Author Topic: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.  (Read 1081 times)

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3184
  • Thanked: 3075 times
  • Hopeful Fatalist
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #15 on: December 01, 2019, 01:08:45 PM »
It wasn't until much later that Latin became regarded as a 'sacred language'.
Hebrew, Greek, and Latin have been sacred languages since when they were nailed to the Cross (Jn. 19:20).

This is a folkloric belief.

Latin became sacred because of its use by the Church in her rites. The same with Greek and Old Church Slavonic in the East. Hebrew fell out of use.

Any vernacular language can become sacred if the Church uses it.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.
 
The following users thanked this post: moneil, Daniel, martin88nyc, TheReturnofLive

Offline Geremia

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3400
  • Thanked: 870 times
    • St. Isidore e-book library
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2019, 05:51:12 PM »
It wasn't until much later that Latin became regarded as a 'sacred language'.
Hebrew, Greek, and Latin have been sacred languages since when they were nailed to the Cross (Jn. 19:20).

This is a folkloric belief.
St. Thomas Aquinas writes, John 19 lect. 4 [2422]:
Quote from: St. Thomas Aquinas
hae tres linguae prae ceteris eminebant
these three languages were the most widely known
more literally: "these three tongues stand out / have a higher dignity before the others
and
Quote from: St. Thomas
hae tres gentes sibi dignitatem vindicant in cruce Christi
these three tongues[/peoples] assumed a certain dignity by being associated with the cross of Christ.
 
The following users thanked this post: Graham, Maximilian, queen.saints

Offline Geremia

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3400
  • Thanked: 870 times
    • St. Isidore e-book library
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2019, 05:55:44 PM »
Any vernacular language can become sacred if the Church uses it.
Language isn't solely about utility, though. The great Latinist Christine Mohrmann makes this point in her Liturgical Latin: Its Origins and Character: Three Lectures.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2019, 05:58:29 PM by Geremia »
 
The following users thanked this post: Lynne, Maximilian, queen.saints

Offline Edmundia

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2019, 03:56:50 AM »
Anglican have frequently used latin in public and private worship.There are two versions of the old (official) 1662 Book of Common Prayer; Liber precum publicarum and another one ( I cannot remember the the title). I remember buying an old copy of the former, bound with a latin Vulgate Bible to enable the owner to recite Matins and Evensong entirely in latin. The University Church in Oxford has a termly Communion service in Latin.  I see that a traditional Catholic publisher has re-printed  Dr F.Brittain's little book LATIN IN CHURCH; he was a very keen Anglican.
 
The following users thanked this post: Maximilian

Offline Prayerful

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6769
  • Thanked: 3013 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #19 on: December 03, 2019, 02:09:01 PM »
The Latin used liturgically cannot be seen as the ordinary tongue of the common man. The Roman Canon draws various on the Gospel, Jewish use, Roman Temple prayer and political ceremonial language. It was more understandable, but it had a stature to it that NOM banality wholly lacks. Even Protestant services, the Book of Common Prayer and KJV used a hieratic form of language, a more formal sort of English. Later good many underwent liturgical updating which drew upon, or was contemporary with the changes which came after and during V2. The resulting dreary gospellers of social justice, have done even worse than Conciliar Catholicism. I'm not sure Common Worship, or whichever Anglicans use, will ever be held with similar affection to that given to the BCP. The banal, middling language of the New Order of Mass, that ICEL slab of biege, is something quite different in that there is there little sacral or authoritative about it.
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.
 

Offline Edmundia

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2019, 03:01:47 PM »
Absolutely right. The language of the old Anglican Prayer Book  (as the Latin of the Traditional Mass) the old King James Version and the Douay Bible had a rhythm,majesty and a memorable quality about them.
Fr John Hunwicke's blog - if you search - has interesting posts about Latin as a liturgical language for Anglicans and its use in Oxford.
 
The following users thanked this post: TheReturnofLive

Online TheReturnofLive

  • The Prodigal Son, except I do it at least twice a week
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
  • Thanked: 394 times
  • Saint Thomas, pray for us.
  • Religion: Unsure Traditional, Liturgical, Apostolic Christian
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2019, 04:25:22 PM »
Also, what does the OP think about the Anglican Ordinariate?

I find that the Anglican Ordinariate tends to have a great spirit to their cause, and has a truly legitimate liturgical tradition; they have many good Priests who are way more educated in theology and tradition than a typical normie Diocesan Priest.
In fact, one Priest of the Ordinariate, recently and infamously, got the sack because he said all the post-Vatican II Popes have denied Christ like Peter did.

Anglican Ordinariate Mass:


And several of their prayer books, which are Anglican based, seem pretty dope.


https://www.ignatius.com/St-Gregorys-Prayer-Book-P3228.aspx

http://andrewespress.com/the-monastic-diurnal?ReturnUrl=LwA%3D
http://absnospin.blogspot.com/2011/11/monastic-diurnal-lancelot-andrewes-vs.html

« Last Edit: December 03, 2019, 04:27:03 PM by TheReturnofLive »
 

Online TheReturnofLive

  • The Prodigal Son, except I do it at least twice a week
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
  • Thanked: 394 times
  • Saint Thomas, pray for us.
  • Religion: Unsure Traditional, Liturgical, Apostolic Christian
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2019, 04:28:38 PM »
What I wouldn't kill for it to be the case that some Pope in the future, if not putting in place the Tridentine Mass as default, at the very least revises the Novus Ordo to conform to the liturgical norms of the Anglican Ordinariate (obviously not replacing Gregorian Chant with Anglican Chant, but kicking to the curb "extraordinary ministers," getting rid of "participation" by removing the laity from handling the gifts, saying their own politically charged prayers, or doing the readings, ad-orientem, forbidding music other than chant, mandatory incense, etc.).
« Last Edit: December 03, 2019, 04:32:56 PM by TheReturnofLive »
 

Offline Geremia

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3400
  • Thanked: 870 times
    • St. Isidore e-book library
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2019, 04:28:17 PM »
Language isn't solely about utility, though. The great Latinist Christine Mohrmann makes this point in her Liturgical Latin: Its Origins and Character: Three Lectures.
Lecture 3:
Quote from: pp. 60-1
The advocates of the use of the vernacular in the liturgy who maintain that even in Christian Antiquity the current speech of everyday life, “the Latin of the common man,” was employed, are far off the mark. Liturgical Latin is not Classical Latin, but neither is it, as is so often said, the Latin which was considered decadent by educated people.
 
The following users thanked this post: martin88nyc

Offline martin88nyc

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3365
  • Thanked: 2224 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2019, 05:08:38 PM »
Language isn't solely about utility, though. The great Latinist Christine Mohrmann makes this point in her Liturgical Latin: Its Origins and Character: Three Lectures.
Lecture 3:
Quote from: pp. 60-1
The advocates of the use of the vernacular in the liturgy who maintain that even in Christian Antiquity the current speech of everyday life, “the Latin of the common man,” was employed, are far off the mark. Liturgical Latin is not Classical Latin, but neither is it, as is so often said, the Latin which was considered decadent by educated people.
Spot on! Liturgical latin is different from vernacular latin
Trads listen to yourself! Are you becoming softies?
"These things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you shall have distress: but have confidence, I have overcome the world." John 16:33
 

Online TheReturnofLive

  • The Prodigal Son, except I do it at least twice a week
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
  • Thanked: 394 times
  • Saint Thomas, pray for us.
  • Religion: Unsure Traditional, Liturgical, Apostolic Christian
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #25 on: December 28, 2019, 05:13:43 PM »
Language isn't solely about utility, though. The great Latinist Christine Mohrmann makes this point in her Liturgical Latin: Its Origins and Character: Three Lectures.
Lecture 3:
Quote from: pp. 60-1
The advocates of the use of the vernacular in the liturgy who maintain that even in Christian Antiquity the current speech of everyday life, “the Latin of the common man,” was employed, are far off the mark. Liturgical Latin is not Classical Latin, but neither is it, as is so often said, the Latin which was considered decadent by educated people.
Spot on! Liturgical latin is different from vernacular latin
Trads listen to yourself! Are you becoming softies?

Well what do you expect about a language used exclusively for ornamental worship for hundreds of years?

The only difference in the forms of Latin is pronunciation and slang - which is to be expected when it comes to language used over hundreds of years for Church use only. Language naturally changes over time, even with zealous protection for it to not change.

There's quite a difference between English used by those who live in the Ghetto and academics. Doesn't mean that it's a different, special language used by academia.


Slavonic was the same way. It would be foolish to say that Church Slavonic is the same exact language in every aspect as the vulgar language spoken by the ancient Slavs.
In fact, the Cyrillic alphabet used now is not even the same exact alphabet that Saint Cyril developed.

See here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrillic_script
« Last Edit: December 28, 2019, 05:20:37 PM by TheReturnofLive »
 

Offline Geremia

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3400
  • Thanked: 870 times
    • St. Isidore e-book library
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #26 on: December 30, 2019, 05:32:19 PM »
Language isn't solely about utility, though. The great Latinist Christine Mohrmann makes this point in her Liturgical Latin: Its Origins and Character: Three Lectures [1957].
Lecture 3:
Quote from: pp. 60-1
The advocates of the use of the vernacular in the liturgy who maintain that even in Christian Antiquity the current speech of everyday life, “the Latin of the common man,” was employed, are far off the mark. Liturgical Latin is not Classical Latin, but neither is it, as is so often said, the Latin which was considered decadent by educated people.
Another good quote:
Quote from: p. 87
If the liturgy were to be celebrated entirely in the vernaculars of the various countries, and the prayers of the Breviary said by each one in his own tongue, the Latin of the Church would automatically die out and our last links with the ancient sources would be irrevocably severed.

Offline Prayerful

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6769
  • Thanked: 3013 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #27 on: December 30, 2019, 07:11:26 PM »
Latin was actually the common tongue of the people in the Western Roman Empire. There was nothing sacred about it.

When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, it was translated into the vulgar tongue of the masses. Hence, the Vulgata.

Latin used in the Mass was never the same as spoken Latin, it was an hieratic form of the language, and that was the custom until ICEL decided we needed the already banal Novus Ordo Missae even more banal. The point with Latin is that it is dead, fixed. There can be no change in meaning.
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.
 
The following users thanked this post: Lynne, Michael Wilson, martin88nyc

Offline Vetus Ordo

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3184
  • Thanked: 3075 times
  • Hopeful Fatalist
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2020, 02:37:55 PM »
Latin was actually the common tongue of the people in the Western Roman Empire. There was nothing sacred about it.

When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, it was translated into the vulgar tongue of the masses. Hence, the Vulgata.

Latin used in the Mass was never the same as spoken Latin, it was an hieratic form of the language, and that was the custom until ICEL decided we needed the already banal Novus Ordo Missae even more banal. The point with Latin is that it is dead, fixed. There can be no change in meaning.

The hieratic character is conferred upon Ecclesiastical Latin on account of its use by the Church. It's the Church's use of the language that sanctifies it. It has nothing to do with any grammatical or lexical sublimity of the Latin in question. While the language used by the Church in her rites and in the Vulgate was not the street Latin used in the market of Trajan, it was not the lofty Classical Latin either. In fact, if you have ever dared to read Cicero in the original, Ecclesiastical Latin feels like a walk in the park.

The same with Byzantine Greek used by the eastern rite vis-à-vis Classical Greek.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.
 
The following users thanked this post: Fleur-de-Lys

Offline Prayerful

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6769
  • Thanked: 3013 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Anglicans hate Latin like the Modernists.
« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2020, 05:24:58 PM »
Latin was actually the common tongue of the people in the Western Roman Empire. There was nothing sacred about it.

When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, it was translated into the vulgar tongue of the masses. Hence, the Vulgata.

Latin used in the Mass was never the same as spoken Latin, it was an hieratic form of the language, and that was the custom until ICEL decided we needed the already banal Novus Ordo Missae even more banal. The point with Latin is that it is dead, fixed. There can be no change in meaning.

The hieratic character is conferred upon Ecclesiastical Latin on account of its use by the Church. It's the Church's use of the language that sanctifies it. It has nothing to do with any grammatical or lexical sublimity of the Latin in question. While the language used by the Church in her rites and in the Vulgate was not the street Latin used in the market of Trajan, it was not the lofty Classical Latin either. In fact, if you have ever dared to read Cicero in the original, Ecclesiastical Latin feels like a walk in the park.

The same with Byzantine Greek used by the eastern rite vis-à-vis Classical Greek.

Byzantine Greek is descended from Koine Greek, which was the Greek used by the ordinary man, for whom, say Attic Greek, would be something scholarly and not really relevant. I know nothing much of it, yet I suspect it is quite like how liturgical Latin is replete with neologisms, created for a much wider use than pagan temple prayers, and to cover hitherto odd concepts like a moral God one yet three (pagan triads were common enough but not God as three in one, although the Roman Canon makes little enough reference to the Holy Ghost). Anyhow, it is a dead and now fixed language, and yes, handily, relatively easier than most Latin prose writers. I'm not sure if any writer was as clear and plain as Gaius Julius Caesar. Anyhow, there is no ICEL (and local bishop's conferences) nonsense where there has been repeated changes in translation in living memory, and now the New Order liturgy is a sort of ping pong, as in this Bergoglian age, as Ratzingerian clarity irritates a certain sort of older Catholic who wants faith weak and vague. A lot of these older Catholics are bishops, unfortunately.

Not certain if it's been mentioned, but the Use of Sarum is only kept alive by Anglo-Catholics, and for the bulk of them who use 'Common Worship,' hate is likely way too strong. Indifference would be likelier.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2020, 05:28:04 PM by Prayerful »
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.