Abscondita In Deo

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1883340' date='Jun 4 2009, 03:49 PM']I wouldn't agree that "αἰών" should merely be transliterated, since the word was translated into Latin as "saeculum". I also don't think "Θεοτόκος" should be left untranslated, as "Dei Genetrix" used in the Latin liturgy in the same manner that "Θεοτόκος" is in the Greek. It would seem that, in matters of liturgical translation, we should follow the same patterns that ancient liturgical translators did.[/quote]
[i]Dei Genetrix[/i] -- as long as the word [i]genetrix[/i] is taken to mean [i]mother[/i] -- is not a translation of Θεοτόκος, but of Μήτηρ Θεού and Θεομήτωρ. That said, the word Θεοτόκος is used in the Byzantine liturgy without being translated in most cases, but when it is translated into English it is rendered as [i]God-bearer[/i]. The most appropriate Latin translation of Θεοτόκος is probably [i]Deipara[/i], but since Θεοτόκος is enshrined in the dogmatic decrees of the ecumenical councils as a technical term of Christological significance it is best to simply transliterate it into the various vernacular languages.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

Θεοτόκος and Μήτηρ Θεού are not synonyms. The former word refers to the Holy Virgin's conceiving and giving birth to the eternal Son of God, i.e., it refers to the event of the incarnation itself; while the latter term refers to the familial relationship that is established by the fact that Mary is [i]Theotokos[/i].

[Resurrexi]

Though [i]Genetrix[/i] may have the meaning of [i]Mother[/i], as it comes from [i]genere[/i] (to give birth to, bring forth, bear), it has the connotation of [i]Bearer[/i]. Thus I believe that it is a good translation of [i]Θεοτόκος[/i]. Additionally, I don't like the idea of challenging a translation of [i]Θεοτόκος[/i] that was probably used by the Pope who approved the decrees of the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus himself. (N.B., The Latin translation of the Council of Ephesus uses [i]Dei Genetrix[/i] in some places and [i]Deipara[/i] in others.)

Though I personally prefer [i]Deipara[/i] as it is more pleasing to the ear than [i]Dei Genetrix[/i], it has rarely, if ever, been used in liturgical prayer. What I would say to be the most important modern uses of [i]Deipara[/i] can be found in the dogmatic definitions of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption (cf. Denzinger-Schonmetzer 2803, 3903)

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1883406' date='Jun 4 2009, 07:03 PM']Θεοτόκος and Μήτηρ Θεού are not synonyms. The former word refers to the Holy Virgin's conceiving and giving birth to the eternal Son of God, i.e., it refers to the event of the incarnation itself; while the latter term refers to the familial relationship that is established by the fact that Mary is [i]Theotokos[/i].[/quote]

I realize this. This distinction is seen as Latin as well. [i]Mater Dei[/i] (the Latin translation of Μήτηρ Θεού) is used in the [i]Salutatio Angelica[/i], where Our Lady's personal relationship to her Son is being emphasized. Like [i]Θεοτόκος[/i], [i]Dei Genetrix[/i] is used in most other places, especially in the Eucharistic Liturgy.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1883411' date='Jun 4 2009, 05:07 PM']Though [i]Genetrix[/i] may have the meaning of [i]Mother[/i], as it comes from [i]genere[/i] (to give birth to, bring forth, bear), it has the connotation of [i]Bearer[/i]. Thus I believe that it is a good translation of [i]Θεοτόκος[/i]. Additionally, I don't like the idea of challenging a translation of [i]Θεοτόκος[/i] that was probably used by the Pope who approved the decrees of the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus himself. (N.B., The Latin translation of the Council of Ephesus uses [i]Dei Genetrix[/i] in some places and [i]Deipara[/i] in others.)[/quote]
The original Greek text is the authoritative text, because it -- and not any vernacular translation -- is God-inspired.

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1883411' date='Jun 4 2009, 05:07 PM']Though I personally prefer [i]Deipara[/i] as it is more pleasing to the ear than [i]Dei Genetrix[/i], it has rarely, if ever, been used in liturgical prayer. What I would say to be the most important modern uses of [i]Deipara[/i] can be found in the dogmatic definitions of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption (cf. Denzinger-Schonmetzer 2803, 3903).[/quote]
I still hold that the term Θεοτόκος should be transliterated, and not translated in most cases, especially in the liturgy. The practice of one particular Church in its liturgical rites (in this case the Latin rite) does not take precedence over a decree issued by the God-inspired Fathers gathered in council.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1883436' date='Jun 4 2009, 07:48 PM']The original Greek text is the authoritative text, because it -- and not any vernacular translation -- is God-inspired.


I still hold that the term Θεοτόκος should be transliterated, and not translated in most cases, especially in the liturgy. The practice of one particular Church in its liturgical rites (in this case the Latin rite) does not take precedence over a decree issued by the God-inspired Fathers gathered in council.[/quote]

I certainly believe that the College of Bishops gathered in an Ecumenical Council is able to define dogmas and doctrines infallibly, but I don't believe that the Fathers of Ecumenical Councils are divinely inspired in the same sense that we say that the human authors of Scripture were divinely inspired.

The liturgical prayers of the Rome Rite are of utmost importance since they reflect, in many cases, authoritative approval by the Pope himself.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1883448' date='Jun 4 2009, 06:01 PM']I certainly believe that the College of Bishops gathered in an Ecumenical Council is able to define dogmas and doctrines infallibly, but I don't believe that the Fathers of Ecumenical Councils are divinely inspired in the same sense that we say that the human authors of Scripture were divinely inspired.[/quote]
I believe that they are, and the prayers of the Byzantine liturgy assert the idea. The idea of infallibility is a later Latin construct.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1883448' date='Jun 4 2009, 06:01 PM']The liturgical prayers of the Rome Rite are of utmost importance since they reflect, in many cases, authoritative approval by the Pope himself.[/quote]
That would hold only if the prayers of the Roman Rite were normative for the whole Church, but that is not the case.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1883454' date='Jun 4 2009, 08:16 PM']That would hold only if the prayers of the Roman Rite were normative for the whole Church, but that is not the case.[/quote]

I never said that the other liturgical books that have been approved by the Supreme Pontiff aren't important as well.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1883475' date='Jun 4 2009, 06:56 PM']I never said that the other liturgical books that have been approved by the Supreme Pontiff aren't important as well.[/quote]
The Byzantine liturgy does not require the Pope's approval.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1883974' date='Jun 5 2009, 08:13 AM']The Byzantine liturgy does not require the Pope's approval. [/quote]

The Byzantine Liturgy requires the Pope's approval if the Pope decides that it does.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1884353' date='Jun 5 2009, 03:20 PM']The Byzantine Liturgy requires the Pope's approval if the Pope decides that it does. [/quote]
The pope is not the source of the liturgy, and so his approval or disapproval of Byzantine liturgical practices is irrelevant. Now, I know this is hard for you to understand because the patriarchal Roman Church created a new liturgy only forty years that broke with its own immemorial customs, but in the Eastern Churches it is not the pope, or a committee establish by him, that gives legitimacy to the liturgy; rather, it is the orthodox faith and the immemorial customs handed down through Tradition that render a liturgy legitimate.

Edited June 5, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Resurrexi]

This says it better than I can:

"Up to our own times, it has been the constant concern of Supreme Pontiffs to ensure that the Church of Christ offers a worthy ritual to the Divine Majesty, 'to the praise and glory of His name,' and 'to the benefit of all His Holy Church.

Since time immemorial it has been necessary - as it is also for the future - to maintain the principle according to which 'each particular Church must concur with the universal Church, not only as regards the doctrine of the faith and the sacramental signs, but also as regards the usages universally accepted by uninterrupted apostolic tradition, which must be observed not only to avoid errors but also to transmit the integrity of the faith, because the Church's law of prayer corresponds to her law of faith.''" (Pope Benedict XVI, [i]Summorum Pontificum[/i])

Edited June 5, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1884384' date='Jun 5 2009, 03:56 PM']This says it better than I can:

"Up to our own times, it has been the constant concern of Supreme Pontiffs to ensure that the Church of Christ offers a worthy ritual to the Divine Majesty, 'to the praise and glory of His name,' and 'to the benefit of all His Holy Church.

Since time immemorial it has been necessary - as it is also for the future - to maintain the principle according to which 'each particular Church must concur with the universal Church, not only as regards the doctrine of the faith and the sacramental signs, but also as regards the usages universally accepted by uninterrupted apostolic tradition, which must be observed not only to avoid errors but also to transmit the integrity of the faith, because the Church's law of prayer corresponds to her law of faith.''" (Pope Benedict XVI, [i]Summorum Pontificum[/i])[/quote]
A letter by the pope about the older form of the liturgy of the Roman Rite is irrelevant to me, and has no application in connection with the Byzantine liturgy. The pope has no power over the liturgy of the Byzantine or other Eastern Churches.

Moreover, if the Roman Curia attempted a major revision of the Byzantine liturgy, i.e., along the lines of that done to the Roman Rite back in the late 1960s, I can tell you now that one would see mass conversions of Eastern Catholics to Eastern Orthodoxy.

Edited June 5, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Resurrexi]

That part of the letter has great relevance to Eastern Catholics since it speaks of how the Liturgy of every particular Church is in the care of the Bishop of Rome.

As I'm sure you are aware, I would think it an outrage if the Liturgies of the Eastern Churches were revised in the same manner that the the [i]Consilium[/i] revised the Roman Rite. That doesn't mean, however, that the Liturgies of the Eastern Churches are not the Roman Pontiff's concern.