The Vernacular as Sacred Language? A Study of the Principles of Translation of Liturgical Texts A thesis submitted to the faculty of the Athenaeum of Ohio/Mount St. Mary’s Seminary of the West in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts (Theology) By Andrew J. Hess Cincinnati, Ohio February 2019 Abstract The Second Vatican Council ushered in an era of liturgical renewal in many ways unlike any renewal in the centuries that preceded it. Perhaps the most obvious and challenging expression of this renewal presented itself in the widespread introduction of the vernacular into the Liturgy. Throughout its history the Church has been honing its theology and worship through precise language within liturgical prayer, and with the promulgation of Sacrosanctum Concilium the work of liturgical theologians became yoked in a radical way to linguistics as they attempted to communicate this same theology in the vernacular. This thesis examines the ongoing process and development of the principles of translation theory that have governed the work of translators over the course of the past six decades. In doing so, it seeks to show that the Church’s preference for the principles of formal equivalence (adopted into the instruction Liturgiam Authenticam) over those of dynamic equivalence (adopted into the document Comme le Prévoit) is not rooted in opposition to the principle of participatio actuosa. Rather, this preference is deeply rooted in a philosophical and theological worldview that centers on the presence of the Logos. Undergirded by the philosophy of George Steiner, who argues for a fundamental Presence that makes all language intelligible, and the liturgical theology of Pope Benedict XVI, which is shaped by the Word, this thesis argues for the primacy of the Logos over anthropos as the only manner in which to faithfully and adequately translate liturgical texts into vernacular tongues. This thesis by Andrew J. Hess fulfills the thesis requirement for the master’s degree in Theology and is approved by: Advisor: Rev. Ryan T. Ruiz, S.L.D. Readers: Msgr. Frank P. Lane, Ph.D. Dr. Bradford W. Manderfield, Ph.D. iii Dedication For my parents, in whose loving care I was both introduced to the Word and encouraged to abide by the Word: In thanksgiving for their fidelity and witness, and in honor of the Blessed Mother. iv Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Toward a Theory of Language .......................................................................... 7 1.1 A Theory of a Transcendental Tongue .................................................................. 9 1.2 Language as Revelation of Truth ......................................................................... 12 1.3 From Theory to Translation ................................................................................. 16 1.4 The Language of Liturgy ..................................................................................... 18 Chapter 2: The Second Vatican Council and the Implementation of the Vernacular ....... 21 2.1 Sacrosanctum Concilium and our Native Tongues ............................................. 22 2.2 Comme le Prévoit and Early Translation Theory in the Liturgical Renewal ...... 24 2.3. Liturgiam Authenticam and Revisiting the Vernacular in the Liturgy ............... 28 2.4 Translation Theory in Liturgiam Authenticam .................................................... 30 2.5 The Import of Liturgiam Authenticam ................................................................ 34 Chapter 3: Liturgy and Logos: Towards a Theology of Translation ................................ 37 3.1 “Worship in Accord with the Logos” .................................................................. 37 3.2 Translation in Accord with Comme le Prévoit .................................................... 42 3.3 Criticisms of Logocentrism and Formal Equivalence ......................................... 47 3.4 The Strength of Formal Equivalence for Liturgical Theology ............................ 50 3.5 The Bride in Conversation with the Bridegroom ................................................ 56 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 58 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 61 v Introduction There are few things so mundane, so every day, so familiar as language. In language we form bonds, in language we communicate. And yet, we discover something truly transcendent in language in that, through words and symbols, humanity can discover truth, and ultimately can discover the Truth who is God, the ground of all being. This is because there is an intrinsic link between words and the things, creatures, and people they signify.1 Language affixes itself, in its proper form, to what is real in the world; it is a means for identifying and communicating the reality around us and thus is born a real association between language and truth. Because Truth Himself has been revealed to us as the Word, both in Divine Revelation2 and through the light of reason, “The Word is [thus] a primal element or component of human language. Human language, in turn, is an expression and an instrument of the human spirit.”3 The Word precedes all human language and is the ground of all human language. In essence, words derive meaning from the Word as their source of Truth. Language then becomes more than a mere tool; it is rather an avenue for an encounter with the Living and Creative God, because “any coherent understanding of what language is and how language performs…any coherent account of the capacity of human speech to communicate meaning and feeling is, in the final analysis, underwritten by the assumption of God’s presence.”4 If language is understood as such, it is raised above being a mere instrument of sociological and psychological convenience, but 1 Holger Zaborowski, “Of God and Men and the Miracle of Language,” Communio 43 (Spring 2016): 7. 2Cf. John 3:16. All biblical citations in this paper are taken from the Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004). 3 Johann Auer, A General Doctrine of the Sacraments and the Mystery of the Eucharist, Dogmatic Theology, n.6 (Washington, D.C: Catholic University of America Press, 1995), 137. 4 George Steiner, Real Presences (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1991), 3. 1 becomes for us something theological. Intelligible language does indeed require the presence of something true standing behind it, which is, in fact, not a thing but a Person, the Person of the living and incarnate Word of God. Nowhere else is His Presence more acutely encountered in this world than in the Eucharist. And nowhere else is this power of language to mediate divine meaning more evident than in the Liturgy. We are speaking here of a particular kind of language, liturgical language, which bears within itself an especial capacity for affecting the reality of the world into which it is spoken. There is reason now to address this question of liturgical language and its role in theology as society continues to render language impotent in signifying meaning and truth.5 Since the Second Vatican Council, with the promulgation of the liturgical norms of Sacrosanctum Concilium regarding the vernacular, the nature and role of liturgical language has been discussed from various positions, sometimes opposed to one another. The two schools that directly touch upon the relationship between words and meaning are those of dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence. Each school has an operative philosophy of language guiding its proponents and each has waxed and waned in terms of its influence on liturgical theology. The former was widely considered to be the linguistic modus operandi immediately following the Council, but with the promulgation of Liturgiam Authenticam in 2001 there was a Magisterial shift in favor of formal 5 Cf. Obergefell v. Hodges, 556 US (2014). This may at first seem extreme, but one need look no further in American society than the Supreme Court ruling Obergefell v. Hodges. This ruling, which granted same-sex couples in their relationships the legal status of married couples, fundamentally altered the meaning of marriage. In order to use the same word to describe relationships of homosexual couples and heterosexual couples, the justices of the Supreme Court needed to change the essential content of the definition of marriage. While the subject of this case is not our subject here, it is an apropos example of the danger of dissociating words from meanings. Because of this phenomenon, the word now being used in the case of marriage no longer means marriage in the sense of its former use but means something strikingly different. Such an approach to language adopted at the level of a nation’s highest courts is symptomatic of a broader societal shift towards a continued divorcing of words from their attendant meanings and definitions. 2 equivalence. Today much of the debate in textual translation regards whether or not formal equivalence can sufficiently render ancient texts in an intelligible manner for the Faithful, and if the Church should adopt a linguistic hermeneutic in favor of a more dynamic philosophy of translation.6 To come to any useful conclusions it is necessary to investigate