Mark+

You've put your finger on one of the things I appreciate about the RSV.
Some translations lend themselves to liturgy better than others simply by
virtue of the poetic cadences with which the English is phrased.  Of all the
modern translations, about the only one that does this is the RSV.  Perhaps
the reason is that when it was translated, many on the NCC's translation
committee knew that it would be used in liturgy.  It's the version I use for
our three-year cycle.  It still retains the "thee's and thou's" in certain
places (address to deity), which makes it a seamless fit with the 1928
liturgy and, as I said, retains the almost chanted cadences.  We've used it
ever since the Bishop authorized the three-year use several years ago.

By the way: anyone in a service who reads the Nativity story in Luke from
anything OTHER than KJV should be boiled in oil!  :)

MLW+

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Clavier+ [mailto:anglican@...] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 11:34 AM
To: faithandlife@...
Subject: Re: [FaithandLife] Three Year Lectionary--question

Frank,

But why stick with the KJV?  Especially as it contains some mistranslations.

Certainly, many people can learn to understand the KJV, but why make them 
cross the extra hurdle in order to hear the Word written?  Heck, most people

can't understand the sense of Scripture in contemporary English, they 
butcher it's meaning in the KJV!

Also, when you set aside slang and colloquialisms, our language isn't nearly

as much in a flux as is sometime suggested.  People can read and understand 
a 1920s novel as easily as they can one written in 2006 (though they may not

have the patience for the former's pace).  Similarly, the RSV is as 
understandable today as it was when first translated.

Now, I think the Church ought to reserve an imprimatur for Bibles used in 
the liturgy.  There are dreadful translations out there from both ends of 
the spectrum.

Finally, we have to be ruthless in our adhering to the principal of 
preaching the Gospel.  Anything that get's in the way of the clear 
presentation and explication of the Gospel must be chucked out or else it 
becomes an idol.  As much as I love the KJV, appreciate it's cadence, and 
esteem it's place in the history of our language, in 2006 it has become a 
relic.  Like other relics, we may bring it from it's reliquary from time to 
time for adoration (I still use it for Christmas Eve service), but, in my 
view, it's role in promoting the Gospel is done with.  But, hey, 400 years 
wasn't a bad run.  Even the Vulgate didn't make it that long without 
revisions!

Mark+ 

--
To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: faithandlife-unsubscribe@...