What is the most ancient rite close to Jesus Time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter convertingtocatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Julius_Caesar said:
We have to assume Jesus and His Apostles would be at least proficient in Greek.
Click to expand...
Jesus did not need a teacher. The apostles however were not learned intellectuals they spoke their native language and were fishermen by trade. St. Paul (lawyer) and St. Luke (medical Doctor) were the intellectuals who wrote and spoke Greek not discounting Mark and Matthew (tax collector) who some scholars are of the opinion that Mark and Matthew may have assisted Peter in some of the New Testament accounts. The apostles were simple men and devoted Jews who spoke Hebrew and it’s close cousin Aramaic. When Hebrew is a dieing language during this time.
 
There seems to exist some false belief that the liturgy closest to the time of the Apostles should somehow be discovered and promulgated throughout the Church, and due to its proximity in time to Christ should then therefore be regarded as the best and “most reverent” form of liturgy.

The Last Supper provides just an outline of consecration, and the meeting with the disciples going to Emmaus expounds a bit more to include the reading of scripture along with the celebration of the Eucharist. However, neither of these passages implies what would be thought of as a “divinely revealed, infallible teaching.” The Church had and has the authority to develop a liturgy as long as it contains these essential elements.

The Latin Mass, rightly so, has been regarded as the highest form of Roman Catholic liturgy for centuries now. Even though it was not the “first” type of Mass celebrated by the Apostles or their disciples, the Church refined the liturgy through the ages by her own authority.
 
The substance of the liturgy since the last supper has not changed to this day in all Catholic liturgies. For example; The consecration and consummation of the Eucharist, the oral teaching, biblical readings or letters from the apostles, the Our Father still remain in all Apostolic liturgies since the resurrection. The New Testament Gospels and Apostolic letters support this fact. The Liturgy was conducted in the language of the peoples including the Greek Apostolic Letters read at the first century Liturgies had a translator according to some Apostle accounts.
I believe what may be missed in this conversation is the validity of the liturgy as being done once and for all and that the mysteries are not repeated in Liturgy, the celebrated mysteries are Parousia an eternal event made present to our humanity by God’s Word not man’s language spoken.
Mystically speaking there is no ancient rite. There is only one Rite that Jesus Christ instituted on earth at the last supper made present by God to all generations until Jesus Christ returns for His Catholic Bride, finding her celebrating the God ordained mysteries in His Presence. The consummation marriage between God and His Bride is made in the Eucharist celebration. All languages should rejoice in this faithful understanding no matter when and where the Apostolic faith was handed down.
Peace be with you
 
Last edited:
I disagree. Jesus did not learn divine knowledge. Jesus did not disclose all divine knowledge. Jesus being fully human and fully God, from His humanity learned in His humanity from His humanity in the natural order of things. But it was Jesus at 12 years old teaching the teachers of Israel about the things of God. It is amazing although, we don’t find Jesus ever needing an interpreter when he healed and parted knowledge to Centurions, Samaritans, Greeks, Jews including very old Jews. it’s like Jesus already new their languages but no one new where Jesus got his knowledge from. Even today we cannot pretend a false pretense.
 
I’m not sure which apostle you are relating too here? It is believed Matthew and or Mark wrote for Peter’s Gospel accounts and his epistles. Luke and Paul were well versed in Greek and could write their own letters. Luke records a Gospel but his Gospel is synoptic. John being raised with the learned Jews may have been an intellectual learned student. But all this is debatable among the best scholars.
 
Julius_Caesar said:
Especially since they came from Galilee, an area called Galilee of the Gentiles.
Click to expand...
Gentile did not automatically entail Greek speaking. Many Gentiles in Judaea were various non-Jewish peoples who had settled in the region (voluntarily or forcibly) several centuries prior during its administration by the Assyrian, Babylonian and Achaemenid Empires. They, like their Jewish neighbours, generally spoke Aramaic.

Galilee was undergoing Hellenisation during the time of Christ, but it was only a recent phenomenon. Alexandria is the archetypical city of Hellenised Judaism, but the Jewish people in the southern Levant (Galilee, Jerusalem) lived in the recent memory of the anti-Hellenistic Maccabean revolt that resulted in the Hasomonean dynasty, the first Jewish government of Jerusalem and its surroundings in centuries. Roman governance (and Hellenistic thinking) of the region was only re-asserted some 50 years before Christ was born. In addition, during the millennia between the birth of Christ and the United Monarchy, the region was only under Greek administration (whether Macedonian, Ptolemaic or Seleucid) for ~150 years. The vast majority of the time was spent under some Aramaic-speaking empire.

This does not exclude Jesus and the Apostles from being literate in Greek, but I think it helps to nuance our understanding of the linguistic diversity of 1st century AD Roman Palestine.
 
Last edited:
Bithynian said:
Gentile did not automatically entail Greek speaking. Many Gentiles in Judaea were various non-Jewish peoples who had settled in the region (voluntarily or forcibly) several centuries prior during its administration by the Assyrian, Babylonian and Achaemenid Empires. They, like their Jewish neighbours, generally spoke Aramaic.

Galilee was undergoing Hellenisation during the time of Christ, but it was only a recent phenomenon
Click to expand...
Considering their knowledge of the Greek Old Testament, I’d say there’s a high chance the Apostles and Christ would’ve known Greek.
 
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
It is amazing although, we don’t find Jesus ever needing an interpreter when he healed and parted knowledge to Centurions, Samaritans, Greeks, Jews including very old Jews.
Click to expand...
Those people you mention had knowledge of Aramaic and Greek. So it’s not a Passion of the Christ situation where Jesus can casually talk in Latin, it’s a situation in which Jesus and others already know a common language. And again, Jesus being God incarnate doesn’t automatically entail Him knowing all languages while He was alive. He was still 100% human.
 
John was well known to study among the High Priest circles, thus he would of spoken and been able to read and write the Greek academia language at the time. As far as the Liturgies being conducted in the first century. The Apostolic Letters came down to the believers in Greek, yet for those Aramaic/Hebrew converts, Latin speaking Christians had the Greek Apostolic letters interpreted to them in their respected Languages at the time. Earlier on before the Apostolic Letters were written, Hebrew/ Aramaic would of been the earliest language conducted in Liturgy with no Greek Apostolic Letters.
The written message from Pilate went to all Hebrew, Latin and Greek speaking Jews that the Crucified Lord was the King of the Jews. Pilate wrote this message in their respected languages.
 
Last edited:
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
Latin speaking Christians had the Greek Apostolic letters interpreted to them in their respected Languages at the time. Earlier on before the Apostolic Letters were written, Hebrew/ Aramaic would of been the earliest language conducted in Liturgy with no Greek Apostolic Letters.
Click to expand...
You underestimate how much people of the Mediterranean in that time knew Greek. There’s a reason Romans, Hebrews, James, and Matthew to name a few NT documents all came in Greek.
 
Julius_Caesar said:
And again, Jesus being God incarnate doesn’t automatically entail Him knowing all languages while He was alive. He was still 100% human.
Click to expand...
Yes, however He was also 100% God…

…He healed the sick…

…He walked on water…

…He rose the dead…

…it is not absurd to imagine that He spoke all languages fluently…

…or perhaps He simply spoke, and all that heard Him, had heard His voice in their own native tongue…

…after all, was He not the word incarnate?
 
Last edited:
CathBoy1 said:
Yes, however He was also 100% God…

…He healed the sick…

…He walked on water…

…He rose the dead…

…it is not absurd to imagine that He spoke all languages fluently…
Click to expand...
It is when you consider the fact that He was like us in all things but sin. So that fact would rule out Him being a language whiz.
 
CathBoy1 said:
So would Greek have been the common tongue between the people?
Click to expand...
How did the West Syriac Rite come about then? I’m told it’s Hellenized. After the Chalcedonian council the Levant area got divided between the pro-Byzantine Empire (Greek) Church and the pro-Oriental (West Syriac) Church. Of course the modern day Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch and the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch.

Since the early West Syriac liturgy was originally in Greek, is it fair to say the West Syriacs are influenced by the Byzantine liturgy?
 
Last edited:
Julius_Caesar said:
It is when you consider the fact that He was like us in all things but sin. So that fact would rule out Him being a language whiz.
Click to expand...
Really?
So perhaps you can raise the dead?
Are you honestly suggesting that there is a 0% possibility that He spoke all languages?

Yes He was 100% human and therefore He felt all emotions…

…He hungered as we hunger…

…His bodily functions worked as ours do…

…He was 100% human, however what you seem to forget is He is also 100% God…

…when speaking about if He can speak all languages we must remember He is full God…

…His ways are not our ways…

…at 12 He was ”teaching the teachers“ in the temple…

…He cured the blind, healed the sick, had control over the weather…

…you seem to overlook that, while yes He was 100% human, He is our God…

…could He speak all languages? There is no doubt in my mind that He could, as He can do all things…

…to deny that fact, is to put limitations on what God can do, I would not dare to put limits on God.
 
Last edited:
CathBoy1 said:
when speaking about if He can speak all languages we must remember He is full God…

…His ways are not our ways…

…at 12 He was ”teaching the teachers“ in the temple…

…He cured the blind, healed the sick, had control over the weather…

…you seem to overlook that, while yes He was 100% human, He is our God …
Click to expand...
And you seem to forget He emptied Himself. When He healed, He sure as heck didn’t do it for His own honor. He also didn’t do anything like that Temple incident as a kid in Nazareth and He didn’t perform miracles till the age of thirty. In all appearances He was as the Prophet Isaiah said, one who didn’t cry in the street.
 
Last edited:
Alexandria2020 said:
How did the West Syriac Rite come about then?
Click to expand...
I am not sure as I have not personally studied the subject in depth.

As for Greek being the common tongue in those times, that was something I had read some 15 years ago whilst reading about which language(s) were spoken in the times of Christ.
Alexandria2020 said:
Since the early West Syriac liturgy was originally in Greek, is it fair to say the West Syriacs are influenced by the Byzantine liturgy?
Click to expand...
From my very limited pov, it seems likely.
I mean from an objective standpoint, if the liturgy was originally in Greek, it stands to reason that it was influenced by the Greeks, on the other hand if Greek was used as the common tongue, perhaps it was originally used as the vernacular for the liturgy and so perhaps there was little to no Greek influences, but who knows?
Certainly not me.
 
Julius_Caesar said:
He sure as heck didn’t do it for His own honor.
Click to expand...
And I did not suggest that He spoke all languages for His own honor.

Look we both agree that while Jesus was 100% human, He was also 100% free of sin, correct?

Perhaps He spoke as people did before the Tower of Babel…

…perhaps when He spoke, all understood.

…and just because He is 100% human, that does not override the fact that He is 100% God…

…and with God all things are possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top