Yesterday (December 11th) was the feast day of St. Damasus. He was Pope from 366 to 384. He was also the Pope who authorized the first official translation of the Scriptures into Latin, and changed the liturgical language of the Church from Greek to Latin. Yes, that is correct. The official language of the Church was Greek for the first 340 years (about 14 generations!) of Church history. No, he did not change it because he received a revelation from God that told him that Latin was inherently superior; he changed it because almost no one spoke Greek any longer and very few people understood it.
The need for a liturgical change was fairly obvious to most. It appears that some had already been translating the liturgies into Latin so that people could understand it (there does not seem to have been any specific prohibition against doing so). Over time, the issue became such a concern, that Pope Damasus decided to enforce it everywhere, and thus Latin (understood by all in the Catholic Church at the time) took over from Greek (for at least the western Church).
There is an important value to having a single language that all Masses are said in. The obvious reason is that everyone knows exactly what to expect when they go to Mass. The common language at the time was Latin, so that was the natural choice for the language of the liturgies that the Church was using. We must note, however, that the "official language" of the Church and the "official liturgical language" of the Church are not exactly the same thing. There did not really need to be an "official language" of the Church since most people already spoke Latin at the time. In fact, the concept of an "official language" did not even arise until many years later when the Church had spread quite far and wide and lesser and lesser people knew Latin.
Whether people realize this or not, it is better to have an official Church language be a "dead" language. A "dead language" (i.e. unspoken as a native language) is unchanging (spoken languages are "flexible") and therefore unites everyone in one original source of communication. When you send out a document with an "official language" then you only need to send out that one document, and everyone can then translate it into their native tongue; if translated properly, then there is no question as to the original meaning. This is especially important when you need to use technical terms in that "official language". Yet, that is not the issue that was at hand in the fourth century when Pope Damasus made Latin the "official liturgical language". He was aiming, back then, at enabling everyone to understand the words of the Mass. The reasons for the use of Latin in the fourth century are unrelated to the issues of our day.
This does not mean, however, that we cannot learn from the choices that St. Damasus made in that time. In fact, having a single language (which all understand) for the Mass would be a much better situation for us today than to have the Mass translated into everyone's common speech. In our current situation (especially when some parishes have a Spanish Mass or a Vietnamese Mass, etc.) you sometimes do not have any idea what language the Mass is going to be said in when you visit another parish. Yet, we do not, today, have a single language that everyone understands. Even English (which is understood worldwide) would not qualify as anything of a universally spoken language. (And most are unaware that the Novus Ordo can be (and should be occasionally) said entirely in Latin!)
So then, how do we resolve this odd situation? Do we have everyone learn Latin so that we can return to having the Mass said only in Latin? That is one option, but it is a seemingly impossible task. I myself do not have the solution, but one needs to be found. Mass said in the vernacular may seem like a resolution to differing languages, but we can see what the fruits of it really are by just looking at the state of the Church today. Whichever way we go with the situation, we must acknowledge that comprehension of the language for the Mass is not a small thing (it was not a small thing to St. Damasus!). Having the Ordinary Form of the Mass in so many different languages is not exactly the same thing that St. Pope Damasus was aiming at.
Yes, he wanted people to understand, but he also wanted uniformity. I do not know all the other languages that the Novus Ordo is translated into, but the English translation is remarkably poor. Aside from the vast number of grammatical and punctuation errors (yes, I am serious), the language is so stilted and vague at times to be almost impossible to understand the point of some of the prayers without diagramming the sentences (and even that is not always helpful). If the goal was understanding the Mass better, the Church failed in this one. Vague language, bad grammar, and poor word choice do not help anyone to understand what is being said.
My purpose here is not to make a pitch for the Divine Worship Mass, but I cannot leave it out. The English is specific, clear, and (usually) more concise than the English of the Ordinary Form. In fact, the only options for the Mass at this time, if we are concerned about precision in the words of the Liturgy, are the Traditional Latin Mass (which is hindered by the fact that most who attend Latin Mass do not know Latin fluently--please do not tell me about how you do not need to know Latin to participate in the Mass; I've heard the arguments already) or the Divine Worship Mass (which is what is used in the Ordinariates).
I do not believe it is an accident that the first liturgy in the Western Church to be without a Latin source is the English liturgy of Divine Worship. Our Lady's Dowry is still active. The English Patrimony is protected by the Holy Spirit. Language is important, and we need to care about what the words are that we offer to God in the Mass. Everything we give to God should be the best possible. Nothing should be "dumbed down" or cheapened. How we pray determines how we live; let us not compromise on this one. St. Damasus pray for us, please!
