The Most Beautiful (Non-Religious) Music Ever Written

As an undergrad, I was widely known as the king of hyperbole. I’d regularly use phrases like, “That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard” or “That’s the greatest thing in the entire universe” for relatively commonplace things. But there was one thing I said, though it was sometimes accused of being hyperbole, that was most emphatically not hyperbole: that Pachelbel’s Canon in D is the most beautiful piece of (non-religious) music ever written.

Period. It just plain is. It can be played on piano, guitar, cello,
even the harmonica (my own instrument of choice, though I’m even more inexpert than the player linked), but it was originally written for three violins and it still sounds best that way.

It’s a “canon”; that is, the three violins each play the exact same music, but they play it two bars behind each other, like singing “Row, Row, Row your Boat” in round. And the music of each bar matches so well with the music of every other bar that it mixes incredibly beautifully at all times.

No matter how stressed or worked up I am about anything, listening to this incredibly lovely piece of music calms my mind immediately. It’s like stepping through a beautiful landscape; it’s like being clothed entirely in silk. It’s like an Upstate summer day, or spring in the sunshine after a hard winter. Aristotle and Plato famously argued that music bypasses the rational mind and goes directly to the passions; Pachelbel’s Canon in D does precisely that. It enters into my soul immediately and brings my passions to calm, well-balanced serenity.

And I must say this: I am not a connoisseur of classical music. (Yes, I know that Pachelbel’s Canon is really baroque, not classical, but I’m using the term broadly to mean “anything that’s older than big band,” as the general populace uses it.) Quite the contrary, I’m deplorably ignorant of the subject. I never played a single instrument long enough to play well enough to really perform any serious classical pieces (I continue to work on the harmonica, but I’m still just not very good). Simply by listening I can’t tell my Mozart from my Vivaldi (though Beethoven and later is pretty easily distinguishable). But Pachelbel’s Canon is a work of unique and consummate skill, a masterpiece rarely if ever equaled in any field of endeavor.

As I often also said as an undergrad, and have never stopped saying, there is a special place in hell for people who don’t like Pachelbel’s Canon.

Praise be to Christ the King!

Published in: on 24 June 2010 at 8:53 pm  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Movie Review: Black Robe

I dusted off my movie case for Black Robe tonight, and I don’t regret a single second of the entire thing. (Almost.) You should watch this movie soon. Not only is it an accurate depiction of life in early New France, it is an accurate depiction of both the French in America and of the Indians themselves. No Dances with Wolves, James Fenimore Cooper “noble red man” nonsense here. We see the Indians as they really were, with both their many virtues and their many vices. And, for that matter, we see the French in the same light. Furthermore, I’ve rarely seen a movie that so beautifully portrays the beautiful country of the near North. It was filmed entirely on location in Quebec, and it shows what a lovely country this is, and still in many places largely empty. It’s nothing short of visually stunning in that regard, and makes me want to go back to my native homeland once again. (Upstate New York is different, but akin.)

Before I begin, I should elaborate: this is a modern production and it has some problems. The most significant problem (the only significant problem, in my view) is its sexual explicitness. There are three scenes in the movie that required aversion of the eyes. They fall only barely short of hard-core pornography; they are brief, but inexcusable. If you are particularly sensitive to these things, it’s best if you simply skip this one. In this case, you can get the benefits of it by reading this review. (!)

That said, the sexual scenes do serve a purpose. Certainly, no purpose whatsoever can justify such immorality, but while this fact doesn’t make these scenes good, it at least makes them less bad. The first is an entirely random incident of two Indians engaging in sexual intercourse; the purpose of this scene is to show the utterly casual nature with which the Indians (this tribe of them, at least) treat the issue. The second is an incident of an Indian and a Frenchman having intercourse; the purpose of this scene is to show what causes the Frenchman to “go native.” As usual, that cause is a woman. The third is an incident in which the materialism of the natives is used, by another Indian, to effect the party’s escape when captured. This is the most graphic. All of them require turning away from, and all are completely unnecessary; the fact of the relations could easily have been made clear without actually displaying them. But that is what they’re there for.

The French missionaries in the New World were almost universally Jesuits, whose habit was (is) a black robe. The Indians, therefore, almost universally knew missionaries as “Blackrobes.” The movie is the story of Father LaForgue, an idealistic thirtysomething missionary who seeks nothing but bringing the Good News to the savages. For the first half of the film, we are intermittently treated to scenes from Fr. LaForgue’s earlier life, prior to coming to New France. The first is Fr. LaForgue, still a layman, coming to serve the Mass of a Jesuit priest in a great cathedral. That priest turns, and LaForgue can see that he is horribly disfigured in his face and in both hands.

“Good morning,” the priest says, as LaForgue vests in cassock and surplice, “you are to serve my Mass?” He notices LaForgue looking at his deformities, and he responds, “The savages did this to me.” LaForgue asks, “In New France?” The priest affirms this, and says something along the lines of, “They are savages, just as the English and Germans were savages before we brought our Faith to them.” He then tells LaForgue, “I am going back…What greater glory can there be?” Speaking, of course, of bringing light to the darkness, of teaching about Jesus to those who know nothing of Him.

The second scene of LaForgue’s earlier life is him sitting with his mother listening to a pretty young woman play the recorder. His mother remarks to him what a beautiful girl she is, and how talented she is, and from what a good family she comes. LaForgue is clearly, from his dress and demeanor, from a wealthy and important family; and the girl is indeed pretty, and she does indeed play well. But he will not be moved; his meeting with the missionary in the cathedral has struck him, and the next time we meet younger LaForgue, he is in Jesuit garb, meeting with his mother, who is praying before a statue of St. Jeanne d’Arc. She tells him that she prays for St. Joan to guide him, because she is certain that God has chosen him, LaForgue, to die for the good of the Indians.

In the New World, LaForgue spends some time learning the Algonquin and Huron languages, and the movie opens with him completing this stage of his mission. His superior is speaking with Samuel de Champlain, the great founder of New France, about obtaining an Indian escort for LaForgue to go to the Huron mission, hundreds of miles to the west, through raw, untamed wilderness, near the territory of the hostile Iroquois. Eventually, Champlain acquiesces; and we are treated to one of the most poetic juxtapositions I’ve seen in all of cinema.

The Algonquin chief we follow for most of the movie, Chomina, is getting dressed. He’s clearly putting on his finest to meet the great French chief, whom the Indians know only as “Champlain.” He puts on his paint; others help him with his paint and his clothes; he wears great furs, including a great bear fur as a cloak, and a tall headdress replete with pelts and feathers. As we watch Chomina prepare for the meeting, we also watch Champlain prepare for it. He puts on his armor; his royal pendant depicting his authority as governor of New France; his broad hat, with its plume; and, most poignantly, a great bearskin which he wears as a cloak. Then, while the Indians wait outside the walls of the fledging colony of Quebec City, his soldiers line up, with their breastplates, plumed hats, swords, and matchlocks, and his drummer and fifer proceed him in solemn procession down the hill to the Indian encampment. As he processes, Chomina is led to the meeting place with his braves beating drums and singing along with their women.

Indians not participating in the meeting are singing and dancing about the fire, playing their drums and shaking their rattles; Frenchmen not participating are also dancing (albeit not around the fire), playing their own instruments and singing their own songs. It’s a powerful reminder: we’re not really all that different, in the externals. It’s the core things that vary, our fundamental beliefs. The necessities of life are almost always mostly the same.

In exchange for some knifes, tools, beads, and a few pots, the Indians under Chomina agree to escort Fr. LaForgue and another young Frenchman, Daniel (who agrees just prior that, after he returns from the Hurons, he will go to France and study to become a Jesuit) to the Huron mission. They leave the next morning. We watch Fr. LaForgue relate to the Indians, and at first things seem to be going rather well. He laughs with them, rows with them, rests with them, works with them, eats with them. They seem to accept him as a man, like themselves. But things take a turn for the worse when LaForgue first shows them something that they cannot understand.

Chomina is watching LaForgue writing in a journal, and asks him what he’s doing. LaForgue responds, “I am making words.” Chomina, who knows nothing of writing, is confused and says, “You’re not speaking.” So LaForgue asks Chomina to tell him something that he doesn’t know; Chomina says, “My woman’s mother died in the snow last winter.” LaForgue writes it down, then brings it to Daniel and hands it to him. Daniel reads it, and the Indians, including Chomina, are shocked; they are convinced that it must be some type of black magic. This is historically viable; nonliterate peoples often, upon first experiencing writing, believe it to be some kind of magic. But LaForgue doesn’t realize this, thinking that they are merely amazed. “There are still greater things than this that I can teach you,” he tells them, unaware that they are already thinking of killing him because he must be a demon, able to impart knowledge to others without speaking as men must do.

They become increasingly mystified by LaForgue as time goes on. One example of this is the source of our second sexual scene; Daniel, losing his idealism and becoming more and more sympathetic to native customs, begins a sexual relationship with Annuka, Chomina’s daughter. She asks him at one point, “Is the Black Robe a demon?” He’s amused by the question and replies in the negative. She says, “He must be a demon; Black Robes never have sex with women.” He says, “It’s a promise they make to their God.” Annuka asks, “Why would you make a promise like that?” The Indians were, fundamentally, materialists; they made gods of the material things around them. They were therefore unable to understand why a man might give up these material things for the sake of immaterial ones. Daniel and Annuka’s relationship makes that clear; and as Daniel becomes more and more like the Indians, he becomes more and more unable to understand LaForgue and his mission.

Another interesting scene involves tobacco, which was not yet well-known in France. (The movie takes place in 1634.) Daniel, who had smoked it with the Indians in Quebec, offers a pipe to LaForgue, and says, “They say it is soothing, once one is used to it.” LaForgue tries it and coughs, saying, “It will take some time.” The Indians ask him, “Black Robe, tell us: will we have tobacco in your Paradise?” LaForgue responds, correctly, that they will have no need of tobacco, or of anything else; they will possess God Himself, and want nothing. They shocked response: “No women?” Once again, we’re confronted with a fundamental clash of worldview; LaForgue, and at first Daniel, are able to understand why a man would sacrifice material comforts for immaterial glory, while the Indians cannot comprehend this.

One of the Indian women is pregnant, and she gives birth one night; the child, sadly, does not survive. The Indians sing a mourning song, and the woman takes the child into the woods and leaves the body in a tree. LaForgue follows her, and christens the child after she has left. However, the Indian shaman Mestigoit, convinced that LaForgue is a demon, follows LaForgue along with Chomina and some others; Mestigoit tells them that LaForgue is casting a spell on the infant, and they are finally convinced to abandon LaForgue in the forest, and proceed to the winter hunting grounds.

Daniel has gone so native by this time that, though the Indians abandon both Frenchmen, Daniel takes the only remaining canoe and leaves LaForgue behind. He pursues the Indians throughout the night, while LaForgue sleeps without shelter under a tree, thanks God for his suffering, and asks for still more if it will bring salvation to the Indians. Finally, one of the Indians decides to kill Daniel, and nearly does before Chomina stops him. Chomina says, “I may be stupid, but I agreed to take him to the Huron mission.” Chomina is an honorable man, and was convinced against his better judgment to abandon LaForgue; he, his wife, his son (who looks to be about ten), and his daughter Annuka return with Daniel to LaForgue.

They are ambushed there, however, by a party of Iroquois, who put an arrow through Chomina’s wife’s neck. LaForgue fearlessly strides out into the middle of the combat (where Daniel makes an excellent, and historically accurate, defense of the party with his matchlock, firing one shot and killing an Iroquois warrior and then using it very effectively as a club, all it was good for once it had released its load). He is not fighting, though; he proceeds straight to Chomina’s wife and baptizes her, whereupon he is clubbed on the back of the head by an Iroquois.

Daniel, LaForgue, Chomina, Annuka, and Chomina’s son (the boy never got a name, as far as I could tell) are led by leashes to the Iroquois village (I suppose they were Mohawks, but they’re never identified precisely). There, Daniel asks LaForgue for forgiveness; LaForgue inexplicably responds, “God is with us; He is the one who forgives us.” (I have no idea why, in this movie where the missions are portrayed so sympathetically, confession is somehow missed at this crucial juncture, especially since the writer apparently remembered it a bit later.) The three men are forced to run the gauntlet; LaForgue is hit in the head and falls, whereupon Daniel, who has recovered his European sensibilities, runs back through the gauntlet, braving the clubs of the Iroquois, and drags him the rest of the way through. Chomina is badly wounded by the gauntlet. The three men are then dragged into a longhouse along with the women, stripped naked, and LaForgue is brought forward. The Iroquois chief cuts off his finger with a mussel shell; LaForgue never cries out, accepting it as his cross for the conversion of the Indians.

Chomina tells Daniel and Laforgue to sing; while Chomina sings an Indian song, Daniel and LaForgue together sing Ave Maria. As they sing, an Iroquois comes forward and slits Chomina’s young son’s throat, throwing him to the ground without ever batting an eye. The Iroquois chief tells them that only more pain is in store for them, and they will die slowly. They then are left, bizarrely with only one guard, for the night.

Chomina asks Daniel, “You wanted to be one of us. What do you think now?” Daniel responds, “That the Iroquois are not men; they are beasts.” But Chomina shakes his head. “No, they are the same as us. If they show pity, they seem weak.” I understand that some criticized the movie as racist, because it showed the Indians as so violent. But this is a fact: American Indians were violent. They were violent in a way that most Europeans, even in a violent age of religious warfare and burning at the stake, couldn’t comprehend. They had brought the disgusting art of torture to a perfection that would’ve made the most hardened jailer at the Tower of London blush in shame. This movie downplayed real Indian violence; it did not exaggerate it.

Which brings me to the best part of the movie: it is honest. The Indians are shown as virtuous in many ways. They fight bravely; they are loyal to kin; they share everything with one another, without any question. But they are superstitious; they are violent; they are unable to look toward the future in any meaningful way. The Europeans are also portrayed honestly, whether it is good or bad; I see no reason why the historical violence of the northern tribes should be whitewashed. It’s not a question of racism; it’s one of history. And this movie is true to history; if anything, it’s kind to the Indians in this regard.

Our third sex scene comes now, when Annuka asks for water from the guard, who releases it on condition of sexual intercourse. To effect that intercourse, he was forced to cut her bonds, and after a few moments she bashes him over the head with his own club. Chomina, Annuka, LaForgue, and Daniel now escape, and begin the long journey toward the Huron mission. Chomina has been having a dream about his own death, and sees the place from his dream during the trip. He therefore insists that they leave him there to die, explaining that the dream world is real. This is as close as the Indians come to a notion of an immaterial world: the dreams. Annuka at one point insists, loudly and confrontationally, that the dream world is real. Because he dreamed that he would die there, he must die there. Annuka, understanding, leaves him freezing in the snow.

But LaForgue tries one more time to convert him, telling him that God loves him, and wants to welcome him into Paradise. Behind him, Annuka demands that LaForgue let Chomina die on his own, and tells Daniel that LaForgue is a fool for trying to disregard the dream. Daniel, however, remembers; he says, “No; he [LaForgue] loves him [Chomina].” Chomina refuses baptism, but he does say goodbye to LaForgue and call him “friend.” LaForgue, honoring Chomina’s wishes, leaves with Annuka and Daniel.

Finally, the river freezes, and the canoes can go no further. Annuka insists at that point that she and Daniel abandon LaForgue, because in her father’s dream “the Black Robe walks alone.” Daniel, again, has remembered; he tells LaForgue, “Father, I will go with you.” But LaForgue refuses. “She needs you; she has lost everything because of us.” And he proceeds the remaining way to the Huron mission alone.

Arriving, he finds that one of the two priests at the mission has been killed; his body lays unburied in the nave of the small, wooden church inside the Huron village. The other priest, Fr. Jerome, is very old, and at death’s door himself. A plague had hit the village, and many had died; the Indians believed that the Jesuits had brought it with them, to punish those who did not accept the Faith. Fr.Jerome felt sure that the Indians would torture them to death the next day. However, Fr. Jerome says, we do have hope; they may believe that baptism will cure them. LaForgue protests respectfully; he says they should not baptize the Indians unless they understand. The two priests hear one another’s confessions; the older one dies in the night.

The next morning, LaForgue stands before the altar of God and begs Him to help him teach the Indians. He then rings the church bell and comes outside. The Indians come outside, as well; it is the first time they have seen Laforgue, except when he was burying the dead priest, when they talked about killing him. One of the Indians then said, “The Black Robes want us to stop obeying the dreams, to have only one wife, to stop killing our enemies. If we do this, we will no longer be Hurons.” One Indian says, “We will cut pieces of their flesh from them and make them eat.” (This is one of the real tortures Indians in this part of the world would inflict upon one another, as well as upon missionaries who got on their bad sides.)

This morning, cooler heads prevailed; the Huron chief tells LaForgue, “Many want to kill you, Black Robe.” LaForgue nods. “I know.” “If we take your water sorcery, will it heal us?” LaForgue tells them no, that it will not heal them, but that it will open up for them a place in Paradise. To be healed, they must pray, and God may listen to their prayers. The chief then looks up at LaForgue and says, “Black Robe, do you love us?”

LaForgue remembers; he remembers all the kindnesses and cruelties he’d experienced at the hands of the natives, up to and including the amputation of his finger, and then nods his head. “Yes,” he says. The chief responds, “Then, baptize us.” LaForgue does so, baptizing the whole village.

And that, my friends, is what this movie is all about; it’s about love. It is never questioned, throughout the whole movie, that LaForgue is in New France, risking his life, enduring incredible hardships and pains, solely for love: love of the Indians, so badly in need of enlightenment, like the English and Germans before they had been taught the Faith. Daniel finally understands that when he rebukes Annuka concerning LaForgue’s final attempt at conversion: “No, he loves him.” Missions make no sense whatsoever, except in the light of this incredible love.

If you can get past those sexual scenes, this movie is well worth the watching. It will impress you, remind you, and inspire you.

Praise be to Christ the King!

East and West Again

No, I haven’t forgotten my promised examination of the Roman liturgy; I’ve just decided that I’m going to write the whole thing, then release it in parts here and make changes where necessary. So you all won’t see it for a while.

But, to tide us over, let us remember this great story from Michael Davies (RIP):

Kasper went on this ecumenical mission to Athens, attended the Greek Orthodox liturgy in the morning and in the afternoon he was having lunch. Then the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Athens, who is a good friend of Count Capponi and Una Voce, asked his Eminence how he had enjoyed the liturgy in the morning. “Oh wonderful, wonderful,” said the Cardinal, “I thought I was in heaven.” Then the Archbishop said that he thought perhaps that they should make some changes to the Greek liturgy because, perhaps for modern people today, some of it is too mystifying. Kasper said, “No that would be a mortal sin. You mustn�t change a thing. Keep it exactly as it is.” And the Archbishop said, “Then why did you destroy your liturgy which was the equivalent of ours?”

Thank you, Archbishop; I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Praise be to Christ the King!

Published in: on 9 June 2010 at 8:21 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , ,

On the Sex Abuse Scandal: A Self-Imposed Crisis

It’s died down a bit since my other postings on this question, but the sexual abuse scandal nevertheless rages on, and scandalous it is indeed. But it is, nevertheless, a self-imposed scandal, imposed by those who are currently spending most of their time decrying it.

I recently reread a book that I hadn’t looked at in a long time, since the American priestly sex abuse scandal died down. It’s an excellent book by Michael S. Rose, Goodbye, Good men, a detailed exposé of the atmosphere of American seminaries in the last quarter of the last century. I’m not sure how much things have or have not improved; but the bottom line is, this is very scary reading. If anyone wants to know how this scandal got started, Goodbye, Good Men is a pretty good place to start.

Rose shows pretty conclusively that what Fr. Andrew Greeley called the Lavendar Mafia has controlled most seminaries for some time, and that they’ve used that control to consistently undermine traditional Catholic teaching in all areas, particularly sexual morality. It’s become increasingly difficult for orthodox men to make it through these seminaries; the decreasing number of candidates who do make it through, though, are much more likely to be heretics than otherwise. These seminaries prevent those who accept Church teaching and Church discipline from advancing, while those who reject it are encouraged and ordained. These priests are taught not to like their vows, particularly their vow of celibacy; they are taught not to support traditional teaching on Catholic morality, encouraged to espouse more modern notions.

Now, when we have a scandal that’s due precisely to priests rejecting their vows and the Church’s sexual morality, the same people who have been encouraging these views say that we ought to make them formal Church teaching. We need to allow married priests (possible, but unwise) and women priests (impossible); we need to loosen up strictures on sexual morality. But it’s precisely that sort of thinking and behavior that produced this problem in the first place. Priests were taught not to remain faithful to their vows, that these vows were relics of medieval theology, that it was important to live one’s faith updated in the modern world. Some of these priests proceeded to do exactly that, and by doing so committed what even our degraded society considers heinous crimes. Yet the fact that priests sinned by abandoning their vows is taken as proof that we need to dispense priests from their vows.

Of course, this is idiotic. If these criminal priests had been faithful to their vows, they would not have become criminals. This situation proves that priests must be more serious about their vows, more strict in their sexual morality, not less. It proves that seminaries must be more careful about screening their applicants for sexual deviancy, not less. This scandal is certainly scandalous; but it’s scandalous not because the Catholic Church is protecting herself, but because she’s not. She needs to return to her real principles and her ancient traditions; that and only that will heal the sickness which is flagging her so severely.

Goodbye, Good Men shows in frightening detail how the priesthood was emasculated and deCatholicized. Let us pray for priests, for seminarians, and especially for bishops, that they may form and be formed correctly according to the teaching of the Church, to help us all into life everlasting. Amen.

Praise be to Christ the King!

How to Learn Latin

Not long ago I posted an urging to learn Latin as a vital part of revivifying Catholic culture in the world. Well, it’s been off and on, but lately it’s been mostly on, and I think I’ve made enough progress to be able to recommend some tactics for learning Latin. This is, sadly, only for the purpose of reading and writing Latin; I haven’t found anyone nearby who’d like to speak and listen in Latin with me yet. Hopefully my children will reach that point, if I don’t find anyone sooner.

(As a side note, father sitting down and studying something, much like my children do (they are homeschooled), has my oldest son very interested in learning Latin. He’s only five, but even today, as I was doing my drills, he told me, “Daddy, I really want to learn Latin, but I can’t remember all the words!” Fortunately, neither can his father, so I hope that gave him hope. I’m looking forward to starting Latin with him just as soon as he’s comfortable reading in English. He can read now, but I’d like him to get very comfortable reading English before I throw another language into the mix. I’ll probably give it another year, when my own fluency should have advanced to a sufficient point itself.)

This advice will apply to one who knows a little Latin from school; who knows some Latin from the liturgy but nothing of the actual structure of the language; or who knows nothing about Latin at all.

The first piece of advice: you’ll have to spend some money. You won’t have to spend much; many people spend more on hobbies every month, and the money you’ll spend on Latin will last certainly your life, and possibly your children’s, as well. But you will have to put some investment in it. Why? To buy books.

Now, I’m a fairly young man, but it still astounds me that people expect to be able to learn everything about everything just by looking things up on the Internet. People feel sick, look up their symptoms on WebMD, and suddenly their lack of any medical credentials whatsoever counts for nothing. The Internet is fun and all, and there is a lot of valuable information on it, for learning Latin as for most everything else. (We’ll get to some of that shortly.) But back when I was coming up, when someone wanted to learn something, they opened large stacks of paper with words printed on them called books. And honestly, as much as the Internet has to offer, it doesn’t have enough; you’ll need books. You’ll be glad you bought them; the investment is well, well worth it.

So here’s a list of the paper books you’ll need if you seriously want to learn Latin. Devote yourselves to these for fifteen minutes a day, give or take (missing a day won’t kill you, but try to be as regular as possible), and within a year you’ll have at least a decent reading and writing knowledge of Latin. Let’s begin:

Buy Books.

A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin by John F. Collins. This is by far the most important tool in your Latin arsenal. It explains grammatical concepts clearly and concisely; gives a good overview of pronunciation without getting too minute and nitpicky; and includes in each unit a vocabulary list that is about the perfect length for one-session memorization. Most importantly, each unit ends with a set of drills and a set of exercises; the drills require the learner to practice the grammar of the unit to the point that it becomes second nature, while the exercises engage one in translating, mostly from Latin to English but also some English to Latin, a direction usually neglected in textbooks. These translation exercises start with easy made-up sentences, but gradually come to incorporate real-world examples from ecclesiastical texts, and eventually move away from individual sentences into real texts. Do all of these drills and exercises, without exception, even if they seem too easy. They’re not. The practice will be invaluable in making Latin second nature to you. Nothing could be more important to the adult student of Latin than this book. If you get the answer key with it, it’s even cheaper.

Cassell’s New Latin Dictionary by D. P. Simpson or The Bantam New College Latin & English Dictionary by John Traupman. Whichever of these you choose, it will be your constant companion in your studies. You really need one or the other of these; personally, I own both, very old and raggedy copies from all the thumbing and flipping I’ve had to do in them. There’s little, as far as I can see, to recommend one over the other; my edition of Cassell’s is larger and more cumbersome, and my edition of the New College has a superb synopsis of Latin grammar in the beginning section that I’ve often found invaluable. (Indeed, I taught myself most of the grammatical forms out of it at one time, long ago.) But either way, you need at least one of these two. Why these two? Simply, the English to Latin section. Many dictionaries neglect this; yet a Catholic learning Latin must want, at least eventually, to do his own Latin composition, and an English to Latin section will prove extremely valuable in that respect.

Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin by Leo F. Stelten. Other dictionaries are required for other purposes. This one is short, but still an important resource for studying ecclesiastical Latin in particular.

A Latin-English Dictionary of St. Thomas Aquinas by Roy J. DeFerrari. An incredibly valuable resource necessary for anyone delving into the Angelic Doctor (and of course you will be, if you’re studying Church Latin). Sadly, this seems to be out of print, and used copies are expensive. Don’t buy it if you can’t find a decently priced copy, and I won’t include it on the list of prices below. But if you can get your hands on a copy, grab it; you won’t regret it. Honestly, it’s excellent simply as reading material, not merely as a reference; it really is a superb volume.

Latin Grammar by Robert Henle (“Henle,” pronounced “Henley”). This is basically a synopsis of the grammar, and in a pinch you could probably get by without it. But especially once you’ve worked through most of Collins and you need a quick refresher on something (I know I want to use a gerundive here, but how would I do that properly?), Henle would be extremely helpful. And it’s not too expensive, either, so it’s a good resource to have.

So here are the essential volumes for your Latin-learning collection, the kind that are available only on dead trees:

Book Price ($)
Collins 17.78
Collins, Answer Key 15.25
Cassell’s Dictionary 16.47
or Bantam’s Dictionary 3.44
Stelten’s Dictionary 19.77
Henle’s Grammar 9.50

All these prices are from Amazon; it’s entirely possible you could find better prices elsewhere. And you can probably get combinations of these volumes at good deals. But all told, assuming you get Cassell’s (the higher priced dictionary), you’re only looking at $78.77, not bad for a skill that will enrich your faith, your intellect, and your life for the remainder of your days in this vale of tears.

Use the Internet.

Just because the Internet isn’t the be-all and end-all of research doesn’t mean it’s not useful; I just get tired of people using the phrase “did some research” as synonymous with “Googled it.” There are a great many Latin resources on the Internet; indeed, most of the Latin texts I read (as opposed to learning materials) I get off the Internet. Here I’m talking about learning Latin rather than reading it, so I’ll start with the available textbooks and learning materials. These are legion; the best, in my opinion, are as follows.

A Practical Grammar of the Latin Language, with Perpetual Exercises in Speaking and Writing by G. J. Adler. This book is available entirely online, and it’s well worth the few minutes it takes to download. The answer key is also fully available. The book shows its age—it was originally published in 1858—but it’s fairly unique among available grammars in its emphasis on actual speech. Personally, I’d rely on Collins, above, for the grammar and drills, and rely on Adler for the conversation.

Latinum: The Online Latin Language Audio Course from London. If you’re not annoyed by the classical pronunciation (where “vici” ends up pronounced “wiki”) to the point that you can’t focus, this might be helpful to you, as well. It’s certainly helpful to hear significant quantities of actual spoken Latin, no matter how irritating the pronunciation is. (If you’re blessed enough to have a Latin liturgy nearby, this won’t be an issue; you can also speak Latin aloud to yourself, even if you don’t know the words, to get yourself used to hearing the sounds of the language and telling words apart, noticing word endings, and so on.) Available for free.

Once you’ve gathered together your supplies, here’s what I’ve found to work for me, and I hope will work for you, as well:

Study for at least fifteen minutes per day. More would be great, but try to keep to that minimum. It’s often noted that children learn languages more easily than adults; this is true, but it’s true because children have almost all their time devoted to it, whereas adults rarely get in a consistent period of study. Fifteen minutes a day isn’t too onerous; it’s enough to learn some words, memorize some grammar, and do a few exercises. Half an hour would be even better, and it’s what I aim for; but a minimum of fifteen minutes it pretty indispensable.

Study vocabulary. Grammar is fun, and learning all the rules is important, but you can have memorized every obscure use for the ablative in the world and still understand no Latin if you don’t know actual words. Work hard on the words; make sure a good portion of your daily study is memorizing vocabulary. It can be extremely boring, but it’s vital. A mentor of mine, Father Adrian Harmening, is a Benedictine monk who for decades taught Latin at a Benedictine high school. He told me students always passed their grammar tests, because grammar is comparatively easy; it was vocabulary that universally tripped them up. Work hard on the vocabulary; it’s the most important thing.

Pronounce the Latin out loud. You’ll feel like an idiot, but do it. You’ll gain familiarity with it; you’ll feel more comfortable with it; it’ll help you memorize your forms and words better. And most importantly, it’ll get you used to hearing Latin used in reality and accustom you to separating words out in Latin without thinking about it.

Think in Latin. Easier said than done, I know, but do it anyway. Even if just in little ways; when you get your shoes in the morning, don’t think shoes, think calcei. Don’t sit down to dinner, sit down to cena. Don’t speak to your wife; loquere uxori. An enormous help in this regard is praying in Latin; once again, a Latin liturgy is hugely helpful but not essential here.

Read Latin. By far the most important. Aside from your fifteen minutes of drills per day, read as much Latin as you can. When you’ve put in a couple of months’ study, start reading the daily Mass readings and Gospels in Latin. As you progress, make your pleasure reading Latin. Skip something you’d otherwise read and instead partake of something in the great language of the Church, even if you’re still slow at it and you can only manage a few sentences, or even only one. When you start looking, you’ll start tripping over Latin texts everywhere; some excellent examples follow.

Read the Bible. The Vulgate, specifically the Clementine Vulgate, is surely the most read piece of Latin literature in history. It’s also an excellent example of grammar, both of the classical (in parts) and vulgar (more akin to Church Latin) varieties. (It’s not called the “Vulgate” for nothing.) bibsearch is a Bible program that will produce biblical texts on command, as well as search for them, in Latin and in English, using texts that it took from the Vulsearch project. It works in most free operating systems, like GNU/Linux and the BSDs. For those sadly still trapped by Microsoft, Vulsearch will do the same, in a graphical environment. Connected to the Vulsearch project is the great Clementine text project, to which we all owe an enormous debt of gratitude.

Get words. Not just any words; Whitaker’s Words. This is a phenomenal little program, written initially for Microsoft-based systems but easily recompiled for GNU/Linux (I’ve got a script; ask if you want it), BSD, and other systems, that will be a constant companion in your studies. Enter any word, of whatever grammatical form, and words will obligingly return all possibilities for its grammatical form and meaning, even when either or both is ambiguous (as happens; this is a human language, after all). Binaries for most free operating systems are also available. It’s console-only (that is, you need to type in a window), but it’s very easy to use and has no substitute.

Corpus Thomisticum’s Omnia Opera. This site provides the original texts of everything that St. Thomas Aquinas ever wrote. Really, you can’t get better than that for source material; the Scriptures are more important objectively, and the Vulgate is the only translation without any error, but they are still a translation, and for native ecclesiastical Latin idiom St. Thomas Aquinas knows no equal, unless it be possibly (in linguistic terms only) the next author on the list.

S. Aurelii Augustini Opera Omnia. The complete works of St. Aurelius Augustinus, usually known in English as St. Augustine. This is hard Latin, borderline classical in its construction, with an enormous vocabulary to draw from and delighting in intricate and unusual constructions. Good for advanced work, or even intermediate work if you know your grammar and are looking for ways to test it.

So what are you waiting for? Get to it! Learning to at least read Latin will open doors to all the great richness of the Catholic tradition. It’s hard to think of a better way to spend fifteen minutes a day.

Praise be to Christ the King!

Published in: on 1 June 2010 at 4:01 pm  Comments (8)  
Tags: , , , , ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.