Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion for anyone who adheres to the Extraordinary form of the mass and any issues related to the practices of Eastern Rite Catholicism.

Saint Athanasius is counted as one of the four Great Doctors of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Athanasius

Mar 10th 2013 new
(Quote) Norm-242638 said: Just venting...I lose my train of during thought when reading the The Nicene Creed and the line is changed to &q...
(Quote) Norm-242638 said:

Just venting...I lose my train of during thought when reading the The Nicene Creed and the line is changed to "..incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became human."



Is it offensive to state that Jesus was a man?



Thanks for listening!

--hide--


I have not heard this. What church did this? I try to always go to Latin mass to avoid this kind of poetic license with the liturgy.
Mar 10th 2013 new
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: You won't find any of that inclusive language at the traditional Mass!
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:



You won't find any of that inclusive language at the traditional Mass!

--hide--


Latin and Greek are very precise languages. A word like men could mean mankind in English, but in Latin or Greek, it would have to be in the neuter gender, as masculine and feminine genders have different endings. This is how we know that God is male and Jesus as well, because the Greek (and also Latin) use male gender in the text. They could never be mistaken as another gender because of the gender of the endings in the individual specific wording. Taking a word in English and expanding its meaning to be multigender when the original text was masculine is not just erroneous, but it is sinister and not a valid translation. Will the next pope correct this kind of nonsense or take us further down the road to traditional versus modern church schism?
Mar 11th 2013 new

(Quote) Jim-624621 said: Latin and Greek are very precise languages. A word like men could mean mankind in English, but in ...
(Quote) Jim-624621 said:

Latin and Greek are very precise languages. A word like men could mean mankind in English, but in Latin or Greek, it would have to be in the neuter gender, as masculine and feminine genders have different endings. This is how we know that God is male and Jesus as well, because the Greek (and also Latin) use male gender in the text. They could never be mistaken as another gender because of the gender of the endings in the individual specific wording. Taking a word in English and expanding its meaning to be multigender when the original text was masculine is not just erroneous, but it is sinister and not a valid translation. Will the next pope correct this kind of nonsense or take us further down the road to traditional versus modern church schism?
--hide--

The Pope and the Church per se, have no offiicial say in how the Bible is translated. The offical texts are the Latin, and the original Greek and Hebrew texts.

They do approve the texts in any language used in the Church.

However, lets face it, no Pope is going to personally read, edit and approve the text in each language. They rely on the drones that work in the Vatican for that and approve what they are assured by the staff to be accurate.

Mar 11th 2013 new
(Quote) Paul-866591 said: The Pope and the Church per se, have no offiicial say in how the Bible is translated. The offica...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:



The Pope and the Church per se, have no offiicial say in how the Bible is translated. The offical texts are the Latin, and the original Greek and Hebrew texts.



They do approve the texts in any language used in the Church.



However, lets face it, no Pope is going to personally read, edit and approve the text in each language. They rely on the drones that work in the Vatican for that and approve what they are assured by the staff to be accurate.

--hide--


That's very true, Paul, but the point I was making is that the ORIGINAL texts of the books of the Bible were Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. These are very precise languages in that there are endings to denote gender on every noun, and the adjectives that modify them follow the case of the nouns. There is little to guess what gender specific nouns were written to be. How they are "translated" today, if different from the gender in the original text, is simply erroneous. It doesn't matter who translates it, even if it is the Vatican or the pope himself.
Mar 11th 2013 new

(Quote) Jim-624621 said: That's very true, Paul, but the point I was making is that the ORIGINAL texts of the books of ...
(Quote) Jim-624621 said:

That's very true, Paul, but the point I was making is that the ORIGINAL texts of the books of the Bible were Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. These are very precise languages in that there are endings to denote gender on every noun, and the adjectives that modify them follow the case of the nouns. There is little to guess what gender specific nouns were written to be. How they are "translated" today, if different from the gender in the original text, is simply erroneous. It doesn't matter who translates it, even if it is the Vatican or the pope himself.
--hide--

True, but also understand that in the original language, despite the specific use of a gender form, the intent/meaning was to encompass both sexes. So it is not erroneous to translate the intent.

An example in English: Men could mean a group (large or small) composed entirely oif males. But it also has the more generic meaning of mankind. So to change the usage to people, would not be incorrect. Ofcourse that is an exampleof alanguage that is in constant flux

Since I am not student of either Greek, or Hebrew (by the way the texts of the Bible were written either in Greek or Hebrew. Aramaic not included, although Aramaic is an off shoot of Hebrew. It was translated by ST. Jerome into Latin, the Vulgate, completed in about 405.

I have often heard FR. Pacwa, a Hebrew and Greek scholar, often expound on the fact that especially in Hebrew there are words that have two distinct and unrelated meanings depending on the gender form used. And that often, the feminine form is in fact referring to a male and the male form of the word referring to something else entirely.

Posts 21 - 25 of 25