LITURGICAL LANGUAGES Since the Liturgy in a wider sense embraces that collection of prayers and rituals by which the Church publicly worships God and sanctifies its members, it is significant that the Fathers of the greatest Council in the Church's history should consider the role of liturgical languages in worship during the first session just concluded. No topic sparked a greater universal interest. To see this question in its true perspective we present this brief historical study without championing any cause and without speculating about subsequent courses of action by the Church. The languages that are used by the Church in her official worship are known as liturgical languages. It can be said with certainty that no evidence can be found to establish the fact that Christ ever commanded the Apostles to use any particular language in the celebration of the Mysteries. On the contrary, scholas agree that the cult-language corresponded with the vernacular of the time. When Christianity made its appearance in Palestine, the people were not racially homogeneous. Depending upon locality, either Aramaic (a northwest Semitic dialect), Greek, or Latin were the spoken languages, although Hebrew had been retained for a limited usage. For many years the question of the languages used in the ancient Liturgy did not raise any difficulties. The Apostles and their first successors celebrated the Liturgy in the language of the faithful, that is to say, in the language they used to instruct the people. Since their preaching did not extend beyond the limits of the countries where these languages were spoken, we may conclude that the liturgical languages and the vernacular were the same.3 PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY Aramaic was the usual language of the Jewish nation during the time of Christ, and it is certain that the Apostles and com A. De Marco, O.F.M., Rome and the Vernacular (Westminster, Md.: Newman Press, 1960), p. 3. J. McKenzie, "The Jewish World in New Testament Times," Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture (London: T. Nelson, 1953), 548, 8. # Hofinger, Worship, the Life of the Missions (Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame Press, 1958), p. 5. munity of early Christians celebrated the Liturgy in the national Aramaic tongue. However, the Apostles did not impose only Aramaic on the Christian Liturgy. They rather adopted the languages of the various places where they founded churches. There is no doubt that in the first three centuries of the primitive Church, Greek stood in the foreground. Although the Roman Empire embraced the entire civilized world. Greece had made its own conquest through tradition, culture and language." "The Mediterranean world did not wait for the Roman legions before making a kind of cultural commonwealth. When in the second century the two worlds met, it was Greece, not Rome, which won the victory in the cultural sphere." The "koine" was the common language spoken and written after the conquests of Alexander throughout the Hellenistic world. There was hardly any town of importance in the West in which the Greek tongue was not in everyday use. In Rome, North Africa, and Gaul, the use of Greek was prevalent up to the third century. It was among nations of Greek descent or those who had been Hellenized by the conquest of Alexander that Christianity was promulgated and made its first converts. Since the Christian message was destined to be universal, it was therefore proper that it be expressed in a language understood by the whole of the then civilized world. This explains why all the books of the New Testament were written in Greek, except St. Matthew's gospel; why Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans in Greek, and Mark wrote down the preaching of Peter at Rome in the Greek language. When St. Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus (366-384) to revise the old Latin text of the Gospels according to the Greek, he clearly states: "Speaking of the New Testament, there is no doubt that it was written in Greek, except St. Matthew, who first wrote the Gospel of Christ in Judea in Hebrew." Forming a part of the early Christian Liturgy (and of private reading), it would necessarily follow that the language of the Liturgy was the language of the Scriptures. 4 J. Hanssens, “Lingua Liturgica," EC, VII (1951), 1379. 5 A. De Marco, op. cit., p. 5. P. Poulain, "The Language of the Mediterranean World," in Twentieth Century Encyclopedia of Catholicism, Vol. 116 (New York, N.Y.: Hawthorn, 1960), 75. 7 Prefatio Hieronymi in Quatuor Evangelia (MPL, XXIX, 559). LITURGICAL LANGI Since the Liturgy in a wider sense emb prayers and rituals by which the Church and sanctifies its members, it is significar greatest Council in the Church's history of liturgical languages in worship dur concluded. No topic sparked a greater this question in its true perspective we study without championing any cau about subsequent courses of action b The languages that are used by th ship are known as liturgical langua tainty that no evidence can be fo Christ ever commanded the Apoguage in the celebration of the Mars agree that the cult-language of the time. When Christianity the people were not racially hor ity, either Aramaic (a northwe were the spoken languages, a for a limited usage.2 For 1 guages used in the ancient I The Apostles and their first the language of the faithfu used to instruct the people beyond the limits of the spoken, we may conclud vernacular were the san the Eastern rites always the languages understood various national languages Je, namely, that the Liturgy rative act both in the etymory and rubrics of the Oriental central act of worship the pro-hip.' "13 Therefore, in consonance Schwartz, GCS II, 1, 378; cf. ibid., III, toal der Oosterse Ritus (Belgium, 1948). IAS, 39 (1947), 528-529. astern Branches of the Tree of Life (New een & Co., 1938), p. 14. brated in a language familiar to the ry various rites develhates) of Alexandria, Here as in most cities the Liturgy during the reek culture had not comned loyal to their "barbaric" Liturgy in their vernacular. nd Palestine, especially in the tes, there is evidence of a Syriac is fact is verified by the pilgrim ctice in the church of Jerusalem of nterpreter) to translate the Liturgy ) for the benefit of the pilgrims who 16 The need for translations of the s known to the people gave rise to the acular tongues in the Liturgy. We can ptic was already in use in the third century; ond century; Rumenian since the fourth, fourth-fifth centuries.17 Between the fifth and · Liturgies attained their definitive forms. The pments and alterations very rarely involved any ge. In accord with the Eastern practice, the elebrated in as many tongues as there were people Christianity. In point of fact, such a variety of uages existed long before the inception of the heretical which placed much emphasis on local idioms. Before the entury the following languages were used: Greek, Syriac, Armenian, Georgian, Geez, Old Slavonic and Arabic. As Issionaries spread the kingdom of Christ beyond their coun D. Attwater, The Catholic Eastern Churches (New York, N.Y.: Bruce, :37), pp. 34 ff. 15 For a history of the growth of the many usages in the Oriental rites (which is outside the scope of this paper) see the general bibliography of J. M. Sauget, Bibliographie des liturgies Orientales (1900-1960), (Rome: Pont. Instit. Orientalium Studiorum, 1962). 16 Peregrinatio Aetheriae (380), 47, 3 (ed. Geyer, CSEL 39, 99). 7 A. Robert & A. Tricot, Guide to the Bible, I (Paris, Tournai, New : Desclée, 1960), pp. 607, 611, 633, 613, 636, 637. tries, they adopted the languages of the people they evangelized. Since the last century the Liturgy has also been celebrated in Japanese, Korean, Ukrainian, Albanian, modern Russian regional dialects, English, French, Italian, German, etc. This remains the continuous and universal discipline in all the Oriental rites. The basic principle for this recognized discipline was expressed by the famous twelfth-century canonist, Theodore Balsamon. In a series of questions submitted to him by Mark, Melkite Patriarch of Alexandria, concerning the problem of Armenian and Syrian priests in Egypt who did not know Greek, whether they should be allowed to celebrate in their own language, Balsamon replied: “Is God the God of the Jews only, and not of the Gentiles also? (Rom. 3:29). Those who do not know any Greek shall celebrate in their own language provided they use correct copies of the official prayers translated from well-written Greek scrolls.' In modern times the Holy See has been both constant and clear in acknowledging the same principle. 9918 THE WEST It has already been noted that the Roman world did not escape the influence of Hellenism. The more she conquered, the more she exposed herself to Greek culture and language. We must remember, therefore, that Christianity was brought to Rome as elsewhere, by Hellenized Jews. Quite logically the vernacular-"the koine Greek" was the language of the Liturgy.19 There were, however, also Latin-speaking Christians who only had a slight acquaintance with Greek, or none at all. As their numbers increased, a Latinized-Christian community developed which before the middle of the second century held a conspicuous position in the Roman community. Since the Scriptures played a vital role in public worship and in private devotion, a Latin translation of the Sacred Books became a necessity for their understanding.20 We must therefore turn to the old Latin translations of the Scriptures in order to see the beginnings of this change of 18 (MPG, CXXXVIII, 957). 19 A. De Marco, op. cit., pp. 3 ff. 20 A. Robert & A. Tricot, op. cit., I, p. 404. |