The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1913. A NEW TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE

New Zealand Tablet, 25 September 1913, Page 33

The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1913. A NEW TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE

S has been widely intimated in the Catholic press, a new translation the Bible, which • MM™ l is 'to b© published under the name of The Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures, has been undertaken by a number of English Catholic scholars under the general direction of two well-known members of yp* the Society of Jesus. The General Editors are the Rev. Cuthbert Lattey, S.J., Professor of Sacred Scripture at St. Beuno’s College, North Wales, and the Rev. Joseph Keating, S.J., Editor of the Month; and it is announced that the collaboration, as Editors of separate sections, of the Right Rev. Dr. Mclntyre, Bishop of Lamus; the Right Rev. Mgr. B. Ward, President of St. Edmund’s; the Rev J. P. Arendzen, Professor of Sacred Scripture at St. Edmund’s; Father Hugh Pope, 0.P., of the ,Collegio Angelico, Rome; Father Joseph Rickaby, -S.J., of Oxford, and other leading Catholic Scripture scholars, has been secured. The object of this new translation, the Editors explain, is two-fold: First to -reproduce in English exactly what. the Sacred Authors wrote, with due regard to idiomatic differences of language; secondly, to produce the Sacred Writings, as far as ex-

ternal appearance goes, in a manner more, worthy of their' character. These objects, it is held, demand, not only recourse to the best attainable original texts, but such apparatus of notes and explanations as will enable the .reader to enter into the whole atmosphere - and occasion of the. several Scriptures; and they demand, moreover, such care in editing that the natural divisions of thought shall be typographically expressed, and all obscurities due to arbitrary divisions and faulty arrangement removed. These requirements, it is claimed, will be fully complied with in the Westminster Version. * The critical and explanatory matter added to the text is said to be of the kind that will be welcome not merely to theological students, but to all- readers of the Holy Scriptures; and the reading and understanding of the sacred text itself will certainly be greatlyfacilitated by the arrangement of paragraphing and sub-heading. Although the new translation has been undertaken with the approval of the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster and the English Hierarchy, it .is not ecclesiastically -authoritative,! and the Editors make it perfectly clear that it does not aim or claim to be a substitute for the old and familiar “ Douay ’ version which, being based upon the Vulgate, must still be used when the Epistles and Gospels are read in church, until the final revision of the Vulgate makes a new version imperative. ‘ But it responds,’ they say, ‘ to a widespread feeling, itself due to increased interest in Biblical studies, that the great advances made in textual criticism, the light thrown upon New Testament Greek by the Egyptian papyri, and the existence-of many needless obscurities and faults in the current version, all demand a more accurate "translation, if the exhortations of the Holy See to a more frequent and fruitful perusal of the Sacred Writings are to meet with general acceptance. And it corresponds with a movement in the same direction in the Church abroad, as is evidenced by the number and excellence of recent French and German versions of the original Scripture texts. No disrespect is shown to the memory of those confessors of the Faith, the Douay and Rheims translators and the great Bishop Challoner, by the suggestion that the result of their labors in ,its modem condition does not satisfy either students or those who wish to read the Scriptures purely for edification. This new version, it is hoped, will be welcome to both classes (but chiefly to the clergy and educated laity, to teachers and the upper forms of schools), as 'giving more sure and ready access to the infinite treasures of revelation.’ From first to last it is expected that the carrying out of the undertaking will extend over something like ten years. * - : .There will, we should say, be absolute unanimity in the English-speaking Catholic world as to the need for a better edition of the Catholic Bible in English. The Douay .version is, on the whole, a marvel of accuracy; and the spirit which animated its translators in their declared and conscientious determination not to modify the original, but to keep to it word for word, is certainly worthy of all praise. But even a good principle can be carried too far; and the translators’ too- rigid, cast-iron adherence to the determination referred to led them into unnecessary obscurities, into the use of words that were archaic and occasionally wholly obsolete, into foreign idioms and ill-expressed metaphors, into extravagant Latinisms, and into frequent uncouthness and angularities of styleall remediable defects and all calling for removal. Numerous and not unimportant changes have, indeed, from time to time been made in the original Douay version; but there still remains urgent need for further revision, and for the ' introduction of something like a uniform text. It may be urged that the promoters of the new translation would have done well to wait until the revision of the text of the Latin Vulgate—which is being carried out with great care by the recently .appointed Papal Commissionis completed; but it is not improbable that the work of the Commission may extend over a generation, and in the meantime there seems no good reason why something should not be

done to make the Bible more readable and more intelligible. There is more . point in the suggestion that the Editors of the Westminster Version might with advantage have based their translation on the Vulgate instead of on the Greek text, since it is only the Vulgate version—or versions made from which ‘is authorised to be read in Churches.’ Undoubtedly the value of the new translation would be immensely enhanced if it were available for public use. It must, however, be remembered that the existing legislation on the subject is a mere matter of discipline, and that it is, therefore, not outside the range of possibility, that some relaxation may be made. * The first instalment of the new venture—in the shape of the publication of the Epistles to the Thessalonians has just,been given to the.public. The volume has not yet reached New Zealand but the reception which the advance copies have met with at the hands of the English press will furnish a sufficiently reliable guide as to the measure of success which has attended and which is likely to attend this important enterprise. The reviews which have so far come under our notice have been uniformly and for the most part highly favorable. The London Tablet, it is true, adopts a severely judicial attitude, and is almost microscopically critical. Yet even this most conservative of Catholic papers, while refusing to accept the translation as a representative one, acknowledges that it ‘ is full of significance for our time and place, and shows how carefully the promoters have read the signs of the times, and how earnestly they have addressed themselves to one of our greatest needs. Courage was needed for the step, and zeal. Neither has been wanting.’ The, Catholic Universe, in the course of a review which contains some friendly and entirely sympathetic criticism, remarks: 1 We extend a most cordial welcome to this first instalment of the Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures. In twenty-one pages we are furnished with a preface, in which the main features of the work are sketched out, with an excellent introduction to the two Epistles, and with an English version of them which is eminently readable. Copious notes are given at the foot of the page, and an appendix on St. Paul’s Eschatology appears at the end.’ . . . The Editors are to be congratulated on the way in which they have achieved their task.’ And the London Times, in the. course of a lengthy and most cordial notice of , the work, says: The translation itself is clear, dignified, and scholarly, and is obviously influenced by the textual work of Westcott and Hort, though it shows no hesitation in departing from their readings. It certainly presents what the editors. call “a readable Bible. We are reminded, by its allied conservatism and scholarship, of the work' undertaken by “Two Clerks,’’ in their recent edition of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The translator is to be heartily congratulated on the success of his work. But the Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures cannot be judged by its translation alone. Tlje notes appended to the text are an essential part of a Roman Catholic translation of the Bible, and the real significance of Father Lattey’s work cannot be judged apart from those accompanying his version. It is a pleasure to notice that they are marked by a desire to arrive at the immediate purpose of St. Paul, and are free from polemical bias. They give evidence of sound scholarship, allied with a frank acceptance of modern critical results, which will at once dispose the reader to accept them and incite him ho a careful study of their implications. . . . We need not allow criticism to diminish anything of our gratitude to the Editors for undertaking their noble enterprise, nor to affect the heartiness of our good wishes that they may be enabled to bring it to a satisfactory completion.’ Coming from such a paper as the London Times that must be regarded as high praise. Incidentally, ■we may remark that the new translation, coupled with the magnificent work which is being done by the Papal Commission on the Scriptures, should do something to stop the mouths of the noisy and shallow bigots who, with empty and parrot-like iteration, are so fond of declaiming against ‘ Rome ’ as ‘ the enemy of , the Bible.’