The Pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in Christian Worship: Unanswered Questions

Recent official statements of the Catholic Church prohibit the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in the liturgy. To be sure, the use of “Yahweh” as needed in courses on the Old Testament and in scholarship generally is not thereby prohibited. יהוה is also pronounced by many (not all) Jewish scholars outside of worship as the (rare) occasion demands. The prohibition is presented as a return to earlier tradition in the official Catholic statements, and as an act of repentance by Catholic participants in Jewish-Christian dialogue. Which is it? Should other Christians follow suit?

In the language of English-speaking Christianity, “Jehova(h)” is found with some frequency in older Bible translations and hymns. More recently, “Yahweh” enjoyed a vogue and is still popular in the prayer language and in hymns of praise in some Christian settings.

It is rarely noted that a shortened version of the Tetragrammaton is pronounced in the context of Jewish worship – “Yah,” to be pronounced as such according to the Masoretic text at Exodus 15:2 and in 49 other instances (statistics according to BDB). It appears as “Yah” in NJPSV at Isaiah 12:2; 38:11 (2x); in other loci (a hypercorrection?), as “Lord.”

Yahwistic names of biblical individuals are also pronounced in Jewish worship, for example, Hizqiyahu the king of Judah, interpretable as a sentence name “Yahu is my strength” (cf. Psalm 18:2); originally, however, “YHW(H) has strengthened (the family by providing a son).”

The Catholic Church’s recommended liturgical substitute for the Tetragrammaton is the traditional one: Lord, equivalent to Adonai in Hebrew, Kyrios in Greek, and Dominus in Latin. The downside is that a personal name is replaced by an attribute which may or may not be apropos in context.

Iyov, who rejoices in this development, quotes Fritz Voll approvingly:

One could only wish that the Protestant churches would follow the example and edit the Bible translations and hymns that use Jahveh or even Jehovah as renderings of the name of Israel’s and only through Israel also the Church’s God.

Hymns like “Guide me, O thou great Jehova” are still sung with great enthusiasm in thousands of churches. Editing such ancient, wonderful hymns, loved by millions of Christians throughout generations and often translated into many other languages, would, no doubt, cause a lot of anguish. But it would be one of the acts of repentance for centuries of Christian anti-Judaism and disrespect of our Jewish relatives, and it is certainly one of the ‘sacrifices’ a new theological understanding of our relationship with Judaism demands.

The wish is understandable. It is far more likely, however, that in non-Catholic settings, the old hymns will continue to be sung as before. It is also likely that Catholic charismatic hymns which use “Yahweh” and have become part of the worship repertoire of many non-Catholic Christians will be sung as before.

This will be done based on a distinction between appearance and intent. Phrases like “Guide me, O thou great Jehova” or “Yahweh’s love will last forever” (Dan Schutte) are prima facie disrespectful of God from the point of view of post-biblical Jewish tradition, but are not disrespectful of God from the point of view of authorial intent.

In short, I cannot agree with Fritz Voll’s statement that the non-use of “Jehova(h)” and “Yahweh” [in Christian worship] is “one of the ‘sacrifices’ a new theological understanding of our relationship with Judaism demands.” To put it another way, is the removal of statements in the Talmud that are derogatory to Mary and Jesus an equivalent ‘sacrifice’ that same relationship demands? If not, why not? Let me be clear. As a Christian I would be offended if said statements were, for the sake of appearances, removed.

But perhaps I am comparing apples and oranges. Further discussion and eventual correction on this matter are welcome.

Unanswered questions in the ongoing debate:

(1)         The article in the Jewish Encyclopedia on “Jehovah” by Emil Hirsch treats it correctly as a mispronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, but exhibits no angst in the face of Gentile use of it. Is a history of Jewish offense-taking at Gentile use of Jehovah available?

(2)         Yahweh might be more problematic precisely because the Tetragrammaton was so pronounced in Greco-Roman antiquity - for example, by Samaritans in judicial oaths and by (presumably) Jews and non-Jews alike in magical incantations (go here for details), not to mention the biblical authors themselves and ancient Israel in general during First Temple and early Second Temple times. To be sure, Yahwī would have been the pronunciation in earliest times, which may have been reduced in anthroponyms to Yaw-, -Ya, or -Yahw^e, the first and the last later (through phonological change affecting the language as a whole) pronounced as Yo and Yahu, respectively. For Yahwī, compare the Amorite personal names attested at Mari, Yaḫwi-ilum, Yaḫwi-Adad (ARM 23, 86:7), and Ya(ḫ)wium (= Iaḫwi-ilum e.g. ARM 23, 448:13) [= the Akkadian name Ibašši-ilum (‘God has manifested himself’)]. Perhaps the issue is to be understood along the lines of copyright infringement. I have RC friends who seethe at the fact that there are churches with names like Santa Maria de Guadalupe Lutheran Church (ELCA). No fair: she’s ours, I hear them muttering. But is YHWH the private possession of the Jewish people? Are not Gentiles free to worship him as they see fit? Of course, the answer to the first question is “no,” to the second question, “yes,” at least in an a-confessional polity. Nevertheless the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in Christian worship is deeply offensive to (some or many) Jews. So, of course, are other things said and done in that context. Where to draw the line, if at all? And what about songs like Bono’s “Yahweh”?  I could be wrong, but I think "Yahweh" is likely to  be employed by  non-Catholic Christians in the anglosphere - with respectful intent - for the forseeable future.

For discussion and links, see Iyov, Charles Halton (and comments by Jim Getz, JP vdGiessen, Rochelle Altman, Ed Gallagher, and others), and David Hymes. 

UPDATE: Doug Chaplin weighs in here.

For Further Reading

Karel van der Toorn, “Yahweh,” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (2^nd ed.; Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter Willem van der Horst, eds; Leiden: Brill, 1999) 915-919 (bibliography!)

Comments

[Charles Halton]

Nice post.

[Justin (koavf)]

John,

There is no doubt in my mind that there are many Christians who use the divine name with respect, but there are certainly Christians who use it in an unthinking manner and in the course of a dialogue with Jews, there should be sensitivity toward the latter's non-use. There is nothing in any Christian tradition as far as I'm aware that *requires* pronunciation of the divine name. To unilaterally say that Christians must forgo its use is simply untrue, but it is a gesture of respect toward co-religionists and hopefully, to the Deity as well. I completely respect Bono's use of it in a really great song, but I will not use it, nor do I feel comfortable hearing it used in a brash manner (even when I read your post, I did not think the sounds of the divine name, but "Why aitch double-you aitch.")

As far as "Jehovah," I have never understood its use or the reverence applied to it. As a clearly un-Biblical degeneration of the divine name, I don't see why there would be any emotional investment in it other than "This is what I grew up singing," which is a completely legitimate and real thing that I simply do not share. I can't figure out why someone would have a preference for it, though.

-JAK

[JohnFH]

Hi Charles. Hats off to you for your great blogging.

Justin,

You make some excellent points. The day may come, and I pray it does, when evangelicals and Jews prioritize mutual dialogue. In that setting, what gestures by the two parts would be most welcome might come to the fore, and in that setting, an understanding might be reached on this matter among others.

[Rebecca]

As a professor of Jewish Studies who teaches a Hebrew Scriptures class every fall, I am confronted with the question of whether to pronounce the divine name in class. Basically, I try to avoid doing so, because it makes me uncomfortable - Jewish tradition holds that we are not supposed to pronounce the name as it is written, and I try to adhere to that. I do sometimes pronounce the name, however, in discussions about how it used to be pronounced and what it means. It has never occurred to me to worry about whether other people, especially Christians, should say the divine name - I figure it's up to them. It strikes me as odd that the Catholic Church has a position on this issue at all.

[JohnFH]

Rebecca,

Thanks for your comments here. Your approach, so far as I can see, is sensible and self-consistent. It is also an approach that is far from unusual among American Jewish biblical scholars.

[Bosco Peters]

Thanks for bringing this balance to the discussion.
My post about it is at
http://www.liturgy.co.nz/blog/yahweh/78

Blesssings

Bosco+
www.liturgy.co.nz

[JohnFH]

Bosco,

you have a fascinating blog. Thanks for dropping by.

[Zephyr]

John, where have you seen statements that express that this directive against pronouncing the divine name is an act of repentance by those in Jewish-Christian dialogue?

[Iyov]

Zephyr, let me answer for John.

Pope Benedict 16th mentioned this in his recent book Jesus of Nazareth.

And Fritz Voll (who is a big shot in the Canadian Conference of Christian and Jews) mentioned this explicitly in his essay that both John and I link to. Indeed, both John and I gave part of the quote in his post.

[JohnFH]

Thanks, Iyov.

[Nathan Bierma]

I'm curious about what you think of Joel Hoffman's "magic .etters" theory in his book on the history of Hebrew: 'In the Beginning' (chapter 4). I won't do it injustice by trying to summarize it; I'll just say it's interesting and seemingly plausible. Read it in full at tinyurl.com/5sxkg9

[Nathan Bierma]

(that was a typo, not a magic letter -- should be "magic letters" theory.)

(See p.46 for Hoffman's conclusion.)

[JohnFH]

Nathan,

Thanks for pointing the theory out. Nope, I don't buy it. It depends on an understanding of how a language acquires a variety of similar words that is pretty naive. The idea that a people - "the Hebrews" - might choose at some point to add heh's to a few pre-existing words is, so far as I can see, nothing more than cute speculation.