Why Latin?

[Lapell]

We use Aramaic in our mass…not all the mass though…it is not true that we do not understand it…of course the first time we won’t, but we can take pamphlets (sp?), and learn how to pronounce them and what they mean…many Arabic words are derived from Aramaic so we understand them perfectly.

So it’s not the Latin rite, then. Which rite is it, Syriac? or Chaldean?

 

[Lapell]

Why would a mass be in Latin, to a population that doesn’t speak Latin?

Why we used to have a Latin rite and use Latin and not Greek or Aramaic or Hebrew, I don’t know. But it might have to do with the mentality then, for those of Eastern Churches have a mentality quite different from us in Western churches who adopted the Latin Rite (when in History was it, I don’t exactly know, except that it was in use in saint Augustine’s times, and he died in 430!)
In the Russian Byzantine Rite, I know they used to use not the Russian language, but Old Slavonic! I suppose in the Greek Byzantine Rite it would be Koinè Greek… so it’s not just the Western Church that would use a language no longer used in daily life…

 

[Lapell]

The Tridentine Mass was very different, even apart from the language. The priest faced the altar (which to my Jewish eyes, seems far more authentic, since he is supposed to be continuing the sacrifice of Calvary, and when the Jewish Kohen, or priest, offered the sacrifice in the Temple, he faced the altar, not the people…but I digress)

I have also been to a few novus ordo missae (funerals, weddings, etc) and frankly, as a non-Catholic who has always admired aesthetics, classical music, Gregorian chant and sheer beauty, the Tridentine Mass has it all over the new one!

I once heard Rosalind Moss express the same preference as for how Mass is said. (I don’t know if it’s the case for all Catholics of Jewish origin, though.)

 

[ralphinal]

If I missed this, please forgive me for the history lesson.

Isreal was under Roman control. The language of Government of Roman Provences was either Latin for most of the world or Greek in the lands that were once Greek Provences, such as the Middle East and Egypt. Even then, the Greek areas had Latin speakers in position so that Rome could send messages.

One thing that made Rome unique was the building of roads. A message could start in Rome and get anywhere in the Empire with relative ease. Once it got there, it needed someone who could read it. Hence, Latin became the universal language.

Peter and Paul ended up in Rome. At that time, the Roman CHurch began to become the dominant one for most of Europe. Remember that any government correspondence was in Latin. Any country or town of any size had at least one Latin speaker, so that government messages could be transmitted. AS the Church grew and spread, these Latin Speakers were instrumental in the spread of the faith. Eventually, Latin became the Church language in the West. The east held on to Greek at first, and the more local, Middle Eastern held to their tongues as well. After the fall of Rome, the Church became the teaching force. Still holding to a universal language, all educated people learned Latin.

As time passed, Latin died as other Languages grew. The Church, still needing a simple way for all members to communicate, held to its form of Latin. Eventually, the service was changed to the vernacular in each nation, to make following the worship easier. The officail language is still LAtin.

For the purposes of what Agnos said, the international language (Language of the UN), is French. International Air Traffic is in English. Due to the importance of the US, English is a more dominant language world wide.

I hope that this helps.

 

[Eden]

I love Latin! It’s part of our heritage and its a language that reminds us of our ancient roots going back 2,000+ years. Because not only is it a language to unite us across borders in the universal Church, but it also ties us throughout the centuries, with other Christians, including saints and Latin Church Fathers. Amo Linguam Latinam.

 

[johncatholic]

Because Latin was the language of Rome and the classical literary language of Western Europe. I don’t mean to get off the subject here nor disparage my Hispanic brethren but it baffles me how Spanish speaking peoples especially of the Western Hemisphere of which the majority of whom are a mixture of several races ended up within the past few decades practically taking over and having applied exclusively to themselves the term and designation “Latin and/or Latino.” I do realize that Spanish and Portugese as well as French, Romanian, Provencal, and of course Italian derived from Latin but if any people have a claim to the Latin heritage and who should be called Latins it is the Italians over any other people since the Latin language and culture originated and devoloped from their land.

 

[Lapell]

Actually, aren’t South-American countries also called “Latino-American” countries? And in USA aren’t the Spanish-speaking people living there called the Latinos?

 

[wmscott]

Latin became the language of the Church around the 4th Century when it was the language of the world. In Europe, throughout the middle ages, all scholarship was in Latin. Anybody who was taught to read, was taught in Latin. It was a language that all literate people (and there weren’t all that many) understood. The Church is, always has been, an international operation. So the best way for Celts, Gaels, Helvetians, Francs etc. to communicate was in their common language. Kind of like the last Russian Tsar and his wife spoke English together because he was Russian and she was a Dane, and their common language was their grandmother’s – English.

One reasaon Aramaic is not the common language of the Church is that our New Testament was written in Greek – which was the “Latin” of the world at that time. Even the early Aramaic versions of the New Testament are later than the Greek.

Jesus, doubtless, DID speak Latin, although not as his ordinary language. He also spoke Hebrew and some Greek. After all, he was a small business man and would have interacted with clients from several layers of the culture. And besides, as the Son of God, he could do stuff like that.

We translate the Bible into the vernacular in order that people who cannot read the original languages may have access to the scriptures at least at some level.

Christians do, indeed, study the Scriptures in their original languages. Just because we have translations, it is not to be assumed that we ignore the original languages. My Hebrew is, um, “rusty” – to say the least. But I can handle Greek fairly well, and frequently resort to the Greek text when pondering a passage of Scripture.

Wasn’t Latin also the vernacular of the times? Meaning even if you did not read it you was still able to understand the spoken word (Latin).

 

[Ignatius]

Why would a mass be in Latin, to a population that doesn’t speak Latin?

Actually, the mass and the bible were translated to Latin because it was the common langage when it was done. The bible continued to be translated into every language down through the centuries.

 

[johncatholic]

Thats true that South American, Central American and other Spanish speaking peoples of the New World are now calling themselves Latin/Latino and erroneously making into a racial and ethnic classification only for themselves. But my point is that this language and culture came from Italy, ancient Rome, Julius Ceaser, Pompeii and was the classical literary language of Europe for many hundreds of years and it is the Italians who are the true Latins.

 

[ralphinal]

Wasn’t Latin also the vernacular of the times? Meaning even if you did not read it you was still able to understand the spoken word (Latin).

Vernacular is a big word. Latin was very common in lands ruled by Rome, and it was not uncommon for people to know enough of it to get by, in addition to their native tongues. In order to deal with governmental issues, you had to speak it. There was some exception to this in Greek lands that Rome took over. Greek remained lingua franca there, although high government was still in Latin.

More than likely, educated Jews in the era knew at least some Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. More than a few of them would have known Latin

 

[Lapell]

Thats true that South American, Central American and other Spanish speaking peoples of the New World are now calling themselves Latin/Latino

I actually thought it was the Americans who used to call them Latinos rather than they themselves…

 

[valient_Lucy]

It provides a universal language, so that any Catholic anywhere in the world can attend a mass and be able to know what is going on.

I slightly disagree, but only slightly. I attended Mass in Korean for a whole year, and I was able to understand what was going on. However, I was not able to respond with the rest of the congregation, since I don’t speak Korean. Over time, I was able to learn a few responses, but for the most part, I was left to saying the responses in English while the rest of the people said the responses in Korean.

I think the advantage of Mass in Latin is a person could participate in the Mass anywhere in the world. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not actually advocating for a return to Mass in Latin, but I see the advantages to more Latin in the Mass.

 

[Ivan_Muniz]

If Latin is the language of the church, did Jesus speak Latin?

Why can Bibles be translated?

If mass can’t be translated because Latin is special then why was the Bible translated from Latin into English, etc?

Should the Bible have been translated into Latin from Greek?

Why isn’t Greek or Aramaic the language of the Church when it’s more likely Jesus spoke those languages? Why not Hebrew, the language of the Jews? Why Latin?

latin is the language of the western church not the whole church
and no we never said jesus spoke latin of course if he wanted too he could

 

[bpbasilphx]

Why would a mass be in Latin, to a population that doesn’t speak Latin?

**Why are the Coran and Mahometan rituals in Arabic?

God bless the Crusaders!

I confess there is NO GOD but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and Jesus is God Incarnate risen from the dead! **