The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)

Associated Press ^ | 3/24/01

[IMRight]

Rome Italy may have spoken latin, but, Latin was not the dominant language empire wide. Greek was the dominant language. Interesting isn't it - That even Paul's letter to the Church in Rome was written in Greek to ensure they'd understand it...

Your really talking about two completely different time periods here. The Vulgate antidates Pauls letter by about 330 years (look at how much English has changed in half that time). Can you give any evidence that Latin was not the common language circa 400 A.D. ? Every site I have found has said that Latin overtook Greek as the common language of the empire (not just Rome) around 350. A letter to Rome 350 years earlier is evidence that Greek was the common tongue (or at least the Church's common tongue) 350 years earlier. How does that bear on whether the Vulgate translation was or was not an "elites only" work of the RCC? These aren't RC sites, just a broad search for Scripture translations. Most of the sites I've looked at are Wycliff and Tyndale references.

[RobbyS]

The one I have in my prayer book concludes as follows:

Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the World, spare us , O Lord.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the World, graciously hear us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the World, have mercy on us.
Christ hear us.
Christ graciously hear us.
Pray for us O holy Mother of God
That we may be made worthy of the promises of God.

Everything said to Mary relates to Our Lord. You seem to have an aversion to hierarchy. Every good person equates to the most heroic? The least in the kingdom of heaven is indeed greater than the mighty of the earth, but in heaven there are those of who are, through the quality of their lives, closer to God. They do not cease to care for us, however, now that they are with God. Or so we think. You, or at least some of you, espouse the dogma that they are dead to the world until the Second Coming. Don't buy that.

[Havoc]

Maybe we can find a saint who can work on that wart with his foot!

That's quite alright, you don't need to pray to your saints on my behalf. I don't need to be annointing my house from unholy things any more often than I already have to.

[RobbyS]

Have someone try a Protestant remedy: hit it with a Bible.

[OLD REGGIE]

I can understand the need for a Latin translation, especially when much of the Hierarchy and Priests spoke Latin. It is true that very few of the laity read the Bible no matter what language. They didn't have the $$$$$'s. (Which leads to my belief the Gutenberg Press was more responsible for the Reformation than Luther). My question is, when did Latin become a "dead" language?

[JHavard]

From New Advent, under Latin literature in early Christianity. The most ancient Latin document emanating from the Roman Church is the correspondence of its clergy with Carthage during the vacancy of the Apostolic See following on the death of Pope Fabian (20 January, 250). One of the letters is the work of Novatian, the first Christian writer to use the Latin language at Rome. But even at this epoch, Greek is still the official language: the original epitaphs of the popes are still composed in Greek. We have those of Anterus, of Fabian, of Lucius, of Gaius, and the series brings us down to 296. That of Cornelius, which is in Latin, seems to be later than the third century.

One of my points last night, was that Latin was promoted to where it finally became dominant right after the Bible canon was put together.

Are you saying that the church began saying mass in Latin so more people could understand it?

JH

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Hey, you forgot "pedophile," this time. What's the matter, slipping up?

What's the matter? You proud of it?

[RobbyS]

Much of the theology that is singular to the West came out of Africa: Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine--colonials all. In the West, Latin, the language of the Romans,became in the West, closely associated with Roman culture. The German conquest may have preserved Latin ascendency in the West by politically/culturally disconnecting the West from the Greek-speaking east.

[malakhi]

My question is, when did Latin become a "dead" language?

My college Latin professor used to say "Latin isn't dead; its just mispronounced". It was a gradual process of several centuries that Latin evolved into the Romance languages. Really up until the time of Dante, the Romance tongues were considered corrupted Latin. It took Dante to prove that Italian could be a literary language in its own right.

400 years later, we can still read Shakespeare without too much difficulty. I expect it was like this with Latin as well.

[RobbyS]

What's the matter? You proud of it? About as proud as you are of serial polygamy.

[JHavard]

While reading some of our ministers answers to questions asked on the Church Website, I ran across this one and thought it interesting, since this subject was pretty well covered recently on our forum.

Question
Hi Hank, My son is 12 years old, and new to his youth group and church also.We just started attending church this year, so many questions arise. Tonight he asked me how it is that if God sent Jesus to us as the son of God, then how is Jesus God in human form? I read from the book of John (ch.10:30) that

Answer
Water is good illustration from nature. Under 32 degrees - a solid; between 32 degrees and 212 degrees - a liquid; and above 212 degrees - a gas. Yet the chemical composition is the same. H2O. One God who exists as three distinct and separate persons.

JH

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Good analogy JH. Hadn't heard that one before.

Becky

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Since you're all three tag teamin' your childish behavior today. I just want to say "thank you very much" (Elvis voice) for all the attention.

=

[JHavard]

Sad the length some of us have to go to justify their own beliefs. Ignore history at your peril.

AC, Catholics have no problem using theology, history, traditions, customs and rare translations of key scripture to debate us NC's who are trying to use scripture and common sense.

What's wrong then, with me using my gut feelings as a method also.

(^g^) JH

[DouglasKC]

Answer Water is good illustration from nature. Under 32 degrees - a solid; between 32 degrees and 212 degrees - a liquid; and above 212 degrees - a gas. Yet the chemical composition is the same. H2O. One God who exists as three distinct and separate persons.

Yeah, but in the case of water the environment is what stimulates the change. Heat the water or cool the water, it changes.

In order for the analogy to hold and to have three seperate people in Heaven (outside of our physical universe) the conditions would have to be altered in three different ways.

It does hold up for say, manifestations of God on earth, for example the holy spirit of God being altered by the physical universe.

[OLD REGGIE]

and you guys want to make a distinction between "living saints" and those who have passed on. The point that Paul makes in 1st Corinthians 15 is that THERE IS NO DISTINCTION.

Where is Saint ever mentioned????????????????

[JHavard]

In order for the analogy to hold and to have three seperate people in Heaven (outside of our physical universe) the conditions would have to be altered in three different ways.

Now why did you have to go and drop that dirty rag in my nice sterile analogy? Lol

I doubt God is water in a solid state, the point is, that we have a substance right here on earth, that demonstrates what we ask ourselves, how could God be three distinct persons in one.

The more I think about it, the better I like it. JH

[OLD REGGIE]

If NCC’s understood the Church’s teaching regarding Latria, Hyperdulia, Dulia it would make sense to you. But since you don’t your comment doesn’t surprise me.

Please show the official Church teaching. Where????

[Havoc]

Your really talking about two completely different time periods here. The Vulgate antidates Pauls letter by about 330 years (look at how much English has changed in half that time). Can you give any evidence that Latin was not the common language circa 400 A.D. ? Every site I have found has said that Latin overtook Greek as the common language of the empire (not just Rome) around 350. A letter to Rome 350 years earlier is evidence that Greek was the common tongue (or at least the Church's common tongue) 350 years earlier. How does that bear on whether the Vulgate translation was or was not an "elites only" work of the RCC? These aren't RC sites, just a broad search for Scripture translations. Most of the sites I've looked at are Wycliff and Tyndale references.

What I'm looking at is the pattern of the spread over time and the use of the phraseology "Dominant language". The laws of the Spanish, French and Germanics were written in their own tongues - That's point one. The dominant language of these groups was their traditional language at that time ie Spanish, French and German - Not latin. Which negates the notion of Latin being the Dominant language. Dominant means the language takes preiminance. There is no evidence that this is the case save for in the Church. Which tends to support the notion that Latin, vulgar or otherwise, was likely a religious language much as Heiroglyphics were the religious language of Egypt. As the priesthood vanished, so too did full comprehension of that language. Such is the case with dead languages.

Ultimately, outside of the heart of the Empire of Ancient Rome, Latin was not widely enough known to survive - to the extent that it so completely disappeared that no one knows how to properly speak it today with 100% certainty. And the only people who seem to know that Latin was predominant are people who talk with regard to religion. Show me early German law written in latin and I'll show you a modern fairy tale. Show me common usage of latin in texts outside the clerical and you'd have something.

People who had direct commerce with Rome Did commerce in Latin and in Greek; but mostly in Greek. The use of Latin within the Church early on seems to be an attempt to maintain what was crippled ship of state trying to right itself. It never happened. The Empire died and it's language with it. Show me evidence to the contrary, and you'll have an argument. I don't go with what someone says merely because they say it. There has to be evidence to back it up. And so far, I haven't seen any. But then I haven't made the study of Latin my lifes work either. In the modern day, latin has no real use aside from it's application to medical science. And since medical science developed more out of documented latin than out of heiratic or Greek, that is the only other place wherein the language has any significance today. Something worth noting; but, not lending itself to either side of the debate.