Abscondita In Deo

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='AbsconditaInDeo' post='1881132' date='Jun 2 2009, 11:43 AM']I've always wondered what this meant in the Glory be:
"As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen"

Does that mean the world will never end? What does this phrase mean and where did it come from?

In the Latin it says:
"Sicut erat in principio et nunc et semper et in saecula saeculorum amen." (As it was in the beginning and now and always and unto the ages of ages)

Why is it different then in the Latin?[/quote]

We must remember that our translation of the Glory Be is around 500 years old.

"World without end" was an idiomatic expression in Elizabethan English that meant about the same thing as "and unto the ages of ages" meant to the Romans. In Early Modern English, the word "world" meant "age".

In Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, we say "ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula", that is, "begotten from the Father before all ages". In the Anglican [i]Book of Common Prayer[/i] written in the 16th Century, this phrase is translated "Begotten of His Father before all worlds".

In modern English, the expression "world without end" would literally mean "though endless ages", or, more figuratively "forever and ever".

Edited June 2, 2009 by Resurrexi

[homeschoolmom]

I think it's really inappropriate to basically move a question from Q/A just so that you can answer it. It's put in the Q/A phorum for a reason-- to get answers from the scholars who have been selected to answer them. To presume to answer them yourself is a little, well, presumptuous.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1881181' date='Jun 2 2009, 01:06 PM']I think it's really inappropriate to basically move a question from Q/A just so that you can answer it. It's put in the Q/A phorum for a reason-- to get answers from the scholars who have been selected to answer them. To presume to answer them yourself is a little, well, presumptuous.[/quote]

Is that your opinion or your authoritative interpretation of the phorum rules as a moderator?

[Noel's angel]

Pride goes before disaster, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1881219' date='Jun 2 2009, 01:42 PM']Is that your opinion or your authoritative interpretation of the phorum rules as a moderator?

[/quote]
My opinion.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

My opinion, too, and as a Church Scholar, I'm insulted that you try to take it upon yourself to answer Q&A questions. The thread on who answers those questions is there to assure that they are answered by those with adequate theological training, which you are lacking. Now this particular question was a relatively easy one, but the Church Scholars on Phatmass have the skills required to do the necessary research and address questions with sufficient pastoral care to avoid the difficulties that could eventually come from questions being answered by those who don't have theological training. When a thread has been in Q&A for a long time unanswered or when we feel that the thread would get a better response from a wider audience, we move that thread. Until we do so, you have no right to go answering those questions for us. You may try to tackle a question you aren't prepared to answer and could cause a big mess.

God bless,

Micah

[StColette]

My opinion as well, not just because I'm a Church Scholar, either. dUSt setup the Q&A forum for a purpose. The answers that are received there are provided by members of the Clergy or Phatmassers who hold a degree in Theology or something similar. Dust did so to insure that the answers would be put forth in a way to keep confusion from happening. Confusion often happens in threads that are open to all of phatmass to post and reply to, this often causes a greater problem for the person who is asking the question. dUSt has selected those that he feels are best qualified to answer the questions in the Q&A forum. That doesn't mean that you can simply copy and paste the topic into a thread and start answering questions as you please. If you do it then others could take it upon themselves to do the same thing and we could have people that aren't as knowledgeable in areas of Theology as you are giving answers that may or may not be correct or in line with Church teaching.

Also, keep in mind that the person asking the question put that question in the Q&A forum for a purpose. They may not have wanted it to have open access on Phatmass. I think it's presumptuous to take a person's question from Q&A and move it to the open areas of the forum just because you can answer it. The person asking the question put in Q&A for a reason and we should respect that reason.

As a Church Scholar, I don't have a problem with people PM me on a particular thread in Q&A either with a follow up question or some added information that I may have neglected. Aloysius has PMed me a few times with added information about certain Latin phrases and I don't mind giving credit to those PMers that give me the information. None of us are above learning something new or being corrected.

Above all, I believe you should respect the person asking the question and leave their question where they put it because they put it there for a reason.

[Apotheoun]

The Eastern Catholic Churches are experiencing translation disputes on this very topic, i.e., whether "forever and ever" is a proper translation of the biblical expression "αἰώνων ἀμήν" in liturgical translations. I would tend to say that it is not a proper translation, because it fails to convey the eschatological nature of the biblical term, which refers primarily to God's [i]kairotic[/i] interventions into history and not to time ([i]chronos[/i]) as simple duration, i.e., as temporal extension.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1881181' date='Jun 2 2009, 11:06 AM']I think it's really inappropriate to basically move a question from Q/A just so that you can answer it. It's put in the Q/A phorum for a reason-- to get answers from the scholars who have been selected to answer them. To presume to answer them yourself is a little, well, presumptuous.[/quote]
I would not make too big a deal out of this, because Resurrexi could have simply posted his comments in this forum without any reference to the other person's post, and it would have achieved the same thing. Besides, the Church Scholars are still free to answer the post in the Q&A forum.

Edited June 2, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

As an additional note: the use of "ages of ages" in liturgical and private prayer is common among the Eastern Orthodox, and even among quite a few Eastern Catholics.

The prayer that I say before meals includes the phrase:

Christ God, bless the food and drink of Your servants, for You are holy always, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

[Brother Adam]

I think its great that someone saw a questions in the Q&A they wanted to talk about and answered in another forum in order to spur greater dialogue. Topics in the Q&A are often spoken about in other forums throughout time anyway and it does not detract from the purpose or sanctity of the forum. I'm insulted by the lack of humility of those who are allowed to answer questions in the Q&A would so publicly tear apart a fellow brother in Christ when they themselves stand above any public ridicule under threat of forum penalty. I'm also insulted at the suggestion that someone else answering a question who hasn't been given special privileges by a certainly holy, but lay Catholic, would create a "big mess". Sure, those tagged with "Church Scholar" are often an intellectual cut above the rest, but that hardly makes them the only ones "worthy" of answering questions about the Catholic faith, and definitely does not make them the most intelligent on the board.

Resurrexi, keep up the good work.

[TeresaBenedicta]

I've always liked what's prayed in the LOTH...

"Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, as it was in the beginning, is now, and will be forever."

Sometimes I slip into that during the rosary by accident.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
this topic is closed for the time being.

[homeschoolmom]

Resurrexi--
I regret that I did not handle this with you in private. My post was meant to express my opinion in [i]how[/i] you addressed the question, not [i]that[/i] you addressed it and I did not intend to impose any moderating authority over the situation. Just to be clear.

--HSM

[StColette]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1882000' date='Jun 3 2009, 11:40 AM']Resurrexi--
I regret that I did not handle this with you in private. My post was meant to express my opinion in [i]how[/i] you addressed the question, not [i]that[/i] you addressed it

--HSM[/quote]

I agree with hsmom I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by addressing it publicly.