The Psalmody of the Choral Ofice.

890
TmP Ϊ’

(

the first note of tire inflection is an unaccented syllable of a
word, the accented syllabic of which is to be sung to the
reciting note.1
Of this class we may take the following examples:—
1

Under the
Rule

in mandatis C - jus
sedes SU per
(piaeSi -

vi

2

4

3

ό

ΞΕΞϊζ
VO - let ni -mis.
(10 - mum Da - vid.
11 -bi.
bo - ua

1

Under the
Exception

ΖΤΖΣΖΒΣΞΖΚΣΙ

laudabi colles SÎC - ut
Uni -

RO - men DO .
a - gni 0 I)0 me- a

mi - ni.
vi - um.
mi - num.

Finally attention may be directed to the case ^of verses
which end in monosyllables or in Hebrew words, lhey will
be found to furnish especially useful exercises in the obser­
vance of the golden rule of Guidetti, Cantabis syllabas sicut
pi'enuntiaveris :—
1

^.s-J5B!!S55-------p

3
2
—a-----

------ ------- ----

rum
ti
et prote ctor
secundum Ol’di - neni
i
in medio til

ante luCife escam dedit

ge - uu nien- ii
0 e
Mel - chi Je
- rn -

4

5

in:__ ^=H
i
to.
bus sc.
rum est.
se - dech.
sa - lem.

I reserve for the December .number of the Record the
explanation of Fr. Ilaberl's method as applied to the remain­
ing Tones.
dl· W. J. W.
1 See the September number of the Recoud, pages 783, 784: and
tiie present number, pages 879, 882, 885, and 887.

891

]

ON .THE CATHOLIC PRINCIPLE OF A LITURGICAL
LANGUAGE.
MONGST the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion of the
. Anglican Establishment agreed upon by the Arch­
bishops and Bishops of both Provinces, and published by
the authority of the King, as Supreme Head of the Church
of England in 1562, we find this statement (Art. xxiv)
It
is a thing plainly repugnant to the word of God, and the
custom of the Primitive Church, to have publick Prayer in
the Church, or to minister the Sacraments in a tongue not
understanded of the people.” This sentence may be fairly
said to formulate the anti-Catholic principle concerning the
use of the vernacular in the official and public prayer of the
Church, There can be little doubt as to the fact that the
carrying into practice of the teaching contained in this ■
principle contributed in a large measure to the ultimate
success of the Protestant Reformation in uprooting the
Catholic faith in this kingdom. The Liturgy in the vernac­
ular has served more effectually perhaps than anything else
in keeping the minds and hearts of the English people
isolated and estranged from the religious ideas and sentiments
of the rest of Christendom, it helped more than anything else
Could have done in building up and fostering that national
Anglican and racial religion which, like the Jewish, is so
essentially opposed to the international and world-wide
character of Catholic Christianity where “ there is neither
Jew nor Greek, bond nor free,” and where “all are one in
Christ,”
Before the twelfth century there docs not appear to have
been any large or notable movement in favour of the intro­
duction of the use of the vernacular into the service of the
Church. Up to that time men seem to have been mindful of
the words of Jesus Christ in the Gospel “ Give not that which
is holy to dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest
perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon
you they tear you.” {Matt. vii., 6.) The minds of the Christian
men and women of those days were trained to a deep and

A

892

On the Catholic, Principle of a Liturgical Language.

filial reverence for holy things by those vestiges of the ancient
“ disciplina arcani,” which has always been preserved in the
practice of the Catholic Church. Brought ιψ in the midst of a
rich and lavish symbolism, which ajipcaled to them throughall
their senses, they had grown accustomed to enshrine that
which was sacred and holy in the depths of their nature,
and when they brought it forth in outward expression, they
strove to do so in a manner commensurate with their deepfelt esteem and reverence. lienee the wealth of gold and
silver and .jewels decking those cosily shrines of mcdiawal
Christendom in which the relics of (Hod’s saints reposed.
Hence too the elaborate and matchless symbolism'of their
architecture causing the very .stones to speak and fill our
minds with holy awe.
lienee the gorgeous richness of
that ritual reminding us in every word and action of the
beauty of holiness, and re-echoing so eloquently the wordsof
the Royal Psalmist, “Domino dilexi decorem domus tuae: et
locum habitationis gloriae tuae;’’ and of those other words,
“Domum tuam decet sanctitudo, Domine, in longitudinem
dierum.” But towards the end of the twelfth century we
can trace the beginnings of that movement which afterwards
broke out with such terrible success in the sixteenth century.
The Waldensian and Albigensian heresies which were the
first to preach the principle of private judgment in the inter­
pretation of the Sacred Scriptures, were likewise the first to
protest against the use of a liturgical language other than
the vernacular, and to celebrate the mysteries of religion in
the vulgar tongue. Moreover they made this principle a
fundamental doctrine of their sects, which together with those
of Wickliffe and Huss were the true precursors of Protestant­
ism from which has sprung the rationalism and naturalism of
our time. It is the same rationalistic spirit that entered into
all these movements, and applied its principles alike to the
faith and practice, the doctrine and discipline of the Catholic
Church.
I
The object of this paper is to draw ont nud sot forth in
|
a short form the Catholic principle concerning the use of a
|
language, other than the vernacular, in the Official and Public
rehgtous services of the Church. The treatment of the

da the Catholic Principle of a LAturgical Language.

893

question 'is taken almost entirely from the work of the late
learned Abbot of Solesmes, Dom Prosper Guéranger, entitled
Intitulions Liturgiques, wherein over one hundred pages are
devoted to its discussion. There is no need here to insist
upon the weight of authority in liturgical matters that
attaches to the name of Dom Guéranger. Let it suffice to
recall the words of Pope Pius IX. (of blessed memory) in an
Apostolic Brief addressed to the Bishop of Poitiers concerniug this illustrious Benedictine monk :
‘' Among the ecclesiastics of our times, who have been most dis­
tinguished for their virtues, learning, zeal, and labours in the advance­
ment of Catholic interests, we must in all justice count our beloved
son, Prosper Guéranger, Abbot of St. Peter’s at Solesmes, and
Superior-General of the Benedictine congregation in France.
*· The principal object to which he turned his whole solicitude and
attention was that the Boman Liturgy should, as by right of recovery,
be restored to France. So well did he labour in this, that to his
writings, perseverance, and extraordinary activity, must be mainly
attributed the adoption of the Rites of the Boman Church by all the
dioceses of France, as he himself witnessed before leaving this life.”

Dom Guéranger begins his treatment of the subject by
citing the ninth cauou of the twenty-second session of the
Council of Trent, which runs thus : “ Si quis dixerit lingua
tantum vulgari Missam celebrari debere anathema sit.” Now
it is quite clear that the principle laid down in the twenty­
fourth Article of the Anglican establishment, concerning
the use of the vernacular in the Church services, excludes
the use of any language but the vernacular, and therefore
falls directly under this anathema of the Council of Trent.
So that the whole discussion resolves itself into this question :
What is the motive, reason, or principle upon which this
authoritative decision of the Church is based ? Here it may
be useful to call to mind the tact that the Catholic Church
bas always regarded the Liturgy not only as a most im­
portant branch of ecclesiastical science, but as the prin­
ciple instrument of ecclesiastical tradition, according to the
famous axiom, “ Legem credendi statuit lex orandi.” That
it has been constantly regarded by the Church as a science
with fixed definite principles is certain. That most learned
Pope Benedict XIV., in a discourse delivered as the inaugural

■

t
I

-.C-'Λ
Ay it' '' >'

",

-

Γ
WS

(«4
■ftr·.-

894

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

address before the Academy of Liturgy founded by him at
Rome, to be found in the eighth volume of the complete
edition of his works, after enumerating five chief branches
of ecclesiastical science, viz , the interpretation ot Sacred
Scripture, mystical, moral, and dogmatic theology, together
with canon law, goes so far as to state (hat the Liturgy as a
science holds a higher place than any of these, and is superior
to all of them. Firstly, because they have all appeared and
grown up in later ages, whilst the Liturgy began with the
Church itself. Secondly, they have at best but a remote,
indirect, and speculative relation to Cod : whilst the Liturgy
is the direct and immediate carrying out in the actual worship
of God of that which they teach. Thirdly, they point out the
way to virtue and good life, whilst the Liturgy brings to us
those solid fruits of religion and piety of which they treat;
and lastly, they generally stop short at the bare knowledge of
the Divine truths, whilst the Liturgy is so bound up and
intimately connected with the Divine truths, that it cannot
be separated from them. But its highest dignify comes from
the fact that its first Author and Master was God himself,
that it has a direct and immediate reference to Him, and that
He has plainly and distinctly delivered to man those acts
of religion such as prayer and sacrifice by which due and
fitting worship is paid to Him.
Dom Guéranger complains of the inadequate treatment
which the subject of the exclusion of the vernacular from the
Liturgy has received at the hands of many Catholic writers
on Ritual of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Ho
tells us that these writers for the most part have lost sight of
those high considerations which give a reason for the discip­
linary Jaws of the Church. He especially mentions such
authors as Le Brun, Dom Martcne, Renaudot, Bocquillot,
and also Papebrock. He contrasts, however, with these the
lofty and solid teaching of Cardinal Bellarmine, and the great
theologians of the sixteenth century, especially mentioning the
famous censure of the Sorbonne on the opinions of Erasmus
concerning the use of the vernacular in Church services
(1526)» The great Cardinal Bona is also brought forward as
an upholder of the true principle upon which the Church’s
practice in this matter is founded.

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

895

la order to obtain a clear idea of the motives of the
Church in the exclusion of the vulgar tongue from the
sendees of the Altar, we must, in the first place, recall
the ancient “ discipline of the secret.”
It is certain
that the Church has modified her practice in this regard,
but it is equally certain that she has never abandoned
the principle upon which it rests. There are no longer any
public penitents to be expelled from the church at the
moment that the Sacrifice of the Mass is about to be offered.
But there is always the same profound depth in the mysteries
of the faith, the same weakness and the same dangers in the
human heart, ever inclined to the things of earth. For us
who accept the institutions of the Church as the work of a
superhuman wisdom, there is no need to apologise or make
-excuse for her intentions in the moans which she lias taken
to. guard the prayers of her Litugry in a sacred language.
That such a sacred language exists is the constant teaching
of the early Fathers and most celebrated Doctors of the
Church, as well in the East as in the West. In the writings
of St. Hilary of Poitiers, who lived in the fourth century, we
find this passage : “His maxime tribus linguis sacramentum
voluntatis Dei, et beati regni expectatio praedicatur : ex quo
illud Pilati fuit, ut in his tribus linguis regem Judaeorum
Dominum Jesum Christum praescriberet” {Prologus in librum
Psalmorum XV.) God has then guided the hand of the
Roman governor in the choice of the languages which should
appear in the inscription as well as in the terms in which
that inscription was couched, and His divine spirit, speaking
to men in the Sacred Scriptures, has been likeAvise pleased to
consecrate those same three languages which the Jewish
people, gathered from the four winds of heaven for the
Paschal feast, read in the title placed over the head of their
Redeemer on the Cross. The dignity of the three languages
which proclaimed on Calvary the Royalty of the Crucified
has not struck only the mystic writers of the Middle Ages.
In modern times Joseph de Maistre has recognised this con­
secration quite as much as the devout Honorius of Au tun,
. and both repeat in their own day the teaching of the great
St. Hilary.

'

ii

-V

,/ζ·?

h »■

A.

*
1}

896
y

âFl-

i
t
i

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

The Hebrew language after the Babylonian captivity
was lost in the Chaldean, which is one of the forms of the
Syriac. The same body of Sacred Scriptures unites the
books of Moses, of Samuel, of David, of Solomon and the
Prophets, and the books of Daniel and Esdras, the first
speaking pure Hebrew, the second giving one part of their
utterances in Sy ro-Chai dam. And when Christ, foretold by
the Prophets, came into the world it was in the language,
then spoken by His people, that is in the Hebrew become
Syro-Chaldaic, that He preached His doct rine.
But already, before tin- fulfilment of the prophetical
utterances, a second language had been sanctified to seine
as an organ of the Holy Spirit, Not only had the Creek
language been raised to the rank of an interpreter of the
Divine Word in the famous Septuagint version of the Scrip­
tures, but the Holy Ghost announcing already the future
outpouring of the grace of the adoption of sons to the
Gentiles, dictated in Greek the book of Wisdom and the
second book of Machabees. Then Christ having appeared
for our redemption and His testament in our favour being
opened by His death, the Holy Spirit the inspirer of the
Scriptures gave to man in the three languages of the title of
the Cross the books of the New Testament. St. Matthew
wrote his gospel in Syriac, the vernacular Hebrew of his
time, as Papias, a disciple of the apostles, St. Irenaeus,
Origen, Eusebius, St. Athanasius, St, Jerome, and St. Augus­
tine testify.
The Greek language had the honour of receiving in its
idiom the gospels of St. Luke and St. John, the Acts, and
the Epistles of the Apostles, except perhaps the Epistle of
St. Paul to the Hebrews which may have been written in
their language. Christianity having been jmeached in
Jerusalem and in the language of Israel, was to spread itself
first of all to that portion of the Gentile world where the
Greek language was used.
But since the Chair of the Prince of the Apostles was
soon to be transferred to the capital of the Lutin tongue it
was fitting that this same Lutin tongue which was the official
language of the whole Boman world, should likewise become

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

*97

the official language of the Church, and as such take pre­
cedence of the Hebrew and the Greek, in the same way that
Home was to take precedence of Jerusalem and Antioch in
the hierarchical order and in the spiritual government of the
whole of Christendom.
Eusebius and St. Jerome both state that St. Mark, win}
composed his gospel at Borne under the eyes of St. Peter,
wrote it in Latin. But if it cannot be quite proved for
certain that any of the books of the New Testament were
originally composed in Latin, it. is certain at least that the
first Christian translation of the Sacred Scriptures was given
to the world in that language, in that most venerable
version called the llala which was written during the lifetime
of tho Apostles themselves, and received the approbation of
St. Peter as head of the Church, according to the testimony
of some of the earliest writers upon Church history. This
version may be said still to exist in the actual Vulgate, which
■ has been declared by the Council of Trent to contain the
pure Word of God for both the Old and New Testaments.
So that from the beginning of Christianity the three
languages inscribed on the Cross became the organ of the
Holy Ghost in proclaiming to the world the written Word
of God.
But besides their use in Sacred Scripture these same
three languages were destined to occupy a place in the
Liturgy of the Church which no others can claim. As
regards all the countries of Europe it is true to say that from
the first introduction of Christianity no other language, save
one of these three, was ever used, with one only exception,
which was Russia, where leave was granted by the Holy
See to SS. Cyril and Methodius to celebrate the Liturgy
in the Slavonic language; but this leave was given at a
period long after the Faith had been preached in the other
nations of Europe. The use of any language rave the Latin
in the Liturgy was unknown in Erance, Spain, Germany,
the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Poland, and the British
Isles from the introduction of Christianity to any of those
countries. With regard to Italy it is most probable that the
Liturgy was celebrated for a short period in Greek, but
VOL. IX.

3 Ij

V

P
♦

v

<S98

On the, Catholic Principle of a .Liturgical Language.

the use of the Latin became universal in that country before
the end of the second century. Latin was the only language
in use throughout the once most famous ami nourishing
Church of Africa, from whence have sprung the greatest of
the Latin Fathers. So that up to fho ninth century the
Liturgy was exclusively celebrated in tlie three languages
of the Cross, and the use of the Slavonic granted during
that epoch is the oidy exception wc (.-an find of a nation
where the Liturgy was celebrated in the vernacular. Thus
we arc forced to the conclusion that if the three sacred
languages were the side depositories of the Sacred Scriptures
during the first period of Christianity, no other language
was admitted to share the same privilege with them
until the Christian religion had been flourishing for
many centuries throughout the greater part of the known
world.
With regard to the concession granted by Pope John VIII.
to SS. Cyril and Methodius for the use of the Slavonic in
the provinces evangelised by them, Bom Gucranger does
not fail to call attention to its fatal result in estranging those
provinces from the union of Latin Christendom and so
facilitating and preparing the way for their ultimate fall
into schism in the twelfth century. Moreover he quotes a
passage from the Annals of Cardinal Baronins which shows
us very plainly the light in which the character of Pope
John VIII. was viewed even by the most devoted children
of the Church. The passage is to be found in the Annals
ad annum 875, No. V. In this passage the illustrious Cardinal
tells us that Pope John VIII. on account of his weakmindedness was called a woman pope “Pa pissa non
Papa,” and that it was his feebleness of character which
afterwards gave rise to the too famous historical myth of
Pope Joan.
As an instance of the way in which the Holy See has,
with the sole exception above referred to, constantly refrained
from authorising the use of the vernacular in the Liturgy it
will be well to recall the attitude it assumed with regard to
the petitions presented by the Jesuit missionaries in China
during the seventeenth century for the use of the Chinese

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

899

language in the services of the Altar. This petition was first
made in 1615 by Father Ricci to Pope l3aul V., who is report ed
to have ordered that a Brief should be drawn up to grant
the request, but Pope Benedict XIV. tells us that this Brief
remained at Rome and was never sent to China. However
this may have been, the superiors of the mission did not judge
it expedient to carry their design into execution at that time.
In .1657 a second petition composed by Father Rougemont
was submitted to the judgment of the Holy See. Λ special
congregation composed of cardinals, prelates, and distin­
guished theologians, was formed to examine the demand of
the missionaries, and in spite of the grave reasons that were
brought forward by them for the use of the Chinese language
the Holy See refused to grant their request. Λ third petition
was made for the concession in 1678 to Pope Innocent XL,
and with a like result. The last effort in this direction of
the Jesuit missionaries in China was made in 1697 when
they laid a memorial before Pope Innocent XII., but the
concession was never granted.
The community, then, of a liturgical language which has
triumphed over national and racial separation has been the
chief exterior means of union of the Christian peoples. By
its means the idea of a centre of union and of a common
origin has penetrated into their minds and hearts, breaking
down the natural frontiers that divide the dwelling-place of
men, so that the Christian finds himself at home in the most
distant land and amongst a people whose manners and tradi­
tions may be most unlike his own. This reason alone would
be sufficient to prove the wisdom, of the Church in confining
herself as far as possible to those three sacred languages
which represent by their wide extent the chosen portion of
the human race.
But it. still remains to be shown that the Church has con­
stantly attached an intrinsic value to these languages as
having been made sacred and set apart for the Divine
Service.
The objection that is commonly brought against their
being looked upon as more sacred than any other languages
is the fact that they were once the common speech of the

4

4

, -4 .

V;‘A

i

’ ’ "-Ία

r

w

ο

I

À·
VJ

S

H
‘æ

900

On the Catholic Prineq ile ot a JÂturtfical ^Language.

respective peoples to which they belonged. But the same
objection would hold good against almost everything that is
looked upon as sacred in the world. From the beginning of
history amongst all the peoples of the earth certain actions
and particular things have been regarded as sacred, and set
apart from common use. For instance, where is the nation of
antiquity that had not its sacred vestments or sacrificial garl)
for its priests? Or when was there a time in which there did
not exist certain sacred ceremonies? Indeed, if we were to
push this objection to its extreme logical conclusion, we
should have to cease to look upon (he Cross itself as sacred
because it was once the common instrument of execution
for ordinary malefactors who were punished with death.
But in reality it is impossible for man, constituted as
he is, to rid himself entirely of the notion of sacred
things and of the distinction of sacred and profane,
because it has its root in his nature, which is surrouuded
on all sides with that which is mysterious, and which
he is unable to penetrate or understand wih his limited
intelligence. Therefore it is that the notion of sacred
things is universal. The teaching of God to mon has been
from, the beginning through the means of mysteries. The
prophets of the Old Testament, guided by the inspiration of
the (Spirit of God, clothed the divine oracles in enigmatical
and oftentimes very obscure language, and when the Word
Incarnate was seen on earth, and conversed with men, lie
conveyed to them His chief teaching in parables, and the
whole Bible is so full of figurative allusions as to necessitate
its always remaining a book of mystery, and the most pro­
found knowledge of the Holy Scriptures can never rcmovo
the necessity for the exercise of faith. In the twilight of
this present life, the human intelligence must always bow
down before and worship mysteries, and can never make
them submit to the searchings of human thought. If this,
then, be true of the Sacred Scriptures, which simply announce
the mysteries of salvation to men, surely it ought to be at
least equally true of the Liturgy, through means of which
the, fruit of those mysteries is applied to oui’ lives. Dom
Guéranger quotes a passage from the writings of Origen

Μ»,

pin the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

901

which bears directly upon the principle now under consider­
ation :—
4.

There are things, seemingly obscure, which nevertheless, by the
very fact of their appealing to our sense of hearing, carry with them
great profit to our soul. If the Gentiles believed that certain verses
of poetry, which they called charms,· that certain names, not under­
stood even by those who invoked them, were able to draw forth ser­
pents from their caves or put them to sleep ; if it can be said that
such words as these were able to disperse fevers and to cure diseases
of the human body ; that they could even sometimes send the soul
into a kind of ecstacy, how much more ought we not to believe that
the words of Holy Scripture should be far more powerful in their
effects.” (Origen’s Iu Librum J esu Save. limn, xx.)

*

St. Basil, in his book on the Holy Ghost, sets before
us the same principle. In chapter xxvii. we find these
words :
“ Moses, in his wisdom, knew that things which were made
common and familiar were by that very fact liable to contempt, and
that those which are rare and scarce, and somewhat withdrawn from
the common gaze, excite naturally a certain admiration and laudable
curiosity. Following his example, the Apostles and the Fathers
have established from the beginning certain rites in the Church, and
have thus guarded the dignity of the mysteries by the discipline of
silence and the secret ; for that is no longer a mystery which is
offered without reserve to the ears of the multitude.”

This passage from St. Basil might almost be taken for a
commentary on the words of Our Lord to His Apostles,
“ To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of
God, but to the rest in parables, that seeing they may not
see, and hearing they may not understand.”
There is another passage in the writings of Origen
in which the same thought is still further unfolded. It
is in his fifth homily on the J)ook of Numbers, and runs
thus:—
“ When the time had come for the children of Israel io move
their camp, the tabernacle was taken down. Aaron and the priests,
his sons, entering into the Holy of Holies, covered each object with
the veil belonging to it, and, leaving them thus veiled in the place
Where they stood, they brought in the sons of Caath, who were set
apart for this ministry, and placed upon their shoulders that which
had been already veiled by the hands of the priests. If you under­

;

j'<5
*

t
?

<■ >

902

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language,

stand the historical meaning, strive to rise to the splendour of the
mystery it signifies : and if the eye of your soul be pure, contem­
plate the light of the spiritual law that shines from it. 1.et him
know to whom the mysteries are entrusted ■. thut it is not good to
unfold them before those who are not lit 1<> sm* them unveiled; but
that he ought to veil them, and, thus veiled. to place them on the
shoulders of those who have not the capaeitv of appreciating them,
and whoso duty is simply to receive them. Therefore. it is that
there tire many things in the observances of the Church which it is
proper to do, but the reason of which is not manifested to all. These
covered and veiled rites wo bear upon our shoulder-, having received
them from the Supreme Pout iff and his prie,sts. 1Λ»γ as they remain
hidden, except we have in our midst. Aaron or the Sons of Aaron, to
whom alone it is given to contemplate them openly and unveiled.'’
(Origen’s Zn Num, Horn, v.)

SS

s

9’11080 fow extracts from the writings of .some, of the
early Fathers will suffice to show how the principle of a
language “ not uuderstanded of the people,” in the services
of the altar, was recognised during the first ages of Christ­
ianity. As a proof of the constant existence of the same
principle in the subseqent history of the Church, we have
the explicit testimony and most weighty evidence of Pope
St. Gregory VII. (Hildebrand), in th© eleventh century; of
the Faculty of the Sorbonne, in the sixteenth: and that
of the Papal Constitution, Unigenitus, in the seventeenth
century.
Vratislaus, Duke of Bohemia, had petitioned Pope St.
Gregory VII. for the extension to his dominions of the dis­
pensation granted by John VIII. for Moravia, on the ground
that his subjects belonged to the Slavonic race. St. Gregory,
in refusing’ to grant the request, sets before the Duke
very clearly the Catholic principle of a liturgical language.
Here are his words, in a letter written to Vratislaus
in 1080

y

&

λ
tty

£

“As regards your request of obtaining our consent to the celebra­
tion of the Divine Office in the Slavonic language, be it known to
you that we can in no way accede to your wishes. For those who
have seriously reflected upon this question, it is evident that it is not
without reason that it has pleased Almighty God to allow the Holy
Scriptures to remain hidden in certain places, from the fear lest if they
were made accessible to the eyes of all, they might be exposed to that
kind of familiarity which breeds contempt, or being badly understood

■ί»Η

. On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

’

•ί

903

by shallow minds, they should become to them an occasion of error.
It is no excuse to say that certain religious men (SS. Cyril and
Methodius) have condescended to the wishes of a people full of
simplicity, or that they have not judged it fitting to apply the remedy
for if, for in primitive times the Church herself has suffered many
things to be done which the holy Fathers, after mature consideration.
have abrogated or corrected when Christianity had taken firm root
and religion had increased. It is for this reason, that by the authority
of the Messed Peter, We forbid that to bo done which you, with im­
prudence, have asked for : and for the honour of Almighty God, We
command you to oppose yourself with all your power to this vain
temerity/’—(Tabb. (Jone. Tom. x., p. 2B1.)

The testimony of the faculty of the Sorbonne in
sixteenth century is of immense value as representing th.»
mind of Catholic Christendom on one of the chief points then
being attacked by the innovators and heretics of the time.
It is contained in the famous censure on the writings of
„ Erasmus, put forth in the year 1.526. Erasmus, in his pre­
face to the Gospel of St. Matthew, had expressed himself
thus: “It is unbecoming and ridiculous to see uneducated
people and women repeating like parrots the words of
psalms and prayers which they do not understand.”
The
Faculty of the Sorbonne condemned this proposition in tho
following terms :—
“This proposition, which is calculated to prevent the simple and
uneducated and women from joining in the Vocal Prayers prescribed
by the rites and custom of the Church, as if this Prayer ceased to
bo of use to them because they did not understand it, is impious,
erroneous, and open to the reproach of tho Bohemians, who have
wished to celebrate the Ecclesiastical Office in the vulgar tongue.
Otherwise it would have to be confessed that under the Old Law it
was unbecoming and ridiculous for the simple folk to observe the
ceremonies of the Law which God had established because these
people could not understand tho text that prescribed them, an opinion
which would be blasphemy against the Law and against God who
gave it, and what is more-—heretical. In effect the intention of the
Church in her prayers is not only to instruct us by the collocation of
words, but principally io bring it about that we, conforming our­
selves to her end and object as her members, should declare the
praises of God, render to Him the thanksgivings which are due to
Him, and implore the necessary graces for ourselves. God, seeing
this intention in those who recite these prayers, deigns to inflame
their wills, to enlighten their minds, to strengthen their human weak­
nesses, and to dispense to them the it nits of Elis grace and of His

si?

«!

4.

A

V
t <♦-

i

*»

*

'V

i

904

1

On the Catholic Principle of a LAturgica.l Language.

olory. This is also the intention of those who recite these prayers
without understanding the meaning of the words. '1 hey resemble an
ambassador who is ignorant of the words of the dispatches with which
he has been entrusted by his sovereign to Lear to a foreign court, but
which nevertheless he delivers according to the ordersJw has received,
and so fulfils his office both to his sovereign and io him to whom he
Jias J/een sent. Besides, a great many passages from the Prophets
arc chanted in tlie Church, which, although they may not be under­
stood by the greater part of those who sing them, are nevertheless
useful and profitable to those who chant them, because in chanting
them a duty is discharged to Cod wlio lias revealed them. λ\ lienee
it follows that the practice of prayer doos not consist only in the
understanding of the words, and that it is a dangerous error to suppose
that vocal prayei· lias no other end (han the understanding of the
Faith, since this kind of prayer is intended chiefly Io in/lmue the
affections of the will, to the end (hat the soul in raising itself to God
by piety and devotion in lhe manner aforesaid, might bear in mind
that its efforts are not in vain, but that it obtains that which its
intention demands, and its intelligence merits, the light and the other
graces which are necessary for it.
“Now, all these effects are far richer and more precious than the
simple understanding of the words, which brings with it but a slight
profit when the love of God is not excited within them. Even when
the psalms are translated into the vulgar tongue, it is by no means
certain that the ignorant and simple people understand them with any
more real appreciation than when left in the Latin.”—(D’Argentre,
Collectio Judiciorum, Tom. ii. f. 61.)

The seventeenth century offers its testimony in the
Papal Constitution Unigenitus, which condemned the errors
of the Jansenist heresy. In that document, which bears
altogether upon things which are of faith and errors
against the faith, we find the following condemned proposi­
tion, taken from the writings of Qnesnel :—
“ To take away from the simple people the consolation of joining
their voices to the voice of the whole Church, is a practice contrary
to the Apostolic custom and the intention of God.”—(Prop. 86.)

Now, a greater testimony than this in favour of the
principle of a Liturgical language we could not have, for it
condemns the contrary principle, not merely as dangerous or
rash and temerarious, but as heretical, and this with all the
authority that attaches to a Pontifical Constitution condemn­
ing errrors against Catholic teaching,

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

905

This error of the Jansenist heretics had been anticipated
a century before by the Council of Trent, for we read in the
Acts of the Council (Sees. xxii. cap. viii.) :—
I

“ Although the Mass contains a vast store of instruction for the
faithful, still it has not seemed fitting to the Fathers that it should
be celebrated in the vulgar tongue. Therefore, each church shall
retain its ancient rites which are approved by the Holy Roman
Church, the mother and mistress of all the churches, but to the end
that the sheep of Christ should not suffer from hunger, and that the
little children should not ask for bread and find no one to break it for
them, this Holy Council orders pastors and all those who have care
of souls, to explain often during the celebration of Mass, cither them. selves or through the ministry of others, some portion of those things
which are read in the Mass, iand' amongst other things to explain
some details of the mysteries of this most Holy Sacrifice, especially
on Sundays and Festivals.”

It is not then without the greatest reasons that Oom
Gucranger speaks of the existence of an anti-liturgical
heresy which he has traced from the time of St. Jerome,
when its principles were represented by the heretic Vigilantius,
down to our own day when its principles are supported by
all the heretical sects that have been the principal offspring
of Protestantism. Efforts in the same direction as those of
the Jansenists in the seventeenth century were made in the
reign of Joseph II. in Austria, in the eighteenth century, and
it was the strange zeal of that emperor for ecclesiastical
innovation that caused Frederick to speak of him as “my
brother the Sacristan.”
But perhaps tho wildest outburst during the eighteenth
century of this dangerous error, condemned so often by the
Church, is to be studied in the abortive schismatical Synod
of Pistoja, held under the protection of the Grand Duke of
Tuscany, and presided over by Scipio Ricci, Bishop of Pistoja
and Prato, in which it was determined amongst other innova­
tions contrary to the practices of the Church, to celebrate the
Liturgy in the vulgar tongue, and to read all the prayers of
the Mass in a loud voice, suppressing entirely this particular
application of the discipline of the Secret which has come
down to us from the earliest times, and the principle of which
is so manifestly maintained in the prayers and ceremonies of

J'

5
f.

* ‘\'X
f, ;
t,'

..λ*

is

906

On the Catholic Principle oj a TAturgical Language,

the Holy Sacrifice. It is needless to add that the doing
of this synod were condemned by Pope Idins Vi., in the Hu
Auctorem Fidei published in 1791. Ricci, after considerabL
deday and hesitancy finally retracted his errors, and died n
communion with the Church.
In 1797 there was held m Notre Dame, atParis,thatstraiig'e
assembly composed of twenty-nine bishops of the so-called
“ Constitutional Church of France.” Some of its decrees
are very similar in character to those of the conciliabuhnn
held at Pistoja in 1786. One result ot its labours was the
publication of a llitual in French, and the expression of
a wish that tho national language should be used in the ser­
vices of the Church. However, after a short session, the
meeting broke up in disorder, and the Constitutional Church
of Franco was too short-lived and too weak to be able to
carry its designs into execution, although we read that a
certain priest, named Duplan, Cure of Gentilly, near Paris,
distinguished himself by having Vespers sung in French in his
church, at which one of the Constitutional bishops assisted.
Dorn Guéranger takes notice of a custom that has prevailed
for a long time in many parts of Germany, which consists in
the singing of the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, and other
parts of the Mass by the people in the Gorman language, and
which he censures as a custom quite contrary to the spirit of
the Church, adding “ that a practice further removed from
the intention of the Universal Church could not be imagined.’’
Ife recalls to our minds the words of the Decree of Cardinal
Otho, Bishop of Augsburg, in 1548 :
,c The Latin language, which, as a divine instrument, was dedi­
cated to sacred usages upon the altar of the Cross itself, and to
which the Western Church is indebted for the Christian religion,
shall be preserved in the administration of the Sacraments, and in the
oi-her offices of the Church, throughout the whole of our diocese, and
■Shall be re-established in those places where it may have fallen into
disuse.
17

It was at the beginning of this century, in 1802, that the
last effort m the direction of a national Liturgy was made
m France by order of those “articles organiques” which were
drawn up to serve as a limitation to the powers granted to

On the Catholic Principle of a TAturgical .Language.

907

the Holy See by the Concordat, and which became the law
of the land upon the 5 th July of that year. A commission
was then formed to draw up and appoint the new liturgical
books of the Church of France : but the result of its labours
was never made known, and it failed utterly to produce any
real effect in the practice and discipline of the Church in
France.
Thus we are able to look back through the records of
more than fifteen centuries, and to recognise in each the
same principle regarding the use of a liturgical language in
the service of the Church. We can see how this principle
has been maintained in the face of heretics and innovators
by the repeated decisions of the Holy See, and how it has
even been proclaimed by the canons of an (Ecumenical
Council.
From all. this it is evident that the reasons on which this
principle is based must lie very deeply imbedded in the foun­
dations of Catholic Christianity. And in truth a liturgical
language is one of those visible signs of that “ Sacrament of
Unity” which is shown to the world in the Catholic Church.
It is one of tho chief means for securing that universality
of discipline and practice which is a constituent part of the
Church’s catholicity. It is the bond that connects together
and unites in one common prayer, not the people of one
nation, but all the nations of the earth, in the unity of truth.
Jt is the chain of Peter thrown around the earth, and keep­
ing it firmly bound to the centre of unity established by
.Jesus Christ in the Roman See. It constitutes one of tho
chief reasons why tho Liturgy of the Church has always
been regarded by Catholic theologians as the first instrument
. of ecclesiastical tradition. It is, moreover, perhaps, the chief
exterior means for the conservation of Catholic dogma in all
its integrity, and it was this that gave rise to that worldfamous axiom first formulated by Pope St. Celestine I.,
“ Legem credendi statuit lex orandi.” It is the one means,
too, by which, in the Catholic sense of the word, popular
religious services arc possible, for by it there is offered to all
the peoples of the earth a common channel for the united
expression of their faith and of their prayer. But a yet more

4·

O·

1

1’
* iv
'I

u ? ·■.
. v-r.’C
.. *

(G
'

-**l
908

On the Catholic Principle of o Liturgical Language,

weighty argument, if possible, in favour of the use of a
liturgical language can be gathered front the fact that it
has served in a wonderfully efiicaeious nmimer in guarding
and fostering that Catholic instinct (il‘rrvu'encc which has
been so well styled by Goethe, “ The soul of all religion that
ever has been among men, or ever will be.”
In concluding· his treatment of the subject of the use of
a liturgical language, Doni Guërauger laments the frequent
substitution in France of so-called “ canihpms’' in the French
language for the Latin hymns of the Church in certain occa­
e commonly held
sional devotional services—such as
speeially alludes:
during the month of May, to which
and he asks how much better would it not be on these occa­
sions to make use of such woli-kuotvu and venerable hymns
as the Ave Maris Stella, the Inviolata, the Jlegina Cu-li, or the
Magnificat, than to join in singing those couplets of such
inferior merit, the melodies of which arc too often sug­
gestive of the concert hall, and which only servo to
attract, to our churches a crowd of “ liases amateurs,” /
who come periodically only to satisfy their eyes and tlieir
ears.
“ Dignity,” he writes, “ in all that concerns the .Divine service is a
necessity with which nothing can ever dispense, and the Church has
placed the secret of this dignity in the liturgical language and in the
severe melodics of the Gregorian chants. Is there not a real danger
of exposing the faithful to the loss of all taste for the Latin tongue
in the Church service if they are allowed to become unaccustomed
to the sound of those masculine chants which were one of the prin­
cipal sources of the simple and robust faith of our forefathers ? For
us, far from resigning ourselves to see the liturgical language share
a divided allegiance with the vernacular in our churches, we desire
very soon to see the knowledge of Latin spread itself beyond the
limits within which it has been confined by modern custom. If
Fenelon said, a hundred and lift y years ago, in speaking of the
education of girls, that ‘ the study of Latin would be much more
reasonable for them than that of Italian and Spanish, because it is
the language of the Church, and there is an inestimable fruit and
consolation in understanding the sense of the words of the Divine
Olhce, at which one assists so often/ it would seem that in this age,
when the education of children has been so fully developed, the
moment had come to enlarge the circle in this direction. Piety
would gain by it, and the knowledge of religion, so necessary to the

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language,

909

*

*

*·

\

mothers of families, would assume a degree of authority and of
gravity, the happy influences of which we would not be slow to recog­
nise.

i
May it not be allowed to English-speaking Catholics to
) unite in the lament and in the desire of the learned Abbot of
I Solesmes, in his lament upon the too frequent substitution of
I services in the vernacular, for the liturgical .services of the
Church, especially on the afternoons and in the evenings of
Sundays and holidays of obligation, more particularly in
those churches where a liturgical service is feasible, and
where nevertheless the preference is given to private forms
of devotion, and in his desire of seeing a more widespread
knowledge of the Latin language amongst the faithful, in
order that they may more easily unite their minds and hearts as
well as their voices, not in the mother tongue of one nation
butin the universal mother tongue of Catholic Christendom?
That so there may ever grow up and increase in our midst
that appreciation and love for the prayer of the Church which
St. Ignatius of Loyola has laid down in his Book of Spiritual
Exercises as one of the signs of a mind in harmony with the
spirit of the Catholic Church. 'These are his words: “To
esteem the ecclesiastical chant, as also the psalms, and long
prayers that arc accustomed to be recited either within or
outside churches ; also to think well of the times appointed
for the Hours of the Divine Office, and every prayer what­
soever’ of the Canonical Hours.” (Regulae aliquot servandae
ut eum Orthodoxa Ecclesia sentiamus). Perhaps no better
words can be placed as a seal to this paper than those of
the late Cardinal Wiseman, to be found in his charming essay
on “Prayer and Prayer Books/’ contributed to the Dublin
lleview in 1842 :—
“ There can be no doubt that while the ancient Christians had
tlieir thoughts constantly turned towards God, in private prayer, the
Church took care to prov ide for all the regular and necessary dis­
charge of this duty by her public oilices. These were not meant to
be holiday services, or mere clerical duties; but the ordinary, daily,
and sufficient discharge of an obligation belonging to every state and
class in the Church. It never was understood that besides the public
offices there should be certain long, family or private prayers, as
necessary to discharge the duties of morning and evening spiritual

i*

*

*

I

■> '
*·Λ·

A

F *
*

k

910

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Lauguuge.

.sacrifice. For all that was right <m this score she took care to pro­
vide, and where she has done this we maybe sure of its being done
beyond hope of rivalry. Unfurl iinately, t)io.-e. cilices have, for the
most part, been reduced to a duty discharged by (he clergy in private,
and have thus come to be considered by us as a purely ecclesiastical
obligation superadded to, not comprehending, the discharge of ordi­
nary Christian duty. One is apt to forget that Prime is tin; Churehh
morning prayer, and Complin her evening devotions. Yet so the two
manifestly are. But wdmt greatly helps to make us ovcilook this
fact is that we have been accustomed to consider morning and even­
ing prayers as necessarily of a specific form, composed of certain
definite acts of devotion, ai ranged in formal order; and have lost
sight of that model which characterizes all the oilier,s of the Church :
and which is and must be far the most perfect. . . ■ There is a
fragrance, a true incense, in thore ancient prayers, w hich seems to
rise from the lips, and to wind upwards in soft balm}· clouds, upon
which angels may recline, and thence look down upon us, as we utter
them. They seem worthy to be caught- up in a higher sphere, and
to be heaped upon the altar above at which an angel ministers. In
them wre look in vain for that formal arrangement, that systematic
distribution of parts wdiich distinguishes our modern players. We
never have petitions regularly labelled and cut to measure, and yet
nothing can wre want that is not there asked for. What seems at
first sight almost disorder, is found, on examination, to be a most
pleasing variety, produced by a most artless, yet mod refined,
arrangement. They lack the symmetry of the parterre ; there seems
to have been no line and compass used in laying them out ; tin
flowers are not ; laced according to a rigid classification ; but they
have the grandeur, and the boldness, and withal the freshness of a
landscape; their very irregularities give them beauties, their sudden
transitions effect ; and their colours are blended in a luxurious rich­
ness with which no modern art can vie. They partake of all the
solemnity and all the stateliness of the places in which they were
first recited. They retain the echoes of the gloomy catacomb, they
still resound w’ith the jubilee of gilded basilicas, they keep (he
harmonious reverberations of lofty groined vaults. The Church’s
sorrow's and her joys, martyrs’ oblation, and confessors’ thanksgiving,
anchorites’ sighs, and virgins’ breathing of love—all arc registered
there. He that would muse over a skull hath his Dies Irac : she
that would stand at the foot of the Holy Rood, her Stabat Mater :
and they that would adore in concert before the altar, their f.amla
Sitm. Nor had the Church at any time lost lier pow'cr of prayer, her
mastery over the harp of David : but silent and unstrung as it may
for a long space appear, she hath only to attune it when she lists,
and strike it, and it brings forth the same sweet, soothing notes as at
the beginning. Every new service or prayer wdiich she has added to
the Pontifical or Bitual dissolves into the mass of more ancient com­
positions, so as to be undistinguishable, and blends with them, as

!
j

\

f

1

!
[
[
ί

On the Catholic Principle of a Liturgical Language.

911

a new ingredient in 4 the sweet confections of the apothecary ’

(Eccles, xxxviii., 7) equal to the rest in savour as in virtue . . .
In the Church offices everything is prayed for that ought to enter into
the exercises for which they arc intended ; but they being composed of
‘psalms, hymns, and spiritual canticles,’ most beautifully selected, the
various petitions run blended through the entire offices, according as
the various portions of the chosen parts express them. This prevents
weariness; it is like a variety of modulations in music, full of passages
through various keys, with occasional apparent and momentary dis­
sonances that only give zest to surrounding harmonies. On the other
i side, our modern devotions have each petition, and each act of virtue,
, accurately distinct; no room is left for a varied play of feeling; there
are no contrasts, no light and shade. The former is the language of
nature, the latter that of art.”

■ Then after a brief analysis of the offices of Prime and
Complin as the morning and evening prayer of the Church,
the Cardinal asks :
“Why should not this use be restored? Why should they not
become the standard devotions of all Catholics, whether alone or in
their families ? Why may we not hope to have them more solemnly
performed, chanted even, every day in all religious communities; or
where there is a sufficient number of persons, even in family chapels ?
Thus would be more truly exemplified that resemblance to the Church
in the Christian family, which St. Paul intimates when he speaks of
• the Church that was in the house of an individual. (Colost. iv., 15).
Surely, if in other respects the resemblance will hold, it should
not be despised in this, that the family united in prayer, should speak
the very language of the Church ■ should observe the forms of devo­
tion which she has herself drawn up and approved ; and, as in good
discipline, in spiritual affection, in communion of good works, in
mutual encouragement to virtue, so likewise in the regularity and in
the order of prayer, assimilate itself to those religious communities
which, in every part of the Christian world, praise God in her
name, and under her especial sanction. We strongly suspect that
many who will join the Church will hail with joy every such return,
however imperfect, to the discipline and practice of the ancient
Church; they will warm to us the more in proportion to our zeal for
the restoration of its discipline.’’

W. II. KlRWAN.