I Don't Know Anymore: TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

Vouthon · Jul 25, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
I think that the Catholic Church stopped using the above name out of respect for understanding of the sacredness of God's name that has come out of the Catholic Jewish dialogues, but I may be wrong about this. Anyone know?

You're correct Indigo, although the Vatican's prohibition on trying to pronounce the Divine Name was actually a restatement of our own sacred tradition as well, in addition to it's being sharpened in response to dialogue with Jews.

The ban on uttering the Tetragrammaton in worship or in biblical translations was promulgated in 2001 under Pope John Paul II in the following document:

Liturgiam authenticam

In accordance with immemorial tradition, which indeed is already evident in the above-mentioned “Septuagint” version, the name of almighty God expressed by the Hebrew tetragrammaton (YHWH) and rendered in Latin by the word Dominus, is to be rendered into any given vernacular by a word equivalent in meaning.

In 2008, a papal letter was distributed to all Bishops' conferences (PDF), in response to reports of the Name being vocalized still in certain contexts at some Masses, with a warning of the canonical penalty attached to doing so in violation of the decree. This document noted:

...in recent years the concept has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel's proper name, known as the holy or divine tetragrammaton, written with four consonants of the Hebrew alphabet in the form יהוהYHWH.
...
Avoiding pronouncing the tetragrammaton of the name of God on the part of the church has therefore its own grounds. Apart from a motive of a purely philological order, there is also that of remaining faithful to the church's tradition, from the beginning, that the sacred tetragrammaton was never pronounced in the Christian context nor translated into any of the languages into which the Bible was translated.
...
In light of what has been expounded, the following directives are to be observed:

1) In liturgical celebrations, in songs and prayers the name of God in the form of the tetragrammaton YHWH is neither to be used or pronounced.

The Jerusalem Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible were published in 1966 and 1985, respectively. They are virtually unique in their use of the "Yahweh" vocalization on print: other Catholic translations such the New American Bible and the Douey-Rheims Bible translate it to "LORD" (capitalized) in accordance with Church teaching.

Given the 2001 and 2008 decrees from the Holy See, any future editions based on the Jerusalem Bible would need to avoid using tetragrammaton in favour of "LORD".

pearl · Jul 25, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
I am wondering when the ^ above ^ took place because in the 1970's the hymm's refrain of 'Peace to Zion Yahweh's people.....' was sung in the Roman rite.

If scholars do not know the original meaning of Yahweh, if the Hebrews may well not have known that meaning, how can people today possibly claim that by using the term they are recovering or restoring something of significance?
Father Michael Gilligan: Use of Yahweh (americancatholicpress.org)

URAVIP2ME said:
Any comments about what Jesus said at John 17:6; John 17:26 ________________

17:6 I revealed your name: perhaps the name I AM;
8:24 I AM: an expression that late Jewish tradition understood as Yahweh’s own self-designation
8:58 Came to be, I AM: the Greek word used for “came to be” is the one used of all creation in the prologue, while the word used for “am” is the one reserved for the Logos.

pearl · Jul 25, 2021

Vouthon said:
Given the 2001 and 2008 decrees from the Holy See, any future editions based on the Jerusalem Bible would need to avoid using tetragrammaton in favour of "LORD".

What the decree does not explain, it was not the purpose of, is the post Vat II 'enthusiasm' to identify with a faith heritage many not only were unfamiliar with but rejected. I remember well prospective teachers had to be 'vetted', through a process of interviews!

URAVIP2ME · Jul 26, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
.................................................
John 17:6 “I have revealed you to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word.'' I'm not sure what your question is about this verse. It has nothing to do with the tetragrammaton.

I find in the Catholic Douay at John 17:6 it reads I (Jesus) have manifested ' thy name' .... ( God's name )
Check the Greek/ English Interlinear.
See also John 17:26 where in the Douay Jesus says I have made known to them thy name (God's name ) and will make it known.
Again, please check the Greek/English Interlinear for those two verses.
I am wondering which translation you are using _____________

URAVIP2ME · Jul 26, 2021

pearl said:
17:6 I revealed your name: perhaps the name I AM;
8:24 I AM: an expression that late Jewish tradition understood as Yahweh’s own self-designation
8:58 Came to be, I AM: the Greek word used for “came to be” is the one used of all creation in the prologue, while the word used for “am” is the one reserved for the Logos.

I AM is a Not a personal name. I AM is Not the Tetragrammaton YHWH

IndigoChild5559 · Jul 26, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
I find in the Catholic Douay at John 17:6 it reads I (Jesus) have manifested ' thy name' .... ( God's name )
Check the Greek/ English Interlinear.
See also John 17:26 where in the Douay Jesus says I have made known to them thy name (God's name ) and will make it known.
Again, please check the Greek/English Interlinear for those two verses.
I am wondering which translation you are using _____________

In no translation that I've been able to find does John 17:26 use the tetragrammaton, God's name. Indeed this name of God is not used in ANY of the New Testament. It is easy enough to go to Biblegateway.com and search for words using a whole shlew of different translations.

pearl · Jul 27, 2021

pearl said:
17:6 I revealed your name: perhaps the name I AM;

URAVIP2ME said:
I AM is a Not a personal name. I AM is Not the Tetragrammaton YHWH

As stated it is a possible interpretation.
I found this quite interesting, maybe IndigoChild would clarify.

URAVIP2ME · Jul 27, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
In no translation that I've been able to find does John 17:26 use the tetragrammaton, God's name. Indeed this name of God is not used in ANY of the New Testament. It is easy enough to go to Biblegateway.com and search for words using a whole shlew of different translations.

Jesus said, Our Father which art in Heaven hallowed (held sacred, holy, sanctified) be thy (His) NAME.
Whose name does Jesus make known according to John 17:26; John 17:6; John 17:11-12 but his God's name.
At Psalms 110 there are two (2) Lord's mentioned. ( Douay Psalm 109 )
The one Lord is speaking to the other Lord.
The Tetragrammaton is only applied to the first Lord.
Where is the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus seen 'standing' according to Acts of the Apostles 7:55-56_______
And where is Jesus found 'sitting' according to Hebrews 10:12-13 ______________
How many separate thrones does Jesus have according to Revelation 3:21 _____
How may separate thrones does his Father have according to Revelation 3:21 _____

URAVIP2ME · Jul 27, 2021

Vouthon said:
Given the 2001 and 2008 decrees from the Holy See, any future editions based on the Jerusalem Bible would need to avoid using tetragrammaton in favour of "LORD".

If any future editions to avoid the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) then are Abraham's words changed/ avoided at Genesis 12:8; Genesis 21:33; Genesis 22:14; Genesis 26:25 A ____________

IndigoChild5559 · Jul 27, 2021

pearl said:
As stated it is a possible interpretation.
I found this quite interesting, maybe IndigoChild would clarify.

He is correct. I am that I am ( אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎, ’ehyeh ’ăšer ’ehyeh), is an entirely different word than the tetragrammaton.

IndigoChild5559 · Jul 27, 2021

URAVIP2ME said:
Jesus said, Our Father which art in Heaven hallowed (held sacred, holy, sanctified) be thy (His) NAME.
Whose name does Jesus make known according to John 17:26; John 17:6; John 17:11-12 but his God's name.
At Psalms 110 there are two (2) Lord's mentioned. ( Douay Psalm 109 )
The one Lord is speaking to the other Lord.
The Tetragrammaton is only applied to the first Lord.
Where is the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus seen 'standing' according to Acts of the Apostles 7:55-56_______
And where is Jesus found 'sitting' according to Hebrews 10:12-13 ______________
How many separate thrones does Jesus have according to Revelation 3:21 _____
How may separate thrones does his Father have according to Revelation 3:21 _____

The name is the tetragrammaton, but it is not used in any of the gospels, or indeed in teh New Testament. The pronunciation of the name had not yet been lost in Jesus' day. I would assume that he would have as much knowledge of what it was as any other Jew.

Psalm is not messianic. LORD refers to the tetragrammaton, and lord refers to David.

BTW, when you reference something, you should quote it. It is not up to your reader to do this work for you.

I in particular, am not really interested in looking things up in the New Testament, since I do not consider it an authoritative text.

My only point here in this debate is to say that Jesus makes allusions to the name, but never once pronounces it. At least, not in the gospels. This would make sense, given the extreme reluctance of Jews to take God's name in vain -- it would never have been said aloud in a casual manner.

pearl · Jul 28, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
He is correct. I am that I am ( אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎, ’ehyeh ’ăšer ’ehyeh), is an entirely different word than the tetragrammaton.

When I asked for your input I neglected to include what is was I found interesting.

באל שדי: הבטחתים הבטחות ובכולן אמרתי להם אני אל שדי:

but [with] My name YHWH, I did not become known to them: It is not written here לֹא הוֹדַעְתִּי, “but My Name YHWH I did not make known to them,” but לֹא נוֹדַעְתִּי, “I did not become known.” [I.e.,] I was not recognized by them with My attribute of keeping faith, by dint of which My name is called YHWH, [which means that I am] faithful to verify My words, for I made promises to them, but I did not fulfill [them while they were alive].

Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 6 (Parshah Va'eira) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible (chabad.org)

IndigoChild5559 · Jul 28, 2021

pearl said:
When I asked for your input I neglected to include what is was I found interesting.

באל שדי: הבטחתים הבטחות ובכולן אמרתי להם אני אל שדי:

but [with] My name YHWH, I did not become known to them: It is not written here לֹא הוֹדַעְתִּי, “but My Name YHWH I did not make known to them,” but לֹא נוֹדַעְתִּי, “I did not become known.” [I.e.,] I was not recognized by them with My attribute of keeping faith, by dint of which My name is called YHWH, [which means that I am] faithful to verify My words, for I made promises to them, but I did not fulfill [them while they were alive].

Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 6 (Parshah Va'eira) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible (chabad.org)

Like I said, the hebrew words for I am that I am are quite different from the tetragrammaton.

pearl · Aug 1, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
Like I said, the hebrew words for I am that I am are quite different from the tetragrammaton.

Yet can you understand the confusion at any attempt to translate that which does not lend itself to translating the words, but the meaning, the intent?

It thus becomes possible to determine with a fair degree of certainty the historical pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, the results agreeing with the statement of Ex. iii. 14, in which Yhwh terms Himself "I will be," a phrase which is immediately preceded by the fuller term "I will be that I will be," or, as in the English versions, "I am" and "I am that I am." The name is accordingly derived from the root (= ), and is regarded as an imperfect. This passage is decisive for the pronunciation "Yahweh"; for the etymology was undoubtedly based on the known word. The oldest exegetes, such as Onḳelos, and the Targumim of Jerusalem and pseudo-Jonathan regard "Ehyeh" and "Ehyeh asher Ehyeh" as the name of the Divinity, and accept the etymology of "hayah" = "to be" (comp. Samuel b. Meïr, commentary on Ex. iii. 14). Modern critics, some of whom, after the lapse of centuries, correct the Hebrew texts without regard to the entire change of point of view and mode of thought, are dissatisfied with this etymology; and their various hypotheses have resulted in offering the following definitions: (1) he who calls into being, or he who gives promises; (2) the creator of life; (3) he who makes events, or history; (4) the falling one, the feller, i.e., the stormgod who hurls the lightning; (5) he who sends down the rain (W. R. Smith, "The Old Testament," p. 123); (6) the hurler; (7) the destroyer; (8) the breather, the weather-god (Wellhausen). All these meanings are obtained by doing violence to the Hebrew text (Herzog-Hauck, "Real-Encyc." viii. 536 et seq.).
TETRAGRAMMATON - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Or is this not a reliable source?

Brickjectivity · Aug 1, 2021

Musing Bassist said:
...I was born in '89 and grew up attending Sunday Mass. I knew nothing but the Novus Ordo as it is typically experienced in the vast majority of Australian parishes. And the experience was banal for the most part. I remember one incident when the homily was replaced by a performance of 'interpretive dance' by a troop of women with ribbons. And while that was an isolated incident the awful, dated 'hymns' ubiquitous in the Church today were not. Just by mentioning those hymns I now have the awful and arguably blasphemous "This Is What Yahweh Asks of You" stuck in my head.

As young man entering his teens what impression of Christianity do you think I had when my liturgical experience was defined by felt banners, tambourines and the ever dreary "One Bread, One Body"?...

I saw one one of these services. I assumed it was influenced by the charismatic evangelical worship style that filled the Christian radio stations or was perhaps an ecumenical experiment.

This has been a very interesting and valuable thread, so I appreciate your starting it.

I'm not a member of any catholic organization and never have been.

IndigoChild5559 · Aug 1, 2021

pearl said:
Yet can you understand the confusion at any attempt to translate that which does not lend itself to translating the words, but the meaning, the intent?

It thus becomes possible to determine with a fair degree of certainty the historical pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, the results agreeing with the statement of Ex. iii. 14, in which Yhwh terms Himself "I will be," a phrase which is immediately preceded by the fuller term "I will be that I will be," or, as in the English versions, "I am" and "I am that I am." The name is accordingly derived from the root (= ), and is regarded as an imperfect. This passage is decisive for the pronunciation "Yahweh"; for the etymology was undoubtedly based on the known word. The oldest exegetes, such as Onḳelos, and the Targumim of Jerusalem and pseudo-Jonathan regard "Ehyeh" and "Ehyeh asher Ehyeh" as the name of the Divinity, and accept the etymology of "hayah" = "to be" (comp. Samuel b. Meïr, commentary on Ex. iii. 14). Modern critics, some of whom, after the lapse of centuries, correct the Hebrew texts without regard to the entire change of point of view and mode of thought, are dissatisfied with this etymology; and their various hypotheses have resulted in offering the following definitions: (1) he who calls into being, or he who gives promises; (2) the creator of life; (3) he who makes events, or history; (4) the falling one, the feller, i.e., the stormgod who hurls the lightning; (5) he who sends down the rain (W. R. Smith, "The Old Testament," p. 123); (6) the hurler; (7) the destroyer; (8) the breather, the weather-god (Wellhausen). All these meanings are obtained by doing violence to the Hebrew text (Herzog-Hauck, "Real-Encyc." viii. 536 et seq.).
TETRAGRAMMATON - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Or is this not a reliable source?

There are some scholars who believe that the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton is Yahwey. Others disagree. But the point is that these are only educated guesses. We truly don't know how to pronounce it -- the knowledge was lost millenia ago. This entry that you quote above is the opinion of some of the scholars, but is still only an educated guess. Even your quote notes that modern critics disagree.

Brickjectivity · Aug 1, 2021

They forgot. That is literally the hardest thing anyone has ever asked me to believe. Now maybe on purpose they lost the info and buried it in a chest somewhere, but they didn't just forget about it.

IndigoChild5559 · Aug 1, 2021

Brickjectivity said:
They forgot. That is literally the hardest thing anyone has ever asked me to believe. Now maybe on purpose they lost the info and buried it in a chest somewhere, but they didn't just forget about it.

If you knew more, it would be more believable to you. This is not my area of expertise, so you may want to research what I'm saying on your own, but here it is as I have learned it.

As time went on, Jews became more concerned with the casual use of the tetragrammaton breaking the law against taking God's name in vain. Rather than use it in conversation, they used adonai (lord). When reading from the scrolls, when the tetragrammaton arose, the reader would not pronounce it, but substitute adonai for it. It finally reached a point where the ONLY time the divine name was used was on Yom Kippur by the High Priest. The problem is, the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, so there was no longer a once a year holy day where everyone heard the name. For a while, the knowledge was passed down orally. But this was inconsistent. There came a point when there simply wasn't anyone left alive who still knew what the correct pronunciation was.

Brickjectivity · Aug 1, 2021

IndigoChild5559 said:
If you knew more, it would be more believable to you. This is not my area of expertise, so you may want to research what I'm saying on your own, but here it is as I have learned it.

As time went on, Jews became more concerned with the casual use of the tetragrammaton breaking the law against taking God's name in vain. Rather than use it in conversation, they used adonai (lord). When reading from the scrolls, when the tetragrammaton arose, the reader would not pronounce it, but substitute adonai for it. It finally reached a point where the ONLY time the divine name was used was on Yom Kippur by the High Priest. The problem is, the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, so there was no longer a once a year holy day where everyone heard the name. For a while, the knowledge was passed down orally. But this was inconsistent. There came a point when there simply wasn't anyone left alive who still knew what the correct pronunciation was.

The temple was destroyed in A.D. 70, however there were still people alive who could have restarted priestly duties. They would have known the pronunciation assuming that all is as we think it is. It would have been important assuming they thought it was important and assuming they hoped that one day the temple would again appear. So...if the pronunciation truly was that important then in my heart they would have preserved the info.

I think it matters not, and if your priests do reopen the temple somewhere, be it on the original site or some other site, I think they can make it work just by using Adonai.

There, you can take my word for it. I'm sure you consider mine the final word, no?

IndigoChild5559 · Aug 1, 2021

Brickjectivity said:
The temple was destroyed in A.D. 70, however there were still people alive who could have restarted priestly duties. They would have known the pronunciation assuming that all is as we think it is. It would have been important assuming they thought it was important and assuming they hoped that one day the temple would again appear. So...if the pronunciation truly was that important then in my heart they would have preserved the info.

I think it matters not, and if your priests do reopen the temple somewhere, be it on the original site or some other site, I think they can make it work just by using Adonai. There, you can take my word for it. I'm sure you consider mine the final word, no?

I think the problem was that the divine name was TOO important. By limiting its pronouncement to the High Priest on Yom Kippur, the stage was set for forgetting it once the temple was no more.

I Don't Know Anymore: TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Well-Known Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Well-Known Member

wind and rain touch not this brain

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

wind and rain touch not this brain

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

wind and rain touch not this brain

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.