ROCZNIKI HUMANISTYCZNE Tom LXVII, zeszyt 11 – 2019 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18290/rh.2019.67.11-4 WIKTOR PSKIT * THE POST-VATICAN II ROMAN MISSAL IN ENGLISH: A PRELIMINARY COMPARISON OF TWO ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS* A b s t r a c t. Following the Second Vatican Council the Roman Catholic liturgy has undergone significant changes. One of them is the shift towards the vernacular as the language of liturgy. First of all, the post-conciliar liturgical reform resulted in a considerable reduction in liturgical texts. Secondly, the shift towards the vernacular entailed further changes, including substantial departure of some translations (e.g. English or German) from the original Latin text of the so- called editio typica of Paul VI’s Missal. This paper is concerned with the differences between the two English translations of the postconciliar Roman Missal (1969/1970), i.e. the 1973 version and the currently used 2010 translation. The analysis has a preliminary character as it deals with selected parts of the Roman Missal in English. The paper focuses on the major differences at the levels of lexis and grammatical structure and it seeks to demonstrate how two radically opposing approaches to the translation of the language of worship contribute to the emergence of texts that significantly differ in their content, style and emphasis. Key words: Roman Missal; liturgical language; hieratic language; English translation. 1. INTRODUCTION This paper offers a cursory glance at two English translations of the post- Vatican II Roman Missal. Its major goal is to discuss the key differences between the two translations in the light of a more general issue of liturgical WIKTOR PSKIT, PhD — University of Łódź, Institute of English Studies, Department of En- glish and General Linguistics; address for correspondence — E-mail: [email protected] * Parts of the research discussed below were presented at the following conferences: Język re- ligijny dawniej i dziś (w kontekście teologicznym i kulturowym) (Poznań 2016, 2018), 13th IASS- AIS World Congress of Semiotics (Kaunas 2017), Personal Identity through a Language Lens (Łódź, 2017). I would like to thank the participants of the conferences for their helpful comments. All shortcomings are mine. Some of the ideas and data presented below are discussed in Polish and juxtaposed with the Polish version of the Roman Missal in Pskit (2017, 2018). 48 WIKTOR PSKIT language employed for the purpose of worship in Roman Catholicism. The differences stem from divergent approaches to the translation of liturgical texts, which, however, are based on two distinct concepts of the language of liturgy (hieratic/sacred language vs. non-hieratic language). While there is a diversity of rites within broadly understood Catholic Church (including a variety of Eastern liturgical traditions), this paper is specifically concerned with the most widespread one, i.e. the Roman rite, and furthermore, its focus is narrowed down to the liturgy of the Mass, leaving aside other aspects of liturgy such as the administering of sacraments or the Divine Office (also referred to as the Breviary). 2. THE LANGUAGE OF ROMAN CATHOLIC LITURGY The language of worship within Roman Catholicism has evolved over time. For most of the history of the Roman rite, with minor exceptions (cf. Fortescue, Jungmann, Reid, Lang), its language was a kind of universal lan- guage, initially Greek and then Latin, since it was viewed as a ‘vehicle of unity’ and stability of faith (cf. Dobszay, Lang). While what could be dubbed Christian Latin was by no means a homogeneous phenomenon (cf. Burton, Coleman, Lang), one register within this broader variety of Latin can be distinguished on the basis of its lexical, morphological and syntactic properties, viz. liturgical Latin (Mohrmann). Based on her studies on early Christian Greek and Latin, Mohrmann argues that the language of Roman Catholic worship was consistently a hieratic (sacred) language with the fol- lowing characteristics: reliance on older linguistic forms and structures (archaisms), introduction of foreign elements (mainly at the level of voca- bulary, e.g. Hebrew and Greek elements in liturgical Latin), and use of rhetorical figures typical of oral style (e.g. parallelism and antithesis, rhythmic clausulae, rhyme and alliteration). The latter feature is significant here since the language of the Roman rite to a large degree inherits the key characteristics of the ancient Roman oratorical style. Importantly, thus un- derstood hieratic language is distinct from the language of everyday com- munication. The sacred language is a product of deliberate stylization, and hence a kind of quasi-artificial language. In Mohrmann’s view, Latin re- placed Greek as the language of Christian worship only when an appro- priately stylized hieratic variety of the language developed. Mohrmann’s publications approximately coincide with the time of liturgical reform in THE POST-VATICAN II ROMAN MISSAL IN ENGLISH 49 Roman Catholicism, culminating in the shift from Latin to vernaculars. It is particularly interesting to note that according to Mohrmann, at that time vernacular languages did not yet have hieratic varieties that would be suitable for liturgy. Similar ideas on liturgical language are expressed by Crystal in the context of English. In his view, liturgical English should include archaic grammatical forms (e.g. older pronominal forms such as thou, thee, thy, thine, ye instead of you; the older variant of the second-person form of be in present tense: art instead of are; the archaic plural brethren), lexical archaisms (e.g. vouchsafe, thrice, behold, etc.), and certain syntactic struc- tures (e.g. unusual word order, frequent use of vocative, imperative includ- ing the subject). The basic characteristics of hieratic (sacred) language in the sense of Mohrmann and Crystal provide an important linguistic background for our discussion of two English versions of the reformed Roman Missal introduced by Pope Paul VI. 3. THE PAULINE ROMAN MISSAL IN ENGLISH: A HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The following events led to the emergence of the English translations officially approved for use in liturgical celebrations within the Roman rite. The Vatican II constitution on the liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963) postulates that vernacular languages be introduced into the liturgy of the Mass, but, as observed by many (cf. Gamber, Ratzinger, Lang), it only permits a limited amount of the vernacular with most of the text still being in Latin. For example, until 1967 it was maintained that the central prayer of the Mass, the Roman Canon, should remain in Latin. This reservation was soon overlooked and in 1970s Latin was almost thoroughly erased from Roman Ca- tholic liturgy1 and replaced by vernaculars. The new Roman Missal promul- gated by Paul VI (1969) is written in Latin and constitutes the so-called typi- cal edition (editio typica), intended as a source text for translation into verna- culars. Since the publication of the Pauline missal, the issue of liturgical trans- lation has been an object of an ongoing debate within the Catholic Church (cf. Dobszay, Elliott, Kalekas, Lang, Marini, Pecklers, Schuler). 1 The exceptions include the liturgy celebrated according to the Roman Missal (1962) — representing the so-called Tridentine Mass — and papal liturgy. 50 WIKTOR PSKIT The question of how to translate the Latin original into vernaculars has been addressed by the ecclesial authorities a number of times. In his speech at a meeting with translators, Paul VI (10 November 1965) suggests that “the language used in the liturgy should always be worthy of the noble realities it signifies … set apart from the everyday speech of the street and the market- place ”, emphasizing the need for “clarity of language and dignity of ex- pression … in the vernacular translations of liturgical texts”. This clearly corresponds to the general concept of sacred (hieratic) language outlined above in section 2. However, the first set of guidelines for translation of liturgical texts prepared by the commission authorized by Paul VI to work on the reformed Missal is the instruction Comme le prévoit (25 January 1969)2. Although the instruction mentions a dignified style and traditional religious language, in many respects it postulates what amounts to be a “revolutionary” approach to the translation of liturgical books. First of all, it argues that rendering the content can occur without preserving the formal structure of the original, which seems to echo the tenets of Nida’s dynamic equivalence, one of the popular trends in translation theory of that time. What constitutes the most revolutionary element is permitting some degree of adaptation, thus making the texts intended for public worship dependent on the translator’s subjective judgments. The instruction also presupposes that there should be a single vernacular text for a language spoken in several countries. Such translations are to be produced by international commissions appointed by the relevant episcopal conferences. In the case of English, the relevant body is dubbed International Committee for English in the Liturgy (henceforth ICEL), esta- blished as early as 1964. Soon it turned out that, while preparing the first English translation of the reformed Roman Missal, members of ICEL ad- hered to the principles of Comme le prévoit, mostly based on dynamic equivalence. As will be shown below in section 4, while dynamic equi- valence is an approach that might be quite useful with reference to a number of literary genres (including some religious genres), its merits in the context of liturgical English are questionable. Anyway, the methodology based on Comme le prévoit guided the preparation of the first translation of the Pauline Roman Missal into English, officially approved in 1973 (in liturgical use since 1974). The 1973 English translation (henceforth ICEL 1973) is characterized by a significant departure from the hieratic nature of the 2 http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/conslepr.htm, DOA 22.05.2018. THE POST-VATICAN II ROMAN MISSAL IN ENGLISH 51 language of Christian worship.