Skip to main content

Link to "Ryan Grant's Less-than-Stellar Latin Translations"

Here is Catholic Monitor's commenter Charmaine's link to "Ryan Grant's less-than-stellar Latin translations":

https://www.facebook.com/paul.kramer.1023611/posts/3059170627461661

"The fact that he plugs the Salza/Siscoe screed, which is so replete with spurious scholarship and sophistry -- as well as out and out fraud, speaks volumes about Mr. Grant's uncritical bias in matters that require rigorously critical judgment. For a man who knows Latin as well as he does, he cannot be easily excuses for his lack of attention in translation which one encounters from time to time; such as when he translated "manavit" as "remain", in a passage of De Romano Pontifice lib. iv cap. iii (and forgot to translate "fortasse" in the same passage); and in the interview linked by Brother Bugnolo, both Grant and Taylor Marshall mistranslate Bellarmine's expression "baptism of spirit" (baptismus flaminis) as "baptism of flame". Flaminis is the genitive form of flamen (gust of wind; breeze); whereas the Latin word for "flame" is flamma, gen. flammæ. Manat is the 3rd person sing. of mano, manare (to flow or extend) -- thus, Bellarmine was saying that St. Peter's grace that his personal faith would not fail "possibly" (fortasse) did not EXTEND to Peter's successors. Mr. Grant rendered it wrongly as "did not remain to". Thus, Bellarmine's passage in Latin (Ex quibus privilegiis, primum fortasse non manavit ad posteros : at secundum sine dubio manavit ad posteros , sive successores.); is translated by Ryan Grant as "From these privileges, we see that the first did not remain to his successors, but the second without a doubt did.” Here is the correct translation: "From these privileges, we see that the first possibly did not extend to his successors, but the second without a doubt did.”

***

"Passage from De Romano Pontifice lib. ii cap. xxx
«Nam iurisdictio datur quidem Pontifici a Deo, sed hominum opera concurrente, ut patet; quia ab hominibus habet iste homo, qui ante non erat Papa, ut incipiat esse Papa; igitur non aufertur a Deo nisi per hominem, at hæreticus occultus non potest ab homine iudicari; nec ipse sponte eam potestatem vult relinquere.»

Grant's translation: "For Jurisdiction is certainly given to the Pontiff by God, but with the agreement of men, as is obvious; because this man, who beforehand was not Pope, has from men that he would begin to be Pope, therefore, he is not removed by God unless it is through men."

Correct translation: “For jurisdiction is certainly given to the Pontiff by God, but with the agreement of men, as is obvious; because this man, who beforehand was not Pope, has from men that he would begin to be Pope, therefore, it is not removed by God unless it is through men.”

"Notice that the subject of the final clause is a pronoun which grammatically must refer back to the subject of the principal clause. Grant makes it refer to the subject of the subordinate clause. I flagged the error quickly, because I remember St. Bernadine of Siena's explanation of this rule of grammar."

"Here's Bro. Alexis Bugnolo's precise translation of the passage:
"For jurisdiction is, indeed, given to the Pontiff by God, concurring with the works of men, as is clear: because from men this man, who was not before the pope, has it that he begins to be the Pope; therefore, it is not taken from him by God, except through men, but an occult heretic cannot be judged by man; and the same does not want to relinquish that power voluntarily."
[http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/02/is-non-theologian-ryan-grants-so-called.html]

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. 

Comments

Alexis Bugnolo said…

Dear Frank,

Every translation can be improved, so please add


but as One

before before Concurring...

Because that translation was done hastily.
Fred Martinez said…
Br. Bugnolo,

I posted this piece because it used your translation as an example of a "precise translation" therefore I thought it waw accurate and also it put forward exact examples explaining why they thought Grant's translations weren't "stellar." I totally trust your judgement. Do you think this piece was fair to Mr. Grant. If you think it is not honest and fair I would be happy to delete and apologize as well as make a post apologizing and explaining why it was wrong as reparation to Mr. Grant. I would like to to see an exchange between you and Grant on the value of his Latin translations.
Fred Martinez said…
Typo alert: waw should be was

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk

"The same Globalists who installed Biden... installed the Zelensky regime... [&] those who did not volunteer for this are Literal Human Shields for the Zelensky/Soros government... [if] Trump had survived the election coup in 2020 we would have no Ukraine war"

Above: Ukrainian President Zelensky (2nd from left) and three other men perform a homoerotic skit on Ukrainian television.    What is the Real Agenda of the corrupt Joe & Hunter Biden's Russiagate backing of the Trudeau-like Obama corrupt Ukraine Operatives in their Warmongering Posturing? "If President Trump had survived the election coup in 2020 we would have no Ukraine war (because he respects Russia’s legitimate security interests and wants to disband NATO)." - Scott Lively Constitutional lawyer Scott Lively thinks that the "same globalists who installed Biden... installed the Zelensky regime in Ukraine... [and] those who did not volunteer for this are literal human shields for the Zelensky/Soros government": The use of human shields in warfare of any kind is a horrifying satanic tactic, and, ironically, it is most effective against people who are truly humane. The tactic uses our humanity against us, because we don’t want the innocent t