The demons hate Latin!

[Athanasias]

Exorcism is a liturgical rite, and what you are proposing can only be described as Latinization in the most literal way. It presupposes that two Catholic priests serving the same liturgy will vary in their effectiveness depending on which liturgical rite they are trained in, and that is simply wrong, and the wrongness of that perspective is explained clearly in the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia.

What you are actually saying, whether or not you realize it, is that Latin Rite priests are more competent to perform exorcisms than Greek Catholic, Maronite Catholic, Syriac Catholic etc. priests who do not speak Latin, even where those priests speak a liturgical language just as ancient and valuable, according to the Roman Catholic church itself.

Oh my goodness if you have such a prejudicial mind that it really thinks those things after reading those articles and hearing my explanation then there is nothing I really do but put you on ignore because your obviously not getting the point. You for some reason are reading much more into this then either article and I had to say. Sorry I am gonna put you on ignore since you really cannot get out of your mindset on this and fruitful dialog with you is impossible at this point. This is my last post to you personally. Peace be with you brother.

 

[Wgw]

Oh my goodness if you have such a prejudicial mind that it really thinks those things after reading those articles and hearing my explanation then there is nothing I really do but put you on ignore because your obviously not getting the point. You for some reason are reading much more into this then either article and I had to say. Sorry I am gonna put you on ignore since you really cannot get out of your mindset on this and fruitful dialog with you is impossible at this point. This is my last post to you personally. Peace be with you brother.

I am not the one implictly casting doubt on the efficacy of Eastern Catholic clergy. FWIW, I am reasonably certain my position, that the liturgical service of exorcism is efdicacious if properly served, regardless of rite or liturgical language, is that of the Roman Catholic Church. This does not mean I am opposed to Latin; I love the traditional Latin mass, Gregorian chant and so on, but I am opposed to Latinization, Byzantinization, indeed Anglicization, and other instances in which an authentic and valuable liturgical tradition dating back to the early church is deprecated in favor of something else.

 

[prodromos]

Just to clarify Prodromos, I do hope you are not advocating a sort of Fr. John C. Romanides anti-Latin position? Because that is frankly just as silly as what Athanasias is arguing (Fr. Romanides embarassed Orhodox scholarship severely with his attempt to argue that ancient Romans, in Rome, as opposed to in the Eastern Empire, did not primarily speak Latin).

No, I'm suggesting they use Latin because it 'sounds' more impressive. I agree with you about the silliness of what Athanasias is arguing. Did demons take less offence at Latin rite exorcisms before Latin was made the official language of the Western Church? Did exorcisms in the Latin rite suddenly become more efficacious after that declaration? It is nonsense of course but I guess the idea gives comfort to Catholics who believe they are the Church.

 

[prodromos]

Oh my goodness if you have such a prejudicial mind that it really thinks those things after reading those articles and hearing my explanation then there is nothing I really do but put you on ignore because your obviously not getting the point. You for some reason are reading much more into this then either article and I had to say. Sorry I am gonna put you on ignore since you really cannot get out of your mindset on this and fruitful dialog with you is impossible at this point. This is my last post to you personally. Peace be with you brother.

He is not the only one seeing this. I think you need to take a step back and look at your posts more objectively.

 

[Wgw]

No, I'm suggesting they use Latin because it 'sounds' more impressive. I agree with you about the silliness of what Athanasias is arguing. Did demons take less offence at Latin rite exorcisms before Latin was made the official language of the Western Church? Did exorcisms in the Latin rite suddenly become more efficacious after that declaration? It is nonsense of course but I guess the idea gives comfort to Catholics who believe they are the Church.

Very good, I agree entirely. I support the liturgical use of traditional languages like Latin; I oppose a view which would imply a theurgic inate capability in spoken lamguahes; since our Lord was probably translated from Aramaic to Koine Greel by the four Evangelists, I see no reason why this approach could be regarded as contrary to the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church. It certainly is not contrary to what the RCs have said about the eastern rites since the forced Latinization policy fell out of favour.

 

[Athanasias]

He is not the only one seeing this. I think you need to take a step back and look at your posts more objectively.

I personally think you just like to take the contrary stance for fun. I am down with that. You like to jab! Whoohoo I am here babe! But I know your not gonna tell me you take offense too at this and catch yourself in a lie because when I confronted you about this you said in post #44 "Nor do I read the OP as an offense against the Orthodox Church."

 

[Wgw]

I personally think you just like to take the contrary stance for fun. I am down with that. You like to jab! Whoohoo I am here babe! But I know your not gonna tell me you take offense too at this and catch yourself in a lie because when I confronted you about this you said in post #44 "Nor do I read the OP as an offense against the Orthodox Church."

I think it a bit much to accuse prodromos of lying, when I would agree with him that there was no intentional offense; the problem with your remarks is their implication.

 

[ewq1938]

Very good, I agree entirely. I support the liturgical use of traditional languages like Latin

According to scripture, if a language is used that isn't commonly understood there needs to be a translator. Without one, a church is doing something very wrong.

As you said in another post:

No, I'm suggesting they use Latin because it 'sounds' more impressive.

Yes, this is the reason it is ever used.

 

[Athanasias]

According to scripture, if a language is used that isn't commonly understood there needs to be a translator. Without one, a church is doing something very wrong.

As you said in another post:



Yes, this is the reason it is ever used.

Well if you mean tongues then sure. But that is another issue. But who said the language cannot be understood? That is why there are english/latin missals with english on one side and latin on the other. I mean I can tell you what some ecclesiastical latin means. So that holds no water. Besides the demons understand it very well.

 

[Wgw]

According to scripture, if a language is used that isn't commonly understood there needs to be a translator. Without one, a church is doing something very wrong.

As you said in another post:



Yes, this is the reason it is ever used.

Firstly, you inadvertantly quoted someone else, Prodromos I think.

Secondly, you are presumably referring to St. Paul, who was discussing "speaking in tongues," and not liturgical language.

That being said the Roman Catholics and Orthodox have these very handy books known variously as "Missals," "Euchologia," and other titles (actually in Byzantine Orthodoxy there are several books that have the Divine Liturgy, for example, an Unabbreviated Horologiom). My parish goes a step further and provides English, Arabic, and Romanized phonetic versions of the Syriac liturgy on monitors, and mixes in English and Arabic into the liturgy in varying places, and prints out the weekly lectionary readings in English and Arabic.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Guess you didn't read the article

"I’m pretty confident that the Devil hates prayer in language of any sort, but I like to think Latin drives him absolutely crazy—and keeps him away."

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/dicamillo/why-the-devil-hates-latin/#ixzz3qdRpczci

"I like to think..."

As in an so says this person. As in this person "thinks."

A lot of the occult stuff is said in Latin too so...

 

[Sword of the Lord]

That's alot of Christian who are historical/traditional in nature and pray to Mary!!

This is interesting to me. In debates about praying to Mary often times Catholics will say they don't pray *to* Mary, but they ask her for prayers. But then outside of debates they will call it what it is: praying to Mary. Why?

 

[ewq1938]

Well if you mean tongues then sure.

Latin is a tongue and it should be translated if used in a non Latin speaking church.

But that is another issue. But who said the language cannot be understood? That is why there are english/latin missals with english on one side and latin on the other.

If what is spoken is translated in text then that's fine but if any is not, then there is an issue.

 

[ewq1938]

Firstly, you inadvertantly quoted someone else, Prodromos I think.

No, I quoted you because I had something to say regarding what you posted.

Secondly, you are presumably referring to St. Paul, who was discussing "speaking in tongues," and not liturgical language.

Tongues is languages. It applies to any real language.

 

[Wgw]

No, I quoted you because I had something to say regarding what you posted.

I did not write the sentence "No, I'm suggesting they use Latin because it 'sounds' more impressive."

 

[prodromos]

This is interesting to me. In debates about praying to Mary often times Catholics will say they don't pray *to* Mary, but they ask her for prayers. But then outside of debates they will call it what it is: praying to Mary. Why?

Because "praying" means little more than "asking". Christians in traditional Churches understand this, but many non-traditional Christians associate prayer with worship which can only be given to God. So appropriate terms are used depending on your audience.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Because "praying" means little more than "asking". Christians in traditional Churches understand this, but many non-traditional Christians associate prayer with worship which can only be given to God. So appropriate terms are used depending on your audience.

I'm LCMS so I'm definitely traditional. I just noticed the lack of consistency is all. But this makes sense.

 

[ewq1938]

I did not write the sentence "No, I'm suggesting they use Latin because it 'sounds' more impressive."

Ah, I see my mistake now. Anyways, the intent was that I agree with that statement.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I like how Athanasias said people using Latin for the occult is a perversion of the holy language. As if Latin was created for Christianity and the Catholic Church. Latin being used for the occult predates Latin being used in the RCC by hundreds if not thousands of years.

 

[ewq1938]

According to scripture, if a language is used that isn't commonly understood there needs to be a translator. Without one, a church is doing something very wrong.

As someone said in another post:



Yes, this is the reason it is ever used.