4

I have considered that this may be stated: "Christī Regēns", emphasising with a capital R and being pronounced actively ruling. Is this sufficient to state?

I wonder that is is not more like, "Christi Cesar Regens" though I have not all of the correct letter inflexions.

It must be careful, if correct, to pronounce Christ as Cesar and not pronounce Cesar as Christ.

Addendum: I concede pronouncing Christ as Cesar is not the answer to what I wish to translate. Is it indeed that "Christī Regēns" is sufficient?

  • 1
    I'm afraid that I'm not quite clear on what you wish to express. There is a possible conflict here with associating "Caesar"/"Cesar" with Christ, seeing that "Caesar" is an emblem of secular power, and Christ is definitely is not. Having said that, I acknowledge that later Roman times, both "Augustus" and "Caesar" came to be as terms for the emperors and their backups in the new, Christian, Roman empire. I do think you need to explain more thoroughly what you're looking for, – varro Aug 4 '18 at 2:10
  • 3
    No. In later times, the title of "Augustus" was higher than the title of "Caesar". In Byzantine times, the ultimate power was in the hand of the Βασιλεύς, the "emperor" (a title fraught will all sorts of connotations). – varro Aug 4 '18 at 2:21
  • 2
    @Willtech Also consider that the Bible uses Caesar exclusively for secular rulers: hence "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's" – Draconis Aug 4 '18 at 2:32
  • 1
    Your Christī Regēns is inconsistent as to inflection. The first word is genitive (presumably not nominative plural!) the second nominative. Christus Regēns for the nominative. – Colin Fine Aug 5 '18 at 18:43
  • 1
    I tagged this ecclesiastical-latin, assuming you are ok with this, considering the religious tone of the sentence. Pleas feel free to change it back, or just ask me to undo it. – Rafael Aug 5 '18 at 18:54
1

If you want a short phrase, I'd go for something simple like [Iesus] Chistus Rex. It says little more or less than Christ [is the] King. It stands alone as a title or as a copulative sentence, since in Latin the verb to be can be easily omitted. In the latter, there is little doubt that you are saying that Christ is king and not the other way around.

If you want to translate the whole thing, I see two approaches: the literal one—a somewhat word-by-word, yet grammatical translation—and the liturgical one—building a mosaic from attested titles and liturgical ways of saying.


  1. As for the literal approach, I had some trouble with the words ultimate and the difference between ruler and king.

    Google gives two meanings for ultimate: i) basically a synonym of last/final and ii) best/supreme. I'll go for the second one. But feel free to ask for the eschatological version.

    For king I'll go with the obvious alternative, rex. For ruler, I'll use Dominus. It is a common word with a wide meaning. In a religious context, its primary meaning is Lord, but it also means ruler. Please make me know if you want to convey a specific contrast with king or make it more explicit that you mean ruler and not lord (in this case, an alternative could be the less frequent dominator).

    The translation could therefore be:

    Christus Iesus Rex Optimus et Dominus in omni tempore


  1. As for the liturgial approach I think of two opposing ideas.

    For ever in liturgy is almost always a variant of for centuries of centuries: [per/in] + [saeculum saeculi/[omnia] saecula [saeculorum]]. To speak about titles of Jesus, I think this makes more sense.

    Christ has been called the King from old. Prominently, the full name of the feast day of Christ the King includes of all things (or of the universe) in its name. Concretely, Dominus Noster Iesus Christus Universorum Rex (note it includes both Dominus and Rex). If you are willing to accept of all things instead of ultimate to stick to liturgy, this is the way to go. In this case, the translation could be:

    Christus Iesus Universorum Rex et Dominus per saecula

    The other option is to base the translation in the hymn Christus Vincit. It is a prominent prayer that in the refrain makes reference to Christ as King stressing different aspects of his triumph in Resurrection. The relevant part is:

    Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat / Christ conquers, Christ reigns, Christ commands

    Note that using this in the mosaic, the translation becomes arguably freer, since the offices (nouns) are changed by actions (verbs).

    Christus Iesus regnat atque imperat per [omnia] saecula saeculorum


Notes:

  • et and atque are two different ways of saying and.
  • Rex optimus et Dominus can mean that ultimate applies to both king and ruler.
  • Chistus Iesus and Iesus Christus are equivalent. I chose the former to stick to your word order in English, but this could be misleading if used as a general rule. It doesn't need to be that way.
  • My personal choice would be the second one, Christus Iesus Universorum Rex...

Hope it helps.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    I appreciate your work here and may yet add a couple of comments. I accept that Lord is a much more well-mannered situation seemingly befitting of Christ than DOMINATOR gives us by common understanding. – Willtech Aug 7 '18 at 9:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.