|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
CHANGES IN THE ROMAN MISSAL, PT. 4: Why A New Translation?
[EDITOR’S NOTE: This column is part of an ongoing series written by Father Daniel Merz highlighting many of the historical and theological bases of the forthcoming publication of a revised English translation of the Roman Missal. The new translation, tentatively set for release around November 2011, will involve slight but noticeable changes at Mass. Father Merz is the chairman of the Liturgical Commission for the Diocese of Jefferson City, Mo. — BH]
“If I translate word by word, it sounds absurd, if I am forced to change something in the word order or style, I seem to have stopped being a translator.” (St. Jerome (+420), Interpret. Chron. Euseb. Pamph., Praef.: PL. 27, 35)
St. Jerome is the patron saint for Scripture scholars and Bible translators. He is most famous for his translation of the Old and New Testaments from Hebrew and Greek into Latin, commonly called the Vulgate (from the Latin word “vulgare” meaning to make accessible or common). His quotation above succinctly captures the frustration everyone has felt who attempts to move from one language to another. It is never simple, and it always involves making choices that can feel more like betrayal than translation.
Many people “assume there is a one-to-one correspondence between words in one language and their mates in another. But a simple glance at any dictionary shows the multiple definitions that exist for any one word within one language” (quote from an unpublished article by Father Paul Turner). It is important to recall that our liturgy is not an original creation of our own making, but has been handed down to us — and in translation at that.
Even before the Second Vatican Council closed, when it became apparent that at least some vernacular would be permitted in the liturgy, English-speaking bishops from various countries began discussing ways to cooperate on a way to produce a common English translation for the whole English-speaking, Catholic world. This was, in part, at the prompting of the council itself. In the “Constitution on the Liturgy” (No. 36.3), the council fathers had recommended that, “whenever it seems to be called for, this authority [an Episcopal Conference, e.g. of the United States] is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.”
The result of these early discussions led to the formation of the “International Commission on English in the Liturgy” (ICEL) on Oct. 17, 1963. Rome established and approved for its governance a constitution composed of 11 member conferences and 15 associate member conferences.
The first changes to the order of the Mass, following upon the recommendations of the bishops at the Second Vatican Council, were promulgated by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on Jan. 25, 1965. The parts of the Mass that pertained to the people were translated by ICEL. The private prayers of the priest and the Eucharistic Prayer were kept in Latin, and the whole text, with the aforementioned parts in English, was published the following year in 1966. This order of the Mass was then thoroughly revised into the shape which is familiar to us today, and it was promulgated in 1969 (in Latin).
ICEL began the work of translation immediately, and a full English translation was published in 1974 — by which time permission had been granted for the celebration of the entire Mass in English. In 1975, Rome promulgated a revised edition of the Missale Romanum (“Roman Missal,” the book containing all the prayers and rubrics necessary for the Mass). This was necessary for a variety of reasons. The office of subdeacon had been suppressed in 1973, and several prayer texts for specific celebrations had been added. The translation of this second edition of the Missale appeared in 1985, the version still in use today.
From the beginning, this work of translation was understood to be a new exercise in the history of the church — at least on such a scale. It was taken for granted that there would be a learning curve, and that the translations would require revision. There had been considerable pressure to make them available as soon as possible. Already in 1983, ICEL began a less rushed process of translation, drawing on the experiences of previous years and consulting broadly with experts in various fields: linguistics, poetry, music, grammar and, of course, spirituality and liturgy. Gradually, a revised translation was approved by all the Episcopal Conferences of ICEL and sent to Rome for approval in 1998. Approval was never given.
[NEXT ISSUE: We delve further into the question of why a new translation of the Roman Missal is taking place.]
(This article was reprinted with permission from The Catholic Missourian, the newspaper of the Diocese of Jefferson City, Mo.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|