Praying in Latin

  • Thread starter Thread starter una_fides
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ConstantineTG said:
I’d agree that having the Scriptures in the original Greek would be awesome, but there is no way anyone will get what is meant there.
Click to expand...
Why is that? After all, the Church has 2000 years experience with both Latin and Greek nuances. In modern changing tongues, obviously not so much, and we end up putting too much stock in modern translations. Thus we end up praying stuff like “world without end,” whatever that means, without questioning and not really understanding what we’re praying anyway.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Any language is as good as the next.
Click to expand...
Would you say the same about computer languages? I think you’re experienced enough to know that a slow language like java isn’t the best language to use on a supercomputer, but I don’t want to delve too deeply into efficacy issues of computer languages here. The point is that modern languages each have a separate purpose, too, if nothing more than defining cultures, measurements, borders, morals, philosophy, and even religious beliefs. Whether one language (or mathematical coordinate system, for that matter) is as good as another depends on what you’re using it for.
 
clem456 said:
Stepping way way way over the line here.
Click to expand...
Clem, could you clarify whether it was Rogers’s content or critical tone (or both) with which you disagree? Out of curiosity, do you agree with or support liturgical dance, removing statues and icons from Churches and leaving bare walls, with children’s songs being played at mass, or with a de-Romanizing the Roman liturgy? While Rogers wording was certainly quite direct and didn’t pull any punches, I would have to say that he does have a point in some of the concerns that he raises.
 
RogerDeCourcy said:
So if Latin was once again mandatory at Roman Catholic masses, you wouldn’t mind? After all, “any language is as good as the next” 😃
Click to expand...
I’m not against the use of Latin. I’m against the ridiculous claims about it.
RogerDeCourcy said:
Other religions see the value in having a language set aside for worship but a tendency in the R.C. Church decided to drop its own, without authority. It’s an act of iconoclasm; thrilling at the time but now we see how reduced our worship is, coupled with all the other changes. Childish hymns at a sacrifice? Gimme a break!
Click to expand...
This I find ridiculous. We say many things against these religions with one language, you know being pagans and heretics and all. Yet when we want to justify Latin suddenly we want to be like them? Give ME a break.

And do you even know what iconoclasm is? Latin is not the image of God, removing it is not iconoclasm.
RogerDeCourcy said:
Protestantism, Islam and Progressive Catholicism have this in common: they tend to leave a seeker in a bare room with a preacher and a book and tell him “Now find God”.

That’s what’s going on here. A stripping away and a dumbing down. And then when ignorant people start playing with the host or dancing in church, the whine goes up “We must have more catechesis!”

Of course, some catholics love all this. That’s what’s really going on. There’s a tendency in the Church to de-Romanise her. Problem is, it blends quite nicely into de-Catholicising her.
Click to expand...
The Catholic faith is not exclusively Roman to begin with. To think that the faith rests on one language or one culture is false.
ProVobis said:
Why is that? After all, the Church has 2000 years experience with both Latin and Greek nuances. In modern changing tongues, obviously not so much, and we end up putting too much stock in modern translations. Thus we end up praying stuff like “world without end,” whatever that means, without questioning and not really understanding what we’re praying anyway.
Click to expand...
The Church wasn’t exclusively in the Greek and Latin tongues even from the beginning. Remember that St. Thomas went East and Christianized many different cultures. We focus on the languages of the Roman Empire because that is where many of the books were written. We overlook the fact that St. Thomas Christianized Indians, Persians and Chaldeans.
ProVobis said:
Would you say the same about computer languages? I think you’re experienced enough to know that a slow language like java isn’t the best language to use on a supercomputer, but I don’t want to delve too deeply into efficacy issues of computer languages here. The point is that modern languages each have a separate purpose, too, if nothing more than defining cultures, measurements, borders, morals, philosophy, and even religious beliefs. Whether one language (or mathematical coordinate system, for that matter) is as good as another depends on what you’re using it for.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day they are all compiled into 1s and 0s anyway. Of course Java is trying to be clever to be “write once, run anywhere”. But you can still compile Java into whatever OS you need it to run on to make it run faster. But of course you now lose the “write once, run anywhere”.

Yes, all programming languages are the same, ultimately.
ByzCathCantor said:
Not many people programming in original Basic these days …
Click to expand...
They’re missing out 😃
 
una_fides said:
Clem, could you clarify whether it was Rogers’s content or critical tone (or both) with which you disagree? Out of curiosity, do you agree with or support liturgical dance, removing statues and icons from Churches and leaving bare walls, with children’s songs being played at mass, or with a de-Romanizing the Roman liturgy? While Rogers wording was certainly quite direct and didn’t pull any punches, I would have to say that he does have a point in some of the concerns that he raises.
Click to expand...
I object to the bolded parts.
Originally Posted by RogerDeCourcy
So if Latin was once again mandatory at Roman Catholic masses, you wouldn’t mind? After all, “any language is as good as the next”
Click to expand...
Other religions see the value in having a language set aside for worship but a tendency in the R.C. Church decided to drop its own, without authority. It’s an act of iconoclasm; thrilling at the time but now we see how reduced our worship is, coupled with all the other changes. **Childish hymns **at a sacrifice? Gimme a break!
Click to expand...
Protestantism, Islam and Progressive Catholicism have this in common: they tend to leave a seeker in a bare room with a preacher and a book and tell him “Now find God”.
Click to expand...
That’s what’s going on here. A** stripping away and a dumbing down**. And then when ignorant people start playing with the host or dancing in church, the whine goes up “We must have more catechesis!”
Click to expand...
Of course, some catholics love all this. That’s what’s really going on. There’s a tendency in the Church to de-Romanise her. Problem is, it blends quite nicely into de-Catholicising her.
Click to expand...
 
The Church wasn’t exclusively in the Greek and Latin tongues even from the beginning.
Click to expand...
Of course. And Pope John XXIII addresses them in his Veterum Sapientia:
Venerable languages
Click to expand...
The Church has ever held the literary evidences of this wisdom in the highest esteem. She values especially the Greek and Latin languages in which wisdom itself is cloaked, as it were, in a vesture of gold. She has likewise welcomed the use of other venerable languages, which flourished in the East. For these too have had no little influence on the progress of humanity and civilization. By their use in sacred liturgies and in versions of Holy Scripture, they have remained in force in certain regions even to the present day, bearing constant witness to the living voice of antiquity.
Click to expand...
A primary place
Click to expand...
But amid this variety of languages a primary place must surely be given to that language which had its origins in Latium, and later proved so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity throughout the West.
Click to expand...
And since in God’s special Providence this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire – and that for so many centuries – it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See.3 Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.
Click to expand...
The nature of Latin
Click to expand...
Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.
Click to expand...
Nor must we overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin for mal structure. Its "concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity"4 makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.
Click to expand...
Preservation of Latin by the Holy See
Click to expand...
For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority "as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws."5 She further requires her sacred ministers to use it, for by so doing they are the better able, wherever they may be, to acquaint themselves with the mind of the Holy See on any matter, and communicate the more easily with Rome and with one another.
Click to expand...
Thus the “knowledge and use of this language,” so intimately bound up with the Church’s life, "is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons."6 These are the words of Our Predecessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church’s nature. "For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular."7
…
Click to expand...
 
I’m speaking about the Roman Catholic Church. Iconoclasm has a wider definition that merely removing images.

I’d say the Roman Catholic Church dropping Latin, and then certain elements studiously opposing its re-introduction, while at the same time allowing any other language and musical style, that is iconoclasm. What it signifies, I’ll leave to sociologists of religion.

1000 years of prayers and hymns, swopped for “On Eagles Wings”, poor translations and Fr Glad ad-libbing the Mass in a bare church (because, hey, now it’s in his native German)?

But I think the patient is slowly recovering from the fever. In times to come, the simple re-translation of *“pro multis” *to “for the many” may be seen as the turning point.
 
RogerDeCourcy said:
I’m speaking about the Roman Catholic Church. Iconoclasm has a wider definition that merely removing images.
Click to expand...
No. The word “icon” itself means “image”. How can it mean anything else?
RogerDeCourcy said:
I’d say the Roman Catholic Church dropping Latin, and then certain elements studiously opposing its re-introduction, while at the same time allowing any other language and musical style, that is iconoclasm. What it signifies, I’ll leave to sociologists of religion.

1000 years of prayers and hymns, swopped for “On Eagles Wings”, poor translations and Fr Glad ad-libbing the Mass in a bare church (because, hey, now it’s in his native German)?

But I think the patient is slowly recovering from the fever. In times to come, the simple re-translation of *“pro multis” *to “for the many” may be seen as the turning point.
Click to expand...
The Byzantine faith was translated to Slavonic from Greek by Sts. Cyril and Methodius. Then from Slavonic to Ukrainain, and then today we are using English from Ukrainian. We’re doing fine. Language has nothing to do with what is going wrong in the Roman Catholic Church.
 
RogerDeCourcy said:
I’d say the Roman Catholic Church dropping Latin, and then certain elements studiously opposing its re-introduction, while at the same time allowing any other language and musical style, that is iconoclasm. What it signifies, I’ll leave to sociologists of religion.
Click to expand...
“Iconoclast” is exactly what Cardinal Arinze calls it in his 2006 address in St. Louis:
The Latin liturgy expresses not only facts but also our feelings, our sentiments, for example, in front of God’s transcendence, majesty, mercy and boundless love (cf. Liturgiam Authenticam, n. 25). Expressions like “Te igitur, clementissime Pater”, “Supplices te rogamus”, “Propitius esto”, “veneremur cernui”, “Omnipotens et misericors Dominus”, “nos servi tui”, should not be deflated and democratized by some translating iconoclast.
Click to expand...
 
ConstantineTG said:
The Byzantine faith was translated to Slavonic from Greek by Sts. Cyril and Methodius.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t Slavonic language itself developed/established by the Church to convey the proper Greek nuances of the faith? I wouldn’t compare this with a fast translation into a common vernacular which has purposes other than worship.
 
ProVobis said:
Wasn’t Slavonic language itself developed/established by the Church to convey the proper Greek nuances of the faith? I wouldn’t compare this with a fast translation into a common vernacular which has purposes other than worship.
Click to expand...
They just standardized the vernacular used by the Slavs. The purpose of Slavonic was to evangelize the Slavs. They didn’t invent a new language that no one spoke of nor cannot understand. They would have failed in their mission if they not only had to Christianize the Slavs, but also usurp their current language.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top