I have a dislike for the church, not the laity (churchgoers). Regarding masses, I meant that masses were conducted exclusively in Latin until the 1980’s - which makes those masses pointless for the laity, as Latin has been a dead language for centuries.
I was referring to the days when the Catholic Church kept the Bible in Latin and hunted down anyone who had a copy of it in a local language, burned their Bible, strangled them to death and then burned their dead body at the stake to intimidate the public. I was also referring to the fact that Catholic masses were conducted in Latin until the 1980’s.
I didn’t mean it in a good way.
That’s very Catholic of them.
That’s very Catholic of them.
That’s very Catholic of them.
Church services are for religious education. I’ll be honest, I’m not sure why masses were conducted in Latin until the 1980’s - despite Latin having died out centuries ago.
At best, Latin masses are more about the traditions of man than religious education. At worst, Latin masses are for religious obfuscation, rather than religious education.
It’s impossible to be educated in a language you don’t speak.
It would be one thing if all Catholics were required to learn Latin in school, but they’re not. Since Catholics aren’t required by the RCC to learn Latin and the RCC never taught it, most Catholics never learn it. The ones who do learn it do so either to learn more about the roots of the English language or because they intend to enter a scientific field.
Latin is also a dead language.
Most people - Catholics included - don’t speak Latin. It died out at least five centuries ago.
You’re only proving my point. Latin masses don’t benefit you. They don’t benefit most people - Catholics included. They haven’t benefited most people for centuries.