Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in Christian Worship
#1
The Pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in Christian Worship: Unanswered Questions
from Ancient Hebrew Poetry by John

Recent official statements of the Catholic Church prohibit the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in the liturgy. To be sure, the use of ???Yahweh??? as needed in courses on the Old Testament and in scholarship generally is not thereby prohibited. ???????? is also pronounced by many (not all) Jewish scholars outside of worship as the (rare) occasion demands. The prohibition is presented as a return to earlier tradition in the official Catholic statements, and as an act of repentance by Catholic participants in Jewish-Christian dialogue. Which is it? Should other Christians follow suit?

In the language of English-speaking Christianity, ???Jehova(h)??? is found with some frequency in older Bible translations and hymns. More recently, ???Yahweh??? enjoyed a vogue and is still popular in the prayer language and in hymns of praise in some Christian settings.

It is rarely noted that a shortened version of the Tetragrammaton is pronounced in the context of Jewish worship ??? ???Yah,??? to be pronounced as such according to the Masoretic text at Exodus 15:2 and in 49 other instances (statistics according to BDB). It appears as ???Yah??? in NJPSV at Isaiah 12:2; 38:11 (2x); in other loci (a hypercorrection? ), as ???Lord.???

Yahwistic names of biblical individuals are also pronounced in Jewish worship, for example, Hizqiyahu the king of Judah, interpretable as a sentence name ???Yahu is my strength??? (cf. Psalm 18:2); originally, however, ???YHW(H) has strengthened (the family by providing a son).???

The Catholic Church???s recommended liturgical substitute for the Tetragrammaton is the traditional one: Lord, equivalent to Adonai in Hebrew, Kyrios in Greek, and Dominus in Latin. The downside is that a personal name is replaced by an attribute which may or may not be apropos in context.

Iyov, who rejoices in this development, quotes Fritz Voll approvingly:

One could only wish that the Protestant churches would follow the example and edit the Bible translations and hymns that use Jahveh or even Jehovah as renderings of the name of Israel???s and only through Israel also the Church???s God.

Hymns like ???Guide me, O thou great Jehova??? are still sung with great enthusiasm in thousands of churches. Editing such ancient, wonderful hymns, loved by millions of Christians throughout generations and often translated into many other languages, would, no doubt, cause a lot of anguish. But it would be one of the acts of repentance for centuries of Christian anti-Judaism and disrespect of our Jewish relatives, and it is certainly one of the ???sacrifices??? a new theological understanding of our relationship with Judaism demands.

The wish is understandable. It is far more likely, however, that in non-Catholic settings, the old hymns will continue to be sung as before. It is also likely that Catholic charismatic hymns which use ???Yahweh??? and have become part of the worship repertoire of many non-Catholic Christians will be sung as before.

This will be done based on a distinction between appearance and intent. Phrases like ???Guide me, O thou great Jehova??? or ???Yahweh???s love will last forever??? (Dan Schutte) are prima facie disrespectful of God from the point of view of post-biblical Jewish tradition, but are not disrespectful of God from the point of view of authorial intent.

In short, I cannot agree with Fritz Voll???s statement that the non-use of ???Jehova(h)??? and ???Yahweh??? [in Christian worship] is ???one of the ???sacrifices??? a new theological understanding of our relationship with Judaism demands.??? To put it another way, is the removal of statements in the Talmud that are derogatory to Mary and Jesus an equivalent ???sacrifice??? that same relationship demands? If not, why not? Let me be clear. As a Christian I would be offended if said statements were, for the sake of appearances, removed.

But perhaps I am comparing apples and oranges. Further discussion and eventual correction on this matter are welcome.

Unanswered questions in the ongoing debate:

(1) The article in the Jewish Encyclopedia on ???Jehovah??? by Emil Hirsch treats it correctly as a mispronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, but exhibits no angst in the face of Gentile use of it. Is a history of Jewish offense-taking at Gentile use of Jehovah available?

(2) Yahweh might be more problematic precisely because the Tetragrammaton was so pronounced in Greco-Roman antiquity - for example, by Samaritans in judicial oaths and by (presumably) Jews and non-Jews alike in magical incantations (go here for details), not to mention the biblical authors themselves and ancient Israel in general during First Temple and early Second Temple times. To be sure, Yahw?? would have been the pronunciation in earliest times, which may have been reduced in anthroponyms to Yaw-, -Ya, or -Yahwe, the the first and the last later (through phonological change affecting the language as a whole) pronounced as Yo and Yahu, respectively. For Yahw??, compare the Amorite personal names attested at Mari, Ya???wi-ilum, Ya???wi-Adad (ARM 23, 86:7), and Ya(???)wium (= Ia???wi-ilum e.g. ARM 23, 448:13) [= the Akkadian name Iba????i-ilum (???God has manifested himself???)]. Perhaps the issue is to be understood along the lines of copyright infringement. I have RC friends who seethe at the fact that there are churches with names like Santa Maria de Guadalupe Lutheran Church (ELCA). No fair: she???s ours, I hear them muttering. But is YHWH the private possession of the Jewish people? Are not Gentiles free to worship him as they see fit? Of course, the answer to the first question is ???no,??? to the second question, ???yes,??? at least in an a-confessional polity. Nevertheless the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in Christian worship is deeply offensive to (some or many) Jews. So, of course, are other things said and done in that context. Where to draw the line, if at all? And what about songs like Bono???s ???Yahweh???? I could be wrong, but I think "Yahweh" is likely to be employed by non-Catholic Christians in the anglosphere - with respectful intent - for the forseeable future.

For discussion and links, see Iyov, Charles Halton (and comments by Jim Getz, JP vdGiessen, Rochelle Altman, Ed Gallagher, and others), and David Hymes.

For Further Reading

Karel van der Toorn, ???Yahweh,??? in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (2nd ed.; Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter Willem van der Horst, eds; Leiden: Brill, 1999) 915-919 (bibliography! )


John,

There is no doubt in my mind that there are many Christians who use the divine name with respect, but there are certainly Christians who use it in an unthinking manner and in the course of a dialogue with Jews, there should be sensitivity toward the latter's non-use. There is nothing in any Christian tradition as far as I'm aware that *requires* pronunciation of the divine name. To unilaterally say that Christians must forgo its use is simply untrue, but it is a gesture of respect toward co-religionists and hopefully, to the Deity as well. I completely respect Bono's use of it in a really great song, but I will not use it, nor do I feel comfortable hearing it used in a brash manner (even when I read your post, I did not think the sounds of the divine name, but "Why aitch double-you aitch.")

As far as "Jehovah," I have never understood its use or the reverence applied to it. As a clearly un-Biblical degeneration of the divine name, I don't see why there would be any emotional investment in it other than "This is what I grew up singing," which is a completely legitimate and real thing that I simply do not share. I can't figure out why someone would have a preference for it, though.

-JAK
Reply
#2
Shlama all--

See to my mind, the most ancient "Christian liturgy" is Scripture itself. First let's look at Tanakh:

Yah is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation; This is my Elohim, and I will enshrine Him; My father's Elohim, and I will exalt Him. YHWH the warrior???YHWH is His name!

Exodus 15:2-3

He said, "It means hand upon the throne of Yah! YHWH will be at war against Amalek throughout the ages.???

Exodus 17:16

Yah is my strength and my might; He has become my deliverance???The right hand of YHWH is triumphant! The right hand of YHWH is exalted! The right hand of YHWH is triumphant!???

Psalm 118:14, 16

Furthermore, there are additional passages where Yah is called the name of YHWH
directly:

In that day you shall say: ???I give thanks to you, O YHWH! Although You were wroth with me, Your wrath has turned back and You comfort me. Behold the El who gives me triumph! I am confident, unafraid; for Yah YHWH is my strength and my might; and he has been my deliverance.???

Isaiah 12:1-2

I recall the deeds of Yah; yes, I recall Your wonders of old; I recount Your works; I speak of Your acts.

Psalm 77:12-13

Praise Yah. Servants of YHWH, give praise. Praise the name of YHWH.

Psalm 113:1-3

And this one is my personal favorite:

May Elohim arise, may his enemies be scattered; may his foes flee before him. As smoke is blown away by the wind, may you blow them away; as wax melts before the fire, may the wicked perish before Elohim. .But may the righteous be glad and rejoice before Elohim; may they be happy and joyful. Sing to Elohim, sing praise to his name, extol him who rides on the clouds-- his name is YAH-- and rejoice before him.

Psalm 68:1-4

Can anyone deny that Christians love the Psalms? I doubt it. And when they read them in Hebrew and without the filters of rabbinic or Gentile fences, what is above is exactly what confronts them.

Now for the NT of course the Greek is ambiguous with KURIOS and such as we have mentioned many times here. Yes in Aramaic we can show "MarYah", but that isn't my focus either, although it is important to point out that in the Eastern 22 "Hallel-u-Yah" is rendered as shubkha 'MarYah when quoting Tanakh (e.g. Romans 15:11). Instead, what I want to show is that if anyone believes Revelation to be worthy of canon (as I do) then it behooves them to recognize that whether we are talking about Greek or Aramaic versions, YAH is there too, and we would be well to recognize also that this same document begins as letters to 7 assemblies/churches that also would have known this:

After this I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: "Hallelu-Yah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our Elohim, for true and just are his judgments. He has condemned the great prostitute who corrupted the earth by her adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants." And again they shouted: "Hallelu-Yah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever."The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped Elohim, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: "Amen, Hallelu-Yah!" Then a voice came from the throne, saying: "Praise our Elohim, all you his servants, you who fear him, both small and great!"6.Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: "Hallelu-Yah! For Master YHWH Elohim Almighty reigns.

Revelation 19:1-6

This, not the the discussions among Catholics and others, is the REAL ORIGINAL prayer text. It is not just what was inherited from Moses and David, but what came from Y'shua's own mouth and Yochanan's pen. To deny it is, to my mind, to deny Scripture itself.

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)