Restoring the Words and Repeating the Same Mistakes

Anthony Esolen at First Things belabors the over-all superiority of the new English translation of the Roman Missal over the one used for 40 years in English-speaking countries. I do get the feeling though that the majority consensus already among Catholic liturgists today is that the soon-to-be-replaced translation does need some changing.

Perhaps he is speaking to the still unconvinced crowd. Maybe it's just me, but I think the more relevant question is not so much whether the new translation is better than the old, but whether the new may be able to hold its own to scrutiny without resorting to "but it's way better than the old".

Though much may be said about its form and content, I will limit my comment on the process through which this new translation came about.

Esolen prefaced his arguments with a well-chosen passage from Orwell's novel 1984, and this rather dramatic narration of what happened years ago:

"Some forty years ago, a team of men was charged with rendering the Latin of the Catholic Novus Ordo Mass into English. They did so, dully and inaccurately, for the common prayers spoken by the people at every Mass. But when they worked just beyond the view of the people, they became different men altogether. Then they felt the fire of zeal. The prayers spoken by the priest—the collects, offertories, prefaces, postcommunions, special blessings, and even the eucharistic prayers—gave them a vast field to ply their talents."

Convincing enough if not for the fact that take away the "some forty years ago", replace it with a more recent date, and he may as well be talking about how the new translation came to be. Consider these:

• 1998. After years of international consultation and collaboration, a new translation was finished by ICEL and approved by the bishops conferences of English-speaking countries. It followed the set criteria of hewing more closely to the Latin, without sacrificing clarity or intelligibility in English. But like the old translation that it sought to replace, it was done using the principle of "dynamic equivalence". The result: Vatican rejected dynamic equivalence and the translation itself. ICEL was reorganized with new appointments, making it accountable to the Vatican, and no longer to the various bishops conferences that created it.
• 2001. Liturgiam authenticam was issued. It formally declared "formal equivalence" as the translation theory to be used in liturgical translations in all vernacular languages. It directed that translation work should make all Latin words accounted for, and that the vocabulary, syntax, punctuation, and capitalization patterns found in the Latin original must be reproduced as much as possible in the vernacular languages. The point was to create a new "sacral language" different from ordinary speech. Needless to say, the document was met with much criticism from all over.
• 2002. Vox Clara, a new Vatican committee to advise on the approval of new English translations, was formed.
• 2008. A new translation prepared by the new ICEL sticking to the new norms laid down in Liturgiam Authenticam was sent to English-speaking bishops’ conferences for approval, subsequently approved (though not without strong criticism from some sectors), and then sent to the Vatican for final approval.
• 2010. Vox Clara introduced an estimated 10,000 changes into the text approved in 2008. Many liturgists commented that the changes impaired the text, displayed no consistent pattern, and, many times violated the very norms laid down in Liturgiam Authenticam. The altered text was declared officially approved and then returned to the bishops conferences for implementation.

Case in point: Esolen praises this new translation of the Prayer after Communion for the First Sunday of Advent 2011 (incidentally, the official start of the new translation's implementation in the US). He describes is as a "splendid work", both "accurate and profoundly scriptural":

May these mysteries, O Lord,
in which we have participated,
profit us, we pray,
for even now, as we walk amid passing things,
you teach us by them to love the things of heaven
and hold fast to what endures.

Anthony Ruff, OSB, at the Pray Tell blog describes it this way: "The word order (in the new translation) is so messed up that the prayer seems to say we learn to love the things of heaven from the passing things of this world – but the Latin prays that it be from the mysteries celebrated in the liturgy!"

The new one is, of course, better than the current (soon to be passing):
Father,
may our communion
teach us to love heaven.
May its promise and hope
guide our way on earth.

Somebody points out, a better translation could have been this:
Lord, may the celebration of these mysteries
profit us, we pray,
since through them you teach us,
on our journey through this passing world,
to love the things of heaven
and hold fast to what endures.


The Latin prayer says:
Prosint nobis, quaesumus, Domine, frequentata mysteria,
quibus nos, inter praetereuntia ambulantes,
iam nunc instituis amare caelestia et inhaerere mansuris.


Let's read Esolen's words again (this time with some personal and arbitrary changes):

"Some four years ago, a team of men was charged with advising on the new rendering of the Latin of the Catholic Novus Ordo Mass into English. They did so, dully and inaccurately, for the common prayers spoken by the people at every Mass. But when they worked just beyond the view of the people, they became different men altogether. Then they felt the fire of zeal. The prayers spoken by the priest—the collects, offertories, prefaces, postcommunions, special blessings, and even the eucharistic prayers—gave them a vast field to ply their talents."

When will we ever learn?

domingo de ramos & the politics of personality

today is palm sunday, the whole catholic church celebrates the start of the holy week: blessing of palm fronds, mark's passion narrative as gospel, red vestments. also very heavy traffic on nlex and slex as regular city folks start their twice, or so,-a-year pilgrimages to their home provinces.

this early morning's blessing of the palms, recalling Jesus' 'triumphal' (over what?) entry to jerusalem, evoked some thoughts on the cult and politics of personality. add to it the rather amusing fact that in this semana santa, not only do we have a "domingo de ramos" but a "sabado de gloria" as well. the 1997 cbcp exhortation on phil politics identifies the 'politics of personality', among other things, as the bane of this country's political culture. too much dependence on individuals of either strength, or celebrity, or notoriety, or all of the above.

come to think of it, Jesus was such a personality himself. and the people were already proclaiming him king, a rightful heir to the house of david. whether or not they were the same crowd, but shouting a markedly different slogan, on john's passion narrative this good friday is another matter.

a strong, charismatic cult figure. peoples at all times and places have been drawn to such figures, accepting their almost-natural leadership, taking on their words as gospel truths. even the current troubles of phil politics have been reduced to a question of personalities.

after the (rhetorical?) question: "did gloria lie, cheat and steal and so is better off stepping down from office?", the next most natural and, to some extent, harder question to answer is: "and who do you propose should take her place". personalities. it seems now this political gordian knot could be simply and swiftly (although apparently there is nothing simple nor swift about this process) be loosened by presenting a charismatic and winnable figure, an icon that would symbolize all the supposedly noble aspirations of the various/divided (take your pick) opposition. someone like cory aquino in 1986. personalities.

a leading cleric puts it succinctly: the question of what happens next, i.e., among other things, who would replace her is itself, a moral question. and for as long as no barabbas is presented the pretender queen of the pinoys will remain queen -- okay now, that was bad metaphor -- and she will railroad chacha, continue to suppress protest actions, threaten the press, and proceed to lie, cheat, steal, not only by her lonesome but with and through her minions as well, and with less impunity than ever.

it is ironic that a system, such as the parliamentary system, that supposedly favors strong parties, party identity and stands -- and, therefore, political maturity -- is widely perceived as a tool and a ruse to prop up the most unpopular, sleaziest, personality-oriented administration in the history of this nation. and the perceived solution to this crisis: a strong and winnable opposition candidate in a snap poll that would be driven by the same manic politics of personalities and party allegiance-switches. and when that candidate (whoever s/he is) wins, then we could all start working for political maturity again.

let us pray that this holy week may be a good time for repentance and conversion for all filipinos, especially our leaders from all sides. hope springs eternal, after all, we are celebrating an epic story that includes a tortured thief availing of salvation right before death's door.

have a holy holy week.