the superiority of celibacy over marriage

[Paphnutius]

Anyone have luck finding the Latin?

[HisChild]

Well for some reason it won't let me edit my last post. That was supposed to read www.religiouslife.org

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Mar 6 2006, 10:35 AM']Anyone have luck finding the Latin?
[right][snapback]904032[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Do you have it?

I can't find it at all.

[phatcatholic]

me neither

[Fides_et_Ratio]

On another note. I'm shocked the translation at EWTN is vastly different--indeed, leaving out an entire clause (that really makes all the difference).

I linked the outset of my Trent stuff to EWTN, and now I'm backpedaling (with more than one souce), but no definitive Latin text that would be the end of the discussion. Though, I haven't heard much recently, so perhaps it's all okay.

[phatcatholic]

we might be a little closer to resolving this matter......

i checked in the JPII library on campus to see if we had the canons from the Council of Trent. i found a book by H. J. Schroeder called [i]Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent[/i]. the 1941 and 1960 editions include the original Latin text along with the English translation, but the 1971 edition only has the English translation. unfortunately, the library only had the 1971 edition, but i requested the 1960 edition via interlibrary loan, so i'll let you all know as soon as it comes in.

another reason we are close to resolving this is that, in the 1971 edition, Canon X reads as follows:[list]If anyone says that the married state excels the state of virginity or celibacy, and that it is better and happier to be united in matrimony than to remain in virginity or celibacy, let him be anathema.
[/list]now, if the English translation from the 1971 is the same as the English translation from 1960, then at least we know that it is a translation from the original Latin. this then would give us more reason to believe that the original Latin was not worded as we find it in J. Waterworth's translation [ [url="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct24.html"][b]here[/b][/url] ]

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[phatcatholic]

ya know, when you compare the two, they could very well be just two different ways of translating the same thing:[list][b]H. J. Schroeder's translation[/b] (identical to [url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TRENT24.HTM"][b]this[/b][/url] from EWTN):
[b]Can. 10[/b] If anyone says that the married state excels the state of virginity or celibacy, [i]and that it is better and happier to be united in matrimony than to remain in virginity or celibacy[/i],[15] let him be anathema.

[b]J. Waterworth's translation[/b] [ [url="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct24.html"][b]here[/b][/url] ] (identical to [url="http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0432/_P2B.HTM"][b]this[/b][/url] from Intratext):
[b]CANON X.-[/b]If any one saith, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, [i]and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony[/i]; let him be anathema.
[/list]the only difference is that the first is stated positively and the second is stated negatively. i don't know alot about latin, but it would seem like they are both correct translations. don't they basically mean the same thing?

the first one says that you are wrong to say that marriage is better. this means that marriage is either equal to or less than celibacy. the second one says that you are wrong to say that it is not better to be celibate. thus, celibacy is either better than or equal to marriage. in summary:

first translation:
1. marriage equal to celibacy
2. marriage less than celibacy

second translation
3. celibacy better than marriage
4. celibacy equal to marriage

notice that 1 and 4 say the same thing, as do 2 and 3. thus, [i][b]both translations[/b][/i] give us the following conclusion:

either, marriage = celibacy, OR marriage < celibacy

essentially, both translations say the same thing, just in a different way. so, fides, since you and your opponent both have a possible understanding of the canon, it would be up to you to pull from other sources to prove that your reading of the canon (the one which says that celibacy is greater) is correct.

i hope that helps

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[Fides_et_Ratio]

somewhat. it seems like the 1st translation is still lacking something in the English.

I mean, the encyclical from Pius XII and JPII's TOTB have certainly taken that canon to be read one way, as with St. Paul's epistle... so either 2 Popes have made potentially serious "errors"/misinterpretations, OR we have a faulty English translation somewhere.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

btw, thanks for looking up/checking out to find a Latin translation!

you rock.

[Paphnutius]

Thanks for requesting that phat.

It would seem to make a difference on how one stated this for it is a difference of positive law and negative law.

In the first translation we see something primarily forbidden, that is saying that marriage is better than celibacy. This would be a type of negative law that strictly forbids something. One cannot perform action X. Negative law is more narrow than positive law (which enjoins an action be taken) but is in a sense more binding for negative laws are often absolutes.

The second translation deals with positive law. One must say that celibacy is better than marriage. Where the first translation left room for the two to be equal, the second translation clearly demands that one be placed over the other (a positive action is required).

So when it comes crunch time, the first translation merely forbids a statement being made whereas the second translation requires one to state the X is better than Y.

Trans 1: Let one be anathema if they say that X is greater than Y.

Trans 2: Let one be anthema if they do not say that Y is greater than X.

I hope that makes sense. While both may be valid translations (we will hopefully see soon), they wording limits or gives freedom to the individual.

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Mar 7 2006, 12:26 AM']Trans 1: Let one be anathema if they say that X is greater than Y.

Trans 2: Let one be anthema if they do not say that Y is greater than X.

I hope that makes sense. While both may be valid translations (we will hopefully see soon), they wording limits or gives freedom to the individual.
[right][snapback]905010[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
so, are you denying that there is the possibility in both translations to say that marriage and celibacy are equal?

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
3/7 - Sts. Perpetua and Felicity
[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Mar 7 2006, 02:38 PM']so, are you denying that there is the possibility in both translations to say that marriage and celibacy are equal?
[right][snapback]905569[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
The only problem with this conclusion is that it goes against Catholic teaching. Our teaching is very clear - the virginal life is superior to the married life. What doesn't seem to clear is what exactly the Church means by that.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Mar 7 2006, 04:38 PM']so, are you denying that there is the possibility in both translations to say that marriage and celibacy are equal?
[right][snapback]905569[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I would.

I think the translations are vastly different. There is one very important clause lacking from one.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Mar 7 2006, 02:38 PM']so, are you denying that there is the possibility in both translations to say that marriage and celibacy are equal?
[right][snapback]905569[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Yes.

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Mar 7 2006, 04:38 PM']so, are you denying that there is the possibility in both translations to say that marriage and celibacy are equal?[right][snapback]905569[/snapback][/right][/quote][quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Mar 7 2006, 08:02 PM']I would.

I think the translations are vastly different. There is one very important clause lacking from one.[right][snapback]905811[/snapback][/right][/quote][quote name='Paphnutius' date='Mar 7 2006, 10:24 PM']Yes.[right][snapback]906053[/snapback][/right][/quote]
maybe i'm slow, but i don't see how my logics breaks apart in my earlier post. i don't understand how both translations would not allow for the two to be equal. if you say that something is not greater, that doesn't automatically mean that its lesser. it could also mean that it is equal. note, that i am not defending the position that they are equal, i'm defending the position that the two translations allow for that interpretation.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

because (as the EWTN translation does) you leave out an entire clause. Namely, that one (celibacy) is superior (greater). Where one is greater, there cannot be "equality"

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Mar 8 2006, 12:44 PM']maybe i'm slow, but i don't see how my logics breaks apart in my earlier post. i don't understand how both translations would not allow for the two to be equal. if you say that something is not greater, that doesn't automatically mean that its lesser. it could also mean that it is equal. note, that i am not defending the position that they are equal, i'm defending the position that the two translations allow for that interpretation.
[right][snapback]906634[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]Lets try removing the first clause of the sentence and see if that helps.

Original:[quote]CANON X.-If any one saith, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema. [/quote]

Without the first clause. [quote]CANON X.-If any one saith that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema. [/quote]So if you say "it is not better to remain in virginity than to enter into marriage" then anathema.

Edited March 8, 2006 by Paphnutius

[cmotherofpirl]

We were always taught by our sisters and priests a vocation to the Church is always the higher calling.

[phatcatholic]

that book came in!!

here's what it says:[list]10. Si quis dixerit, statum conjugalem anteponendum esse statui virginitatis vel coelibatus, et non esse melius ac beatius manere in virginitate aut coelibatu, quam jungi matrimonio:15 anathema sit.
[/list]
[i]footnote:
[b]15.[/b] Matt. 19:11 f.; I Cor 7:25 f., 38, 40; c.12, C.XXXII, q.I; c.9, C.XXXIII, q.5; c.16, X, De spons., IV, I. Rouet de Journel, p. 783, n.582.[/i]

i hope that helps

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[Fides_et_Ratio]

Yay! Phat, you rock!