Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Clemenza
Be careful. If you believe certain folks on this site, Jesus spoke Latin


It's not just the use of the vernacular that's being objected to, the whole mass was changed. However if you are interested to know the benefits of retaining Latin, here you go:

Mass in Latin? ...Why in Latin?

82 posted on 10/14/2005 11:11:02 AM PDT by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]


To: murphE
Knee-Jerk "anti-Protestantism" is not a good reason for retaining Latin, the language of the Roman Empire. I no longer have a dog in this fight, although much of my family does.

I agree that most of the rituals from Pre-Vatican II (the sequel!) should have been retained, but the ONLY negative of getting rid of the Language of the ROMAN EMPIRE is the lack of a universal lingua franca. As I said, the Church in that case could use Aramaic or English. The latter is unlikely due to certain Euro-Peons at the Vatican who have a cultural prejudice against "Anglo Saxons."

84 posted on 10/14/2005 11:15:28 AM PDT by Clemenza (Gentlemen, Behold!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | 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