Why the Mass in Latin?
#11
Indeed.
Reply
#12
I'm not talking about the written word.  If spoken Latin words sounded similar to the same spoken words in a Gaelic language they'd be able to understand the Latin Mass when they heard it.

We so often hear from Protestants that Latin has been used in the liturgy so the faithful would not be able to understand it.  But that is not true, they could understand it.

The Brits of Strathclyde (Brythonic) merged with Scotland (Goidelic) so they must have been able to understand each other.  In 271 a confederation of Celtic tribes descended into Italy.  Juleus Ceasar fought against a confederation of Celtic tribes in the Gallic Wars.  Those different Celtic tribes must have been able to communicate with each other.  I have read there were Irish that went to the continent to fight against the Romans in the Gallic Wars.  "In Post-Roman Britain Goidelic and Brythonic seem to have been of roughly equal status, with several Goidelic loan words in Brythonic and several Brythonic loan words in Old Irish. There is historical evidence of Irish in what are now Wales and England, as well as of Brythonic in Ireland, during this period. There is also archaeological evidence of substantial contact between Britain and Ireland in the Pre-Roman period and of Roman period contact."  "In writings from Ireland, the name Cruthin, Cruthini, Cruthni, Cruithni or Cruithini (Modern Irish: Cruithne) was used to refer to the Picts and to a group of people who lived alongside the Ulaid in eastern Ulster."  The Celts were not isolated from each other and they could obviously understand each other.
Reply
#13
(06-14-2011, 01:32 AM)mikemac Wrote: I'm not talking about the written word.  If spoken Latin words sounded similar to the same spoken words in a Gaelic language they'd be able to understand the Latin Mass when they heard it.

We so often hear from Protestants that Latin has been used in the liturgy so the faithful would not be able to understand it.  But that is not true, they could understand it.

The Brits of Strathclyde (Brythonic) merged with Scotland (Goidelic) so they must have been able to understand each other.  In 271 a confederation of Celtic tribes descended into Italy.  Juleus Ceasar fought against a confederation of Celtic tribes in the Gallic Wars.  Those different Celtic tribes must have been able to communicate with each other.  I have read there were Irish that went to the continent to fight against the Romans in the Gallic Wars.  "In Post-Roman Britain Goidelic and Brythonic seem to have been of roughly equal status, with several Goidelic loan words in Brythonic and several Brythonic loan words in Old Irish. There is historical evidence of Irish in what are now Wales and England, as well as of Brythonic in Ireland, during this period. There is also archaeological evidence of substantial contact between Britain and Ireland in the Pre-Roman period and of Roman period contact."  "In writings from Ireland, the name Cruthin, Cruthini, Cruthni, Cruithni or Cruithini (Modern Irish: Cruithne) was used to refer to the Picts and to a group of people who lived alongside the Ulaid in eastern Ulster."  The Celts were not isolated from each other and they could obviously understand each other.
I think, today in age, that there are more protestants who read and understand latin than Catholics.
Reply
#14
Mikmac u roughy up the alphabet so obviously u were speaking about the written word
anywY look I've lived in the gealtacht I to to tlm
u cannot understand Latin if u understand gealic. They are two mutually intelegibke languages
learn gealic or Latin e ough to udersta d either the. See for yourself
I'm no mskin  it up
sip

Reply
#15
Even when u pronounce  Latinnthe classical  way. Sounds a bit nore like hawiaiin granted  vini  vidi vici being wini  widi  wci still doesn't help u in understanding Irish
sip

Reply
#16
(06-13-2011, 12:49 PM)Stubborn Wrote:
(06-12-2011, 08:45 PM)Petertherock Wrote: 4. Mass is said in Latin because a universal Church requires a universal language. The Catholic Church is the same in every clime, in every nation, and consequently its language must be always and everywhere the same, to secure uniformity in her service.

IMO, no other reason is necessary.

For whoever, like myself, does not understand Latin - neither did the Apostles fully understand why Our Lord suffered and was crucified - yet they believed.
In like manner, we do not need to understand all the intricacies of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to do as we were commanded and be participants at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

This point seems to ignore the existence of the Eastern Catholic Churches.
Reply
#17
Mikmac u need ro focus on your history  and sources more. Also some common sense
ur claiming celts of various mutually u intelibke languages must of u derxtood eachother due to some joint ventures and wars toeyher
that's a bit shoddy. While there sure was some celts Irish or others who did u derstand more then one Celtic language thstdoesnt mean th languages are not mutually intelegible. It just means teanlators and I treprerors were used foe what everreasons were  justified
scots gealic and Irish from which scors gealic comes is not understood by p Celtic speakers ie welsh oe brethonic
not even close. Sure same language family and some shared words and rukes ok but when your speakin it thst accounts for squat. U come across as a monoglot cuz if your s polyglot u wpuld instinctivley k ow what th hell I'm saying
clearly you don't
some langaguess in some  families  are closel. Tied. The romance family is one others it's not that close and really family divisions in linguistics doesn't help much in the feild of practicle lingusitics
csn u understand old engkish by just knowing modern English even hough both are english?
No
yes if u u derstand Italian u have a better chance and fsr eiaser time in understanding Latin
not like what ibsay will fo anyplace with you but iv been aroundhis block many times
I know what I'm talkin about
anyhoooo
no harm no foul
sip

Reply
#18
(06-14-2011, 08:43 AM)Aragon Wrote:
(06-13-2011, 12:49 PM)Stubborn Wrote:
(06-12-2011, 08:45 PM)Petertherock Wrote: 4. Mass is said in Latin because a universal Church requires a universal language. The Catholic Church is the same in every clime, in every nation, and consequently its language must be always and everywhere the same, to secure uniformity in her service.

IMO, no other reason is necessary.

For whoever, like myself, does not understand Latin - neither did the Apostles fully understand why Our Lord suffered and was crucified - yet they believed.
In like manner, we do not need to understand all the intricacies of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to do as we were commanded and be participants at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

This point seems to ignore the existence of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

Latinise them all, I say!
Reply
#19
What i would like to know is how did century after century of illiterate peasants know the faith and Latin responses and prayers well and now we living in the era of so-called"educated" humanity can't understand Latin.
Reply
#20
(06-14-2011, 12:04 PM)salus Wrote: What i would like to know is how did century after century of illiterate peasants know the faith and Latin responses and prayers well and now we living in the era of so-called"educated" humanity can't understand Latin.

1. The laity did not offer any responses. Dialogue masses are a fairly recent invention. 

2. Particularly in countries based off the Romance languages its not that hard to pick up some Latin after attending mass every Sunday. 

3. People don't know Latin today because Max from Rushmore never saved Latin in real life.
[video=youtube]
[/video]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)