Why pray in Latin?
#41
(08-27-2019, 03:24 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(08-27-2019, 02:56 PM)Stephanus ignotum Wrote: Of course Eastern Catholics aren't less Catholic, but it seems like they (and probably all of us with Latin's diminished status) are depriving themselves/being deprived of greater Divine Grace.

Please qualify that.

Well, for the subsequent examples of Latin having greater spiritual power (e.g. against demons in exorcisms), having been intimately involved in the forging of a new age/civilisation (Age of Faith/Christendom), it connecting us to those heights and to so many of our ancestors and their achievements - all of which I've cited before.

Plus, one that I haven't, which is hopefully of humility in accepting the authority of the See of Peter/adopting its practises.
Reply
#42
One argument I heard today on a recent Taylor Marshall interview was that Latin, Koine Greek and Hebrew are all considered sacred languages because they were the languages nailed to the Cross at Our Lord's crucifixion. There's also the fact that Latin does not change nor is it used in any profane manner. And then a third, which has probably been mentioned, is that it is a very precise dialect as opposed to English.
"The Heart of Jesus is closer to you when you suffer, than when you are full of joy." - St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

“Behold this Heart which has so loved men that It spared nothing, even going so far as to exhaust and consume Itself to prove to them Its love” - Our Lord to St. Margaret Mary

My blog: https://slavetothesacredhe.art.blog/

Malachi Martin was right.
Reply
#43
(08-27-2019, 03:47 PM)Stephanus ignotum Wrote: Well, for the subsequent examples of Latin having greater spiritual power (e.g. against demons in exorcisms), having been intimately involved in the forging of a new age/civilisation (Age of Faith/Christendom), it connecting us to those heights and to so many of our ancestors and their achievements - all of which I've cited before.

Plus, one that I haven't, which is hopefully of humility in accepting the authority of the See of Peter/adopting its practises.

1. Stephanus, I would say that one important thing to keep in mind about the Eastern Churches is that their Liturgy has never been conducted in Latin. They have never used Latin in the history of the Church. When we think of Christendom, it is bigger than the Latin West. 

The Eastern Churches have their own culture, an exceedingly rich one I should add, that makes no use of the Latin language. 

When you say that they are depriving themselves of greater Divine Grace, it sounds like you are saying that because of their failure to use the Latin Language they are somehow receiving less grace than Latin Catholics. If that is your position (and I am not suggesting that it is, it just appears such), then it is wrong, and offensive.

2. This follows from the above. A Catholic who is a member of one of the Eastern Churches does not need to use the Latin language to show that he is faithful the See of Peter. That attitude had generated a lot of animosity amongst Easterners. As a Latin Catholic, it shouldn't be hard to imagine what it is like to have someone force you to change your liturgy and language. I think most of us why that would irritate people, to say the least.
Reply
#44
(08-27-2019, 07:43 PM)Alphonse il Segundo Wrote:
(08-27-2019, 03:47 PM)Stephanus ignotum Wrote: Well, for the subsequent examples of Latin having greater spiritual power (e.g. against demons in exorcisms), having been intimately involved in the forging of a new age/civilisation (Age of Faith/Christendom), it connecting us to those heights and to so many of our ancestors and their achievements - all of which I've cited before.

Plus, one that I haven't, which is hopefully of humility in accepting the authority of the See of Peter/adopting its practises.

1. Stephanus, I would say that one important thing to keep in mind about the Eastern Churches is that their Liturgy has never been conducted in Latin. They have never used Latin in the history of the Church. When we think of Christendom, it is bigger than the Latin West. 

The Eastern Churches have their own culture, an exceedingly rich one I should add, that makes no use of the Latin language. 

When you say that they are depriving themselves of greater Divine Grace, it sounds like you are saying that because of their failure to use the Latin Language they are somehow receiving less grace than Latin Catholics. If that is your position (and I am not suggesting that it is, it just appears such), then it is wrong, and offensive.

2. This follows from the above. A Catholic who is a member of one of the Eastern Churches does not need to use the Latin language to show that he is faithful the See of Peter. That attitude had generated a lot of animosity amongst Easterners. As a Latin Catholic, it shouldn't be hard to imagine what it is like to have someone force you to change your liturgy and language. I think most of us why that would irritate people, to say the least.

1) Of course Christendom was bigger than the Latin West when it still existed, but Eastern Christianity cut itself off (heresy/schism) and/or was cut off (Muslim invasions) - from participating in its greatest phase of the Middle Ages-Early Modern Age. Latin was partly the basis of that, which strikes me as neither random nor accidental. The mentioning of this period of Christian civilisation has become a recurrent theme, since for me, it is an ideal whose traditions/tenets we should remember and even seek to restore to make things right again.

Yes, the Eastern Catholic Churches do have their own culture, we're all Catholics - which is the deepest of connections and not using the Latin language doesn't mean they are somehow receiving less grace than Latin Catholics, as though 'they're so bad and we're so good'. Yet in all candour, I do believe that Latin has greater spiritual power and the Papacy making it its own resulted in the rise to prominence of Western Christianity in contrast to the fall in dignity of its Eastern equivalent.


2) No, a member of an Eastern Catholic Church does not need to use Latin to be loyal, but it could help in relations being greater and more harmonious, with its unity and efficacy. Besides, is it not possible that the animosity is as a result of pride? The same pride which to a greater extent led much of the rest of Eastern Christianity ('Orthodox' etc.) to lapse into schism?

The decline (and fall?) of (Ecclesiastical) Latin in the wake of Vatican II is indeed most sad, though I have not spoken - or even thought - of forcing the East to adopt Latin (even if it were possible, which it isn't), just that it might well aid them if they did adopt it themselves. It is mistaken of you though in comparing the adoption of the official language of the Church and the Pope to its undermining by the enemies of the Church, many of whom are also within it.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)