Is Latin a holy language?

[newcalling]

I understand the history of how Latin became the church language: the church was (and is) centered in Rome, and with evangelization it became prudent to have a common liturgical language. However, I have met a lot of Catholics who believe that the mass should still be in Latin and who treat Latin as if it is a holy language.

Latin certainly feels spiritual, and I even like to pray in Latin. I know that the feeling is mostly due to cultural exposure (especially with Hollywood. ) I just don’t see any logical reason for it to be a holy language. I know that I partially like it because of continuity: many of the saints prayed in Latin.

I think that Hebrew (or Aramaic-Hebrew) would be a better candidate for a holy language. I also like to pray in Hebrew. However, I also understand the early Christian-Jewish schism, and that early Christians didn’t want to be identified with the Jews after the fall of the temple. So, I can understand why the early church eventually switched to Latin.

My question is whether Latin has any special holy property, or if it is simply a matter of tradition (little “t”) and what makes it special?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I understand the history of how Latin became the church language: the church was (and is) centered in Rome, and with evangelization it became prudent to have a common liturgical language. However, I have met a lot of Catholics who believe that the mass should still be in Latin and who treat Latin as if it is a holy language.

Latin certainly feels spiritual, and I even like to pray in Latin. I know that the feeling is mostly due to cultural exposure (especially with Hollywood. ) I just don’t see any logical reason for it to be a holy language. I know that I partially like it because of continuity: many of the saints prayed in Latin.

I think that Hebrew (or Aramaic-Hebrew) would be a better candidate for a holy language. I also like to pray in Hebrew. However, I also understand the early Christian-Jewish schism, and that early Christians didn’t want to be identified with the Jews after the fall of the temple. So, I can understand why the early church eventually switched to Latin.

My question is whether Latin has any special holy property, or if it is simply a matter of tradition (little “t”) and what makes it special?

There is nothing intrinsically holy about Latin any more than Greek. The veneration of the Latin language springs from its role in unifying Christendom up to the Reformation period. After the Reformation, the emergence and dominance of national languages was promoted by the invention of the printing press. Latin lost its appeal, certainly for Protestants, who had lost the idea of a universal Church, and finally for Catholics who could see at long last that Latin had become a fairly dead language. The abandonment of the Latin Mass was a good thing, so long as the Mass is still celebrated the same way all over the world in whatever language you find it. I find unfathomable the view that Latin somehow is more spiritual than English.

 

[MtnDwellar]

Some priest, exorcists in particular, refer to Latin as a holy language and the local language as profane.

They claim increased efficacy in Latin prayers as opposed to the same prayers in a profane language.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Some priest, exorcists in particular, refer to Latin as a holy language and the local language as profane.

They claim increased efficacy in Latin prayers as opposed to the same prayers in a profane language.

Highly disbelieve that.

 

[phil19034]

Some priest, exorcists in particular, refer to Latin as a holy language and the local language as profane.

They claim increased efficacy in Latin prayers as opposed to the same prayers in a profane language.

To clarify this… this is because the prayers were written in Latin and that we often lose something in translations.

If a prayer was written in Greek, then the “holy language” for that prayer would be Greek and Latin would be a profane.

The use of Latin in the Church allows us to have an “official” version which can be translated from. Since Latin is a “dead language,” we don’t have to worry about slang and figure of speech changes. That is why Latin is “preferred” for official Church stuff.

Living languages evolve, which is why they are considered “profane” for Church related stuff. While the Holy Languages are “dead” and do not evolve (even Greek and Hebrew because the Church uses the Ancient Greek and Ancient Hebrew, not modern).

I hope this is helpful.

God bless.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The Catholic Mass is holy regardless of the language in which it is celebrated.

 

[theyoungmonk]

It does depend on what you mean by holy. You could say that Latin, Greek and Hebrew are three Holy Languages as these were the languages of Our Lord. We can also see that these are the three languages of the Latin Rite liturgy and were the three languages on the sign above Our Lord when he was crucified.

Latin is also the language in which the only inerrant copy of Sacred Scripture is written. As well as the proper language of the Church in which the official documents are written. It is also the language in which the typical edition of the Novus Ordo Missal is written as well as that of the Mass of Ages.

 

[epan]

It is unfortunate that the Church has lost its Aramaic and Hebrew origins. Poor translations of the Bible have resulted in a number of problems with religious belief and teachings over the centuries.

Rather than a reversion to Latin, I would advocate reviving the actual texts, and understanding them. Many religions do try to do this.

 

[Ignatius]

I understand the history of how Latin became the church language: the church was (and is) centered in Rome, and with evangelization it became prudent to have a common liturgical language. However, I have met a lot of Catholics who believe that the mass should still be in Latin and who treat Latin as if it is a holy language.

Latin certainly feels spiritual, and I even like to pray in Latin. I know that the feeling is mostly due to cultural exposure (especially with Hollywood. ) I just don’t see any logical reason for it to be a holy language. I know that I partially like it because of continuity: many of the saints prayed in Latin.

I think that Hebrew (or Aramaic-Hebrew) would be a better candidate for a holy language. I also like to pray in Hebrew. However, I also understand the early Christian-Jewish schism, and that early Christians didn’t want to be identified with the Jews after the fall of the temple. So, I can understand why the early church eventually switched to Latin.

My question is whether Latin has any special holy property, or if it is simply a matter of tradition (little “t”) and what makes it special?

Nope. It is a venerable tradition, when one attends to EF Mass it is exactly the same no matter where in the world or what the local languages are. It makes it truly universal.

 

[Pat_Payne]

It does depend on what you mean by holy. You could say that Latin, Greek and Hebrew are three Holy Languages as these were the languages of Our Lord. We can also see that these are the three languages of the Latin Rite liturgy and were the three languages on the sign above Our Lord when he was crucified.

Latin is also the language in which the only inerrant copy of Sacred Scripture is written. As well as the proper language of the Church in which the official documents are written. It is also the language in which the typical edition of the Novus Ordo Missal is written as well as that of the Mass of Ages.

Explain, please? The Vulgate of St. Jerome is somehow more authoritative than the Koine Greek/Aramaic originals?

 

[oliver927]

You could say that Latin, Greek and Hebrew are three Holy Languages as these were the languages of Our Lord.

I always thought Jesus spoke Aramaic. Was that not the reason the movie The Passion of the Christ was in Aramaic?

 

[theyoungmonk]

Explain, please? The Vulgate of St. Jerome is somehow more authoritative than the Koine Greek/Aramaic originals?

As far as I am aware we do not actually posses any literal originals of any book of Holy Scripture. We do though have the decree of the Council of Trent which declared that no error is contained in the vulgate translation. This is a higher degree of surety than granted anywhere else.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Unless I am truly confused, the Church does not teach that the Mass is celebrated in an unholy language when it is celebrated in English.

I was raised on the Latin Mass. I never regarded it as holy so much as mysterious. I don’t think it seems logical to say that there is a moral equivalence between mysterious and holy. I went to a Latin Mass several years ago. I never want to go to one again. I don 't think that means I am a linguistic bigot, so much as a person who just wants to understand every word of the prayers he is uttering.

 

[TarkanAttila]

Explain, please? The Vulgate of St. Jerome is somehow more authoritative than the Koine Greek/Aramaic originals?

The Vulgate is declared to be an official, authoritative translation of the Scriptures.

The problem with the “originals”, is that the originals no longer exist, or if they do, we have no way to know whether we have them or not. The closest thing we have are copies of the originals - granted, very old copies and fragments thereof, but still copies.

Nevertheless, the Holy See can approve new translations, and has done so. Many of these are based on the oldest copies we have available, interpreted in light of Tradition. And it’s really the Tradition that is authoritative, not merely the manuscripts, which are a part of Tradition.

 

[newcalling]

To clarify this… this is because the prayers were written in Latin and that we often lose something in translations.

If a prayer was written in Greek, then the “holy language” for that prayer would be Greek and Latin would be a profane.

The use of Latin in the Church allows us to have an “official” version which can be translated from. Since Latin is a “dead language,” we don’t have to worry about slang and figure of speech changes. That is why Latin is “preferred” for official Church stuff.

Living languages evolve, which is why they are considered “profane” for Church related stuff. While the Holy Languages are “dead” and do not evolve (even Greek and Hebrew because the Church uses the Ancient Greek and Ancient Hebrew, not modern).

I hope this is helpful.

God bless.

Some great responses from everyone. Thank you. To the quote: Yes, helpful. Curiosity; which form of ancient Hebrew does the church use? There is proto-Hebrew (proto-semitic, proto-sinaitic) which is Moses and Joshua’s Hebrew, Davidic Hebrew, and post-captivity reconstructed Hebrew with Aramaic influences; the last one being the language at the time of Yeshua, and the basis for modern Hebrew. Just wondering because I study languages as a hobby, and I love Hebrew.

Back on topic. I have learned some Latin and I know classical Latin pronunciation. Will people look at me funny because of the differences with liturgical Latin? For example, in classic Latin pronunciation the “ae” is pronounced as a long “i” whereas I think in liturgical Latin it is pronounced “ay” like in “stay.” The difference between nostri and nostray. (Ora pro nobis peccatoribus nunc, et in hora mortis nostrae) I may eventually adapt to the other, but old habits… Anyway, when we pray or sing in Latin in mass, will my Julian accent cause anyone pause or distraction?

 

[theyoungmonk]

Anyway, when we pray or sing in Latin in Mass, will my Julian accent cause anyone pause or distraction?

Most people have awful pronunciation so they would most likely be unable to tell the difference between the two. I expect you will pronounce and understand more than many.

 

[jinglebelle]

Some priest, exorcists in particular, refer to Latin as a holy language and the local language as profane.

They claim increased efficacy in Latin prayers as opposed to the same prayers in a profane language.

only in exorcist mumbo jumbo land

 

[jinglebelle]

I always thought Jesus spoke Aramaic. Was that not the reason the movie The Passion of the Christ was in Aramaic?/QUOTl
absolutely,

 

[pianistclare]

I always thought Jesus spoke Aramaic. Was that not the reason the movie The Passion of the Christ was in Aramaic?

Jesus indeed spoke Aramaic. He would have known Hebrew due to being a Jew, and he would have had familiarity with Greek because the marketplace and commerce were using the Greek language. So, all my theology professors have taught that He could speak and was well versed in 3 languages.

 

[Beautiful]

Some priest, exorcists in particular, refer to Latin as a holy language and the local language as profane.

They claim increased efficacy in Latin prayers as opposed to the same prayers in a profane language.

This is what I have read repeatedly. I don’t doubt it. I don’t want to find out first hand.