[Kolokotronis]

" It's probable that those latinizations are what have kept the maronites from schism out of all of the Eastern rites."

The latinizations which so changed the original liturgy of the Maronites came long, long after the Great Schism. Of all the non Latin Churches in communion with Rome, the Maronites likely became the most latinized. It is a magnificent thing that the Maronites, by a decision of their own Synod in Lebanon have embarked on a restoration of their original rite. Whatever the merits, or lack thereof, of the Roman domination of the Maronite Church and its consequent latinization, those merits are long gone.

You mention Syriac. The original liturgy of the The Church at Antioch was chanted in Syriac because that's the language the people spoke. Today its Arabic. What is important is that in the East, the language of the liturgy traditionally has been the language of the people. With good translations, the vernacular is what is faithful to Tradition, not an ancient language. In the event that the laos tou Theou can understand the ancient language in all its subtleties, that's fine, though.

[Gerard.P]

I said the latinizations "have kept" not "did keep" the Maronites from Schism.

As I stated in the subsequent post those latinizations are still meritorious. (not all but they are not by any means "long gone")


A societies religions tend to "kill" the language that they have reserved for Sacred/sacred worship. That's just a fact of history.

From Judaism to Buddhism and Shintoism, languages that start out practically as the vulgar tongue tend to die. It's a human characteristic.