Communication is not always easy and it does not help when several languages are involved. Lost in Translation is not just a movie, it is a common reality when different languages and cultures interact. The Salvation Army abounds with stories of translation going wrong, creating amusing situations, like the Indian officer giving a testimony during an open air in Denmark, telling how ‘a group of Sikh people” had been converted and the translator, in Danish, told the onlookers that ‘a group of sick people’ had become Christians.
When the International Staff Band twenty-five odd years ago visited Denmark, I was asked to travel with them as translator. I still remember how upset and offended the band secretary was when he realised that every time he had presented a plaque to dignitaries I, in Danish, had asked them to receive ‘this little thing.’ No amount of explanation that we did not have a good word in Danish for ‘plaque’ and that ‘under-stating’ your own value or importance was culturally not just acceptable, but advisable, could help to ease the tension. Fortunately he only found out the last day of the tour.
Lately I have become aware of a translation issue of somewhat more substance than the above. The Salvation Army’s international statement states that our ministry is“…motivated by the love of God.” That seems clear and concise, at least in English. However, the majority of the world, even I guess The Salvation Army world, does not have English as their first language and so the mission statement, that covers the whole international Army, needs to be translated. And here I am wondering whether something is getting lost in translation. My grammatical skills and knowledge are very limited, but I think it is correct to say that the issue is who is the object and who is the subject. The real issue is not one of grammar, but of theology – maybe even between good and bad theology.
A few months ago I realised that the Dutch translation says the motivation comes from ‘our love of God.’ When I realised this I reacted, because surely it is God’s love of us that is the motivational source? My language skills are limited, but checking out the Danish and Norwegian versions, I found that the translation into these languages were similar to the Dutch (I am a bit embarrassed that I never had noticed this in the Danish translation!)
So what is it? Is God the subject or the object? Is it his love to us that is our motivation, or is it our love of God? Does it really matter, as long as ministry happens and love is involved? Maybe I am just a bit pedantic, but I actually think it matters a whole lot at least on two accounts:
If it is our love of God, then we can point to our amazing love of God and how, because we love God so much, we do ministry. We become the centre of attention, we become, or at least risk becoming, proud, because of how good we are. That, by the way, is true for individuals as well as eg. The Salvation Army. While there is some truth in that because we love God we do ministry, surely it is God’s amazing love that is the motivation and we can point to him, and say because he loves us (and you) so much, we can only respond by loving him and living out that love in practical ministry? We do not put ourselves at the centre of attention and have nothing to be proud of, but give God his rightful place and acknowledge that without his love, we would be and do nothing.
Secondly, my love is at best limited and variable, flawed with selfishness and prone to distraction. Basing anything on that love is risky business, like building on sand. God not only loves, he is love (1. John 4:16), and he ‘does not change like shifting shadows.’ (James 1:17) When we build our ministry (and life) on his love, then we stand firmly on the rock that will not be moved.
Is this not really just a question of the ‘chicken or egg’? I think not. According to John ‘We love, because he first loved us’ (1. John 4:19) and earlier in the same chapter he makes it very clear:
‘This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins’ (1 John 4:10)
Words matter, and what we say or write can form how we think and act. Theology matters, as good theology helps us to better and more fully know and experience God (just as our experience of God helps us to formulate better theology).
It is not advisable to finish one’s sermons with ‘but what do I know?’ However, I am wondering if I have got it right? Not so much the theology, but the translation. Does the English version of the mission statement make God the subject, so that ‘the love of God’ is to be understood as ‘God’s love’? Is the ambiguity of the language intentional, so that both understandings are implied or at least possible? Does it matter, or should I just get a life and do something worthwhile, rather than waste my time ‘nitpicking’?
In the unlikely event anyone actually has persevered to this point, please take the above questions as an invitation to share your thoughts and guidance on the matter. While waiting for that I will go looking for another nit to pick.