[m4629]

I’m looking for an explanation of the vital importance of Latin, that it is so superior that the costs thereof (opacity of liturgy) is worthwhile. Don’t get me entirely wrong, I’m sure the practice makes for an aesthetically pleasing experience (I’m rather fond of listening to Gregorian Chant), but as worship it seems empty.

Good question.

"Lex Orandi, lex credendi". Strictly translated -- the Law of Prayer is the Law of Belief. Loosely but accurately translated -- how one prays reflects what he believes.

Frankly, we couldn't afford NOT to do the Latin Mass, in light of what the Vatican II experience brought us in the past 50 years. Judge a tree by its fruits. Would you honestly say that the spiritual/liturgical life of the past 50 years in the Church has been good? Not me.

When Latin Mass was the standard, Catholics everywhere at least believed the same things, sinners that we are. But now? Latest survey indicates 67% of Catholics don't believe in the Real Presence! For that, they can't be called Catholics, technically speaking, but Apostates.

Hopefully, with the unifying force and no-nonsense nature of the Latin Mass, Catholics will become real Catholics once again, and be proud of it.

The catholic Woodstock of Vatican II must come to an end soon.

[ctdonath2]

Catholics everywhere at least believed the same things,

Did they? AFAIK they showed up and mumbled the same thing - in a language they didn't understand, and therefor didn't know what they were imputed to believe.

When allowed to address the subject in a language they understood, by your account they responded by in effect saying "I _don't_ believe that!" Mutual ignorance is not a viable basis for faith.