ithinkjesusiscool Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Pax! I found this on Youtube: I have no idea why it says Credo in unum deum. It is grammatically wrong. It should be Credo uno Deo. Credo takes its object in the dative case, not in + accusative. This rule is for, at least Classical Latin; I guess the creed was written, after the classical era of Latin. And the Greek has the same mistake here: This is Liturgical Latin, not Classical Latin. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norseman82 Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 (edited) I think we have more urgent things to worry about... Edited June 30, 2013 by Norseman82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 I think the grammatical construction of the creed (both in Greek and Latin) is intentional, because the "I believe in" phrase is used only in reference to the persons of Holy Trinity, and this specific usage is meant to convey the fact that a Christian believes "in" the divine persons as opposed to merely believing certain things about them. That is why that same grammatical structure is not used later in the creed when the Church is mentioned; instead, the creed simply says "and one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church," and this structure is meant to convey the truth that we do not "believe in" the Church, but that we believe the Church, that is, we believe what the Church teaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Pax! I found this on Youtube: I have no idea why it says Credo in unum deum. It is grammatically wrong. It should be Credo uno Deo. Credo takes its object in the dative case, not in + accusative. This rule is for, at least Classical Latin; I guess the creed was written, after the classical era of Latin. And the Greek has the same mistake here: This is Liturgical Latin, not Classical Latin. What do you think? I'm no Latin scholar, but to go off of what Apotheoun was saying above, consider the following: a. Credo amico meo. and b. Credo in amicum meum. Without knowing how it would have been taken contemporaneously, it seems to me that using the dative -- as in example a -- has the implication of believing someone (e.g., in what they say or think), whereas the accusative construction -- example b -- implies believing in someone/something. Perhaps I am horrifyingly wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Just to make sure I am understanding this here, are you trying to correct the grammar - on a language in which you are not fluent - of a document which is literally older than the English language itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKolbe Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 something like that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Just to make sure I am understanding this here, are you trying to correct the grammar - on a language in which you are not fluent - of a document which is literally older than the English language itself? Seemed like a more or less innocent enough question to me (if phrased a little heavy-handedly...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Seemed like a more or less innocent enough question to me (if phrased a little heavy-handedly...). The heavy-handed phrasing is what is getting me. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Vinny Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Maybe [s]he has been doing a lot of shakeweighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 That was one of only two good parts of that entire movie. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 That was one of only two good parts of that entire movie. :P False, there were at least three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 False, there were at least three. I remember that part and the part with the useless philosophers. The rest I recall finding really lame. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Vinny Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 (edited) I remember that part and the part with the useless philosophers. The rest I recall finding really lame. :P I liked Cleese's summation of the Beatitudes as saying the blessed are those maintaining the status quo. I liked the stoning scene with all the women wearing long beards. I liked the discussion about the different sects ("Judean People's Front" vs. "Peoples Front of Judea"). "Splitters!" And, of course, the scene referenced above. Oh, and the guy complaining because he got healed and now he's out of his begging job. Edited July 1, 2013 by Brother Vinny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ithinkjesusiscool Posted July 1, 2013 Author Share Posted July 1, 2013 I think we have more urgent things to worry about... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuIZ9E4T8uQ Just to make sure I am understanding this here, are you trying to correct the grammar - on a language in which you are not fluent - of a document which is literally older than the English language itself? this is not about correcting something. it's about understanding the language used in the Liturgy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now