The recent changes that we have all experienced in the English speaking world in the translation that we use at Mass are something that all of us cannot have failed to remark upon, whether we have found ourselves largely positive or negative in our response to them. But it is not just the English-speaking countries that are affected. In fact most major languages will soon be undergoing a similar, albeit mostly less dramatic, change in the translations used at Mass. All this work is in response to the Vatican’s document Liturgicam authenticam of 2001. The Voice of the Church at Prayer: Reflections on Liturgy and Language by Fr Michael Lang (who while working in Rome has done much for the on-going task of re-translation) is, therefore, a timely contribution to our understanding of the debate that surrounds the language in which the Church prays when she uses the vernacular.

The work begins by examining the language of Sacred Scripture as a way of establishing, in St Augustine’s words, that there is ‘the Lord’s way of speaking.’ This special way of speaking establishes a common language that is understood by those who are on a ‘common pilgrimage’ (Ratzinger-Benedict XVI). Sacred Scripture has its own vocabulary which the Church takes over in her liturgical prayer, formed as it is by Sacred Scripture. Biblical Latin is a special type of Latin and so is Biblical English a special type of English. Ordinary words and place names attain a certain significance that is lost to those who do not share this language. The basic and underlying thesis of the book is that liturgical (and originally Biblical) translation is not a mere rendition into the ordinary vernacular but must necessarily develop its own special language to convey as fully as possible the many meanings and associations that come with the way in which the Lord speaks to us and we to Him.

In the first chapter Fr Lang examines a number of words that help establish this idea that Scripture has its own special language. And if Scripture has a special language, then it would seem that Liturgical language, based as it is so heavily on Biblical language, has its own special way of speaking. The Latin of the Liturgy, then, is deliberately stylised, moreover it is designed to convey a message that is stable and so, unlike ordinary language, develops its own stable vocabulary, where words, as in Scripture, attain a significance greater than their more common meaning. In the development of Liturgical Latin we are not dealing simply with a change from Aramaic to Greek to Latin but the formation of a new language to convey the message of salvation.

It will be useful to quote a passage from the book to reinforce the above remark: “It would not be accurate to describe … [the] process simply as the adoption of the ‘vernacular’ language in the Liturgy [here the author is referring to Latin], if by vernacular is meant colloquial. The Latin … of the Mass was removed from the idiom of the ordinary people.” But does this not mean then that the Liturgy (and by extension the Bible) are to be seen as deliberately obscurantist, deliberately inaccessible to ordinary people? Surely the answer to this must be a resounding ‘No’. Language is more than words. The author quotes the Lutheran liturgical scholar Frank Senn, who writes, “The laity have always found ways to participate in the liturgy, whether it was their language or not …” This reminds us that the Mass, and even the readings at Mass, are not just about instruction but that, as Vatican II puts it: “the liturgy of the Word and the Eucharistic liturgy, are so closely connected with one another that they form but one single act of worship.”

In Chapter III the author examines the specifics of this special liturgical language which he concludes is “distinctively Christian, indeed, biblical.” Following this chapter the virtue of silence in the liturgy, especially the almost silent recitation of the Canon of the Mass is examined. Then we move onto a fruitful examination of St Thomas Aquinas’ theology of the Mass – especially his assertion that the Liturgy has three languages that are proper to it, namely Hebrew, Greek and Latin because these were the languages used on the Title of the Cross. For St Thomas the idea of solemnitas (solemnity) is important and this helps us reflect on the supreme role of the Liturgy as an act or worship. This idea of liturgy as principally an act of cultic worship was one challenged by the Protestant leaders who understood divine worship principally and essentially as the proclamation of the Word of God and in doing this altered the whole approach to Liturgy.

It was for this reason that the Protestants (except in the world of the University) came to reject Latin in the liturgy because the proclamation of the Gospel was not intelligible to most ordinary people. The author shows, however, that this was an oversimplification. The laity of the middle ages were not ignorant of the Bible, especially in Latin countries, where the Latin based languages meant that many of the phrases of the old Latin liturgy would be comprehensible even to uneducated people, allowing them to get the ‘gist’ of many texts. Fr Lang also notes that, “… the stable order of readings for each Sunday and feast day, which was repeated each year, meant that the faithful became more easily familiar with the biblical passages in the course of time.” This reminds us that translation into the vernacular is not necessarily to be equated immediately or directly with understanding.

This last idea is not only useful in helping us begin to understand the role of liturgical Latin specifically and why it must, at least in part be retained, but also in helping us understand what method is best employed when it comes to the thorny problem of translation. Just as we have a special Biblical language for our vernacular Bible translations, so a special Liturgical language is to be employed that gives us an entry into ‘the Lord’s way of speaking.’ If we choose another language from that which our Saviour chose, then we risk misunderstanding the message. Of course we can never fully understand the Mass but if we have an impoverished translation the many treasures that the Liturgy holds for us will be either obscured or even completely lost.

 This book, then, gives us the means to better understand the role and importance of language in worship. It is not just a question of ‘getting it right’ but of producing as best we can, in a language which does not have the moderated gravitas of Liturgical Latin, the ideas and expressions that go back beyond the world of Late Antique Latin to the time of our Lord and back even further into the age of the Old Testament. We may find some of the phrases in the new translation cumbersome and we will always find something in any translation to criticise but at least we should see that an attempt has been made to re-form a liturgical language so that we now have something that begins to be worthy of our worship of the One True and Living God. But let us never forget, as the Church herself never can, the venerable place of Latin in the Liturgy. The Latin Liturgy is (in the words of the Venerable Pius XII), “a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth.”

 

The Voice of the Church at Prayer: Reflections on Liturgy and Language (Paperback, Ignatius Press, 2012) by Fr Michael Lang is on sale in the Oratory Bookshop & Repository for £12.99.