THE OLD ROMAN CREED
AS QUOTED BY TERTULLIAN (c. 200)
| De Virg. Vel., 1 | Adv. Prax., 2 | De Praecept., 13 and 26 |
| (1) Believing in one God Almighty, maker of the world, | (1) We believe one only God, | (1) I believe in one God, maker of the world, |
| (2) and His Son, Jesus Christ, | (2) and the son of God Jesus Christ, | (2) the Word, called His Son, Jesus Christ, |
| (3) born of the Virgin Mary, | (3) born of the Virgin, | (3) by the Spirit and power of God the Father made flesh in Mary's womb, and born of her |
| (4) crucified under Pontius Pilate, | (4) Him suffered died, and buried, | (4) fastened to a cross. |
| (5) on the third day brought to life from the dead, | (5) brought back to life, | (5) He rose the third day, |
| (6) received in heaven, | (6) taken again into heaven, | (6) was caught up into heaven, |
| (7) sitting now at the right hand of the Father, | (7) sits at the right hand of the Father, | (7) set at the right hand of the Father, |
| (8) will come to judge the living and the dead | (8) will come to judge the living and the dead | (8) will come with glory to take the good into life eternal, and condemn the wicked to perpetual fire, |
| (9) who has sent from the Father the Holy Ghost. | (9) sent the vicarious power of His Holy Spirit, | |
| (10) to govern believers (In this passage articles 9 and 10 precede 8) | ||
| (12) through resurrection of the flesh. | (12) restoration of the flesh. |
c. 200? That's about 125 years BEFORE the Nicene Creed was written.
I have some grammatical issues. Whether the words exist in the Latin or not, there are some grammatically necessary additions. For instance, "And in the Holy Spirit... who proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets"
should read,
"And in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, AND WHO with the Father and Son is adored and glorified, AND WHO has spoken through the prophets."
I'm trying to understand why the changes were needed?!??!?!?!
18 months since I 1st started attending Mass in my life and I have yet to get the Creed memorized--now they go and change it?
I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, And of all things visible and invisible: And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God; Begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God; Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made: Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man: And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried: And the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures: And ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of the Father: And he shall come again, with glory, to judge both the quick and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, The Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spake by the Prophets: And I believe one Catholic and Apostolic Church: I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins: And I look for the Resurrection of the dead: And the Life of the world to come.
Amen.
I'm so glad they kept "for us men" and did not kowtow to the feminist inclusive language crowd. The Latin original is clearly gender-neutral anyway, in a way that can't be perfectly rendered into non-ugly English. Dropping "men" means "homines" is left untranslated, while translating it "humans" or "human beings" sounds ugly and clinical ("Who for us hominids?" :-0)
This is very similar to the translation I heard when travelling in England earlier this year. (Yes, I was assisting at Mass in a Roman Catholic Church.) The only real difference is the use of "visible and invisible" in this translation vs. "seen and unseen" in current use in England.
The 3 columns you've added are irrelevant. They are the predecessors of the Apostles' Creed (the Old Roman Symbol) and have nothing to do with the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed that the ICEL translation renders into English. These three columns only confuse matters.
I like it much better since many of the words and phrases are better translations.
"Visible and invisible" as opposed to "seen and unseen".
"Consubstantial" as opposed to "one in being".
"Incarnate of the Virgin Mary" as opposed to "born".
"Adored and glorified" as opposed to "worshiped and glorified".
"the Only-begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages," is much better than it's current counterpart.
And, of coarse, use of the first person singular as opposed to plural.
Good news in indicating that the past horrible translations of ICEL are not only coming to an end, but are being reversed. The heterodox cannot be happy about that...
What is ICEL?
And don't you have a better source than somebody's blog?
Wow, NYer, thanks for this thread. I do prefer more traditional translations. That said, it's also nice to have a poetic ear and definitely NO politically correct "inclusive" language. I prefer Holy Spirit to Holy Ghost, I also prefer Worshipped to Adored.
Call me when they remove the filioque.
Anathema was pronounced on ANYONE who changed the creed.
What about — “From thence He will come to judge the quick and the dead.” Which might be the Apostle’s Creed, which I learned as a child. If I do not READ the Creed, word for word, I will say this. Oh, and ‘He descended into Hell’ too.
Brains are so hard to train.