M
Manfred
Guest
Salve, fratres!
There has been more than one poster within these Forums who has stated that, since the Revised New American Bible (RNAB) has been approved for use in the Lectionary for Mass (LFM), then the RNAB must therefore be a rather fine translation in which one can have confidence for use in reading or studying. However, one should exercise caution in subscribing to this notion. The need for caution arises because of the fruits of the work of The International Consultation on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), the body responsible for the texts of the Common of the Mass used in English-speaking countries worldwide.
For 35-plus years now, the Catholic faithful in English-speaking countries have had to endure several “infelicities” in the ICEL translation of the Latin of the Novus Ordo (NO) Missae. Here are just a few examples:
(1) “Glory to God in the highest, and peace to His people on earth.” The Latin of the italicized phrase reads “et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis.” The most literal rendering, found in the Douay-Rheims as well as in the 1941 Confraternity New Testament, both based on St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, is “and on earth peace to men of good will.” The Catholic edition of the Revised Standard Version (RSV-CE) reads “and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!” In fact, the translators of the evangelical New International Version (NIV) had noted that they felt an accurate rendering would be “and on earth peace to men of (His) good will.” Ah, but no, we were given, and have had to use for almost four decades, “peace to His people on earth.” Maybe it’s just me, but this just fails to hit the right note. Greek and Latin scholars: please feel free to jump in here and have at it!
(2) “Pray, brethren [or (my) brothers and sisters, or (my) sisters and brothers, or (my) friends, ad libitum ad nauseam], that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God, the Almighty Father.” The most literal translation of the Latin “ut meam ac vestrum sacrificium” would be “that my sacrifice and yours” So what, right? Well, the use of “our” blurs somewhat the distinction between the role of the ministerial priesthood and the universal priesthood of all the faithful, whereas the Latin makes the distinction quite clear. And I can’t remember the last time I heard “Pray, brethren,…”
(3) Eucharistic Prayer II (“Lord, you are holy indeed, the fountain of all holiness, etc.”), the shortest of all the approved Eucharistic Prayers, does NOT - in the English, at least - even mention the word “sacrifice”. “Sacrifice”, as in “The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass”. But this must be OK, since some Masses have indeed become “a celebration of the community” more than the Lamb’s Supper. But, hey - this is an approved text, so…
So, you see, for me, trying to validate use of a particular translation of the Scriptures because “it’s used in the Mass” just isn’t going to cut it.
At my NO parish, I’m a lector at the 11:00 AM Sunday Mass which follows the 9:30 children’s Mass. Now, when I’m scheduled to be the lector, I arrive early enough to ensure that the correct Lectionary is in place on the pulpit before Mass begins. This is necessary since the lector for the 9:30 Mass sometimes leaves the Lectionary for Use at Masses with Children on the pulpit. More than one lector at the 11:00 Mass has been unpleasantly surprised by finding in front of him or her the children’s lectionary; I include myself here when I’m pressed into service at the last minute to cover for a no-show lector. Now I’m not sure on just which paraphrase of Scripture this lectionary is based, but I can tell you it is low-brow enough to make even the RNAB sound good.
Why am I so bitter? Probably because since the RNAB was introduced, the RSV-CE and the Jerusalem Bible (1966 non-inclusive version), previously approved along with the 1970 NAB, were now banned from use ithe USA by the USCCB.
Thus if you were to say to me that the RNAB (or some other banal translation, such as the NRSV) must be good because it’s been approved for use in the Liturgy, I would respond that so are those rather infelicitous and bland Mass texts from ICEL. And being in the same class with the latter is not necessarily desirable.
There has been more than one poster within these Forums who has stated that, since the Revised New American Bible (RNAB) has been approved for use in the Lectionary for Mass (LFM), then the RNAB must therefore be a rather fine translation in which one can have confidence for use in reading or studying. However, one should exercise caution in subscribing to this notion. The need for caution arises because of the fruits of the work of The International Consultation on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), the body responsible for the texts of the Common of the Mass used in English-speaking countries worldwide.
For 35-plus years now, the Catholic faithful in English-speaking countries have had to endure several “infelicities” in the ICEL translation of the Latin of the Novus Ordo (NO) Missae. Here are just a few examples:
(1) “Glory to God in the highest, and peace to His people on earth.” The Latin of the italicized phrase reads “et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis.” The most literal rendering, found in the Douay-Rheims as well as in the 1941 Confraternity New Testament, both based on St Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, is “and on earth peace to men of good will.” The Catholic edition of the Revised Standard Version (RSV-CE) reads “and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!” In fact, the translators of the evangelical New International Version (NIV) had noted that they felt an accurate rendering would be “and on earth peace to men of (His) good will.” Ah, but no, we were given, and have had to use for almost four decades, “peace to His people on earth.” Maybe it’s just me, but this just fails to hit the right note. Greek and Latin scholars: please feel free to jump in here and have at it!
(2) “Pray, brethren [or (my) brothers and sisters, or (my) sisters and brothers, or (my) friends, ad libitum ad nauseam], that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God, the Almighty Father.” The most literal translation of the Latin “ut meam ac vestrum sacrificium” would be “that my sacrifice and yours” So what, right? Well, the use of “our” blurs somewhat the distinction between the role of the ministerial priesthood and the universal priesthood of all the faithful, whereas the Latin makes the distinction quite clear. And I can’t remember the last time I heard “Pray, brethren,…”
(3) Eucharistic Prayer II (“Lord, you are holy indeed, the fountain of all holiness, etc.”), the shortest of all the approved Eucharistic Prayers, does NOT - in the English, at least - even mention the word “sacrifice”. “Sacrifice”, as in “The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass”. But this must be OK, since some Masses have indeed become “a celebration of the community” more than the Lamb’s Supper. But, hey - this is an approved text, so…
So, you see, for me, trying to validate use of a particular translation of the Scriptures because “it’s used in the Mass” just isn’t going to cut it.
At my NO parish, I’m a lector at the 11:00 AM Sunday Mass which follows the 9:30 children’s Mass. Now, when I’m scheduled to be the lector, I arrive early enough to ensure that the correct Lectionary is in place on the pulpit before Mass begins. This is necessary since the lector for the 9:30 Mass sometimes leaves the Lectionary for Use at Masses with Children on the pulpit. More than one lector at the 11:00 Mass has been unpleasantly surprised by finding in front of him or her the children’s lectionary; I include myself here when I’m pressed into service at the last minute to cover for a no-show lector. Now I’m not sure on just which paraphrase of Scripture this lectionary is based, but I can tell you it is low-brow enough to make even the RNAB sound good.
Why am I so bitter? Probably because since the RNAB was introduced, the RSV-CE and the Jerusalem Bible (1966 non-inclusive version), previously approved along with the 1970 NAB, were now banned from use ithe USA by the USCCB.
Thus if you were to say to me that the RNAB (or some other banal translation, such as the NRSV) must be good because it’s been approved for use in the Liturgy, I would respond that so are those rather infelicitous and bland Mass texts from ICEL. And being in the same class with the latter is not necessarily desirable.