Someone has posted yet another draft translation of the mass into English at
http://valleadurni.blogspot.com/2007/04/new-translation.html
I am relatively pleased at first glance, but I am dismayed that in the the Gloria, "pax hominibus etc" has been translated as "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will."
The problem is that it doesn't scan. The problem is people. It really needs a monosyllabic word with strong consonants, such as "men." If they really have to be PC then they could use "those."
What do people think?
By the way, if you are interested in the new translation, go to the site and save yourself a copy on your machine. When new draft translations have been posted before they disappear after only a few days. It may help you to be the first parish with a setting of the new words when they finally get authorised.
New Mass Translation
Moderators: Dom Perignon, Casimir
Re: New Mass Translation
nazard wrote:I am relatively pleased at first glance, but I am dismayed that in the the Gloria, "pax hominibus etc" has been translated as "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will."
The ugly bit is and on earth peace, where the fetish for following the Latin word order (et in terra pax) seems to have got in the way of elegant English. And peace on earth to people of good will would have been much better, it seems to me.
Are composers allowed to move the words around?
M.
-
contrabordun
- Posts: 514
- Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 4:20 pm
Re: New Mass Translation
mcb wrote:Are composers allowed to move the words around?
M.
contrabordun wrote:You may live to regret actually asking the question rather than just hoping for some instruction that "composers must set exactly those words permitted by the translation"...
To paraphrase Morecambe and Wise, Martin is proposing to set all the right words permitted by the translation - just not necessarily in the right order!
-
contrabordun
- Posts: 514
- Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 4:20 pm
What this people thinks
No (mcb) this is the ugly bit, because it directly contradicts Jesus' call to us in the beatitudes (Mt5:44-48) by introducing a caveat: 'peace to these people, but not these because (in our judgement) they're no good'.peace to people of good will
Whether it's an 'accurate translation' or not, I hope this sort of thing is why the bishops hold fire on the new translation, and rightly so. I'll stick with the old one, thanks.
Given that the Latin original is an old text (12th Century?) what does your choice to reject a 12th century text in favour of a 40 year old translation/construct say about the faith of those in the 800 years that precede us? Possibly a fair point about the Beatitudes, but the passage you object to is a faithful rendering of Luke 2, so whilst the Gloria is perhaps only 800 years old...
At the risk of being too old-fashioned in my views, if something is a faithful rendering of the official Latin texts, and we don't like it unless it's been toned down in the translation process, then it could be that what we object to is not the translation but the text itself. That's not to say that we can't object to a translation on the grounds that it does not adequately express the original, but objecting to it on the grounds that we don't like what it is expressing...? Given that the liturgy is a gift from God and not a man-made thing, should it not be that we conform ourselves to it rather than vice-versa?
At the risk of being too old-fashioned in my views, if something is a faithful rendering of the official Latin texts, and we don't like it unless it's been toned down in the translation process, then it could be that what we object to is not the translation but the text itself. That's not to say that we can't object to a translation on the grounds that it does not adequately express the original, but objecting to it on the grounds that we don't like what it is expressing...? Given that the liturgy is a gift from God and not a man-made thing, should it not be that we conform ourselves to it rather than vice-versa?
Reginald wrote:...the passage you object to is a faithful rendering of Luke 2, so whilst the Gloria is perhaps only 800 years old...
There's more to it, I think. It comes down to variant readings of the Greek text of Luke 2:14 - either (a) "on earth peace to men of good will" or (b) "on earth peace (and) good will to men". (In Greek, it comes down to whether the last word of the verse is eudokias or eudokia respectively.) (a) is the Catholic reading and (b) the Protestant. (Puzzlingly! You'd think the restrictive nature of reading (a) would appeal to Calvinists more than to Catholics.)
Biblical scholarship isn't my subject! But I know how to use Google.
A Jesuit scholar called Ernest Vogt argued (50 years ago) that the Dead Sea scrolls give evidence for the reading (a), but concludes that the meaning isn't either of the standard interpretations:Ernest Vogt wrote:The Qumran texts do more than lend decisive support to this reading eudokias. They also indicate that 'God's good pleasure' here refers more naturally to the will of God to confer grace on those he has chosen, than to God's delighting in and approving of the goodness in men's lives. Thus neither 'good will toward men' nor 'peace among men with whom he is pleased' is an accurate translation, but rather 'peace among people of God's good pleasure,' i.e., God's chosen ones.
Someone who knows their biblical scholarship can tell us how respectable a point of view this is.
Reginald wrote:At the risk of being too old-fashioned in my views, if something is a faithful rendering of the official Latin texts, and we don't like it unless it's been toned down in the translation process, then it could be that what we object to is not the translation but the text itself.
Can we translate a text faithfully if we're not sure what it means?
M.
My New Jerusalem bible gives the text as
Our current version, or even "for those he favours" is more in keeping with the sentiments expressed (by Peter) in Acts 10:28, that there are no 'chosen ones' (Vogt) - we are all God's children. God is also the fair judge who looks at each human heart.
Things get lost, or confused, in time and translation. Earthly limitations. Our bishops are aware of this.
One difficulty with our liturgy is the great length of time and many places through which it has passed, during which some languages have (a) died and (b) evolved. Hence the problem identified by Vogt/mcb of Eudokia/Eudokios - which to use? Which provides us with a better teaching for our Christian journey? I'll conform to the current version until a better one comes along; "...men/those of good will" isn't it.
which is very different to "men/those of good will". I would suggest it is much more accommodating to the people of the world. The text is noted that "men of good will" is based on various older Bible versions and does not render the usual use of the term....and on earth peace for those he favours.
Our current version, or even "for those he favours" is more in keeping with the sentiments expressed (by Peter) in Acts 10:28, that there are no 'chosen ones' (Vogt) - we are all God's children. God is also the fair judge who looks at each human heart.
Yes, but it's still subject to earthly limitations, which our learned elders (bishops etc) do their best to iron out for our better teaching, so that we can conform to it without fear of error or prejudice. You wouldn't go on teaching that 2+2=5 just because your great grandparent got his/her sums wrong. It's a glitch, it happens, so correct it.Reg wrote:...the liturgy is a gift from God and not a man-made thing, should it not be that we conform ourselves to it rather than vice-versa?
Things get lost, or confused, in time and translation. Earthly limitations. Our bishops are aware of this.
One difficulty with our liturgy is the great length of time and many places through which it has passed, during which some languages have (a) died and (b) evolved. Hence the problem identified by Vogt/mcb of Eudokia/Eudokios - which to use? Which provides us with a better teaching for our Christian journey? I'll conform to the current version until a better one comes along; "...men/those of good will" isn't it.
Perhaps there is not the presumed contradiction between "on earth peace to men of good will" and "on earth peace (and) good will to men"(eudokias or eudokia), since all "good will" comes from God, even that which is then "passed on" to others through people of faith, hope and love (God's friends!)
People are both "receivers" and "givers" of that good will, but it comes from the one Divine source.
While mcb will, I am sure, support me when I say that I would always wish to be strict in using not only the authorative words of the liturgy but in their authorised order, I think that primarily, composers of music, but also those of us who must introduce new translations into our liturgical assemblies need to be prayerfully inspired by that authorised translation. This means more than just correctly translating the words and their theological sense, but actually translating the "hymn" factor.
In short, translators and those in authority must give composers the words they need to set our beautiful hymns and prayers to music or we are in danger of missing out on one of the most wonderful ways in which the presence of God is experienced in the liturgy or even in the world!
People are both "receivers" and "givers" of that good will, but it comes from the one Divine source.
While mcb will, I am sure, support me when I say that I would always wish to be strict in using not only the authorative words of the liturgy but in their authorised order, I think that primarily, composers of music, but also those of us who must introduce new translations into our liturgical assemblies need to be prayerfully inspired by that authorised translation. This means more than just correctly translating the words and their theological sense, but actually translating the "hymn" factor.
In short, translators and those in authority must give composers the words they need to set our beautiful hymns and prayers to music or we are in danger of missing out on one of the most wonderful ways in which the presence of God is experienced in the liturgy or even in the world!
-
gwyn
- Posts: 1148
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:42 pm
- Parish / Diocese: Archdiocese of Cardiff
- Location: Abertillery, South Wales UK
Canonico said
Excellently expressed.
translators and those in authority must give composers the words they need to set our beautiful hymns and prayers to music or we are in danger of missing out on one of the most wonderful ways in which the presence of God is experienced in the liturgy or even in the world!
Excellently expressed.
Below is a link to a - brief - look at the translation issues.
http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/Angelsng.htm
I'd argue that, whilst the Greek may be susceptible to a variant reading (and I'm at work and therefore nowhere near my Nestle-Alland New Testament), the Latin isn't. Given what we know of the Church in the 12th Century, we can surely presume that the hymnist had in mind the Vulgate text of Luke 2 and is consciously imitating the song of the angels in his (her?) great hymn of praise?
We're in the same territory as the use of We believe in the Creed instead of I believe. Yes, the Greek original says "We believe", but the Latin liturgical texts of the Novus Ordo Mass don't. The translators aren't there to second guess the text of the Mass. If we don't like the text then we should be petitioning Rome to change the Latin original. It is not, I think, appropriate that the English speaking Church should forge its own path in defiance of the Church Universal (and yes, I know that other languages have adopted a translation of the English, rather than the Latin).
And one last thing - I stick to speed limits too!
http://www.bardstown.com/~brchrys/Angelsng.htm
I'd argue that, whilst the Greek may be susceptible to a variant reading (and I'm at work and therefore nowhere near my Nestle-Alland New Testament), the Latin isn't. Given what we know of the Church in the 12th Century, we can surely presume that the hymnist had in mind the Vulgate text of Luke 2 and is consciously imitating the song of the angels in his (her?) great hymn of praise?
We're in the same territory as the use of We believe in the Creed instead of I believe. Yes, the Greek original says "We believe", but the Latin liturgical texts of the Novus Ordo Mass don't. The translators aren't there to second guess the text of the Mass. If we don't like the text then we should be petitioning Rome to change the Latin original. It is not, I think, appropriate that the English speaking Church should forge its own path in defiance of the Church Universal (and yes, I know that other languages have adopted a translation of the English, rather than the Latin).
And one last thing - I stick to speed limits too!
