3 ms·
... but even if you're an old-school Catholic who wants Latin mass, is that consistent with a strong version of Sapir-Whorf given that the new testament was wri
by abeppu 3y ago
... but even if you're an old-school Catholic who wants Latin mass, is that consistent with a strong version of Sapir-Whorf given that the new testament was written in Koine Greek and Jesus and the disciples spoke Aramaic? I.e. if language limits which concepts you can hold, Latin may not be able to communicate same understandings as intended by the authors of the gospels?
- lazyasciiart 3y agoI don't think you'd get informed takes on Sapir-Whorf, but people who already have opinions on Latin Mass and not linguistics might assume that you were referring to that topic.
- abeppu 3y agoYeah but if your conversational partner wants to express an opinion without understanding the question, and who doesn't have the intellectual curiosity to ask about the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis then they encounter it, maybe you already weren't going to have a good conversation irrespective of the topic.
- toyg 3y agoThese arguments are rarely about who's objectively right, but rather an ideological justification for a power struggle. Undoing "Vatican II" is largely about repositioning Catholic attention towards the wealthy end of the social spectrum, to make it easier to wield hard, temporal power; Latin mass is just one of the ideological wedges used to support that effort.
- philwelch 3y agoThe Sapir-Whorf stuff has almost nothing to do with why some traditionalist Catholics prefer the traditional Latin Mass. (Also, the language spoken is not the only difference between the TLM and the post-Vatican II mass.)