www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy Translation inconsistency

While preparing the texts for reader's vespers at home tomorrow evening, I noticed a rather blaring inconsistency in the leaflet (as posted on the MCI site). In the first stichera of the Council Fathers, the first line uses the "Lover of us all" phrase. This I expected. However, the first line of the festal theotokion reads "O gracious Lord, for the sake of mankind..." (emphasis mine). "Mankind" is used later in the same theotokion.

Deacon Anthony mentioned in another thread the rubrical schizophrenia clergy must go through in order to serve the RDL and (presumably) the "old" liturgy in Slavonic. We're apparently going through a similar thing in just the actual translations to English!

The works prepared and distributed by the Metropolitan Cantor Institute have customarily used "mankind", "men", etc. except where authoritative texts have been prepared by the Inter-eparchial Liturgical Commission. Thus, for example, where a troparion occurs in both the Green Book and MCI publications, the official text is used.

The issue of official texts goes way back. In fact, long before the MCI, the CANTOR-L project was guided by Father Maximos' very strong recommendation that the bishops' blessing should be sought for any extensive work on Vespers and Matins, and that officially promulgated texts should be used where they existed.

While I understand the concern about rubrics, does it really cause a PROBLEM if different wordings are used in translating different texts? The same occurs, of course, if propers from other sources (such as the St. John of Kronstadt Press, or Father Ephrem) are used. Do you have a real difficulty singing proper texts with different phraseology? Or are you asking that the MCI reword all texts "in advance" to use inclusive language?

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

The gathering hymn on the MCI RDL sheet for this Sunday also has "mankind" in the first line. Quite honestly, based on the new translations, I figured that it would not be used at all.

Dear John,

I suppose you could rewrite it to use "inclusive language" if you want, but since the bishops have never exercised any particular oversight over paraliturgical hymns, I don't see why you would have to. If the bishops issue an explicit directive on translation, I suppose we could achieve even greater consistency - but I'm only really worried about consistent translation of particular texts (e.g. not having three different English translations of Heavenly King in use at once).

The paraliturgical hymns from the Lekvulic pew book being typeset for re-publication have not been modified, except for the tiny number that were also included in the Green Book.

Jeff

Vespers stikhera are also available on our St. Irenaeus Mission Society page http://stirenaeus.net/vespers.htm These are metered to Galician or Kyivan samohlasnij but may be of some use.

Jeff,

My problem lies in the fact that the phrase "Lover of us all" grates on my ears in more ways than one. However, I will use the texts as transmitted to me until (I pray) it changes. It is, however, exceptionally difficult to get used to something that I may find personally distasteful when there's no consistency across the board. I do understand that most of the MCI publications are not mandated like the RDL. I am merely voicing my frustration at the (IMHO) poor translation of the mandated texts and how they affect the overall rhythm of trying to, in this case, pray Vespers on Saturday evening. While the problem is definitely mine, it's very distracting to be singing "Lover of us all" in one breath and then back to using "mankind" in another.

Dear Mikey,

I understand and agree - though if you knew how many translations for Vespers and Matins were floating around in our own church in the early 1990's (perhaps you do!), you'd realize the extent to which having a book with all the texts and music for Sunday and feastday Vespers is quite a bit of progress. I would be willing to wager that had the MCI not restored the "non-inclusive" version of Psalm 103 in its books a few years ago, we might very well be using the "inclusive" Basilian version now.

Jeff

Jeff,

Oh, I am very grateful for the noted texts! As one who did not grow up in the ByzCath tradition I had to get used to the idea of not having the music in front of me and now that I do, I'm ecstatic. In fact, having the music itself was a motivator in actually doing reader's vespers at home in order to prepare for Sunday liturgy.