|
Senju Kannon posted:but that part is good. what does latin mean to cultures with no connection to rome? it seems like an imposition, especially since translating from latin to indigenous languages usually requires an english translation in between Then the indigenous people should send a monk on a journey to the west to bring back the original scriptures, possibly engaging in action packed episodic adventures on the way.
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
christianity's journey into most parts of africa and asia are... not quite as ideal as buddhism's entry into china. that's... also a major reason why the vernacular was seen as an important move.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Yes, I too would describe the systematic massacre and suppression of christians and missionaries in China, Korea and Japan over the last few hundred years as "less than ideal" though I don't think I would suggest that these have much to do with the use of vernacular liturgy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
look up the chinese rites controversy. also the japanese martyrs were partially in response to the centuries long practice of bashing the indigenous with the bible and then shooting them with the gun. the expulsion of missionaries was part of an active attempt to subvert foreign influence in japan, and considering what happened elsewhere in the 17th century it's hard to not understand where that came from. the murder of japanese christians is a tragedy but i would argue pointing to it when i am clearly referencing colonialism is a bit tonedeaf then again so's saying "tokugawa did nothing wrong" so congrats we're both assholes tho i would once again emphasize that the catholic church was not at all blameless in what happened to chinese christians centuries ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:but that part is good. no
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
man if you just want a perfectly-accessible completely demythologized totally inclusive in-no-way-exalted rite why not just become a unitarian idgi
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:man if you just want a perfectly-accessible completely demythologized totally inclusive in-no-way-exalted rite why not just become a unitarian idgi i'm buddhist these days actually also you know latin used to be, like, the lingua franca, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:so congrats we're both assholes Wisdom
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
alright rather than these snarky fly by posts that everyone hates, i'm going to explain why i think the vulgar mass is, in fact, good it has to do with the fact that translation, by necessity, breeds dialogue. it breeds dialogue with the church in rome with the local communities who often have little to no representation in what the holy see does. how long were bishops in africa, latin america, and asia white europeans? how long have indigenous people been told their words and symbols for god are wrong and to pray instead in a language that has absolutely no meaning for them? you can talk about "demystifying the liturgy" all you want, but which is more mystic; a liturgy that doesn't invite the indigenous faithful to pray in a way that demands they understand what their culture has within it that can be seen in christ, or a liturgy that regurgitates the dead language of dead colonizers? the fact is for centuries christianity demanded that indigenous people let go of whatever their faith traditions had, whatever the cultures considered to be sacred, and instead demanded that they give to rome. whether it was ancestral veneration in china, dance in africa, or their very languages in america, very rarely did the catholic church actually look to different cultures and ask what they can add to the church, instead demanding uniformity in prayer, theology, and culture. where muslims built mosques in styles native to the countries they were in, including a mosque in china that looks exactly like the temples surrounding it (a mosque i've been to and i will say is AMAZING) christians instead built cathedrals without every asking WHY they thought churches had to look like that. the fact that the second vatican council has instead encouraged indigenous people throughout the world to do the hard work of inculturation, of looking to their own cultures to see what is sacred and what is applicable to art, architecture, and yes, liturgy, is something that should be praised and seen as a defiant example of christ overcoming imperialism. did the second vatican council lead to stale american masses with guitars and poorly translated prayers? yes. but it also led to decades of liturgical, architectural, artisitc, and theological dialogue that has continued unabated, and if guitar masses are the price to pay for giving african americans the ability to sing slave spirituals during mass instead of forcing them to sing gregorian chant, then i think it's a price that was well worth paying and one that people should be willing to pay besides, you can do the latin mass now! you don't need permission to do it! any priest can do it now! no one took it away from you (well, okay, they did, but they gave it back)! why take this away?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:Wisdom you joke but recognizing we suck is part of not only calvinist spirituality i assume but also jodo shinshu i deserve to be reborn in hell and it's only because of amida that i'm not going to be
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:i'm buddhist these days actually uh sure but for the vast majority of congregants over the millennia of the latin mass' use would still not have been able to understand it, and that was sort of the point
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:uh sure but for the vast majority of congregants over the millennia of the latin mass' use would still not have been able to understand it, and that was sort of the point you can think that if you want but that's not historically why it happened that way i'd explain why instead of being snarky but it's been i think five years since i took a liturgical theology class and BOY do i not remember anything about it other than liturgical studies was full of garbage scholarship for decades and based off of faulty assumptions about the applicability of jewish liturgical scholarship and biblical scholarship to our understanding of how the early christians worshipped
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:you can think that if you want but that's not historically why it happened that way It's of course not how it started but it fairly quickly (and certainly by the Middle Ages) became one of the main reasons it was not altered
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:uh sure but for the vast majority of congregants over the millennia of the latin mass' use would still not have been able to understand it, and that was sort of the point I rather think it would have been nice for the average priest to be able to understand it though, considering how little was apparently understood by most for that "Millenia". I think the most common complaint I remember from some of my Bishop correspondence during the medieval period was "For fucks sake try and learn what the words mean, your just making sounds at this point!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:
I'm gonna be checking out Senso-ji and some other temples while I'm in Japan for a bit next month. Cool if I take the opportunity to send you some non-denominational wishes for good vibes and positive energy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
P-Mack posted:I'm gonna be checking out Senso-ji and some other temples while I'm in Japan for a bit next month. Cool if I take the opportunity to send you some non-denominational wishes for good vibes and positive energy? sure, that's cool. i really need to get a job soon so i can use all the non-denominational help i can get lmao chernobyl kinsman posted:It's of course not how it started but it fairly quickly (and certainly by the Middle Ages) became one of the main reasons it was not altered
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:is a post facto justification really that much more important than inculturation? that plus a couple millennia of tradition, yeah
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:you joke but recognizing we suck is part of not only calvinist spirituality i assume but also jodo shinshu No joke. Actual wisdom. can't post much, at work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
gotta ask if you've actually studied early christian liturgical rituals because dudes were having wineless eucharists and even eucharists with water. dudes were wet and wild with rubrics and poo poo. that's part of tradition too my dawg
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
i have yeah and if they'd continued doing those things for the next 1900 years i would defend them as tradition too. they didn't, though, so it's not a very good comparison
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
yeah but now we're doing the vulgar thing so that's part of tradition too like i get it catholicism is like Tradition and Scripture but i guess i disagree that latin mass is Tradition it just seems like tradition to me then again i still think countries that don't harvest wheat should be able to use bread from their own regions instead of importing wheat at high prices to make communion wafers and this was a position i held while ostensibly catholic so my position on "hey this is dumb just cause people did it like this for centuries don't mean it has to be like that" is pretty clear also my whole position on gay marriage, womenpriests, and gender transition. and gender roles. oh also my love of liberation theology and asian theology but those have always been grey areas at worst
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
So your defence is literally "well we have always done it this way!" That, that's the worst arguement for something I have ever heard in my life. I mean sure "if it ain't broke don't fix it" but come on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:yeah but now we're doing the vulgar thing so that's part of tradition too lol come on man that's not even worth responding to and you know it quote:like i get it catholicism is like Tradition and Scripture but i guess i disagree that latin mass is Tradition it just seems like tradition to me i honestly dont understand that at all. i know i'm a broken record but it's the language in which the mass was done from 190 until the 60s
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
i value indigenous religious experience and culture more than i value historical accident
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So your defence is literally "well we have always done it this way!" yeah i think tradition is an important part of catholicism, crazy. well i mean that plus its universality plus it's a strong point of spiritual contact for two thousand years' worth of ordinary christians and saints plus i think it inspires vastly more reverence plus i think it's much more beautiful plus it more effectively marks out the mass as being a sacred event isolated from the normal flow of time but we can be reductive about it too Senju Kannon posted:i value indigenous religious experience and culture more than i value historical accident ok
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So your defence is literally "well we have always done it this way!" "We've always done it this way so why change" is apparently one of the fundamental tenets of Orthodoxy, though my only real exposure to Orthodoxy is talking to HEY GAIL (and going to her church a few times) plus this thread. Pews? Instrumental music?!? What is this modernist heresy. edit: chernobyl kinsman posted:yeah i think tradition is an important part of catholicism, crazy. well i mean that plus its universality plus it's a strong point of spiritual contact for two thousand years' worth of ordinary christians and saints plus i think it inspires vastly more reverence plus i think it's much more beautiful plus it more effectively marks out the mass as being a sacred event isolated from the normal flow of time yeah this seems to basically be how the Orthodox feel about Divine Liturgy, too Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:uh sure but for the vast majority of congregants over the millennia of the latin mass' use would still not have been able to understand it, and that was sort of the point The correct answer is that Latin language enables a less mediated entry into the Latin tradition of the church (which was reified in Vatican II) and everyone should learn Latin and understand liturgy that way, but, barring that, vernacular is good for most of the liturgy (keep those kyries), and the Latin Mass should be offered where it is desired. If parishioners don't understand what's going on they can't contemplate the mystery of the Eucharistic celebration and the whole thing just becomes so much hocus pocus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
as someone who spent years learning latin no one should learn latin learn something marginally more useful, like underwater basket weaving
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
nah Latin rules man, it's fun to learn and beautiful to read. if you think it's bad you should try welsh
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
one of the local radio stations broadcasts Lakota drumsongs and then Hail Marys at noon in Lakota, it's p neat
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:yeah i think tradition is an important part of catholicism, crazy. well i mean that plus its universality plus it's a strong point of spiritual contact for two thousand years' worth of ordinary christians and saints plus i think it inspires vastly more reverence plus i think it's much more beautiful plus it more effectively marks out the mass as being a sacred event isolated from the normal flow of time From what I have read Latin wasn't even spoken by "ordinary Christians" for that long. Hell I don't think it was spoken by educated Christians for that long. Other than if you mean "made sounds with voice" and not "meant and understood". The delenation between the sacred and the secular would also not have been nearly as accute during large stretches of the time period you are talking about. Churches had pigs among the pews, chatting, gossip and couples making out midway through, your idea of it all being a great big sacred quiet space is apparently pulled from the same space that made G.K. Chesterton nostalgic for the medieval period. I mean I have a source from one of the books "A handbook for Parish priests" written in 1385 describing what you should tell your congregation not to do "He should admonish them that no one should cause a disturbance or a disagreeement or hold discussions or idle and progance conversations in a church or in a graveyard". If you have to forbid something, its kind of a thing that people are doing. Pellisworth posted:"We've always done it this way so why change" is apparently one of the fundamental tenets of Orthodoxy, though my only real exposure to Orthodoxy is talking to HEY GAIL (and going to her church a few times) plus this thread. Personally I have changed, ha, my mind on change. I'd argue that it needs to be nigh on constant. Because, hell, poo poo changes anyway may as well try and get ahead of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:From what I have read Latin wasn't even spoken by "ordinary Christians" for that long. Hell I don't think it was spoken by educated Christians for that long. Of course not, I even said that. But define spoken, because educated men very definitely knew and used Latin until like the 17th century, when it was replaced by French as the lingua franca (& of course it was only recently that the classical education died) quote:The delenation between the sacred and the secular would also not have been nearly as accute during large stretches of the time period you are talking about. I know, I'm a medievalist quote:I mean I have a source from one of the books "A handbook for Parish priests" written in 1385 describing what you should tell your congregation not to do "He should admonish them that no one should cause a disturbance or a disagreeement or hold discussions or idle and progance conversations in a church or in a graveyard". If you have to forbid something, its kind of a thing that people are doing I'm not really seeing your point, here? chernobyl kinsman fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Welp, off to conquer Münster, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Fr. Michael Oleksa's Orthodox Alaska convinced me both that (1) translating into local languages is an essential missionary tool (the Russians translated as much as they could into Native Alaskan languages, and invented alphabets to do it), and (2) churches should also use and teach the original languages (by the time the Russians left, Native Alaskans tended to be bi- or tri-lingual). At the very least, I'm a lot more okay with Greek parishes using Greek than I was before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:Of course not, I even said that. And define spoken, because educated men very definitely knew and used Latin until like the 17th century, when it was replaced by French as the lingua franca Educated men used a version of Latin if I remember that is rather different from, y'know, the one the early Christians used. And I define, spoken, to mean "could speak and understand" and even most priests couldn't do that in whacking great portions of the medieval period in Europe. What you said was "well i mean that plus its universality plus it's a strong point of spiritual contact for two thousand years' worth of ordinary christians" to which I believe I am allowed to go "Not really". Because of the points I pointed out. The point I am attempting to make is "The thing you are reaching for is not true". Its not an unbroken chain back to the start of Christianity, it isn't a connective across millenia. It is, at best, something that a series of people thought were those things. At worst? It is, as Senju puts it, an attempt to paint over native peoples understanding of their faith with the idea of the chain. Josef bugman fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Educated men used a version of Latin if I remember that is rather different from, y'know, the one the early Christians used. And I define, spoken, to mean "could speak and understand" and even most priests couldn't do that in whacking great portions of the medieval period in Europe. medieval latin is not that different from classical latin and i do not agree that 'most' priests couldn't understand latin in at least the high and late middle ages quote:What you said was "well i mean that plus its universality plus it's a strong point of spiritual contact for two thousand years' worth of ordinary christians" to which I believe I am allowed to go "Not really". Because of the points I pointed out. you're allowed to do whatever you want but i don't really see how what you're saying in any way contradicts that statement. yes, there were pigs in church sometimes. but two thousand years' worth of christians, including just about every saint you've ever heard of, heard the mass sung in latin, and pigs don't change that. that's what i meant about a point of contact quote:Its not an unbroken chain back to the start of Christianity not a perfect one no but it's a drat sight better than english, lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
docbeard posted:Welp, off to conquer Münster, I guess. That's your answer to everything!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:medieval latin is not that different from classical latin So it's not even a straight Millenia now? Its become "maybe, about five hundred years". You don't get to claim it goes on for Millenia when it clearly hasn't. I can accept hyperbole (hells I really indulge in it) but it's not a Millenia long connection, its a disjointed joining of lots of different pieces that can, if you squint, make a whole. Thats fine that you don't agree about 'most', I will try and find a source for my claims but it seems as if a good percentage just don't really care to learn Latin during any age. chernobyl kinsman posted:you're allowed to do whatever you want but i don't really see how what you're saying in any way contradicts that statement. yes, there were pigs in church sometimes. but two thousand years' worth of christians, including just about every saint you've ever heard of, heard the mass sung in latin, and pigs don't change that. that's what i meant about a point of contact So your saying that it matters not if the person understood what was being said, merely the sound matters? Perhaps if I changed the words and said it to a smiliar tone it would have the same meaning and connection? If it is as a point of connection then it is still not for millenia. It is for a reasonably shorter period by the looks of it considering that the sounds probably changed somewhat dependent on where you were or if the priest had a stammer. chernobyl kinsman posted:not a perfect one no but it's a drat sight better than english, lol I would not wish English to be, English is a bastard language and long may it remain so. I am simply saying that your idea is one that is based more on your own view of aesthetics than any real practical view.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So it's not even a straight Millenia now? Its become "maybe, about five hundred years". You don't get to claim it goes on for Millenia when it clearly hasn't. I can accept hyperbole (hells I really indulge in it) but it's not a Millenia long connection, its a disjointed joining of lots of different pieces that can, if you squint, make a whole. Thats fine that you don't agree about 'most', I will try and find a source for my claims but it seems as if a good percentage just don't really care to learn Latin during any age. what are you talking about dude. are you arguing that the mass wasn't performed for millennia in latin? or are you arguing that most priests couldn't speak latin, which i don't believe to be true and furthermore don't really consider relevant to my argument? also it's spelled millennia, millennium in the singular, and it's not capitalised. i wouldn't be a dick about this except that we've been using this word a lot and it's starting to grate on me quote:So your saying that it matters not if the person understood what was being said, merely the sound matters? Perhaps if I changed the words and said it to a smiliar tone it would have the same meaning and connection? i find it really hard to believe that you're not either being willfully dense or just disingenuous, here chernobyl kinsman fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:what are you talking about dude. are you arguing that the mass wasn't performed for millennia in latin? or are you arguing that most priests couldn't speak latin, which i don't believe to be true and furthermore don't really consider relevant to my argument? I'm arguing that it wasn't performed in the same latin, across two thousand years, that it was often not transmitted to ordinary people with any understanding of the words being said and that it should not be held up as a permanent link to the past because of that. Sorry about the misspelling what I meant to point out was focussed on this post: chernobyl kinsman posted:that plus a couple millennia of tradition, yeah I was trying to demonstrate that this claim quoted above is incorrect due to the fact that the classical and medieval latin possess differences. If I am being too focussed on details I do apologise. chernobyl kinsman posted:i find it really hard to believe that you're not either being willfully dense or just disingenuous, here Neither I hope, I am trying to argue something though. I will ask it as a question "What is more important, the sound Latin makes during mass or the meaning of the words said". Because if its the later shouldn't it be in the local language? I am trying to be straightforward here, am I saying stuff wrong?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:44
|
|