 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
CHANGES IN THE ROMAN MISSAL, Pt. 1
[EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the first column in an ongoing series written by Father Daniel Merz highlighting many of the historical and theological bases of the forthcoming publication of a revised English translation of the Roman Missal. The new translation, tentatively set for release around November 2011, will involve slight but noticeable changes at Mass. Father Merz is the chairman of the Liturgical Commission for the Diocese of Jefferson City, Mo. — BH]
Cardinal John Henry Newman once famously wrote: “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.” I wonder if one could also say that to be deep in liturgical history is to cease to be ideological. I believe one of the reasons for this is that there is great reassurance in our liturgical history, littered as it is with saints and sinners, fidelity and abuses, that the Holy Spirit is in charge and guides the church.
There has been a great deal of discussion, some calm and reasoned, some less so, regarding the Roman Missal translation project. In this article, I propose to give some history of sacred (liturgical) languages in the church’s worship.
In subsequent articles, I intend to discuss the reasons — the advantages and the disadvantages — for the current translation project. My purpose is twofold: first, to provide some catechetical preparation for what is to come; second, to provide some history behind and foundation for this project and, hopefully, to encourage people to step away from ideology in order to hear the real concerns from all sides. It is only when we have truly listened, that we have the right to speak our opinions, let alone to proclaim the Gospel.
THE LANGUAGES OF THE CHURCH’S WORSHIP
[Note: The vast majority of the following material was taken from the book, “Dynamic Equivalence: The Living Language of Christian Worship” by Jesuit Father Keith F. Pecklers, Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 2003; especially chapter one.]
1 Cor. 14:16-19: “If you pronounce a blessing with the spirit [in tongues], how shall one who holds the place of the uninstructed say the ‘Amen’ to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? For you may be giving thanks very well, but the other is not built up. I give thanks to God that I speak in tongues more than any of you, but in the church I would rather speak five words with my mind, so as to instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.”
ARAMAIC
Jesus preached and taught in Aramaic. Consider, for example, his use of the words “Abba” or “Amen, Amen,” or even in Acts 26:14, where the voice of Jesus is said to speak in Hebrew (Aramaic was the Hebrew of the common man). The apostles also spoke and taught in Aramaic (the Gospel of Matthew — or at least parts of it — is often thought to have been originally written in Aramaic).
GREEK
As the apostles, including Sts. Paul and Barnabas, moved beyond the land of Israel (Palestine), they took up their preaching, teaching and worshipping in the international language of the day, which was Greek. Even the Jewish communities in Rome spoke Greek; and the Christian community in Rome used Greek also for its liturgy and Bible (the New Testament, of course, was written in Greek). Perhaps one reason for the Roman liturgy being in Greek was that many of the earliest Christians in Rome were slaves, poor people and foreigners — all of whom spoke Greek rather than Latin — even if some other language was their mother tongue. One of the earliest “papal” letters, written by St. Clement (d. 99 A.D.), was written in Greek. St. Justin, martyr (d. 130), a Christian philosopher who lived in Rome, wrote in Greek. St. Irenaeus (d. 202), bishop of Lyons (in modern day France), spoke and wrote in Greek.
THE SHIFT TO LATIN
As more of Rome and the Western Roman Empire became Christian, however, there were more and more Christians who spoke Latin only and not Greek. By the third and fourth centuries, Christians were beginning to experiment with Latin. Tertullian, a lawyer who lived in North Africa between about 160-220 A.D., was among the first Christian theologians to write in Latin. For approximately two centuries the church had taught and worshipped in Greek. The transition to Latin was a long and difficult struggle. After all, the inspired Word of God was written in Greek, wouldn’t it be safer doctrinally to worship in Greek, too? The transition needed to find the right Latin words to grasp the authentic and orthodox meaning of the church’s Greek. Tertullian was a tremendous help in developing a theological and liturgical lexicon in Latin that was both theologically correct and understandable to the average Christian. This was a tremendous early example of inculturation, the process of applying the Gospel to the various cultures throughout the world. The goal is to allow the Gospel to purify the culture of superstition, idolatries or anything contrary to Christ, but also to use the language and custom of the culture, where possible, in proclaiming the Gospel. The ultimate “inculturation,” of course, was the incarnation, when the Word of God, by clothing itself in the language and culture of humanity — particularly Jewish humanity — purified all of humanity.
Over the next three centuries, the Roman Church continued to refine and develop its Latin liturgical lexicon. Popes Innocent (401-417), Leo the Great (440-461), Gelasius (492-496), Vigilius (537-555) and Gregory the Great (590-604) were major contributors to the development of liturgical prayer in Latin. When one reads the sermons and prayers of Pope St. Leo the Great, for example, you can almost hear the Greek language in the background. Latin had become the dominant liturgical language, but Greek was still the intellectual and theological touchstone behind it.
It is interesting to note that the Roman Church always held the principle in mind that language was a beautiful means to be used for the end of bringing people closer to Jesus. At times, in the history of the city of Rome, there would be a sudden influx of Greek speaking refugees from the East (from parts of the Byzantine Empire, often due to persecution or war). Then, there would be a sudden resurgence of Greek in the Roman liturgy. The Roman Christians always seemed concerned to minister in the language of the people, originally Greek, then Latin, and then both Greek and Latin depending on the immigration situation of the city.
LANGUAGES IN THE EAST
The Christian Church in the Eastern Empire (modern day Turkey, Greece, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and parts of Egypt) primarily spoke Greek (never Latin), but likewise was solicitous to minister in the vernacular for different peoples. Thus, local languages like Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian were immediately used for both the Bible and the liturgy. The Bible was translated into Syriac by the second century, into Coptic in the third, and into Armenian in the fourth. Liturgical translations followed the biblical translations.
[NEXT COLUMN: More historical background as Father Merz discusses the tensions between Latin and the vernacular, the Council of Trent and the Second Vatican Council.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |