Showing posts with label 7 Questions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 7 Questions. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 1, 2017

The Real Douay-Rheims Bible (Review and Interview)

Dr. William von Peters is the author of The Real Douay-Rheims Bible Site, where you can find his transliteration of the original 1610 edition of the venerable Douay-Rheims Bible.  You can purchase both digital and print copies, in various editions, on the website.  

I received a review copy of the Rheims New Testament (1582) which was printed through Lulu.  As you will see from the images provided, it is a very basic paperback edition.   Yet, the print is very clear and the binding seems to be OK.  The scripture, itself, is set out by verse, not in paragraph form, which was custom at that time and remained popular until fairly recently.  Before each chapter you will find, in italics, a summary of that chapter.  In the margins you will find cross-references, commentary focusing on liturgical/lectionary connections, as well as brief notes.  At the end of each biblical chapter, you will find an extensive amount of annotations, which are much more detailed than the what is found in the margins.  These notes are both theological and apologetic.  You will notice two things, the use of the Church Fathers and Councils, as well as a direct focus on refuting the teachings of the Reformation.   In so many ways, these annotations are a window into the time in which they were written.  Many of the reformers are referred to by name, such most notably Martin Luther and John Calvin.  The "errors" of the Protestant reformers are not handled in the more ecumenical spirit of our current days.  For example, the annotation for Romans 3:22 refers to the Calvinist commentary on it as "wicked and vain."  Most of you are aware that by the time of the Challoner revision, much of that style of annotation was eliminated from the text.  

So, I see this text as a very interesting peek into a particular moment of time.  Much like the King James Version, most people who read the Douay-Rheims don't realize that it has been revised and edited since the original version was completed in the early 17th century.  

Recently, I was able to ask Dr. von Peters a few questions about this project.  I'd like to thank him for taking the time to answer my questions.


1) To begin with, could you tell my audience a little bit about yourself?
I am a natural physician with degrees in various natural therapies such as oriental, homeopathic and naturopathic medicine, as well as in religion and humanities. Religiously I'm a former Protestant seminarian and convert to the Catholic Church.


2) What interested you in making the original Douay-Rheims more readable for a modern audience?
As a Protestant, and particularly as a seminarian, we learned all about the unscriptural Catholic Church and its worship of statues and such. While not buying into the idea that Catholics were not Christians, they didn't seem to be Bible Christians.


One day an instructor in one of our courses remarked upon a verse, I can't remember which one any longer, and stated that our seminary believed it meant this, but Baptists thought it meant that, others something else, and Catholics, well they had their own strange ideas At that point I realized that if I was to be responsible for souls as a pastor, and could not be sure of correct interpretation of text, I could not continue, and so left seminary.


Years later, as a result of a divine intervention after being given a "rosary challenge" by a good Catholic, I was told out of the blue by a voice as I walked down the sidewalk that - "the oldest Church is the true Church" - and this set me upon the path of gradually becoming a Catholic. Having been brought up that the worst thing one could do was become a Catholic, it was difficult.


Once in the Church, I heard that the Douay Rheims was the official bible of the Catholic Church and the one that should be used.  Later I learned that the Challoner is not the real Douay Rheims, but Challoner's translation. So I bought a photocopy of the 1610 Douay Rheims, and began reading it. I was struck by the quality and erudition of the notes and annotations, as well as the difference in translation of the original DR compared to other translations I was familiar with.


Reading the notes and annotations of the 1610 original Douay Rheims I found that all the questions that Protestants throw at Catholics were answered easily. It occurred to me that "everyone should have a copy of this bible". The problem was that it was in old English script, and had never been rendered into Latin script; and so was basically unknown, and unreadable to the masses.


I had studied German in high school, and the German script is very close to the old English, and I had no trouble with it, but this would not be so for others. So I set about transliterating the text to render it readable.


3) What was the process by which you transliterated the text?  How long did it take?
The process was to simply sit down at my computer and begin typing. I began with the New Testament, and every evening I would type a chapter or two along with the notes and annotations, trying to keep the formatting close to the original. I'm sure my family wondered about this seeming obsession every evening, but I wanted to get it done as quickly as possible. And it was a daunting job.


My eyesight at that time was much better and I could read the very small print easily. Now I could not do it as with age my eyesight, while still good, is no longer up to the job.


When it was complete after several years of work, I began offering it for sale. The process was so long and intensive that I took a few years off, and didn't really want to get into the Douay Old Testament.


But then one day I decided to begin with it. People had been asking when the Douay would be available and I realized that I needed to get going again. So began the same process of sitting down and typing. During the process, and after I had completed about a third of the Old Testament, someone said they had a pdf file of the Douay, which they gave me.


This new technology enabled me to greatly speed up the process. So I began the slow work of rendering the old English into a workable copy in Latin script. At that point everything sped up as I could work on cleaning up and correcting the copy instead of continuing to type from scratch.


I began with the Rheims in early 1994, and finished just prior to Christmas in 2005. So overall, the time frame was close to twelve years before the entire REAL Douay Rheims Bible was complete.


4) Are there any differences between your work and the original?
Well, there is no difference between the two at all, as all I did was bring the Douay Rheims into our modern world of latin script which is the English that we are familiar with. There are some footnotes that I added to give the meanings for obsolete words in the text, which I got from the Oxford unabridged dictionary, but other than that it is what it was.

5) What else is included in your Real Douay-Rheims? Annotations? Cross-references?
The original Douay Rheims is a remarkable work by Dr. Gregory Martin and his team, and includes cross references, references to verses used in the Mass of various types, such as for a bishop, for a confessor, etc.



The annotations are prodigious. They take up about half of the space in the entire Bible and give the reasons why a certain text means what the Catholic Church says it does. It does this by quoting Doctors of the Church, Saints, Popes, Councils and others. In addition it goes into the reasons why Protestant arguments are not correct and are heretical.


The Bible is the product of the Catholic Church. She put the canon of Scripture together, carefully protected it from the fires of heresy and schism, and made it available to the world as the Word of God - one of the two sources of truth, the other being sacred Tradition.


6) Why do you consider the original Douay-Rheims to be superior to the Challoner revision?
Cardinal Wiseman said regarding Challoner's version: "To call it any longer the Douav or Rheimish Version is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and modified until scarcely any verse remains as it was originally published."


If one looks at the reasons for Bp. Challoner's work one can understand why he did what he did, but it is definitely inferior. He removed pretty much everything against the Protestants, soft pedaled doctrine, and made the translation in line with the King James Bible.


This was done for a reason. Under British penal laws being -caught with the Douay Rheims Bible was an executable offense. Henry VIII set up the Church of England as the only official church in his realm, and Catholics were hounded, persecuted, and executed. The Douay Rheims gave true Catholic doctrine and could not be permitted by the authorities.


So Catholics in England were not allowed the Douay Rheims Bible, and indeed had no bible until Challoner (who was a convert) made his edition and put it between the covers as the Douay Rheims in the 1700s. This was watered down enough to be allowed by the Crown to English Catholics.


As the REAL Douay Rheims was never printed in Latin script (what we today simply call modern English) it became basically an interest of scholars, and was lost to ordinary Catholics. This is what I sought to remedy.

Thursday, July 20, 2017

7 Questions: Samuel Bray

I want to thank Samuel Bray for taking the time to answer my "7 Questions" about their new translation of Genesis 1-11.  I will have a review up in the coming weeks.  (If you are wondering, I would highly encourage you to pick this volume up.)


1) As we get started, I was wondering if you could you tell my audience about how this book came to be? What was your motivation for proceeding with this project?
We each bring different backgrounds and motivations to this project. For John's part, there has been years of study of the Bible in its original languages, teaching Hebrew, service as a pastor, consulting on Bible translations, and blogging at Ancient Hebrew Poetry. I'm a law professor with interests in language and literature. One of my recent papers, for example, is on figures of speech in the Constitution. I had been trying to decide on a Bible translation to read at home with my kids, and I was dissatisfied with the new ones either for their distance from the original or their roughness when read aloud. I started working on a translation of Genesis, and then approached John about it--I knew him from his blog and thought we would have a similar translation philosophy. We started collaborating, and the first volume, on Genesis 1-11, was recently published. It's called Genesis 1-11: A New Old Translation for Readers, Scholars, and Translators 


2) The heart of this book is your translation of Genesis 1-11.  What style of translation would you say it is?  More formal like a NASB or dynamic like the NIV?  
Translations are classified in many different ways. On a spectrum of formal (NASB) to dynamic or functional (NIV) to more paraphrastic (the Message), we're definitely at the formal end. In fact, our translation is often closer to the Hebrew than the NASB is. To be clear, these terms are generalizations: every translation will be "formally equivalent" some of the time and be forced into "paraphrase" in some places, so these labels should be taken as descriptions of a translation's tendency and emphasis.

But that isn't the only way to classify a translation. Compared to more "formal equivalent" recent translations (e.g., NASB, ESV), our translation is more attentive to literary characteristics of the original, including its puns, its figures of speech, its physicality (discussed here and here and its repetitions here). Our translation is also more attentive to how the English text sounds when it is read aloud--rhythm, euphony, pacing, and so on. Of course this claim about the sound of the English is one that many translations make. The proof is in the pudding; we recommend that you taste it.


3) Could you give an example from your translation that shows its unique characteristics?
One verse that shows a number of careful choices is Genesis 6:9. We translate it like this:

---

These are the generations of Noah.
Noah was a righteous man. Perfect was he in his generation. With God Noah walked.

---

Note that our translation is usually not this choppy, but there are several short clauses here, and we render them as separate English sentences, which has the effect of slowing the pace and putting emphasis on each clause.

Let's start with the sentence that is italicized and set off: "These are the generations of Noah." This is an instance of a formula that marks major seams in the Book of Genesis. We don't add headings to the text, but we italicize these and set them off because they are like headings that Genesis itself uses. (A couple instances are complicated, as we discuss in the notes.) Like the older translations, including Douai Rheims, we use "generations" consistently for the keyword in the formula (toledot). That helps the reader follow the use of the formula as a structural marker.

To unpack more of our translation choices in this verse, let me quote three paragraphs from our translation notes (footnotes omitted):

“Perfect” is the traditional rendering. It accords with the Septuagint and Vulgate. Compare Matthew 5:48: “Be yee therefore perfect, euen as your father, which is in heauen, is perfect” (KJV). In recent English translations the dominant rendering is “blameless.” But the Hebrew word (tamim) is not a negation; it expresses integrity and perfection.
***
The word translated “generations” in “These are the generations of Noah” means “begettings.” A different word is translated “generation” in “Perfect was he in his generation.” This word (dor) refers not to the family a person has generated, but to the people generated and living in a given time, and by extension to that time. (Compare “the Greatest Generation.”) This description has long been understood as qualifying the assessment of Noah’s perfection. In Jerome’s words, “Scripture says distinctly in his generation, to indicate that he was righteous not in respect of the highest degree of righteousness, but relative to the righteousness of his own generation.” Other good renderings: “among those of his generation,” “in his age” (NJPS), “in his time” (NASB, Alter). Note that the Hebrew is plural, “in his generations,” and KJV has that more literal rendering.
***
In the Hebrew clause rendered “With God Noah walked,” the word order is unusual, and the placement of “With God” at the beginning of the Hebrew sentence likely emphasizes that it was with God that Noah conducted his affairs, that he walked in the path of righteousness indicated by God, not in the path of his peers. In Genesis 5:24, on the other hand, there is no fronting, because the opposite possibility, of walking with all flesh which “had ruined its way upon the earth,” was not in view: “Enoch walked with God.”


4) One of the things I really appreciate about your book is that, since you reference both Protestant and Catholic translations, it has a true ecumenical spirit to it.  Therefore, it makes this text useful to Catholics, who really don't have anything like this available to them.  Was that intentional?  Was there anything you discovered that was unique to the Catholic translations, in general?
John and I are constantly reminded of the wisdom and skill of our predecessors in translating Genesis. As you note, these include Catholics and Protestants. We also draw on ancient rabbinic commentary, the great Jewish medieval exegetes, and more recent Jewish translations and scholarship, as well as a number of Eastern Church fathers. This ecumenical gathering of insight was certainly intentional. And, truth be told, not unique. Although the translators of the King James Version didn't readily admit it, they leaned on the excellent scholarship in the Douai Rheims version for their translation of the New Testament. (The DR rendering of the Hebrew Bible appeared too late to have much influence on the KJV's rendering of Genesis.) And of course all subsequent translators stand in Jerome's debt on many points.

We quote or cite many Catholic translations of Genesis. The ones we invoke most often are the Vulgate, Douai Rheims, and NABRE, but we also refer to the Old Latin, the Latin version of Sanctus Paginus, the Confraternity Bible, Knox's translation, and the Jerusalem Bible, as well as Catholic-Protestant ecumenical projects like Traduction Å“cuménique de la Bible.

I don't think there's a unique characteristic of Catholic translations. Some translate the Vulgate (e.g., Knox), but the more recent ones translate from the Hebrew, emending the received text at various points (e.g., NABRE). Compared to most recent English translations, the NABRE had better stylists and shows more attention to public reading. But it's hard to say that that's a characteristic of Catholic translations--one could invoke modern counter-examples--and despite its strengths Douai Rheims is not stylistically stronger than Tyndale or the KJV.

In the end, I think the sixteenth-century English translations have more in common with each other, whether Catholic or Protestant, and the twentieth and twenty-first century English translations have more in common with each other, whether Catholic or Protestant. Our translation has more of the virtues and vices of the old translations, but that's another topic.

I should add that we are careful, in theologically sensitive passages, to translate with openness to the history of interpretation. One example is the proto-evangelium (Genesis 3:15), which we render: "Enmity will I set between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. He shall bruise your head; you shall bruise his heel." Moreover, because we try to preserve connections with the rest of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, the reader may find passages that echo in unexpected ways, such as Lamech's "Just as I kill a man for a wound, so a child for a stripe" (Genesis 4:23b)--stripe may call to mind stripes in Isaiah 53, where the same word is used, creating a contrast between the suffering of Lamech and the suffering of the Servant. And our rendering of the end of Genesis 6:6 may for some readers call to mind the cross: "And the LORD was aggrieved that he had made man on the earth, and in his heart he sorrowed."


5) After having examined a number of different Catholic translations for this book, did any of them stand out to you?  Why?
I gained new respect for the Douai Rheims version, which is a translation I had not used much before this project. There are a number of places where it carries over a detail lost in other English translations. Sometimes we follow its lead, as in Genesis 10:11, where it has “Niniue, and the streets of the citie" and we have "Nineveh, and the city's wide squares"--not "Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir" as in many translations.

By the way, we have five indices for the book, including an Index of Authors and an Index of Translations. These make it easy to look for where the notes discuss a favorite author or translation. For example, Thomas Merton is quoted or cited on pp. 98, 109, 128, 133, 168, and 179. NABRE is quoted or cited on pp. 50, 55, 66, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 77, 78, 79, 85, 88, 90, 91, 95, 100, 107 (twice), 109, 112, 113 (twice), 117 (twice), 119, 122, 128, 133, 134, 136, 138, 141, 143, 144, 145, 146 (twice), 147, 151 (twice), 152, 153, 154, 156, 157 (thrice), 159, 160, 161, 162, 165, 168 (twice), 171 (twice), 173, 176, 179 (twice), 184, 188, 189, 193, 196, 225.


6) Are there plans for doing additional volumes?
We are continuing our work on Genesis, which should keep us busy for a while, especially since we both have other full-time vocations.


7) After completing this book on Genesis 1-11, was there a verse or two that you came to appreciate more after doing this book?

There are many, but I think one of them is Genesis 4:13, which we render "My iniquity is too weighty to be forgiven." I had thought of Cain as a petulant complainer, but there are good arguments that he is in fact more like Esau as described in Hebrews 12:17. We have a lengthy note on the translation of this verse (pp. 135-138), explaining this choice. But the bottom line is that the tragedy of Genesis 4 cuts deeper, the sense of loss of divine and human fellowship is much keener, than I had ever realized.

Thank you for the chance to discuss the translation. And I should note that we welcome criticism and suggestions from readers. Thank you!

Thursday, August 20, 2015

5 More Questions for Greg Pierce of ACTA Publications

Greg Pierce is President and Co-Publisher of ACTA Publications.  Back in the summer of 2013, I interviewed Greg concerning the publication of The Message: Catholic/Ecumenical Edition.  I contacted Greg recently to see if he would answer some follow up questions about how The Message was being received by the public, as well as to discuss some of the other upcoming publications from ACTA.


1) It has been almost two years since the publication of The Message: Catholic/Ecumenical Edition.  How do you feel it has been received by the Catholic community?     
It took a while for Catholics to understand what The Message: Catholic/Ecumenical Edition is and how it is meant to be used. There was some confusion as to why it is not an "official" Church translation of the Scriptures. But as they began to understand that The Message is a translation into contemporary American English from the original ancient texts that is meant to help people understand what the Bible means and to inspire them to delve further into what it means for their own lives, then it began to gain traction.
When I first started showing it to Catholics, their reaction was "What is this?" Now it is more, "Yes, I've heard of this, let me take a look at it." And once they get the idea, many of them--especially young people--love it. We are planning our second printing next year, and we authorized a special edition of 10,000 copies of our Catholic edition that is being distributed by the Claretians in Africa and Asia. Many Protestants are buying our edition as well because they want to read the Deuterocanonical books in The Message voice for the first time.


2) What challenges are still out there in getting The Message known about, and more importantly read, by more Catholics?
That is the real issue, isn't it? How do we get Catholics to read the Bible at all? I maintain that before people want to study the Scriptures, they have to fall in love with them first. How do they do that? One of the ways is to read the Bible the way it was written and originally heard: in vibrant, contemporary language, without footnotes or explanations. That is what The Message is designed to do. It is, first and foremost, a "Reader's Bible," one meant to inspire, enlighten, and--yes--entertain the reader. One of the lines we use is that The Message is "a Bible anyone can read and understand." What can possibly be wrong with that? Some Bible scholars and Church officials scoff at The Message, and a few even claim that people should only read translations such as the NAB or the NRSV. But I ask them if The Message were to bring even one person to Christ wouldn't that be a good thing.  Many people, especially young people, find the Church-approved translations difficult at best and incomprehensible at worst. It is almost as if they need to learn a whole new language before they can really enter into the Scriptures. I believe that if people read The Message and like what they read, they will be more open to reading and studying the more traditional translations, footnotes and all. And that, too, would be a good thing, wouldn't it? Most people in ministry who "get" The Message know how to use it to help others understand the Bible. I just have to help them "get" it, and that is what I've been trying to do for the past couple of years.


3) Over the past year, I have noticed an increased integration of The Message into a number of ACTA's books and prayer resources.  Now you are beginning a new series of books called Literary Portals to Prayer.  Could you explain to my readers what this series is about and how The Message is incorporated into it?
Early on, I realized that we would have to give Catholics "free samples" of The Message and that the best way to do that was to incorporate its fresh, compelling, challenging, and faith-filled into other things that people were reading or doing. So one of the first things we did was develop a 45-minute presentation called "The Message Proclaimed" that is written for and performed by a group of young adults. This has turned out to be a great way to introduce The Message to people who might otherwise never experience it. By watching a group of talented young people proclaims 10-12 passages from the Bible in language of The Message, people experience the Scriptures as they were originally "heard"--live and passionately--not as something stuck inside a 2000-year-old book that needs to be "unpacked" for them. We are now offering the script and a DVD of the performance to any diocese, parish, or organization that wishes to put on a performance of "The Message Proclaimed" at no cost. We'll even help train their own young adults to perform it!
We have also incorporated The Message into a variety of books by ACTA Publications (and other publishers as well) so that people could experience the translation in small pieces and wonder "Does the Bible really say that?" We have booklets for Advent and Lent produced by The Pastoral Center that are affordable to be handed out for the entire parish. Last year, we sold 10,000 of them for Lent, and this year we are following the them of Pope Francis' Year of Mercy in the booklets. We have also used The Message in books for the average person such as Great Men of the Bible by Fr. Martin Pable, This Transforming Word by Alice Camille, Christian Contemplative Living by Thomas Santa, Explain That to Me by Joeph McHugh, and Faith, Fun, and other Flotation Devices by Michelle Howe. We also have a new book called Yes, It Is So! 50 Call-and-Response Prayers from The Message for Gatherings, Meetings, and Small Groups.
Finally, you mention our new series Literary Portals to Prayer. I am very excited about these new books. I think they are one of the few truly new resources for personal prayer in many years. My twenty-something daughter, Abby, who is our marketing director and is also researching a volume on George Eliot for this series, calls it "A New Way In." The idea is fairly simple: We take 50 passages from a writer who has stood the test of time (e.g., Shakespeare, Melville, Alcott, Austen, Dickens, Gaskell, Hans Christian Andersen) and pair them with a well-chosen biblical passage from The Message: Catholic/Ecumenical Edition that illuminates the secular quote and takes the reader off in new directions of meditation. Each book is only 120 pages and is produced both in a pocket size (5 x 7") for personal use and an enhanced-size version (7 x 10.5") for public display, performance, and prayer. There is something very grace-filled about the result, and I hope that it will be "a new way in" to prayer for many people and in the process will introduce them to the insights that the Bible can bring to literature and vice versa.


4) What other resources utilizing The Message can we expect in the coming years? Any chance we may see The Message: Catholic/Ecumenical Editionpublished in a variety of styles and sizes in the future?  
We have entered into a new partnership with Tyndale House Publishers to produce and sell the "Catholic Message" to an international and multi-denominational audience. This will include experimenting with new styles and sizes of both the full Bible and individual books. For example, I am interested in doing an illustrated version of the Book of Job, using The Message translation, which has allowed me to understand that great ancient story for really the first time.


5) Finally, does the future look bright for The Message: Catholic/Ecumenical Edition?
I already told my wife, Kathy, that when I die I want her to put on my tombstone: "He always was too optimistic!" I will say that publishing a Catholic/Ecumenical edition of The Message is the most important thing I have done as a publisher in my 30 years in the business, and I believe that this book will inspire many people, including many Catholics and especially many young-adult Catholics to read the Bible for many years. The Holy Spirit will do the rest.



Wednesday, August 12, 2015

7 Questions: Christopher Calderhead


Christopher Calderhead is a visual artist and graphic designer who has exhibited his letter-based works in the United States and Great Britain. He graduated from Princeton with a bachelor's degree in art history. In 1998 he obtained a master of divinity degree from Seabury-Western Theological Seminary. Ordained the same year, he has served parishes in the Church of England and the Episcopal Church USA. He is editor of Alphabet, a journal of the lettering arts published by the Friends of Calligraphy, and author of One Hundred Miracles (2004), a collection of miracle paintings by the great masters.  He recently published, through Liturgical Press, Illuminating the Word: The Making of the Saint John's Bible Second Edition.  I believe it is the best book, currrently in print, concerning The Saint John's Bible.  Christopher blogs at Studio Notes.

1) To start off, could you tell my readers a little bit about the work you do?  How did you get involved in calligraphy?  Was this something that was a passion of yours from early on?

I have been interested in calligraphy and lettering since I was a boy. My father had his own advertising agency in New York, and I grew up in the art department. I remember looking at headlines in the ads the art directors created and pondering the letterforms: Why are the strokes of the sans-serif type Kabel cut off at an angle? How do you draw the fat, balloon shapes of the typeface Cooper Black?

When I was in fourth grade, I traced out a series of alphabets from an old 1930s lettering manual. I used to carry this tracing in my pocket, and when I had to add a heading to an assignment in school, I would carefully unfold it and trace my heading out, letter by letter.

In college at Princeton I majored in Art History, and a lot of the papers I wrote had to do with fine printing and graphic design.

After college, I studied calligraphy and bookbinding at the Roehampton Institute. Ann Camp was my principal teacher, and she grounded me in the rich tradition of edged-pen writing. At Roehampton, for the first time, I was surrounded by people who would sit and discuss the shape of the lower bowl of the lower case g through an entire tea break! It was wonderful.

Since then—that was 25 years ago—I have had a very varied career. For the last ten years, I have concentrated mostly on teaching and writing books. Since 2007, I have been the editor and designer of an international quarterly magazine, Letter Arts Review, which covers all aspects of lettering art, from calligraphy to typography and text-based art.

My own calligraphic and lettering art has evolved over time. Fresh out of Roehampton, I worked in fairly classic styles. Since then, I’ve broadened my approach. I’m not actively seeking commissions these days; most of the lettering art I do is designed as a fine art, and I explore both direct pen- and brush-made lettering along with photomontage and other techniques.


2) Could you talk a little bit about how you got involved with The Saint John's Bible project?

I was living in Cambridge, England, at the time (this is around 1999). I knew Donald Jackson already—I had written an article about him for The Scribe, the journal of the Society of Scribes and Illuminators, and I had visited him and his wife Mabel at their home in Wales.

Jo White was the person who put the deal together. She was one of the most important people involved in making The Saint John’s Bible happen in the first place. She has been one of the great movers and shakers of the Calligraphy world, organizing conferences and workshops, and creating a genuine network for calligraphers to gather and work together. Jo and I knew each other fairly well, and she really pushed for me to be hired to write about the project.

Everyone involved in The Saint John’s Bible knew that the project should be documented. Donald’s staff were careful to collect and save all the sketches and preparatory material. The Bible project sent photographers to shoot Donald and his team at work.

When I was brought on board, I was something of an unknown quantity to the people at Saint John’s. So the initial idea was that I would write a series of articles documenting the process of making the Bible. Each article existed in a long (5000 word) form, and also in shorter excerpt format which could be immediately published. That these would later turn into a book was not guaranteed—but it was a start, a foot in the door, and an opportunity to show I had the chops to do the work.

By the time I left England to move back to the States, I had written about seven or eight articles.

I was at Saint John’s in the summer of 2002, and I pushed the matter with Carol Marrin, who was then Director of the Bible project: Is this going to turn into a book or not? I did a book proposal, and everyone agreed to go ahead and turn my articles into a full-fledged book. (I am simplifying here what was in fact an extremely protracted process!)


3) What was a typical day like observing and documenting the process?

Donald’s Scriptorium in Wales is about 5 hours by train from Cambridge. I had a wonderful boss who gave me some flexibility with my time, so I would go to Wales for short visits—just three days and two nights at a time. Sometimes, I would my vacation days to accommodate a trip.

Donald ran his studio in a very old-fashioned way: his model was very much the old apprenticeship model, and family life and the life of the studio were in many ways complementary.

Sometimes I stayed with Donald and Mabel at their house, which was across the lane from the Scriptorium and its attendant outbuildings. On other visits I would stay with my friend Sally Mae Joseph, who was the studio manager in the early years of the project, and lived in a cottage down the road.

The setting was incredibly bucolic, with the houses and buildings nestled in a hilly countryside surrounded by fields of sheep and small patches of woods.

I would walk over to the Scriptorium after breakfast, and Donald or members of his staff would unpack things for me to look at, talk about the work on the drafting tables, and generally help me explore what it was they were doing. Donald would come and go, but at some point we would sit down for a good, long interview. Sometimes we sat for two or three interviews over the course a visit.

I generally had lunch with the staff in the kitchen of the Scriptorium, and in the evenings we might have dinner out at a pub, or sit down to one of Mabel’s beautifully cooked meals at the big house.

The feeling of these visits was never rushed; I really can say I had the privilege of entering into the ongoing life of the Scriptorium.


4) For those who don't realize how immense and complicated the Saint John's Bible project was, what would you say was one or two of the biggest obstacles Donald Jackson and his team had to overcome?

Now that’s a hard question.

It took well over a decade to complete the manuscript of The Saint John’s Bible. Donald had to assemble teams of scribes and artist to collaborate with him. All the money—and it was serious money—had to be raised for the project. And while the manuscript volumes were being made, an ambitious program of exhibitions and promotional tours was taking place. In addition, once the full-sized printed facsimile, the Heritage Edition, went into production, the project became vastly more complex. All the while, Donald and his counterparts at Saint John’s had to figure out how they planned to work together. It was long learning process for both sides of the negotiation between the artist and his client.

But I will hazard a guess that one of the most challenging aspects of the project arose from the choice of the actual text. The contract specified that Saint John’s would chose which translation was to be used. When they opted for the New Revised Standard Edition (the Catholic edition), they locked in some very specific challenges for Donald. The NRSV has extremely detailed guidelines for how the text may be used. For example, there are four levels of text indentation that have to respected, and the chapter and verse numbers are set up according to a complex formula. As a result, every page had to be set up first on a computer, proofread and approved, and then given to the scribes to write. This not only limited Donald’s freedom to format the text, but introduced a massive logistical issue in coordinating different stages of design and execution with proofreading and computer layout.

The other greatest important challenge, I think, was the simple fear involved for Donald in making what had to be his masterpiece. This project is the culmination of his whole career—the biggest, most sustained project he has ever done. And to take on something as weighted with tradition as the Bible and make something fresh and new and worthy is an enormous, frightening challenge.

One of the things I admire most about what Donald produced is that the Bible looks very much of our own period—it is not an antiquarian exercise. It draws from tradition in many key ways, but this is a contemporary response to the biblical text.


5). Which of the various technical aspects of the project impressed you the most and why?  (Like vellum preparation or making ink or creation of rough drafts...)

Donald is a master with using gold and working on vellum, so of course those aspects were fascinating to see. But the one thing that impressed me the most was the way he created a team of scribes with a unified style.

Most calligraphers today work alone, and so they develop their own personal styles. And calligraphers aren’t used to working like gig musicians, picking up on the riffs of other artists and playing in sync. It’s just not the way the world of modern calligraphy works.

If you go back to the big scriptoria of the Middle Ages, however, you had whole trams of scribes working in a house style. We can look at medieval manuscripts and detect personal characteristics of individual scribes, but we can also see that all the scribes working on a project had a common ethos or way of writing. It’s a very subtle thing—on one hand, there is plenty of personality in those scripts, while on the other hand, their communal effort holds together as a unity.

So the most remarkable aspect of the project—for me—is that Donald assembled a group of contemporary calligraphers and recreated that unifying feel, while not extinguishing the unique personality of each scribe. I don’t think anyone but Donald could have pulled that off. He’s so deeply embedded in the tradition that he understood how to get the group to coalesce into a team.

One of the striking things about his method was that he refused to give them an exemplar—a standard sheet showing the Bible Script. Instead, he talked and demonstrated and the team spent hours writing together to get a feel for the script. As the writing continued, the scribes would gather at intervals in Wales and they would compare their writing. Inevitably, when they were each writing alone at home, their styles would slightly diverge. But by gathering every few months, they would come back into sync with one another.

That’s something really unique about this project.

I contrast that with another 20th century project—the series of Royal Air Force memorial books in St Clement Danes church in London. Those were written in the 1950s, I think—maybe 1960s. The artistic director of that project set a pattern for the scribes to follow, and each book was handed to a separate calligrapher, who worked alone on his or her volume. That project, as fine as it, doesn’t have that unitary flavor that Donald achieved in The Saint John’s Bible.


6) Liturgical Press recently published the second edition of your book "Illuminating the Word: The Making of the Saint John's Bible".  Of all the books concerning the Saint John's Bible it is easily my favorite.  Although it is in the form of a "coffee table" book, I read it so often that it rarely sits on my coffee table, so I hesitate even calling it that.  Could you talk a bit about what the process was working on this book?  What is unique to the second edition?

Of the books I’ve written, this one is very special to me.

There’s a real pressure when you have an institutional client—like a monastery or a university—to write an “official” history of a project like this. It’s simply in the nature of human institutions. You end up having to interview the provost and the dean, each of whom say something pleasant about the project. It’s easy to end up with a lot of platitudes that aren’t very interesting to read.

I was determined when I began writing the chapters that became Illuminating the Word that I wanted to tell a good story, and give people the feeling of being there in the moment. I took a risk by writing it in the first person, because the book is not about me. But that seemed the best way to capture the immediacy of the scenes I was describing.

Although the chapters in the first book were written to specific themes such as the layout of the pages or the search for the proper writing surface, I chose to treat them in a narrative fashion. So in effect, I take the reader on a journey to visit the project and discover it alongside me. I think that’s why a lot of people have reacted positively to the book. It’s not dry. It’s a good story.

The first book was published to coincide with the first exhibition of the Bible at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts in 2005. At that point, Donald had completed only three of the seven volumes of the manuscript, so my book detailed the making of Gospels and Acts and the Pentateuch and ended with the Psalms volume. We knew that once had finished all seven volumes we would probably need to do a second edition and bring the story to its close.

The second edition preserves most of the chapters of the first one. We made as few changes in those as possible.

We then added a whole new section that told the story of each volume in a step-by-step fashion, detailing which artists and scribes joined the project at each stage, how the layout and design of the volumes developed, and recounting some of the difficulties and challenges that arose along the way.

The third part of the new edition looks at specific aspects of the production of The Saint John’s Bible. Tim Ternes, the current director of the Bible project, has a lot of experience talking to visitors who come to Saint John’s and to the exhibitions, and he knew what kinds of questions people asked. As a result, we added a very technical chapter on the scripts of the Bible, geared toward accomplished calligraphers, and explaining the characteristics of the various scripts in the book. We also added a chapter on how the pages were prepared for exhibition and stored. And we added a full chapter with interviews with each artist and scribe who participated in the project.

Probably one of the most important new chapters is the one that describes the printing of the full-size facsimile Heritage Edition. I have to say here that I can be kind of old-school sometimes, and I always thought that the manuscript was the main thing. People are so used to printed books that they assume the point of a project like this is to produce an edition. But I feel quite strongly the manuscript is the original artwork, and any printed edition is essentially something else. So it was always clear to me that such offshoots of the project like the reduced-size “trade edition” facsimiles were wonderful in their own right, but quite secondary to the main project, which was to produce a manuscript.

The Heritage Edition really changed the game. It was produced at the full size of the original, and it was lavishly printed and bound. Eventually, it became a project of its own, and Donald split his time between finishing the manuscript and working with the printers and other skilled craftspeople to produce a really exquisite printed version of the manuscript. Now we can really say that The Saint John’s Bible exists both as an original manuscript and as a full-size printed edition.

That change in the nature of the project was very important to capture, which is why we added a separate chapter to describe it.

Altogether, the second edition gives a really comprehensive account of how The Saint John’s Bible was made.


7) Finally, do you have a favorite illumination or text treatment from the Saint John's Bible?  Why?

Oh man. It’s very hard to choose.

Of the illuminations, the one that consistently sticks my mind is the image of Wisdom from the Wisdom of Solomon. Donald rendered her as an old, wise woman, who looks directly at the viewer. The background is metal leaf in two tones, so the effect is like that of a mirror, as though one is both seeing the figure of divine Wisdom and looking at oneself at the same time. I love the fact that the face is rendered in a somewhat photographic manner, although without color and half-tones.

In that illumination I think Donald really succeeded in creating a brand-new image that has an iconic quality. It’s not like anything in the long history of Christian art, yet it also has the distilled quality of devotional imagery.

I also appreciate the fact that that illumination reflects a theological interest in mining the Bible for images of the feminine. The Bible is clearly the product of patriarchal societies, and reflects the values of those societies. In our time, many Christians have wanted to redress the balance and find messages and images that celebrate women and their role within the communities of faith, as well as seeking to move away from purely masculine understandings of the divine.

In the end, however, I like that image simply because it sticks in my mind, and that’s a mark of an effective work of art.

But I should close with this—whenever I spend time looking at The Saint John’s Bible, I almost always look carefully at the large blocks of capitals that make up the beginning of some of the books. Genesis 1 is a perfect example. Those massed caps are incredibly subtle. Donald uses his quill to make shapes that often depart from the purely classical forms of traditional scripts. Those caps show how deeply he understands the way our letters function, and he has no need to be consistent with his letterforms. In fact, he plays with them, pushing and distorting them in incredibly sophisticated ways. It’s looking at those caps that really sends the shiver down my spine.