Latin: Divisive or Unitive

[ProVobis]

No disrespect intended, but it will NEVER be up to the lay people what happens in the liturgy.

Not in substance anyway.

 

[TimSpalding]

Speaking of intensifiers, is there a better translation of “Per IPSUM, et cum IPSO, et in IPSO” than “Through Him and with Him and in Him”?

Yeah, I think the translation is dead on. In Classical Latin ipse means “he himself” but it was undergoing a slow shift to meaning just “he.” (See this article I found online google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ipse%20latin%20vulgate&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.journals.uio.no%2Findex.php%2Fosla%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F41%2F218&ei=YMb9UcbnFNL84APb2YDwDA&usg=AFQjCNHRDLXWcYWO9bHne5ULPWMupEZffA&bvm=bv.50165853,d.dmg ).

It’s notable that the NT passages I read are generally looked at for this phrase in the mass (2 Cor 1:20; Col 3:17; Heb 13:15) are all “ipse” in the Vulgate and just “houtos” (he or “this guy”) in the Greek, not “heautos” or “he himself,” which is what ipse means earlier on. It may be that Jerome felt some pull to translate “houtos” as “ipse” not “is” when talking about the Lord. I’m not sure. But in any case there’s no cause to translate it as “through he himself” or “through that very fellow,” which one might do for Latin of an earlier era.

Not to be obnoxious—because my Latin and Greek are certainly rusting fast!—but this shows the problems with trying to understand the mass in a foreign language. Getting nuances like this is incredibly hard. I certainly needed to think about and look it up, and I’ve had seven years of Latin–albeit mostly of an earlier period. While knowing Latin does offer up some gems of insight, it’s hard to do better than an English translation done by people who’ve made translation their life’s work.

That said, I think both the “new” and the “old” English translations of the mass are bad—and bad in opposite directions as it were. As for the new one, I’m not sure the people translating it were actually comfortable with Latin. It reads like a bright third-year Latin student’s translation.

 

[ProVobis]

Yeah, I think the translation is dead on. In Classical Latin ipse means “he himself” but it was undergoing a slow shift to meaning just “he.” (See this article I found online google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ipse%20latin%20vulgate&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.journals.uio.no%2Findex.php%2Fosla%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F41%2F218&ei=YMb9UcbnFNL84APb2YDwDA&usg=AFQjCNHRDLXWcYWO9bHne5ULPWMupEZffA&bvm=bv.50165853,d.dmg ).

It’s notable that the NT passages I read are generally looked at for this phrase in the mass (2 Cor 1:20; Col 3:17; Heb 13:15) are all “ipse” in the Vulgate and just “houtos” (he or “this guy”) in the Greek, not “heautos” or “he himself,” which is what ipse means earlier on. It may be that Jerome felt some pull to translate “houtos” as “ipse” not “is” when talking about the Lord. I’m not sure. But in any case there’s no cause to translate it as “through he himself” or “through that very fellow,” which one might do for Latin of an earlier era.

So you’re saying that the text framers could have just as easily made it “Per EUM and cum EO and in EO” and it wouldn’t have made any difference as far as the Anglophones understood it? Perhaps.

it’s hard to do better than an English translation done by people who’ve made translation their life’s work.

Unfortunately I don’t put that kind of trust into translators when I read or hear different translations into other languages, like Polish, which likes to minimize the use of pronouns altogether (as well as being more inflective).

That said, I think both the “new” and the “old” English translations of the mass are bad—and bad in opposite directions as it were. As for the new one, I’m not sure the people translating it were actually comfortable with Latin. It reads like a bright third-year Latin student’s translation.

I agree but I feel it was a good exercise, though. (Maybe an exercise in futility? )

Perhaps we should have another one in a few years. unless all the Anglophone Catholics have died off. I usually count only a handful of people under 55 at the English Masses. The Spanish Masses, OTOH…

 

[Aramis]

“Multis” is more toward “many.” “Pluribus” is the superlative form, and it could easily be translated as “all” here.

There is also the “Annuit coeptis/novus ordo seclorum” printed on the bill. That loosely means “He (God) favors our undertaking/ New order of ages”. But interestingly enough,when the words “In God We Trust” were added in English in the 50’s, the atheists went bonkers.

But I agree, most don’t know and don’t care. Probably a good thing.

If that much. Have you checked the latest reading scores of Americans?

Only reading scores I’ve checked have been of K-12. And those are actually improving, for the most part. (Albeit at the same rate or slightly slower growth since the NCLB act than prior to it.)

The second most common language in the US is spanish, at over 35% of the population speaking it; English leads, of course.

Latin was divisive in the 50’s - the lack of people understanding it proved a barrier then, and it’s a barrier now, as well, to people entering the church. It also drove some away from the church. And it allowed many superstitious folk to be totally ignorant of the Church’s teachings.

Latin as an option for the Roman Rite is good. The 1962 missal in the vernacular would also be good. But I really think it would be best served by an ordinariate and/or separate sui iuris church, not the current system. The current system fails to serve well those attached strongly to the 1962 missal and/or to the use of Latin. And then there’s the crowd that wants latin, but not the 1962 missal, and those who love the 1965 provisions (TLM in English, anyone?).

Any options are a source of division. It’s simply human nature.

 

[ProVobis]

Latin was divisive in the 50’s - the lack of people understanding it proved a barrier then,

It appears that there may be some truth to that.

jakomonchak.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/languages-and-veterum-sapientia.pdf

and it’s a barrier now, as well, to people entering the church.

I think you’re making this part up because Latin is hardly used at all right now.

It also drove some away from the church.

In the U.S. the decline in Mass attendance began in 1964, according to CARA, about the time Latin in the Mass was being dismantled. Coincidence?

 

[Khalid]

Lastly, if anyone is choosing between them—and both is not an option—I’d recommend the Greek. From a Christian perspective, there’s a lot more good stuff in Greek than Latin, notwithstanding a few important Latin authors. And the same goes for non-Christian literature. Latin literature started late and almost all the good stuff was written within a period of maybe 200 years. It’s a teacup. Geek literature is an ocean.

Latin is Augustine, Greek is everyone else and the Bible.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Not to mention Greek grammar can be accused of being overly precise, whereas Latin grammar really doesn’t matter, and can be very sloppy while still comprehensible (such as the Vulgate Latin compared to Tully).

This reminds me of a joke one of my professors once told me while I was in school. In Latin, there is one sense in which the ablative case may be used which is not taught in text books, that being the ablative of desperation, which is when the writer did not know what case to use, and simply stuck the noun in the ablative.

 

[Baelor]

I stand corrected. So does English have a comparative to “many”?

One could use “more” in some cases:

A: I have many sheep.
B: I have more.

 

[ProVobis]

One could use “more” in some cases:

A: I have many sheep.
B: I have more.

So “e pluribus unum” becomes “out of more than many, one”?

And FWIW, “Annuit coeptis” and “e pluribus unum” each have 13 letters. Perhaps it’s coincidence but it is significant to some degree:

13 original colonies,
13 signers of the Declaration of Independence,
13 stripes on our flag,
13 steps on the Pyramid,
13 letters in the Latin above,
13 letters in “E Pluribus Unum,”
13 stars above the Eagle,
13 bars on that shield,
13 leaves on the olive branch,
13 fruits, and if you look closely, 13 arrows.

qsl.net/w5www/dollarbill.html

So if you want a translator to put the dollar bill in vernacular, good luck!

 

[Baelor]

So “e pluribus unum” becomes “out of more than many, one”?

Maybe more along the lines of “out of rather many” (a common translation of comparatives) or “out of most.”

 

[ProVobis]

Maybe more along the lines of “out of rather many” (a common translation of comparatives) or “out of most.”

You could have said “for you and for all” and they would have believed you.

 

[Fogwalker]

We don’t need Latin, Greek, or any other “unitive” language to celebrate Eucharist - the Body in Blood are the same in St. Paul, Minnesota as they are in Sao Paulo, Brazil. At a time when many Catholics and former Catholics are fighting the misconception that Catholicism is about unnecessary rules and regulations, why impose an unnecessary rule on 100% of the people who worship at Mass?

 

[Baelor]

We don’t need Latin, Greek, or any other “unitive” language to celebrate Eucharist - the Body in Blood are the same in St. Paul, Minnesota as they are in Sao Paulo, Brazil. At a time when many Catholics and former Catholics are fighting the misconception that Catholicism is about unnecessary rules and regulations, why impose an unnecessary rule on 100% of the people who worship at Mass?

The rule already exists. It has practical purposes, if only facility going to Mass in foreign countries and the connection that one feels to Catholics through space and time.

 

[Fogwalker]

The rule already exists. It has practical purposes, if only facility going to Mass in foreign countries and the connection that one feels to Catholics through space and time.

The Eucharist is what unites Catholics through space and time, not Latin or Greek.

 

[ProVobis]

The Eucharist is what unites Catholics through space and time, not Latin or Greek.

Uhm, I pass by a Liberal Catholic church closeby and they have “Eucharist celebrated at 10:30am” on their sign. I’m sure there are other denominations which claim they have the “Eucharist” as well.

 

[Fogwalker]

I really do respect and admire the desire to have all Catholics worshiping in exactly the same way no matter where or when someone is celebrating Mass. But it can’t be done. What about all of the non-Latin rites? What about our brothers and sisters who are deaf? What about those who are mentally disabled? Latin or Greek would not unify those groups of people with their brothers and sisters any more or less than English or Spanish. If anything, a universal language at Mass would further isolate the three groups I mentioned above. As it stands now, non-Latin-rite liturgies and Latin-rite Mass in sign language are just another celebration of the diversity of the universal Church, celebrating her liturgies in hundreds of languages and customs.

 

[ProVobis]

We don’t need Latin, Greek, or any other “unitive” language to celebrate Eucharist -

Chances are that if we didn’t, we wouldn’t even have the word “eucharist” today because that would change every 40 years.

Fact is we do need one or two stable languages; otherwise we’d have all kinds of corruptions in meaning and in our faith.

 

[Fogwalker]

Uhm, I pass by a Liberal Catholic church closeby and they have “Eucharist celebrated at 10:30am” on their sign. I’m sure there are other denominations which claim they have the “Eucharist” as well.

Some of those same churches that advertise “Eucharist” are also performing “Marriages”, but just because they use the same word doesn’t mean we are talking about the same thing.

 

[Fogwalker]

Chances are that if we didn’t, we wouldn’t even have the word “eucharist” today because that would change every 40 years.

Well played! But I was referring to the Presence, not the word used to describe it.

 

[ProVobis]

As it stands now, non-Latin-rite liturgies and Latin-rite Mass in sign language are just another celebration of the diversity of the universal Church, celebrating her liturgies in hundreds of languages and customs.

At some point this can get confusing. For example, a few of us were invited to a wedding of a colleague. It was a Vietnamese wedding and it sure resembled a Catholic wedding. Later we found out it was a Baptist church; we found out from the bridegroom who turned the entire affair into a Catholic-bashing party.

Go to any Lutheran or Anglican service and tell us there’s no resemblance to a Eucharist or Presence there.