How Literal Should a Translation Be?

[Manfred]

Correct me if I’m wrong but the Bible readings at Mass come from the NAB from various years. They don’t come directly from the Vulgate or the New Vulgate.

I’m not for sure if other parts of the Mass directly match scriptures from the NAB, Vulgate, New Vulgate or none of the above.

Do all the above translations translate the Consecation the same?

Do all the translations translate the Lord’s Prayer exactly the same?

That’s what I meant when I said I wish there was a Bible that EXACTLY MATCHED everything that came DIRECTLY from scripture in the Mass.

The Lectionary uses the NAB OT, including the Psalms, of 1970, and the NT of 1986 - but a good part of it was “edited” to remove some inclusive language, as well as add back some verses in Sirach not included by the original NAB translators. One cannot as yet purchase an NAB that exactly matches the readings in the Lectionary. I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t want to, anyway.

As for your other concerns, I think porthos already addressed them quite well in his most recent post.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Now THAT’s more unlikely.since you mention the Mass texts themselves. I thought you meant only the Lectionary.

The Mass texts (not counting the Lectionary), although heaviliy based on Scripture are not Scripture readings and they stand as texts in their own right.

If one only took the time, they would see that in the Roman Rite, none of the accounts of the Institution in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and 1 Corinthians match the Roman Mass’s Institution Narrative exactly. Even farther from the Scriptural accounts was the older Tridentine Narrative; the words “mystery of faith” are not present in the Gospel accounts (major reason it was removed in the present Missal and shifted as an invitation instead).

If ever there should be any changes, it should be the Mass texts that should match the Scripture, and not vice-versa. But again, the Mass texts stand in their own right.

Our previous posts referred specifically to the Lectionary.

Dear Friends,
I cannot quote on other parts, but in the case of Our Lord’s Prayer, it would seem that the Latin version in the Missal was taken from the Vetus Latina, which St Jerome saw fit to modify with non Latin words, which produced non English words.

You might like to look at the Vetus Latina in the Codex Fuldensis capitum which introduces Our Lord’s Prayer.
sangallen56.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Page67.htm#XXXIIII
The prayer is actually on the next page, #68.