Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book VI: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (Second)
Chapter 11: On the Kind of Language
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. IV, De Sacramento Eucharistiae, Book VI: On the Sacrifice of the Mass (Second Book). The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
There follows the controversy on the kind of language, namely whether it is necessary that the Mass be recited in the vulgar tongue: for this the adversaries contend, and especially Kemnitz in the second part of the Examination, page 883 and following. But this question we have for the greatest part treated, partly in Book 2 on the word of God, at the end, partly in Book 2 on the Sacraments in general, at the end. For three things pertain to the Mass. First, the reading of the Scriptures and public prayer. Secondly, the consecration and dispensation of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Thirdly, the oblation of the sacrifice. Of the reading and prayer we disputed in the book on the word of God, in the cited place: of the consecration and dispensation of the Sacrament it was treated in the books on the Sacraments in general, as we have already said: therefore there only remains the disputation on the oblation of the sacrifice itself.
But that is most easy. For first the oblation of the sacrifice consists more in the thing than in words. For, as we said above, that action by which the body of the Lord is placed upon the altar for the honor of God is a true and real oblation, even if it be not said in words, "I offer" or "we offer." Further, that action indeed requires some words necessarily, namely the words of consecration: but those words are not directed to instruct the hearers, but to consecrate the element, as is known. But the element understands no language; wherefore it is impertinent to the real oblation whether the Mass be said in the vulgar or the non-vulgar tongue.
Secondly, although the oblation itself necessarily had to be expressed in words, as it is now in fact expressed in the Mass, yet still it would be impertinent in what tongue this were done; since the words of the oblation are directed to God, not to the people; but God understands all tongues.
Thirdly, the words of the oblation are to be pronounced in a low voice, as we shall demonstrate in the following chapter: therefore it is not necessary that they be recited in the tongue which the people understands. For what does it profit to know what the words signify, if you cannot hear the sound of the voice?
Fourthly, the sacrifice is not offered to instruct the people, if we treat of the primary and proper end, but to worship God and to obtain benefits for the people: therefore this is not required, that the people understand what is said, but it is enough if God understand.
Fifthly, if the sacrifice were to be offered in the vulgar tongue, two most grave inconveniences would follow. One, that it would be necessary frequently to change the words of the sacrifice, since words which at one time are vulgar, not long after cease to be vulgar. The other, that the communication of the Churches would be taken away: for an Italian priest could not offer the sacrifice in France, nor a French in Italy, nor an Italian or French in Germany, nor a German in Italy or France; which same is to be understood of Spain, England, Poland, and other regions.
Sixthly, there is added the most ancient custom of the Church. For in the whole East no ancient Liturgies are found except Greek or Chaldean: but in the whole West there are no ancient Liturgies except Latin; and yet for many ages now all these languages have ceased to be vulgar; nay to the Germans, French, English, Poles the Latin tongue was never vulgar: rightly therefore the Council of Trent, session 22, last canon, decreed that the Mass is not to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue. The arguments which the adversaries object against this are all refuted by us in the two places noted a little before. Wherefore I did not think it worth while to repeat them; especially since they do not fight against the action of the sacrifice.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XI. De genere linguae. Sequitur controversia de genere linguae, an scilicet necessarium sit Missam vulgari lingua recitari : id enim contendunt adver¬ sarii, et maxime Kemnitius in 2. par. Exam. pag. 883. et sequentibus. Sed istam qua)- stionem maxima ex parte tractavimus partim libro ii. de verbo Dei, extrenlo, partim lib. ii. de Sacramentis in genere, extremo. Nam tria quaedam ad Missam pertinent. Primo, lectio Scripturarum, et publica oratio. Se¬ cundo, Sacramenti Eucharistiae consecratio, et dispensatio. Tertio sacrificii oblatio De lectione, et oratione disseruimus in lib. de verbo Dei, loco citato : De Sacramenti con¬ secratione, et dispensatione tractatum est in libris de Sacramentis in genere, ut jam dixi¬ mus : solum igitur superest disputatio de ip¬ sa sacrificii oblatione. Sed ea facillima est. Nam in primis sacri¬ ficii oblatio magis in re, quam in verbis con¬ sistit. Nam ut supra diximus, illa actio, qua corpus Domini super altare ponitur ad Dei honorem, vera ac realis oblatio est, etiamsi verbis non dicatur, Offerro : vel offerimus. Porro illa actio verba quidem aliqua neces¬ sario requirit, nimirum verba consecrationis : sed illa verba non diriguntur ad instruendos auditores, sed ad elementum consecrandum, ut notum est. Elementum autem nullam lin¬ guam intelligit; quare impertinens est ad re- alem oblationem, utrum Missa dicatur lin¬ gua vulgari, vel non vulgari. Secundo, licet oblatio ipsa necessario ver¬ bis exprimenda esset, ut jam reipsa in Missa exprimitur, tamen adhuc impertinens esset, qua lingua id fieret; siquidem oblationis verba diriguntur ad Deum, non ad populum; Deus autem omnes linguas intelligit. Tertio, verba oblationis Submissa voce pronuncianda sunt, ut in sequenti capite de¬ monstrabimus : non igitur necesse est, ut ea lingua recitentur, quam intelligit populus. Quid enim prodest nosse quid verba signifi¬ cent, si sonum vocis exaudire non valeas ? Quarto, sacrificium non offertur ad popu¬ lum instruendum, si de primario, et proprio fine agatur, sed ad Deum colendum, et ad impetranda populo beneficia : non igitur id requitur, ut populus intelligat id quod dici¬ tur, sed satis est si Deus intelligat. Quinto, si lingua vulgari sacrificium offeren¬ dum esset, duo gravissima incommoda se¬ querentur. Unum, quod oporteret frequenter mutare verba sacrificii, cum vocabula, quae uno tempore sunt vulgaria, non diu post de¬ sinant esse vulgaria. Alterum, quod tollere¬ tur communicatio Ecclesiarum : nec enim posset sacerdos Italus in Gallia, neque Gal¬ lus in Italia, neque Italus aut Gallus in Ger¬ mania, neque Germanus in Italia, aut Gallia sacrificium offerre ; quod idem de Hispania, Anglia, Polonia, aliisque regionibus intelli- gendum est. Sexto, accedit antiquissima Ecclesia} con¬ suetudo. Nam in toto Oriente non inveniun¬ tur antiqua) Liturgia), nisi Graecae, aut Cal- daica) : in toto autem Occidente antiquae Li¬ turgia) nullse sunt nisi Latina) ; et tamen a multis jam saeculis desierunt omnes istae lin¬ guae esse vulgares, imo Germanis, Fran¬ cis, Anglis, Polonis, nunquam fuit lingua latina vulgaris: recte igitur Concilium Triden- tinurn sess. xxn, can. ult., statuit Missam non esse lingua vulgari celebrandam. Argumenta quae adversarii contra objiciunt, sunta nobis omniarefutata in duobus locis paulo ante no¬ tatis. Quare non putavi operae pretium esse illa repetere ; pra)sertiam cum non pugnent contra sacrificii actionem.