When the Pope Speaks Latin, What Does He Actually Say?

The election of Pope Leo XIV, formerly Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, marks an important moment in history with the first American Pope. He greeted the world, celebrating the first Mass in Latin. To many viewers, this was a ceremonial act, but to all studying Latin, it was more significant. For nearly a millennium, Latin was the universal voice of Western Christianity. Latin was not any one people's language, which made it holy. When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin (Vulgate) in the late 4th century, he was tying the entire Christian theology to the Latin language.

Then came the Second Vatican Council. From 1962–1965, Vatican II made one of the most important decisions in modern church history, deciding to permit Mass to be said in the vernacular. The purpose of this was to make liturgy more accessible. While this was their intention, the results were different, depending on whom you talk to. Some people saw the decision as liberating the faithful, whereas others saw it as losing Latin Masses, which had been an integral part of western culture for millennia prior. The debate never died down; in 2007, Pope Benedict XVI issueed Summorum Pontificum, a papal decree that opened the door to greater use of the Traditional Latin Mass, sometimes referred to as the Tridentine Mass. Benedict argued that the traditions of earlier generations were not to be viewed as dangerous. This decree ignited responses of both praise and criticism, further dividing the church. Pope Francis later pulled back on this division when he limited the Traditional Mass again in 2021. Thus, the issue of Latin in the liturgy is ultimately one of identity and continuity. The fact that Pope Leo XIV chose Latin as the language of his prayers sends at least one message to me. Preserving the original language affirms that the past continues to have something to offer the present. We do not know yet if Leo XIV's papacy will mark a shift toward the use of Latin in the Church. The institutional pressures to make Latin more accessible in vernacular languages are real. Most interesting to me is the deeper issue his papacy poses: in an era that values immediate understanding, is there value in using a language that requires a majority of listeners to slow down? I think so. And I also think that Marcus Aurelius, the Roman emperor who wrote his personal reflections in Greek, the language of philosophy in his day, instead of Latin, would concur. How do you think the Church should handle its linguistic heritage?