Monday, February 8, 2016

NABRE NT Revision Answers

Thanks to all of you who posted question, and, of course, to Mary Sperry for taking the time to answer them!

One change in previous announcements:
Bishop Trautman resigned from the Editorial Board. He now serves as a consultant. Reverend Edward Mazich, OSB, replaced him as an editor.

What will the new text be called?
No decision has been made as to the name of the final product. I would doubt that any decision will be made until much closer to publication.

Textual basis for the revision:
The teams are working from the 1986 NABNT with reference to NA 28. In questions of canonicity, the Nova Vulgata is consulted.

Say more about how Liturgiam authenticam figures in or guides your work.
The editors consulted Liturgiam authenticam in developing the principles of translation. These principles were reviewed by the Committee on Divine Worship, the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, and the Subcommittee on the Translation of Scripture Text prior to approval by the bishop members of the CCD.

What efforts can you make at this stage to incorporate considerations of other Bishops Conferences / Biblical Associations in hopes of the widest possible adoption?
The NAB is already used broadly in the Philippines, India, and Anglophone Africa.

What kind of ecumenical participation will there be? Will there be translators from the evangelical/mainline/Orthodox traditions involved?
The translation teams include some Protestant scholars and some Orthodox scholars, though the majority of revisers are Catholic.

Are there any literary consultants on the NABRE NT Revision Committee?
Not at present.

Will the NABRE 2025 be available in mobile versions?
Who knows what technologies will be available in 2025!!! As we have with the NABRE, the CCD will welcome proposals for a variety of media. The NABRE is available in e-books, apps, etc., from a variety of publishers.

Are there any plans to modify lightly the Old Testament if the Holy See would compel them to do so even for the lectionary approval to get Vatican's recognitio that would require outside of the committee's scope of work?
At present, no such plan is in place.

Is there any possibility that the completed new revision might include an Apocrypha appendix that would include translations of books outside of the Deuterocanonical books that are included in the RSV and NRSV versions of the Apocrypha (1 & 2 Esdras, 3 & 4 Maccabees, Psalm 151, Prayer of Manasseh)?
At present, no such plan is in place.

We simply opened a copy of the approved translation and read directly from the Bible. …So, no: we COULD quite easily create a Biblical translations that takes into account the breaks in the Catholic lectionary assignments and structures the rendering accordingly.
The Ordo Lectionum Missae requires the addition of incipits and some other small changes in the creation of a Lectionary, plus, some verses are omitted from readings.

Will the footnotes be revised and include commentary by the early Church Fathers?
The footnotes are being revised. At present, only the textual notes and those notes necessary for understanding the text are being prepared. More extensive pastoral/catechetical notes are a later step.

Will the bishops consider permitting its publication without interpretive notes?
The official interpretation of the canon that we have received is that this is not permissible.

Will they consider permitting its publication alternative notes?
Alternative notes may be included alongside the essential NAB notes, but may not replace them.

Would the USCCB ever allow publication of a "protestant edition" of the NABRE?
To the best of my recollection, we’ve never been asked (and I’ve been here 20 years!). If asked, the decision would have to be made at the episcopal level.

Will the NT be ready in time? What kind of coordination is there with the USCCB committee working on the LOTH?
The NT should be ready to be part of the LOTH. Once the editors have completed their work, the Committee on Divine Worship will be part of the review process. As noted above, the Committee on Divine Worship participated in the development of the principles of translation.

Like CELAM began a translation project called the Bible the Church in the Americas (Biblia de la Iglesia en las Américas).
Interestingly, that project (La Biblia de Iglesia en America) was initiated and funded by the USCCB!


Christopher Buckley said...

Thank you!

Thank you, for the time and info, Mary.

Hopefully, you can tell there are a lot of people here - critical, appreciative, or both - who will eat up any advanced info you can give, pulling back the curtain on this emerging translation.

Really appreciate the time.

rolf said...

Thank you Mary!

Mike said...

Thank-you for answering these questions. :-)

Neil Short said...


Timothy said...

Anonymous said...

I'm confused. If the revised NT isn't going to be finished until 2025 (I assume that's why it's being called NABRE 2025), then does this mean that the revised Liturgy of the Hours will be delayed until then? The last I heard was that the LOH would be finished around 2019.

Neil Short said...

1 Chronicles 5:26 could use some lipstick.
Therefore the God of Israel stirred up against them the anger of Pul, king of Assyria, and the anger of Tilgath-pilneser [sic], king of Assyria, who deported the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh and brought them to Halah, Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, where they have remained to this day.

Neil Short said...

It was a dumb question on my part. I was asking iy NA28 would be the basis; and I see that it will.

Mark DeForrest said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Christopher Buckley said...

Mary's comments indicate that they're revising the NABNT 1986 using the Nestle Aland Greek NT v.28 and referencing the Nova Vulgata when questions of canonicity arise.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Mary for responding to our inquiries and we hope, with the committee's consent, may you continue to provide us with developments with the project.

We only hope as Catholics that we finally have a version that is concordantly corresponding with the Liturgy.

Seriously, I am not bothered with pronouns replacing its antecedents on the Lectionary, it is not degrading the Holy Scriptures. It is only an auxiliary help that is essentially needed for public proclamation or worship.

The RSV and NRSV also admittedly done this on the translation itself, e.g. "Jesus" footnoted with a "Gk he". This is especially needed when the lectionary reading starts or being pulled out from a continuous account. Of course, we cannot expect the biblical writers to use nouns redundantly, it is the main purpose of the pronouns in the first place, to avoid the repeated use of the antecedent nouns. So as Biblical and Greek writers at that time, they would naturally maximize the use of pronouns, similar to how pronouns are taught to be used when we are still in school.

But when they are pulled out from their antecedent paths, it would be required to replace them with their antecedents unless it is unclear from the Scriptures itself who or what these pronouns are being referred to.

owen swain said...

2025 . . . will you still need me, will you still feed me when I'm 66?

I'll likely be enjoying my unrevised NRSV ;-)