Is it okay that they changed the Our Father?

[MiserereMeiDei]

Continuity doesn’t seem to have been a priority for a number of decades. Perhaps if those pesky trads would have been quieter.

 

[TK421]

A while ago, in Italy, the changed the words to the Our Father prayer just a little. Instead of saying “Lead us not into temptation” They say “Do not let us fall into temptation” Because the first part hints that God would lead us into temptation, which he would NEVER do. So it makes sense, but, at the same time, it IS the Lord’s Prayer, taught to the apostles by Jesus himself. Do they have any right to change it? Any thoughts on this? Thank You!!!

You can never do a word-for-word translation from one language to the other.

“Lead us not into temptation” is fine as long as the person praying realizes it doesn’t literally mean that God leads us into temptation.

The new translation is fine too and avoids misunderstandings. Neither of them teach error.

If the new translation is adopted for the Mass, then we should follow with the celebrant and not use our own version.

People can pray whatever version they want in their own time.

Peace.

 

[Hodos]

A while ago, in Italy, the changed the words to the Our Father prayer just a little. Instead of saying “Lead us not into temptation” They say “Do not let us fall into temptation” Because the first part hints that God would lead us into temptation, which he would NEVER do. So it makes sense, but, at the same time, it IS the Lord’s Prayer, taught to the apostles by Jesus himself. Do they have any right to change it? Any thoughts on this? Thank You!!!

I wasn’t a fan because I think that within the older translations of the Lord’s Prayer IS the actual explanation of that clause of the Lord’s Prayer. To me, the updated verbiage actually brings MORE confusion rather than using what Christ taught and pointing people to what he was actually saying. Here is what I mean:

God does allow us to undergo temptation and testing. This is demonstrated throughout scripture. In other words, God is in charge of his creation. So when Satan asks to test Job, and God relents, well guess what, God was in charge and allowed Satan to test Job for his purposes. In Luke 22, Christ says that Satan has asked to sift Peter like wheat. God allows this. In 1 Corinthians 10:13, Paul says that God will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able. And when you look at Hebrews it is evident that even our Lord was allowed to undergo temptation for our benefit. The Pope’s new translation attempts to hide the ball here, which makes it all the more shocking when you come across these other passages. Unfortunately, it is completely unnecessary because there are two clauses to this one petition.

The second clause of the petition is “But deliver us from evil (or the evil one).” The word translated as but is αλλα which is normally translated as but, yet, except. The translation as “But” doesn’t quite give the strong context of demonstrating a contrast as it does in the original Greek. So while, we are frequently tested, the petition here is that our Father, through Christ, will deliver us from the power of the evil one.

Personally, I think the newer translation the Pope is pushing for confuses the issue rather than teaching sound doctrine.

 

[Hodos]

Or when they wrote down what they heard in Aramaic into Greek in the first place …

I hear this explanation frequently, but this is a bad apologetic to follow for a number of reasons. First, there is no credible evidence that Matthew’s gospel comes from an Aramaic predecessor. Rather, most scholars would agree that Matthew’s gospel was originally written in the Greek. What this means is that what was written, was written with a Greek speaking audience in mind and the verbiage that was chosen, was chosen for a reason (to accurately convey what Jesus actually taught). The other issue with this whole line of thinking is that you are essentially saying the Holy Spirit who inspired the gospel to begin with didn’t know what He was doing and made a mistake in translation. That is problematic and is a quite dangerous apologetic to rest your hat on.

 

[OddBird]

God does allow us to undergo temptation and testing. This is demonstrated throughout scripture. In other words, God is in charge of his creation.

It’s interesting you say this, because it is precisely one of the arguments that were made in favor of the French new translation. The theological explanations I read said that in all these cases, as well as in Jesus’ temptation, God actually does not leave us alone and stays in charge. The meaning of the 6th demand was understood as asking God to stay with us when we are tempted, instead of allowing us to give in to temptation.

I do feel this particular argument is a bit contrived, as it ascribes a meaning to εισφερω which would be something like “bring in and leave”, which, to the best of my knowledge, is not attested anywhere.

 

[Hodos]

It’s interesting you say this, because it is precisely one of the arguments that were made in favor of the French new translation.

I had not heard that reasoning given, but you are probably more plugged into this than I am. Personally I think rather than change the translation the Church’s job is to provide better catechesis. I just think the new translation adds to the confusion, personally. Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[JanR]

No it’s not okay.

First of all, the Greek verb is bring. Not let, not allow, but bring. So the change violates Scripture right there.

Second the translation proceeds from a false assumption. God DOES sometimes lead us to places and situations that pose trials, tests, and temptations.

I believe this is the correct way to understand that passage. God does test us at times, and some of his testing may include temptations.

 

[Grizzly1]

Linguistics sure can be a fun and interesting rabbit hole to fall into, right?

I think some arguments don’t take into account ancient colloquialisms, sense vs. definition, and the fact that words change over time, or even differences in spelling. “Bread” can literally mean “bread” but also mean “sustenance” in a broader sense. I can see how “fall” could be a colloquialism for “lead.” When it comes to spelling, “thou” and “you” are in fact the exact same word, the “th” is the modern phonetic spelling of the archaic English letter “þ” which was replaced by “y” when movable type was introduced from France, which didn’t have that letter, but now the “sense” of that word is poetic despite it being the same word but with slightly different spelling. In past centuries “meat” simply meant “food,” but now refers to animal flesh.

I think that as long as the original sense is preserved–a prayer to God to stay away from temptation–then nothing is wrong.

I think people who frequent these types of forums benefit because it gives us something to talk about.

 

[AlNg]

There is another question as to whether or not we should say as part of the prayer:
For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory forever and ever. Amen.
Some say no, others say yes.

 

[Bithynian]

Some say no, others say yes.

Most scholars consider it a later addition (Jerome’s Vulgate doesn’t include it). Western Catholics have historically not used it, though there isn’t anything objectionable with the doxology itself.

Many Protestants do use the doxology.

 

[dol]

I think it depends on what is original word in the Bible: temptation
or test/ trial. That I would like to know. But what we the is beyond us course it does not change Church’s decision anyway.
They only have access and there are some new discoveries of Holy
Scripture and languages wasn’t same as today. We ought to only trust the Church because for that God will not punish us because it’s not our job to solve problems. Although…I agree it add some sort of concern especially this day. Buy if we are here to discuss our thought,I would say: God does not
tempts but let us and wants us to be tested like gold in fire. God led Jesus into the desert to be tempted by Satan. We have to only pray for grace so we can pass tests in life.Reassuming:test is like daily crosses and temptation is leading is by the devil astray, so or way following Jesus with daily duties in life plus resisting evil or
asking God to not being put on christians way but a broad noce easy one.

 

[dol]

But that is very wise and glorying sentence and
if Church ordered it it’s more than welcome to me. We also when praying in private put our own words from our hearts and do not ask if that’s OK.Hail Mary also we pray as have learned and so we would soon start questioning everything.

 

[dol]

Essentially, we have free will.
"Do not let us fall
into temptation"would mean, if understood literally(and maybe in the long term future people would try that as try now translate Scriptures) indeed we do not have free will and ask God for leading us completely like a parent own child who can’t walk.
But if we understand our faith we know what’s all about; that we "don’t want to ho astray so please God The Father do not let us fall but deliver(save) us
by directing us on the right path(cause temptation leads only to destruction).
That we know. Pope or Church changing something keeps in mind present times. Always has been like that(that’s why we had to and still are learning about ancient times(and so will be generations after us). There’s as we know today not just wording translation and meanings but also cultural differences.Church in history was changing sth very rarely but the world nowadays is spinning at extreme. As for us important is only what we understand by that based on what we have learned.

 

[poche]

That is what we have said in Spanish for years. “No nos dejes caer en tentacion.”

 

[porthos11]

AlNg:

Some say no, others say yes.

Most scholars consider it a later addition (Jerome’s Vulgate doesn’t include it). Western Catholics have historically not used it, though there isn’t anything objectionable with the doxology itself.

Many Protestants do use the doxology.

As do we, but the Church wisely separates it from the main body of the Lord’s Prayer with an embolism (Deliver us, O Lord…).

 

[AlbMagno]

Why would “but/yet/except” express contrast if the petition is “lead us not into temptation”? What contrast is there between “lead us not into temptation” and “deliver us from evil”? To me they seem to be in the same line.

Also, if you want to discuss the meaning within Scripture: if God leading someone to temptation is something that happens and is good within God’s Plan; then why Jesus prays for the Father to NOT lead us to temptation? Wouldn’t Jesus know that if that happens it’s God’s Will?

 

[Hodos]

Why would “but/yet/except” express contrast if the petition is “lead us not into temptation”? What contrast is there between “lead us not into temptation” and “deliver us from evil”? To me they seem to be in the same line.

Also, if you want to discuss the meaning within Scripture: if God leading someone to temptation is something that happens and is good within God’s Plan; then why Jesus prays for the Father to NOT lead us to temptation? Wouldn’t Jesus know that if that happens it’s God’s Will?

I think you need to re-read my comments because you are putting words in my mouth that I did not say. God does allow us to be tested, that much is clear from scripture as I demonstrated above. However, he is not the agent of temptation, sin is.

And there is a clear contrast when you read both clauses. Do not do this, but do this instead (the word alla is a nuanced contrasting word that communicates this idea).

 

[AlbMagno]

he is not the agent of temptation

Then you agree that “lead us not into temptation” is not the best translation?

And now I understand your point about “yet/but”. Thank you.

 

[goout]

People changed the words the moment they translated it from koine Greek.

The fact that Koine Greek is itself almost certainly a translation of the oral tradition highlights the fact that scripture transmission and exegesis is messy, like all the rest of human life. And Modern English isn’t the definitive barometer of the meaning of scripture.
Human life and the transmission of scripture are messy.
English is several translations down the road from the spoken languages. That should not scare people. It should help us appreciate the deeper mysteries that Inspiration open up for us.

 

[goout]

JulianN:

Or when they wrote down what they heard in Aramaic into Greek in the first place …

Beat me to it by one minute

Yes, in order to avoid “changing the prayer that Jesus taught to His disciples,” you would have to take a time machine back to 28 A.D. or so, record the audio, and memorize it. As soon as there is translation from one language to another, there is the modification of words and meanings.

D

Which is why Scripture can’t exist in a sola, self referential vacuum outside the living Tradition of the Catholic Church. (I know, a different thread)