Collect for the Memorial of St. Ambrose: Translation Issues

While celebrating Mass yesterday for the memorial of St. Ambrose, I was struck by the new English translation of the collect:

O God, who made the Bishop Saint Ambrose / a teacher of the Catholic faith / and a model of apostolic courage, / raise up in your Church men after your own heart / to govern her with courage and wisdom…

I didn’t remember any petition in the former translation articulating with such clarity that Church governance be limited to those of the male gender. Sure enough, when I checked the RM1974 translation I discovered this:

Lord, / you made St. Ambrose / an outstanding teacher of the Catholic faith / and gave him the courage of an apostle. / Raise up in your Church more leaders after your own heart, / to guide us with courage and wisdom….

This, of course, sent me to the underlying Latin text from MR1970-2008:

Deus, qui beatum Ambrosium episcopum / catholicae fidei doctorem / et apostolicae fortitudinis exemplum effecisti, / excita in Ecclesia tua viros secundum cor tuum, / qui eam fortiter et sapienter gubernent….

It should be clear that the Latin text definitely refers to human beings of the male gender by its use of “viros”. I assume, therefore, that the request is that God will raise up more men to serve AS BISHOPS in the Church after the model of Ambrose the bishop. In that sense the RM1974 translation probably extended the meaning too widely by referring to “leaders” in general.

On the other hand, without making it explicit that “men after God’s heart governing the Church with courage and wisdom” refers to the role of bishops, the RM2011 translation may cause problems for those who recognize that baptized humans of either gender may in fact exercise some forms of governance within the Church. I suspect that a pastoral solution would be to offer some catechesis on the collect text, indicating that we are praying on this day specifically that God will raise up bishops after the model of Ambrose and that on other days we will pray for leadership exercised in other ways in the Church.

Michael Joncas

Ordained in 1980 as a priest of the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis, MN, Fr. (Jan) Michael Joncas holds degrees in English from the (then) College of St. Thomas in St. Paul, MN, and in liturgical studies from the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN and the Pontificio Istituto Liturgico of the Ateneo S. Anselmo in Rome. He has served as a parochial vicar, a campus minister, and a parochial administrator (pastor). He is the author of six books and more than two hundred fifty articles and reviews in journals such as Worship, Ecclesia Orans, and Questions Liturgiques. He has composed and arranged more than 300 pieces of liturgical music. He has recently retired as a faculty member in the Theology and Catholic Studies departments and as Artist in Residence and Research Fellow in Catholic Studies at the University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

47 responses to “Collect for the Memorial of St. Ambrose: Translation Issues”

  1. Gwyn Williams

    Isn’t “Men” or “Man” indicative of mankind and therefore gender-inclusive? That’s always been my understanding.

    I’m open to fraternal correction. I’m told that this is often down to an impaired understanding of how the English language works rather than a bad translation of the Latin.

    Reply
    1. Julie Heath Elliott

      Latin has two different words — vir (or the plural form in the prayer viros) does mean gendered male, while homo (plural homines in the Nicene Creed). is the term that means a human/ human beings.

      I see that there are several other comments addressed to this below — keep reading!

      Reply
  2. Paul Inwood

    For comparison, here is ICEL 1998, which agrees with Michael’s analysis:

    O God,
    you made the holy bishop Ambrose
    a teacher of the Catholic faith
    and a model of apostolic courage;
    raise up in our midst
    bishops after your own heart
    to guide your Church with wisdom and with strength.

    Interesting to notice that this translates beatum as “holy” whereas 2010 uses “Saint” which does not convey the same thing at all, to my way of thinking.

    Reply
    1. Hugh Farey

      Could it be because Ambrose only became a saint after he died, and, indeed, a “Saint” by human proclamation, while God made him holy and a model of courage from his conception? The prayer to God doesn’t need to emphasise his sainthood (the whole mass recognises that), but his sanctity. Beatus doesn’t mean either, and being a participle, emphasises that Ambrose’s qualities were “made” by God, while sanctus is simply an adjective describing them. However, being a Saint, translating beatus as “blessed” would be confusing.

      Reply
  3. Adam Wood

    I imagine most of us who wished that collect read, “men and women” are likewise those of us who await the day when women are able to exercise ordained ministry within the Church.

    And, even as wise and courageous women are both needed and very much present, we also know that such a change would require as it’s agent….

    MEN after God’s own heart, governing the Church with both COURAGE and WISDOM.

    Reply
    1. Simon Dodd

      If those charged with doing so govern the Church with courage and wisdom after God’s own heart, they will know that such a change is absolutely impossible. This question has been settled decisively.

      Reply
      1. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
        Anthony Ruff, OSB

        Settled for whom? For you? OK. But I wish you could realize that it’s not settled for much of the church – those calling for development in this teaching include many theologians (most in the West is my impression), many clergy including some bishops, and many devout laypeople. Cardinal Schoenborn of Vienna, a co-author of the catechism, said that a change such as ordaining women could only be made in an ecumenical council – point being, he didn’t think the development was absolutely impossible in the future.

        awr

      2. Simon Dodd

        For whom? For Catholics. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis definitively settled the question, and when it was asked whether the question was definitively settled, the CDF authoritatively confirmed that the question was definitively settled. I simply cannot understand how any Catholic can seriously consider the question in the slightest doubt in the year of our salvation 2011, or envisage the contorted conception of the magisterium necessary to reach such a conclusion. I’m sorry, father, it’s just incomprehensible to me that any faithful Catholic could think so.

        Setting aside whether Vatican II overruled earlier Papal pronouncements—I know we disagree on that—which were less authoritative than OS, I would be surprised if his eminence suggested that a council could change a teaching given with that level of authority. I would really want to see a quote, because that could be seen as conciliarism, a heresy that I’m sure that Schoenborn didn’t have in mind.

      3. Paul Robertson

        Simon, exercise care in judging others, for that is the standard by which you will be judged. You call many faithful Catholics unfaithful or non-Catholic because we hold an opinion at variance with the teaching of the magesterium.

        Fine. They have teaching authority.

        They have, in the past, exercised that authority to tell us that the Earth is flat, that the Earth is at the centre of the universe and that “for many” means “for all.”

        Take a moment to look up the magesterial teachings on the primacy of conscience. One scholar, some guy by the name of Ratzinger, said “Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. Conscience confronts [the individual] with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church.” (“Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II”, ed. Vorgrimler, 1968).

        Some of us think that the Holy Father was drawing on 60 years of living in a male-dominated hierarchy that grew from an ancient male-dominated society when he wrote Ordinatio Sacerdotalis and that Cardinal Ratzinger was drawing deeply on the same source when he confirmed it. We can think they are wrong, we can think they were crazy, we can think they were drunk (personally, I’d go with the first but not necessarily the others), and we remain Catholics. Faithful Catholics.

        Regardless of any judgement you make about us.

        I am certain that God won’t hesitate to ask your opinion on such matters should he need advice.

      4. Sean Parker

        @Paul: +1

  4. Simon Dodd

    Paul, maybe that is one reason why the Holy See rejected ICEL1998 as “seriously deficient,” noting “its failure to adhere faithfully to the Latin editio typica altera and to convey accurately in English its contents.” I don’t understand why ICEL1998 is even still spoken of; regardless of whether one accepts the new translation, it should be obvious that ICEL1998 is a non-starter.

    Reply
    1. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
      Anthony Ruff, OSB

      You really don’t understand why 1998 is still spoken of? Because it’s an excellent translation – higher quality English, faithful to the Latin in an intelligent way, and the changes it makes to the Latin are well-founded.

      The new text, by contrast, gets the Latin wrong quite frequently, and without any apparent reason other than incompetence or not understanding the Latin.

      awr

      Reply
      1. Xavier Rindfleisch

        Dear Father Anthony,
        You’re letting facts get in the way of Simon’s “talking points”. It’s fascinating to see how few of those referred to as “cheerleaders” are defending the Vox Clara Pell-Moroney-Ward Missal’s version of the December 8 Collect. Thanks to Mgr Harbert for his excellent analysis. Have any of the “cheerleaders” tried defending the defective theology repeated daily in the Collect Conclusion (also pointed out to us by Mgr Harbert), that extra “one” which is not in the Latin (for a very good reason: i.e., it isn’t true!)?

      2. Simon Dodd

        No, I don’t understand it. You say it’s an excellent translation, but we know that it isn’t; that option is foreclosed by the Vatican’s rejection of it precisely and expressly because it is a deficient translation. It may strike you as a good English composition, and I can’t really gainsay that (we apparently have fundamentally different aesthetic sensibilities), but the Vatican has told us that it’s no good as a translation. (Indeed, as you concede, it makes changes to the Latin, which instantly invalidates it as a translation.) So no, I don’t understand why it’s still spoken of, and the new translation’s virtues or deficiencies don’t seem relevant to that point.

      3. Paul Inwood

        Simon,

        (1) There are far fewer inaccuracies in 1998 than in 2010. Have you been following? The fact that 1998 makes changes to the Latin is not relevant. We are now discovering that 2010 makes even more changes to the Latin than 1998 did.

        (2) 1998 is an English translation, not a Babelfish one. Portentous, pompous, pretentious, convoluted, ambiguous, klunky are just some of the adjectives that have been applied to the 2010 version. I have not yet heard any traditionalist commentator saying that it is beautiful. All they can say is that it is more accurate than 1973. No one disputes that. The issue is whether 2010 is actually English or not.

        (3) The fact that the Vatican decided to reject 1998 is irrelevant. History has already recorded the political ideologies that were coming into play at that point, and those have not diminished. Not only has the Vatican’s decision to reject 1998 earned them no respect, but Liturgiam Authenticam, which changed the rules on translation, has been damned as “the most ignorant document ever to be issued by a Vatican congregation”. In that case, how can Vatican approval or otherwise be taken seriously? The argument that “Rome says it’s no good and therefore it isn’t” can easily be countered by “the folks in Rome are no good and therefore their opinions are valueless”.

      4. Xavier Rindfleisch

        Stop it, Paul, you’re terrifying us! 🙂

    2. Gerard Flynn

      Mr Dodd, Ordinatio sacerdotalis is an Apostolic Letter, which in the hierarchy of teaching documents is not used for doctrinal definitions or formulations. It’s quite far down the line. It’s lower than a constitution or an encyclical for example.
      The doctrinaire character and rigidity of your contributions is exacerbated by an arrogant tone and dismissive tenor. I don’t see much evidence of Christian, not to mention, Advent joy. Roll on Gaudete!

      Reply
      1. Lynne Gonzales

        Amen! Alleluia!

        Obviously, the matter is NOT settled…it is still being talked about, discussed, and demonstrators are still demonstrating…it is far from “settled”!

        Telling us we can no longer discuss ordination of women in the Catholic Church is like telling someone not to think of an elephant…

    3. Fr. Jim Blue

      The ICEL1998 EP’s are working nicely. I started using them earlier this week. Using them seems like a pretty fine pastoral decision. They are beautiful and lack the ungainly character of the VC2010 dreck. So far no visits from the temple police!

      Also the 1998 has a great replacement for the massively ugly Preface Coda!

      Reply
  5. John Drake

    I will be thrilled the day I hear the priest teach about one of the collects during his homily!

    Reply
  6. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

    Despite all the negativity here about the corrected translation, I watched the Mass by Cardinal Wurel from the Basilica Shrine of the Immaculate Conception at 12 noon EST. It is the first time I’ve experienced the new Mass as a spectator. I must say it was rather beautiful in its totality and the words used I could understand very well from just listening to them. The Cardinal used the Roman Canon and shared it with other concelebrants, one of whom was Hispanic, and he said his part very well.
    Overall, it seem to me to be a very prayerful experience of the Mass in such a grand setting and the congregation which packed the Basilica participated very well with their new parts. Despite the hope for failure by some, I think this Mass is a success at the Basilica and in such a short time of usage, just a little more than a week.

    Reply
    1. Jeff Rice

      As much as I’m enthused about how much our priests are singing the Mass texts, having to enter into prayer with phrases like, “on account of your prevenient grace,” with 200 kids at school Mass this morning was difficult. I’m all for teaching theological concepts to children and adults alike… it has been a blessing in my opinion to explore the meaning of incarnation this Advent using the Credo as a starter. But a theology degree shouldn’t be a prerequisite for understanding the prayers of the Mass.

      Reply
      1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        Well, you really do need some theology, doctrine as well as faith to understand the Mass no matter how old you are and no matter how simple the language. It really is a Mystery.

      2. Bill deHaas

        Good point and the original ICEL was aware of these issues you raise – thus, the EPs for Children.

        Apologize for Fr. Allan’s flip and dismissive response – it is not helpful. Your task is difficult and will require creativity.

        Don’t think that liturgy is meant to be a “theological test or hazard course” that one has to get a “passing grade on”.

        Your example and others have raised questions not only with children but with caring, adult catholics.

      3. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        O Bill, I explained “prevenient” in my homily to our elementary school kids today. It is a hard word and I even had to look it up before I prayed it. There wasn’t anything dismissive in my comment but rather an acknowledgment that some things are hard to understand but when explained we learn. We need to teach our children in other words as well as our adults and yes priests too. You shouldn’t be so prejudiced towards me. 🙁

      4. Jeff Rice

        Fr. Allan, with respect, I was responding to your statement that you could understand the words very well just from listening. This is obviously not the case, as the only way to understand the prayers is to read them over and over, and look up terms like “prevenient”. Ritual is supposed to speak for itself, with maybe a few hints along the way to help us focus on an action or a word. The new prayers sound like cold, scientific statements, and seem removed from the voice of the faithful. The prayers of the Missal are a collection of the longings of our brothers and sisters in faith over many centuries, and we should have the opportunity to join our hearts and minds to their pleas.

      5. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        Jeff, thanks for the clarification, but my listening to the prayers and even Cardinal Wurel used a form of “prevenient” in his homily, I was aided by the fact that I had studied these prayers ahead of time and looked up “prevenient” in order to explain it at our school Mass. I think every Catholic family should have a personal hard back laity-missal to help them to look over things before the Mass begins, either in their meditation before Mass or at home–we did that in pre-Vatican II times with the Latin. No reason why we can’t do it now. But in terms of attitude toward the revised prayers–we’ll all have to admit there are a diversity of views on that both positive and negative.

    2. Gerard Flynn

      Which being translated means:
      “If you’re reading this, Rev. Wuerl, here are some texts for translation into English:
      ‘El Paso vacata est.’
      ‘Baltimore vacata est. etc. etc.’
      Volens, adsum.”

      Reply
  7. Sandi Brough

    I think with prayers like this we finally have our answer to people who whine that those of us who reject this new imposition, with all its “most grievous faults,” are really rejecting the Latin text more than the transliteration: Yes! As this collect demonstrates, these prayers are evil, and no civilized people could ever accept them. They are the exact opposite of progressive. Sorry boys, it’s not 1311 any more, it’s 2011. We’ve moved on.

    Reply
  8. Fr. Jan Michael Joncas

    To address Gwyn Williams query: Latin generally uses “homo” to speak of a human being as opposed to other kinds of beings; this term was frequently translated by what some grammarians call the “masculine generic”, i.e., “man” understood as “human being.” In contrast Latin generally uses “vir” to speak of a male human being as opposed to other kinds of human beings, i.e., “man” understood as a male human being. In the collect under discussion the word translated as “men” is “viros” not “homines.” I hope this is helpful.

    Reply
    1. Eileen Russell

      And those other kinds of human beings feel excluded in all this. What do they want?

      Reply
    2. Gerard Flynn

      “Masculine generic” is a misnomer and an oxymoron.

      Reply
    3. Gwyn Williams

      Excellent.
      Thanks Fr. Joncas. You’ve clarified the issue beautifully.
      Gwyn.

      Reply
    4. Adam Wood

      I am seriously opposed to use of the “man” to mean “human” or “person.”

      However…
      Just as a note of linguistic historicity:
      The word “man” ORIGINALLY did mean a person/human, not a specifically male one. Gender was specified with prefixes:
      male = wer-man
      female = wyf-man
      (Notice relations to modern words werewolf and wife.)

      The male-specific prefix was dropped over time starting in around the 13th century, due to the combined forces of linguistic laziness and the conception that maleness is normative, whilst femaleness is a deviation from normal.

      POINT:
      This happened in THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY.
      So all the traddie-linguists who claim that “man” is a good word to mean “person of non-specific gender” because, you know, that’s good English or something, should remember that it hasn’t really been current for 700 years. And if you want to go down that road in translations, then we should also be real specific about how we need more weremen like Ambrose.

      Reply
    5. Ann Riggs

      Man as a “masculine generic” not really all that helpful, if one wants to highlight a literal rendition as more “faithful to the Latin.” ISTM that the kind of formal equivalence called for in LA would find a way for the English to reflect the differences between generic human beings and male ones. English does in fact have a way of doing that, it’s called human beings, human persons, or some such. As in the revised translation of the Gloria, where the peace given by God is for PEOPLE of good will — “hominibus bonae voluntatis.” In the Credo, however, the “propter nos homines” becomes “for us men,” which is technically less accurate.

      Reply
  9. Bill deHaas

    Fr. Jan Michael Joncas – “masculine generic” – have a question. The continued use of the masculine generic creates a negative emotional response in the females of my immediate family.

    Is it really necessary to translate and say – “for us men”? How do you incorporate language and cultural development in terms of “sexist” language as defined by current MSM and corporate standards?

    Reply
    1. Ann Riggs

      For many publications, the use of “masculine generic” has been replaced in their stylesheet by more “inclusive generic” terms.

      Reply
  10. Brian Duffy

    It is interesting to realize that another possible meaning for uir is husband. Do you think that ++Bugnini’s people were envisioning the Anglican Ordinariates when they composed that collect in honor of S. Ambrose?

    Reply
    1. Ann Riggs

      If the prayer were for more bishops like Saint Ambrose, I would have no problem with the use of men, which is both close to the Latin and reflective of current RC Church practice. In fact, I *definitely* wish there were more men who were wise and holy bishops.

      Reply
  11. Fr. Jan Michael Joncas

    Since Bill asked me directly, as an academic writing English in a United States context I don’t use the masculine generic. I find other ways to express collective humanity. I also usually translate “homo” when it is referring to a group rather than a single individual as “humanity” rather than “man.” Your issue seems to be with “propter nos homines” which appears in the Creed, not in the collect I was speaking about. I would probably have translated that “For us humans/human beings” but then I would have been faced with the problem a few lines later of translating “Et homo factus est” with reference to the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity, where I believe I would have translated “and he was made human / a human being” but that translation has been attacked by those who note that in fact he was made a male human being. I believe for some the issue is that the Second Person of the Trinity assumed human nature at the Incarnation and did so not in a generic way but as an enfleshed male. But none of this was my concern in speaking about the collect for the memorial of St. Ambrose. This collect used “viros,” which is why I raised the question.

    Reply
  12. Bill deHaas

    Thanks, Fr. Joncas.

    Reply
  13. Marci Blue

    A hundred years ago we couldn’t even vote in the US although we were citizens and here in the 21st century there are people who STILL see us as too inferior to be priests! Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton have demonstrated that women can murder millions of people just as efficiently as Henry Kissinger. Joan of Arc, Mary Magdalene and Mother Teresa have demonstrated that women can love just as unselfishly as Jesus.

    Reply
  14. Marci Blue

    I didn’t know God ordained anyone Simon – besides some women have been ordained despite the misogyny of the Roman Church!

    BTW – my recent research shows there were women priest right up to the 8th century. It doesn’t make any sense that Jesus would keep his number one apostle, Mary Magdalene, out of the priesthood does it? I don’t imagine that god had anything to do with excluding women from the priesthood – sounds like a classic case of male chauvinism and I wouldn’t blame that on a genderless god.

    Reply
  15. Sean Whelan

    Fr. Allan J. McDonald :

    O Bill, I explained “prevenient” in my homily to our elementary school kids today. It is a hard word and I even had to look it up before I prayed it. There wasn’t anything dismissive in my comment but rather an acknowledgment that some things are hard to understand but when explained we learn. We need to teach our children in other words as well as our adults and yes priests too. You shouldn’t be so prejudiced towards me.

    Would you be willing to video one of your Sunday Masses and post it for all to see? One gets the impression that your liturgies, preaching, and assembly are the absolute cream of the crop. It would be interesting to see.

    Reply
    1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

      Sean, I’m certainly proud of my parish as any parent would be of their children, no matter their age, but we can always improve including my preaching. Rather than videoing our liturgies, I would suggest you visit on your way to Disney World, we’re off of I-75 in downtown Macon, in the Heart of Georgia and judge for yourself. I’d love your feedback, positive or negative.Cream of the crop is a nice way to describe it and I like your terminology, but I would prefer something that is more “on its way” like “in process of becoming” cream of the crop in heaven. 😉
      This is a clip from a local TV station of the Memorial Mass we had for a local law student who was murdered in late June. I was out of town, but the priest only 2 weeks ordained did a rather stunning job:
      http://www.13wmaz.com/news/local/article/135781/0/VIDEO-Memorial-Mass-for-Lauren-Giddings

      Reply
  16. Mgr Bruce Harbert

    The phrase `viros secundum cor tuum’ in this prayer is an echo of Acts 13,22, `I have found in David the son of Jesse a man after my heart, who will do all my will’ (RSV), which in turn echoes 1 Sam 13,14, `the LORD has sought out a man after his own heart’ (RSV). As the Latin uses ‘vir’ in each case, and in each case the reference is to a male (David), it does not seem inappropriate to preserve the masculine gender-marking in translation.

    Reply
    1. Gerard Flynn

      It does not seem inappropriate to you.

      Reply

Posted

in

,

by

Michael Joncas

Tags:

, , , ,

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading