The formation of Christian thought is influenced greatly by Greek philosophy and the LXX. The term dikaiosune had by the 3rd Century acquired a generally Aristotelian sense, something quite close to iustitia distributiva. Aristotle's concept of dikaiosune is set within the context of the polis and has to do with the well being of teh city, hence the righteousness of God is irrelevant since they do not dwell in the city. Evidently, this is not what it was meant in the Heb. sedaqa. Although the LXX tried to be consistent with translating sedaqa with dikaiosune, it was impossible to do so in every occurance of the word. Therefore a second word was used to convey the strong soteriological sense of sedaqa, eleemosune. This pose a danger to the reader of LXX by opposing God's righteousness to His mercy, where in Heb. the same word is used. The western church depended on the Vulgate for the first 15th Century of the Christian milieu for their theological deliberation. Without access to the Heb. OT, they depended on the Lat bible for discussion on iustitia Dei and iustificare. Therefore, it is important to consider the difficulty in translating the Heb. term to Lat. Iustitia had already carried well established connotation by the 2nd century. The Ciceronian definition of iustitia as reddens unicuique quod suum est had become normative. This is quite similar to iustitia dustributiva, and the 'due' is being established through iuris consensus, and embodied in ius. This tension between the Lat. and Heb. is evident.The book that has great influence upon the Christian doctrine of jsutification is the Psalter. The Vulgate translation contains Jerome's second revision of Old Lat Psalter based upon Origen's recension of the LXX version. A second translaltion of Jerome was Psalterium iuxta hebraicam veritatem which was not very popular. The dofference between the two can be seen in Psalm 24.5 where Psalterium Gallicum has misericordiam and Psalterium iuxta hebraicam veritatem used iustitiam. Although there is considerable confusion this is reduced by teh following two factors:1. The Vulgate itself is not consistent in its translation of LXX.2. The two passages that have the greatest influence are Ps 31:1 and 71:2 where the psalmist appeal to God's righteouness to deliver him. A careful study of the passages in their context woudl be able to detect the strong sotriological sense of the owrd iustitia.(McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 9-12 )
The difficulty for the LXX translatation of hasdiq to dikaoun is two fold:
1. dikaioun, in classical usage, carries the meaning 'to punish' or 'to do justice to'. It is extremely unusal, though there are some occurances, for dikaioun to have the positive meaning of 'to right an injustice suffered' which is closer to the idea of hasdiq (to vindicate, to acquit, to declare to be in the right).Hence the LXX use of dikaioun is representative of a significant shift in its meaning to correspond ot the Heb term.
2. The positive meaning of dikaioun in LXX causes some passages in the Bible to be senseless if read with the understanding of dikaiounin the neagtive sense (eg. Is 5:22-3). Those without Heb background would find these passages perplexing. It seems, therefore, that the LXX use of dikaioun has assumed the meaing of the Heb hasdiq and quite distinct from its classical connotation. This should also mean that the postive meaning of dikaioun is familiar to Greek speaking Judaism else the LXX would have been incomprehsible at some points.This inherent difficulty reflects the difference in semantic field of the two words. A different difficult is encountered when translating hasdiq or dikaioun into Lat. Iustificare is a post-classical word and requires explanation. Augustine's expalnation of of iustificare as iustum facere is followed by latin speaking theologians, accepting -ficare as the unstressed form of facere. This point alone did not warrant the translation of dikaioun to iustificare, but has to do also with reference to the concept of 'merit'.The western church's idea of 'merit' is different from that of the Greek.
Greek --> merit is understood as a quality (adjectival), estimation, something that is external (i.e. the estimation in which he is held by others, and which cannot be treated like a quality)
Latin --> something that is deserved, worthy of something, internal to man's make-up (i.e what it is about him that has caused the estimation in which the individual is held by others)
The Greek verb has the primary sense of being considered or estimated as righteous, whereass the Latin verb denotes being righteous, the reason why one is considered rigteous by others.As we begin to study the development of the dovtrine of justification we must understand that the early theologians depended on the Latin versions of the bible, and approached the subject with a set or presuppositions that are dependent upon Latin language and culture than to Christianity itself. The translation from Heb. to Gk. to Lat. shifts teh focus thoelogically from iustitia coram Deo to iustitia coram hominibus, from an emphais and reference to God to taht of man. Hence, the discussion of the doctrine of justification in the western chruch surrounds the 'righteousness of man': its nature, process and means.The shift in the theological focus is due to the non-contioguous semantic traisiton of the Heb. to Gk. to Lat. which impacted greatly the shape of the discussion of justification in the western church.(McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 12-16)
No comments:
Post a Comment