[quote="Chatter163, post:10, topic:286972"]
The problem with the former "one in being," was that it did not even mention substance, which is a key metaphysical concept contained in the Latin.
The Anglicans had traditionally translated consubstantialem as "being of one substance," which I always thought was reasonable and accurate. However, I am fine with consubstantial. It should be fairly easy to tell its meaning from context, and even if it is not, one simply gets to learn a new theological and philosophical word. Is that such a bad thing?
Given that 4 year olds are also having to try to learn it, needlessly IMHO, yes it is. We are not all great theologians or philosophers, and cannot all hope to be either.
Our Lord used the simplest language possible, even when speaking of the great mysteries of our faith - 'the Father and I are one' - 'This is My body' - 'what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven' and so on. He didn't express things in an unnecessarily difficult way.