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

Flashback: The Truth: "It's Not Just Fraud; It's Treason" by the Propaganda Media, the Democrats and those Complicit in the Fraud

November 30, 2020  NewsMax TV host Greg Kelly explained best what the massive 2020 presidential voter fraud and lying as well as gaslighting of the " Media, Judges, 'Experts' all 'Nothing to See Here, Folks, Move along'" means to you, your family and the United States: Greg Kelly @gregkellyusa The SYSTEM trying to RAILROAD @realDonaldTrump OUT OF OFFICE. The Media, Judges, “Experts” all “Nothing to See Here, Folks, Move along” —They have NO respect for US. IF they can pull this FRAUD with a President, think of what they can do to YOU. NOT OVER. NO WAY. [https://twitter.com/gregkellyusa/status/1333044311978618881 and https://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/11/gateway-pundit-videos-first-time-in.html] -Catholic Monitor "H older of 4 degrees from MIT Ph.D. Dr. Shiva Ayvadurai, the inventor of the email, at the Arizona state voter fraud public hearing " presented his data at the Arizona hearing, showing the only way for Joe Biden to hav...

Fr. Chad Ripperger's Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) & Binding Prayer ("In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, and by the power of the Most Holy Catholic Church of Jesus, I render all spirits impotent...")

    Deliverance Prayers II  The Minor Exorcisms and Deliverance Prayers compiled by Fr Chad Ripperger: Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) I bind (myself, or N.) today to a strong virtue, an invocation of the Trinity. I believe in a Threeness, with a confession of an Oneness in the Creator of the Universe. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Christ’s birth with his baptism, to the virtue of his crucifixion with his burial, to the virtue of his resurrection with his ascension, to the virtue of his coming to the Judgment of Doom. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of ranks of Cherubim, in obedience of Angels, in service of Archangels, in hope of resurrection for reward, in prayers of Patriarchs, in preaching of Apostles, in faiths of confessors, in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Heaven, in light of Sun, in brightness of Snow, in splendor of Fire, in speed of l...

Was Bergoglio Chosen?: CIA Pope - "The Real Mover and Shaker of this Entire Spectacle is the Deep State"

U.S. Deep State Pope And Its Implications For You By Laramie Hirsch The U.S. State Department routinely pressures members of the United Security Council with a view to influencing the vote pertaining to Security Council resolutions. U.S. covert operations and propaganda campaigns are routinely applied with a view to influencing national elections in different countries around the world. Similarly, the CIA has a longstanding covert relationship with the Vatican. Did the U.S. government attempt to influence the outcome of the election of the new pontiff? Firmly committed to serving U.S. foreign policy interests in Latin America, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was Washington’s preferred candidate. Were undercover pressures discretely exerted by Washington, within the Catholic Church, directly or indirectly, on the 115 cardinals who are members of the Vatican conclave? Professor Michel Chossudovsky,  “Washington’s Pope”? Who is Pope Francis I? Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Argentina’s “Dir...