Sanctus By Jake Tawney

Sanctus according to the first word of the Latin prayer, means “Holy.” However, the prayer itself actually two prayers in one: the Sanctus and the Benedictus. The first part is taken from Isaiah 6:3, a description of the prophet’s vision of the throne of God. Isaiah 6:3 reads:

And one called out to another and said, "Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts, The whole earth is full of His glory" (NASB).

The second part of the prayer is referred to as the Benedictus because of the first Latin word. Benedictus means “blessed”, and this prayer comes from Matthew 21:9, the description of Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem:

The crowds going ahead of Him, and those who followed, were shouting, "Hosanna to the Son of David; BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD; Hosanna in the highest!" (NASB).

In the older forms of the rite, it was not uncommon for the choir to sing a polyphonic arrangement of the Sanctus before the consecration and continue with the Benedictus after. Hence, one will often find separate compositions for the two parts in the works of the great composers of the past, for instance Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina’s Missa Ave Maria.

In the Novus Ordo the prayer is joined into one and sung after the Preface to the Eucharistic Prayer.

Obviously the most striking part of the prayer is the thrice repeated “Holy” at the start. Because of this, the prayer is occasionally called the Tersanctus, meaning “thrice Holy.” The reason for the three repetitions of the word sanctus goes back to the Old Testament text. Keep in mind that the language of the Old Testament is Hebrew. The curious thing about the Hebrew language is that is does not allow for comparative or superlative endings on its adjectives. For instance, in English we can distinguish between “holy,” “holier” (comparative), and “holiest” (superlative). There is a similar construction in Latin (sanctus, sanctior and sanctissimus).* In Hebrew, however, to indicate the comparative it is common to repeat the adjective (“holy, holy”), and to indicate the superlative it is common to repeat it three times (“holy, holy, holy”). Thus, the passage from Isaiah begins, in Hebrew, “Kadash, Kadash, Kadash ...” (This is phonetic, of course; the Hebrew language has its own alphabet.)

Thus, the opening phrase of the Sanctus could be rendered “Holiest Lord.” When the Old Testament was translated into Latin, even though there was a construction that could deal with the superlative, the translators decided to be faithful to the rhythm of the

Hebrew. Hence, instead of using Sanctissimus, they opted for Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus. Recall that a similar principle is governing much of the new English translation of the Roman Missal: fidelity not only to the Latin vocabulary but also to the rhythm inherent in the Latin.

The changes to the translation of the Sanctus are but one. The opening line in Latin is

Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus Deus Sabaoth.

Currently, the faithful sing

“Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, God of power and might.”

The new translation will have us sing instead

“Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts.”

The word in question, of course, is Sabaoth. The interesting thing about this word is that it is not the one found in the Isaiah passage. In the Latin Vulgate, Isaiah 6:3 reads: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus exercituum.

The Latin word exercituum comes from the root exercitus meaning “army,” “multitude,” or “host.” The word Sabaoth is not actually a Latin word (try looking it up in a Latin dictionary), but instead is borrowed from ... guess where: Hebrew. The root word in Hebrew is tsaba, meaning “a mass (or multitude) or persons,” “an army,” or “a host of persons.” The relevant point here is that neither the Hebrew tsaba (or the borrowed Sabaoth) nor the Latin exercituum should be translated as “power and might”. It is far more appropriate to render it as “hosts”. Actually, the best “translation” perhaps would have been to not translate it at all, but simply to retain the word itself: “Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of Sabaoth.” After all, we already retain several Hebrew words in our Mass, including Hosanna, Amen, and Alleluia (these words were retained in Greek but can be traced back to Hebrew). Nevertheless, if the word is going to be translated, “hosts” is most appropriate.

There is also a subtle point about punctuation. In the current translation, there is a comma placed between “Lord” and “God.” This actually splits up the single title given to God. There seems to have two titles being addressed: “Holy, Holy, Holy Lord,” and “God of power and might”. The new translation, more faithful to the Latin construction, presents this as a single title: “Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts.”

In addition to being faithful to the Latin, this is also more faithful to Scripture. I checked ten different English translations of the book of Isaiah, and eight of the ten rendered the word as “hosts.” (The other two used “armies.”) Thus, when the faithful hear the reading from Isaiah during Mass, they will immediately recognize its connection with the Sanctus.

Finally, as an interesting side note not related to the new translation of the Sanctus, let’s examine the rest of the Isaiah passage: In the year of King Uzziah's death I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple. Seraphim stood above Him, each having six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he

flew. And one called out to another and said, "Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory." And the foundations of the thresholds trembled at the voice of him who called out, while the temple was filling with smoke. Then I said, "Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken from the altar with tongs. He touched my mouth with it and said, "Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away and your sin is forgiven." Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?" Then I said, "Here am I. Send me!" (NASB).

This passage is about the prophet’s unworthiness, due to sin, before God. It is the Lord who saves the prophet from his own sin, thereby rendering him suitable to be sent. There is a connection here with the “Lord, I am not worthy,” that follows the Lamb of God. Our unworthiness before God can only be healed by His saving action. * It turns out the that Latin word sanctus is not a straight adjective, but rather a participle. A participle is a verb being used as an adjective. For instance, in the English phrase “the running dog,” the word “running” comes from a verb, but is being used as an adjective to describe the dog. Sanctus is the participle for the verb sancire, which means “to consecrate,” “to hallow,” or “to make holy” (among other meanings in different contexts). This means that the phrase “Sanctus Dominus” is literally rendered as “Consecrating Lord,” or “Hallowing Lord.” It is fully appropriate to translate this as “Holy,” but seeing that the word comes from a verb puts the emphasis on an action. A person who is “holy” is not in a static state. Rather, “holiness” is the result of a particular act of being. God, who is pure act, is the embodiment of true holiness. Moreover, the very act of being holy is diffusive; one who is holy tends to radiate that holiness and cause others to be holy. God, who is the source of all holiness, radiates his own holiness to all of creation. When the word is used as a simple adjective (“holy”), the connection with the act of hallowing is lost. See my previous post on the Lost Meaning of the Sacred for more information of the etymology of the various forms of “sacred.”