This story, Essay 350, which may be my last Harvard story, may be the most incredible of all, and it is about one word, a Greek word — doulos — which means slave. It occurred in a class with Professor Henry J. Cadbury, who at that time had recently served on the committee that translated the new Revised Standard Version. From time to time he would tell us of some of the differences the committee had over the translation of certain Greek words. One was that Edgar J. Goodspeed, who himself had published a translation of the New Testament, insisted that the Greek musterion should be rendered “open secret” rather than mystery.
This would make Paul say, “God made known to me the open secret” instead of “God made known to me the mystery” (Ephesians 3:3). That is, “the mystery of Christ” was first God’s secret, but it is now an open secret. Cadbury said the committee was sympathetic with Goodspeed’s insight, but it at last voted to retain the traditional translation mystery, which is not a translation at all, but a transliteration, which is simply rendering the Greek letters into English letters, as the old King James scholars did with baptism.
Amidst some such discussion a student asked Cadbury why the RSV committee had translated doulos servant rather than slave, its obvious meaning. The professor surprised me when he replied, “We didn’t have the courage.” He went on to explain that the committee felt that the modern church would be offended by such a radical idea that Christians are to be slaves of Christ, and so they went along with the traditional translation,servant. To the credit of the ongoing committee, which was replaced over time, doulos was eventually translated slave, making Paul say “slaves of Christ” in Ephesians 6:6 instead of “servants of Christ.” But the latter committee still sometimes used servant, with a footnote that the Greek word meant slave, as in Romans 1:1, “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ.”
I was surprised that a committee of scholars, dedicated to providing the public with a faithful translation of the holy Scriptures, would allow themselves to be influenced by what the readers might think. There is a big difference between being a servant and being a slave, the latter meaning “one who gives himself wholly to another’s will,” and a slave is owned by his master. Cadbury’s committee chose to withhold clarity for pragmatic reasons. That he confessed that it was a lack of courage may have indicated regret on his part.
This story also exposes the modern church’s reluctance to accept the sub-culture nature — the radical character — of the Christian faith. We can accept being disciples of Christ and followers of Christ, but can we be slaves of Christ? To the primitive church it was not only a voluntary servitude, but a glorious liberation. As the great apostle put it, “God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you are delivered. And having been made free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness” (Romans 6:17-18). We are never so free as when in servitude to our Savior. We joyfully place our lives, our fortune, our destiny under his sovereignty.
This would make Paul say, “God made known to me the open secret” instead of “God made known to me the mystery” (Ephesians 3:3). That is, “the mystery of Christ” was first God’s secret, but it is now an open secret. Cadbury said the committee was sympathetic with Goodspeed’s insight, but it at last voted to retain the traditional translation mystery, which is not a translation at all, but a transliteration, which is simply rendering the Greek letters into English letters, as the old King James scholars did with baptism.
Amidst some such discussion a student asked Cadbury why the RSV committee had translated doulos servant rather than slave, its obvious meaning. The professor surprised me when he replied, “We didn’t have the courage.” He went on to explain that the committee felt that the modern church would be offended by such a radical idea that Christians are to be slaves of Christ, and so they went along with the traditional translation,servant. To the credit of the ongoing committee, which was replaced over time, doulos was eventually translated slave, making Paul say “slaves of Christ” in Ephesians 6:6 instead of “servants of Christ.” But the latter committee still sometimes used servant, with a footnote that the Greek word meant slave, as in Romans 1:1, “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ.”
I was surprised that a committee of scholars, dedicated to providing the public with a faithful translation of the holy Scriptures, would allow themselves to be influenced by what the readers might think. There is a big difference between being a servant and being a slave, the latter meaning “one who gives himself wholly to another’s will,” and a slave is owned by his master. Cadbury’s committee chose to withhold clarity for pragmatic reasons. That he confessed that it was a lack of courage may have indicated regret on his part.
This story also exposes the modern church’s reluctance to accept the sub-culture nature — the radical character — of the Christian faith. We can accept being disciples of Christ and followers of Christ, but can we be slaves of Christ? To the primitive church it was not only a voluntary servitude, but a glorious liberation. As the great apostle put it, “God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you are delivered. And having been made free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness” (Romans 6:17-18). We are never so free as when in servitude to our Savior. We joyfully place our lives, our fortune, our destiny under his sovereignty.
Written by Leroy Garrett
No comments:
Post a Comment