Meaning of 'Lord of hosts'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mattjolley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mattjolley

Guest
I have just read an article which was posted in another topic, which was about the changes that are being made to the liturgy translation in the U.S.

I quote the article:

"The “Sanctus” will start “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God of hosts.” The current version says “Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might.”
(catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=20238)

My question is, what exactly does ‘Lord God of hosts’ mean? I recall it is a title of God’s, used extensively in the Old Testament, but what are the ‘hosts’ of which God is Lord?

Sorry if ive placed this in the wrong forum!

Matt
 
Hello,

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Sabaoth

(In Hebrew, plural form of “host” or “army”). The word is used almost exclusively in conjunction with the Divine name as a title of majesty: “the Lord of Hosts”, or “the Lord God of Hosts”. The origins and precise signification of the title are matters of more or less plausible conjecture. According to some scholars the “hosts” represent, at least primitively, the armies of Israel over whom Jehovah exercised a protecting influence. Others opine that the word refers to the hosts of heaven, the angels, and by metaphor to the stars and entire universe (cf. Genesis 2:1). In favour of the latter view is the fact that the title does not occur in the Pentateuch or Josue though the armies of Israel are often mentioned, while it is quite common in the prophetic writings where it would naturally have the more exalted and universal meaning.
 
why thankyou:) thought I was along the right lines, but this really clears things up for me.

Matt
 
Why “Hosts” instead of “Sabaoth”?

I go to a Western Rite Orthodox Church every Sunday morning, and the priest says “Lord God of Sabaoth”, not “Hosts”, so I wonder why the word change. :confused: I like the ring of Sabaoth.
 
TarkanAttila said:
Why “Hosts” instead of “Sabaoth”?

I go to a Western Rite Orthodox Church every Sunday morning, and the priest says “Lord God of Sabaoth”, not “Hosts”, so I wonder why the word change. :confused: I like the ring of Sabaoth.
Click to expand...
It sounds okay to me, but there would probably be a group picketing the Vatican because they think the word is too hard to pronouce/spell/understand etc., etc. A catechetical explanation would not suffice. A historical explanation would not suffice. A dictionary would be of no avail. The sky would fall, and the world would come to an end early.
At the very least, greeters and ushers would have to pass out smelling salts to all who enter (in case of fainting during the “Holy, Holy…”).

All kidding aside, you’re making me think about my grandparents and their families: poor,
uneducated, simple immigrants of he Byzantine Rite. They would have defended their very high-sounding Divine Liturgy to the death.

So much for all the tears and worry about the poor, simple and uneducated not being able to grasp a few new words.

P.S. What’s a “Western Rite Orthodox Church”? Is it the same as an “Eastern Rite Catholic Church”?
 
opus101 said:
P.S. What’s a “Western Rite Orthodox Church”? Is it the same as an “Eastern Rite Catholic Church”?
Click to expand...
Kinda. It’s made up of Western converts (mainly), but instead of using the Mass or Liturgy native to them, they most commonly use either the Liturgy of St. Gregory, of St. Tikhon (which is an amended version of the Anglican liturgy), among others. They are also subject to the bishop of whatever Eastern diocese they are a part of. For example, Bishop Basil of the Antiochian Orthodox Diocese of Wichita and the Midwest leads both Eastern and Western Rite Antiochians. We pray for his Holiness every Sunday.
 
TarkanAttila said:
Why “Hosts” instead of “Sabaoth”?

I go to a Western Rite Orthodox Church every Sunday morning, and the priest says “Lord God of Sabaoth”, not “Hosts”, so I wonder why the word change. :confused: I like the ring of Sabaoth.
Click to expand...
If you’re going to say Lord God of Sabaoth, then you might as well say Dominus Deus Sabaoth.

And then you’ll have to say the whole Sanctus in Latin.

Not a bad idea. 🙂
 
opus101 said:
P.S. What’s a “Western Rite Orthodox Church”? Is it the same as an “Eastern Rite Catholic Church”?
Click to expand...
TarkanAttila said:
Kinda. It’s made up of Western converts (mainly), but instead of using the Mass or Liturgy native to them, they most commonly use either the Liturgy of St. Gregory, of St. Tikhon (which is an amended version of the Anglican liturgy), among others.
Click to expand...
Er, its not “kinda”. Western Rite Orthodoxy as Tarkan has pointed out, it an community in the Orthodox Church (I’m confused which jurisdiction, you speak about Antioch but I thought it was ROCOR or ACROD who had Western Rite, oh well…) which uses a Western Liturgy which is an adaptation from the Anglican Mass (which in turn is an adaptation of the Tridentine Mass).

Eastern Catholics use the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and for 10 times a year, the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great. Its a purely Eastern Liturgy and the faith is purely Eastern theology.

And yes, we say “Lord of Sabaoth”
 
ConstantineTG said:
Er, its not “kinda”. Western Rite Orthodoxy as Tarkan has pointed out, it an community in the Orthodox Church (I’m confused which jurisdiction, you speak about Antioch but I thought it was ROCOR or ACROD who had Western Rite, oh well…)
Click to expand...
Antioch has the Western rite as well: antiochian.org/western-rite (sorry, OT, but had to answer that).
 
TarkanAttila said:
Yes; like “Hosanna”, “Alleluia”, and many of the other funny-sounding words. Hm. I wonder why Hosanna, Alleluia, but not Sabaoth.

Either way, they look weird.
Click to expand...
I would agree. The word was kept in the Latin Mass since there was no word in Latin that carried the sense of Righteous Power that “Saboath” has in Hebrew. Sure, they could have used “EXERCITUS”, but it conveys simply military power. “Hosts” has much the same problem in English.

So I too would have preferred that we kept with “Sabaoth” in the same way we kept “Hosanna”," Alleluia" and “Amen”
 
Brendan said:
I would agree. The word was kept in the Latin Mass since there was no word in Latin that carried the sense of Righteous Power that “Saboath” has in Hebrew. Sure, they could have used “EXERCITUS”, but it conveys simply military power. “Hosts” has much the same problem in English.

So I too would have preferred that we kept with “Sabaoth” in the same way we kept “Hosanna”," Alleluia" and “Amen”
Click to expand...
Even the Greeks didn’t translate it. It came from an older Hebrew prayer
TrueLight said:
oops!
Click to expand...
Someone posted something about it here on CAF recently. I think he spelled it more like Tzavaot
TarkanAttila said:
Yes; like “Hosanna”, “Alleluia”, and many of the other funny-sounding words. Hm. I wonder why Hosanna, Alleluia, but not Sabaoth.

Either way, they look weird.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget Amin
 
From the supplement to the Sunday Liturgy that I received explaining the changes:

Scriptural Source: Isaiah 6:3
The meaning: Instead of saying “God of power and might,” we remember that God is Lord over heavenly hosts (angels) with supreme power over earthly and heavenly forces. This same power is about to change bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus.
 
To add to my previous post, I for one favor just using “Sabaoth”. If the Greeks and Latins didn’t see it fitting to translate the Hebrew, why should the English?
 
Brendan said:
The word was kept in the Latin Mass since there was no word in Latin that carried the sense of Righteous Power that “Saboath” has in Hebrew. Sure, they could have used “EXERCITUS”, but it conveys simply military power. “Hosts” has much the same problem in English.

So I too would have preferred that we kept with “Sabaoth” in the same way we kept “Hosanna”," Alleluia" and “Amen”
Click to expand...
I agree.

“Host” has a real big problem in that sometimes it can mean “Victim,” as in what is sacrificed and translated from “hostia.”

If the Latin Mass was mandated to preserve some Hebrew and some Greek in the Mass, why is the English Mass exempt?
 
Brendan said:
I would agree. The word was kept in the Latin Mass since there was no word in Latin that carried the sense of Righteous Power that “Saboath” has in Hebrew. Sure, they could have used “EXERCITUS”, but it conveys simply military power. “Hosts” has much the same problem in English.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the problem was inability to translate the nuance of the Hebrew word; rather, that that portion of the Mass comes to us from the Septuagint, which retained sabaoth, instead of the Vulgate, in which it is throughout translated exercituum, or occasionally virtutum, except where the Greek NT used it as a loan-word, and Jeremiah 11:20, where it is inexplicably retained (though cf., e.g., Jer 11:17, Jer. 11:22).
 
ConstantineTG said:
To add to my previous post, I for one favor just using “Sabaoth”. If the Greeks and Latins didn’t see it fitting to translate the Hebrew, why should the English?
Click to expand...
ProVobis said:
If the Latin Mass was mandated to preserve some Hebrew and some Greek in the Mass, why is the English Mass exempt?
Click to expand...
We’re saying the same thing here and its freaking me out! What is the world coming to?!?!?

:D:D:D:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top