The Use of Yahweh

  • Thread starter Thread starter poche
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

poche

Guest
I understand that a few years ago the Vatican prohibited the use of Yahweh in the liturgy. Why is it that Societas Laudis uses that name in the Liturgy of the Hours? On week one Saturday they use a Latin rendition of the holy name.
Can someone explain why they do this?

This is the text that I am referring to;

Dóminus quasi vir pugnátor; Iahveh nomen eius! * Currus pharaónis et exércitum eius proiécit in mare.

societaslaudis.org/?date=20160924&mois=09&an=2016
 
poche said:
I understand that a few years ago the Vatican prohibited the use of Yahweh in the liturgy. Why is it that Societas Laudis uses that name in the Liturgy of the Hours? On week one Saturday they use a Latin rendition of the holy name.
Can someone explain why they do this?

This is the text that I am referring to;

Dóminus quasi vir pugnátor; † Iahveh nomen eius! * Currus pharaónis et exércitum eius proiécit in mare.

societaslaudis.org/?date=20160924&mois=09&an=2016
Click to expand...
I suggest you contact them directly. I don’t really know what you expect CAF posters to tell you about this. I think inquiring directly with the group that produced the document would get you better results.
 
I suspect it is because it is using the Liturgy of the Hours version that was promulgated in 1985 (Liturgia Horarum, editio typica altera). The Latin text would have come from the Nova Vulgate available at that time. This would have been the edition published in 1979 where the Tetragrammaton had not yet been replaced. The Nova Vulgate did not replace it with *Dominus *until 1986, a year after that edition of the Liturgy of the Hours was promulgated. I do not have a copy of the Latin version promulgated in 2000 to see if the most recent addition uses *Dominus.
*
 
YHVH is a very poor concept of God. Besides the concept of monotheism the concept of God in Judaism before Christ was very deficient.

Only Christ revealed the perfect concept of God. And Christ did not used the concept of YHVH.

But Judaism was very rich in the concept of human souls. The Jewish concept of souls was almost entirely embraced by Christianity.
 
LiamQ said:
Hey?

Isn’t YHWH simply God’s name?
Click to expand...
Short explanation: At the burning bush Moses asked God what His Name was. God answered in Hebrew that His Name is " 'Ehyeh 'asher 'Ehyeh," “I am that I am.” (The initial apostrophe stands for the consonant known as the glottal stop, which is the prefix for first person singular in Hebrew and Arabic, and maybe other Semitic verbs as well; I don’t know at this time.) God went on to say, “Tell them that My Name is ‘I am’ ('Ehyeh).” Apparently when Moses reported back to the Hebrews in Egypt, he changed the word from 'Ehyeh (which could have been confusing) to YHWH. Note that the two h’s remain; they are the first and third consonants of the Hebrew verb “to be.” The middle consonant is variable (we don’t want a discourse on Semitic hollow verbs), and the initial yod is the prefix for 3rd person masculine singular. So Yahweh = “He is.”

This was the name by which the Israelites, speaking Hebrew, referred to God until they switched to the euphemism Adonai (literally, “my Lords”) after the Babylonian captivity. The controversy surrounding the spoken use of YHWH is concerned with the reason why the Jews made that change, which was that they feared that they were mispronouncing it, and therefore “taking it in vain.” Therefore the actual pronunciation was lost; “Yahweh” is the best guess by the most knowledgeable experts, and it’s not "yaa-way; the h’s are part of the verb stem and must be pronounced.

Circling back to the question above, Ehyeh 'asher 'Ehyeh is God’s Name as revealed to a speaker of the Hebrew language. But the Name is not a set sequence of sounds; rather, it is a concept: “I am that I am,” and to properly express that Name, it needs to be spoken or thought in the language of whatever person is using it – “Ich werde sein, der ich sein werde” in German, “Я есмь Сущий” in Russian, “Yo-Soy” in Spanish, etc.

I have thought that the French version of the Jerusalem Bible handled it best, especially when it came to that troublesome name “Yahweh.” Instead of using it letter for letter, as the 1966 English JB does, or using “the LORD,” the translation of the word “Adonai,” as most English translations do, the French version translates “YHWH” al “l’Eternel”, “the Eternal One.” That is the real name of God.

And that is my short explanation. You don’t want to see my long explanation 😛
 
My understanding of the change is that is to be united with the people of the Jewish faith, simply stated. The word Yahweh is forbidden to be uttered in a Temple. Even all songs that were written for Catholic worship had to be changed. A good example is Schutte’s “You are Near.” It started with “Yahweh, I know you are near…” It has been changed to “O Lord, I know you are near…” Whatever documents that are used in our Church for prayer that use the word Yahweh should be changed; they are too old.
 
rondirect said:
My understanding of the change is that is to be united with the people of the Jewish faith, simply stated. The word Yahweh is forbidden to be uttered in a Temple. Even all songs that were written for Catholic worship had to be changed. A good example is Schutte’s “You are Near.” It started with “Yahweh, I know you are near…” It has been changed to “O Lord, I know you are near…” Whatever documents that are used in our Church for prayer that use the word Yahweh should be changed; they are too old.
Click to expand...
This is correct; the use of YHWH in any pronunciation has been removed from Catholic liturgy. However, its use in private devotions is not prohibited.

One interesting side note – during my Protestant days I had some contact with Messianic Jews, particularly Jews for Jesus, and their talented musical arm the Liberated Wailing Wall. I don’t think I have ever heard them use the Name in any of their music, while many Protestant Christians were using it. I could be wrong, and I will accept correction.
 
DaveBj said:
This is correct; the use of YHWH in any pronunciation has been removed from Catholic liturgy. However, its use in private devotions is not prohibited.

One interesting side note – during my Protestant days I had some contact with Messianic Jews, particularly Jews for Jesus, and their talented musical arm the Liberated Wailing Wall. I don’t think I have ever heard them use the Name in any of their music, while many Protestant Christians were using it. I could be wrong, and I will accept correction.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. I can understand the public liturgy and private devotions. The change as I know it is for us Catholics alone, and I think many Protestant churches are still singing Yahweh. Not too sure though.
 
rondirect said:
Thanks for the clarification. I can understand the public liturgy and private devotions. The change as I know it is for us Catholics alone, and I think many Protestant churches are still singing Yahweh. Not too sure though.
Click to expand...
That is correct. I won’t post any links here, but anyone who wants examples – just search on “Yahweh” in YouTube.
 
Usige said:
I suspect it is because it is using the Liturgy of the Hours version that was promulgated in 1985 (Liturgia Horarum, editio typica altera). The Latin text would have come from the Nova Vulgate available at that time. This would have been the edition published in 1979 where the Tetragrammaton had not yet been replaced. The Nova Vulgate did not replace it with *Dominus *until 1986, a year after that edition of the Liturgy of the Hours was promulgated. I do not have a copy of the Latin version promulgated in 2000 to see if the most recent addition uses *Dominus.
*
Click to expand...
I have the 2000 Editio Typica Altera in Latin and it still uses Yahweh or rather Iahveh. Example the OT canticle for Lauds on Saturday from Exodus 15, 3d verse:

Dominus quasi vir pugnator
Iahveh nomen eius!

I have some of the older liturgical choir books of our abbey as they were put up for sale when the new choir books were prepared, and the monk that possessed the Lauds booklet crossed out Iahveh for this canticle and replaced it with Dominus. In the new edition of the choir books (produced in-house) it is changed to Dominus.

Evidently the memo from the Vatican to the publishers of Liturgia Horarum took longer than 4 years to arrive…
 
The value of all this was to bridge the two religions together; to “get along” with our Jewish sisters and brothers. Interesting note: a friend of mine is a local Rabbi of his Temple (actually 1/2 mile from our church). When I heard of this change, I went to the Temple and told him. He had no idea this had come to be even though he is very knowledgeable and up-to-date on all things religious, Jewish or not. He, at first, thought I was joking; however, he was very much pleased with this decision even though he thought that it was not necessary as he shrugged his shoulders!
 
Jomann said:
YHVH is a very poor concept of God. Besides the concept of monotheism the concept of God in Judaism before Christ was very deficient.

Only Christ revealed the perfect concept of God. And Christ did not used the concept of YHVH.

But Judaism was very rich in the concept of human souls. The Jewish concept of souls was almost entirely embraced by Christianity.
Click to expand...
Actually I think it is a very good concept of God. He is telling Moses that He is the God who is. So that when the Pharaoh asked him, “Which god were you talking to?” he could answer, “the real God who is.”
 
1ke said:
I suggest you contact them directly. I don’t really know what you expect CAF posters to tell you about this. I think inquiring directly with the group that produced the document would get you better results.
Click to expand...
I have asked around and this is the first place that has given any kind of an answer that makes sense.
 
poche said:
Actually I think it is a very good concept of God. He is telling Moses that He is the God who is. So that when the Pharaoh asked him, “Which god were you talking to?” he could answer, “the real God who is.”
Click to expand...
Yes the direct meaning of the word YHVH is very good. Jesus itself used it to describe himself.

But I was talking about the general idea about YHVH.

Remember that Jews started out as a polytheistic religion. YHVH was first conceived as a minor god, a god of war.

The great development in Judaism is the development of monotheism. Egyptians had tried to develop the monotheism but failed.

Jews for some reason decided to elevate specifically YHVH as the Supreme God and then a war against the worship of others gods in Israel begun.

The entire narrative of the Old Testament is about the struggle to establish YHVH as the Only and Supreme God.

In this process the development of the concept of God was very restricted to the attributes of a god of war in YHVH.

YHVH is not a Trinity and is not a person from a Trinity.

YHVH can be understood as the symbol of monotheism before Christ. No other religion before Christ was so adamant about monotheism. This happened as a preparation for the teachings of Jesus about God. Monotheism was an essential prerequisite for people to even understand Christ.

The Old Testament can only make sense for Christians if read with the Light of Christ. The horrendous genocides and wars in the OT is to be read as a spiritual struggle Christians face with sin and Satan.

I wonder why Jews chose YHVH and not EL.

EL is a much better concept of God. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never knew about YHVH.
 
DaveBj said:
Short explanation: At the burning bush Moses asked God what His Name was. God answered in Hebrew that His Name is " 'Ehyeh 'asher 'Ehyeh," “I am that I am.” (The initial apostrophe stands for the consonant known as the glottal stop, which is the prefix for first person singular in Hebrew and Arabic, and maybe other Semitic verbs as well; I don’t know at this time.) God went on to say, “Tell them that My Name is ‘I am’ ('Ehyeh).” Apparently when Moses reported back to the Hebrews in Egypt, he changed the word from 'Ehyeh (which could have been confusing) to YHWH. Note that the two h’s remain; they are the first and third consonants of the Hebrew verb “to be.” The middle consonant is variable (we don’t want a discourse on Semitic hollow verbs), and the initial yod is the prefix for 3rd person masculine singular. So Yahweh = “He is.”

This was the name by which the Israelites, speaking Hebrew, referred to God until they switched to the euphemism Adonai (literally, “my Lords”) after the Babylonian captivity. The controversy surrounding the spoken use of YHWH is concerned with the reason why the Jews made that change, which was that they feared that they were mispronouncing it, and therefore “taking it in vain.” Therefore the actual pronunciation was lost; “Yahweh” is the best guess by the most knowledgeable experts, and it’s not "yaa-way; the h’s are part of the verb stem and must be pronounced.

Circling back to the question above, Ehyeh 'asher 'Ehyeh is God’s Name as revealed to a speaker of the Hebrew language. But the Name is not a set sequence of sounds; rather, it is a concept: “I am that I am,” and to properly express that Name, it needs to be spoken or thought in the language of whatever person is using it – “Ich werde sein, der ich sein werde” in German, “Я есмь Сущий” in Russian, “Yo-Soy” in Spanish, etc.

I have thought that the French version of the Jerusalem Bible handled it best, especially when it came to that troublesome name “Yahweh.” Instead of using it letter for letter, as the 1966 English JB does, or using “the LORD,” the translation of the word “Adonai,” as most English translations do, the French version translates “YHWH” al “l’Eternel”, “the Eternal One.” That is the real name of God.

And that is my short explanation. You don’t want to see my long explanation 😛
Click to expand...
There will be a written test on Friday.
 
Usige said:
I suspect it is because it is using the Liturgy of the Hours version that was promulgated in 1985 (Liturgia Horarum, editio typica altera). The Latin text would have come from the Nova Vulgate available at that time. This would have been the edition published in 1979 where the Tetragrammaton had not yet been replaced. The Nova Vulgate did not replace it with *Dominus *until 1986, a year after that edition of the Liturgy of the Hours was promulgated. I do not have a copy of the Latin version promulgated in 2000 to see if the most recent addition uses *Dominus.
*
Click to expand...
Does this Nova Vulgata use the name Yahweh more often than that? Is this usage of the name of God in this way based on an earlier Latin version or is there some other reason?
 
poche said:
Does this Nova Vulgata use the name Yahweh more often than that? Is this usage of the name of God in this way based on an earlier Latin version or is there some other reason?
Click to expand...
The older version used the Latinized version in 3 parts of Exodus if I remember correctly. I don’t know why it was retained in those 3 instances other than they we naming God or an altar of God rather than speaking about Him, but that is a complete guess.

As far as I know the current edition of the Nova Vulgata uses Dominus in all instances. For instance the part you listed earlier from Exodus 15:3-4 now reads:
Dominus quasi vir pugnator; Dominus nomen eius! Currus pharaonis et exercitum eius proiecit in mare;
I did a quick check of the current Nova Vulgata available on the Vatican website and did not find the transliteration of the tetragrammaton in any places such as the Pslams or the Book of Jeremiah where it occurs most often in the Masoretic Text. As I understand it, the Septuagint always used the Greek word, kyrios, in the place of the tetragrammaton. It has only been since the 16th century when Christian Bibles were being re-translated from Hebrew sources that the practice was abandoned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top