Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Official Orthodox English Translation: But How?

Expand Messages
  • Fr. John R. Shaw
    ... JRS: There is also no *official* Greek text of the Septuagint or the New Testament, or even of the Greek service books. One can meet variant readings in
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 6, 2006
      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, malcolm robertson <mjriii2003@...> wrote:

      >... Orthodox jurisdictions) do not possess an OFFICIAL English translation of the Bible.

      JRS: There is also no *official* Greek text of the Septuagint or the New Testament, or even
      of the Greek service books.

      One can meet variant readings in the Greek Biblical texts that appear in various books.
      One key "variant" is in Ps. 16, heard in the 3rd Hour. Fr. Lawrence's "Unabridged
      Horologion" uses the HTM Psalter, with the reading "they have filled themselves with
      swinishness", from a minority reading in the Septuagint.

      The majority of Septuagint texts have "they have had sons at their desire".

      There are other key variants in the Greek. A fully authoritative English edition would have
      to take them all into consideration, probably with extensive footnotes and learned
      apparatus in the text.

      Besides that, we have the undying battle over "what style of English?"

      In Christ
      Fr. John R. Shaw
    • malcolm robertson
      Dear Fr. Shaw, Your question is quite pertinent. I suppose it will depend on one s perspective as to how this is to be accomplished. When I was still a
      Message 2 of 7 , Jul 6, 2006
        Dear Fr. Shaw,

        Your question is quite pertinent. I suppose it will depend on one's perspective as to "how" this is to be accomplished.

        When I was still a teenager my mother gave me a copy of the KJV published by Thomas Nelson Co (this was the second English Bible I received the first being the Revised Standard Version). In it there were footnotes indicating variant readings such as the one you note at Ps 16. Another example might be LXX 39:6 and Hebrews 10:5. Some variant readings are easily explained in the LXX (Septuaginta) as a misunderstanding of the underlying Hebrew text. But in some instances perhaps not because there are still words in the Hebrew text whose full semantic range of meaning is unknown to us.

        The point I am trying to make is this. Do we wish to choose from the already available plethora of English versions (New International Version, English Standard Version, New King James Version) or do we want to make another anew? Hence your question about style? Or quite simply do we wish to be content with what we have available now? The purpose would be perhaps for uniformity in readings in worship (a sort of uniformity in "Church" language in English). Perhaps for personal devotions the selection of an English version should be left up to the individual.

        Please don't think this will produce another schism like that under Nikon. Perhaps if nothing is done and the reading is left up to the discretion of the individual parish this course might prove to be the best in the end if uniformity in English translation is not a desired goal. A certain flexibility might in the end prove best. Doubtless the Fathers encountered their fair share of slight variants in the LXX manuscripts/versions at their disposal.

        Of course the issue is complex; but in order to extend the impact of the Gospel some further present day attempt (or at least clarification) should be made in this area if this issue is at all of some importance.

        Because He lives,

        Malcolm

        ________________________

        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, malcolm robertson <mjriii2003@...> wrote:

        >... Orthodox jurisdictions) do not possess an OFFICIAL English translation of
        the Bible.

        JRS: There is also no *official* Greek text of the Septuagint or the New
        Testament, or even
        of the Greek service books.

        One can meet variant readings in the Greek Biblical texts that appear in various
        books.
        One key "variant" is in Ps. 16, heard in the 3rd Hour. Fr. Lawrence's
        "Unabridged
        Horologion" uses the HTM Psalter, with the reading "they have filled themselves
        with
        swinishness", from a minority reading in the Septuagint.

        The majority of Septuagint texts have "they have had sons at their desire".

        There are other key variants in the Greek. A fully authoritative English edition
        would have
        to take them all into consideration, probably with extensive footnotes and
        learned
        apparatus in the text.

        Besides that, we have the undying battle over "what style of English?"

        In Christ
        Fr. John R. Shaw





        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Michael Coleman
        Fathers bless! This then brings up another question to me: If obtaining an official English translation of the Scriptures, then what organ would do the
        Message 3 of 7 , Jul 6, 2006
          Fathers bless!

          This then brings up another question to me: If
          obtaining an 'official' English translation of the
          Scriptures, then what organ would do the 'blessing' of
          the 'official' English translation?

          Would each local Church authorize it?

          And, my main question for those who know: if, as is
          the case, that ROCOR is on the path towards
          eucharistic and administrative union with the MP, then
          is there any thought yet on ROCOR's possible entry
          into SCOBA (as the original invitation I understand
          was declined due to the MP's membership therein) now
          that the original stumbling block is no longer
          considered?

          Has SCOBA re-invited ROCOR as of yet?

          Thanks to all!

          Michael Coleman
          Knoxville, TN

          --- "Fr. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> wrote:

          > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, malcolm
          > robertson <mjriii2003@...> wrote:
          >
          > >... Orthodox jurisdictions) do not possess an
          > OFFICIAL English translation of the Bible.
          >
          > JRS: There is also no *official* Greek text of the
          > Septuagint or the New Testament, or even
          > of the Greek service books.
          >
          > One can meet variant readings in the Greek Biblical
          > texts that appear in various books.
          > One key "variant" is in Ps. 16, heard in the 3rd
          > Hour. Fr. Lawrence's "Unabridged
          > Horologion" uses the HTM Psalter, with the reading
          > "they have filled themselves with
          > swinishness", from a minority reading in the
          > Septuagint.
          >
          > The majority of Septuagint texts have "they have had
          > sons at their desire".
          >
          > There are other key variants in the Greek. A fully
          > authoritative English edition would have
          > to take them all into consideration, probably with
          > extensive footnotes and learned
          > apparatus in the text.
          >
          > Besides that, we have the undying battle over "what
          > style of English?"
          >
          > In Christ
          > Fr. John R. Shaw
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >


          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          http://mail.yahoo.com
        • Fr David Straut
          Dear Michael, The MP in the USA is *not* a member of SCOBA. For that matter, neither is the Jerusalem Patriarchate a member of SCOBA. Priest David Straut
          Message 4 of 7 , Jul 6, 2006
            Dear Michael,

            The MP in the USA is *not* a member of SCOBA. For that matter, neither is the Jerusalem Patriarchate a member of SCOBA.

            Priest David Straut



            Michael Coleman <usmichaelnew@...> wrote:And, my main question for those who know: if, as is
            the case, that ROCOR is on the path towards
            eucharistic and administrative union with the MP, then
            is there any thought yet on ROCOR's possible entry
            into SCOBA (as the original invitation I understand
            was declined due to the MP's membership therein) now
            that the original stumbling block is no longer
            considered?

            Has SCOBA re-invited ROCOR as of yet?

            Thanks to all!

            Michael Coleman
            Knoxville, TN





            ---------------------------------
            All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Fr. Anthony Nelson
            ... When the MP applied to SCOBA two or three years ago for membership, their application was denied by SCOBA on the grounds that the MP is a foreign Church.
            Message 5 of 7 , Jul 7, 2006
              Fr David Straut <frdavidstraut@...> wrote:

              >The MP in the USA is *not* a member of SCOBA. For that matter,
              >neither is the Jerusalem Patriarchate a member of SCOBA.

              When the MP applied to SCOBA two or three years ago for membership,
              their application was denied by SCOBA on the grounds that the MP is
              "a foreign Church."

              Just more example of how disingenuous the whole SCOBA silliness really is.

              Fr. Anthony


              * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
              Fr. Anthony Nelson
              St. Benedict Russian Orthodox Church
              Oklahoma City, OK USA 405-672-1441
              mailto:fr.anthony@...
              http://www.russianorthodoxoklahoma.org

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Philip Silouan Thompson
              ... Unlike, say, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese (?!) After union, as an autonomous part of the Church of Russia, we ll still be a foreign church . Meanwhile
              Message 6 of 7 , Jul 7, 2006
                Fr. Anthony Nelson wrote:
                > Fr David Straut <frdavidstraut@...> wrote:
                >
                >> The MP in the USA is *not* a member of SCOBA. For that matter,
                >> neither is the Jerusalem Patriarchate a member of SCOBA.
                >>
                >
                > When the MP applied to SCOBA two or three years ago for membership,
                > their application was denied by SCOBA on the grounds that the MP is
                > "a foreign Church."

                Unlike, say, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese (?!)

                After union, as an autonomous part of the Church of Russia, we'll still
                be a "foreign church". Meanwhile SCOBA will still be an uncanonical
                synod of competing bishops of overlapping dioceses.

                There's meant to be one bishop for any given territory; when there are
                competing claimants, the Church is meant to *resolve* the issue by
                naming a single bishop, not to acknowledge all claimants as legitimate
                members of a quasi-synod.

                If ROCOR joined SCOBA wouldn't we be participating in an uncanonical
                false synod? It seems better to me to acknowledge honestly that there
                *isn't* a united American Orthodox Church (nor a united Orthodox mission
                to North America), rather than to legitimize the current uncanonical
                jurisdictional situation by joining SCOBA.

                But I could be wrong. Corrections welcome!

                Reader Silouan
                Walla Walla, Washington
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.