www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Canon law - Latin anyone?

Francisco, can you provide proof for this statement?

Naturally. Homilies are (and have always been, I believe) preached in the vernacular tongue, not Latin. If it were preached in Latin, few could understand it. (When Latin was used throughout 99% of the Tridentine Mass, the people knew what was being said because they either had missals, or simply knew by repitition and picking up on it). From the little Latin I have heard chanted/said in the Mass, I can already understand what many words mean, and infer on their relationship to other words. Not so with homilies...unless they go reeeeally slow, and you had a missal to follow along.

The Church uses a form of Latin called "Ecclesiastical Latin". Yes, this is actually a type of Latin. In the Latin language of Cicero, the "c" was pronounced hard, like a "kuh" sound. In Ecclesiatical Latin, the "c" is pronounced like it is in Italian, with a "chuh" sound. If I'm not mistaken, Ecclesiastical Latin developed when the early Christians in Rome sacrificed Mass underground, etc. and were mostly commoners (Romans of nobility spoke the language differently than did the commoners). Therefore, Ecclesiastical Latin is a development from the lower-class Latin, adding the Italian "chuh" sound, which was not the dialect of Cicero. Speakers of both Vulgar Latin and Ecclesiastical Latin could easily understand each other, but they are separate variations of the same language. I get the impressions it's kind of like Koine and Ancient Greek, although I am not positive on this because I have little idea about the history of the Greek language. The Latin taught in public schools (not many schools, anymore) is NOT Ecclesiastical Latin, but the Latin taught in Western seminaries is.

Latin IS the official language of the Catholic Church (Eastern and Western, or just Western???....I'm thinkin' just Western). It's beautiful, it's timeless, and it highlights the universality of the Church. I fully support the deeper study of Latin (and Greek, and Aramaic), especially within the confines of the Roman Church.

ChristTeen287

Carisime ac dilectisime Amado Guerrero

The web-site (by the way how do you say website in Vatican Latin, "locum electronicum Sanctae Apostolicae Sedis in rede digitale" or "album digitale"?) of the Holy See http://www.vatican.va/ (the only official one I know) provides information in English, German, Spanish, Italian and French not in Latin.
The point here it is if they can speak Latin at the Vatican or not, I consider that the point here is why one of the new requirements for canon law degrees is more study of Latin. After II Vatican Council the liturgical texts of the Latin Church were translated from Latin to the different vernacular languages, the documents of the Council and the Code of Canon law of the Roman Church were also translated into English, Italian… Why them are they talking now about studding more Latin? I love Latin and I consider that to study Latin is a good thing but is Latin really necessary for canon lawyers? I do not think so. I consider that a good translation with a good commentary of those Latin legal term that are difficult to be translated into the vernacular languages is more than enough. I will give you an example, in the legal system of my country we have something called “habeas corpus”, I expect from a lawyer to know the exact meaning of the legal concept “habeas corpus” not what “habeas corpus” (“you should have the body”) means in Latin. Other expression like “in dubio pro reo” can be translated into the different vernacular languages without any difficulty. Do they want with this requirement better canon lawyer or just more conservative and traditionalists ones (learning Latin teaches us character!)? Why are they giving so much importance to the study of Canon Law (most Catholic seminarians I know are studding for the canon law degree but very few are interested in dogmatic theology)? Why do not they talk about the deficient knowledge of Greek and Hebrew (the two most important biblical languages together with Aramaic) of most of the students in the Catholic seminaries? If they consider important to read the Canon law in its original language I consider more much important for a theologian or a future priest to study the Bible in its original languages (the Vulgata is not enough). Are our seminarians able to read the works of the Fathers of the Church in its original language? Do they read the translations of the works of the Fathers of the Church at all? Do the Catholic Church want canon lawyers to study the canons of the 7 first Ecumenical Councils and the history of the Canon law both in the western and the Eastern Church or just the Code of Canon Law ( a certainly not very big book)? Do they want scholars in Canon Law or just experts in the anulation of marriages that supposedly never took place? Canon Law is important thing in the live of the Church but we should not forget that “love is the plenitude of the law” and that Christ “is the plenitude of the law and the prophets”.

Si tu vales ego valeo
Franciscus

Dear Christeen 287,

We are talking about Canon Law but we are not at the court now so that excuse me if I can not give you in this very moment any proof for my statement, but there is nothing wrong about writing official documents in Italian or other modern languages even at the Holy See.

You say "If homilies were preached in Latin, few could understand it" my personal oppinion is that "if homilies were preached in Latin very few priests could preach".

From the scientific point of view “Ecclesiastical Latin” does not exist. That is not a language or a dialect that is just the intent of speaking the Latin of Ceasar with a strong Italian pronunciation. There are not speakers of “Ecclesiastical Latin”. Nobody has got “Ecclesiastical Latin” like mother “language” in the same way that nobody has “speranto” like mother language. “Vulgar Latin”, “Later Latin” and “Christian Latin” has nothing to do with “Ecclesiastical Latin”. “Vulgar Latin” is the Latin spoken by a social class, “Later Latin” is the Latin spoken in a historical period and “Christian Latin” is the Latin spoken by the first Roman Christians. Christian Latin has got a lot of similarities with “Vulgar Latin” of the 1st and 2nd century (the first Roman Christians came from the lower social classes or used deliberately the Vulgar Latin to make the message of the Gospel known to everybody) and generally has got a lot of Greek elements (some authors use the word “mysterium” that we heard at the beginning of the Latin Mass, whereas others try to create a Latin Christian vocabulary, “sacramentum” which was originally the oath of the soldiers to their general) . Ecclesiastical Latin is much nearer to the Latin of Caesar and Cicero and has not so many Greek elements. To give you an example the first translation of the Bible into Latin “Vetus Latina” is more “Vulgar Latin” than the Vulgate of Saint Jerome. The language of saint Austin and saint Jerome is not Christian nor Ecclesiastical Latin but “Cult Latin” with obviously a lot of Christian elements.

You say that "Latin is the official language of the Catholic Church"and that “it highlights the universality of the Church”. I am very sorry to tell you that probably most of the first Roman Christians would not agree with you. The liturgical language of the Church of Rome was Greek (the language of the New Testament) and not Latin. The "Canon of the Roman Mass" has got Greek origing whereas the Anaphora of Saint Hypolitus is entirely in Greek. Most of the first Fathers and apologetics of the Latin Church wrote in Greek (Hypolitus, Clement of Rome, Saint Gregory, Epistle to the Corinthians, Saint Justin Martyr). I have nothing against Latin but I stongly disagree with those who pretend that the Latin is the “official” or “universal” language of the Church. The Latin theory of the “Three holy languages” i. e. that only Hebrew, Latin and Greek can be used in the Holy Liturgy (by the way the Apostles did not celebrate the Eucharist in Hebrew but in Aramaic, Hebrew has never been a Christian liturgical language) was condemn as heretical by some of the Fathers of the Eastern Church and by the popes of Rome (John VIII Adrian II?) who approved the translation of the Byzantine Holy liturgy into Slavonic by Saint Cyril and Methodios by putting solemnly the books translated by the Apostles of the Slavs over the Altar of Saint Peter and taking part in the Holy Liturgy in Slavonic celebrated by the two holy brothers. So that there is no “official” or “universal” language in the Catholic Church: Hebrew is the language of the Old Testament, Aramaic is the language spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ, Greek is the language of the New Testament and Latin is (or was) the language of the Christians of Rome. I believe in the “universality” of the message of the Gospel i. e. that the massage of the Gospel can and must be preached to all peoples and in all the languages (the Church was born the day of Pentecost and the gift of the languages was a very important one in the primitive Church).

Yours in Christ

francisco

Interesting you should say "at court"...both my parents are lawyers actually and I'm sure that's where I get my "court of law" attitutude.

If you come across some proof for your abovementioned statement, I'd be interested to see it.

That's very true. I would have mentioned that but I thought we were speaking from the laity's point of view. I'm sure only a handful of your everyday Latin parish priests could actually preach in Latin.

Also very true. I did not mean to imply that Ecclesiastical language developed like any other spoken language; it did not. However, when one speaks "Latin with a strong Italian pronunciation" that, by definition, is Ecclesiastical Latin. How, in the Roman Mass, is Ecclesiastical Latin not spoken? Some sort of Latin is spoken in the Church, and I'm sure it's not Vulgar.

Once again, I did not mean to imply that every early Western Christian wrote and spoke in Latin, simply that Latin is the official language of the Church (Western and Eastern, or just Western?)

Then I have been terribly misinformed by many priests and laypersons. Obviously you know something they don't.

I have never argued this. I, too, believe that it is fitting and necessary to preach our Beloved Gospel in the tongue of those who are being converted. Using Latin in the Church, translating papers into Latin, etc. is not in opposition to this. Where is the problem? It would be sheer lunacy to preach to everyone in Latin, but it would be equally insane to throw out the language used by the Roman Catholic Church for hundreds upon hundreds of years. A happy medium can be achieved, and I think that's what the "pro-Latin translators" of these documents are trying to do.

Gracias Estimado Francisco,
ChristTeen287

By the way in America you got used to "Ecclesiastical" Latin with Italian pronunciation because the Italian pronunciation of Latin was that of both the Roman Catholic priest of Italian backgrounds and the Roman Catholic priest of Irish or Anglo-Saxon-Celtic (whose mother language is not a Romance one) backgrounds but if you have ever the opportunity listen to the “Pangue Lingua” of Saint Thomas of Aquinas in Spain or in a Spanish parish in America you will realize that Ecclesiastical Latin means for us “Latin with Spanish pronunciation”. Very few of the those old Spanish priests who used to celebrate mass in Latin everyday would actually use the Italian pronunciation when celebrating. I suppose that is the same for Frenchs and Germans. If you put an Italian, a Spanish, a French and a German Roman Catholic priest to celebrate mass together you will realize how many Ecclesiastical Latin do exist.

Shlomo Amado,
You state:

That is incorrect. Iran is a theocratic republic.

One interesting fact that most do not know is that the Knights of Malta (Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem) can issue passports

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Yuhannon:

I said:

And you said:

I believe you are mistaken, my friend.

Yes, Iran may be called a theocratic republic or, more correctly, an Islamic republic. Still, the form and system of government is secular in that the traditional 3 branches of government are manned mostly by non-clerical functionaries.

There are numerous "theocratic" republics in the Islamic world, whether these are headed by imams, shieks, mullahs, ayatollahs, or what not. But the United Nations has not granted non-secular status to these states.

Only the Vatican, by international law and comity, is such as of now. The 3 "branches" of government in the Vatican are manned exclusively by clerics, from the Pope down to lowest functionary in the Roman Curia.

Another cogent reason for the Vatican's non-secular status is that BOTH the object and subject of its governance are beyond the purview of secular states.

You also said:

From what country or state? I thought their sovereign rule in Malta ended in the 19th century?

AmdG

Francisco,

The information about the different ways to pronounce Ecclesiastical Latin is very interesting. I would suppose that, if those who do not speak a Romance language speak Ecclesiastical Latin the Italian way, then that would apply to the Germans as well (German is, obviously, a Germanic language).

ChristTeen287

I think the Order's headquarters is an estate that is its own country, much like Vatican City.

Mor Ephrem:

Has that "estate" or "HQ" been endowed by the international community of nations statehood status?

Otherwise, granting of passports (which should be recognized worldwide) is the prerogative only of sovereign nations or states. This is the reason why the PLO, which is governed by the Palestinian Authority under Arafat, has been afforded the status of a "de facto" state although the definition of its boundaries is still in process. Thus, the PLO is a member of the United Nations, as an observer, without voting rights as of now. And as a "de facto" sovereign state, she has the power and authority to issue passports to her citizens.

A passport is a document issued by a sovereign country where it affords the holder the privilege to travel to and from different countries which have "visas" endorsed thereon.

If the "passport" that can be issued by the Knights of Malta (Knights of St. John of Jerusalem) allows one only to travel in and around Jerusalem then it is not a "passport" in the legal sense under international law.

Perhaps, Juhannon can provide us with a document showing a specific grant by the United Nations of a special power and authority for the Order to issue passports to its member knights.

I am at a loss at how such a special power and authority could exist without a recognition of the Order's sovereignty by other states.

AmdG

I don't have the book handy (I'm at school, not at home), but if you manage to pick up a copy of James Charles Noonan's The Church Visible, there is a section where he goes into great detail about the Order, and explains these matters in depth.

Shlomo Amado,

The supreme head of the Iran is the "Leader" Here is what the Iranian Constitution says:

8- The Leader or Leadership Council

Article 107

After the demise of the eminent marji' al-taqlid and great leader of the universal Islamic revolution, and founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatullah al-'Uzma Imam Khumayni - quddisa sirruh al-sharif - who was recognized and accepted as marji' and Leader by a decisive majority of the people, the task of appointing the Leader shall be vested with the experts elected by the people. The experts will review and consult among themselves concerning all the fuqaha' possessing the qualifications specified in Articles 5 and 109. In the event they find one of them better versed in Islamic regulations, the subjects of the fiqh, or in political and social Issues, or possessing general popularity or special prominence for any of the qualifications mentioned in Article 109, they shall elect him as the Leader. Otherwise, in the absence of such a superiority, they shall elect and declare one of them as the Leader. The Leader thus elected by the Assembly of Experts shall assume all the powers of the wilayat al-amr and all the responsibilities arising therefrom. The Leader is equal with the rest of the people of the country in the eyes of law.

Article 108

The law setting out the number and qualifications of the experts [mentioned in, the preceding article], the mode of their election, and the code of procedure regulating the sessions during the first term must be drawn up by the fuqaha' on the first Guardian Council, passed by a majority of votes and then finally approved by the Leader of the Revolution. The power to make any subsequent change or a review of this law, or approval of all the provisions concerning the duties of the experts is vested in themselves.

Article 109

Following are the essential qualifications and conditions for the Leader:

1.scholarship, as required for performing the functions of mufti in different fields of fiqh.
2.Justice and piety, as required for the leadership of the Islamic Ummah.
3.right political and social perspicacity, prudence, courage, administrative facilities and adequate capability for leadership. In case of multiplicity of persons fulfilling the above qualifications and conditions, the person possessing the better jurisprudential and political perspicacity will be given preference.

Article 110

Following are the duties and powers of the Leadership:

1.Delineation of the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran after consultation with the Nation's Exigency Council.
2.Supervision over the proper execution of the general policies of the system.
3.Issuing decrees for national referenda.
4.Assuming supreme command of the armed forces.
5.Declaration of war and peace, and the mobilization of the armed forces.
6.Appointment, dismissal, and acceptance of resignation of:
1.the fuqaha' on the Guardian Council.
2.the supreme judicial authority of the country.
3.the head of the radio and television network of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
4.the chief of the joint staff.
5.the chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.
6.the supreme commanders of the armed forces.
7.Resolving differences between the three wings of the armed forces and regulation of their relations.
8.Resolving the problems, which cannot be solved by conventional methods, through the Nation's Exigency Council.
9.Signing the decree formalizing the election of the President of the Republic by the people. The suitability of candidates for the Presidency of the Republic, with respect to the qualifications specified in the Constitution, must be confirmed before elections take place by the Guardian Council;, and, in the case of the first term [of the Presidency], by the Leadership;
10.Dismissal of the' President of the Republic, with due regard for the interests of the country, after the Supreme Court holds him guilty of the violation of his constitutional duties, or after a vote of the Islamic Consultative Assembly testifying to his incompetence on the basis of Article 89 of the Constitution.
11.Pardoning or reducing the sentences of convicts, within the framework of Islamic criteria, on a recommendation [to that effect] from the Head of judicial power. The Leader may delegate part of his duties and powers to another person.

Article 111

Whenever the Leader becomes incapable of fulfilling his constitutional duties, or lobs one of the qualifications mentioned in Articles 5 and 109, or it becomes known that he did not possess some of the qualifications initially, he will be dismissed. The authority of determination in this matter is vested with the experts specified in Article 108. In the event of the death, or resignation or dismissal of the Leader, the experts shall take steps within the shortest possible time for the appointment of the new Leader. Till the appointment of the new Leader, a council consisting of the President, head of the judicial power, and a faqih from the Guardian Council, upon the decision of the Nation's Exigency Council, shall temporarily take over all the duties of the Leader. In the event, during this period, any one of them is unable to fulfil his duties for whatsoever reason, another person, upon the decision of majority of fuqaha' in the Nation's Exigency Council shall be elected in his place. This council shall take action in respect of items 1,3,5, and 10, and sections d,e and f of item 6 of Article 110, upon the decision of three-fourths of the members of the Nation's Exigency Council. Whenever the Leader becomes temporarily unable to perform the duties of leadership owing to his illness or any other incident, then during this period, the council mentioned in this Article shall assume his duties.

Article 112

Upon the order of the Leader, the Nation's Exigency Council shall meet at any time the Guardian Council judges a proposed bill of the Islamic Consultative Assembly to be against the principles of Shariah or the Constitution, and the Assembly is 'unable to meet the expectations of the Guardian Council. Also, the Council shall meet for consideration on any issue forwarded to it by the Leader and shall carry out any other responsibility as mentioned in this Constitution. The permanent and changeable members of the Council shall be appointed by the Leader. The rules for the Council shall be formulated and approved by the Council members subject to the confirmation by the Leader.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Shlomo Amado,

Here is information from the web on the Knights. The reason that they can issue passports is that they are a sovereign military order, and therefore, under international law (which is Western base) they can issue passports. They also have embassies in about 75 countries.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

**************************************************
http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa040600a.htm

SMOM - The Sovereign Military Order Of Malta
Some claim that there is a country even smaller than the world's smallest country, Vatican City. They claim that world's actual smallest country, is an organization headquartered in Rome called the Sovereign Military Order Of Malta (SMOM for short but also known as the Knights of Malta and also officially the Sovereign Military Hopsitaller Order Of St. John Of Jerusalem, Of Rhodes And Of Malta).

While the Sovereign Military Order Of Malta was once an independent country, today it is no more an independent country than any other organization such as the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. SMOM as a religious organization that provides humanitarian and medical assistance worldwide. It has held Permanent Observer status at the United Nations (as does the Red Cross) since 1994 and issues "passports" to its diplomats for diplomatic business but it does not meet the criteria for being an independent country. It lacks territory, a permanent population, police power, and has no economy.

The Knights of Malta was founded in the late 11th century when it established a hospital in Jerusalem to care for ill pilgrims during the First Crusade. The organization expanded and built additional hospitals along the route from Europe to the Holy Land. In addition to their hospitaller duties, the Knights also waged war against the Muslim "infidels."

Eventually, Jerusalem was recaptured by the Muslims and the knights left Jerusalem and spent time in various places, especially the island of Cyprus. In 1309 the SMOM took control of Rhodes (today a Greek island) but had to flee in 1523. They were given Malta in 1530 and built the capital city of Valletta.

Despite the neutrality of the Knights of Malta, Napoleon conquered Malta in 1798 and the SMOM fled once again. Finally, in 1834 the organization found a home in Rome, where they still reside.

While SMOM is recognized as an independent country by the Vatican City (a country that doesn't meet all of the criteria for being an independent country itself) and a handful of other Roman Catholic countries, it does not issue coins or stamps for more than ornamental purposes. Though SMOM maintains "embassies" in a host of countries (in such places as Russia, Spain, Hungary, and Poland) it does not in others (such as the U.S., Canada, United Kingdom, or Japan).

There are fifty national SMOM organizations and thousands of members (called "knights") worldwide. The United States maintains an association as does Canada and the United Kingdom. For a great article about the history of the Knights of Malta online, visit Britannica.com.

Yuhannon:

We are talking about "states", not international organizations like the Red Cross and the SMOM.

Your citation even put "passports" in quotations clarifying its non-equivalence to regular passports issued by countries of the world:

The Order, as an international service organization, does not qualify as a STATE, to which the Vatican does in all respects by international law and comity.

AmdG

Dear Amado,

Well, it's "Greek" to me!

Alex