Thoughts
of a layman on ways to improve the American English translation of Sacred
Scriptures, the New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE)
I have spent long hours in thought and
prayer on this subject, and the following are some conclusions I have come
to. The NABRE represents a rich heritage
in the transmission and evolution of the Sacred Scriptures, dating all the way
back to the original Hebrew autographs penned at least three thousand years
ago, coming down through time by way of Kings, Priests, Prophets, Scribes,
Sages, Apostles, Fathers and Saints. We
owe a tremendous debt of gratitude, especially when dealing with our current
NABRE version, to three men in particular who paved the way for modern English
Bibles. First and foremost, St. Jerome,
the holy and brilliant man whom God raised up to give the Scriptures to the
people in the Vulgar tongue, the single entity behind the translation of the
Latin Vulgate. Next we owe a tremendous
debt to Father Gregory Martin, who together with a small team of English exiles
working in Rheims, France, translated the entire Latin Vulgate into English in
what has come to be known as the Douay-Rheims translation, the first ever
English, Roman Catholic translation of the Sacred Scriptures, published in 1582
(NT), and 1609-10 (OT). Finally, last
but not least, we owe the saintly Bishop Richard Challoner with updating the 16th
century DR and giving Catholics the DRC bible, which was THE English Catholic
Bible from 1750 until close to 1950, and even to the present day still a
favorite of many Traditional Catholics.
Now that I’ve given credit to the pedigree which made the NABRE
possible, I will also thank all the men and women who began work in the 1930s
for the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, which gave us the lovely 1941
Confraternity New Testament, which evolved into the 1970 New American
Bible. And to all the Bishops, Priests,
Deacons, scholars, religious, laity, and separated brethren who cooperated in
producing the updated New Testament in 1986 (which is still the current NT used
in the NABRE, and the text which underlies the American Catholic Lectionary in
use today. And of course, all the men
and women who worked on the 1991 revision of the Book of Psalms, and the final
current revision, the updated 2010 Old Testament.
I have researched this subject and spent
many hours viewing popular Catholic opinion by talking with laity in person,
and also by browsing several internet forums and social networking sites and I
have a pretty good feeling of what Catholics think of the NABRE and I have an
idea of what needs improvement, and it is my prayer that what I am typing right
now will eventually make it to someone on the editorial board and maybe if even
one of my suggestions is heard and influences the (NABFE? NAB Final Edition? NAB Fifth Edition?) Which, from what I know,
is currently in preliminary stages of work?
First, I will write briefly on what the
NABRE has done wonderful so far, and what should stay exactly the same in any
updated editions. The text of the
translation itself, I would say, is 95% complete and perfect as it is. It is wonderful how closely the translation
methodology of the NABRE lines up perfectly with Dei Verbum, Divino Afflante
Spiritu and Liturgiam Authenticum. I
would love to see the final NAB released with absolutely nothing changed aside
from the suggestions I am making below, but I know this issue is much more
complex than the feelings of a single lowly sinful man.
Next I am going to write a brief and far
from extensive list of things I believe should be changed in the translation
itself. After I am finished going over
the translation changes, I will touch briefly on the topic of introductions and
footnotes, which seems to be the most serious issue most people have with the
NABRE, but in light of the fact that these issues are of secondary importance
behind the translation itself, I will not emphasize the issue too much for the
time being.
Many of the changes that need to be made
are typographical, some grammatical. Some
of the vocabulary needs to updated and gender-neutral language should be double
checked and toned down slightly in certain areas. Finally, traditional renderings of certain
well beloved verses need to be replaced.
Touching on point number one,
typographical updates, my biggest suggestion and what I have seen griped about
the most, is the novel use of “holy Spirit” instead of the traditional “Holy
Spirit”. As the Holy Spirit is the
second Person of the most Holy and Divine, Blessed and Sacred Trinity, His Name
should always be capitalized. For
example, the Gospel of Matthew, chapter iii, v. xi, reads: He will
baptize you with the holy Spirit and fire. I recommend updating this to: He will
baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Some of the other issues I can think of
are the issue of novel renderings in Genesis chapter I. I have seen not a few people refuse to give
the NABRE credit because “it gets it wrong right from the first verse of the
first chapter of the first book”. I
understand recent advances in our understanding of ancient Hebrew linguistics
have given us reason to update traditional renderings, but I see no reason why
the text itself cannot reserve the traditional rendering, and relegate the new
suggested rendering to a footnote. For
example: from time immemorial, starting
with St. Jerome, coming down through Fr. Martin, Bishop Challoner, even to our
own day with Msgr. Ronald Knox, the JB/NJB, and the RSV Catholic Editions,
Genesis 1:1 has always been rendered “In the beginning, God created…” There is no reason why we should depart from
this traditional rendering. If certain
translators or editors feel inserting a “when” before God is a legitimate
option for translation, they ought to relegate such nuances to a footnote, not
disturb the text itself with what seems to be new renderings for the sake of novelty
instead of fidelity.
Moving along to Genesis 1:2, we have a
more intricate dilemma. Many seem to
agree the context gives credence to the rendering of Ruach Elohim as “mighty wind”,
but this is another case where Tradition should reign even over modern
scholarship. Rendering this verse Spirit
of God does no harm to the flow of the text, and it is faithful to the
underlying text. It is my opinion that
even “Divine wind” would be acceptable, but if these two changes alone were put
forth, I would bet my bottom dollar that thousands of Catholics, who are now opponents
of the NABRE, would become proponents, just like that. I have no doubt about it whatsoever.
Psalm 40:7 uses the word holocaust. In the preface to the NABRE OT, one of the
updates was the ditching of the word holocaust for burnt offering. This isn’t a problem in itself, but it seems
that it’s evidence of an alternating translation philosophy.
Another issue of hot debate is the use of “the
young woman” in place of “a virgin” in Isaiah 7:14. Both the Hebrew ‘almah and the Greek Parthenos,
in traditional translations, have been rendered virgin. Yes, the Hebrew word almah has been an issue
of significant debate over whether virgin is a legitimate translation thereof,
but the ancient translators of the Septuagint thought it was, St. Jerome
agreed, and so did St. Matthew, as well as the Traditions of our Holy Mother
the Church. It’s understandable when
using the historical-critical approach that maybe the Prophet had Hezekiah in
mind, but it’s also obvious that by using a Christocentric exegesis that the
Holy Spirit had the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, in mind. Therefore, we should stick with the
traditional translation of “a virgin”, and relegate the “almah-young
woman/maiden” debate to a footnote.
There is no reason to upset Catholic sensibilities to placate a few
noisy people who insist on introducing innovations into our beloved Scriptures
for no reason but to be consistent in using only the methodology of higher
criticism in place of traditional catholic exegetical thought.
Next up we have the, quite honestly, quite
awkward wording of Isaiah 9:5, one of the most beautiful verses in all of the
Great Prophet Isaiah, and for that matter, even of the entire Old Testament. However, the NABRE took the traditional
rendering which was wonderfully poetic and easily memorized, and butchered it
to the point where many Catholics cringe every year when they hear this read
during Advent and Christmas Masses. Here
is the current rendering of the NABRE: “For a child is born to us, a son is
given to us;
Upon his shoulder dominion rests.
They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero,
Father-Forever, Prince of Peace.”
My recommendation is to update this to a
more traditional sounding rendition, such as “For a child is born to us, a son
is given to us;
Upon His shoulder dominion rests.
His name shall be called Wonderful
Counselor, The Mighty God,
The Everlasting Father, the Prince of
Peace.”
Restoring traditional wording and updating
typography to indicate Deity gives this passage a much more powerful impact
both when read verbally and silently. It’s
also loyal to the Hebrew, written in modern English, and traditional. This rendering, I suggest, would placate most
Catholics, and even most non-Catholic Christians.
This ends my issues with the Old Testament
for now.
I’ve written all I have so far in one
sitting of about 45 minutes, so I will end after a few more short
comments. In addition to the suggestions
I have already made, I suggest updating certain areas of the New Testament in a
similar way. The Lectionary, thanks to
the Vatican, has already updated Luke 1:28, now the NAB itself needs to catch
up. Simply change the wording from “Hail,
highly favored one” to “Hail, full of grace!”
Also in the NT, an important verse supporting absolution in persona
Christi is 2 Cor 2:10. All we have to do
is change one word, to change the reading from “presence of Christ” to the
traditional Catholic “person of Christ”.
These are the first changes that have come
to mind, as I’ve stated. As far as the introductions
and footnotes go, many of them need to be either rolled back to what was in the
original 1970 NAB, completely removed, or rewritten to introduce the view of
the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church alongside the view of modern
higher-criticism, but that is another article for another time.
I am sorry if I have done or said anything
in ignorance, and please forgive me for my mistakes. I am young and exceedingly ignorant of all
things and sinful, and completely unworthy to judge or correct anybody
regarding anything. These are simply my
humble suggestions, from somebody who’s legitimate hobby and favorite pastime
is studying, reading, praying, eating, breathing and sleeping the Living Word
of God. Forgive me for anything I may
have spoken presumptuously, and please brothers and sisters, pray for me to the
LORD our God.
Your brother in Christ,
With Peace and Love,
Jason Michael Prewara
No comments:
Post a Comment