Page 11, 25th July 2008

25th July 2008
Page 11
Page 11, 25th July 2008 — Aural integrity

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.


Organisations: Vatican Council


Related articles

Taking Liberties

Page 11 from 18th July 2008

Pub English

Page 9 from 23rd April 2004

Supine Complacency

Page 11 from 26th November 2004

A Time For Dancing

Page 11 from 5th August 2005

Needing Elbow-room

Page 11 from 31st October 2008

Aural integrity

Keywords: Religion / Belief

From Mr Ton McIntyre SIR May I defend myself against Gus Thomas' criticisms (Letter, July I 8)? He is right about this: that translation should redder accurately something expressed in another language: though common practice understands that "something" as the meaning, and not the literal words. (Try it with French.) But attempts to "reflect ambiguity in the original" have their technical problems. My point, though, was that in Our Lord's words pro muftis there is no ambiguity. Modern Scriptural scholarship simply accounted for the understanding implicit in St Paul and the Fathers, that "many", just as in "many are called". referred to the new covenant with all humankind ie, that Christ shed his blood for the world God loves.

The real trouble is that in the vernacular "many" is not ambiguous. Without much explaining, its obvious sense for the faithful would be that Christ shed his blood only for those who actually enjoy its fruits: the justified. those with the wedding garment of faith.

And I wonder why Smart Reid (Charterhouse, July 4) and Gus Thomas feel themselves qualified to insult the fine scholars of the 70s? They should value that fidelity to the Vatican Council's specific requests: simplicity, brevity and heed for the faithful's limitations, with minimum need for explaining; not to speak of such aural integrity and delicate, accurate expression of everything that the Latin conveys.

Yours faithfully. TOM McINTYRE Frome, Somerset

blog comments powered by Disqus