Re: Pater Noster (purely linguistically)

caeruleancentaur wrote:
>
> I agree with you in principle.  Missionaries do have problems in
> translating terms that are culturally bound.  Just a reminder,
> though, that the donkey is not mentioned in the Christmas stories of
> Matthew and Luke.  Neither are camels or oxen.  It would be very easy
> to translate the Christmas stories without mentioning donkeys.  I
> would be more worried about the espousal custom in Matthew or the
> census in Luke.  Or the manger.

I can understand the difficulty of explaining espousal customs
or angels to a different culture, but what's so hard about
explaining a manger?

On another note, a hundred years ago people wrote such
things as "The infant Jesus was laid in a manger" which I
suppose reflected the rural life of most Americans. Today
I hear many people say "The infant Jesus was born in a
manger." When I ask them what a manger is, they tell me
that it's the building in which Jesus was born. With few
Americans living on farms anymore, they've never heard
the word "manger" except in reference to the Nativity.

--Ph. D.

Reply