Works and Prayers of a Fils Prodigue

(English paper for ENGL 3310 — not my best, but not my worst either)

Vatican II and the Nova Latina Populi

The Catholic Church is seldom seen as democratic – and rightfully so. The Church has never been a republic, nor has it sought to represent the vox populi as much as the vox Dei. But this fundamental hierarchy was greatly affected by the extreme reaction of the American Catholic Church to the decrees of the Vatican II Council (1962-1965). The Council sought to reflect more deeply upon the Catholic Church’s place in the modern world and its relation to the various sects of Protestantism. Ultimately, its decisions profoundly altered the usage of vernacular English in place of Latin or Anglicanized Latin the American Church bringing to light the ancient tension between dominant and local language.

Without being unfair, the Catholic Church can be classified as a dominant institution. It could be classified as the “oldest significant organization in western civilization” without exaggeration (Cheney 35). Thus, when the Catholic Church enters a territory – even if it is previously occupied by other religious groups – it brings with it a language and a culture. There is an extensive history of Latin influence upon English, extending back to St. Patrick and continuing through the Norman Invasion. In this respect, the Catholic Church bears a resemblance to most imperial powers, who occupy an area and then strive for political (and cultural) incorporation. With the Catholic Church’s emphasis on hierarchy and its use of a foreign language, one could expect no less than an eventual nationalist reaction –this is precisely what occurred in the 1960s and 70s.

The Vatican II Council, opened by John XXIII in 1962 and closed by Paul VI in 1965, “[opened] the windows of the Church” to the modern world. This Council was undoubtedly the most important event in the history of the U.S. Catholic Church (Bianchi 31). The Council had a direct, intentional effect not only upon the Church’s relationship to the modern world, but to the rest of Christendom as well. The aggiornamento ( “bringing up to date”) of the Council through its efforts at ecumenism and greater analysis of the Church’s place in the world shifted its emphasis from exclusivity to inclusivity and from dominance to service (Cheney 42, 86). What had once been a secluded and monarchical institution had now signaled the “transfer of power from the papal monarchy to the Church as a whole” (Cheney 34). An unprecedented era of openness and dialog had begun and had brought about some of the greatest changes the Church had seen in centuries.

Not the least of these changes was a linguistic evolution. Tension is common between a dominant language and the language of the people. As the native Englishmen of the 13^th century began to see Norman French as a “foreign tongue,” the American lay catholics also began to act as though Latin were an antiquated and foreign language (Champneys 166-7, Moorman 92). Prior to Vatican II reforms, all masses were said exclusively in Latin (except for the homily). However, with the approval given to the local bishops (the supreme heads over the Catholic diocese) by the Council to make use of the vernacular language in the mass, a “linguistic vacuum” was soon created in the American Catholic Church (Stern 1). The reaction to this “vacuum” was a characteristic uprising of the local people against a seemingly foreign language in favor of their own language. Henry Stern writes that, after this reaction, “Latin and Anglicanized Latin no longer distinguish Catholic Worship” (2). Rather than an entirely Latin mass, local English had become the primary language.

Nevertheless, it was not only the language of the mass that had altered – the entire catholic register was changed. The names of the Sacraments and the offices and all manners of jargon had altered. The Sacrament of Penance became the Sacrament of Reconciliation, while Extreme Unction became the Anointing of the Sick. Another host of terms flooded the Catholic register, such as teaching ministry, social ministry, Minister of music, youth and campus ministry/youth pastor, minister of the Eucharist, renewal, Christian Fellowship, which were primarily used by young, middle-class professionals. However, traditional Latin terms such as ember days, ferial days, angelus, benediction, litany, monstrance, alb, novena, octave, votive mass, Tantum Ergo, introit, gradual, collects, monsignor, and curate had become either extinct or relegated to the most traditional or elderly of the parish (Stern 2-3, 6).

Moreover, the over-elaborate jargon reflected a deeper theological and cultural shift in the Church. The changes in the Church’s language signaled an increased individualism, lay authority, and even homogeneity (Stern 5-6). In essence, the American Church began to reflect American values through its usage of a distinctly American terminology. For example, the Church began to utilize the lingo of its Protestant neighbors – especially Evangelical sects, which are deep-rooted in the American religious consciousness (Bianchi 31). And, as an even greater reflection of American democracy, the parishioners themselves began to have a greater influence on their language (Stern 5). The parishioners began referring to themselves as “Christians,” rather than simply “Catholics” (Stern 4). Far from being the seemingly alien institution that the Church was in the early 20^th century, the Church began to reflect its surrounding culture to an increasing degree through its language.

Still, many orthodox catholics remain disappointed with the period immediately post –Vatican II. After all, it is undeniable that the Church has been irrevocably altered in the United States. Still, this alteration should not be construed as entirely negative. On the contrary, the linguistic uprising in the American Catholic Church has brought about a greater awareness of local culture and language (Cheney 36). For example, John Paul II himself celebrated a mass in Los Angelos in over 30 languages, highlighting the importance of culture and language to a particular people (Cateura 225). One might even been tempted to attribute the Church’s new-found ecumenism to its outstanding growth by the year 1986, which marked it as the fastest growing Christian group in the United States (Hoge 290).

Nevertheless, others exclaim that the wave of new language and newer theology has made the Church “a helluva lot worse than it was,” citing lower attendance to the sacraments and more “cafeteria catholics” (Cateura 65, Cheney 39). Archbishop Roger Mahoney complains that the language of the Church remains too exclusive. Still more lament the lack of Spanish usage in the U.S. Catholic Church (Cateura 221). Although the Catholic Church in the United States has altered greatly its own terminology in response to the laity, it evidently has yet to adequately accommodate the large influx of new cultures and languages.

As the post-Vatican II changes illustrates, in all societies and in all institutions which function by hierarchy there remains a tension between the language of the powerful and the language of the people. The Church, as a living institution, continues to swing to and fro in response to the usages and jargons of the people and clergy – sometimes the tension is resolved; other times, it remains. In my own experience, there has been a greater acknowledgement of Latin terms and prayers in recent years which indicates a new direction in the language of the Church(perhaps in response to Benedict XVI’s Motu Propio allowing for the regular usage of the “extraordinary [Latin] form”). Nevertheless, as Fr. Virgilio Elizondo said, “in religion, language is crucial” (Cateura 221). The relationship between English and Latin, ancient as it is, will continue to evolve and affect not only the parishioners’ language, but their relation to and impact upon the American society.

WORKS CITED

Bianchi, Eugene C.. “John XXIII, Vatican II, and American Catholicism.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 387

Cateura, Linda Brandi. Catholics USA. New York: William Morrow & Co. Inc., 1989.

Cheney, George. Rhetoric in an Organizational Society. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1991.

Hoge, R.. “Interpreting Change in American Catholicism: The River and the Floodgate.” Review of Religious Research 27(1986): 289-299.

Stern, Henry R.. “The Changing Language of American Catholicism.” American Speech 54(1979)