Understanding the Translational Tragedy: Ekklesia to Church
- Laldanmawia
Introduction:
Words have been
translated and developed to meet the understanding of the people of other
lingual groups. For many times words of some languages do not have equivalent
quality to others; in this case the meaning of its nearest has been searched
and used. At the same time some translations of the words have been found inconvenient
when seeing from various angles. The same thing happened to the word Ekklesia;
that the translation of this very word into ‘church’ does not really bring out
the meaning of what it actually says! The church is found not inclusive enough
when it goes on with the kyriarchal form where men are dominating it. Then in this
paper we present about how the translation of Ekklesia to church becomes
tragedy, particularly for the women learners.
1. Origin of the word
‘church’:
The origin of the church rests entirely in God: God the
Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit and is the church of God. The New Testament
refers to the Church as “the church of the living God’ (I Timothy 3:15). Jesus
Christ speaks of the church as “my church” (Matthew 16:18).[1]
Although the church is made up of many people and human composition but the
origin is not from human but from God. The word church does not occur in the
Old Testament but it can be seen as they are actively devoted to the worship of
God. The church is not founded by Christ but founded on him, the church is a
community of those who have become involved in the cause of Jesus Christ and
who witness to it as hope for all peoples of the world.[2]
The church then in origin is entirely of God, human neither planned it, nor
founded it, nor builds it, however much human may and must be a part of it.
The word ‘church’ came into existence in the Bible in the
Middle age. The 1395 Wycliffe
translation used the word “church” (chirche). But, the 1525 Tyndale
version did not use it. Tyndale translated ekklêsia as “congregacion”.
However he used the word “church” two times, in Acts 14:13 and 19:37 which both
refer to buildings connected to idol-worship.[3] Now
NRSV uses temple for these words. The word ‘church’ comes via the old English chirche,
which was in turn come from the Old Greek kuriakê oikia which meant “the
Lord’s house”.[4]
The church was translated
from the Greek word ‘ekklesia’ which means an ‘assembly of people’ or a
‘congregation’. Therefore it can also refer to as the people of Israel chosen
by God to carry forward His purposes and promises in the world.[5] The English Word ‘church’ is uncertain and
unspecific meaning and as it takes over the name ekklesia from the people of
the Old Testament it is also called ekklesia of God. The church can be defined
as a community of those who believe in Jesus Christ. The church is a new
reality which our Lord brings into being.[6]
The meaning of the word church can used in different aspects: (i) it means for
the building in which people meet for worship. (ii) It also refers to the whole company of
Christ’s people. (iii) It can be refers to the whole company on earth.[7]
2. The privileging of
the kyriarchal/hierarchical form of the word church:
The term hierarchy, meaning ‘the rule of Bishops’ relate to
a ranking system with God at the top. While the ranking meaning obscures the
more fundamental pattern of the organizing hierarchy, there is a pinnacle – a
top element, root, whole source – in both type of ‘Kyriarchy’ (ranking and
organizing). Kyriarchy is a word taken from the Greek word Kurios, which
means ‘Lord’ and Arche meaning dominion. Sovereignty is a social system
or set of connecting a social system built around domination, oppression and
submission. Thus we can combine and simply understand that the privileging
within the church through domination and subordination either in term of race
or sex-gender.[8]
Accordingly as mentioned above, the translation of Ekklesia
is misleading and is being brought into privileging for the elite male rather
than female. It is usually understood that in the discipleship of equal, women
and men have equal status, dignity and right as image of the Divine. However
these are still in the name sake even today not only in the society and family,
but also in the church. Church is best rendered as “democratic assembly of full
citizen. However, the translation processed which transformed church (Ekklesia
/ democratic Assembly) into Kyriak/church indicate a historical development
that has privileged the kyriarchal/hierarchical form of the church over that of
a democratic congress or discipleship of equals. Therefore, the same word –
“Church” in English entails two contradictory meanings; one derived from the
patri – kyriarchal household in antiquity which was governed by the
Lord/master/husband/father of house to whom freeborn women, freeborn dependent,
women and men were subordinated. The other meaning is ekklesia understood as
the equality of members in term of citizenship and friendship.[9]
Then the first meaning is given privilege which is kyriarchal and hierarchical
form.
For instance; although in the
theory western democracy has promised freedom and equality to all its citizens,
in practice it has realized equality only in kyriarchal ways that have
restricted leadership for a long time to elite male citizens only.[10]
3. Translation and
the tragic lose of the radical democratic meaning of the word ekklesia:
It is evident that the translation of the Greek word ekklesia as church does not really bring
out what its actual meaning. Ekklesia is best rendered as democratic assembly,
gathering or congress of full citizens.[11] In the democratic assembly,
freedom and equality are to be provided to all its citizens. Restriction of the
weaker sections from equal participating in the society must not be seen.
However the democratic meanings of things are being exploited for many reasons.
Democratic government could not really serve its citizens equally. There is
always a point where we can find incompleteness. Even the word Ekklesia of its
radical democratic meaning is all about gathering, sharing and participating
equally, but it loses its strength. It is a tragic lose that in the meaning of ekklesia,
the patriarchal and hierarchal ‘church’ is being developed; and this is because
of the translational process.
In the Assembly of God
(ekklesia), everyone participates and is given equal right and opportunity. No
woman is treated differently; but in the church (ekklesia) differences are
there. It lost its radical democratic meaning and found kyriarchal meaning. It
is a tragic loss for the people who cry for the equality. And it is all about
happening because of its translational mistakes.
4. Entry of the
hierarchical form and praxes of empire (kyrierche) in the early Christian
ekklesia as it entered into the Roman world:
The
formation of hierarchy was basically led by implementing the existing
household-codes in Greco-Roman society into the Christian church. Andrew T. Lincoln explains it in the
following way.
The early Christian codes, despite their distinctive
Christian motivations, turn out in practice to be in line with the variety
within the consistent patriarchal pattern throughout Greco-Roman society, where
subordination of wives to husbands, children to parents, and slaves to masters
was the overarching norm, who notes some differences in the legal status of women
under Greek, Roman, and Jewish law but concludes that in both Greece and Rome
‘the household was conceived as a patriarchal institution, whose male head…
exercised sweeping, although not entirely unrestricted authority over the other members’ and that ‘from the social structure
alone, one would have a difficult time distinguishing pagan from Jewish
households in the cities of Hellenistic-Roman Diaspora.’[12]
They
reflect a stage in which Christians were conscious of criticisms of subverting
society and of the need to adjust to living in the Greco-Roman world without
unnecessarily disrupting the status quo.
Jerome
represents a strong hierarchical structure in the church, although he sometimes
mingles the office of presbyters and bishops.
From him we may identify four levels of hierarchy in early church, a
bishop was chosen from among the presbyters, and archdeacon chosen among
deacons.[13] All of them he identified with
the priest. Insisting on their authority, he represents a twofold argument.
First, they (bishop, presbyters and deacons) are representatives of the
parallel with Aaron, his sons and the Levites. Second, they "all alike are
successors of the apostles."
On the
basis of this developed research through the writings of church Fathers, and
the hierarchical influence of the cultural, political and religious
environment, we can point out some important points:
People
view about the leaders of the church was advanced enormously.
The
hierarchical leadership form of government of the church with the emphasis on
the role of the bishop experienced rapid development.
There
was a strong hierarchical model for the formation of a community structure
represented by Jewish, Roman and Greek social, religious and philosophical
framework.
There
were hints of, democracy, human liberty, and equality in all three nations, but
especially strongly represented by Hellenistic thought.
We may
identify that the influence of the cultural, religious and political
environment upon the early church appears in two directions: the outward
hierarchical framework and the inner democratic dynamic.
5. Reflection and
Conclusion:
Elisabeth
Schüssler Fiorenza states that the "Church" is characterized by hierarchical
structures, represented by men, and is divided into a sacred two-class system
of the ordained and the laity. Laity/lay is derived from laikos, which
characterizes someone as subordinate to the clergy. This includes those who are
uneducated and belong to the secular realm, those who have no power and status
in the church, those who are not religious.[14]
Among the laity women are always included. That means they are regarded as
second class church members. This is in the church that we find this kind of
differentiation of church members. The implication of the church in reality
does not cover equality in its inside. So in this situation, women scholars
suggest the changing of our language habits.
If the translation of ekklesia to church and our language habits make
exclusion to some groups, it will be a tragedy for the victims. The reasons to
the development of the church may be determined by the meaning of how we
understand. Actually the word church as mentioned before has some hierarchical
orders in its original meaning. If so, the minds of the people who exercise
authority in the church will be washed by this root meaning. So what will we
say? It seems that there is a possible way to bring equality in the ‘ekklesia
of God’ as translated as Assembly, if the word ‘church’ cannot bring.
………………………………………………………………………..
Bibliography:
Gregorios, Paulos Mar. The
Church and Authority. Delhi:
ISPCK, 2001.
Kanyoro,
Musimbi RA, ed. In Search of a
Round Table: Gender, Theology & Church
Leadership. Geneva:
WCC Publications, 1997.
Lincoln, Andrew T. Ephesians. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 42. Dallas Texas:
Word books Publisher,
1990.
Manohar, Moses P., ed.
Church: Towards Understanding Mission and
Witness. Delhi:
ISPCK, 2002.
Stewart, William. The Nature and Calling of the Church. Madras: The Christian
Literature Society, 1958.
Webliography:
http://www.cta-usa.org/reprint11-98/fiorenza.html (18 January 2013).
http://www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/fg06.html
(18 January
2013).
http://www.Cbn.com/..10 teachings_ eight.aspx. (19 January 2013).
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/ekklesia.html.
(19 January 2013).
http://www.evtos.hr/fileadmin/publications/Yordan_Zhekov/TheRiseofHierarchicalLeadership.pdf
(20 January
2013).
[1]
http://www.Cbn.com/..10 teachings_ eight.aspx. (19
January 2013).
[2]
Moses P. Manohar, ed. Church: Towards
Understanding Mission and Witness (Delhi: ISPCK, 2002), 3.
[3]
http://www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/fg06.htm
(18 January 2013).
[5]
http://www.Cbn.com/..10 teachings_ eight.aspx. (19
January 2013).
[6]
Paulos Mar Gregorios, The Church and Authority (Delhi: ISPCK, 2001), 2.
[7] William Stewart, The Nature and Calling of the Church
(Madras: The Christian Literature Society, 1958), 4.
[8] http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/ekklesia.html.
(19 January 2013).
[9] Kanyyoro, Musimbi R.A. ed. In search
of a Round Table, Gender Theology and Church Leadership (Geneva: WCC
Publication, 1997), 2, 3.
[10] Kanyyoro, Musimbi R.A. ed. In search
of a Round Table, Gender Theology and Church Leadership…3.
[12]
Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians. Word
Biblical Commentary, vol. 42 (Dallas Texas: Word books, Publisher, 1990),
359-360.
[13]http://www.evtos.hr/fileadmin/publications/Yordan_Zhekov/TheRiseofHierarchicalLeadership.pdf
(20 January 2013)
Very Interesting...
ReplyDelete