Do You Pray In Latin?

[iggyjoan]

[quote name='RC _' post='1306397' date='Jun 30 2007, 04:16 AM']I usually pray in ASL.[/quote]


^^ THAT'S awesome.




i can't even speak pig latin.

[Knight of the Holy Rosary]

[quote]I'd like to see the actual quote of him saying that. Could you provide a reference, please?[/quote]


I found this:


[quote]From Times OnlineJune 23, 2007

Behind the scenes with the Vatican’s exorcists
In this extract from her new book, Tracy Wilkinson explains how Father Gabriel Amorth has re-established exorcism as a common rite in the Roman Catholic Church

[b]The Devil doesn’t like Latin. [/b]

That is one of the first things I learnt from Father Gabriele Amorth, long known as Rome’s chief exorcist, even though that has never exactly been his formal title. Perhaps Rome’s chattiest exorcist is the more apt title. Now past the age of 80, Amorth has dedicated the last decades of his life to regaining for exorcism a measure of respectability.

Despite his advancing age, he continues to perform the rite several times a week at his office in Rome. Scores of people seek him out.[b] He prefers to use Latin when he conducts exorcisms, he says, because it is most effective in challenging the Devil. [/b]
A little over a decade ago, Amorth founded the International Association of Exorcists, which holds a secret exorcists’ convention in Italy every two years. He is the group’s president emeritus. On alternate years, the national association of exorcists meets, also with Amorth in attendance.

Father Amorth has had a hand in recruiting, training, or inspiring many of today’s exorcists. In Italy the number of exorcists has, remarkably, grown tenfold in the last decade, by Amorth’s count. As he slows his pace ever so slightly – old age and the rigours of a strenuous vocation catching up to him – he has overseen a new generation of exorcists and helped to fuel a global renaissance of the ritual. Devil detox these days is something of a growth industry: in a world awash in catastrophe and unspeakable suffering, many people feel increasingly compelled to see evil in concrete and personified – not to mention simplified – forms, and to find a way to banish the bad.

But how is evil defined and conceptualised? Is evil, as many people believe, merely the absence of good – privatio boni – a metaphysical concept? Or is evil a force, a physical entity, that acts? Is evil personal or impersonal? Is the Devil a symbol or something concrete and real? It is this latter view of evil that is held by many priests and other Catholics for whom exorcism is an acceptable practice, because if evil is an active force, there must be a remedy, a way to combat it.

Many critics, however, see the Church’s willingness to use exorcisms at all as a perilous crutch. It allows people to take flight from personal responsibility and constitutes not just a wilful ignorance of serious mental illness but also, potentially, an exacerbation of such illness.

Where psychiatry and therapy require a person to look within to solve his or her problems, exorcism and blaming the Devil allows a person to escape introspection and instead discern only external causes for problems. But Amorth and other practitioners quickly dismiss the criticism. “Exorcism is God’s true miracle,” Amorth likes to say.

“We of the Bible know that evil spirits are angels created as good by God and who then rebelled against God,” Amorth said during one of our chats at the Society of St Paul congregational residence in suburban Rome, where, in a back room, he conducts exorcisms. “But the idea of evil spirits is a universal idea, in all cultures, all religions, all times. Naturally, everybody defends themselves according to their own culture and mentality . . . perhaps resorting to witchdoctors or what have you. But all people, all the time, have a perception that spirits of evil exist, which it is necessary to protect against.”

Recognising demonic possession – the “discernment,” as it is called – is the first and very difficult aspect of an exorcism. This is most commonly achieved by seeing how the patient responds to religious symbols such as holy water or a crucifix. For example, the person has a great aversion to entering a church or cannot bear to face a priest.

It must be said: Amorth and other exorcists insist that true demonic possession is extremely rare. In fact, of the thousands of Italians who seek exorcisms for themselves or for relatives, the priests say, few really need them. In most cases, the exorcist does not perform a full-fledged exorcism, but rather offers a prayer of “liberation,” which includes some of the same incantations but does not involve the full ordeal.

Officially, the Roman Catholic Church today is adamant about one thing: the need to establish that a person seeking an exorcism is not mentally or physically ill. This requirement is emphasised in the revised exorcism rite, which was formulated in 1999. Many exorcists say they work with psychiatrists and physicians to determine the nature of the patient’s affliction. However, in practice, exorcists disagree on the need for doctors to participate. Amorth usually asks the person seeking the exorcism whether he or she has first consulted a doctor (almost always they say they have) and he will take them at their word.

Like a number of the older exorcists, Amorth sees a diagnostic role for the exorcism itself. He maintains that the exorcism is the only procedure that can truly and definitively determine whether a person is afflicted by satanic influence. Only an exorcism, in his opinion, can overcome the tricks the Devil uses to conceal his presence. The consequence of this is that some exorcisms take place without the consent of medical personnel. Since an exorcism is basically prayer, Amorth reasons, it can’t hurt. “An unnecessary exorcism never harmed anyone,” he says, rather controversially.

It is exactly that attitude that worries doctors, in Italy and elsewhere, who approach the subject of demonic possession and exorcism much more sceptically, or who think it is completely bogus. Ignoring physiological causes and medical advice risks exacerbating the patient’s condition, they say. Furthermore, an exorcism can be highly suggestive, and a susceptible patient could be convinced that he or she is possessed and could begin to display the symptoms out of imitation, compliance, or a subconscious need to please the priest.

“You promise something to someone who is very sick and at best you offer a temporary cure,” says the philosopher Dr Sergio Moravia of the University of Florence. “It’s a scam.”

Amorth counters with the argument that people who come to him for exorcisms or healing prayers do so only after having recurring symptoms despite treatment from a host of doctors. If they had not exhausted medical possibilities, they would not knock on his door.

By some estimates offered by Italian mental health organisations, thousands of Italians seek exorcisms every year. Amorth is reluctant to pinpoint a number, and he contends that, regrettably, many more people frequent practitioners of witchcraft and black magic. Whatever the number, there is no doubt that demand has soared.

As Amorth put it in one of his essays: “Why, today, is there such a high demand for exorcists? Can we make the case that the demon is more active today than in the past? Can we say that the incidence of demonic possession and other, lesser, evil disturbances is on the rise? The answer to these and similar questions is a decisive. Yes. Rationalism, atheism – which is preached to the masses – and the corruption that is a byproduct of Western consumerism have all contributed to a frightening decline in faith.

“This I can state with mathematical certainty: where faith declines, superstition grows.”

Guidelines from The Roman Ritual

- Possession is not to be taken lightly. Each case is to be carefully examined and great caution is to be used in distinguishing genuine possession from certain forms of disease.

- The priest who undertakes the office should be himself a holy man, of a blameless life, intelligent, courageous, humble, and he should prepare for the work by special acts of devotion and mortification, particularly by prayer and fasting (Matthew 17:20).

- He should avoid in the course of the rite anything resembling superstition and he should leave the medical aspects of the case to qualified physicians. He should admonish the possessed, insofar as the latter is capable, to dispose himself for the exorcism by prayer, fasting, confession and communion.

- The exorcism should take place in the church or some other sacred place, if convenient; but if on account of sickness or for other legitimate reasons, it takes place in a private house, witnesses (preferably members of the family) should be present: this is specially enjoined, as a measure of precaution, in case the subject is a woman.

- All idle and curious questioning of the demon should be avoided, and the prayers and aspirations should be read with great faith, humility and fervour, and with a consciousness of power and authority.

- The Blessed Sacrament, or the host, is not to be brought near the body of the obsessed during exorcism for fear of possible irreverence; but the crucifix, holy water, and, where available, relics of the saints are to be employed. If expulsion of the evil spirit is not obtained at once, the rite should be repeated, if need be, several times.

- The exorcist should be vested in cassock, surplice, and a violet stole.

© Tracy Wilkinson 2007. Extracted from The Vatican’s Exorcists, to be published by Little Brown on July 5 at £16.99 and available from Times Booksfirst for £14.99 (free p&p), 01326 555745, timesonline.co.uk/booksfirst[/quote]

[philosophette]

I would much prefer to pray the Our Father in Aramaic than Latin... as Jesus did not give the prayer to us in Latin.

That is, of course, after I learn what the words mean. I hate praying something that I do not understand.
[quote][url="http://www.v-a.com/bible/prayer.html"]Galilean transliteration of the Lord's Prayer[/url]

Avvon d-bish-maiya, nith-qaddash shim-mukh.
Tih-teh mal-chootukh. Nih-weh çiw-yanukh:
ei-chana d'bish-maiya: ap b'ar-ah.
Haw lan lakh-ma d'soonqa-nan yoo-mana.
O'shwooq lan kho-bein:
ei-chana d'ap kh'nan shwiq-qan l'khaya-ween.
Oo'la te-ellan l'niss-yoona:
il-la paç-çan min beesha.
Mid-til de-di-lukh hai mal-choota
oo khai-la oo tush-bookh-ta
l'alam al-mein. Aa-meen.[/quote]

I also love to pray in Hebrew. I have a Transliterated Version of the Psalms that is simply beautiful. (Unfortunately I cannot access the website link today because it is still the Sabbath and the publisher is Orthodox Jewish - they shut the website down on the Sabbath, but here is the [url="http://www.artscroll.com/Books"]general link[/url].)

I can see how Latin might vibe with other people's spirituality, though, so I do not begrudge them their enjoyment of it, it is just not for me, even though I can understand most of it.

Edited July 1, 2007 by philosobrat

[Maria]

I've gone to Mass at TAC. Does that count as assisting at a Latin Mass? Anything unique to the day they do in English, and the rest is in Latin.
I suspect I don't pray a Latin prayer at least once a month.


[quote name='StColette' post='1306509' date='Jun 30 2007, 12:40 PM']Dr. Miravalle would have us pray the Ave Maria before every class, but I no longer have a class with him since I've take almost all the ones he offers.

Now with my French Prof. we pray or prayers in French, I must say the Hail Mary in French is a lot more difficult than it in Latin[/quote]
Hmm... well, I suppose if you're trying to fit the 'pauvre' in there (priez pour nous pauvre pecheurs) then I could understand you... it does kind of mess up the rhythm.

Edit: Although, now that I'm used to it, I get messed up when I try to omit it, so I can't verify my memory of it messing up the rhythm.

Edited July 1, 2007 by Maria

[Resurrexi]

[quote]I've gone to Mass at TAC. Does that count as assisting at a Latin Mass? Anything unique to the day they do in English, and the rest is in Latin.
I suspect I don't pray a Latin prayer at least once a month.[/quote]

What's TAC?

[quote]I would much prefer to pray the Our Father in Aramaic than Latin... as Jesus did not give the prayer to us in Latin.

That is, of course, after I learn what the words mean. I hate praying something that I do not understand.[/quote]

Seeing as we don't have the Aramaic original and that Aramaic version you posted is just a translation from the Greek of the Gospel of St. Matthew, it is no better than the English translation. The Latin version, however, is taken from St. Jerome's [i]Vulgata[/i], the official translation of the Bible of the Holy Roman Church.

[quote]I also love to pray in Hebrew. I have a Transliterated Version of the Psalms that is simply beautiful. (Unfortunately I cannot access the website link today because it is still the Sabbath and the publisher is Orthodox Jewish - they shut the website down on the Sabbath, but here is the general link.)

I can see how Latin might vibe with other people's spirituality, though, so I do not begrudge them their enjoyment of it, it is just not for me, even though I can understand most of it.[/quote]

Seeing as the psalter you mentioned does not have an [i]Imprimatur[/i], I don't think Catholics are allowed to use it. Moreover, the [i]Masoretic Text[/i] may have gone through changes and probably has many textual errors in it, it is better to use the Vulgate or LLX for the psalms in both of which the original Hebrew lives on.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1307278' date='Jun 30 2007, 08:20 PM']What's TAC?[/quote]
i'm guessing Thomas Aquinas College?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1307285' date='Jun 30 2007, 09:21 PM']i'm guessing Thomas Aquinas College?[/quote]
That's how I understood it as well.

[StColette]

[quote name='Maria' post='1307186' date='Jun 30 2007, 08:22 PM']I've gone to Mass at TAC. Does that count as assisting at a Latin Mass? Anything unique to the day they do in English, and the rest is in Latin.
I suspect I don't pray a Latin prayer at least once a month.
Hmm... well, I suppose if you're trying to fit the 'pauvre' in there (priez pour nous pauvre pecheurs) then I could understand you... it does kind of mess up the rhythm.

Edit: Although, now that I'm used to it, I get messed up when I try to omit it, so I can't verify my memory of it messing up the rhythm.[/quote]

Hmm I've never noticed that it messes up the rhythm. *says Hail Mary to herself in French* Nope I don't think it does.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='StColette' post='1307295' date='Jun 30 2007, 08:24 PM']Hmm I've never noticed that it messes up the rhythm. *says Hail Mary to herself in French* Nope I don't think it does.[/quote]

[Era Might]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1306784' date='Jun 30 2007, 06:22 PM']Pope Paul VI said that those who are willing to devote themselves to learning, using and advancing Latin as a living language, do a great service to the Church.[/quote]
There is nothing wrong with learning, using, and advancing Latin, as long as you do not cast aspersions on Catholics who pray in a different language. The Liturgy is a separate matter from private prayer, because it is the public prayer of the Church. She alone has the authority to regulate the language used, whether Latin or the vernacular (and she desires that they both be preserved). In private prayer, we do not have to pray in any particular language, because it is our own private time with God.

I do not pray in Latin, but I still support the learning and preservation of Latin, especially for the Liturgy. This can be done in many ways, and does not require private prayer in Latin. This was the essential point made by Pope Paul VI, that the heart of prayer is not language or anything external, but praying with our hearts. Understanding prayer and giving it from the heart is more important than anything else. If someone can easily understand prayer in Latin and wants to incorporate it into their spiritual life, they may do so. If someone finds it easier to focus and pray in their own tongue, then they may do that as well.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1307316' date='Jun 30 2007, 08:31 PM']There is nothing wrong with learning, using, and advancing Latin, as long as you do not cast aspersions on Catholics who pray in a different language. The Liturgy is a separate matter from private prayer, because it is the public prayer of the Church. She alone has the authority to regulate the language used, whether Latin or the vernacular (and she desires that they both be preserved). In private prayer, we do not have to pray in any particular language, because it is our own private time with God.

I do not pray in Latin, but I still support the learning and preservation of Latin, especially for the Liturgy. This can be done in many ways, and does not require private prayer in Latin.[/quote]
nicely said.

[StColette]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1307300' date='Jun 30 2007, 09:25 PM'][/quote]

lol well I wanted to make sure

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1307316' date='Jun 30 2007, 09:31 PM']There is nothing wrong with learning, using, and advancing Latin, as long as you do not cast aspersions on Catholics who pray in a different language. The Liturgy is a separate matter from private prayer, because it is the public prayer of the Church. She alone has the authority to regulate the language used, whether Latin or the vernacular (and she desires that they both be preserved). In private prayer, we do not have to pray in any particular language, because it is our own private time with God.

I do not pray in Latin, but I still support the learning and preservation of Latin, especially for the Liturgy. This can be done in many ways, and does not require private prayer in Latin. This was the essential point made by Pope Paul VI, that the heart of prayer is not language or anything external, but praying with our hearts. Understanding prayer and giving it from the heart is more important than anything else. If someone can easily understand prayer in Latin and wants to incorporate it into their spiritual life, they may do so. If someone finds it easier to focus and pray in their own tongue, then they may do that as well.[/quote]
I don't think that anyone is suggesting that we MUST pray in Latin. But what I believe is not fully captured by the perspective you've articulated is that in the tradition of the Roman Church, and indeed in the teachings of our Popes, there is a certain objective quality to be discovered in the sacrality of Latin prayer.
I believe it is important to emphasize this insight simply because it appears to be all but lost in the contemporary Church. Certainly there is great value in vernacular prayer, and I don't believe that a correct elucidation of Latin as a sacred tongue would in any way diminish the goodness and value of vernacular prayer.
I am speaking of Latin prayer in general; there are of course particular matters pertaining specifically to the use of Latin in the Roman Liturgy which I must refrain from discussing for now.

And so there is no mistake, the response I've quoted pertains to but a small percentage of what I had posted above. Please see my original post and the associated links for the full story on what I was trying to say. At face value I believe that the response to my post distorts the meaning and intention of that post.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1307347' date='Jun 30 2007, 10:45 PM']But what I believe is not fully captured by the perspective you've articulated is that in the tradition of the Roman Church, and indeed in the teachings of our Popes, there is a certain objective quality to be discovered in the sacrality of Latin prayer.[/quote]
I agree in the sense that the Latin language is a sacramental. But there are many sacramentals in the Church. There is an objective quality in wearing a Brown Scapular, but if someone wears a different kind of Scapular, or does not wear a Scapular at all (but instead a Miraculous Medal), none of them have more spiritual profit than the other because of those things. There is a venerable tradition in the Church with the sacred language of Latin, but there is also a venerable tradition with the vernacular (which is how Latin came to be a sacred language). I don't have a problem building up the value of our sacred language, as long as it is balanced with respect for the tradition of vernacular. Pope John Paul II touches on this in his Encyclical Epistle "Slavorum Apostoli":

[quote]At this point it is an unusual and admirable thing that the holy Brothers, working in such complex and precarious situations, did not seek to impose on the peoples assigned to their preaching either the undeniable superiority of the Greek language and Byzantine culture, or the customs and way of life of the more advanced society in which they had grown up and which necessarily remained familiar and dear to them. Inspired by the ideal of uniting in Christ the new believers, they adapted to the Slavonic language the rich and refined texts of the Byzantine liturgy and likewise adapted to the mentality and customs of the new peoples the subtle and complex elaborations of Greco-Roman law. In following this programme of harmony and peace, Cyril and Methodius were ever respectful of the obligations of their mission. They acknowledged the traditional prerogatives and ecclesiastical rights laid down by Conciliar Canons. Thus, though subjects of the Eastern Empire and believers subject to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, they considered it their duty to give an account of their missionary work to the Roman Pontiff. They likewise submitted to his judgment, in order to obtain his approval, the doctrine which they professed and taught, the liturgical books which they had written in the Slavonic language, and the methods which they were using in evangelizing those peoples.

...

We can say without fear of contradiction that such a traditional and at the same time extremely up-to-date vision of the catholicity of the Church - like a symphony of the various liturgies in all the world's languages united in one single liturgy, or a melodious chorus sustained by the voices of unnumbered multitudes, rising in countless modulations, tones and harmonies for the praise of God from every part of the globe, at every moment of history - this vision corresponds in a particular way to the theological and pastoral vision which inspired the apostolic and missionary work of Constantine the Philosopher and of Methodius, and which sustained their mission among the Slav nations.[/quote]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1307347' date='Jun 30 2007, 10:45 PM']At face value I believe that the response to my post distorts the meaning and intention of that post.[/quote]
I'm not sure how, but I apologize if I misrepresented what you were saying. I think maybe I was addressing the larger issue as well as responding to you, so it may not have been clear.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1307398' date='Jun 30 2007, 10:32 PM']I'm not sure how, but I apologize if I misrepresented what you were saying.[/quote]
I don't think you were actually trying to misrepresent my post, but your opening line, "[i]there is nothing wrong with learning, using, and advancing Latin, as long as you do not cast aspersions on Catholics who pray in a different language[/i]", implies that I was casting aspersions or at least sanctioning such a thing. I'm sure you intended nothing of this sort but I feared that a reader who had perhaps failed to read my original post in its entirety would get that impression.

Quite frankly I don't think we have a real dispute on this subject. We both admit that Latin is more than some dead language that the Church used to use, and now, "good riddance". And we both agree that there is value in the use of the vernacular. I feel safe in assuming that we are both equally interested in having minds conformed to the teachings and spirit of the Church so I don't see how we can truly disagree in essence.

I do detect a certain difference in emphasis as I have explicitly stated a desire to affirm the use of Latin in Liturgy and private devotion in the face of a contemporary scene in which Latin is a rarity. You seem more interested in stressing the fact that there is good reason and value behind the use of the vernacular. If this assessment is true than we agree in substance but differ in emphasis. In good old traditional Catholic manner I am prepared to agree to disagree.