My First ESV Review: Psalm 51

Steadfast love…abundant mercy

I know this isn’t supposed to be a review of the NAB, but I
can’t help
but point out how awful it is sometimes. How is “goodness” an adequate
replacement for “steadfast love”? If you’re going to insist on a more
commonly used word, “unswerving”, “faithful”, or “enduring” would be
good picks. “Goodness” is an attribute (and an understated one at
that). “Love” is an action. “Steadfast love” describes an action that
can’t be stopped. Also, “compassion” is not the same as “abundant
mercy”. The former is a desire to relieve suffering. The latter is
clemency, that is compassion towards those under one’s power,
particularly the power of a sovereign or judge. Mercy is being
presented as an aspect of God, a just judge. Mere compassion does not
carry the same meaning.

Blot out my transgressions

All three agree on the use of the verb “blot”, but it strikes
me as a
bit archaic. When was the last time you heard/read it outside of
Scripture? I’m not sure what would be a good replacement. “Obliterate”?
“Hide”? “Obscure”? “Cover”? “Eclipse”?. None of these (and others I’ve
contemplated) feel quite right. Perhaps the translators ran into the
same problem and decided to use the traditional translation. As for
“transgressions”, it’s not a commonly used word and perhaps
“trespasses” would have been a better choice (ala the Lord’s Prayer).
Even the latter is a bit archaic, though. Still, there are better words
that are more powerful than the offensively inoffensive “offense”. How
about “crimes”, for instance? Remember, David committed the offense of
adultery with Bathsheba and was responsible for the death of her
husband, Uriah. I could offend someone with crude language. They’re not
remotely offenses of the same magnitude.

Iniquity

The RSV and ESV use the rather archaic word “iniquity”. The
NAB’s use
of “guilt” is a step in the right direction, but it lacks force. My
choice would have been “wickedness”, “depravity”, “impurity”, or
something similar. Why do I insist on less archaic words? The
Scriptures were written by uneducated men. Average Joe shepherd could
understand them without a dictionary handy.

Justified in your words

“Justified in your words”? Yuck! How did that
make
it past the editors? That’s just plain awful. What’s so wrong with
“sentence”? It goes so well with the judge imagery in the first verse.

Behold…brought forth

I would change the NAB’s “True” to “consider” or something
like it and
keep the rest. “Iniquity” has to go, as must “brought forth”. Even
“brought into the world” would work better. IIRC, the NJB says,
“Remember, I was born guilty, a sinner from my conception.”.

Truth in the inward being

One of these things is not like the other. “Desirest” and
“insist”
strike me as a bit stronger than “delight”. I think “desire” would have
been fine. As for “inward being”, the NAB seems to capture the meaning
while losing the literal translation. What is an “inward being” anyhow?
That concept (if I rightly understand it) is generally referring to the
heart in Scripture. “Core” or “soul” might work as well. “Heart” seems
especially appropriate here given the conceptual repetition with
“secret heart”. Ironically, that phrase becomes “inmost being” –
basically equivalent to “inward being” – in the NAB. So the NAB
basically flips the two parts of the verse. *scratches head* Anyhow,
“secret heart” is a little awkward, but it does evoke vivid images and
so I’d be inclined to leave it be. The only reasonable replacement I
can think of is “recesses of my heart”.

Purge me

Hyssop is a plant used for ritual purification with either
blood or
water. In that sense of purging sin, I can understand the use of “purge
me”. However, the phrase seems a bit awkward to me. “Purify me” ought
to work well in it’s place. It retains the dual imagery of physical
cleanliness and spiritual purity.

Let me hear

Given that both the ESV and NAB change “Fill me with joy” to
“Let me
hear [sounds of] joy”, I suspect that the former is an inaccurate
translation. I’m inclined to agree with the NAB’s insertion of “sounds
of”, even though it’s probably not found in the source language. Some
translations change “rejoice” to “dance”, so “sounds of joy and
gladness”, i.e. merry music, fits well.

A right spirit

What exactly is a “right” spirit? Is it “lawful”, “correct”,
“proper”,
or (archaically) “genuine”? I think “right” is too ambiguous to use in
this context. I’d have to know the source language to suggest the right
replacement, though.

Cast me not away

I don’t think the imagery of casting someone away is foreign
to modern
readers and indicates forceful removal against one’s will. The NAB’s
“Do not drive me” evokes images of herding cattle, that is pushing a
stubborn animal away from where it’d otherwise want to be, often at the
expense of much energy. Which image do you think more accurately
reflects God’s omnipotent actions?

Uphold me with a willing spirit

I applaud the use of “uphold” rather than “sustain”, as it
brings to
mind a weak person being propped up by someone stronger. “A willing
spirit”? Willing to do what? Perhaps the NJB’s “generous spirit” would
make more sense. I’m not sure. Again, I’d need to know the source
language.

Transgressors

I’ve already expressed my distaste for “transgressions”, so
I’ll mostly
leave “transgressors” alone. I’ll just point out that in a twist of
irony, the NAB uses “wicked”, a variation of a strong word I liked in
place of the equally strong “iniquity”, whereas “transgression” became
a mere “offense”. *scratches head*

Bloodguiltiness

“Bloodguiltiness” is very tricky and I honestly can’t blame
the ESV
translators for not changing it. It means “guilty of murder or
bloodshed”. This is no hyperbole. After committing adultery with
Uriah’s wife, David sent him to the front of a fierce battle. Uriah was
killed in that battle. Uriah’s blood was on David’s hands. A reasonable
translation might be “Free me from the guilty of my bloody crime”,
whereas “Rescue me from death” obscures the sin David implied.

Sacrifice…burnt offering

Perhaps it’s in agreement with the source language, but I
don’t like
the ESV’s use of future tense in verse 16. The RSV and NAB both use
present indicative. If one insists on the future, I would use the
subjunctive in the second half. My rendition of this verse would be,
“For you do not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; a burnt
offering would not please you.”

Sacrifices of God

There’s a problem with verb-noun agreement in verse 17. “The
sacrifices
of God are…a broken spirit”. I can only assume the implication is
that every sacrifice is the same broken spirit. Even so, it’s still an
awkward phrase. I’d probably have used “The sacrifice to God is a
broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart you will not spurn.” “Scorn”
would work for the last word as well. On the whole, though, the ESV’s
translation beats the NAB which is egocentric and insubordinate.

Do good

“Do good” just doesn’t feel right. I can’t put my finger on
it, but it
just doesn’t sound like mature English. “Good pleasure” is similarly
flawed. How about this? “Be gracious to Zion in your goodness”

Right sacrifices

Given the confusion regarding meanings of “right” mentioned
earlier,
I’d have avoided that word here. The NAB’s “proper” seems adequate, if
imperfect.

Whole burnt offerings

While I respect the retention of the poetic repetition of
“burnt
offerings” in the last verse, I think the phrase “whole burnt
offerings” falls flat. “Holocaust”, a sacrificial offering that is
consumed entirely by flames (which is mentioned numerous times in the
Old Testament), is an ideal substitute.

Conclusion

The ESV translators describe their work as “an ‘essentially
literal’
translation…[that] seeks to be transparent to the original text,
letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and
meaning of the original.” They also “sought to be ‘as literal as
possible’ [formally equivalent] while maintaining clarity of expression
[functional equivalence] and literary excellence” From reading this
psalm, it seems that literalness has sometimes gotten in the way of
clean, clear English. For the most part, though, the ESV seems to be an
acceptable replacement for the venerable RSV, but I’ll reserve judgment
until I’ve read more. It’s certainly better than the NAB, with its
egocentrism and wishy-washy feel-good word choices, and I wouldn’t mind
seeing the ESV, or a refinement thereof, replace it as the official
English translation for the Catholic Church in the U.S. Now if we can
only convince the translators to provide the deutercanonical books…
😉

This entry was posted in essays, editorials, fisks, and rants and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on by .

About Funky Dung

Who is Funky Dung? 29-year-old grad student in Intelligent Systems (A.I.) at the University of Pittsburgh. I consider myself to be politically moderate and independent and somewhere between a traditional and neo-traditional Catholic. I was raised Lutheran, spent a number of years as an agnostic, and joined the Catholic Church at the 2000 Easter Vigil. Why Funky Dung? I haven't been asked this question nearly as many times as you or I might expect. Funky Dung is a reference to an obscure Pink Floyd song. On the album Atom Heart Mother, there is a track called Atom Heart Mother Suite. It's broken up into movements, like a symphony, and one of the movements is called Funky Dung. I picked that nickname a long time ago (while I was still in high school I think), shortly after getting an internet connection for the first time. To me it means "cool/neat/groovy/spiffy stuff/crap/shiznit", as in "That's some cool stuff, dude!" Whence Ales Rarus? I used to enjoy making people guess what this means, but I've decided to relent and make it known to all. Ales Rarus is a Latin play on words. "Avis rarus" means "a rare bird" and carries similar meaning to "an odd fellow". "Ales" is another Latin word for bird that carries connotations of omens, signs of the times, and/or augery. If you want to get technical, both "avis" and "ales" are feminine (requiring "rara", but they can be made masculine in poetry (which tends to breaks lots of rules). I decided I'd rather have a masculine name in Latin. ;) Yeah, I'm a nerd. So what? :-P Wherefore blog? It is my intention to "teach in order to lead others to faith" by being always "on the lookout for occasions of announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful" through the "use of the communications media". I also act knowing that I "have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors [my] opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and [I] have a right to make [my] opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward [my and their] pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons." (adapted from CCC 904-907) Statement of Faith I have been baptized and confirmed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I, therefore, renounce Satan; I renounce all his works; I renounce all his allurements. I hold and profess all that is contained in the Apostles' Creed, the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. Having been buried with Christ unto death and raised up with him unto a new life, I promise to live no longer for myself or for that world which is the enemy of God but for him who died for me and rose again, serving God, my heavenly Father, faithfully and unto death in the holy Catholic Church. I am obedient to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, I promote and defend authentic Catholic Teaching and Faith in union with Christ and His Church and in union with the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of St. Peter. Thanks be unto Thee, O my God, for all Thy infinite goodness, and, especially, for the love Thou hast shown unto me at my Confirmation. I Give Thee thanks that Thou didst then send down Thy Holy Spirit unto my soul with all His gifts and graces. May He take full possession of me for ever. May His divine unction cause my face to shine. May His heavenly wisdom reign in my heart. May His understanding enlighten my darkness. May His counsel guide me. May His knowledge instruct me. May His piety make me fervent. May His divine fear keep me from all evil. Drive from my soul, O Lord, all that may defile it. Give me grace to be Thy faithful soldier, that having fought the good fight of faith, I may be brought to the crown of everlasting life, through the merits of Thy dearly beloved Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen. Behind the Curtain: an Interview With Funky Dung (Thursday, March 03, 2005) I try to avoid most memes that make their way 'round the blogosphere (We really do need a better name, don't we?), but some are worth participating in. Take for instance the "interview game" that's the talk o' the 'sphere. I think it's a great way to get to know the people in neighborhood. Who are the people in your neighborhood? In your neighborhod? In your neigh-bor-hoo-ood...*smack* Sorry, Sesame Street flashback. Anyhow, I saw Jeff "Curt Jester" Miller's answers and figured since he's a regular reader of mine he'd be a good interviewer. Without further ado, here are my answers to his questions. 1. Being that your pseudonym Funky Dung was chosen from a Pink Floyd track on Atom Heart Mother, what is you favorite Pink Floyd song and why? Wow. That's a tuffy. It's hard to pick out a single favorite. Pink Floyd isn't really a band known for singles. They mostly did album rock and my appreciation of them is mostly of a gestalt nature. If I had to pick one, though, it'd be "Comfortably Numb". I get chills up my spine every time I hear it and if it's been long enough since the last time, I get midty-eyed. I really don't know why. That's a rather unsatisfying answer for an interview, so here are the lyrics to a Rush song. It's not their best piece of music, but the lyrics describe me pretty well.

New World Man He's a rebel and a runner He's a signal turning green He's a restless young romantic Wants to run the big machine He's got a problem with his poisons But you know he'll find a cure He's cleaning up his systems To keep his nature pure Learning to match the beat of the old world man Learning to catch the heat of the third world man He's got to make his own mistakes And learn to mend the mess he makes He's old enough to know what's right But young enough not to choose it He's noble enough to win the world But weak enough to lose it --- He's a new world man... He's a radio receiver Tuned to factories and farms He's a writer and arranger And a young boy bearing arms He's got a problem with his power With weapons on patrol He's got to walk a fine line And keep his self-control Trying to save the day for the old world man Trying to pave the way for the third world man He's not concerned with yesterday He knows constant change is here today He's noble enough to know what's right But weak enough not to choose it He's wise enough to win the world But fool enough to lose it --- He's a new world man...
2. What do you consider your most important turning point from agnosticism to the Catholic Church. At some point in '99, I started attending RCIA at the Pittsburgh Oratory. I mostly went to ask a lot of obnoxious Protestant questions. Or at least that's what I told myself. I think deep down I wanted desperately to have faith again. At that point I think I'd decided that if any variety of Christianity had the Truth, the Catholic Church did. Protestantism's wholesale rejection of 1500 years of tradition didn't sit well with me, even as a former Lutheran. During class one week, Sister Bernadette Young (who runs the program) passed out thin booklet called "Handbook for Today's Catholic". One paragraph in that book spoke to me and I nearly cried as I read it.
"A person who is seeking deeper insight into reality may sometimes have doubts, even about God himself. Such doubts do not necessarily indicate lack of faith. They may be just the opposite - a sign of growing faith. Faith is alive and dynamic. It seeks, through grace, to penetrate into the very mystery of God. If a particular doctrine of faith no longer 'makes sense' to a person, the person should go right on seeking. To know what a doctrine says is one thing. To gain insight into its meaning through the gift of understanding is something else. When in doubt, 'Seek and you will find.' The person who seeks y reading, discussing, thinking, or praying eventually sees the light. The person who talks to God even when God is 'not there' is alive with faith."
At the end of class I told Sr. Bernadette that I wanted to enter the Church at the next Easter vigil. 3. If you were a tree what kind of, oh sorry about that .. what is the PODest thing you have ever done? I set up WikiIndex, a clearinghouse for reviews of theological books, good, bad, and ugly. It has a long way to go, but it'll be cool when it's finished. :) 4. What is your favorite quote from Venerable John Henry Newman? "Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt." 5. If you could ban one hymn from existence, what would it be? That's a tough one. As a member of the Society for a Moratorium on the Music of Marty Haugen and David Haas, there are obviously a lot of songs that grate on my nerves. If I had to pick one, though, I'd probably pick "Sing of the Lord's Goodness" by Ernie Sands.

24 thoughts on “My First ESV Review: Psalm 51

  1. Funky Dung

    I’d never thought of using “occult” as a verb. I had to look it up in a dictionary to convince myself it was a legit. 😉 Were that use of the word more common, it’d be ideal. Great suggestion. 🙂

  2. Jerry

    I’ve often been struck by how sensitive you are to nominally archaic language in the Scriptures, especially given how traditionally oriented you are, liturgically and theologically speaking.

    Some archaisms are a good thing: the Scriptures are millennia old. Reading them perhaps should sometimes require us to look up things since they come from distinct cultural milieus–e.g., the hyssop in v. 7. (BTW, I’ve heard “blot” plenty of times, it’s still often mentioned in chemistry and bio labs, and one is supposed to “blot out” stains on carpet,rather than try to rub it out. The action is thus quite different than any of the alternatives presented in your entry for “blot”.)

    No, we should lay on baroque archaisms, and many earlier English translations of Catholic prayers got way too unwieldy that way, but I fear that too much zeal in keeping things “modern” will send us right back to the NAB. The Psalms in particular, after all, are poetry, and should be given particular leeway for style.

  3. Funky Dung

    The blot you refer to is different in meaning than the one used inscripture. It means (roughly) to obscure (like putting your thumb over a word on a page). The biochemical use of blot is like splotch. To blot a carpet to get a stain out is to soak up liquid, not cover it up.

    Also, the Scriptures were written in what was vulgar (i.e. common) at the time, without sophisticated vocabularies or grammatical gymanstics. Average Joe shepherd could understand them.

  4. Funky Dung

    BTW, poetry need not be in iambic pentameter (to use an extreme example) in order to be beautiful. Anyhow, I don’t think I criticized the poetic grammar structures. As for the repitition found in ancient Hebrew poetry, I think you’ll find that I defended translations that retained them as much as possible.

  5. Funky Dung

    Ah, the irony…

    Writing posts in Notepad means doing without a spelling checker. There’s nothing like criticizing poorly constructed English with more poorly constructed English. 😉

  6. Jerry

    I wasn’t referring to the repetition of poetry, but that word-choice in poetry may be more figurative (and thus may reasonably demand a trip to dictionary once or twice; e.g., that they used “blot” in a sense that I wasn’t aware of. 😉 Where did you learn that bit about how the term “blot” was used?)

  7. Tom Smith

    I agree that the language of scripture should be dignified without being pompous, but readable without being inane.

    Regarding the text of Psalm 50/51, verse 9 of which comprises the famous “Asperges me” chanted versicle and response from the old Mass, the text from the NAB is, believe it or not, closer to the Vulgate than the others. Here is the text of the Mass part, the same as in the Vulgate:

    Asperges me domine, hyssopo, et mundabor; lavabis me et super nivem dealbabor.

    The word “asperges” (as in “aspersion”) is typically translated as “sprinkle”, which the NAB has, while the ESV and RSV have “purge.” Perhaps the difference comes from the fact that the RSV and ESV are translated from the Hebrew, while the NAB, Douay-Rheims, and the Vulgate come from the Septuagint (Greek). But that doesn’t explain why the word “domine,” a derivative of “dominus,” lord, doesn’t show up at all in the English translations cited.

  8. Wayne Leman

    I appreciated reading your first review of the ESV. I have been evaluating it a great deal and posting some of my analysis on my blog. I just linked from my blog to your ESV post.

    I agree with you that even though the Bible itself is ancient, its language in translation need not sound ancient. In fact, that would contradict the original sound of the Bible which was, as you stated in a comment, in the “vulgar” language. The Bible can still describe the ancient cultures in whose contexts it was written while using contemporary language which is more accessible to current speakers than is obsolete and archaic wordings.

  9. Funky Dung

    Just to be clear – I don’t prefer modern wordings to venerable wordings sinply because they are modern any more than I prefer Tuesday to Monday simply because today is Monday (except that it puts me one day closer to the weekend ;)). I like the idea of literal translations that retain the vulargity of the originals in comprehensible English. Most modern/contemporary language translations I’ve seen lean toward or fully embrace idea-for-idea vs. word-for-word. I’d rather see an effort made to go word-for-word except in cases where a word, phrase, or idiom cannot be translated directly to English without losing or distorting the meaning.

    In response to Tom, I’ll say that I don’t much care for English translations made from the Vulgate. A translation of a translation is bound to lose information along the way. It’s like playing Whisper Down the Lane. That said, if you’re going to translate from the Vulgate, do it right. Stay as word-for-word as possible and refer to the original languages when any doubts arise. The English “translation” of the Vulgate found in the English version of the Roman Missal is a disaster. It bears little resemblance to the Latin, let alone the Greek or Hebrew.

  10. Wayne Leman

    “uphold me with a willing spirit”

    One problem with this wording is that it is syntactically ambiguous. It is not clear from this wording if the person with the willing spirit is God or the repentant sinner. I think, according to English syntactic rules, that the more likely interpretation is that it is the person who is doing the upholding who has the willing spirit.

  11. Wayne Leman

    After posting my preceding message about 51:12, I did further research and discovered that English versions are split over whether the meaning of the original Hebrew is that God or Dave is the one to have the willing spirit. It’s not, then, actually a case of syntactic ambiguity in the RSV and ESV, but, rather, of a different interpretation of the Hebrew. Sorry for posting prematurely. But I learned something from the exercise which is always good.

  12. Funky Dung

    I wonder if it’s a little of both. That is, the willing spirit is an aspect of God which David wishes to share. Thus, the spirit would dwell in David but belong to God. Thoughts?

  13. Funky Dung

    Jerry,

    I learned that bit about “blot” from a trip to dictionary.com and a look at other translations (like NJB). Translation consensus reveals which meaning of the word was intended. Also, IIRC, there is a NAB footnote about that verse.

  14. Funky Dung

    For those interested, here’s the Douay-Rheims version (which is based on the Vulgate) of this psalm.

    3 Have mercy on me, O God, according to thy great mercy. And according to the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my iniquity.
    4 Wash me yet more from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
    5 For I know my iniquity, and my sin is always before me.
    6 To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee: that thou mayst be justified in thy words and mayst overcome when thou art judged.
    7 For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.
    8 For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.
    9 Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed: thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow.
    10 To my hearing thou shalt give joy and gladness: and the bones that have been humbled shall rejoice.
    11 Turn away thy face from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities.
    12 Create a clean heart in me, O God: and renew a right spirit within my bowels.
    13 Cast me not away from thy face; and take not thy holy spirit from me.
    14 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation, and strengthen me with a perfect spirit.
    15 I will teach the unjust thy ways: and the wicked shall be converted to thee.
    16 Deliver me from blood, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall extol thy justice.
    17 O Lord, thou wilt open my lips: and my mouth shall declare thy praise.
    18 For if thou hadst desired sacrifice, I would indeed have given it: with burnt offerings thou wilt not be delighted.
    19 A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
    20 Deal favourably, O Lord, in thy good will with Sion; that the walls of Jerusalem may be built up.
    21 Then shalt thou accept the sacrifice of justice, oblations and whole burnt offerings: then shall they lay calves upon thy altar.

  15. Wayne Leman

    “I wonder if it’s a little of both. That is, the willing spirit is an aspect of God which David wishes to share. Thus, the spirit would dwell in David but belong to God. Thoughts?”

    Yes, I think this is entirely possible. And support for that comes from a Biblical Hebrew scholar who was one of several scholars who responded to my questions about Psalm 51:12 (posted after reading your blog post) on a private discussion list about the Old Testament. This particular scholar claims that in the O.T. predominantly references to “spirit” are to God’s spirit. When there are references to a human spirit, they often are with reference to a spirit which God has placed within that person, sometimes for a particular purpose and time.

  16. Talmida

    I enjoyed your comparison of the 3 versions. It’s a bit tough to rag on any one version for its translation of hhesed, though. It’s a huge word, as far as meaning goes, and gets translated lovingkindness, kindness, mercy, and goodness. The most encompassing definition I’ve seen is “covenant loyalty” but I’m not sure that that concept is understood by Christians the same way it would be by Jews.

    The word in the second half of the couplet which was translated “compassion” in one version and “abundant mercy” in another has a root that means “womb”. The implication here is of motherly love, or perhaps the brotherly love of two who share the same womb.

    I blogged a bit about this in May if you’re interested in more details.

  17. Funky Dung

    Talmida, thanks for dropping by and educating us. 🙂 I’m very glad someone with some knowledge of Hebrew found this post. I certainly don’t have any. 😉

    As far ragging on the NAB goes, I make no apologies. It consistently soft-peddles. The word choices are often extremely egocentric (“my sacrifice” being a prime example) and/or “feel good” rather than having the power to convict hearts.

  18. Talmida

    Funky Dung, rag the NAB all you want — I do it all the time! 😉 It really is awful.

    It’s just that particular word (hhesed) seems to defy translation in English.

    I’m almost tempted to just leave the HEbrew word in, as we do with Halleluia or Hosanna. Simon the Just said, “On three foundations does the world stand: On the Torah, on Divine worship, and on hhesed.”

    In Christian terms, maybe the Word of God, the Eucharist and hhesed are our 3 pillars, with hhesed encompassing the kind of love that Jesus expresses in “love your neighbour”?

  19. Tom Smith

    Not to sidetrack too much, but, since you seem to know a bit about Hebrew, Talmida, what exactly does *Sabaoth* mean? In the new Mass translation that’s been “just about to come out” for years, “Sabaoth” is supposedly restored to the English Mass, and that it’ll be used like Alleluia or Hosanna. The ICEL translation is “Lord of Hosts,” I think, but I don’t particularly trust ICEL too much.

  20. edey

    tom

    isn’t sabaoth latin? (as in “sanctus dominus deus sabaoth”) in which case, isn’t it translated in the icel version “power and might”? (that’s all i could come up with given

    “sanctus, sanctus, sanctus dominus deus sabaoth”

    “being translated as holy, holy, holy, Lord God of power and might”

    and sanctus=holy, dominus=Lord deus=God

    so sabaoth has to be what’s left, right? ie power and might)

    now i don’t know if that’s a good translation, but i don’t know where you got “Lord of Hosts”?

    i could be totally off here….

  21. edey

    ok, i just retract that last comment. i didn’t realize there was a hebrew word in the middle of a prayer completely in latin. sorry.

  22. Talmida

    Sabaoth (ts’va’ot) is the plural of tsava, which means warfare, army, warriors when used of humans. It means host, God’s attendants when used of God. Whether they are warriors or angels or stars is up for grabs, according to my lexicon.

    I suppose that’s why they kept the original word (with its archaic and misleading transliteration)– probably nobody really knows what or whom it designates.

    Many of the words that we consider titles of God (mighty warrior, everlasting Father, etc) are considered by many to be NAMES of God, and are not translated, any more than we would call Amy “Beloved” or Thomas “the Twin”.

    Hope that answers your question. I don’t read this blog regularly, so if you have more questions, you’ll probably have more luck finding me at mine or thru email. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *