Ecclesiastical Latin
The Ecclesiastical Latin is different from the classical one, mainly by the introduction of new idioms and words. Both in syntax and literary method, Christian writers are not so much different from other contemporary writers. These differences are due to the origin and purpose of ecclesiastical Latin. Originally Roman people spoke the old tongue of Latium ( known as prisca latinitas). In the 3rd century B. C. Ennius and other writers from the school of the Greeks undertook to improve the language with Greek elements. This attempt was encouraged by the aristocratic classes in Rome, and it was to these classes that poets, historians, and literary writers of Rome addressed themselves.Under the combined influence of this political and intellectual aristocracy was developed the classical Latin which has been preserved in a good purity in the works of Caesar and of Cicero. Most part of the Roman population in their native ruggedness remained distant from this hellenizing influence and continued to speak the old tongue. After the third century B. C. there existed side by side in Rome two languages, or rather two idioms: that of the literary circles or hellenists (sermo urbanus) and that of the illiterate, or "sermo vulgaris" and the more highly the former developed the greater grew the chasm between them.
But in spite of all the efforts of the purists, the exigencies of daily life brought the writers of the cultured mode into continual touch with the uneducated populace, and constrained them to understand its speech and make it understand them in turn. So they were obliged in conversation to employ words and expressions formi00ng part of the vulgar tongue. Hence arose a third idiom, the sermo cotidianus, a medley of the two others, varying in the mixture of its ingredients with the various periods of time and the intelligence of those who used it.