|
Post by tisbearself on Oct 29, 2022 19:11:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by StellaMaris on Oct 29, 2022 19:31:08 GMT
I can't see the TLM movement celebrating his election as Pope if it were to happen.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Oct 30, 2022 2:59:39 GMT
Priests in general should be able to say not just evening prayers but even celebrate the OF in Latin (which is its original language). The problem is that most lay people don't understand Latin.
|
|
|
Post by iagosan on Oct 30, 2022 8:16:28 GMT
Priests in general should be able to say not just evening prayers but even celebrate the OF in Latin (which is its original language). The problem is that most lay people don't understand Latin. I would hazard a guess that most lay people do not understand any other language than their native tongue, so a Universal Church requires a universal language. Latin fulfills that role as it is the root (for want of a better term) of all Romance languages i.e. Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, French and Romanian. Traces are still found in the "Anglo- Saxon" languages including English which incorporated much from French due to the Norman conquest of England in 1066 and the fusion with Anglo Saxon English. Consequently, many nouns were then adopted into scientific study to facilitate international recognition and understanding.
Finally, to revert back to a "Catholic" perspective, I often hear people say that Christ did not speak it. There is no evidence to support this claim and it can even be argued that when Christ spoke to Pontius Pilate, there was a greater chance of a Jewish native growing up in the Middle Eastern crossroads of the Roman Empire, being able to speak the language of the conquerors, than of a governor being able to speak Aramaic or Hebrew, both of which were spoken by "minorities" (in the Roman mind). Additionally, it has a proven track record of successfully helping bring about conversion and evangelisation on a global scale as evidenced by the work of generations of Catholic missionaries. Finally, it was one of the three languages that was inscribed on the Cross at Calvary (the others being Greek and Hebrew) and is shown on every Crucifix to this day and is therefore considered by many, to hold a special place in the concept Christ`s role in our salvation and redemption.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Oct 31, 2022 3:05:16 GMT
I think Latin is used for the original documents of the Church, from which translations are made for Scriptures, liturgy, and catechism.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Oct 31, 2022 4:45:36 GMT
I think Latin is used for the original documents of the Church, from which translations are made for Scriptures, liturgy, and catechism. True. If it weren't Latin, what would it be? Italian? English? French, perhaps? (The latter would probably have been a more viable option 100 years ago than now.) As a side note, I've long been fascinated with Interlingua. If you know any of the Romance languages (Romanian would be tricky), you can pick up something in Interlingua and read it "cold" with near-perfect understanding. I know I am able to. Esperanto, OTOH, is weird, looks kind of like Hungarian fell into a mosh pit of the various Romance tongues. I don't like it.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Nov 1, 2022 1:54:08 GMT
It doesn't matter because the language serves as a base for original documents. The important thing is that translations are made so that people can read them.
|
|
|
Post by farronwolf on Nov 1, 2022 3:05:32 GMT
It was centuries after Christ died that the Church adopted Latin as its language. Where any of the oldest manuscripts which were combined to make the Bible written in Latin. Nope. Not one. As the inspired work of God, seems odd that he didn't have them written in Latin, or not really.
The main reason Latin adopted was to have a single language which could be used to communicate between people who didn't speak each others language. Someone who spoke Spanish could write in Latin to someone who spoke German, and vice versa.
It had very little to do with God's preference, but was simply man's preference for the Church to communicate.
This brings to mind when people in my parish were upset about starting Spanish Masses. Many used to old excuse, if they are in Merica they should be speaking English. Hmm, pretty certain God doesn't care what language you pray to him in, he understands all of them and prefers that you pray and understand what you are praying and if you are genuine in your prayers. But that is just my thought on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 1, 2022 3:43:36 GMT
It was centuries after Christ died that the Church adopted Latin as its language. Where any of the oldest manuscripts which were combined to make the Bible written in Latin. Nope. Not one. As the inspired work of God, seems odd that he didn't have them written in Latin, or not really. The main reason Latin adopted was to have a single language which could be used to communicate between people who didn't speak each others language. Someone who spoke Spanish could write in Latin to someone who spoke German, and vice versa. It had very little to do with God's preference, but was simply man's preference for the Church to communicate. This brings to mind when people in my parish were upset about starting Spanish Masses. Many used to old excuse, if they are in Merica they should be speaking English. Hmm, pretty certain God doesn't care what language you pray to him in, he understands all of them and prefers that you pray and understand what you are praying and if you are genuine in your prayers. But that is just my thought on the matter. Granted, Latin was probably not used in the Church to any large extent in the first century or two, but it morphed organically and gradually into the common language of the Western Church, and it is difficult not to see some kind of divine approbation for its use, call it "God's preference", call it what you will. It is fairly succinct, does not admit of changes in meaning, and compared to Greek, is not terribly complicated. It does have case structure, but so do many other languages, such as German and Polish.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Nov 1, 2022 11:34:59 GMT
It was centuries after Christ died that the Church adopted Latin as its language. Where any of the oldest manuscripts which were combined to make the Bible written in Latin. Nope. Not one. As the inspired work of God, seems odd that he didn't have them written in Latin, or not really. The main reason Latin adopted was to have a single language which could be used to communicate between people who didn't speak each others language. Someone who spoke Spanish could write in Latin to someone who spoke German, and vice versa. It had very little to do with God's preference, but was simply man's preference for the Church to communicate. This brings to mind when people in my parish were upset about starting Spanish Masses. Many used to old excuse, if they are in Merica they should be speaking English. Hmm, pretty certain God doesn't care what language you pray to him in, he understands all of them and prefers that you pray and understand what you are praying and if you are genuine in your prayers. But that is just my thought on the matter. 'If the KJV Bible was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me' mindset. A Catholic version of it which would reject the KJV Bible but a similar outlook all the same.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Nov 1, 2022 13:59:43 GMT
I don’t advocate for Latin as being “God’s preference” (and Jesus probably spoke to Pilate in Greek which was the standard language people used to communicate across cultures then).
I like to see the liturgical traditions of the Church preserved and if necessary peacefully co-existing with the vernacular OFs that serve people who for whatever reason want or need a Mass in their own language.
I don’t object to Mass in English, Spanish, Vietnamese or what have you, I don’t think it’s less holy, but I also see no reason to completely suppress the traditional Latin liturgy of the Church in the situations where Catholics, many of whom have learned enough Latin to be functional, actively wish to worship in that way.
|
|
|
Post by StellaMaris on Nov 1, 2022 18:52:36 GMT
It was centuries after Christ died that the Church adopted Latin as its language. Where any of the oldest manuscripts which were combined to make the Bible written in Latin. Nope. Not one. As the inspired work of God, seems odd that he didn't have them written in Latin, or not really. The main reason Latin adopted was to have a single language which could be used to communicate between people who didn't speak each others language. Someone who spoke Spanish could write in Latin to someone who spoke German, and vice versa. It had very little to do with God's preference, but was simply man's preference for the Church to communicate. This brings to mind when people in my parish were upset about starting Spanish Masses. Many used to old excuse, if they are in Merica they should be speaking English. Hmm, pretty certain God doesn't care what language you pray to him in, he understands all of them and prefers that you pray and understand what you are praying and if you are genuine in your prayers. But that is just my thought on the matter. Granted, Latin was probably not used in the Church to any large extent in the first century or two, but it morphed organically and gradually into the common language of the Western Church, and it is difficult not to see some kind of divine approbation for its use, call it "God's preference", call it what you will. It is fairly succinct, does not admit of changes in meaning, and compared to Greek, is not terribly complicated. It does have case structure, but so do many other languages, such as German and Polish. And it's just as organically become a relic (in a positive sense), in favour of the vernacular. Not just in global language but in religion, science, medicine, the law, history. There's no prophecy supporting it as an eternal or divine language.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 1, 2022 19:26:57 GMT
Latin continues to be used and studied in many different fields of endeavor, and not just religion. Law, medicine, and science, just to name a few, use it liberally, and it has not departed from the life of the Church, nor will it. It's not going anywhere. I direct the reader to the portions of Sacrosanctum concilium ( a Vatican II document) where the preservation of Latin, as well as allowance for the vernacular, is affirmed. Surely we're not moving into a future where the documents of Vatican II will be dismissed.
|
|
|
Post by StellaMaris on Nov 1, 2022 19:54:09 GMT
Anybody that doesn't live in some sort of insulated bubble knows that Latin is no longer primary in all those fields. It isn't even taught in schools anymore. It is preserved as a relic (in the good sense) and connection to the past but is no longer predominant. I could cite loads of different sources to prove this to you but I doubt it would change your very insulated view on things.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 1, 2022 20:08:20 GMT
|
|