Saturday, February 6, 2016

NABRE NT Revision Introduction

Below you will find the introduction to the NABRE NT revision, as found on the Catholic Biblical Association website.  I will have Mary Sperry's responses for you on Monday.

The Revision of the New American Bible New Testament

Introduction:
At their June 2012 plenary meeting, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) approved the initiation of a revision of the New American Bible New Testament and entrusted that work to the oversight of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. Following the development of a plan and budget for the project, the work began in 2013 with the appointment of an editorial board consisting of five members, all of whom are active members of the Catholic Biblical Association. The editorial board then drafted a document detailing the "Process and Principles" of the revision project, which were approved by the USCCB.
In July 2014 the revision project was announced to CBA members present at the Annual Meeting at Providence College. In Fall 2014 additional revisers were recruited, who will work together in five teams covering five sections of the New Testament (Matthew & Mark; Luke & Acts; Johannine Literature; Pauline Literature; and Catholic Epistles). Work by the revision teams will begin in early 2015. Following the necessary approvals for liturgy and for publication of a Scripture translation, publication of the final text is expected around 2025.
The three-fold purpose of this process is to produce a translation of the New Testament that is even more suitable for individual study and devotion, catechesis, and proclamation within the Sacred Liturgy. The goal of the revision is to improve a good translation with a focus on fidelity to the original text, clarity of expression, appropriate consistency in rendering Greek into English, and suitability for public proclamation. The revised translation aims to facilitate the reader’s or hearer’s encounter with Jesus Christ through his Word and to build up faith, hope, and love.
Editorial Board:
  • Dr. Harold Attridge
  • Rev. Christopher Ciccarino
  • Dr. Mary Healy
  • Rev. Felix Just, SJ
  • Rev. Edward Mazich, O.S.B.
  • Reverend Edward Mazich, OSB
  • Most Rev. Donald Trautman (Consultant)
  • Mary Elizabeth Sperry (USCCB Staff)

16 comments:

Emilia said...

Oh man, I hope they fix all those times they translated porneia as merely "immorality" into "sexual immorality". This is actually one of the biggest irritations I have the 1986 New Testament.
But yaaay I'm excited to see the final product!

Anonymous said...

I hope to some degree they address syntax and punctuation. There are a number of passages with 6 or 7 commas in one long, run-on sentence with parenthetical thoughts nested inside one another. It's terrible to have to read these at mass and have them make sense to people who are hearing it.

Timothy said...

You might have to take that up with St Paul. I have been told that Paul's letters are getting revised in a way to address your concern.

Kevin Davis said...

...publication of the final text is expected around 2025.

Wow! They sure are taking time to do it...hopefully right. I wonder why it will take so long. It took the NIV translation team (including literary editors and theological consultants) about ten years to do the whole NIV revision, both OT and NT, for the 2011 update.

Paul W said...

Kevin, this is mainly because the proposed text must go through various layers of ecclesiastical approval to be an approved translation. The NIV is only revised by one translation committee. And if you include the original NIV inclusive language edition and TNIV as failed stages of the revision process, the NIV committee took about 16 years to get a revised text right!

Biblical Catholic said...

'hey sure are taking the time to do it...hopefully right. I wonder why it will take so long. It took the NIV translation team (including literary editors and theological consultants) about ten years to do the whole NIV revision, both OT and NT, for the 2011 update."

Well, for one thing, 2011 NIV wasn't a real revision. In 2005, they released the updated NIV that they had always wanted, Today's New International Version, or TNIV, but they didn't pull the 1984 NIV out of print because it was so popular. The result was that the TNIV became very controversial due to the 'inclusive language' used in it, and it sold poorly. In 2009, Zondervan decided to kill the 1984 NIV text completely, and in 2011, the TNIV, with minor revisions, was released as the 2011 NIV text. They basically just replaced the NIV with the TNIV but changed the name so that people wouldn't notice.

As far as it goes, about 10 years to translate the NT sounds about right and is about standard for the industry. By way of comparison, the RSV was commissioned 1937, and the NT was published in 1946, 9 years later. The NT then underwent minor revisions when the full Bible was published in 1952 and was then revised again 1971.

About 10 years seems reasonable.

Mark DeForrest said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Biblical Catholic said...

I have never read of even seen the original 1970 NAB NT, but based on what I've read of it, it is really bad, with a lot of really weird translations.

For examples, instead of the traditional translation 'the kingdom of God' it consistently uses the very awkward phrase 'the dominion of God'.

Emilia said...

What's even more interesting is the note concernin 1 Corinthians 3 in the Confraternity NT; this is one of the popular places where attackers of the 1986 NAB NT focus on.

From the "New Testament, Confraternity edition" (1941). With the "Commentary on the New Testament" published in 1942:

3, 10-17: Their Responsibility and Reward. 10 f. Builder: literally a master-builder. Paul laid the foundation, the doctrine of Christ and Him crucified (2, 2); others built by further doctrinal instruction. 12. Gold, silver, precious stones represent solid and fruitful doctrines; wood, hay, straw help to build and hence are not errors or heresies, but are flimsy materials, such as frivolous teachings, useless stories or light ramblings that have little influence for good. 13. The day of the Lord: i.e., the last judgment. The day is to be revealed in fire: this probably refers to the fire of the final general conflagration (2 Pet. 3, 7). This suggests the metaphor of final judgment by fire with is developed in the following verses. 14 f. Reward: since this reward is distinct from salvation it must refer to the special reward for preaching. Yet so as through fire: when fire breaks out in the building those who are constructing with perishable materials will be scorched by the burning of their work. Purgatory is not here referred to directly, since this is the last day when purgatory will cease. But by analogy this implies that those who die before the last day will have to suffer for their venial sins before gaining salvation. It is possible that the comparison is suggested because of fire in purgatory, but the fire cannot be proved from this text. 16 f. God dwells in the Corinthians individually and collectively: God's dwelling is the temple. Those who attempt to destroy God's temple (third class of workers) by teaching errors will be deprived of eternal salvation.

Biblical Catholic said...

I believe that the notes are being completely revised as well, which may well be another reason why the plan is to take 10 years. The revision of the translation by itself might not take 10 years, but combine that with the full revision of the notes and it suddenly starts to seem like maybe 2025 is too optimistic for a target date.

Christopher Buckley said...

Do we have enough info - here and from Mary's update - to intuit who is responsible for translating each section?

Editorial Board:
-Dr. Harold Attridge (Yale, best known for work on Hebrews - Catholic epistles?)
-Rev. Christopher Ciccarino
-Dr. Mary Healy
-Rev. Felix Just, SJ (Jesuit, has published on John 21 - Johannine literature?)
-Rev. Edward Mazich, O.S.B.
-Most Rev. Donald Trautman (Advisor)
-Mary Elizabeth Sperry (USCCB Staff)

Interesting that Most Rev. Donald Trautman is known for being a propoent of more inclusive language in liturgy, and that he cautioned priests celebrating mass according the extraordinary form per Summorum Pontificum to be well versed in latin and the old rubrics.

If he's moved to consulting rather than directly editing, that may signal more of a balanced commitment to formal equivalence than before?

Mary Elizabeth Sperry said...

It says nothing apart from the fact that Bishop Trautman's health prevented him from continuing the intensive work required of the editors.

Christopher Buckley said...

Yes, granted.
Just curious to understand more about the section assignments.
Do each of the five editors align with each of the five sections?
Or do they "share" section assignments among them?

Mary Elizabeth Sperry said...

Each editor heads a revision team. The whole editorial board reviews every book.

Christopher Buckley said...

Got it. Thanks!

Gerald de Belen said...

I would suspect that Dr. Mary Healy would hit on the Gospels (not sure though, if she will take the Matthew-Mark or the Luke-John portion) since she already published a commentary on the Gospels.