Modern Catholics and Protestants are the only major religions who don’t use a sacred language as opposed to the vernacular language in worship. I never realized this until tonight. Jews use an ancient Hebrew (not modern Hebrew). Muslims use ancient, classical Arabic (not modern Arabic) and are forbidden to translate their holy books into modern languages. The Greek Orthodox Church uses Koine Greek, not modern Greek, in their services and it is much different than modern Greek. Hindus use Sanskrit, the ancient language of the Vedas. The Coptic Orthodox Church uses Coptic, an ancient Egyptian language, in their worship. Church Slavonic is the language of worship in the Russian Orthodox Church, as well as in other churches associated with the Russian Orthodox Church. Old Tibetan, known as Chhokey in Bhutan, is the sacred language of Tibetan Buddhism. There are more examples at the link below.
Everywhere the desire seems to be for a special language, set apart, for sacred worship. And yet many in the Modern Church want to counter this normal human desire. Why?
Vernacular languages, by definition, separate. Which is why “vernacular” is contrasted to “sacred,” and “literary” languages.
Vernacular \Vernac"ular, n.
The vernacular language; one’s mother tongue; often, the
common forms of expression in a particular locality, opposed
to literary or learned forms.
Webster’s 1913 Dictionary
In the old Radio Replies, radio show the following question was asked and answered:
1395. Why does the Church cling to Latin, a dead language?
For one reason, precisely because it is dead! In modern and living languages, words are constantly changing their meaning whilst in a dead language, such as Latin, they do not. The essential doctrine and significance of Christianity must not change, and the safest way to preserve it intact is to keep it in an unchangeable language. Again, a universal Church must have at least her chief form of worship in a universal language. Christ came to save all men, and wherever a member of the true Church may be in this world he should be able to find himself at home at the central act of Christian worship. The Mass, being said in Latin, is the same in all lands. If a Frenchman, who could not understand a word of English, were to enter a Catholic Church in London, he would be at home the moment the Mass began. An English service would be a mystery to him. I myself have said Mass with as many as fifteen different nationalities present, and not all could follow my discourse when I spoke to those present, though I spoke for a few minutes in English, in French, and in Italian. There were still many who could not understand any of these languages, but being all Catholics, they were quite at home the moment I turned to the Altar and went on with the Mass in Latin.
In my opinion, a Universal Church deserves a universal language. Most religions, throughout the world, tend to agree.