Guest Post: One Approved Translation per Territory (w/ Fr. Neil)

Given some confusion in the discussion about the possibility of using the RNJB as the basis of a new Lectionary, I thought it might be helpful to explain a little the current rationale of having only one Biblical translation per language per bishops’ conference.  So that, for example, the Bishops’ Conference of Canada is welcome to have one Bible translation for their French Lectionary and another for their English, but is not allowed to use both the NRSV and the NAB and have two English language Lectionaries.

Immediately after Vatican II, the Congregation for Divine Worship (CDW) in Rome approved multiple lectionaries for the same region. So that in the United States three lectionaries were approved: The Jerusalem Bible, The New American Bible and the Revised Standard Version. In Ireland, England & Wales and Scotland, the Jerusalem Bible and the Revised Standard Version were both approved.  I am not sure which translations were approved in other regions. When the current US Lectionary that uses an adaptation of a revision (of a revision) of the New American Bible was approved in 1998 and 2001 the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops themselves withdrew permission to use the three older Lectionaries (JB, RSV and NAB 1^st ed.).

In 2001 the CDW published Liturgiam Authenticam the Fifth Instruction “for the Right Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council.”

This instruction radically transformed the translation philosophy of the Catholic Church. In number 36 this document says:

36. In order that the faithful may be able to commit to memory at least the more important texts of the Sacred Scriptures and be formed by them even in their private prayer, it is of the greatest importance that the translation of the Sacred Scriptures intended for liturgical use be characterized by a certain uniformity and stability, such that in every territory there should exist only one approved translation, which will be employed in all parts of the various liturgical books. This stability is especially to be desired in the translation of the Sacred Books of more frequent use, such as the Psalter, which is the fundamental prayer book of the Christian people. The Conferences of Bishops are strongly encouraged to provide for the commissioning and publication in their territories of an integral translation of the Sacred Scriptures intended for the private study and reading of the faithful, which corresponds in every part to the text that is used in the Sacred Liturgy.

This desire for a single translation was not retroactive.  But when any new liturgical book was approved in a region, permission to use any older translations was automatically withdrawn. However, in Ireland while the JB Lectionary is basically the only Lectionary used at the parish level, the current JB Lectionary pre-dates 2001, so the 1970 RSV Lectionary is still approved for use. However if a new Lectionary was approved for use in Ireland, the JB and the RSV would automatically be withdrawn.   

So from a technical point of view, the fact that the CDW has approved a Lectionary for one region, that permission does not carry to other countries. So if a RNJB Lectionary was approved in Ireland, technically it could not be used in a celebration in the U.S. This can be seen, for example, in the case of the RSV. Ignatius Press prepared a Lectionary based on their own edition of the RSV (The Second Catholic Edition). This was approved as the Lectionary in the Antilles. However many US parishes considered adopting it.  In the April 2006 edition of the Newsletter of the Committee on the Liturgy of the USCCB carried this clarification:

Approved Editions of the Lectioanry for Mass

The Secretariat has recently received many inquiries concerning the use of an edition of the Lectionary for Mass based on the Revised Standard Version of the Scriptures and available from Ignatius Press. This Lectionary has not been approved for use in the Dioceses of the United States of America. Only the New American Bible edition of the Lectionary for Mass, published in 1998 and 2001 may be used at celebration of the Liturgy in this country.

However, as I noted in my original post, Pope Francis has officially said that the translation principals of Liturgiam Authenticam are to be revised. So it is possible that a bishops’ conference could ask for more than one Lectionary to be used at the same time. There is no way to know what the guidelines that replace Liturgiam Authenticam will say in this regard. I personally hope that they will allow the bishops to make a pastoral decision that best suits their region. Although it is also worth noting that the market forces of printing Lectionaries, hand missals, devotional books, worship aids, etc. make it impractical to have too many editions in use in a given area.

At the end of the day, if the bishops ask for a particular liturgical bool to be recognized, the CDW may well grant their request. This is the case in English-speaking Africa. They use a 2012 edition of the RSV Lectionary (which form their website looks very like the Ignatius Press Lectionary and a 2009 edition of the Liturgy of the Hours, that uses the New American Bible. Surely Liturgiam Autheticam 36 mandated that they use one translation for these liturgical books that are boith almost entirely composed of scripture passages and published within 3 years of each other, and which must have been in preparation at the same time. This shows that even before Pope Francis said that Liturgiam Authenticam was no longer fit for purpose, during the time-period when many liturgists thought that the CDW was being very inflexible in their supervision of liturgical translation, that it was still possible to have more than one Scripture in use in a given region.

Neil Xavier O'Donoghue is a priest of the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey. He currently ministers in the Archdiocese of Armagh, Ireland, where he serves as vice rector at Redemptoris Mater Seminary. He has studied at Seton Hall University, the University of Notre Dame, and St Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary. He holds a Doctorate in Theology from St Patrick’s College, Maynooth.

Is the RNJB a Viable Option for the New Lectionary?

I would like to thank Fr. Neil Xavier O’Donoghue for providing this essay on the RNJB and the Roman Lectionary.  Fr. Neil will be a regular guest contributor, focusing on issues related to the lectionary and other translation issues.  Please welcome him to the Catholic Bibles Blog.  A full bio is below.

Lectionary translation is a tricky business. Initially after Vatican II a number of English lectionaries were prepared and in many areas parishes were free to pick the translation that best suited them.  In the United States three translations were approved: The Jerusalem Bible, The Revised Standard Version and the New American Bible. Of these the New American Bible was the most widely used.

In 2001 the Congregation of Divine Worship in Rome published an instruction called Liturgiam Authenticam that regulates liturgical translation in Catholic liturgy.  Liturgiam Authenticam 36 deals with the use of scripture in the liturgy:

In order that the faithful may be able to commit to memory at least the more important texts of the Sacred Scriptures and be formed by them even in their private prayer, it is of the greatest importance that the translation of the Sacred Scriptures intended for liturgical use be characterized by a certain uniformity and stability, such that in every territory there should exist only one approved translation, which will be employed in all parts of the various liturgical books. This stability is especially to be desired in the translation of the Sacred Books of more frequent use, such as the Psalter, which is the fundamental prayer book of the Christian people. The Conferences of Bishops are strongly encouraged to provide for the commissioning and publication in their territories of an integral translation of the Sacred Scriptures intended for the private study and reading of the faithful, which corresponds in every part to the text that is used in the Sacred Liturgy.

This preference for a single translation of Scripture was implemented in the United States and (even before Liturgiam Authenticam) when the current Lectionary edition was adopted permission to use the three earlier translations was withdrawn. Although it is worth noting that the current US Lectionary is not actually from any published edition of the New American Bible. John Allen, the veteran Vatican reporter, analyzed the process used to produce the current US Lectionary in a 1998 article.

Canada also has a fairly new edition of the Lectionary using an adapted edition of the New Revised Standard Version.  Ignatius Press prepared a new edition of the Lectionary using their own Second Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version that was approved for use in the Antilles. Some had hoped that US parishes might adopt this as an alternative to the New American Bible, but this was not possible due to the restrictions of Liturgiam Authenticam and this edition of the Lectionary was eventually adopted by the Ordinariates for their liturgy. Surprisingly an edition of this Lectionary was also adopted by English Africa (with the Revised Grail Psalms), even though this seems to be in contravention of Liturigam Authenticam as they had recently published a new edition of the Liturgy of the Hours uses the New American Bible (also with the Revised Grail Psalms). 

However, in many English speaking countries the Jerusalem Bible Lectionary has remained in use as basically the only Lectionary version, and these regions are still using the initial edition of the Lectionary prepared in the aftermath of the Council (with minor revisions made in 1981). This is the case in Ireland, England and Wales, Scotland, Australia and New Zealand.  

Today this Lectionary is clearly in need of revision.  Over the years there have been attempts by the bishops of these regions to prepare a new Lectionary using the New Revised Standard Version, the English Standard Version, and, most lately, the Revised Standard Version.  For one reason or another (usually to do with copyright) all of these projects have failed to produce a new Lectionary and some have suggested that there is now a certain fatigue on the part of the bishops regarding the prospect of starting another process to produce a new Lectioanry.

The Jerusalem Bible has served the Church well and is now over 50 years old. In 1985 a new edition (the New Jerusalem Bible) was prepared by the Benedictine Dom Henry Wansbrough. This was based on the newer French edition and contains updated scholarship and has corrected some of the translation inaccuracies of the original English translation.  However, to my knowledge, this newer edition was never used in any approve liturgical book.

Readers of this blog will be aware that Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd have recently published the New Testament of the Revised New Jerusalem Bible. This edition was also prepared by Benedictine Henry Wansbrough and is a thoroughly reworked translation that is more faithful to the original text, has been prepared with an eye to proclamation and has a moderate use of inclusive language.

The New Testament has been published before the full Bible to allow the public to have an appreciation of the full project while the final touches are being put to the Old Testament which will be published before the end of this year (and is in the process of receiving an imprimatur).

Personally I have been impressed by the quality of the translation and have been wondering if it could provide a relatively painless solution to the Lectionary problem in those countries that use the Jerusalem Bible Lectionary. In particular, given that it is the direct successor of the original Jerusalem Bible, the translation already sounds familiar to Catholics in these countries. I believe that there is a great value in continuity in translation. Also given that there are new translation guidelines governing the process of liturgical translation, it should now be easier to officially prepare a new Lectionary edition.

During the Easter season a peculiarity of the Lectionary is that it uses only New Testament readings. Therefore I propose that the readers of this blog help me to compare the current Jerusalem Bible version of the Sunday Lectionary readings with the same passages in the Revised New Jerusalem Bible.  

Each week I will post a comparative table of the two translations of the selection of readings for that Sunday’s Mass accompanied with a short analysis of any differences that I note. I invite readers to chime in with their comments. The goal of this exercise is to help answer the question if it would be wise to propose this new translation of the Bible as the basis for a new Lectionary in those regions that already use the Jerusalem Bible in their Lectionary.

This week we are posting the first comparative version for the Mass of the Day of Easter Sunday. Due to the length of this introduction I have not prepared any comments on the translations, but I invite the readers to do so in the comments section.

Neil Xavier O'Donoghue is a priest of the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey. He currently ministers in the Archdiocese of Armagh, Ireland, where he serves as vice rector at Redemptoris Mater Seminary. He has studied at Seton Hall University, the University of Notre Dame, and St Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary. He holds a Doctorate in Theology from St Patrick’s College, Maynooth.

Show Me the Money: NAB(RE)

If you have been a regular to Catholic online forums (or even this blog at times) and the topic comes up about the NAB, someone will eventually bring up the issue of the royalities that are collected for licensing the NAB.  Usually the person who brings up this issue does so with an axe to grind against the NAB, CCD, or USCCB. 

Well, I was happy that our friend, Mary Sperry, passed along a recent USCCB Press Release that shows were some of this money goes.  (There are others not listed here.)  I thought I would share it with you so you could see for yourself:

November 3, 2017

WASHINGTON—This Fall 2017, for the first time, the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD) awarded grants in the amount of $85,900 for four projects that support the goals of the CCD to promote Catholic biblical literacy and Catholic biblical interpretation.

Funding for these grants comes from the royalties received from the publication of the New American Bible and its derivative works which the CCD develops, publishes, promotes, and distributes.

The four projects sponsored by the CCD are as follows:

• $11,750 to Dr. Todd Hibbard (Associate Professor, University of Detroit Mercy) for field research in Jerusalem related to his project on the rhetoric of urban destruction in the prophetic books of the Old Testament. This research will inform the forthcoming monograph, Prophets and Prophecy in Ancient Israel and Judah: A Phenomenological Approach.
  
• $11,800 to Father Robert Lapko (Moderator for the Centre for Biblical and Near Eastern Studies of the Archdiocese of Košice, Slovakia) to provide partial financial support for continuing biblical education and formation of Slovak clergy through seminars, and intensive summer school for biblical languages, and a study trip to the Holy Land.
  
• $17,350 to Dr. Patrick Russell (Chief Academic Officer and Professor of Scripture Studies, Sacred Heart Seminary and School of Theology, Hales Corners, WI) for a project to ascertain the most effective preaching strategies employed by priests that lead parishioners to more profound encounters, focusing on the Gospel parables in the Sunday Lectionary for Mass.
  
• $45,000 to Dr. Nathan Eubank and Dr. Markus Bockmuehl (Keble College, University of Oxford) for 12-month research project designed to contribute to renewed understanding of the relationship between Scripture and the early Christian creeds, particularly, the Apostles' Creed.

The CCD works with the Catholic Biblical Association (CBA) to offer these grants accepting applications only from the CBA, including the organization itself, its designees, and its active and associate members. In fidelity to Dei Verbum, the CBA's purpose is to promote scholarly study in Scripture and related fields by meetings of the association, publications, and support to those engaged in such studies.

New Official NAB(RE) Site!

Press Release:

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Acquires Catholic.Bible

November 6, 2017

WASHINGTON—The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has acquired Catholic.Bible. 

The domain serves as the home base for resources for National Bible Week. This year’s National Bible Week celebration takes place November 12-18. In recognition of the 25^th anniversary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the theme for this year is The Bible: A Book of Faith/ La Biblia: Un Libro de la Fe.

In addition, Catholic.Bible is the place to also find Lectio Divina resources (English and Spanish) for every Sunday of the year, an expansion of past years’ resources which were limited to Advent/Christmas and Lent/Easter.

Other resources available on Catholic.Bible include:

• A survey on Bible use among Catholics sponsored by American Bible Society
• An RSS feed of the daily readings in English and Spanish
• A link to the New American Bible, revised edition (NABRE)

More resources will be added in the months ahead. Catholic.Bible went live, October 31.

The .Bible top-level domain is a trusted online source for all things Bible. The mission of .Bible is to encourage Bible engagement, translation, innovation, and global partnerships so that all people may experience the life-changing message that the Bible gives us.

The American Bible Society, a Christian ministry that has equipped people to engage with the life-changing message of God's Word for over 200 years, operates the .BIBLE registry.

Please visit Catholic.Bible at https://catholic.bible/.

First Things Article on Sacral Language

Thanks to the Surly Hermit for passing this First Things article along to me.  It is in the November edition and available online.

Thus Saith the Lord
by Nathaniel Peters

One Sunday in high school, we went to the Anglo-Catholic parish where my headmaster served as an assistant priest. Catechized by evangelical Episcopalians and Presbyterians, I believed that the Bible was divinely inspired by God. But I had never seen it treated as such in a physical or ritual way. Down Mr. Jarvis came, robed in damask and the smoke of incense, into the congregation to sing and kiss the Word of God. He spoke the words of the King James Bible, a language steeped in the same reverence for Scripture that the liturgy made manifest.

My thoughts drifted to that day on seeing the news that Pope Francis has appointed a commission to review Liturgiam Authenticam, the Congregation for Divine Worship’s 2001 instruction governing translations of the Mass and sacramental rites into vernacular languages. More recently, he issued a decree giving local bishops’ conferences greater control over such translations. The conflict is partly over jurisdiction: Who should decide what is an acceptable Japanese translation of the liturgy, a committee in Japan or in Rome?
Continue on here.

Let me note here that the main point of this essay would be in conflict with Msgr. Ronald Knox.  When Peters quotes Nicholson, in his work God’s Secretaries, saying that the KJV translators considered it more important “to make English godly than to make the words of God unto the sort of prose that any Englishman would have written” he is in direct contrast to what Knox thought, in regards to translation.  Knox, in his book On Englishing the Bible, references the great Hilaire Belloc, saying, “The great principle he there lays down is that the business of a translator is not to ask, ‘How shall I make this foreigner talk English’ but ‘What would an Englishman have said to express this?‘“ 

 I am eager to read your thoughts on this, as always, let’s engage in this topic with great charity.

Local Kid Beat Up On Church Playground For Carrying NIV

Thanks to Chris for passing along this article from the satirical site The Babylon Bee:

DALLAS, TX—Local youngster Caleb Beckett brought his trusty NIV Bible For Boys to church Sunday, as he does every week. But this Sunday was different, as a classmate reportedly noticed for the first time that Beckett was using the NIV translation.

According to sources, the classmate began to loudly ridicule him for his choice of translation, resulting in a group of young hooligans assaulting the youth and mocking him.

Witnesses confirmed that Beckett effectively shielded himself with his Bible—aided by the fact that it was housed in a very large and elaborate Bible cover—until one of the bullies got a hold of him while the others pummeled him, shouting insults like, “Dynamically equivalent little dork!” and “You wouldn’t know a good translation if it bit you in the butt!”

Finally, Beckett was thrown to the ground while the gang of ESV-wielding youths threw his NIV translation up onto a tree branch, far out of his reach.

“You’ll have better luck jumping up to grab your so-called ‘Bible’ than the NIV translators did imposing their gender neutrality on the text, you chump!” one of the bullies called out as they high-fived each other and left Beckett moaning in the playground sand, sources confirmed.

This made me think, if there was an equivalent in the Catholic bible translation world.  Hmmm.....I would think in some circles the NAB takes a lot of grief/crap from people who generally aren't aware of how that text has changed over the years.  Your thoughts?  (Let's not take this too serious, just have some fun.)

Freshmen Bible Day

Physical Comparison of The Catholic Study Bible 1990 + 2016

Over the past few years, I have slowly been gifting away most of the bibles I have accumulated since this blog started in 2008.  Two bibles I have kept, however, are the 1990 and 2016 The Catholic Study Bible (CSB) published by Oxford University Press.  They represent the first and the most recent update in this venerable edition.  I am not going to spent that much time discussing the content in both of these bibles, but rather I am going to look at their physical and visual qualities.   However, as we get started, it is important to note that the 1990 edition contains the original 1970 NAB OT (including the original NAB Psalter) and the 1986 NAB revised NT.  The 2016 edition contains the now branded NABRE, with fully revised OT and 1986 revised NT.  (The 2016 edition is also important since it finally updated the extensive reading guides to reflect the NABRE OT, which was not reflected in the 2011 edition.)  The reading guides in both editions are a little under 600 pages in length, but the content is different reflecting updates to scholarship and translation.

The first thing you will notice is the size.  The 2016 is thicker than the original, even though its length is a tad bit shorter.  There are two reasons for this: The first is that the 2016 has considerably more study helps included compared to the original 1990.  When the original came out, it was praised for the extensive reading guides, essays, appendix materials, Sunday Lectionary Readings, and Oxford Maps that accompanied the NAB translation and notes.  Yet, times have changed and the demand for "more" in a study bible have continued to increase.  The newest edition contains all of what the previous edition had, but also more essays, full lectionary readings, updated Oxford Maps, concise concordance, and dozens of in-text mini-essays, charts, drawings, and maps.  The second reason for the size difference is that in the early 90's Oxford created their study bibles with generous margins.  I own the 1991 New Oxford Annotated Study Bible (NRSV) and it too has the same generous margins. 

The cover materials have also changed in the years since 1990, at least for these Catholic editions.  My 1990 CSB was bounded in genuine leather.  Being almost 27 years old, it still has a nice feel to it and continues to have no structural issues.  The sewn binding allows it to still lay open flat, just like it did when I first got it.  The 2016 is made of a fairly stiff bonded leather.  No genuine leather edition is available currently.  A genuine leather cover was not available for the previous edition as well.  Now, if you are suggesting that Oxford isn't doing quality genuine leather editions any more, I will point you to their most recent NOAB NRSV 4th Edition.  That is a beautifully crafted cover, which may be the nicest genuine leather cover I have ever held in my life.  So, it can be done.  The only reason I can think as to why Oxford hasn't done the CSB in genuine leather is the fact that Catholics simply don't buy premium bibles in the numbers that will allow most publishers to make a profit.  Over the many years of this blog, I hate to say it, but I think that remains true for the most part.  

Lastly, the differences in the page-layout are striking.  The 1990 has much more space to it and feels less confined and cramped.  The 2016, while still attractive to read from and enhanced by the many in-text maps, charts, and essays, just isn't as appealing compared to the original.  This, I know, is completely subjective, but I also feel the same way about how the page-layouts have progressed in the NOAB NRSV's as well, which in many ways parallel each other.  

Overall, these are two very different study bibles from Oxford.  Over the span of 26 years, the translations changed, twice, the reading guides were updated, more material was added, and the physical/visual quality morphed into something different.  If I were to sum it up in one sentence, it would be this: While the content improved in almost every way, the packaging of that content decreased in quality.  

As always, your thoughts?

Older NAB College Bible on Big Discount

My friend Paul, at the Pastoral Center, is offering a pretty massive discount on the Saint Mary's Press College Study Bible which utilizes the pre-2011 NAB.  Each of these editions are on sale for $5.00 in their softcover version.  I own one and appreciate that it does include a ton of extra information and articles.  Although it is intended for college students, I think it could also be used for high schoolers as well.

Some of the features of this edition:

• Introductory articles on how to read and understand the Bible, along with the Vatican Council II document Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum)
• Scholarly introductions to each section and book of the Bible, written and edited so that unfamiliar concepts and customs are easy to understand
• Ninety short articles that address the social concerns, life issues, and spiritual needs of a student
• Colorful in-text maps, illustrations, charts, biblical art, and photos throughout
• Additional study aids, including a glossary of biblical terms, table of Sunday lectionary readings, and biblical history timeline.

Guest Post: The NAB vs. the Lectionary (Feast of St. Mark)

Thanks again to Robert for doing this new series!

Feast of St. Mark the Evangelist

Entrance Antiphon

Mark 16:15b

Lectionary:

Go into all the world, and proclaim the Gospel to every creature, alleluia.

NAB 1970/1986

Go into the whole world and proclaim the gospel to every creature.

Nothing to see here, really.  I suppose the lectionary text is marginally more poetic.  Alleluia, of course, isn't from the bible text.  I suppose this is one of those little things that causes changing a lectionary to take a decade.

  

First Reading
1 Peter 5:5B-14

Lectionary:

Beloved:
Clothe yourselves with humility
in your dealings with one another, for:

God opposes the proud
but bestows favor on the humble.

So humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God,
that he may exalt you in due time.
Cast all your worries upon him because he cares for you.

Be sober and vigilant.
Your opponent the Devil is prowling around like a roaring lion
looking for someone to devour.
Resist him, steadfast in faith,
knowing that your brothers and sisters throughout the world
undergo the same sufferings.
The God of all grace
who called you to his eternal glory through Christ Jesus
will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you
after you have suffered a little.
To him be dominion forever. Amen.

I write you this briefly through Silvanus,
whom I consider a faithful brother,
exhorting you and testifying that this is the true grace of God.
Remain firm in it.
The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting, as does Mark, my son.
Greet one another with a loving kiss.
Peace to all of you who are in Christ.

New American Bible 1970/1986

And all of you, clothe yourselves with humility in your dealings with one another, for:

“God apposes the proud

but bestows favor on the humble”

So humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time.  Cast all your worries upon him because he cares for you.

Be sober and vigilant.  Your opponent the devil is prowling around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.  Resist him, steadfast in faith, knowing that your fellow believers throughout the world undergo the same sufferings.  The God of all grace who called you to his eternal glory through Christ Jesus will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you after you have suffered a little.  To him be dominion forever.  Amen.

I write you this briefly through Silvanus, whom I consider a faithful brother, exhorting you and testifying that this is is the true grace of God.  Remain firm in it.  The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting, as does Mark, my son.  Greet one another with a loving kiss.  Peace to all of you who are in Christ.

Exactly the same except for the incipit, which provides an antecedent for the “you” in the reading as it appears in the NAB.

Responsorial Psalm

Psalm 89:2-3, 6-7, 16-17

Lectionary:

R. For ever I will sing the goodness of the Lord.
or:
R. Alleluia.

The favors of the LORD I will sing forever;
through all generations my mouth shall proclaim your faithfulness.
For you have said, "My kindness is established forever";
in heaven you have confirmed your faithfulness.

The heavens proclaim your wonders, O LORD,
and your faithfulness, in the assembly of the holy ones.
For who in the skies can rank with the LORD?
Who is like the LORD among the sons of God?

Blessed the people who know the joyful shout;
in the light of your countenance, O LORD, they walk.
At your name they rejoice all the day,
and through your justice they are exalted.

New American Bible 1970/1986:

The favors of the Lord I will sing

forever;

through all generations my mouth

shall proclaim your faithfulness.

For you have said, “My kindness is

established forever”;

in heaven you have confirmed

your faithfulness”

The heavens proclaim your wonders,

O Lord,

and your faithfulness, in the

assembly of the holy ones.

For who in the skies can rank with

the Lord?

Who is like the Lord among the

sons of God?

Happy the people who know the

joyful shout;

in the light of your countenance,

O Lord, they walk.

At your name they rejoice

all the day,

and through your justice they are exalted.

For contrast, the NABRE:

I will sing of your mercy forever, LORD

proclaim your faithfulness through all ages.

For I said, “My mercy is established forever;

my faithfulness will stand as long as the heavens.”

The heavens praise your marvels, LORD,

your loyalty in the assembly of the holy ones.

Who in the skies ranks with the LORD?

Who is like the LORD among the sons of the gods?

Blessed the people who know the war cry,

who walk in the radiance of your face, LORD.

In your name they sing joyfully all the day;

they rejoice in your righteousness.

And the Revised Grail Psalms:

I will sing forever of your mercies, O LORD;

through all ages my mouth will proclaim your fidelity.

I have declared your mercy is established forever;

your fidelity stands firm as the heavens.

The heavens praise your wonders, O LORD,

your fidelity in the assembly of your holy ones.

For who in the skies can compare with the LORD,

or who is like the LORD among the heavenly powers?

How blessed the people who know your praise,

who walk, O LORD, in the light of your face,

who find their joy every day in your name,

who make your justice their joyful acclaim.

The response is an adaptation of the 2^nd verse of the psalm, which matches neither the lectionary text as the reader or cantor presents, nor the NAB.  The lectionary shows its allergy to the use of the word “happy” when “blessed” is an option.  I tend to agree with that decision.  Many translations seemed to opt for “happy” in the heady days of the mid 20^th century, but I suppose the word simply seems banal and overused now. 

Here, the NABRE shows how one must take the sour with the sweet when it comes to formal equivalence translations.  “I will sing of your mercy forever, Lord” is magnificent in its simplicity and its beauty.  Other parts (“skies”, “sons of the gods”, “war cry”) remind us that the original context of the psalms was one much different from ours.  The world of the psalter is an untamed one, and to ignore that is frankly to ignore the psalter.  Notice the difference in Verse 3 between the NABRE and the original 1970 translation. 

As you may know, the Revised Grail Psalms are another choice for the liturgy.  Rumor was that it would become the norm for the Liturgy of the Hours and the Mass, but that may not end up occurring.  I am unsure if that would be because the Bishops' Conference is nervous about the official Psalter of the American Church being so tightly controlled by GIA or their not wanting to see the NABRE psalms orphaned after years of effort.  Perhaps someone with much more knowledge can add something to the conversation.

My first instinct while reading the responsorial psalms back to back to back is that the Revised Grail version is head and shoulders above the others, but I wonder what an expert in Hebrew poetry would think of this.  Like the Grail Psalms themselves, this revised version seems to be sandpapered of any rough edges and obscure bits.  In the NABRE, some of the psalms sound like dirges, some sound like war songs, and some sound like prayers.  In the Grail Psalms, by contrast, they all sound like prayers.  I'm not sure if that is a bad thing or a great thing.  The vocabulary of the Grail Psalms seems to have been preserved in this Revised Version—perhaps this joyous familiarity is simply that it sounds a lot like the Liturgy of the Hours. 

Alleluia Verse
1 Corinthians 1:23A, 24B

Lectionary:

We proclaim Christ crucified:
he is the power of God and the wisdom of God.

New American Bible 1970/1986:

But we proclaim Christ crucified, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Note that the NAB text would make more sense with I:23B included.  So far in this study, the lectionary seems to use the most freedom in the antiphons and alleliuia verse.  Here, the lectionary has mercifully added a verb to the final clause.  Perhaps some Greek expert will tell us if the NAB's odd syntax there is faithful to the Greek or simply a snatch of English which is odd to these ears.

Gospel

MK 16:15-20

Lectionary:

Jesus appeared to the Eleven and said to them:
"Go into the whole world
and proclaim the Gospel to every creature.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved;
whoever does not believe will be condemned.
These signs will accompany those who believe:
in my name they will drive out demons,
they will speak new languages.
They will pick up serpents with their hands,
and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not harm them.
They will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."

Then the Lord Jesus, after he spoke to them,
was taken up into heaven
and took his seat at the right hand of God.
But they went forth and preached everywhere,
while the Lord worked with them
and confirmed the word through accompanying signs.

New American Bible 1970/1986

He said to them:
"Go into the whole world
and proclaim the Gospel to every creature.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved;
whoever does not believe will be condemned.
These signs will accompany those who believe:
in my name they will drive out demons,
they will speak new languages.
They will pick up serpents with their hands,
and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not harm them.
They will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."

So then the Lord Jesus, after he spoke to them,
was taken up into heaven
and took his seat at the right hand of God.
But they went forth and preached everywhere,
while the Lord worked with them
and confirmed the word through accompanying signs.

These two texts are exactly the same except for the incipit and the deletion of the word “so” in the lectionary. 

Communion Antiphon

Matthew 28:20

Lectionary:

Behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the age, says the Lord, alleluia.

New American Bible 1970/1986:

And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.

The “and” which make this last verse of Matthew so pleasing to the ear is unnecessary when shorn of its context as an antiphon. 

Final observation:

The NAB 1970/1986 proves to be all but identical to the lectionary.

The first comparison with the NABRE reveals the limits of a formal equivalence approach to the Old Testament, as well as some of that translation's underrated beauty.

Guest Post: The Bible, the NAB(RE), and the Lectionary at Mass

Thank you to Robert for the first in a series of two guest posts.

You have heard it or read it before.  “The New American Bible is the bible you hear at every Catholic mass.”  This was probably an introduction to a lengthy screed about the barbaric English style, tin ear, and modernist leanings of what for most U.S. Catholics is the bible.

My name is Bob Short.  I'm a 30 year old school teacher who reverted to the faith when he found the Eucharist on the ground in a Stop n Shop parking lot.

I have a great love for literature, and so for most of my time as a Catholic-by-choice, I bounced around between the translations everyone suggests as literary: JB, NEB, REB, NRSV, even the Knox.  Many times I return to these translations—wooed by their cachet among the internet commentariat and their page layouts and book designs which assume that the bible is to be read, not simply chucked into a desk drawer with the other cheap stuff your parish ordered in bulk to hand out to the CCD kids.

I'll go through a stage when I fall in love with one of these dynamic equivalence translations—devouring the Book of Job for a couple hours, reading Acts of the Apostles in two sittings, etc.  But I always put them down for various reasons.  I find the use of “Yahweh” distracting in the Jerusalem Bible, and find that I'm capable of reading a a couple pages in a row before realizing, “did any of that stick into my brain?”  The Knox bible is wonderful, but it seems an awful lot like a period piece to someone like me who cut his teeth on Hemingway and not the masters of 19^th century English literature.  The New English Bible is wonderful, even with its odd habit of falling flat on its face about once every 20 verses.  The Revised English Bible, much like the New Jerusalem Bible, seems to have resulted from a sober minded decision to make an idiosyncratic translation slightly more acceptable to scholars and students who are just going to ignore it in favor of the RSV and NRSV anyway.

So I keep coming back the the New American Bible.  Living in a city in a heavily Catholic part of the country, its quite easy for me to make daily mass part of my spiritual practice.  The NAB is the language that I'm used to, language I find pleasurable. 

“My face I did not shield from buffets and spitting.”

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock.  If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, then I will enter his house and dine with him, and he with me.”

“You have brought them abundant joy and great rejoicing, as they rejoice before you as at the harvest, as people make merry when dividing spoils.”

“Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest.  Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and you will find rest for yourselves.  For my yoke is easy, and my burden light.”

And so on.  The New American Bible is the source of my “memory verses” and no amount of poorly formatting or St Joseph Edition art inserts will take that away from me.  Yes, of those four examples I just gave, at least two of them are snatches of scripture which, frankly, are unspeakably beautiful in any translation.  My point, however, is simply that the setting I find these scriptures in most often and with the most comfort is in the NAB.  Unlike Carl Hernz's appreciation of the NABRE a few years back, I am incapable of making any case based on knowledge of source languages.  What I have is my own emotions.  To many readers, I'm sure RSV 2^nd edition is that pleasing to the heart, soul, and mind.

To the ashamed NAB readers, hiding in the shadows, I say: Come out!  It's okay!

I won't defend the NAB footnotes, though I am of the opinion that they aren't nearly as bad as their reputation suggests. 

When people speak badly about the notes, they are usually speaking about the ones from earlier editions.  Often, though, the criticism revolves around the text itself.  But which New American Bible are they talking about?  For the uninitiated, there are quite a few.

The 1970 edition?: Which featured a freshly translated New Testament and an Old Testament cobbled together from the never-quite-completed Confraternity Old Testament.  It is on the dynamic-equivalence side of things, and in many places reads like the Jerusalem Bible.  It's poetry is quite good—if you don't believe me recite the Canticle from the book of Daniel that pops up on Week One Sundays in the Liturgy of the Hours.  It has become almost a meme to make fun of its rendering of Isaiah 9:5, but to many of us, that is the most familiar version of this passage, one with a music all its own.  (The idea that many Catholics grew up hearing the NAB at the liturgy and that it is what we think of when we hear the phrase “bible English” probably causes a good deal of wailing and teeth gnashing, even here!)  Where might you know the 1970 NAB from?  Its Old Testament is still used in the lectionary, as well as its psalter, though some parishes use the Revised Grail Psalms, as is allowed.  It's New Testament was almost instantly found wanting when it came to oral proclamation and was heavily edited for the lectionary.  It appears unedited in the readings from the Liturgy of the Hours, for good (many canticles) and ill (oh dear, that halting and sloppy rendition of the Epistle to the Hebrews we read every Lent and Holy Week).

Or were they talking about the 1986 edition with the revised New Testament?: The Old Testament is unchanged, but the New Testament features the revisions made to make the NAB acceptable for oral proclamation at the mass.  This New Testament is quite good—clear and vivid at an appropriately elevated tone.  Things have gone in a formal equivalence direction, solving instances where the 1970 New Testament had slid into banality.  It's rendition of the Gospel According to John is a tour de force, revealing Christ's divinity in all its challenge and ruggedness.  If the worst thing you have to say about a bible are its footnotes and whether they chose “hades”, “hell,” or “netherworld,” you've got yourselves a pretty good bible.  It also has included some very light inclusive language.  When people speak about what a responsible and conservative use of inclusive language, the Revised English Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible are most often proposed, but I put it to you that the '86 New Testament (and later NABRE Old Testament) are particularly good examples of expressing the non gender specific nature of the original languages without rendering the text bland or butchering English.

Perhaps the 1991 edition with the revised psalter was the one they meant?:  With a dignified New Testament which very nearly matched what was heard at mass, the next step was obviously to update the Old Testament in order to make the NAB a consistent reading experience, fine for study, prayer, and following the liturgy.  Well, instead they just got together and ruined the psalter.  Trust me, this not a well liked translation.  Even people who liked the 1995 ICEL Psalter don't like this thing.  It removed the familiar and replaced it with the aimless.  What was left was a bible featuring an dynamic equivalent Old Testament with no gender inclusive language, a psalter that is a lesson on how not to do inclusive language which featured widely varied style from psalm to psalm, and a formal equivalence New Testament with  very well done inclusive language.  Of the 47 years the New American Bible has existed, this edition was in print for 20 of those years.

At long last, was it the 2011 NABRE?: This latest edition features an improved, more literal Old Testament, including a wonderful new psalter that was translated the the liturgy in mind.  Finally, we have a consistent New American Bible!  Will we hear it at mass?  Err, no.  Rather, it seems to be the first step of a master plan to have a single translation which will be featured in the mass and the liturgy of the hours.  For the foreseeable future the lectionary will still feature the 1970 Old Testament and the 1986 New Testament.

So, if you are interested in a bible which will match up with the liturgy, you will need to find one printed between 1986 and 1990.  Good luck. 

And so I leave you with the following unsupported conclusions:

1.                  The 1986 edition of the NAB is quite good.

2.                  The NABRE is even better, though it does not match the mass as well.  It seems reminiscent to me to what an in-house Catholic NRSV would read like: rich in insight to the literal Hebrew and Greek, yet flowing with some amount of beauty as well.

3.                  I hope no copyright holding bishops read this, but the format of many New American Bible editions are so resistant to actual long periods of reading that I think I'm going to copy/paste the text of the NAB gospels into a PDF and have some copy shop print them out in book form for my own personal use.  The longer I reflect on it, what draws me toward deep dives in dynamic-equivalence translations like the NEB aren't the translations themselves, it is their single-column layouts, readable fonts, and lack of asterices, brackets, and assorted gobbledegook interrupting the text.

I will be submitting for consideration to this blog occasional comparisons of the lectionary text we receive at mass with the different printed editions of the New American Bible.

We deserve, I think, a bible that matches the liturgy.

I even put it to you that this will be a good first step toward many of us (first and foremost, me) abandoning debates about the different translations of the bible in favor of actually reading the thing!