Biskop Serratelli, i Paterson, New Jersey, er formann for de amerikanske biskopenes liturgikomité, og holdt et foredrag i oktober 2008 om prinisppene bak den nye (og lenge etterlengtede) oversettelsen av messen til engelsk. Hans foredrag om bakgrunnen for den nye oversettelsen, og prinsippene som ligger til grunn for den, er ganske interessante. Foredraget kan i sin helhet leses her (og Father Z har også en del kommentarer).
In May 2002, the publication of the (revised) Missale Romanum marked an historic moment in the life of the Church in our day. It gave an impetus to the great liturgical renewal set in motion when Vatican II issued Sacrosanctum Concilium as its first document. With Vatican II, «began … the great work of renewal of the liturgical books of the Roman Rite. [This] … work … included their translation into vernacular languages, with the purpose of bringing about in the most diligent way that renewal of the sacred Liturgy….» (Liturgiam authenticam 1 and 2).
In the enthusiasm of the aggiornamento [updating], translators set to work to produce translations that expressed the Latin Missal in modes of expression appropriate to the vernacular languages. From 1969 until 2001, the document Comme le Prévoit granted translators wide latitude in translations for the liturgy. Rather quickly in the English-speaking world, translators adopted “dynamic equivalency” as their approach to the texts. Simply stated, dynamic equivalency translates the concepts and ideas of a text, but not necessarily the literal words or expressions.
In light of the experience in the last 36 years, the Church has revisited the question of how to best translate the texts of Sacred Scripture and the liturgy. Many people had noticed the deficiency of dynamic equivalency. In 2001, the Holy See issued the instruction Liturgiam authenticam to guide translations both of the Scriptures and of liturgical texts. The new instruction did not deny the necessity of making the text accessible to the listener. But, it did refocus the attention of translators on the principle of unearthing the theological richness of the original texts. This needed balance keeps us from suffering an impoverishment of language in terms of our biblical and liturgical tradition.
Liturgiam authenticam espouses the theory of “formal equivalency”. Not just concepts, but words and expression are to be translated faithfully.
Så nevner biskopen noe prinsipper som er fulgt i den nye engelske oversettelsen – og han gir flere eksempler i selve foredraget for å illustrere:
• First of all, Latin orations, especially the post-Communion orations, tend to conclude strongly with a teleological or eschatological point. The new translations in English follow the sequence of these Latin prayers in order to end on a strong note.
• Secondly, in the new translation, there is a deliberate attempt to pass on the biblical references imbedded in the Roman Rite.
• Thirdly, the new translations are careful to keep the allusions from patristic writings.
• Fourth, the new translation respects the rich vocabulary of the Roman rite. The post-Communion prayers employ a variety of words such as nourished, fed, recreated, and made new. The collects use words such as: we pray, we beseech, we ask.
• Fifth, the Latin text is cast in concrete images and parallelism. The Latin uses anthropomorphic expressions that add a certain poetry to the prayers.
• Sixth, within the new translation, there is a concern for an exactness of vocabulary.
Og oppsummerende skriver han: As we await the final modifications and amendments that will come, at this point, we should recall a number of facts:
1. The new texts will be used in many different English-speaking countries. Therefore, the language will not bear the cultural stamp or preference of one particular country. This calls for certain openness on the part of all of us to use words that may be understood, but are not commonly used in our own particular country.
2. Since we use the language of the liturgy to address God, it should be intelligible. This does not, however, mean every word has to be part of the active vocabulary of everyone.
3. In the liturgy, we should use a noble language that lifts us up as well as honors God. From the earliest Latin texts from the 4th century, the style of the language used in prayer differed from street language. In the new translations, the noble, heightened style of liturgical prayer is certainly a gain for all.
4. When we receive the new Roman Missal for the English-speaking world, we will have a work that has aimed at an exact, though not slavishly literal translation.
5. The new Missal will provide prayers that are “marked by sound doctrine, exact in wording and free from all ideological influence” so that “the sacred mysteries of salvation and the indefectible faith of the Church are efficaciously transmitted by means of human language….” (Liturgiam authenticam 3)
6. The new Missal will come as the result of years of growth and understanding. It will improve our liturgical prayer, but it will not be perfect. Perfection will come when the liturgy on earth gives way to that of heaven where all the saints praise God with one voice.
7. When put in use, the common English text for all English-speaking countries will reaffirm in a tangible manner the breadth of our Catholic identity.