But Italian is a direct descendant of Latin. Respect your elders.It is “Traduttore, traditore”. BTW thanks for giving proof that Latin is superior to the other languages but second to Italian.
This may be so if you attended the Divine Liturgy in Ukraine, but not in the United States. Even Ukrainian Catholics (or Romainian, or Melkite, etc.) in the U.S. are expected to celebrate the Divine Liturgy primarily in English because in the East we evangelize through our Liturgical services. How can we evangelize our nation if our Liturgies (our means of evangelization) are in a language that few in this country understand. You have, however, hit on a key problem that pertains in both the Catholic and Orthodox East; the problem of parishes often being little more than ghettos for preserving one’s ethnic heritage. It is often forgotten that we are Christian first and Ukrainian, Arab, Romanian, etc. second. Spreading the message of the Gospel ALWAYS must take precedence over the preservation of our ethnic quirks. This is one of the reasons why translation of the Divine Liturgy in English were done and celebrated by both Eastern Catholics and Orthodox decades before this took place in the Roman Church sui iuris.
What I find interesting is that Latin would have been used at all. I was thinking that the Church didn’t start using Latin until it became centered in Rome and was the common language. A little research indicateds that at the time of Christ, Latin was just developing as a dirivited from Greek and scholars place what they call Old Latin as starting around 75B.C… This could lead to some interestig questions as to why it was used, if it was used on the inscription, or perhaps it was a vehical that St. John used to convey a message to his community who were Greek Helonist. I think I’ll do more research on the Gospel of John. Perhaps his message was, Hebrew, the language of the past , Greek the Language of the now (in his day) and Latin the language of the new. i.e. God yesterday, today and tomorrow.
It isn’t misguided when one realizes there may be a danger to his faith when doctrine is translated. For example, the Poles (or the Italians probably too for that matter) don’t concern themselves with whether Mary is to be “worshipped” or not or understand the ramifications. Yet on the Vatican website itself, there it is in English. Bad thing when theology (and gospel) becomes corrupted in such a way. And differs from translation to translation. Better stick to and teach in Latin so the doctrine is the same for everyone and not create Protestant-type division.
The matter is quite a two-edged sword. It is likewise often forgotten that without the “ethnic connection” (which I see so often vilified in these fora) the various Eastern and Oriental Churches (OC & CC alike) would have long ago ceased to exist, even in their “home” territories. It was precisely that “ethnic connection” which allowed them to live and allows them to continue to be witness to the Faith today.
1599 is the date of the first concordat of Munkacs between the returning Easterners and Rome.
By your augument the scripture should only be read in Greek, the original script and not translated into Latin because it is corrupted.
What about Old Church Slavonic? Our Ukrainian Rite priest still uses it for parts of the Divine Liturgy.
Don’t confuse the issue with facts!
But can’t I use the same argument for those in the Church or coming into the Church to learn or at least respect its theology and its language, which incidentally by design has no national/secular borders associated with it?
We discussed some of the other ones here.
It’s not really a “sacred” language. St. Cyril and Methodius translated the Liturgies into Church Slavonic because at the time it was the language spoken by the Slavic people they were attempting to convert. Many Churches, however, simply didn’t really update their translations. The Greek Orthodox, from what I understand, are pretty much the same way. They still use Koine Greek in their Liturgies I believe.
You could if the Church had one language and one theology. But it doesn’t. Never has. Never will.
But why create newer and newer theologies all the time? Does Christianity really need more denominations? Why not try to have a “gold standard” which at least preserves some theology going back to Christ? We’ve already seriously undermined the theology and doctrines of Trent, parts of which had been considered infallible by most, even Eastern churches.
Liturgical translations, when properly done, do not create new theologies. We must remember that the Gospel is alive because ultimately the Gospel is not human words, but a Divine-Human Person. The living dynamic of the Gospel makes “inculturation” possible. Christ reaches us where we are. This does not mean that we adapt the Gospel to “fit into” the philsophy and mentalities of whatever culture we are trying to evangelize, but that we must express the truths of the Gospel in ways that are understandable/graspable/within the living experience of the cultures we in which we live. Just observe how the Roman world was evangelized by couching the Gospel message in Greek philosophical terms.
If I recall correctly, Ss Cyril and Methodius used a Slavic dialect (probably old Bulgarian or old Macedonian) as a basis for creating a literary language for the evangelization of the Slavic peoples, but OCS itself was never exactly a “vernacular” language.
Yes, and as I understand it, the GO proudly maintain Koine as a liturgical language. AFAIK, Koine is also what is used by the Melkites and the Antiochian Orthodox.
Most, if not all, Greek Orthodox here in the States will use a mixture of Greek and English. The parish up the street from me has two Liturgies on Sundays, one almost all in Greek, the other half Greek half English.
Yes, I know. I was simply noting that it is, in fact, Koine (rather than Modern) Greek that the GO use liturgically when using the Greek language.
I’m quite familiar with the practices, and again, I was merely saying that when Greek is used by either, it’s Koine.
