/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>739658

Why should God care what language you pray in? He is omnipotent. He knows all the languages already. He would rather you speak to him from the heart in your native tounge than reciting a prayer from a language you barely understand.

God doesn’t care what language you pray in, but the Devil has his preferences.

>>739674

This, according to Fr. Ripperger latin is particularly effective in exorcisms. I imagine that's because the establishment of a world language for prayer and holy matters stings them quite a bit. Beyond that yeah, the post is right,

>>739711

The Bible itself was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and/or Greek tho, so wouldn’t the language of the scriptures hurt him the most?

>>739713

All sacred languages do

>>739674

>>739711

>>739714

Here's an interview with another exorcist that addresses this topic. TL:DW it's more about the exorcist's intention than the language.

>>739674

Perhaps, but latin was the Church standard for over a millenium so I doubt anything else would be tested. Ask an ordodox.

>>739658

>Rev 7:9

>After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

God knows your heart, what words you choose to convey it doesn't matter all too much outside of being rude

>They think they will be heard because of their many words

There has been an active push by modernists to "do away with liturgical Greek" in America.

So at least the demons care.

>>739750

>demons care

yes, i can imagine them being actively engaged in maintaining pointless ritualism, especially that which prevents the laity from understanding what God would speak to them from Scripture

>>739758

>prevents the laity from understanding what God would speak to them from Scripture

I like how we've pointed out that the translations are put out for the laity to read in the last thread, but people like you keep ignoring it because they're intellectually dishonest and don't have our best interests at heart.

>>739658

If he cared he would have given us a single holy language such as hebrew.

Instead we have only ancient and revered liturgical languages but no holy language.

Language doesn't matter, it's what you're saying that is important. However when using very old prayers that were not originally written in English, you could be saying something completely different than what was originally different. How would you know if you have only ever read it in English?

>>739781

well i don't like how alleged christians ignore the words of st. paul who said in 1 corinthians 14:19 that he would rather speak 5 intelligible words to instruct the church than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue, especially when it adds an unnecessary aura of mystic superstition to the gospel of Christ which has continually bred an atmosphere of heretical folk-religion throughout the history of the church

>>739658

You haven't read the Bible until you've read it in the original Klingon.

>>740431

>Clearly about Latin and not people pretending to speak in tongues

read first cor again - paul is speaking of legitimate tongues being practised

as for these so called 'traditional ceremonies', we have an apostolic tradition straight from paul telling us he wants preachers to preach in the language of the people

divergence from that has historically led to people making an idol of the magic words being spoken over them, as if there is some power or mystical significance in the language being used

this is the same idolatry as the KJV-onlyists practice, do you really want to sin in the same way?

>>739658

Latin is a Catholic language pretending to be a scriptural language.

So as long as you DON'T say them in Latin, all is good.

>>740673

I do wonder how far the word would've gotten if people like you would've been discouraging the use of Latin this hard since the beginning, probably not far enough for you to be even aware of it today much less be able to complain about it.

wow that's a cool and funny meme picture.

>>740411

Nobody is speaking 10000 words in an "unknown" tongue, churches that intermix Latin and Greek liturgically repeat the same phrases again and again that are also at times done in English, the language is explained and also translated in missals. Homilies are given in English even in full Latin masses. When "Angus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi" is sung instead of "Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world" nobody is mystified or confused. Plus as vernacular languages evolve over time, it is valuable that liturgical words are translated from a common basis in another language, the alternative is confusion of language and possible error creeping in from translating past vernacular into future vernacular repeatedly.

The consensus would say 'the language doesn't matter.' But just in case, let's all learn koine Greek so to pray rightly as the apostles did.

>>740719

while i disagree with your assertion that 10,000 words aren't being spoken in unknown tongues, since the liturgies are said at every mass throughout the world, numbering words in the million-millions; i think you make one of the strongest arguments for maintaining the use of ecclesiastical latin with this:

> …as vernacular languages evolve over time, it is valuable that liturgical words are translated from a common basis in another language, the alternative is confusion of language and possible error creeping in from translating past vernacular into future vernacular repeatedly.

i respect the sentiment of that argument because those who wish to maintain continuity with the historic faith must of necessity have a fixed foundation point

but please, read what you are saying again… you decry the use of modern language when speaking the liturgies – so as to preserve the doctrines contained therein – yet admit that in every instance it is necessary to translate those same liturgies into the local tongue

you're running in circles friend, and make no argument for the speaking of latin in churches, for in every instance and in every age, the church is still tasked with making the meaning clear and free from error to its people

now please, do you really not see the circularity of that thought?

and moreover, since we know from history that error, heresy and idolatrous folk-religion has always crept in when a rite or form has been imbued with a spiritual significance it does not own; i would have to ask why-oh-why would you want to put more stumbling blocks in the way of Christ's flock – latin isn't a magic language, so why give the unlearned the impression that it is?

… look, here's my resolution to this - you don't have to answer this question ITT - but is it possible that the reason you like Latin in church is because you just like the way it makes you feel?

if that's the case, i quite understand - it's like candles and incense and choral strains from the vestibules - the smells and bells are a joy to the senses; especially so at this time of year

but we have to remember that the gospel is something so much more transcendent, able to sustain a man who is chained to a cell under persecution; and in reality it needs no such ornamentation to display it's intrinsic worth; the cracked lips of the condemned martyr giving just as much glory to God as the highest choir of angels

>>740782

>giving just as much glory to God as the highest choir of angels

nb4 moreso, because the highest of angel has never been redeemed

>>739717

Church standard in the West, the East spoke and wrote in Greek