Hail, Full of Grace

[stmaria]

In 1970 Pope Paul VI allowed a new translation of the Bible to be made "in cooperation with our separated brethren”. Can anyone justify these translations?

Pope Pius IX used Luke 1:28 “Hail, full of grace” as evidence to define the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Protestants don’t believe in this dogma. Is that why the translation was changed?
*Douay-Rheims * Luke 1:28 “Hail, full of grace the Lord is with thee”
*New American Bible * Luke 1: 28 “ Rejoice oh highly favored daughter”
*King James * Luke 1:28 “Hail thou that art highly favored”

Here are a few more new translations:
*Douay-Rheims *Luke 1:46 “My soul doth magnify the Lord”

• New American Bible *“My being proclaims the greatness of the Lord”
  *Douay Rheims * Matt 16:26 “ For what does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of his own soul?”
  New American Bible ” what profit would a man show if he were to gain the whole world and destroy himself in the process”

. In the Vatican II document Dei Verbum it states:

Chapter VI:
22. Easy access to sacred Scripture should be provided for all
the Christian faithful….but since the Word of God should be accessible at all times, the Church by her authority and with maternal concern sees to it that suitable and correct translations are made into different languages, especially from the original texts of the sacred books.
And should the opportunity arise and the Church authorities
approve, if these** translations are produced in cooperation with the
separated brethren **as well, all Christians will be able to use them.

Pope John Paul II
Ut unum sint
On commitment to Ecumenism

1. Significant progress in **ecumenical cooperation **has also been made in another area, that of the Word of God. I am thinking above all of the importance for the different language groups of ecumenical translations of the Bible. Following the promulgation by the Second Vatican Council of the Constitution Dei Verbum, the Catholic Church could not fail to welcome this development. These translations, prepared by experts, generally offer a solid basis for the prayer and pastoral activity of all Christ’s followers. Anyone who recalls how heavily debates about Scripture influenced divisions, especially in the West, can appreciate the significant step forward which these common translations represent”

 

[Genesis315]

Bl. Pius IX didn’t write in English, but Latin so technically he didn’t use “full of grace” either, but gratia plena, which is itself a translation of the original Greek.

No translation is perfect, there are usually multiple valid options for translating phrases–some more precise than others. The original Greek can be validly translated either way. Likewise, the original Greek supports the Immaculate Conception so therefore any translation from it does as well by definition (since it intends to express the same idea)–even if the phraseology used to express the same idea is different.

Also, language evolves over time, which is why new translations are needed every so often (the DR was updated in the 1700s, for example).

In the Lectionary, “full of grace” is used for the same reason the older English is used for the “Our Father” as they are put in the form of the prayers as said most commonly by the faithful. It also probably gives a better sense of the specific way Mary is favored in Catholic theological terminology.

As an aside, one reason for a translation that both sides can agree upon is it provides a common accepted authority that both can use to demonstrate their position.

 

[stmaria]

=Genesis315;3512123]Bl. Pius IX didn’t write in English, but Latin so technically he didn’t use “full of grace” either, but gratia plena, which is itself a translation of the original Greek.

No translation is perfect, there are usually multiple valid options for translating phrases–some more precise than others. The original Greek can be validly translated either way. Likewise, the original Greek supports the Immaculate Conception so therefore any translation from it does as well by definition (since it intends to express the same idea)–even if the phraseology used to express the same idea is different.

Surely you are not saying that “highly favored daughter” conveys the same meaning as "Hail, full of grace’. Also this translation of “Hail full of grace” has been use for centuries. Why change it now?

Also, language evolves over time, which is why new translations are needed every so often (the DR was updated in the 1700s, for example).

In the Lectionary, “full of grace” is used for the same reason the older English is used for the “Our Father” as they are put in the form of the prayers as said most commonly by the faithful. It also probably gives a better sense of the specific way Mary is favored in Catholic theological terminology.

So would you be in favor of changing the Hail Mary to say, " Hail Mary most highly favored daughter the Lord is with thee"?

As an aside, one reason for a translation **that both sides can agree upon **is it provides a common accepted authority that both can use to demonstrate their position.

By “both sides” do you mean the Catholic translation should agree with the Protestant translation?

 

[Sure]

Does anyone know what the Greek says? And how it can reasonably be translated?

That’s the place to start.

 

[Canto]

Κεχαριτωμενη / Kecharitomene
found only in verse 28 of ch1 Luke

Most seem to argue that that the verb is a perfect passive participle (language jargon)

i.e.
action in past
expressing action done to subject
relevant to the future etc

So it means that sometime before the announciation Mary was filled with divine grace (past)

and that she remains full of this grace (present)

rather than a long convolouted scentence St. Jerome simply transalted gratia plena or full of grace and this was the translation used for more than a millenium until many (even Catholics ) started the highly favoured business.

 

[Gara3987]

"Consider the word “grace”—in Greek, charis. As one conservative Catholic professor of Hebrew, Greek and Latin told this author, by the time St. Paul wrote, the Greek word charis already had its specifically Christian theological meaning of “grace.” And St. Jerome corresponded to St. Paul’s meaning by translating charis into Latin as gratia, which in English becomes “grace.”

It does not take any particular mental acumen to distinguish the difference between being “full of grace” and “highly favored.” “Favor” or “favored” is one of the meanings for charis, but not the one intended by St. Luke in Scripture. A person may be highly favored with any number of talents and abilities, or with good looks or plenty of money, and so forth. But does that mean he or she is therefore “full of grace”? We understand Our Lady to be “full of grace” in the sense of being absolutely full of God’s divine life (Sanctifying Grace), so that there is no sin in her soul whatsoever. What a difference in meanings!

Concerning the method of translating employed by the translators of the modern Catholic Bibles, this writer believes it can be demonstrated clearly where they are mistaken; and this point alone brings into question the value of their entire work.

The ancient translators of the Sacred Scripture, by and large, did literal, wordfor-word translations of the Bible. It was their policy to be faithful to every word—and to every shade of meaning of every word—used in the Bible. This included the 72 Hebrew scholars who translated the Old Testament into Greek at Alexandria, Egypt, about 284 B.C.; the translator(s) of the Old Itala (Vetus Itala) Latin Bible of about 150 A.D.; and of course, St. Jerome, who did the Latin Vulgate Bible and who finished his work about 405 A.D. The same is true of the original Douay-Rheims commission (1582-1610), of Bishop Richard Challoner (1748-1751), and of Mgr. Kenrick (1859).

However, the translators of the modern Catholic bibles—in the judgment of this writer, after reading their translations and comparing them to the Douay-Rheims, the Vulgate and the Greek of the New Testament—are proceeding according to the following method:

They read a text in the current transcriptions of the original languages, decide what THEY THINK it means, and then translate THEIR interpretation into English! The result is that the English is sometimes (not always!) easier to understand, but it is not necessarily what the Bible says; rather, it is THEIR INTERPRETATION AND THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE BIBLE Interpreting Rather than Translating 21 SAYS! And often the difference from the Vulgate and DRB, the traditional Catholic versions, is glaring."

This information Came from What bible should you read? pg 18-22.

 

[stmaria]

"
This information Came from tanbooks.com/audio/wbsyr.pdf What bible should you read?

pg 18-22.

Thanks for the link.** A very disturbing read**. The book points out this translation that I was unaware of.

Douay Rheims Genesis 3:15
15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

New American Bible Genesis 3”15
“ I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers;** He **will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel”

It is traditional teaching of the Church that towards the end of time the** Blessed Mother **will crush the head of Satan. This translation does away with that prophecy.

One of the things I find odd about the New American Bible, and it is not covered in the link, is the New American Bible’s account of Genesis. In my opinion its language opens the door to the possibility of a belief in evolution.
New American Bible Genesis 1:24-25
“Then God said, “let the earth bring forth** all kinds of living creatures:** cattle, creeping things, and wild animals of all kinds.” And so it happened” God made **all kinds **of wild animals, **all kinds **of cattle, and **all kinds **of creeping things of the earth.”

Compare that to the Douay Rheims which excludes evolution.
Douay- Rheims Genesis 1:24-25

24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind. And God saw that it was good."

 

[Gara3987]

Thanks for the link.** A very disturbing read**. The book points out this translation that I was unaware of.

Douay Rheims Genesis 3:15
15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

New American Bible Genesis 3”15
“ I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers;** He **will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel”

It is traditional teaching of the Church that towards the end of time the** Blessed Mother **will crush the head of Satan. This translation does away with that prophecy.

One of the things I find odd about the New American Bible, and it is not covered in the link, is the New American Bible’s account of Genesis. In my opinion its language opens the door to the possibility of a belief in evolution.
New American Bible Genesis 1:24-25
“Then God said, “let the earth bring forth** all kinds of living creatures:** cattle, creeping things, and wild animals of all kinds.” And so it happened” God made **all kinds **of wild animals, **all kinds **of cattle, and **all kinds **of creeping things of the earth.”

Compare that to the Douay Rheims which excludes evolution.
Douay- Rheims Genesis 1:24-25

24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind. And God saw that it was good."

There are a lot of verses from the modern bibles that are completely incorrect, It is a shame really. There are some books that I am reading currently by Ven Mary of Agreda, called The Mystical City of God. There are a total of eight books compiled into four volumes. She explains the mysteries of the scriptures, and you will begin to see things a lot more clearly. I am only on Chapter twenty of Volume I, and so far She Explained, Proverbs 8, 22-31 completely, and Apoc. Chapter 12 (and the Immaculate Conception). I think that you will enjoy and benefit from these books as well. I have recently come across a website devoted to it you may check it out here. At the site you will find a brief biography on her with a current photo of her today, she looks as if she is merely taking a nap. She passed away over 340 years ago.

Here is the Synopsis:
This magnificent 4-volume hardbound set is an heirloom book that should be in every Catholic home library. Dictated to Ven. Mary of Agreda (1601-1664) by the Blessed Mother herself, this amazing book of revelations about the life of Mary and the divine plan for creation and the salvation of souls has been enthralling readers for centuries. Composed of the Conception, Incarnation, Transfixion and Coronation, this magnificent narrative takes the reader through the various stages of the life of the Blessed Virgin Mary, plus it reveals all sorts of facts about our entire salvation history. Reproduced at 100% of the size in the original book and printed from the original negatives for complete fidelity.

Take Care and God Bless.
Sincerely,
Jonathan