GUIDELINES FOR INTERCONFESSIONAL COOPERATION
IN TRANSLATING THE BIBLE
THE NEW REVISED EDITION ROME
1987
PRESENTATION
The Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity and the United Bible
Societies are pleased to present to all concerned a revised version of
the 1968 “Guiding Principles for Interconfessional Cooperation in
Translating the Bible”.
The document, now entitled “Guidelines for Interconfessional
Cooperation in Translating the Bible”, affirming the spirit and
following the principles set forth in the historic agreement first
published in 1968, reflects the experience gained in producing scores of
Bible translations since then. These interconfessional Bible
translation projects have largely been made possible by those “Guiding
Principles”; as a result of reports received from the users minor
modifications have now been introduced into this new edition.
The basic understanding, however, remains unchanged: as in the
past, interconfessional translations will continue to be based on a
Hebrew text of the Old Testament and a Greek text of the New Testament
which have been agreed on by scholars from various church traditions.
Drafting and reviewing of the translations will be carried out in close
cooperation, with the aim that the new text will be acceptable to, and
be used by all Christians and Christian communities who speak the
language into which the translation is being made.
The clear goal of this interconfessional effort is to produce
editions of the Holy Scriptures which provide all speakers of the
language with a common text. This will in turn make possible, often for
the first time, a common witness to the Word of God in the world of
today. To all who are interested in obtaining faithful and
understandable translations of the Bible, this updated version of the
“Guidelines” will, we pray, be an effective instrument for reaching this
goal.
May God bless those who work to make His Word more widely known
and lived, and through them bless all who will receive and read these
new interconfessional translations.
Vatican City, November 16th, 1987.
JOHANNES Cardinal WILLEBRANDS
President,
Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity
Lord DONALD COGGAN
Honorary President,
United Bibles Societies
PIERRE DUPREY
Secretary
ULRICH FICK
General Secretary
GUIDELINES FOR INTERCONFESSIONAL COOPERATION
IN TRANSLATING THE BIBLE
1. TECHNICAL FEATURES
1.1. TEXTUAL
1.1.1. Common Texts
1.1.1.1.New Testament: For joint translation programs, teams
should base their work on the critical edition of the Greek New
Testament published by the United Bible Societies, which is itself a
joint effort of scholars representing Roman Catholic and other Christian
constituencies. Translators should normally follow this text for
readings rated as A or B in The Greek New Testament but may choose other well attested readings when the text has a C rating.(1)
Though a critical text must form the basis of any adequate
translation, it is recognized that in some situations certain
constituencies may require that some passages of the New Testament found
in the Byzantine tradition (as largely represented by the Textus Receptus) should
be noted in the translation. When this is the case, such material may
appear in footnotes with an appropriate marker in the text. The extent
of textual adjustment will depend, of course, upon the local situation,
and will need to be covered carefully by clear and detailed principles
(see section 2).
1.1.1.2. Old Testament: The Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, published by the German Bible Society, is recommended for use by joint translation committees.
In general the Masoretic text is to be retained as the basis for
translation. Where, however, there are special difficulties in the
traditional form of the text, scholars should make use of the evidence
provided by recent textual discoveries and by ancient versions for other
forms of the Hebrew text. New insights provided by related Semitic
languages should be given due consideration though they may conflict
with traditional renderings. In dealing with textual problems, the
volumes of the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, prepared under the
auspices of the United Bible Societies, should be considered.
1.1.2. Canon
In many situations where there is a direct request from the churches,
Bible Societies publish editions of the Bible which contain what some
call the deuterocanonical books and others call the Apocrypha. It is the
aim of the Bible Societies to provide the Scriptures in the canon
desired by the churches.(2)
It is recognized that on the one hand an edition of the complete
Bible bearing the imprimatur of Roman Catholic authorities must contain
the deuterocanonical texts and that, on the other hand, while many
groups within Protestantism have employed the Apocrypha, a great
majority find it impossible to accept an arrangement of the Old
Testament which does not clearly distinguish between these texts and the
traditional Hebrew canon. It is suggested that these two positions are
in practice generally reconcilable if in editions of the Bible published
by the Bible Societies and bearing the imprimatur of Roman Catholic
authorities the deuterocanonical texts are included normally as a
separate section before the New Testament. In the case of the book of
Esther the translation of the complete Greek text will be printed in the
deuterocanonical section while the translation of the Hebrew text will
be printed among the books of the Hebrew canon. The deuterocanonical
parts of the book of Daniel will be presented as items in the separate
section.
For Ben Sirach, it would be advisable to print the shorter text, as
found in the main Greek manuscripts, while taking into account the
Hebrew and Syriac texts. The longer texts, from other Greek and Latin
manuscripts and eventually other Hebrew readings, could be printed, if
necessary, in the notes.
1.2. EXEGETICAL
1.2.1. Exegesis
In view of the growing agreement between scholars of different
Christian constituencies a common exegetical base should be established
by the adoption of mutually acceptable commentaries and scholarly
works.
1.2.2. Helps for readers
Both the needs of the reader and the traditional requirements of the
churches can be satisfied with the following types of helps:
1.2.2.1. Alternative readings: those texts which represent a
significant possibility of being original or which reflect a long
tradition in existing translation.
1.2.2.2. Alternative renderings: different interpretations
based either on ambiguities in the original languages or alternative
means of expression in the receptor language.
1.2.2.3. Explanation of proper names: literal renderings of
proper names when the meaning of the text depends on an identification
of the so-called popular etymologies, e.g., Isaac, Israel, Jesus (at
certain crucial points in the text).
1.2.2.4. Plays on words: the identification of related meanings of forms of words in the original language, e.g., pneuma meaning both “spirit” and “wind” (John 3).
1.2.2.5. Historical backgrounds: brief identification of
historical individuals, places, and events which are related to
so-called “secular history”. Much of this information may be given in
the form of maps (with ancient and modern nomenclature) and short
explanations provided in a glossary and an index.
1.2.2.6. Cultural differences: explanations of social,
religious, or cultural terms, e.g., (i) individuals or groups, e.g.,
Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, etc.; (ii) objects of radically
different form and function, e.g., weights and measures (weights,
measures and coins must be explained if a text is to be meaningful, and
if this is not done in the text of the translation itself, the
information must be supplied in footnotes or glossary); (iii) biblical
customs, e.g., “being seated on the right hand” must be explained as
implying distinction and honor when in certain societies the “left hand”
is the preferred location.
Notes (of type 1.2.2.1. through 1.2.2.6.) created during the
translation process to aid the correct understanding of the published
text are to be reproduced in all editions of the text.
1.2.2.7. Introductions: short objective guides for the
reader’s help in grasping the significance of the Bible, testaments,
grouping of books, individual books, and sections. Outlines, aids for
understanding the discourse structure, and brief presentations of major
themes may be included.
1.2.2.8. Cross references: the listing of other passages
involving parallel content, similar historical events, quotations, clear
cases of allusion, and parallel treatment of subject matter.
1.2.2.9. Section headings: the placing of identificational
phrases as titles for significant sections. Readers are increasingly
requesting the use of section headings in the text to facilitate
location of passages, to indicate where a particular narrative or
discourse begins, and to break up the otherwise heavy page of type. Such
headings must be set off from the text by location and contrastive type
face, should, in so far as possible, consist of words or phrases from
the text, and should be identificational rather than interpretative.
Some committees have considered the possibility of explaining
different sets of beliefs by noting that certain interpretations are
held by Roman Catholics and others by other Christian constituencies.
Such a procedure does not seem wise, for it tends to accentuate
differences; nor is it necessary, since most diversities of
interpretation can be covered more objectively by marginal helps on
alternative renderings if the issue in question is important.
Furthermore, most of the real differences of interpretation are rarely
to be understood from a simplistic view of their being distinctively of
one tradition or another since the differences in exegetical approach
vary as much within one particular constituency as across confessional
lines. Accordingly, it seems far wiser to identify various positions
within the history of interpretation without labeling them as belonging
to one or another Christian constituency. Where the differences are not
of great consequence, it is better to simply omit reference in the
interest of joint undertakings.
Most helps for readers considered above are located on the specific
page in the text where the difficulty arises, but if such a note would
occur frequently, it is often more satisfactory to summarize the data in
tables of weights and measures or glossaries of difficult terms.
Restrictions on the types of annotations in no way preclude different
constituencies from employing the text in publishing commentaries as
separate volumes to help the reader to understand and appreciate more
fully the nature and significance of the Holy Scriptures in the light of
their own traditions. The publisher or publishers must do everything
possible to insure that annotations are not offensive to any of the
constituencies for which the text has been prepared.
1.2.3. Supplementary features
The addition of certain other features, such as glossaries, indexes,
concordances, maps, illustrations, etc., should be considered for
certain types of publications. It is particularly important that
complete Bibles have adequate helps of this kind if the reader is to
understand the text.
Illustrations pose more complex problems than any other supplementary
feature, for there are many different concepts of what is artistic, and
there are diverse views as to what is appropriate for the Bible.
Furthermore, what is aesthetically pleasing and historically meaningful
in one culture may be grossly misunderstood in another. Rather than
employ merely “decorative pictures” (often of dubious artistic merit and
of only passing relevance) publishers should provide background
information or promote a measure of psychological identification and
involvement by means of the symbolic and dramatic character of the
illustrations.
When illustrations are to be included, it is extremely important that
translators and translation consultant personnel have the opportunity
of reviewing the illustrations, in order to insure that they do
correctly relate to the text.
To serve the purpose of joint editions, a preface, if desirable,
should be restricted to a commendation of the Holy Scriptures to the
reader.
It is not the practice of the United Bible Societies to associate the
names of translators or revisers with translations of the Scriptures.
1.3. LINGUISTIC
1.3.1. Orthography
Where different constituencies employ different systems of spelling,
these differences should be resolved by the employment of carefully
developed scientific principles before any significant steps toward a
common translation of the Scriptures can be realized. It is important to
recognize, however, that orthographic changes can be made at any time
prior to publication, and it is possible for the translation program to
move forward rapidly even when orthographic decisions are still pending.
Orthographic differences in newly literate areas are relatively
widespread. They have often resulted form different language backgrounds
and linguistic orientations of early missionaries. Changes in such
systems cannot be easily made, but given a significant measure of good
will and a concern for Christian cooperation and educational efficiency,
it is usually possible to work out practical solutions. At the same
time, it is recognized that the problems of orthography are not merely
linguistic but are largely sociolinguistic. Cultural factors, such as
conformity to a prestige language, and the psychological elements of
efficiency and rapid reading are often more important than purely
linguistic considerations.
1.3.2 Proper Names
Agreement must be reached on the forms of proper names before any
joint text can be adopted or any joint translation presented for
publication. Factors which complicate such agreement are:
a) the traditional use by Roman Catholics of Latin forms as a
basis for transliteration, even including certain inflected forms of
Latin words;
b) Protestant use of European languages as a basis for transliteration, most commonly English;
c) the dominance of local, national, or trade languages, e.g.,
French, Portuguese, Spanish, and Swahili, in contrast to systems
employed by Roman Catholic and Protestant missionaries;
d) the attachment to particular forms of proper names as symbols of religious difference.
In the case of major languages with relatively long traditions,
differences of usage can usually be resolved by following more closely
the Greek and Hebrew forms with two major exceptions:
(a) Old Testament persons referred to in the New Testament should
have the Old Testament forms of names, and (b) certain widely known
forms of names may be so deeply embedded in popular or local usage that
they cannot be readily changed.
1.3.3. Borrowings
Borrowing is of two major types: (a) terms borrowed in the past by
normal linguistic processes and often completely absorbed into the local
language, in which case they are really a part of the vocabulary of
that language, and (b) terms expressly introduced for the first time in
Bible translations.
Roman Catholics and Protestants have exhibited two rather distinct
tendencies in borrowing. For the most part, Roman Catholics have
borrowed largely from Latin, while Protestants have borrowed from Greek,
Hebrew, or modern European languages, with theological terms coming
from Greek and Hebrew and cultural terms from European languages.
Borrowing of terms (other than proper names), e.g., words for
“grace”, should be kept at a minimum, since words not already used in
the receptor language are empty terms. But if borrowing is regarded as
necessary, it should generally be from living languages rather than from
ancient ones. All languages have a sufficiently large vocabulary or
sets of phrasal equivalents to make borrowing relatively unnecessary.
For minor languages borrowing should be made from those major living
languages from which the languages in question normally appropriate such
terms as may be required by expanding technology, commerce, and social
contact.
1.3.4. Style of Language
Any joint translation should aim at a style of language which would
be both meaningful and readable in public. It must make sense to those
both within and outside the church and be in a language which is
appropriate for the importance of the message and which reflects current
usage.
In language situations which have a lengthy history of Bible
translation, the problem of “traditional” language has to be faced
realistically, for such language is often of real value in pastoral care
in view of its profound spiritual and theological connotations.
Accordingly, insofar as is practicable, attempts should be made to
incorporate such terminology, particularly in liturgical contexts,
provided the resulting expressions are functional equivalents of the
source-language text.
It is wrong to assume that only one legitimate type of translation in
major world languages is required. Although it is increasingly less
necessary to prepare different translations for diverse geographical
dialects, many languages include significant sociolinguistic dialects.
Such diversity of language and corresponding differences of purpose in
translation suggest that more than one style of language may not only be
desirable but necessary in many situations.
2. PROCEDURES
Procedures will differ radically, depending upon the nature of the
project (a new translation or revision), upon the level of training and
education of the constituency, upon whether the psychological climate is
conducive to cooperation, and upon the adherence of one or another
constituency to its distinctive traditions. In all tasks at least
certain of the following procedural factors figure significantly in the
development of a translation program.
2.1. CLIMATE FOR COOPERATION
Whether a revision or new translation can be undertaken jointly in a
particular area depends largely upon the attitudes with regard to
translation held by the respective constituencies.
These attitudes significantly affect the policy and procedures of the
Bible Societies, which generally hold the publishing rights for the
Scriptures on behalf of the churches. Therefore, any cooperative
undertaking requires as wide an agreement as possible.
2.2. REVISION VERSUS TRANSLATION
In general, it is preferable to undertake a new translation rather
than attempt a revision of an existing text. This makes possible the
avoidance of undue traditional attachments, provides freedom to adopt
new forms of language and a more relevant style, demonstrates a real
interconfessional undertaking, and provides both psychological and
scholarly bases for creative decisions.
2.3. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
For the most adequate development of a translation program, there is
need for three groups: 1. a translation team, 2. a review panel, and 3. a
consultative group.
2.3.1. Translation team
Consisting of not more than six persons of high competence from the
Roman Catholic and other Christian constituencies and possessing four
essential characteristics:
a) comparable qualifications,
b) complementary abilities,
c) mutual respect, and
d) capacity to work together.
Moreover, it is essential that these persons have the opportunity to
give sufficient time to the work, for their goodwill must be matched by
the opportunity afforded to carry out the program. Members of
translation teams have sometimes been assigned tasks without adequate
provision being made for their being able to carry through such
projects.
2.3.2. Review panel
Consisting of not more than ten persons specially qualified to make a
scholarly study of the text, exegesis and style. Roman Catholic and
other Christian constituencies should be adequately represented on such a
panel, keeping in mind that technical ability is one of the most
important considerations for choosing members of the panel. The members
should make their suggestions largely by correspondence, though for
certain key issues they may be invited to sit with the translation team.
2.3.3. Consultative group
Consisting of up to fifty persons, depending upon the language and
circumstances, selected for their position as church leaders and for
being representative of different constituencies, ecclesiastical,
political, and geographical. The members provide their assistance
entirely through correspondence.
Often a project coordinator is needed to receive and circulate
drafts, arrange for the meetings of the translation team and the review
panel, and to coordinate the work in general. In most circumstances a
secretary is essential if the work is to be properly presented and
decisions adequately recorded.
2.4. TRAINING AND APPOINTMENT OF PERSONNEL
Members of the translation team and review panel should be selected
very carefully after full consultation with all leaders involved, while
the members of the consultative group may be named by their respective
constituencies.
To find the most qualified persons to constitute the translation team
and the review panel, it is necessary to use informal decision-making
procedures. That is to say, an extensive investigation is made by
translation consultants so as to assess the technical capacities of such
persons and the probability of such persons being able to work together
effectively. After determining the availability of such individuals in
consultation with church leaders, they may be formally nominated by
their respective churches and appointed by the Bible Societies. It has
often proved extremely valuable to arrange for an initial training
program for prospective translators and members of the review panel as
part of the extensive investigation leading to appointment. Such a
training program should be conducted by translation consultants, who are
then able to observe the work of each person while actively engaged in
translation. The consultants’ recommendations regarding members of the
translation team review panel can then be made more objectively.
Translators are normally employed by their churches and not directly
by the Bible Societies. This is necessary because after the completion
of the translation project the translators will generally return to the
work they had done previously. All conditions of service should,
however, be established in consultation with the national Bible Society
and the translation consultant involved, as the supervision of the
overall program requires that a balance be maintained between members of
the translation team, who come from different churches. In most cases
also the translation consultant will be the person most directly
involved in training translators and proposing the approval of the final
text of the translation for publication.
2.5. FORMULATION OF PRINCIPLES
To provide proper guidance to a translation program, to ensure
consistency of the results, and to make possible creative collective
efforts, detailed principles, must be worked out covering the entire
range of technical features, e.g., text to be used, exegetical base,
system of transliteration, level of style, etc.
An adequate formulation of principles provides the best guarantee of
success of a translation or revision project. In the first place,
adhering to such principles provides a high measure of assurance that
the work of the translators will be accepted by the constituencies whose
leaders have agreed on and accepted these principles. In the second
place, formulation of such principles makes possible a more rapid
solution of translation problems, since the persons concerned may argue
for or against the principles rather than for or against each other.
Furthermore, principles are a significant aid in the production of
greater consistency in the translation, for even in instances where some
principle needs to be changed as a result of later experience in the
work, all previous materials can be adjusted in keeping with such an
alteration of principles, so that the resulting work may be basically
uniform. The translation consultant should assist the translation team
in designing a set of principles that are applicable to the particular
translation being considered.
2.6. EDITORIAL SUPERVISION
The translation consultant should take the responsibility for
editorial supervision. Such supervision, however, does not necessarily
entail constant “watching” over the work, but rather provides a means by
which the translators may have guidance as to ways of solving those
problems which arise during the course of the work.
2.7. COPYRIGHT: INTEGRITY AND USE OF THE TEXT
If joint translation programs are to lead to meaningful cooperation
in the preparation of editions of the Holy Scriptures, it is important
to avoid the production of different texts by different publishing
houses.
If the result of joint effort is merely to produce different texts to
be put out by different publishers, it is almost inevitable that within
five to ten years the texts will be further changed and ultimately
there will be different Bibles rather than a joint production. Even when
the same text is put out by different publishers, it can become the
object of very considerable pressure for a series of minor modifications
which within a short time can add up to major changes. This does not
mean, of course, that there should be only one edition of the Scriptures
containing precisely the same supplementary or marginal helps, for a
variety of formats and types of supplementary material can be useful in
reaching diverse parts of a constituency. Nevertheless, once an
agreement has been made as to a united approach to a translation or
revision, it is wise to foresee the need of implementing this unity by
continued procedures in publication.
The copyright of the translation and the published text is normally
held by a national Bible Society or the United Bible Societies, but in
the case of joint publication the text will be jointly copyrighted. If
any constituency which has participated directly in the translation of a
text has a concern as to the future integrity or use of the text, the
publisher or publishers may deal with this concern by a contractual
arrangement.
2.8. IMPRINT AND IMPRIMATUR
An interconfessional edition of the Scriptures normally bears the
imprint of the Bible Society and the imprimatur of the appropriate Roman
Catholic ecclesiastical authority. The most appropriate form for such
an edition published by the Bible Societies would be for the Bible
Society imprint to occur on the title page and the imprimatur of the
appropriate Roman Catholic authority to occur on the back of the title
page, this being the normal procedure for books properly authorized by
the Roman Catholic Church. In some circumstances it may be wise to
consider a preface including a joint recommendation by ecclesiastical
authorities instead of a formal nihil obstat and imprimatur.
NOTES
(1) The Greek New Testament text
employs the rating A for those texts in which the reading printed in
the Greek text is quite secure. B indicates there is some minor doubt
and C indicates that there is considerable doubt. For further
explanation of this rating see the Introduction to The Greek New Testament.
(2)
It should be noted that Roman Catholics generally refer to certain
books of the Greek canon not found in the Hebrew canon of the Old
Testament as the “deuterocanonical books”, while Protestants generally
refer to these (and certain other additional books) as the “Apocrypha”.
This leads to confusion since in Roman Catholic circles the terms
“Apocrypha” or “Apocryphal books” refer to those books which were never
received into the canon. Protestants refer to these books as the
“Pseudepigrapha” or “pseudepigraphical books”. A common terminology is
clearly desirable, but the terminological traditions are deeply rooted
and will probably need to be respected for some time to come.
