I understand and speak some Syriac, but find it difficult to follow the liturgy completely. I don’t see the point of insisting on using Syriac in the liturgy, while most of young people don’t understand the language. Of course Syriac is important and we should work hard to preserve it inside and outside the church, but the christian faith in our churches should have the at most priority.
Sometimes I can’t help feeling that there is a barrier, because many people don’t fluently speak/understand the language. I wish our church would be more inclusive and more open to people from different backgrounds.
It is most definitely a hindrance to evangelism from what I observe. I don't feel comfortable inviting people to church who will struggle to follow the liturgy. I have had Eastern Orthodox friends visit, and they were largely fine, but they are used to the liturgy and its elements. For those outside the church, it is very difficult to present the Gospel in a setting where they do not understand what happens.
The language is really a topic of discussion continuosly in many Syriac churches in the US and it looks like it's the same in Germany and I'm sure it's the same in every Syriac Orthodox church around the globe. My short answer is that we need to have a separate mass in local language, i.e. English, German, French, etc. and never give up on the Syriac language. The Syriac language holds a special place in the Syriac Orthodox Church becasue during the last 2000 years, the Church used the language to continue and survive amd the language used the Church to continue and survive till present day. As we, the Syriac Orthodox peeple lost our home our historical homeland in the Middle East, we dont't have a country to protect our language. If we let it go, can we call our church The Syriac Orthodox Church any more? All our heritage will be lost. While I'm on my 3rd attempt to learn Syriac, I'm trying my best to learn even though I don't think I will be able to speak it fluently, at least I will be able to read the many documents and letters that are important to me. When I go the Church on Sundays, the majority of parishinors came in the last 20-25 years and their English is not that great and they are used to hear the mass in Syriac and Arabic from where they came from. The priests are trying to mix it up with English but I have been in the church here long enough to know it will not work.
There's a correction I'd like to make here. The Syriac Orthodx Church is the US is much older that the Church in Germany. The Syriac Orthodox people started migrating from Turkey and Syria in the late 19th Century and established churchs and sent requests to the Patriarch in Mardin to send them priests. The first 3 churches in the US were officaly consecrated in 1927 when H.H. the late Patriarch Aphrem I visited the US and consecrated these churches.
P.S. Your Ph. D thesise in my list to read next becasue I'm intrested to know why people lose their native language after 3 generations.
Hi. I finished reading your dissertation a couple of weeks back. As the subject is of interest to me, I enjoyed and appreciat all the work you have done. It's well written and on topic and I only found one typo, Dr. was repeated twice. I also found 3 books in the refrences that I plan to read next when I get them from the WorldCat library. I expected to see more information about Sayfo and about the Syriac Churches in Germany like # of churches, etc. , but this might be a good addition if you plan on publishing a book. The conclusion of your research mirrors the conclution of a similar Ph.D research in Australia and I suspect it would similar to Alya Iwas research. What suprised me, teaching Syriac language was not in the list of solutions you presented in your research.
This is a most important question. I don't speak or read Arabic beyond a few greetings, and I pray the liturgy mostly in English with some Coptic. It seems to work in Liturgy at the moment in my congregation when there is a mix of languages representing the mix of language used by the people, so that there is a natural drift towards more English without having any definite programme about what that looks like. My online Bible Study is in English and we get people of all ages and mostly Egyptian immigrants. The Sunday School service is all in English, but there is still lots of social space for the use of other languages. I thought I had definite answers 15 years ago, but I now think that things happen better when they are organic and sensitive to the varied needs of the community.
The Coptic Orthodox community has already been evangelised by an Aramaic speaker (St Mark), but worshipped in Greek, and then transitioned to Coptic as well, and then into Arabic. It makes no sense not to transition into English and other modern languages where we find ourselves.
How do Copts view the loss of the Coptic language if the local language route is chosen? That is the biggest concern in the Syriac Orthodox world: the fear of losing this admittedly incredibly important language giving us access to writings that haven't even been translated.
The Church had already transitioned from Greek to Coptic and then to Arabic, so really it should be natural to transition to local languages as a matter of Orthodox practice while also preserving what is of value through translation and research and also through language acquisition.
I have organised an academic intensive Coptic course in London some years ago, and took part in a two week Summer School last year from a university in Italy. I think that there is no real fear that Coptic studies would disappear. They seem to be increasing everywhere.
In my own congregation, as in most, we have a hymns class in Coptic but I want to make sure that people know what they are singing. It is more a matter of balance between English and Arabic rather than English and Coptic. I think we have a mix of languages that suits the present demographics.
Coptic is already not a spoken language and so it does not have the same position as Syriac (which I also tried learning and would love to have ability in). I have Iraqi Syriac Orthodox in my congregation. I do think that it is problematic when preserving a social culture becomes the goal rather than the spiritual culture. But I would not expect or intend the preservation of a spiritual culture to mean the elimination of the history of that culture in language, but the language must be secondary to the theology and spiritual experience and need not be lost.
Indeed I think that if the spiritual culture is preserved with the use of local languages then this is much more opportunity and desire for the historical language to be learned and used for study and research and to have some part in the liturgy. When a historic language is used without understanding then it will not engender a desire to know it better and so it will turn people away from the social culture and the spiritual culture, or the social culture will be adopted with no knowledge of the spiritual culture. But in my experience, if the culture is mediated in the local or known languages (which may include Syriac in some places) then there will be a desire to preserve more of the social culture and the spiritual culture will be fruitful.
I wish I knew Syriac, and I could put work into knowing Coptic better. But I would always rather people prayed with knowledge and understanding and also valued historic languages and did research and made translation efforts, and were also a welcoming place for those from the local society. In the end we are not the Coptic Orthodox Church or the Syriac Orthodox Church, these are recent labels, we are the Orthodox Church in the place and culture where we find ourselves.
I would answer your question and say that more or less everyone knows or should know some Coptic and Greek responses and hymns. Others can read and say much more Coptic but probably without understanding (which is not a good thing if left there I think), while others are very active in wanting even conversational Coptic restored. But that is a social aspiration it seems to me, which people may have, it is not a spiritual nor Orthodox one, since there are no holy languages, only the languages of holy people.
George Kiraz has a good book about the Syriac Orthodox church in US and how it started
I understand and speak some Syriac, but find it difficult to follow the liturgy completely. I don’t see the point of insisting on using Syriac in the liturgy, while most of young people don’t understand the language. Of course Syriac is important and we should work hard to preserve it inside and outside the church, but the christian faith in our churches should have the at most priority.
Sometimes I can’t help feeling that there is a barrier, because many people don’t fluently speak/understand the language. I wish our church would be more inclusive and more open to people from different backgrounds.
It is most definitely a hindrance to evangelism from what I observe. I don't feel comfortable inviting people to church who will struggle to follow the liturgy. I have had Eastern Orthodox friends visit, and they were largely fine, but they are used to the liturgy and its elements. For those outside the church, it is very difficult to present the Gospel in a setting where they do not understand what happens.
The language is really a topic of discussion continuosly in many Syriac churches in the US and it looks like it's the same in Germany and I'm sure it's the same in every Syriac Orthodox church around the globe. My short answer is that we need to have a separate mass in local language, i.e. English, German, French, etc. and never give up on the Syriac language. The Syriac language holds a special place in the Syriac Orthodox Church becasue during the last 2000 years, the Church used the language to continue and survive amd the language used the Church to continue and survive till present day. As we, the Syriac Orthodox peeple lost our home our historical homeland in the Middle East, we dont't have a country to protect our language. If we let it go, can we call our church The Syriac Orthodox Church any more? All our heritage will be lost. While I'm on my 3rd attempt to learn Syriac, I'm trying my best to learn even though I don't think I will be able to speak it fluently, at least I will be able to read the many documents and letters that are important to me. When I go the Church on Sundays, the majority of parishinors came in the last 20-25 years and their English is not that great and they are used to hear the mass in Syriac and Arabic from where they came from. The priests are trying to mix it up with English but I have been in the church here long enough to know it will not work.
There's a correction I'd like to make here. The Syriac Orthodx Church is the US is much older that the Church in Germany. The Syriac Orthodox people started migrating from Turkey and Syria in the late 19th Century and established churchs and sent requests to the Patriarch in Mardin to send them priests. The first 3 churches in the US were officaly consecrated in 1927 when H.H. the late Patriarch Aphrem I visited the US and consecrated these churches.
P.S. Your Ph. D thesise in my list to read next becasue I'm intrested to know why people lose their native language after 3 generations.
Thanks for the correction. My experience in the US is largely based on a very small number of parishes I have visited (or my own).
Hi. I finished reading your dissertation a couple of weeks back. As the subject is of interest to me, I enjoyed and appreciat all the work you have done. It's well written and on topic and I only found one typo, Dr. was repeated twice. I also found 3 books in the refrences that I plan to read next when I get them from the WorldCat library. I expected to see more information about Sayfo and about the Syriac Churches in Germany like # of churches, etc. , but this might be a good addition if you plan on publishing a book. The conclusion of your research mirrors the conclution of a similar Ph.D research in Australia and I suspect it would similar to Alya Iwas research. What suprised me, teaching Syriac language was not in the list of solutions you presented in your research.
This is a most important question. I don't speak or read Arabic beyond a few greetings, and I pray the liturgy mostly in English with some Coptic. It seems to work in Liturgy at the moment in my congregation when there is a mix of languages representing the mix of language used by the people, so that there is a natural drift towards more English without having any definite programme about what that looks like. My online Bible Study is in English and we get people of all ages and mostly Egyptian immigrants. The Sunday School service is all in English, but there is still lots of social space for the use of other languages. I thought I had definite answers 15 years ago, but I now think that things happen better when they are organic and sensitive to the varied needs of the community.
The Coptic Orthodox community has already been evangelised by an Aramaic speaker (St Mark), but worshipped in Greek, and then transitioned to Coptic as well, and then into Arabic. It makes no sense not to transition into English and other modern languages where we find ourselves.
How do Copts view the loss of the Coptic language if the local language route is chosen? That is the biggest concern in the Syriac Orthodox world: the fear of losing this admittedly incredibly important language giving us access to writings that haven't even been translated.
The Church had already transitioned from Greek to Coptic and then to Arabic, so really it should be natural to transition to local languages as a matter of Orthodox practice while also preserving what is of value through translation and research and also through language acquisition.
I have organised an academic intensive Coptic course in London some years ago, and took part in a two week Summer School last year from a university in Italy. I think that there is no real fear that Coptic studies would disappear. They seem to be increasing everywhere.
In my own congregation, as in most, we have a hymns class in Coptic but I want to make sure that people know what they are singing. It is more a matter of balance between English and Arabic rather than English and Coptic. I think we have a mix of languages that suits the present demographics.
Coptic is already not a spoken language and so it does not have the same position as Syriac (which I also tried learning and would love to have ability in). I have Iraqi Syriac Orthodox in my congregation. I do think that it is problematic when preserving a social culture becomes the goal rather than the spiritual culture. But I would not expect or intend the preservation of a spiritual culture to mean the elimination of the history of that culture in language, but the language must be secondary to the theology and spiritual experience and need not be lost.
Indeed I think that if the spiritual culture is preserved with the use of local languages then this is much more opportunity and desire for the historical language to be learned and used for study and research and to have some part in the liturgy. When a historic language is used without understanding then it will not engender a desire to know it better and so it will turn people away from the social culture and the spiritual culture, or the social culture will be adopted with no knowledge of the spiritual culture. But in my experience, if the culture is mediated in the local or known languages (which may include Syriac in some places) then there will be a desire to preserve more of the social culture and the spiritual culture will be fruitful.
I wish I knew Syriac, and I could put work into knowing Coptic better. But I would always rather people prayed with knowledge and understanding and also valued historic languages and did research and made translation efforts, and were also a welcoming place for those from the local society. In the end we are not the Coptic Orthodox Church or the Syriac Orthodox Church, these are recent labels, we are the Orthodox Church in the place and culture where we find ourselves.
I would answer your question and say that more or less everyone knows or should know some Coptic and Greek responses and hymns. Others can read and say much more Coptic but probably without understanding (which is not a good thing if left there I think), while others are very active in wanting even conversational Coptic restored. But that is a social aspiration it seems to me, which people may have, it is not a spiritual nor Orthodox one, since there are no holy languages, only the languages of holy people.