A Catholic of the Latin rite

Question

Latin (noun)1 : the Italic language of ancient Latium and of Rome and until modern times the dominant language of school, church, and state in western Europe — see indo-european languages table2 : a member of the people of ancient Latium3 : a Catholic of the Latin rite4 : a member of one of the Latin peoples; specifically : a native or inhabitant of Latin America5 : latin alphabet[M-W's Col. Dic.]Is there really a difference between Roman and Latin as languages?"a Catholic of the Latin rite". Latin rite is mostly associated with Roman Catholic Church. Does it mean that a Catholic of Latin rite would be a Roman Catholic Christian?"the people", what is the reason for using definitive article 'the'? "Latin peoples", would it be incorrect to use 'people'  here?Please help me with the above questions. Thank you.

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

Jackson6612Is there really a difference between Roman and Latin as languages?

No. The words refer to the same language. Latin is the usual name for the language that originated in Rome & surrounding areas. Of course, there were many varieties of Latin, and it had a long history of evolution. The Romance languages developed from Latin, and there are modern day languages called Romansh, Ladin, and Ladino.

Jackson6612"a Catholic of the Latin rite". Latin rite is mostly associated with Roman Catholic Church. Does it mean that a Catholic of Latin rite would be a Roman Catholic Christian?

Yes, but you are getting into the history of the Catholic Church, originally seated in Rome, which has had many schisms in the past. Theologians have distinctions in terminology. From Wiki:
"Roman Catholic" is not used in the Church's official documents to mean "Latin Rite". On the contrary, Church documents use the term "Roman Catholic Church" to refer to the worldwide Church as a whole, though by no means as frequently as the term "Catholic Church".

Jackson6612"the people", what is the reason for using definitive article 'the'? "Latin peoples", would it be incorrect to use 'people' here?

The text is correct in using "the peoples." People here refers to a particular group of humans who are related to each other by cultural heritage, language, common values, geographical proximity, etc.
This was its sense in the American Declaration of Independence, which begins "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,..." and in the preamble to the Constitution: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, .."

There are many peoples in Latin America - it covers a very large geographical area with many countries.

Avangi · Answer

Jackson66122 : a member of the people of ancient Latium

"the people", what is the reason for using definitive article 'the'?

That's a tough one. Why can't we say, "A member of people of ancient Latium"?
We say, "a member of Parliament," but "a member of the group." We skip the article only when the official name of a group is used, and that name does not use the article.

You could say, "People of ancient Latium are called "Latins."
And you could say, "The people of ancient Latium are called "Latins."
You could say, "A number of [the] people of ancient Latium were called traitors.

"He is a member of people of China" just doesn't work.
Maybe I'll think of a better way to explain it. I hope so.

Jackson6612 · Answer

Hi

Thank you very much for the detailed reply. I like your new profile picture. The ducklings were also good but this one goes better with your forum name.

AlpheccaStarsNo. The words refer to the same language. Latin is the usual name for the language that originated in Rome & surrounding areas.

It comes to my mind once someone told me that during Roman Empire's times Latin was predominately used by educated, literary culture, and Roman was a vernacular variety spoken in many different regions governed by the empire (or perhaps it was the opposite). Is there any truth in it, or is it just a some incorrect recall of my mind?

AlpheccaStarsYes, but you are getting into the history of the Catholic Church, originally seated in Rome, which has had many schisms in the past. Theologians have distinctions in terminology.

I have tried to read the Wikipedia article on Latin Rite. But like every other religion Christinaity is a complex religion to a outsider. In Church nomenclature 'rite' can be used in two different senses, 'liturgy' or 'a particualr dvision of a church'.

catholic (adjective)

1 a often capitalized : of, relating to, or forming the church universal b often capitalized : of, relating to, or forming the ancient undivided Christian church or a church claiming historical continuity from it c capitalized : roman catholic
2 : comprehensive, universal; especially : broad in sympathies, tastes, or interests <a catholic taste in music>
[M-W's Col. Dic.]

'universal' can be used as an adjective or noun. In "church universal" 'universal' is used postpositively. I don't know what part of speech it is here. But placing it after the modified word seems a little strange. By the way, what is the antonym of 'postpositive'? 'prepositive'?

From Wikipedia articles onhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Rite and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particular_church:

The Latin Rite or Latin Church is the majority rite (in the sense of "church", not of "liturgical tradition") or particular church within the Catholic Church, comprising roughly 80% of its membership. The Latin Rite is one of the 23 sui iuris particular churches within the Catholic Church. This particular church developed in Western Europe and North Africa, where, from classical antiquity to the Renaissance, Latin was the principal language of education and culture, and so also of the liturgy.

The Oriental Church is composed of four rites - Greek, Armenian, Syriac, and Coptic; all these rites are referred to by the single name of the Greek or Oriental Church, just as the name of the Latin or Roman Church signifies the Roman, Ambrosian, and Mozarabic rites.

However, "Roman Catholic" was also used at the same time, as well as much earlier, to refer to the whole Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome. "The terms 'Roman Church' and 'Roman Catholic Church' date from at least the early Middle Ages, but the stress on these terms became prominent after the Protestant Reformation. The reason was to emphasize the distinctive quality of being not only a Christian, because baptized, but of being a Catholic, because in communion with the Pope.

There are 23 such autonomous Churches, one "Western" and 22 "Eastern", a distinction by now more historical than geographical. The term sui iuris means, literally, "of their own law", or self-governing. Although all of the particular Churches espouse the same beliefs and faith, their distinction lies in their varied expression of that faith through their traditions, disciplines, and Canon law. All 23 are in communion with the Pope in Rome.

Latin Rite comprises 80% of the membership within the Roman Catholic Church. The 20% covers Roman, Ambrosian, and Mozarabic and other rites. Correct?

Doesn't Oriental Church fall outside the pope's jurisdiction? I mean to say they don't take the pope as a chief authority.

"All 23 are in communion with the Pope in Rome". That means all the 23 enjoy considerable independence from the pope in their matters and differ from each other to a significant degree. But they still consider the Roman pope as their head. Do I have it right?

AlpheccaStarsThe text is correct in using "the peoples." People here refers to a particular group of humans who are related to each other by cultural heritage, language, common values, geographical proximity, etc.

I get it now. To some alien planet we are "the people", people of the planet earth. But when speaking ethnographically of different nationalities, ethic groups, etc, then the use of 'peoples' is more apt.

Best wishes
Jack

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Jackson6612I like your new profile picture. The ducklings were also good but this one goes better with your forum name.

Thanks, I like the starburst fireworks. We celebrate holidays with firework displays, and I felt like celebrating!

Jackson6612It comes to my mind once someone told me that during Roman Empire's times Latin was predominately used by educated, literary culture, and Roman was a vernacular variety

You have a good memory. The name of the commoners' language was "Vulgar Latin."

Jackson6612Doesn't Oriental Church fall outside the pope's jurisdiction? I mean to say they don't take the pope as a chief authority.

Yes, you are right. The division comes from history. The Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity after 300 CE. and the state religion of the Roman Empire became Christianity. He moved his capital to Constantinople (Byzantium), but the church in Rome became more esteemed and powerful than in other cities. The patriarch in Constantinople was also powerful. When Rome was conquered by the German tribes, the Roman Empire lost all its the western lands, including Rome. That increased the isolation of the two sides. The Eastern Church adopted Greek; there were theological debates. The disagreements and discord peaked in 1054, when the two leaders excommunicated each other and the two Churches went their separate ways. There have been attempts at reconciliation, but the primacy of the Pope in Rome was always (and still is) a point of contention.

Jackson6612By the way, what is the antonym of 'postpositive'? 'prepositive'?

Yes. (Actually the word preposition shares the same root as prepositive.)

There are postpositive adjectives (used with nouns) in English. The church universal is a phrase I've encountered before; the adjective is universal.

Here are two articles with information and examples - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-positive_adjective and link

Jackson6612 · Answer

Thank you, Avangi.

AvangiThat's a tough one. Why can't we say, "A member of people of ancient Latium"?
We say, "a member of Parliament," but "a member of the group." We skip the article only when the official name of a group is used, and that name does not use the article.

I would like to offer my somewhat uninformed and personal explanation. There are many different kinds of people living in England. Some of them are Asians, and were born there after their parents emigrated to settle there. Politically speaking, those persons born of Asians emigrants are also English. But are they really "English". In my opinion they aren't purely English. You can say English is a kind of particular 'race'. You can assimilate into English culture, speak English, get a English passport, and everything, but you cannot change your 'race'. Maybe the definition deals the inhabitants of Latium in a similar way.

PS: I composed this reply last night and slept without even posting it. I was simply too sleepy at that time!

Avangi · Answer

Jackson6612Maybe the definition deals the inhabitants of Latium in a similar way.

Hi,
"A member of the people of England/Latium" is not a common collocation, so it's difficult to infer various shades of meaning.
I'll grant you that "the people of England" has a different feeling than "the people of ancient Latium," but I don't think it affects the use of the article.

The need for the article seems to be determined by the expression "a member of X."
You cannot omit "the" from "a member of the group."
In the expression "a member of Congress / Parliament," I sometimes see "the" included, but usually not.
Organizatons whose names are an acronym usually don't use the article.

Avangi · Answer

A member of MADD
A member of Mothers Against Drunk Driving

("The" would not work here.)

A Catholic of the Latin rite

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions