Bad translation?
Thursday’s New York Times ran a story on page A6 (and online) about the statement Benedict XVI made at Wednesday’s papal audience. He attempted to explain his decision to reach out to the SSPX and reiterated the Church’s condemnation of the Shoah. The last line of that article — a quote from the pope’s address — struck a few of us in the office as slightly odd:
He added that he hoped that his gesture would be met “by a commitment on their part to fulfill the further steps necessary to realize full communion with the church,” including “recognizing the majesty and authority of the pope and of the Second Vatican Council.”
The “majesty” of the pope? Doesn’t that seem rather…preconciliar?
As you probably suspected, the Times‘s Rachel Donadio was apparently working with a less than authoritative translation. Whispers went with the one provided by Zenit:
I trust that following from this gesture of mine will be the prompt effort on their part to complete final necessary steps to arrive to full communion with the Church, thus giving testimony of true fidelity and true recognition of the magisterium and the authority of the Pope and the Second Vatican Council.
You couldn’t call that fluid prose, but the part about the “magisterium” sounds a lot more likely, doesn’t it?
Since the pope was speaking Italian at the time, let’s check the original text:
Auspico che a questo mio gesto faccia seguito il sollecito impegno da parte loro di compiere gli ulteriori passi necessari per realizzare la piena comunione con la Chiesa, testimoniando così vera fedeltà e vero riconoscimento del magistero e dell’autorità del Papa e del Concilio Vaticano II.
I’m no expert, but I think that rules out “majesty” as an option. (That would be, I think, “maesta”?) Just one more amusing bit of evidence that a little Catholic knowledge would go a long way in the newsroom.
Why not Latin :) ???
Seriously, my ignorance of Italian notwithstanding, it does seem to read “of the majesty and of the authority…”
The word ‘magisterium,’ of course, means “teaching authority.”
Does Italian not have a similar or identical rendering for the English word ‘magisterium?’
Molly,
May I respectfully suggest that on the post’s title you delete the ? and add an !
Yes, the translation in the NYT is incorrect. “Magistero” in Italian is teaching, e.g., “il magistero della Chiesa.” I suspect that in Italian ecclesiastical circles the Latin “magisterium” is used just as in English. I suspect also that many English-speakers, including Catholics, wouldn’t use or be familar with “magisterium,” but Italians would have an advantage here since it is so close to a fairly common Italian word. “Majesty”! Depending perhaps on your point of view, un po’ divertente. No?
I should have added that in this case a literal translation of “magistero” would not do since “magisterium,” which is in the American Heritage Dictionary, is a precise theological term. But Father Imbelli got the point across much more succinctly and deftly than I.
What’s most important is that it’s not only the pope’s teaching office and authority that is mentioned, but also those of the Second Vatican Council.
Yes, “magistero” is “magisterium.”
Rachel Donadio is new to the beat (from the Book Review, which is an interesting selection which will I think work out well), and while I believe she speaks the Italian of her forebears, she may not have all the resources at her disposal that correspondents before her have had.
Wonderfully charitable group we have here.
I stand justly chastised. In fact, I have been very impressed with Rachel Donadio’s reporting on events in Rome this week. A real baptism by fire! I think the NYT has found a winner for the not at all easy Rome/Vatican beat.
Do not be chastised. I am being too sensitive, on her behalf, and perhaps mine. I once translated a papal homily, alone in the office on a Sunday, at Vatican Radio, in my early and Protestant days. JP2 was talking about the “gioia insano” of the crowds at the crucifixion, and I translated it, in a rush, as “insane joy,” rather than “unhealthy.” I was going to run it by Father McCarthy at the English Africa Programme next door but had no time, as it was live radio. He later corrected me. of cours emy ears still burn at the memory, though there are many others. Live radio is a great thing. Being a foreign correspondent for The Times is really hard.
Rachel Donadio (good name) hasn’t had a chance to write much yet, that I’ve seen, but I do like that they thought “out of the box” (fuori la scatola?) on this one.
Ah Davide, you’ve been away too long — “gioia insanO?”
With regard Signora o Signorina Donadio, I join in the general plaudits;. though her recent piece on “The Peace Prayer” was a filler that could have been filed from Peoria.
In any case I think her much superior to one of her predecessors who has found his true métier gobbling it up at New York’s swankiest dining spots.
I just wonder how many people read their Thursday NYT and wrinkled their nose at that last line — “The ‘majesty of the pope’? Who does he think he is!” When that’s not what he said at all. (And heaven knows he doesn’t need any help looking out of touch these days.)
During the days after John Paul II died, I was up very late one night and found myself watching CNN (I think? — some secular news channel) broadcasting a mass from Rome. It was very weird to see a Mass on a station other than EWTN! Especially because whoever was doing the translating from Italian into English had not, poor man, been furnished with the text of the readings or prayers. So he was paraphrasing everything. My favorite part was when he translated the Gospel — Luke’s account of the women finding the empty tomb and hearing, “He is not here. He has been resuscitated.”
Maybe the New York Post got it right. Fr. Imbelli?