ought to have been changed centuries ago; indeed, no serious defence can be made of the use of Latin at all in the Church of Rome.
Ecclesiastical Latin is, of course, easy, still it is a fact that many priests know so little Latin of any kind that many parts of the Mass and Office are quite hieroglyphic to them. I remember a country priest who was invited to bless a churn. He took the book of (Latin) benedictions to the farm, and donned his surplice; not knowing the Latin for a churn (which may be excused) he pitched upon a ‘Benedictio thalami’ as probably referring to a churn, and read the ‘Blessing of a marriage bed’ with the usual solemnity over the churn of cream.[1] Certainly some of the sequences in the Mass and many of the hymns in the Breviary are beyond the capacity of a large number of priests.
And it must be admitted that no familiarity with Latin will enable the priest to attach a meaning to certain portions of the liturgy—especially to some of the psalms. The approved Latin version of the Psalter is a disgraceful performance; yet it has been used for
- ↑ There are blessings for every thing conceivable. In my younger days a woman once asked me to read a prayer over her; I could not divine the particular purpose and she seemed uncommunicative. So I chose one, rather at random; she was safely delivered of twins shortly afterwards. In Belgium I was much tormented for sending a young woman, who came to me with a severe tooth-ache, to a dentist, and an old lady, who had diseased cows, to a veterinary surgeon. I incurred grave suspicions of rationalism from my colleagues.
