 |
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
Although the Latin termoratio dominica is of earlydate, the phrase "Lord's Prayer" does not seem to have been generally familiar inEngland before theReformation. During theMiddle Ages the "Our Father" was always said in Latin, even by the uneducated. Hence it was then most commonly known as thePater noster. The name "Lord's prayer" attaches to it not becauseJesus Christ used theprayer Himself (for to ask forgiveness ofsin would have implied the acknowledgment of guilt) but because He taught it to Hisdisciples.
Many points of interest are suggested by the history and employment of the Our Father. With regard to the English text now in use amongCatholics, we may note that this is derived not from theRheims Testament but from a version imposed uponEngland in the reign ofHenry VIII, and employed in the 1549 and 1552 editions of the"Book of Common Prayer". From this our presentCatholic text differs only in two very slight particulars: "Which art" has been modernized into "who art", and "in earth" into "on earth".
The version itself, which accords pretty closely with the translation in Tyndale'sNew Testament, no doubt owed its general acceptance to an ordinance of 1541 according to which "his Grace perceiving now the great diversity of the translations (of the Pater noster etc.) hath willed them all to be taken up, and instead of them hathcaused an uniform translation of the said Pater noster, Ave,Creed, etc. to be set forth, willing all his loving subjects to learn and use the same and straitly commanding all parsons,vicars andcurates to read and teach the same to their parishioners". As a result the version in question became universally familiar to the nation, and though the Rheims Testament, in 1581, andKing James's translators, in 1611, provided somewhat different renderings ofMatthew 6:9-13, the older form was retained for theirprayers both byProtestants andCatholics alike.
As for theprayer itself the version inSt. Luke 11:2-4, given byChrist in answer to the request of Hisdisciples, differs in some minor details from the form whichSt. Matthew (6:9-15) introduces in the middle of the Sermon on the Mount, but there is clearly no reason why these two occasions should be regarded as identical. It would be almost inevitable that ifChrist had taught thisprayer to Hisdisciples He should have repeated it more than once. It seems probable, from the form in which the Our Father appears in the "Didache", that the version inSt. Matthew was that which theChurch adopted from the beginning forliturgical purposes. Again, no great importance can be attached to the resemblances which have been traced between the petitions of the Lord's prayer and those found inprayers of Jewish origin which were current about thetime ofChrist. There is certainly no reason for treating theChristian formula as a plagiarism, for in the first place the resemblances are but partial and, secondly we have no satisfactory evidence that the Jewishprayers were really anterior indate.
Upon the interpretation of the Lord's Prayer, much has been written, despite the fact that it is so plainly simple, natural, and spontaneous, and as such preeminently adapted for popular use. In the quasi-official "Catechismus ad parochos", drawn up in 1564 in accordance with thedecrees of theCouncil of Trent, an elaborate commentary upon the Lord's Prayer is provided which forms the basis of theanalysis of the Our Father found in allCatholic catechisms. Many points worthy of notice are there emphasized, as, for example, the fact that the words "On earth as it is inHeaven" should be understood to qualify not only the petition "Thy will be done", but also the two preceding, "hallowed be Thyname" and "Thy Kingdom come". The meaning of this last petition is also very fully dealt with. The most conspicuous difficulty in the original text of the Our Father concerns the interpretation of the wordsartos epiousios which in accordance with theVulgate in St. Luke we translate "our daily bread",St. Jerome, by a strange inconsistency, changed the pre-existing wordquotidianum intosupersubstantialem inSt. Matthew but leftquotidianum in St. Luke. The opinion of modern scholars upon the point is sufficiently indicated by the fact that the Revised Version still prints "daily" in the text, but suggests in the margin "our bread for the coming day", while the American Committee wished to add "our needful bread". Lastly may be noted the generally received opinion that the rendering of the last clause should be "deliver us from the evil one", a change which justifies the use of "but" in stead of "and" and practically converts the two last clauses into one and the same petition. Thedoxology "for Thine is the Kingdom", etc., which appears in the Greektextus receptus and has been adopted in the later editions of the "Book of Common Prayer", is undoubtedly an interpolation.
In theliturgy of theChurch the Our Father holds a very conspicuous place. Some commentators haveerroneously supposed, from a passage in the writings ofSt. Gregory the Great (Ep., ix, 12), that hebelieved that the bread and wine of the Eucharist wereconsecrated inApostolic times by the recitation of the Our Father alone. But while this is probably not thetrue meaning of the passage,St. Jerome asserted (Adv. Pelag., iii, 15) that "our Lord Himself taught Hisdisciples that daily in theSacrifice of His Body they should make bold to say 'Our Father' etc."St. Gregory gave the Pater its present place in the Roman Mass immediately after the Canon and before the fraction, and it was of old thecustom that all the congregation should make answer in the words "Sed libera nos a malo". In the Greekliturgies a reader recites the Our Father aloud while thepriest and the people repeat it silently. Again in the ritual ofbaptism the recitation of the Our Father has from the earliest times been a conspicuous feature, and in theDivine Office it recurs repeatedly besides being recited both at the beginning and the end.
In manymonastic rules, it was enjoined that thelay brothers, whoknew no Latin, instead of the Divine office should say the Lord's Prayer a certain number of times (often amounting to more than a hundred)per diem. To count these repetitions they made use of pebbles orbeads strung upon a cord, and this apparatus was commonly known as a "pater-noster", a name which it retained even when such a string ofbeads was used to count, not Our Fathers, butHail Marys in reciting Our Lady's Psalter, or in other words in saying therosary.
APA citation.Thurston, H.(1910).The Lord's Prayer. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09356a.htm
MLA citation.Thurston, Herbert."The Lord's Prayer."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 9.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1910.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09356a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Tomas Hancil.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor.Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.