Ecclesiastical Latin - What's the Big Deal?

[I_Believe]

I’ve read enough after a google search to get an idea of why the Church embraced latin, but I’d like to hear from others who are more knowledgeable on the topic.

What was the Church Fathers intent in the shaping of Ecclesiastical Latin ? Why is it retained in modern times ?

I’m getting the feeling those who are uninformed believe that latin was used initially simply because it happened to be the language at the time the Church began documenting things.

 

[Hesychios]

I’m getting the feeling those who are uninformed believe that latin was used initially simply because it happened to be the language at the time the Church began documenting things.

What other purpose could there be?

It was the language of the people in the west. When Christianity first came west it was among Greek speakers: both Hellenized Jews and gentiles came west and planted the Faith. It remained that way for a few hundred years until a larger native Latin speaking population was evangelized, and the Greek speaking population gradually assimilated into the predominately Latin speaking culture.

In that era the church at Rome translated it’s own liturgy into commonly understood Latin, and sought out a reliable Latin translation of scripture.

That’s all there was to it.

 

[I_Believe]

What other purpose could there be?

It was the language of the people in the west. When Christianity first came west it was among Greek speakers: both Hellenized Jews and gentiles came west and planted the Faith. It remained that way for a few hundred years until a larger native Latin speaking population was evangelized, and the Greek speaking population gradually assimilated into the predominately Latin speaking culture.

In that era the church at Rome translated it’s own liturgy into commonly understood Latin, and sought out a reliable Latin translation of scripture.

That’s all there was to it.

Well, ok, but why does the Church retain it ? I mean, if that’s all there is to it, and it’s a dead language as some say, what gives ?

And that doesn’t explain the Church Fathers work on Ecclesiastical Latin does it ?

 

[mikeanayaus]

This is kind of a bad analogy, but take for example the Pentecostal sects in the United States that have a lot of Hispanics. The main language they use is Spanish because many of the original members spoke Spanish, but their children and grandchildren speak more English. Most services are still in Spanish even though many members can barely speak or even understand the language. They now have two choices, keep using Spanish because that’s what they’ve used, therefore all of their preachers would be required to speak it. Also, there are bibles that are available with English on side, Spanish on the other. They sing a lot the same songs service after service so it’s easy to memorize them and figure out what they mean at home. Alternatively, they can just switch to English because that’s what people in their churches speak.

 

[mikeanayaus]

Well, ok, but why does the Church retain it ? I mean, if that’s all there is to it, and it’s a dead language as some say, what gives ?

Because it’s a dead language, you can use the original documents as something to compare translations to because the meaning will always be the same. Also, using one language throughout the Latin Church means that you can attend Mass or any other liturgical service in Latin, and it will be the same throughout the world.

 

[I_Believe]

Because it’s a dead language, you can use the original documents as something to compare translations to because the meaning will always be the same. **
Also, using one language throughout the Latin Church means that you can attend Mass or any other liturgical service in Latin, and it will be the same throughout the world.**

Quite correct. Thank you.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Same throughout the world…In 1972, I was a young sailor whose transport squadron deployed to Rota, Spain. I went off by myself in Rota to explore and came across a Catholic church. It was in the late afternoon and a priest came out and addressed me in Spanish. I had had 2/12 years of Spanish and I told him in my broken Spanish that I was Catholic and had been an altar boy.

He said to me: “Introibo ad altare Dei” to which I answered “Ad Deum qui laetificat juventum meam”. He showed me all around the church. Latin - the universal language of the Church.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Because it’s a dead language, you can use the original documents as something to compare translations to because the meaning will always be the same. Also, using one language throughout the Latin Church means that you can attend Mass or any other liturgical service in Latin, and it will be the same throughout the world.

Which means what you don’t understand at home you can travel thousands of miles and not understand abroad.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Well, ok, but why does the Church retain it ? I mean, if that’s all there is to it, and it’s a dead language as some say, what gives ?

Latin didn’t die overnight (if it can be said to have died at all).

Even as the Romance languages developed (also not overnight), Latin was still learned, spoken, and used by the educated peoples, including the clergy. Indeed, higher education conducted exclusively *in *the Latin and Greek languages continued until fairly recent times.

:twocents: And my own opinion is that the so-called death of Latin is greatly exaggerated. Latin did not so much die, as transform into a typographic and chirographic language – A language regulated by those who read and wrote it. No one speaks Latin who cannot also read and write it.

tee
Who does not understand your question about the Church Fathers?

 

[Dempsey1919]

brotherhrolf:

Same throughout the world…In 1972, I was a young sailor whose transport squadron deployed to Rota, Spain. I went off by myself in Rota to explore and came across a Catholic church. It was in the late afternoon and a priest came out and addressed me in Spanish. I had had 2/12 years of Spanish and I told him in my broken Spanish that I was Catholic and had been an altar boy.

He said to me: “Introibo ad altare Dei” to which I answered “Ad Deum qui laetificat juventum meam”. He showed me all around the church. Latin - the universal language of the Church.

What a great story! It is for reasons like this that I wish the Tridentine Mass was still the ordinary Mass of the Latin Rite. I could attend Mass in every country of the world and follow along just fine. Now, if I went to Spain and attended an ordinary Mass I wouldn’t understand a thing. I could understand the Tridentine Mass ANYWHERE in the world.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

I’ve read enough after a google search to get an idea of why the Church embraced latin, but I’d like to hear from others who are more knowledgeable on the topic.

What was the Church Fathers intent in the shaping of Ecclesiastical Latin ? Why is it retained in modern times ?

I’m getting the feeling those who are uninformed believe that latin was used initially simply because it happened to be the language at the time the Church began documenting things.

I think there are a number of solid reasons for retaining Latin given by Blessed John XXIII in Veterum Sapientia:

adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html

 

[mikeanayaus]

Which means what you don’t understand at home you can travel thousands of miles and not understand abroad.

Exactly, if I could ever afford a ticket to China I’d rather not understand the Mass in Latin than not understand it in a language I understand even less . But seriously, it’s not that hard to learn the Ordinary of the Mass in both Latin and the vernacular. (Okay, from a Romance speaker’s point-of-view, it wasn’t rocket science to figure out “oremus” means “oremos”. ) The only thing that wouldn’t be understood would be the homily and any announcements made. But for the most part, I do think that a unifying language makes it easier for people to participate in Masses in an international setting.

 

[I_Believe]

Latin didn’t die overnight (if it can be said to have died at all).

Even as the Romance languages developed (also not overnight), Latin was still learned, spoken, and used by the educated peoples, including the clergy. Indeed, higher education conducted exclusively *in *the Latin and Greek languages continued until fairly recent times.

:twocents: And my own opinion is that the so-called death of Latin is greatly exaggerated. Latin did not so much die, as transform into a typographic and chirographic language – A language regulated by those who read and wrote it. No one speaks Latin who cannot also read and write it.

tee
Who does not understand your question about the Church Fathers?

Hi tee, what I meant about the Church Fathers is in regards to the shaping of ecclesiastical latin.

Here is an exerpt regarding St Jerome and his contribution…

…" They are both accurately formed and useful words, expressing for the most part abstract qualities necessitated by the Christian religion and which hitherto had not existed in the Latin tongue, e.g., clericatus, impoenitentia, deitas, dualitas, glorificatio, corruptrix. At times, also, to supply new needs, he gives new meanings to old words: conditor, creator, redemptor, saviour of the world, predestinatio, communio, etc. Besides this enriching of the lexicon, St. Jerome rendered no less service to ecclesiastical Latin by his edition of the Vulgate. Whether he made his translation from the original text or adapted previous translations after correcting them he diminished, by that much, the authority of the many popular versions which could not fail to be prejudicial to the correctness of the language of the Church. By this very same act he popularized a number of Hebraisms and modes of speech – vir desideriorum, filii iniquitatis, hortus voluptatis, inferioris a Daniele, inferior to Daniel – which completed the shaping of the peculiar physiognomy of church Latin. "

newadvent.org/cathen/09019a.htm

I honestly had no idea of what Ecceseastical Latin was. I thought is meant simply the specific latin words used in the Liturgy. It appears there is much more to it.

 

[Rawb]

For a purely sentimental reason to hold on to Ecclesiastical Latin:

In my house there are words we use that probably don’t mean a lot to others, screwjiggered, caddywampus, bubuleh, mommanimms, gigi, and, (you probably wouldn’t understand it in the context we use it) popcorn.

I could say at a family gathering, “Mommanims said she wants to see Makhennah because her diapers is all caddywampus. Makhenna bubeleh, you want to go see Gigi?”

Now you can probably understand what some of those words mean, but that’s not the point.

Latin is/was the ‘home language’ of the Church. It’s the special family language that we only speak ‘in the house’ with other ‘family’ memebers. The effect of having such a language shouldn’t be just brushed aside. Imagine you lived in a foreign country, but in your house you and your family could still speak English to one another and understand it, even if outside nobody did. Wouldn’t hearing someone else speak English automatically make you feel closer and more united to them?

Like I said, purely sentimental, but not something that aught be brushed aside either.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Hi tee, what I meant about the Church Fathers is in regards to the shaping of ecclesiastical latin.

Here is an exerpt regarding St Jerome and his contribution…

…" They are both accurately formed and useful words, expressing for the most part abstract qualities necessitated by the Christian religion and which hitherto had not existed in the Latin tongue,

And yet not able to come up with a decent translation of ἐκπορευόμενον.

But that’s the subject of another (several) thread(s)

 

[tee_eff_em]

Hi tee, what I meant about the Church Fathers is in regards to the shaping of ecclesiastical latin.

Here is an exerpt regarding St Jerome and his contribution…

…" They are both accurately formed and useful words, expressing for the most part abstract qualities necessitated by the Christian religion and which hitherto had not existed in the Latin tongue, e.g., clericatus, impoenitentia, deitas, dualitas, glorificatio, corruptrix. At times, also, to supply new needs, he gives new meanings to old words: conditor, creator, redemptor, saviour of the world, predestinatio, communio, etc. Besides this enriching of the lexicon, St. Jerome rendered no less service to ecclesiastical Latin by his edition of the Vulgate. Whether he made his translation from the original text or adapted previous translations after correcting them he diminished, by that much, the authority of the many popular versions which could not fail to be prejudicial to the correctness of the language of the Church. By this very same act he popularized a number of Hebraisms and modes of speech – vir desideriorum, filii iniquitatis, hortus voluptatis, inferioris a Daniele, inferior to Daniel – which completed the shaping of the peculiar physiognomy of church Latin. "

newadvent.org/cathen/09019a.htm

I honestly had no idea of what Ecceseastical Latin was. I thought is meant simply the specific latin words used in the Liturgy. It appears there is much more to it.

Okay. I think there is nothing “special” about Latin in that sense, except that it was the language of the time. The Church was going to have to obtain a specialized, technical vocabulary no matter what language she was building on, she just happened to be speaking Latin at the time.

:twocents:
tee

 

[mikeanayaus]

And yet not able to come up with a decent translation of ἐκπορευόμενον.

But that’s the subject of another (several) thread(s)

If we really need an exact equivalent of it, let’s just add a new word à la Spanglish: ecporevomenare - to have as the only source. There, problem solved in the great Ecclesiastical Latin tradition of adding new words to better express the Faith.

 

[Hesychios]

And that doesn’t explain the Church Fathers work on Ecclesiastical Latin does it ?

I don’t know anything about this, I don’t think anyone was composing a special language form. Latin had developed into a number of dialects by the time of Jerome.

Latin is not a perfect language (there is no perfect language), it does not express every possible thought with precision, some people accord much more authority to it than they probably should. Aramaic could probably serve as well.

So why Latin? Because at one time most of the educated people in the west knew some form of it. Why is it retained? I cannot answer that, I firmly believe that worship should always be available in the vernacular.

Religion has enough mystery built into it, IMO we don’t really have a need to obscure the language. What is needed more thabn anything else is a dignified liturgy.

Michael

 

[I_Believe]

For a purely sentimental reason to hold on to Ecclesiastical Latin:

In my house there are words we use that probably don’t mean a lot to others, screwjiggered, caddywampus, bubuleh, mommanimms, gigi, and, (you probably wouldn’t understand it in the context we use it) popcorn.

I could say at a family gathering, “Mommanims said she wants to see Makhennah because her diapers is all caddywampus. Makhenna bubeleh, you want to go see Gigi?”

Now you can probably understand what some of those words mean, but that’s not the point.

Latin is/was the ‘home language’ of the Church. It’s the special family language that we only speak ‘in the house’ with other ‘family’ memebers. The effect of having such a language shouldn’t be just brushed aside. Imagine you lived in a foreign country, but in your house you and your family could still speak English to one another and understand it, even if outside nobody did. Wouldn’t hearing someone else speak English automatically make you feel closer and more united to them?

Like I said, purely sentimental, but not something that aught be brushed aside either.

Well saidibus

 

[I_Believe]

Okay. I think there is nothing “special” about Latin in that sense, except that it was the language of the time. The Church was going to have to obtain a specialized, technical vocabulary no matter what language she was building on, she just happened to be speaking Latin at the time.

:twocents:
tee

Perhaps I’m trying too hard to look for a reason to defend latin.
What you offered makes sense.

Thanks