday language and the possible clouding of meaning that can creep in with changes of understanding. This is a novel idea to children of the modern relativist age where everything is transient, things go viral on the internet and then are forgotten; the pop charts are peopled with one-hit wonders; fashions change in the blink of an eye.
Our world is geared to the ephemeral. Our economy thrives on it. But it is a mistake to try and make our Holy Mass “relevant” in the same way.
If we do try to keep up with fashion too much, we risk making something that is timeless and eternally relevant appear ephemeral and subject to the changing winds of fashion.
We run the real risk of making our Mass and our Catholic religion look as if it is merely a construct of the times, and therefore able to be changed substantially to suit the times. Which, of course, it emphatically is not and cannot be.
The Mass is ancient and beautiful and timelessly relevant. It is, and must ever be, “the source and summit of the Christian life”. The new version actively seeks to convey a more harmonious idea of this. I believe it succeeds.
Now all we need are some suitably beautiful hymns to go with it.