Ef In The Vernacular

[Innocent]

[quote name='scardella' post='1880287' date='Jun 1 2009, 09:45 PM']Question: can a Mass be validly celebrated in Klingon? or, for that matter, Esperanto?[/quote]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that Masses have already been celebrated in Esperanto.


EDIT: Here is some relevant information: [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Union_of_Catholic_Esperantists"]Wikipedia: International Union of Catholic Esperantists[/url]

EDIT 2: The comments in [url="http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2008/06/if-hebrew-can-be-revived-so-can-latin.html"]this blog post[/url] also have some information about Masses in Esperanto.

EDIT 3: I should think that if it is determined that Klingon can be a valid language to celebrate Mass in, then surely Quenya and Sindarin would qualify, too, wouldn't they?

Edited June 3, 2009 by Innocent

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Innocent' post='1881775' date='Jun 3 2009, 06:00 AM']I seem to remember reading somewhere that Masses have been celebrated in Esperanto.[/quote]

Why would you [i]want[/i] to use Esperanto for [i]anything[/i], let alone the liturgy?

We've already got a universal language for the Roman Rite: Latin.

[puellapaschalis]

Apparently there's an approved translation of the Missal and Lectionary (if that Wiki page is to be believed, anyway), although I also found this sentence on another Wiki page:
[i]The decision to authorize use of a particular vernacular language and the text of the translation to be employed must be approved by at least a two-thirds majority of the relevant Bishops' Conference, whose decisions must be confirmed by the Holy See.[/i]

What's the relevant Bishops' Conference for Esperanto speakers? Do they get treated like some kind of military diocese with no strict geographical area?

This is all more than can be said of Frisian. I found a Mass setting in Frisian earlier today, and I'm pretty sure the Frisian Missal isn't approved.

[MithLuin]

[quote name='Innocent' post='1881775' date='Jun 3 2009, 07:00 AM']I should think that if it is determined that Klingon can be a valid language to celebrate Mass in, then surely Quenya and Sindarin would qualify, too, wouldn't they?[/quote]

I have no desire to see the mass translated into Klingon, but it is likely possible to do so. They've done [i]Hamlet,[/i] I think. Klingon has a fairly substantial vocabulary and a complete grammar, so you can say most anything in it like a normal language. It's rather...unlovely, though. I can't imagine this finding any sort of approval from the bishops, though - thank God!

Quenya and Sindarin, on the other hand, are incomplete languages. You'd have to do a lot of guesswork and coin all sorts of new words to translate the mass into either of them. While it may be an interesting task (academically), you'd never get the linguists who study the language to agree that your version is 'correct'.

The Lord's Prayer and the Ave Maria were translated into both Sindarin and Quenya by Tolkien. Before this was known, some Tolkien language scholars attempted the Our Father. There is very little correlation between the two versions. As an example: "Our Father who art in heaven" became [i]Attolma i menelessie[/i] in theirs, but was rendererd [i]Átaremma i ëa han ëa[/i] by Tolkien. [size=2][The differences - 'atto' is the familiar form of father, like 'daddy', and was chosen to correlate to 'abba' in Hebrew. 'Atar' means father more formally. -lma means 'our' while '-mma' means 'my'. [i]menel[/i] is the sky or firmament, not heaven. [i]ea[/i] is the created world - all that is.][/size]

That being said, there have been Quenya translations of portions of the Bible: the first two chapters of Genesis, the Gospels of Matthew and John, and the book of Revelation.

If you are interested in learning more about these languages, check out [url="http://folk.uib.no/hnohf/"]Ardalambion[/url]




As for the idea of 'three sacred languages', yes, you can find that in Isidore of Seville and other early writers. Preferring those languages is not necessarily an exclusive thing, though - calling those languages sacred does not mean you cannot validly pray in other languages. At various times in history, certain Christians have considered some languages 'off-bounds', and their opponents referred to their view as the 'three languages heresy'. The term was coined by the Bulgarian monk Khrabr against those Greeks who opposed the Slavonic liturgy in the 800's.

As your quotation suggests, the Church accepted the Slavonic liturgy as valid, thus effectively condemning an insistence on an [i]exclusive[/i] use of Greek, Latin and Hebrew. Someone who claimed the liturgy must be celebrated in [i]only[/i] those languages would be in disagreement with the Church.

[scardella]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1881776' date='Jun 3 2009, 06:02 AM']Why would you [i]want[/i] to use Esperanto for [i]anything[/i], let alone the liturgy?

We've already got a universal language for the Roman Rite: Latin.[/quote]

Umm... because you're a language geek?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='scardella' post='1882143' date='Jun 3 2009, 02:04 PM']Umm... because you're a language geek?[/quote]

The whole point of permitting languages besides Latin to be used for liturgical worship was for the edification of those who could only understand the vernacular or who had trouble using a hand-missal. If you're educated enough to have learned Esperanto, a language that has never been living, I'm certain that you either already know Latin or at least have the intellectual ability to use a hand-missal.

Edited June 3, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Marie-Therese]

Speaking as a convert who has only known the OF, I find it edifying and lovely. I think it could stand some minor tweaking...i.e. I am not a big fan of having the sign of peace in the middle of the process of consecration, it breaks my concentration. I am also not a huge fan of EM that aren't deacons, however I understand it due to the size of some parishes (like mine, which you could get in the backseat of a VW bug) and the availability of deacons to serve as such. I also abhor the NAB and wish they'd use the RSV in the lectionary and missals. I mean, if the Vatican uses it, what's the deal? That said, I think that a reverently said OF mass is beautiful and spiritually fortifying.

That said, I do want very much to visit an EF mass. I think it speaks volumes of the beautiful tradition of our faith.

I think that there are some compromises to be made...I have seen on EWTN the daily mass where they use the OF in a more "Latinized" way, I suppose you could say...including more Latin in the responsories and using chant in some places. I think that is the best compromise possible.

The versus populum issue...well, like I said, I've never seen the EF form, but I like being able to see and participate in the consecration. That to me is why they call it "assisting" at mass and not just attending.

JMHO.

[scardella]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1882202' date='Jun 3 2009, 03:12 PM']The whole point of permitting languages besides Latin to be used for liturgical worship was for the edification of those who could only understand the vernacular or who had trouble using a hand-missal. If you're educated enough to have learned Esperanto, a language that has never been living, I'm certain that you either already know Latin or at least have the intellectual ability to use a hand-missal.[/quote]

Supposedly, there are some (small) number of people whose native language is Esperanto.

Re: Klingon, that's probably the only common language at a Star Trek convention.

[MithLuin]

Considering all the Star Trek shows and movies are in English, you do have to understand English to be a Star Trek fan. They only invented a language for the Klingons when they started making the movies in the '80s.

I could understand a language buff wanting to translate things into strange new languages, but I do not think it would serve much purpose to actually celebrate mass in those languages.

Created languages are meant to be used, the way natural languages are, but no one [i]speaks[/i] Quenya.

[puellapaschalis]

[quote name='MithLuin' post='1882317' date='Jun 4 2009, 12:33 AM']I could understand a language buff wanting to translate things into strange new languages, but I do not think it would serve much purpose to actually celebrate mass in those languages.[/quote]

As a language buff, part of me would enjoy the challenge and exercise of translating the Missal into $lang_with_no_approved_translation. Simply because I could. But on the other hand, I can take up that kind of challenge with any text out there. It's an intellectual sacrifice for me to [i]not[/i] tinker or meddle with any part of the Mass, even if it's something I do at home curled up on the sofa. The Mass is always and shall always be holy; I shouldn't let my mucky (linguistic) paws all over it.

(Not to mention the fact that once I'd let my pride out enough to translate it, the same pride would want me to upload it to the internet and show off, and there's guaranteed some nutjob out there who'd want to actually use it. I'm not going to let that happen with something that came from my hands.)

Edited June 3, 2009 by puellapaschalis