A very interesting new music version of the Lord's Prayer in both English and Hebrew!
The Hebrew is interesting. Most scholars agree that Jesus spoke Aramaic not Hebrew; there are several Aramaic texts of the Lord's Prayer that are used in worship by Churches who use semitic languages, e.g., Syriac. However, this is the first time I have been aware of a Hebrew version. Most likely it is the composer's translation back in Hebrew of the English text he has posted. However, there is (or was) a Hebrew Matthew. Most scholars view that text as the translation of either Greek Matthew or an Aramaic Matthew used by some vanished Hebrew Christian communities. So maybe this is not a modern Hebrew version?
Note that in the English version waves go from left to right, while in the Hebrew version waves go from right to left.
Below the break for the convenience of discussion are the full texts
OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN
OUR HEAVENLY FATHER
LET YOUR NAME BE SANCTIFIED
O LET YOUR KINGDOM COME
LET YOUR WILL BE DONE
AS IT IS IN HEAVEN
SO LET IT BE DONE
ON THE EARTH
OUR DAILY BREAD
OUR DAILY PORTION
GIVE UNTO US
THIS DAY
AND FORGIVE US
FORGIVE US OUR SINS
AS WE FORGIVE OUR DEBTORS
AND LET US NOT, ENTER IN
TO THE HANDS OF THE GREAT TRIAL
BUT DELIVER US
FROM THE EVIL ONE
YOURS IS THE KINGDOM
YOURS IS THE POWER
YOURS IS THE GLORY
FOREVER
AMEIN
OUR FATHER, OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN
YOUR NAME WILL BE SANCIFIED
YOUR KINGDOM WILL COME, YOUR WILL, WILL BE DONE
AS IN HEAVEN IT IS ON EARTH
OUR PORTION OF BREAD
GIVE US THIS DAY
AND FORGIVE US FOR OUR SINS
AS WE FORGIVE THOSE WHO SIN AGAINST US
AND DO NOT BRING US INTO THE HANDS OF TRIAL
BUT DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL
FOR YOURS IS THE KINGDOM AND THE POWER
FOREVER
AMEIN
"... they contain many of the alternatives that have been proposed by scholars to our present English texts."
ReplyDeleteOh, dear. You mean "chalice" and "consubstantial" were just the beginning?
The Anglican and Catholic responses during the liturgy and versions of the Creed and Our Father were pretty much the same for years. I only had to refer to the hymnal for the songs.
Recent changes ensured that ecumenism took a few steps backwards. Pretty sure that Rome doesn't care, but it does made it harder for me to blend in when I was going to Mass "live" with Raber.
"Oh, dear. You mean "chalice" and "consubstantial" were just the beginning?"
DeleteThere is the scholarly question of how we translate the "original" texts into contemporary English. And then there is the question, which can be a separate one, of which translation we use in our worship.
From what I can tell, the English version we pray today in Catholic churches (and presumably many other denominations' churches) hasn't been copied and pasted directly from a particular English translation of Matthew's Gospel. It is a variation on what was in the original Book of Common Prayer, which is not precisely the same as appeared in the King James Version.
Here is Matthew's version in the New American Bible translation, which is the basis for the readings proclaimed at mass in Catholic churches in the United States:
Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread;
and forgive us our debts,
as we forgive our debtors;
and do not subject us to the final test,
but deliver us from the evil one.
I think, if the powers that be told us we couldn't pray the original version anymore in worship, the people would rise up as one and tell the powers were to stuff it.
If we believe lex orandi / lex credendi, then the difference between "debt" and "trespass" in the biblical and liturgical texts respectively, could be significant.
Yes, translations and liturgucal language are certainly fraught things sometimes. Just making the point that there is an ecumenical dimension to liturgical language that may be of more, less, or no importance to Rome at any given time.
Delete"I think, if the powers that be told us we couldn't pray the original version anymore in worship, the people would rise up as one and tell the powers were to stuff it."
DeleteYep, pretty much. The Our Father was one of the first prayers I learned as a child. Not changing at this point. I don't think anyone is clamoring for a new version of the Our Father. Shakespearean English, works for me. And kind of a neat link with the past.
One of the aspects of the interplay between worship and scripture which isn't intuitive to most of us is that, historically, Christian worship preceded the canon of the New Testament as we know it today. We know this is true because descriptions of worship (and, almost certainly, vestiges of worship such as hymns/canticles) are part of the New Testament.
DeleteIt's probably better to think of them as running together in the times of very early Christianity: Paul's letters, the apostolic recollections which may be the basis for Mark's Gospel, the multicultural theological ferment in John's community, collections of sayings of Jesus and John the Baptist - these were all circulating in early Christian communities as those communities gathered to praise God in hymns, psalms and inspired songs, and for the breaking of the bread, and where they also experienced the presence of the risen Christ and reveled in the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It was all interwoven into the fabric of these Christian communities.
I am very interested in getting beyond the mechanical repetition of the words into a more meaningful prayer.
ReplyDeleteI really like "Forgive us our debts as we forgive those who are indebted to us." I am indebted to a vast number of people for all sorts of things but think that there are few people who are indebted to me. So those words encourage a very eucharistic humble life. Most people who don't appreciate me I can easily forgive.
The translation "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" has the oppositive effect. There are also many people who trespass against me (and most other people) beginning with all the billionaires, corporations, government entities, etc. that make our lives miserable. In comparison, I see myself as having contributed only modestly to "trespassing." I really don't care to build a life around forgiving all the trespassing that goes on in the world. I would rather feel indebted for all the good things that other people have done and try to do more myself.
Do you find yourself "translating" the rote language into thoughts that better reflects these ideas? When I say the rosary, the words sort of become a backgrounf chant that focuses the meditation.
DeleteMaybe just me.
Jim said:
ReplyDeleteThere is the scholarly question of how we translate the "original" texts into contemporary English. And then there is the question, which can be a separate one, of which translation we use in our worship.
There has long been a tradition of paraphrasing scripture in the worship of the Church. A lot our hymns, antiphons, etc. consist of blending together various scriptural phrases, images and passages. It is not simply a translation question because you find the same thing in the Latin texts of the antiphons and responsories for the office. Some of the texts of Byzantine Divine Office contain elaborate footnotes of all the scriptural references. These texts were originally Greek referencing the Greek Scriptures
There is a long tradition of writing paraphrases of the Lord's Prayer and the psalms. It is a good spiritual exercise to paraphrase the psalms to make them more contemporary. I have enjoyed doing it myself beginning praying the Latin texts over and over until a contemporary English text and images take shape. Then I sometimes study the Greek and Hebrew text to help me shape psalm paraphrases that are free of ancient cultures. I am perfectly content with Dominus in the Latin, Kyrie in the Greek, and Adonai in the Hebrew but prefer not to translate them with Lord.
There are many artists today from the Evangelical tradition that remake the psalms into contemporary language, music and visual art. The composer of the Lord's Prayer of one of these. In psalm 29 used at morning prayer today, another Evangelical composer brought freshness to his music by referring to "the Adonai of splendor, the Adonai of glory" which helps evoke the "otherness" of God rather the images of earthly monarchs.
Perhaps the very imagery of God as monarch is itself culturally contingent. The US is, in some ways, a relatively un-hierarchical society. It is true that we have people with more gobs of money than, I assume, any other society ever has had. But the sort of conspicuous-consumption living that separates the elites from the hoi polloi is, I think, considered to be in bad taste nowadays. To be sure, a rich guy's blue jeans may cost 20 times what I paid for these Levi's I have on now. But he's wearing denim, and really, it doesn't look that different.
DeleteI think this is very different from how society worked in Jesus's day, when cities would be designed to reinforce the elite's demi-god status over the rest of us, with the palaces, amphitheaters and other public spaces in the center of town to showcase their literal lording it over the rest of us.
God as King? I don't know if people around here have much of an idea of what that means. Our images of royalty are (1) the Queen of England, who comes across as a pampered figurehead, and (2) the Pope. Francis seems to be doing his best to dial down the pomp surrounding that office. Benedict had dialed it up in some ways (although he stopped short of being toted about in a sedan chair), but I don't think that was well-received by most people.
I have no problem with the idea of God as king. He's the only one who actually deserves that title.
Delete