Why Ecclesiastical Latin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Curious11
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Curious11

Guest
Why doesn’t the Church switch to Classical Latin? Veni Vidi Vici was pronounced Weni Widi Wiki by Julius Caesar
 
Why doesent the US speak British English?

If you separate a language over time, you will end up with two different varieties.
 
Actually, US English is much more similar to Shakespearean English which did indeed pronounce the R. Modern British accents are a 19th century phenomenon. So the question should be: why don’t the British speak with an American accent?
 
What does that have to do with classical or Ecclesiastical Latin?
 
Some folks want to replace the vernacular with it. That’s what I thought you meant.
 
Either way, the point still stands- Language and pronunciation evolve over time. There’s no real difference in Church latin and Classical, other than the v and w change.
 
No no. I mean that the Latin the Church speaks uses a pronunciation that bears no resemblance to the Latin Julius Caesar would have spoken.

That said, it is the same language
 
  1. Caesar never said “veni, vidi, vici”. Popular error.
  2. Classical latin is different in the meaning of many words. Especially words for power, religious offices and institutions changed - and may cause heavy misconceptions. When I have to translate latin sources, this is one of the most critical parts. So, please leave it as it is, everyone knows how to understand it.
 
It deends on the time. Medieval church sources in latin language differ very much in gramar, style and vocabulary from the classical latin sources.
 
Curious11 said:
Why doesn’t the Church switch to Classical Latin? Veni Vidi Vici was pronounced Weni Widi Wiki by Julius Caesar
Click to expand...
Changing to the reformed pronunciation, which you propose, would be costly and time-consuming, not to mention controversial. Take a look at this article in the Spectator, published in 1907, when schools in Britain were still debating whether to switch to the reformed pronunciation or to maintain the traditional English pronunciation of Latin, which was different again from Church Latin.

The important thing is that all Catholics in every country should be able to understand one another. Why should we all strive to speak “like Julius Caesar”? He wasn’t a Catholic anyway.

 
Last edited:
So, my question to you, Curious, is this:

What’s the big deal?
 
I just thought if Romans could hear us they’d hardly understand
 
Curious11 said:
It just feels right to speak the language correctly
Click to expand...
But language changes constantly so there is no correct language. We could also say using “you” for second person singular is wrong because it should be “thou”.

Also even in Roman times I think there is the written Latin and vernacular Latin. People probably didn’t speak Classical Latin as you imagine it.
 
ratio1 said:
Also even in Roman times I think there is the written Latin and vernacular Latin. People probably didn’t speak Classical Latin as you imagine it.
Click to expand...
I believe thou hast made a mistake. Classical Latin was spoken by the educated elite and was the way Latin was supposed to be apoken
 
Curious11 said:
I believe thou hast made a mistake. Classical Latin was spoken by the educated elite and was the way Latin was supposed to be apoken
Click to expand...
I’m sure there were a lot of variations on the way Latin was spoken throughout the Roman world in the day. The Latin spoken by Pilate in Jerusalem sounded different that that spoken in Gaul or Britain or Asia. And the Latin spoken by Cincinnatus varied from that spoken by Virgil and Julius Caesar and from that spoken by Augustine of Hippo.
 
Curious11 said:
I believe thou hast made a mistake. Classical Latin was spoken by the educated elite and was the way Latin was supposed to be apoken
Click to expand...
If that’s the case, mea culpa, but my logic still stands.
 
Last edited:
It IS correct. Ecclesiastical has become a variant of Latin and therefore has validity on its own merits.

What you’re demanding is analogous to telling Australians to speak English correctly. Or telling Americans to speak English correctly. Or telling the English to speak English correctly because it’s not the language Beowulf is written in. Or that Mexicans are not speaking Spanish correctly because they’re missing the Iberian lisp.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top