Approved Lectionary Translations

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Does anyone know - for certain - what the approved Bible translations for the Liturgy are? If you have authoritative documentation, that’s 10000% better.

I have heard that the NAB, RSV-CE, Douay-Rheims, and the Jerusalem versions were all approved for usage. I have heard that the Douay-Rheims usage had been abrogated. I have heard that only the current Lectionary based off the NAB is approved and thus all other versions (including the NAB) are not approved.

I have yet to read a hierarchial statement give clarification. And authoritative clarification is what I am looking for.

 

[James0235]

Hello,

Does anyone know - for certain - what the approved Bible translations for the Liturgy are? If you have authoritative documentation, that’s 10000% better.

I have heard that the NAB, RSV-CE, Douay-Rheims, and the Jerusalem versions were all approved for usage. I have heard that the Douay-Rheims usage had been abrogated. I have heard that only the current Lectionary based off the NAB is approved and thus all other versions (including the NAB) are not approved.

I have yet to read a hierarchial statement give clarification. And authoritative clarification is what I am looking for.

In the dioceses of the United States the only Lectionary currently permitted is based on the NAB.

According to the USCCB:

**Is the New American Bible the only translation of Scriptures we can read from at Mass?

Since May 19, 2002, the revised Lectionary, based on the New American Bible is the only English-language Lectionary that may be used at Mass in the dioceses of the United States, except for the current Lectionary for Masses with Chil**dren which remains in use.**
** The 1970 edition of the New American Bible is used in the Scripture readings and canticles of the Liturgy of the Hours (except the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc dimittis.)**

The USCCB has in the past permitted other Lectionary translations. And other countries use different Lectionary translations as well.

James

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Thank you very much! That does clear things up significantly - even if I don’t like how the picture has turned out .

One more clarification - does that indeed say that not even the NAB may be used, but only the Lectionary based off of it - which is how it reads to me? It may just be a nuance in the language, but I can’t tell for sure.

 

[James0235]

One more clarification - does that indeed say that not even the NAB may be used, but only the Lectionary based off of it - which is how it reads to me? It may just be a nuance in the language, but I can’t tell for sure.

Correct.

The NAB and the Lectionary are different even though the Lectionary is based on the NAB.

One example comes immediately to mind:

In the Gospel Reading for the Feast of the Immaculate Conception we hear “Hail, full of grace! The Lord is with you.”

But, in the NAB itself it reads as “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”

I believe that the Congregation for Divine Worship itself ordered the change (but I can’t seem to find a reference).

I am sure there are more differences. That is just the first one that came to mind.

James

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Thanks!

 

[Rolltide]

The following information comes from the Frequently Asked Questions section of the EWTN website. The original question asked about approved Bible translations in the Catholic Church. The following traces the evolution of the NAB, especially in reference to its use within the United States.

4.1 New American Bible or NAB (1970). Translated from the original languages by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine according to the principles of Vatican II for use in the liturgy. It was the basis of the American Lectionary from the 1970s until 2002. A good translation, but it was criticized for its changing of some traditional and familiar expressions, such as “full of grace”.

4.2 NAB with Revised New Testament (1986). A restoration of some traditional familiar phraseology. Unfortunately, it also included some mild inclusive language. No longer widely available, owing to the publication of the revised Psalms (see next entry).

4.3 NAB with Revised Psalms and Revised New Testament (1991). It was due to the use of vertical inclusive language (re: God and Christ) and some uses of horizontal inclusive language (re: human beings), that the Holy See rejected this text as the basis of a revised Lectionary for the United States. This is the version of the NAB currently on sale in the United States.

4.4 Modified NAB with Revised Psalms and Revised New Testament (2000-2002). This title is of my own invention. It does not refer to any currently available Bible, but to the NAB with Revised Psalms and Revised NT, as modified by a committee of the Holy See and the Bishops for use in the liturgy. It is the text found in all current Lectionaries in the U.S… The Holy See accepted some use of inclusive language, where the speaker/author intended a mixed audience (e.g. “brothers and sisters”, instead of the older “brethren”), but rejected it in references to God or Christ, and man, where the word has anthropological and theological significance (e.g. Psalm 1:1, with reference to Adam and Christ). Whether a Bible will be made available having these modified NAB texts is not known at this time. Since they do not extend to the entire Bible, it is possible that none will be, as that would require further editing of the underlying NAB text.

 

[benedictgal]

You might find this article interesting. I pulled this from the Adoremus website:

Revised Lectionary Proposed
The Lectionary review is the result of an amendment presented during the discussion and vote on the revised Lectionary for Mass in 1997, which said that the Lectionary would be reviewed after five years of use. The review process was described by Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, chairman of the BCL, in his presentation to the bishops on November 13:

After consultation with the Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions and the Ad Hoc Committee for the Review of Scripture Translations, the Bishops’ Committee on Liturgy approved a review instrument. In 2003 we shared that review instrument with all the bishops and a select group of pastors throughout the United States. ***That consultation surfaced detailed and serious reservations about the present Lectionary. For example, concerns about the suitability of certain texts for proclamation, concerns about grammar and vocabulary, concerns about length of sentences, pronouns without a clear antecedent. ***The Bishops’ Committee on Liturgy then conducted an experimental revision for the readings of Advent. This process called upon pastors, Scripture scholars and persons with credentials in proclamation and English literature to help revise the text. The results of this work were then reviewed by the entire Bishops’ Committee on Liturgy, and final recommendations are now before you.

Most of the changes proposed are fairly minor. Only the Advent revisions were presented at this meeting, though the entire Lectionary will be revised (based on the re-revised New American Bible). Only the readings were considered, the Responsorial Psalms were not included in this segment of the revision. (The revisions for Lent will be presented at the June meeting.)

Only after the entire Lectionary is revised, approved by the conference and receives recognitio from the Holy See, will a new Lectionary be introduced into parishes. It appears that the recognitio will not be sought until the entire set of revisions has been approved by the USCCB.

Since it is a revision of a liturgical book, the Lectionary needed a two-thirds vote of the Latin rite bishops. The vote was 205 in favor, 13 against and 2 abstentions.

This was from 2006. I suspect that although we are on a slow boat to China, maybe something will happen to move us along quicker.

The section that I put in bold, italicized, letters is something that I’ve been harping on, especially from the standpoint of proclamation. The sentences, especially those from the epistles, are TOO LONG. One sentence goes on for three or four lines and you never know when to make the break so that way it won’t appear as though you are reading a run-on group of words. That is when I turn to my trusty RSV-CE or Douay-Rheims to help me make the appropriate breaks. Incidentally, the Mexican lectionary doesn’t have that p;roblem.