At Droitwich I found the conversion was made earlier than 1649 but
for filling in the details I couldn't recall.
>A ban on the use of Latin in English legal documents was first made during
>the English Commonwealth not the Reformation. This was repealed after the
>accession of Charles II and Latin continued in use until 1730 when
>statute 4 Geo. II. c. 26. came into force requiring legal proceedings
>(documents and hearings) to be undertaken in English. The statute would
>only appear to have applied to the generality of the proceedings and hence
>a large number of Latin phrases remaining in use i.e sub judice, habeas
>corpus etc etc.
> Interestingly in the Church of England, whilst the use of English during
>the service became mandatory after the adoption of Cranmer's Book of
>Common Prayer in 1549, Latin was never totally proscribed.
> 'Though it be appointed, That all things shall be read and sung in the
>Church in the English Tongue, to the end that the Congregation may be
>thereby edified; yet it is not meant, but that when men say Morning and
>Evening Prayer privately, they may say the same in any language that they
>themselves do understand'.
> Bea Hopkinson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Within my limited experience I do know that all documents at Droitwich
>were previously written in Latin, were after 1536 written in English.
>If this was
>not widespread then it is possible it applied only to the Crown domain?
>Did this not also affect church services previously given in Latin but
>now mandated in English? Perhaps
>someone who is more knowleageable on this subject can enlighten us?
>>> Linguistics is not my field of study but I am wondering, if there are few
>>> Latin loan words in English, if that is because English became mandatory
>>> at the Reformation?
>>This is a baffling question on any number of levels. English did not, of
>>course, become mandatory at the Reformation (except, perhaps, in Ireland)