From: kevin@pages.com (Kevin Sven Berg)
Subject: Re: Bible translations, or Does God Speak Latin?
Organization: Banzai Research Institute
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:57:58 GMT

In article <C09stH.J02.1@cs.cmu.edu> drake+@cs.cmu.edu (Drake) writes:
> Yes...saying Masses in English was, I think, one reason for the Church's
> downfall; when they were in Latin, they were beautiful, they were
> mysterious, and they were powerful.  ...

and re: enlightenment...
> Provided the hearer understands it, yes.  Other than that, I see no
> spiritual value in hearing someone make mouth noises at me, ...

In article <1i9a3jINNshe@shelley.u.washington.edu> jeon@carson.u.washington.edu  
(Sangyong Jeon) writes:
> One, the Latin, which was hardly understood by ordinary people
> nevertheless had the effect of magic words, sort of like saying
> Abracadabra, nobody really knows what it means, but that is precisely
> why it seems magical. 
> Two, related to the first, is a matter of power of the clergy....

Before becoming judgemental about another time in history, it may
benefit us to change from our present frame of reference to that of
the commoner attending the early church.

The entire church domain was an embodiment of heaven. Art, architecture,
music and language served to transport the individual into something
which was much greater than his/her everyday experience. Latin played
a large role in this transformation. The entire early church was
specifically designed for this (ref: "Ancient Churches, Machines of
Transformation" - Roger Sherman, also "The Sacred and the Profane,
the Nature of Religion" - Mircea Eliade).

As for understanding, recall that the commoner was not highly educated
and could come to spiritual understanding only through the imagery, 
sounds and totality of experience within the bounds of the church. Yes, 
the church was the keeper of the spiritual power, but recall that the
clergy played a role similar to shamans in other societies.

It is critical to note that the initial "religious design" was devoid
of ego, often hiding where or whom music emanated from, allowing no
personal scriptural interpretation, and sweeping an individual participant 
into the expanse which was a portion of heaven on earth. (BTW: To this day 
people often report similar claims while visiting these early cathedrals; 
there is even a syndrome related to tourist over-exposure to divine places!). 

Yes, unfortunately the "power" of greed (through taxation and political
control) changed the underlying dynamics of the early church, and thus
began its fragmentation. However, I don't believe this discounts either the
tradition, Latin's effectiveness, or its place among the peoples of the time.

Regarding present-day use of Latin: note that people have expressed two
points of view: (1) intellectual side of spirituality, and (2) the
experiential side (e.g. mysticism). Latin mass and chanting belongs
to the mystical tradition.

There are some pretty neat references on Christian Mysticism if
anyone's interested...

Kevin

ps. I believe that Joseph Cambell may have said similar things about the
early church... (?).


-- 
Kevin Sven Berg               /    /    /    /  P /  a /  g /  e /  s
kevin@pages.com              /    /    /    /    /    /    /    / 
Pages Software Inc.         /    /    /    /    /    /    /    /   
San Diego, CA.               `    `    `    `    `    `    `    `
Newsgroups: alt.pagan,talk.religion.misc