Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: SampleMan
Latin has but one advantage, and that is being universally unknown. Seriously, a common language that no one knows? Why not conduct Mass in Aramaic or Greek? I get the nostalgia for it, but why put the hurdle of a foreign language into Mass?

"Put the hurdle" of a foreign language in the Mass is looking at it exactly the wrong way. You make it sound like the natural state of the Mass has always been the vernacular, and we'd be imposing some weird artificial language on top of it.

No. The Christian Mass was in Latin as a *conservative principle*. It's not a novelty we are imposing, it's a tradition we are retaining.

By the way, some parts of the Latin Mass are in Greek, and many Eastern Christians do in fact say the Mass in Aramaic (Syriac), even though their spoken language may be quite different.

5 posted on 06/26/2014 3:21:30 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Claud

Besides nostalgia, you failed to note any positives for conducting the Mass in Latin.

At the time Latin was first used, it was for the sole reason that it was the vernacular in Rome. It continued to be used because it was universally understood by the educated class throughout Christiandom. Neither of those are now the case. English has replaced Latin in that respect.


8 posted on 06/26/2014 3:38:18 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson