Modernizing the Hail Mary

[Leonius]

I am just saying that the use of the word “seno” (breast) is not utterly ridiculous in Italian. However, it would probably be ridiculous if used in English.

While I prefer the direct translation of ventris because of the theological idea of Mary as the tabernacle. I can see the use of 'seno" because the “fiat” was not just about procreation (any woman can be a mother) but about the willful choice of being a real mom.

The angel did not say either ventris, or ventre, or womb. All of these are translations and translations must take account of the original context and the culture behind the language.

No the angel did not say it at all the Holy Spirit said it through Elizabeth.

And the Church recorded those words from the very beginning starting with the Apostle Luke writing in Greek and then later Jerome writing in Latin as womb, this is why ALL Christians have said womb from the time of the Apostles till now, and in all languages. The original scriptures say womb.

What is it about today’s Italians that requires them to say breast instead of womb? And what gives them the right to change the words of God as recorded first by St. Luke and then by St. Jerome?

 

[Cristiano]

No the angel did not say it at all the Holy Spirit said it through Elizabeth…

I was referring to Luke 1,31 “Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.” I was referring to that because you mentioned “from God himself” and the Angel was directly speaking for God.

 

[Cristiano]

…What is it about today’s Italians that requires them to say breast instead of womb? And what gives them the right to change the words of God as recorded first by St. Luke and then by St. Jerome?

Translations are not divinely inspired. The Bible is not the Torah, where even one character cannot be changed. Can you show to me that all the writings that the Church used to build the Canon do not have any departure? What I am asking is the following: Were all the copies of the Gospel of Luke matching each other word by word at the time the Bible was compiled? Honestly, I am not sure!

 

[Leonius]

I was referring to Luke 1,31 “Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.” I was referring to that because you mentioned “from God himself” and the Angel was directly speaking for God.

Thats not were womb is mentioned you need to go further on to:

“et factum est ut audivit salutationem Mariae Elisabeth exultavit infans in utero eius et repleta est Spiritu Sancto Elisabeth 42 et exclamavit voce magna et dixit benedicta tu inter mulieres et benedictus fructus ventris tui” Luke 1:41-42

“And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghostwhich means God is speaking through her) 42 And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” Luke 1:41-42

"και ανεφωνησεν κραυγη μεγαλη και ειπεν ευλογημενη συ εν γυναιξιν και ευλογημενος ο καρπος της κοιλιας σου Luke 1:42

The Greek word used been koilia which means womb, or belly, but certainly not breasts. That is what is in the original scriptures, which are the divinely inspired word of God. And it is God’s divine word upon which the Ave Maria is based.

 

[Leonius]

Translations are not divinely inspired. The Bible is not the Torah, where even one character cannot be changed. Can you show to me that all the writings that the Church used to build the Canon do not have any departure? What I am asking is the following: Were all the copies of the Gospel of Luke matching each other word by word at the time the Bible was compiled? Honestly, I am not sure!

Then have Faith.

 

[Cristiano]

Thats not were womb is mentioned you need to go further on to:

“et factum est ut audivit salutationem Mariae Elisabeth exultavit infans in utero eius et repleta est Spiritu Sancto Elisabeth 42 et exclamavit voce magna et dixit benedicta tu inter mulieres et benedictus fructus ventris tui” Luke 1:41-42

“And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghostwhich means God is speaking through her) 42 And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” Luke 1:41-42

"και ανεφωνησεν κραυγη μεγαλη και ειπεν ευλογημενη συ εν γυναιξιν και ευλογημενος ο καρπος της κοιλιας σου Luke 1:42

The Greek word used been koilia which means womb, or belly, but certainly not breasts. That is what is in the original scriptures, which are the divinely inspired word of God. And it is God’s divine word upon which the Ave Maria is based.

This is taking a whole new twist because I was looking at the NAB. But if you look at the verse I quoted in its Latin version it goes: “Ecce concipies in utero, et paries filium, et vocabis nomen ejus Jesum”

So I guess that the NAB and the Douay-Rheims Bible (Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus.) are wrong too!! How did they dare to change the word of God?

 

[Leonius]

This is taking a whole new twist because I was looking at the NAB. But if you look at the verse I quoted in its Latin version it goes: “Ecce concipies in utero, et paries filium, et vocabis nomen ejus Jesum”

So I guess that the NAB and the Douay-Rheims Bible (Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus.) are wrong too!! How did they dare to change the word of God?

How are they wrong? There is more than one word for womb in Latin, that’s all I am seeing on display here. What am I missing?

 

[Cristiano]

How are they wrong?

They are not, I was kinda of joking because both translations use the word womb to translate either utero and ventris. Theoretically they should use both the words uterus and womb.

I am not arguing with you, I am just learning something new. I never went into this kind of details between Latin, Italian and English for this particular case. It is a good exercise for me. Sometime I do it with the Vatican documents.

 

[Leonius]

Well I would still love to know the reason for the change if anyone knows, I mean if it was good enough for Italians for hundreds of years why not now?

 

[Cristiano]

Well I would still love to know the reason for the change if anyone knows, I mean if it was good enough for Italians for hundreds of years why not now?

I will try to find it out on an Italian Catholic Forum in the traditionalist thread. I am sure we will be able to find an answer. I am curious too.

Just a word of advice, if you do not like this kind of changes do not try to read the new version of the Bible the the Italian Bishops are releasing now, it will freak you out. I might be a little bit more flexible than you are in relation to the use of words and I freaked out when I read some of the passages.

 

[ac_claire]

Cristiano if you do find out, will you also post it to the Hail Mary in Italian changes the meaning of the original? thread as well?

 

[Leonius]

I will try to find it out on an Italian Catholic Forum in the traditionalist thread. I am sure we will be able to find an answer. I am curious too.

Just a word of advice, if you do not like this kind of changes do not try to read the new version of the Bible the the Italian Bishops are releasing now, it will freak you out. I might be a little bit more flexible than you are in relation to the use of words and I freaked out when I read some of the passages.

Thanks Christiano I appreciate that, both your trying to find out and your advice about the Bible lol

 

[brigid12]

Thank you so much Leonius, Christiano and Malphono for posting for me the Hail Mary in Italian, Spanish and French. I really appreciate it.

Something just occurred to me regarding the change in translation in Italian - it seems to me (and I am not in any way a scholar so may be very wrong!) that changing from ‘womb’ (or born of) to ‘breast’ (or nurtured) might be a beginning to a change in the way of seeing Jesus’ Divinity that avoids the Holy See, the Bishops and even the Nicene Creed (since the “Ave” is a personal prayer). I wonder if it is (purposely or not) a change from an understanding/knowledge of a total Transcendence combined with a total Immanence to one of only Immanence. I also wonder if this change has anything to do with the idea of the nurture/upbringing of a child by parents of opposite gender vs. upbringing of a child by “parents” of a gay lifestyle.

Boy, this really sheds light on the even small changes in Scripture! It shows that seemingly innocent changes that seem to fit secular societies’ understanding of a language in its current state, allow secular (not biblical) ideas into the Bible/devotions also.

 

[mullenpm]

JW55, no, I am not saying that the Divine Mercy Chaplet is the same as the Rosary.

I thought I made it clear in my post - the Marian priests who say the INTRODUCTORY prayers (before the Chaplet) use the more modern language.

Didn’t mean to confuse anyone.

 

[atassina]

I am still waiting for someone to establish an rational, non-emotional, basis for using thee and thy or thine in any modern prayer. Will somebody get to it please.
Thanks,
Anthony

 

[malphono]

I am still waiting for someone to establish an rational, non-emotional, basis for using thee and thy or thine in any modern prayer. Will somebody get to it please.
Thanks,
Anthony

I think you’re going to be waiting a long time. The long and short of it is, it’s a matter of tradition. Some people actually like and appreciate traditions.

Let’s say your family always had roast goose for Christmas dinner. The family all loved it and looked forward to it in that one day a year. All on her own, your sister decides to break tradition and make boiled corned beef. OK, it was tasty and everyone was hungry so they ate it. But I bet you dollars to doughnuts that at least some people at the table were disappointed. They wanted the roast goose. The way grandma did it. And her mother, and her mother …

 

[brigid12]

Atassina -

It seems to me (admittedly a semi-traditionalist) that changing any part of a prayer to modernize it will/may eventually add more and more of the secular to it - eg. ‘thee’, ‘thou’, ‘thy’, ‘thine’ ; have a slightly different meaning than ‘you’ or ‘your’ regarding formality vs. informality and in plural ‘you’ vs. singular ‘you’ as seen in some other languages - modern English doesn’t have those possibilities, as middle-English (or Aramaic) had ) And, yes, it wouldn’t bother me to have the Church teach us prayers in Aramaic, Latin or Greek (like the ‘Kyrie’ at Mass, now).
It doesn’t help to change the wording to something easier for the contemporary person, if that change in fact changes the original meaning of the prayer.

 

[atassina]

Dear brigid12:
I agree and I agree and I agree: we must never change the fundamental meaning. Once a crack appears in the window, it weakens the surrounding structure and them more cracks appear. After a time, nothing is left except cracks. However, there is a clear distinction between passion and fashion and truth and clarity. I consider thee and thine like fashions. One time they made sense, now they no longer make sense. We must stick to the Tradition and not build our house on the traditions, traditions that at one time were life giving but no longer have the same immediacy and power that they once did. CS Lewis wrote about this very issue much better than I have (no surprise).

Yes I like goose, once a year every year. I won’t change the Tradition :nope: , but I will challenge a tradition when it no longer serves the Gospel-- in my not so humble opinion.:yup:

 

[PKinsale]

I think that sometime it would probably be better. In Italian they changed the translation of the word “ventris” from “ventre” (womb) to “seno” (breast). If you can go off the tangent in Italian, then why not in English.

Wow this just seems so … biologically wrong. “fruit of thy breast”?

 

[cathguy]

Why do you worry over such petty things? Unless the person is completely changing the prayer to make it inclusive or neo-pagan, you shouldn’t worry how the Lord leads a soul in prayer.

I find changing “thee and thou” to “you and your” problematic. For me it removes an element of the sacral nature of the prayers and renders them more mundane.

Kids can understand thee and thou, and I see absolutely no reason to take beautiful prayers and “dumb them down” as it were.