[ALBSA-Info] Ideological aspects of Bishop Noli's liturgical translations into Albanian and English

[Fatmir Foti Cici]

I am sending you an article of mine, taken from ILLYRIA-the only Albanian-American newspaper.



IDEOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF BISHOP NOLI'S LITURGICAL TRASLATIONS INTO ALBANIAN AND ENGLISH 

BY Fatmir Cici


INTRODUCTION

Bishop Noli published around fifty books. Half of his publications are translations of liturgical
texts from Greek into Albanian and English, including musical settings in both languages,
translation of the New Testament into English for liturgical use, and a complete translation of
the New Testament and the Psalms into English. In addition, he arranged and translated into
Albanian and English two catechism books.

After the 1940s, hundreds of articles and books were published about Noli, and many authors still
are investigating different aspects of his life and work: his poetry, translations of world
literature, historical works, politics, etc. Noli’s Albanian translations of liturgical texts,
used today in Albania and in the United States, are the only ones that exist. His English
translations of the Liturgy and the New Testament are still used by most of the Albanian Orthodox
Churches in the United States and in some other parishes in different jurisdictions.

While there is a large bibliography regarding Noli’s life and secular works, it is nearly
impossible to find even one work pertaining to his religious publications in either Albanian or
English. Furthermore, there is no work about Noli as a bishop and leader of the Church in Albania
and in the United States. There are several reasons for this gap in Noli’s bibliography.

First, after World War II, the communist regime discouraged all references to religion, including
the worship texts of all the religions practiced in Albania. Bishop Noli’s secular works, however,
were taught in the Albanian schools during the dictatorship and he was considered by the regime as
a forerunner of Communism in Albania; during this period very few Albanians knew that he was a
bishop. Consequently, up to the 1990s, Albania did not have any works on Noli’s liturgical
translations or his church career.

While in Albania it was impossible to produce any work in this area, there was not the same degree
of censorship of religious publications in Kosovë. However, liturgical translations are a very
specific field of scholarship and no Kosovar author had the interest or the background to deal
with them. Most importantly, Kosovë does not have an Albanian Orthodox community. Nor do I do know
of any studies of Noli’s liturgical translations by Albanian authors in Macedonia, where most
likely the same situation obtains as in Kosovë.     

Another reason for this bibliographical gap is the current situation in Albania. For nearly 50
years under the communist dictatorship there were no theological studies, and for 24 years there
was not even a church school. As a result, contemporary Albanian authors are not able to read
liturgical Greek and do not have the religious background with which to approach Noli’s
translations, in either Albanian or English.

Most Albanian authors avoid mentioning Noli’s liturgical translations, which they associate with
“religion and its stereotypes,” a subject not worthy of scholarly attention. This attitude is
supported by the general ridicule in Albania of the idea that Noli “did not believe in God”. The
influence of “Socialist Realism”, as an institutional ideology, on Albanian cultural and literary
life for almost fifty years is still alive today and it seems that will remain alive for a couple
of generations.

The only theologian to survive the communist era in Albania was the late Greek-Albanian Dhimitër
Beduli, and he was the only scholar with the theological background to read Bishop Noli’s church
work. He started to publish a critical study of Noli’s liturgical translations in the early 1990s
from the Orthodox point of view. But Beduli was accused by Albanian nationalists of denigrating
Noli’s work and his publication was stopped.

It is difficult to speak objectively in Albania about Noli’s life and work. Many have glorified
him as an anti-Greek hero and a great man of history and of letters, a man whom no Albanian would
criticize, unless “they have been paid by the Greeks.”  In the case of the late Beduli, this would
be factually true, though he was being paid for his assistance to the Greek Archbishop Anastasios,
not for writing articles against Bishop Noli. A factor promoting these illogical opinions about
Albania’s past is the attack on Noli by contemporary Greek authors writing about Albania. While
they express their sympathy with “the poorest country of Europe”, they approach Bishop Noli with
the same confrontational attitude that the Greek Church had towards Noli in the 1920s. 

The Orthodox Church itself has never encouraged research about Noli’s church aspect. The only
Albanian Orthodox community outside of Albania, the Albanian Archdiocese in America, is using
Noli’s English and Albanian liturgical translations. The Chancellor, Fr. Arthur Liolin, who does
not read Greek, believes that Noli’s English translations should be used in all Albanian parishes
in the United States. This is a response to those Albanian parishes that have hired non-Albanian
priests, who most commonly are theologians and sometimes prefer to use other translations. Fr.
Liolin’s attitude is ideological and emotional, rather than national or ecclesiastical.

The well-known Albanian community in Southern Italy, the Arbëresh, have also the Byzantine rite in
their services and use the same texts for worship, as the Albanian Orthodox do. Yet, Arbëresh
authors make very few and obscure references to the subject of Noli.

With respect to Greece, Apostolos Glavinas, a professor at the University of Thessaloniki, did the
only significant research on the history of the Albanian Church, from the Greek point of view. He
describes Noli at best as “an adventurer” and he states that “The Orthodox Albanians did not have
the right to be separated from the Patriarchate and proclaim their Church as Autocephalous.” The
traditionalist Greek professor considers Bishop Noli as a “black sheep” because he separated the
Albanian Church from the “Mother Church of Constantinople”. Glavinas, who does not read any
Albanian, disavows Noli’s translations because he replaced Greek words with Albanian or foreign
ones. The fourth edition of Glavinas’ book, in 1998, does not have any change or reconsideration
from what he wrote originally in the 1960s. 

Today, ten years after the Orthodox Church was reestablished in Albania, Bishop Anastasios
Yannoulatos, who was sent to Tiranë by the Greek Government to become the Archbishop of Albania,
does not allow any research on Bishop Noli’s work, since Noli is considered “an enemy of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate and of the Church of Greece.”  Archbishop Anastasios went to Albania with
the full support of the Greek government, the Church of Greece and of the Greek Diaspora. He
managed to become the permanent leader of the Orthodox Church in Albania even though his flock did
not have a unanimous voice in his enthronement. Many Albanians still do not feel comfortable
having a foreign archbishop, because the Orthodox Church in Albania has been autocephalous,
enjoying the same independent status as the Church of Greece, since 1937.  Therefore any author
working under Dr. Yiannoulatos’s jurisdiction (or under his political and, especially, financial
influence) cannot express views about Noli that are contrary to those held by the Greek Church.

I believe that the bibliographical vacuum regarding Bishop Fan Noli’s church work has a political
dimension, which is what has motivated me to undertake this research. The empty Albanian
“fanolism” on the one hand, and the anti-Albanian Greek campaign, channeling its financial and
political influence through Archbishop Anastasios of Albania, on the other, are the main obstacles
to approaching Noli’s church contribution with an objective eye. 

Bishop Noli’s liturgical translations in Albanian and English are worth reading for the first time
as a source of Noli’s ideology.  He is the founder of the Albanian Autocephelous Orthodox Church
and of the Albanian Archdiocese in America. Bishop Fan Noli has influenced the political,
religious and the intellectual life in Albania as few other men have in Albanian history, but this
does not prevent us from viewing him in his human dimensions.    



NOLI'S LITURGICAL TRANSLATIONS INTO ALBANIAN

During Ottoman rule (late 16th century up to early 20th century) the liturgical language of the
Orthodox Church in Albania was Greek, according to an uncompromising agreement between the Ottoman
government and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. The Orthodox population was mainly in
the South and Greek influence upon the Orthodox Albanians was very strong, since Greek schools and
the Byzantine rite’s churches were the only educational institution in the area. Albanian Orthodox
who made efforts to teach Albanian or use it in worship were excommunicated by the Church, and
some of them were killed.

With the start of the 20th century the Albanians, and especially the Albanian communities outside
of Albania, began to coordinate their efforts to gain the independence of their country from the
Turks, which was achieved in 1912. They realized, though, that it was almost impossible to be
independent while at the same time having foreign religious leaders, and consequently foreign
influences (especially Greek), for the three religions of Albania: Islam, Orthodoxy and
Catholicism. Many Albanian politicians of that time were confused and suggested that Albanians
should be united and embrace one common faith instead of being devised in three religions. But the
young Fan Noli opposed these opinions and supported the idea of “Albanizing” the present religions
of the country by electing Albanian leaders and using Albanian language in worship.

The idea of having an independent Albanian Orthodox Church was not new in Noli’s days, but he was
the charismatic person who had the talents to be the central figure of this movement. When the
Albanian Orthodox of the United States decided to ask the Russian Church to ordain an Albanian
priest for the pastoral needs of the Albanian immigrants, Noli, although was not the only
candidate, insisted that he is the persona grata to undertake this position. Noli’s motivation was
political and financial and not spiritual. 

I want to emphasize, though, that Noli was not an atheist, as many Albanian and Greek scholars
contend. But he was definitely not the traditional model of the Orthodox clergyman. His only
passion was Albania, and for her liberation he was ready to do anything, even though he did not
feel a calling to priesthood. But as a priest Fan Noli had the opportunity to preach and organize
more effectively the Albanians in America who were immigrants from South Albania, most of whom
were Orthodox. In his late 20s Noli was dreaming of planting this Church of the Albanian Diaspora
in his homeland and of being the first Albanian Archbishop. In addition Noli concluded that only
as a priest would he have the financial means to study literature at Harvard, which he had not
been able to do at the University of Athens, Greece. 

It was in 1908 that Noli was ordained under the Russian Church and, as a condition for having an
Albanian Church under its jurisdiction, was asked by the Russian Archbishop of New York to use
Albanian in the Liturgy using a printed Service Book. This put Noli into a difficult position
because it was hard for him to start this monumental work of liturgical translations by himself.
He asked the help of Greek-educated Albanian philologists and theologians but no one was to be
found in America, and even though Fan Noli announced his request in the Albanian press there were
no positive responses from Albania or Albanian communities abroad. Having no other solutions, he
began the translation by himself.

Noli knew liturgical Greek and Byzantine music very well, but his Albanian was not at the same
level, and he did not have any theological or philological training. When he decided to translate
the liturgy into Albanian he did not look to any previous work in the field. In actuality, there
were no printed translations and I doubt if he had the opportunity to see any manuscripts of
fragmentary previous works. Furthermore, Noli does not mention anywhere the first printed
translation of the New Testament into Albanian, edited and published in 1827 by the Archbishop
Gregorios Argyrokastrites (Grigor Gjirokastriti). But he knew very well Kostandin Kristoforidhi’s
translations of the New Testament and some books of the Old Testament. 



NOLI AND KRISTOFORIDHI: TWO IDEOLOGIES

It is very important to see Noli’s initial ideological agenda in his translations, comparing his
works with Kristoforidhi’s, because Kristoforidhi’s biblical translations were the basis of the
existing Orthodox liturgical terminology in Albanian. Kristoforidhi was a very challenging figure
for Noli as a translator of Liturgy. He had absolute authority in Albanian letters and especially
in Orthodox terminology, which was created through his translations into Tosk, the Southern
dialect of Albania. Most Orthodox Albanians spoke Tosk, which was Noli’s language as well and
would be the language of his translations and his works in general in his Albanian publications.
Although Noli admired Kristoforidhi’s New Testament translation into Tosk, he would not accept his
works as models for his new school of translations into Albanian. This was very daring, and after
his liturgical publications were issued, Albanian scholars attacked Noli because he did not follow
Kristoforidhi’s way of translating certain Greek terms. 

Noli and Kristoforidhi had different backgrounds, decidedly different ideological influences,
different conditions for their work and a different reception for their publications in Albania.
Kristoforidhi was born in Elbasan, in central Albania, where the two main dialects of Albanian
(Geg and Tosk) meet.  He was also well known as a linguist of the Albanian language who had
studied in several countries and was professionally prepared for his translations. Fan Noli was
not born in Albania and he knew only his forefathers’ Tosk dialect (to be strictly accurate, Noli
spoke a sub-dialect of Tosk), which he only spoke and was trying to learn to write, just a few
years before he made his liturgical translations. 

Kristoforidhi worked for many years on his translations and had the full support of the British
Biblical Society for his publications. Noli translated the church services and the hymns in a very
short period of time, during his years of studying literature at Harvard University, without
professional training. The only support that Noli had was by Albanian patriots who were convinced
by Noli’s speeches that these books should be published for the salvation of the nation and must
be published as soon as possible, “regardless of their quality.” 

Kostandin Kristoforidhi came from one generation older than Noli, which means that his views about
the language were strictly purist and his purpose was to create a national language, taking out
the Greek and other foreign words. Kristoforidhi’s purpose was to translate the Bible writing in
two dialects of Albanian, giving to the Albanians the impression that Geg and Tosk are not that
different and should be united in one national language. Kristoforidhi worked hard to prove with
his translations that the Albanian language has the potential to express all modern terminology
without borrowing foreign words.

Kristoforidhi used the Greek alphabet for the Tosk publications and the Latin alphabet for Geg.
But Noli had a different ideology about the “standardization” of Albanian. He wanted to make Tosk
a literary language for all Albanians, enriching it with new modern terms from other western
languages, thus removing many purist words from Krisroforidhi’s tradition, and using only the
Latin alphabet. Noli used Geg only in a satirical political poem and in some official documents
during his tenure as Prime Minister, which were most likely written by his secretary over Noli’s
signature.

Comparing the works of these prominent authors of Albanian letters, regardless of the translation
quality of both men, we see obviously a significant difference: Kristoforidhi translated
translations, and not the original Hebrew, for the Old Testament, or Koine Greek, for the New
Testament, while Fan Noli worked translating original text from Biblical and Byzantine Greek into
Albanian. 
    
Last and not least, although Kristoforodhi was Orthodox, he was a layman working for a Protestant
organization and not a priest of the organized church. He did not have the pressure of time and
had greater independence to act according to his beliefs. Noli was not a layman but a priest under
the Russian Orthodox jurisdiction. He did not have the luxury of waiting, studying, and perfecting
his translations. These texts were the first step toward creating an Albanian Church in the United
States, and the quality of the translations was a secondary matter. 



FIRST PERIOD OF THE ALBANIAN LITURGICAL TRANSLATIONS: 1908-1914

There are six books from this period, most of them dedicated to the Russian Archbishop Platon. The
first book is a translation of the Holy Week services and hymns, and was translated very quickly
in time for Easter. From this book we see how Noli is struggling to create his personality in the
Albanian world.  His language is full of sub-dialectical forms, compared to the other five
liturgical books of this period. His language style is not consistent, the biblical readings are
cited from Kristoforidhi, and he chose to use one of the many alphabets of that time. A few months
later, the Congress on the Albanian Alphabet was held. Fr. Noli adopted the alphabet currently
used for Albanian, although he did not agree with the decision reached by Albanian scholars
representing both dialects.

In these translations Noli enriched the language with foreign modern terms and created his
literary style in Albanian. Noli was trying to create a literary Albanian language in keeping with
the modern terminology of European languages. 

The philosophy of these translations ran counter to Noli’s will and talent. He was being
challenged to provide literal translations, whereas his second liturgical translations (1941 –
1952) and all his future literary translations in Albanian were much more free. In the first
period of his translation work Noli gave an exact meaning for the original Greek, thus sacrificing
the musical setting of the text. It is very difficult in any language to balance the exact
translation of the original hymns while keeping the originality of Byzantine chant. But in Noli’s
case his political intention was to induce the Orthodox Church to accept and recognize these books
and not to erect obstacles to the movement for the independence of the Albanian Church. With this
strategy he hoped that any negative reaction to his translations would be limited.
 
After the second publication (the Service Book) Noli made clear the purpose and the nature of his
church work. He was not willing to undertake a full translation of the Liturgy and the Bible of
the Orthodox Church into Albanian, a work which even today does not exist. The young priest
sincerely promised his fellow Orthodox Albanians that he would provide them the most important
services in Albanian, as an indispensable tool for worship in their own language. In Noli’s notes
for all these publications we see him asking for financial support from the Albanians, without
which he could not complete the project.

Noli’s decision to publish these translations raised the question of providing the canon for the
Albanian Liturgy. In the first period (1908 – 1914) Noli selected the most useful services and
hymns, trying to give an exact translation from the Greek and reining in his tendency towards free
translation. Instead of translating the whole Parakletike he published a small Lutjesore,
translating only the Sunday services (Saturday evening Mbrëmësore and Sunday morning Mëngjesore),
without shortening the hymns and the services. In such a way Noli was helping the Albanians to
have a full service on Sundays and the most common feasts of the ecclesiastical year. 

If Noli had had an exclusively spiritual motivation, along with the necessary time, he would have
also translated the daily hymns from the twelve-volume hymnological work, Menaion, and given the
full translation of the Lenten Book, Triodion, and the Easter Pentekostarion. For the weekday
services of the great feasts Noli translated and published a one-volume anthology from Menaion,
compiling thus a Festal Menaion in Albanian. And from Triodion and Pentekostarion he translated
the Sunday services and the Holy Week services and hymns.       

While Noli was publishing the Service Book he began to inform and organize the Albanian Orthodox
inside and outside of Albania, asking them to send petitions to the Ecumenical Patriarchate for
the independence of the Albanian Church, using the fact that the Liturgy had been translated by an
Orthodox Albanian priest. But he also asked Albanian patriots to support the recognition of his
translations by the Russian Church by sending letters to Archbishop Platon stating that the
translations were accurate, whether they actually believed that to be true or not.

The reception of this period’s translations by many Albanian figures, including Faik Bey Konitza,
the most prominent figure of Albanian letters at that time, and other Albanian authors, was
enthusiastic. There were negative reactions, however, from serious, Greek-educated Albanian
patriots and philologists, including the well-known author and linguist Alexandër Xhuvani. The
Greek Church considered these translations as having “dogmatic mistakes,” and consequently
unaccepted for worship. The reception of these works had historical importance because they were
the first liturgical translations into Albanian, and without those books it was impossible to
assert the independence of the Orthodox Albanians from the Greek Ecumenical Patriarchate. However,
while the Albanian style of Noli’s translations satisfied those who were working for a literary
Albanian distanced from Greek linguistic influence, the theological nuances in the texts escaped
their attention.
    
This was his first series of liturgical publications. Before the work was complete Noli had made
it clear that he would fulfill his promises to his countrymen, giving them the most essential
prayers in Albanian, before he now dedicating himself to translations of world literature “for
which the nation has such a great need.” 



SECOND PERIOD OF THE ALBANIAN LITURGICAL TRANSLATIONS 1941 – 1952

Between 1914, when Noli published the last liturgical translations of his first period, and 1941,
when he published Uratore, the first volume of the second liturgical translations, he published 14
other books, mainly translations of world literature. Noli’s six books of the first period are
included, but retranslated, and the quantity is approximately doubled in the three volumes of his
second period of liturgical translations.

Bishop Noli had two reasons to retranslate and republish the Liturgy in Albanian. First, the
liturgical canon in worship was not complete because many important services were not translated
during the first period. Second, he wanted to publish the Liturgy according to his own ideology,
which was not possible during his early years as a translator and young priest. Now he was
politically independent and his position in the Albanian community in America was very strong. In
addition, in the 1940s he had the same authority in Albanian letters as Kristoforidhi had had in
Noli’s first period liturgical translations.   

There are two obvious changes in this work. First, Noli translated the hymns more freely,
achieving a perfect setting of the translated text within the Byzantine chant, something that
didn’t exist in the first period, since the translation of the text was the primary goal, rather
than the musical setting. Second, Noli was not satisfied with providing only a free liturgical
translation with priority given to the music, which is a non-church pattern for liturgical
translations. On the one hand, he translated new services to complete the canon, but on the other,
he edited these services, shortening some of the readings by the priests and abridging many
phrases and verses of hymns.  

Why did Noli edit the hymns and the services of his second translations? Since music was his
priority it is understandable that in some hymns he was forced to sacrifice the text for the
chant’s sake, but that does not explain all his changes. In the priest’s readings there is no
connection with music, yet Noli still edited those readings. In Uratore he is justified in saying
that he edited these readings and prayers “not only to save money but also because they figure
only in the books and are never read in Church.” That is true for some of those readings and
prayers but not for all the prayers that Noli shortened and edited.

It is surprising that there is no apparent difference in language style or liturgical terminology
between the two periods of Noli’s translations. This shows that Noli’s busy mind never thought
deeply about the Liturgy. But it is obvious that he worked very hard and was never satisfied with
his previous work. Even the biblical passages are retranslated in his second translations, which
represents a great deal of work that was not necessary. In the publications of the second period
we see very clearly Noli’s political ideology as a translator of the Liturgy and as an Orthodox
Church leader in the Diaspora. 

Since Noli was not a theologian, his vision of the future of Orthodoxy in North America was
clearly defined from an ideological perspective (issues of language and politics of jurisdiction)
but not from a theological one. And the Liturgy is an inseparable part of Orthodox theology. He
believed that the Orthodox Church in the West would reconsider its liturgical eastern tradition
and would make changes in the length and the structure of the services, to adapt itself to the new
world. But this did not happen. 

Were these translations addressed to the Albanian Church in America or were they universal,
intended even for the Orthodox Church in Albania, which at that time had a canonical Archbishop,
despite the political difficulties in the country? It is very difficult to say yes or no, because
the prayers commemorating the bishop are not uniform. In all the translations for the first period
we read “Për Kryepeshkopin tonë aksh” (For our Archbishop N…), relying on each priest to name his
bishop, but this is not true in the second set. The latter translations have “Për Kryepeshkopin
tonë aksh”, wherever the local bishop should be commemorated, but there are other places where we
read Noli’s name: “Theofanit, Kryepeshkopit tonë…” (To you, o Archbishop Theofan….”  In this
passage Bishop Noli is using for himself the titles of the Archbishop of the Orthodox Church of
Albania, making himself superior to all the Albanian bishops of that time, without any canonical
authority to do so.  

In Uratore Noli translated and added the service of Myron, celebrated by the Patriarch. Why did he
add this service to the canon of the Albanian Liturgy? Albania does not have a Patriarch and the
Myron was traditionally given to the Orthodox Church of Albania either by Constantinople or,
during the communist regime, by Russia. Having observed all these phenomena, if we compare the two
periods of Bishop Noli’s translations into Albanian, I would say that the first ones come from a
priest who is offering them as texts to be prayed in Church, while the second come from a bishop
to be used by and for himself. But this still cannot explain the paradox of the translations from
the second period.   

The Albanian translations of the second period received limited acceptance and were not recognized
by the Church of Albania for use in worship. However, the difficulty of translation into Albanian
made Noli the most useful liturgical translator until recent days. Greek missionaries, who work in
Albania assisting Archbishop Yiannoulatos, although they do not accept Bishop Fan Noli as a
canonical clergyman of the Orthodox Church, and use Albanian only for political reasons (when and
where they are forced to do so), they prefer the first period’s publications, and they use the
second period’s publications only when necessary.

The first period’s translations found a better reception because of their historical link with
Albanian independence, both political and religious. The second period had no historical
connection except to meet liturgical needs in worship and pastoral use. In addition, it was
difficult to spread awareness of these publications, since the communist regime in Albania had
begun to isolate and persecute religion, and the publication of these kinds of works was not
appreciated as an important contribution. 



NOLI'S LITURGICAL TRANSLATIONS INTO ENGLISH: 1949 - 1964

When Bishop Noli returned from Europe and undertook the pastoral care of the Orthodox Albanians in
America, in the 1930s, he realized that Albanian was no longer the first language of worship. At
that time liturgical languages in the US were mostly foreign and Noli had dreams of  “the American
Orthodox Church of the future, which will unite all Orthodox groups and enable them to fulfill
their evangelical mission in the United States of America.” Dedicating himself to liturgical
translations, he was one of the pioneers of American Orthodoxy. His work, though, must be seen not
as that of an Orthodox theologian, but as that of a Christian clergyman and politician, the
open-minded Orthodox leader of the Church, who after his busy life in politics and exile is
struggling to make peace for himself and for his people. 

While the Albanian translations are “a turning point in the history of the Albanian Renaissance”
(Faik Bey Konitza), the English translations are the turning point in Bishop Noli’s life. It is
very rare for men like Noli to shift their ideology from strictly national to wider, universal
thinking, taking decisions that are completely different from their whole previous work and life.
When the Greek bishops in America were trying to maintain their language both in worship and in
education, making their churches a national (and, some times, nationalistic) institution, the
ideologue of Albanian nationalism, Fan Noli, the first translator of the Liturgy into Albanian,
decided to use English in the Liturgy. “If we want to keep the young generation in Church we
should make painful decisions and use only English in our services.” The Greek Church, which still
looks upon Bishop Noli as a fanatic nationalist, cannot make up its mind even today, while he,
more than 50 years ago, sacrificed national ideology for the Church’s sake, translating the
Liturgy into his flock’s language.

Noli published his English translations from the late 1940s to the early 60s. Although the first
books of the English translations were published at the same time as the Albanian translations of
the second period, they are different in ideology, canon, and reception. While the Albanian
translations are more powerful in their language expression, the English ones are more accurate in
their translation of liturgical terms. The order of the services in English was made according to
the Slavonic rite and the musical settings according to the Russian composers, while the Albanian
translations follow the Byzantine order and use Byzantine chant. In order to achieve the setting
of the Slavonic melodies Noli made radical textual changes comparing to the Albanian settings. 

Bishop Noli had visions of a universal Orthodox translation of the Liturgy but a Byzantine musical
setting of the translated text into English would serve only the Byzantine rite’s parishes. He
tried to create a new and uniform liturgical tradition for his parishes, closer to the Russian
background, but this was an artificial way of mythmaking a new tradition, because the Albanians in
America did not have any cultural or emotional connection with the Russian world. Noli had great
admiration for Russian music and tradition and it is well known that Noli wanted to distance
himself from the Greek tradition. But he could not do the same with the Albanian translations
because the Albanian Church at that time had a solid Byzantine background, and this cultural
connection between Byzantine culture and Albania is clear even in the folk tradition.

Slavonic and Russian models were closer to Noli’s ideological inspiration but were as well closer
to the western music, comparing to the Byzantine music. Bishop Noli wanted to create a new
Orthodox Western tradition for the Liturgy, using church music with Russian and some “Byzantine”
motifs. Since the Patriarchate of Constantinople considered Bishop Fan Noli’s episcopacy to be
non-canonical, it would be the American Orthodox Church, supported by the Russian Church, that
recognized him, especially because of his very important contribution to the American Orthodox
Liturgy, with its obviously Russian cultural background in music and typikon. All this happened
after Metropolitan Noli’s death, in 1972, when the Orthodox Church in America commemorated Bishop
Noli in the diptycha and recognized his successor and his diocese as a part of the newly named
Church among the other ethnic Orthodox dioceses.  

While the Albanian translations are strictly liturgical, the English are not. Noli did not publish
any Festal Menaion, Lenten Book or Easter Book in English, but he did translate the New Testament
and the Psalms, which he did not translate into Albanian. It seems that he gave emphasis to the
Sunday Liturgy and not to the major daily feasts, as in Albanian. From this perspective his
biblical translations are liturgical tools. Although Noli translated and published many readings
of the Gospel and the Epistles in his Orthodox Prayer Book, he later compiled a Lectionary of
gospel and epistle readings, which are important books for priests and cantors in their liturgical
service. Not only is the length of these readings different from the previous work, but so also is
the translation itself and the language.

Noli’s English translations were an important contribution at that time because since the
publication by the Episcopalian Isabel F. Hapgood of the Service Book, there had been no
systematic work of liturgical translation into English. Noli’s work in English, apart from his
catechism, can be separated into three parts: Liturgy, biblical translations and musical
compositions. I, however, make no distinction in my research between liturgical and biblical
translation by Noli, because all his English translations were destined for liturgical use,
including the New Testament and the Psalms. And of course Bishop Noli’s musical books are the
musical settings of his liturgical translations, chant being an inseparable part of worship,
interpreting the theological notions and human emotions of the Byzantine hymns. Thus, the
compositions of church music cannot be included with his secular musical works, or they must be
counted on both sides.

Were Noli’s liturgical translations good enough to be used beyond the Albanian Orthodox Church in
America? It is problematic that while his books were dedicated to the whole Orthodox community in
the US, Noli’s name is the only person to be commemorated as an Archbishop in his liturgical
translations, which is not true even of the Albanian translations of the second period. Why did
Noli change the practice of Hapgood, whose Service Book even today is used by Orthodox Churches in
America, and put “For our Most Reverend Archbishop Theofan” in the commemoration, instead of “Our
Archbishop N.”? Even if the Albanian Orthodox Church in America was the only Church to use these
translations, Noli at that time was in his 70s, and he knew that in the Orthodox Liturgy the
priest commemorates the living bishop of the Church. I don’t believe that Bishop Noli hoped that
his books would be used only in his day. And as in the Albanian translations of the second period,
we have here the same paradox of his title as the primate of the Albanian Church.

Noli expressed his opinion about the structure that the American Orthodox Patriarchate should
have, and he suggested that the Russian Metropolitan Leonty be the new Patriarch. But why did
Bishop Noli put down his name as the only celebrating hierarch in his English translations? Did he
see the acceptance and use of his liturgical translations by other Orthodox Churches as a sign
that others would recognize him as a canonical bishop? From an inter-textual point of view, the
use of Noli’s name in his liturgical translations, both in English and Albanian, does not seem
uniform and has no reasonable interpretation. From an Orthodox prospective though this phenomenon
might arise a discussion about the question of his ecclesiastic phronema. 

The reception of the English translations was somehow similar to the first Albanian publications.
The English translations had a historical importance for the Orthodox mission in North America,
for which they were praised, used and appreciated by many Orthodox dioceses. The references
pertaining comments for the quality of these translations come from friends and scholars, but not
from Orthodox theologians, although they knew Metropolitan Noli and admired him for his missionary
attitude, through his preaching for the American Orthodoxy and his indispensable publications. The
silence for further comments on these translations was the sign that these texts were seen as
eccentric to be accepted by the theological movement for establishing an American Orthodox Church,
for which Bishop Noli was a pioneer. It is not an accident that two professors of Harvard who were
scholars of Church History and Music, praised Noli’s English translations; Church History and
Music are those fields related to Noli’s liturgical work in English with an importance beyond his
time, rather than the translation quality of his work.  


CONCLUSION

The liturgical translations of the first period (1908-14) were a consequence of the movement for
the independence of Albania from the Turkish Government and from Greek influence, a sine qua non
condition for organizing an Albanian Orthodox Church in North America, with the prospect of
planting it also in Albania, of which Noli became the charismatic leader. This period coincided
with Noli’s ordination to the priesthood and his undergraduate studies at Harvard University. At
the same time Noli was struggling to develop his literary persona, especially in Albanian politics
and letters, which meant that liturgical translations were not a priority in his life and work.

These early translations are very literal, with priority on the word rather than on the musical
setting, thus giving an Orthodox character to these texts. This is an ideological compromise
between the ordained translator and the textual mentality of Orthodox worship; the style of Noli’s
later translations was free rather than literal. The “literal” character of these early books is
the reason that they were accepted for use by the Albanian Church and were tolerated until
recently by the Orthodox Church of Albania. The publications of the first period were not accepted
by the Greek Church, as “having dogmatic mistakes,” and were criticized by purist Albanian
scholars for their “enterprising” spirit of creating a “latinized” terminology in Albanian, in
contrast to Kristoforidhi’s Orthodox tradition in Tosk. Yet Albanian men of letters of that time
had praised these translations for their poetic and strong expression of language. 

 The liturgical translations of the second period (1941-52) do not have the same historical
importance as those of the first period. With these translations Bishop Noli wanted to complete
his canon of the Albanian liturgy by translating additional services.  What is new here is that
Noli edited and shortened the hymns and the priest’s readings. This philosophy is part of Noli’s
vision of the Orthodox Liturgy in North America.  The style here is “Nolian,” free translation,
and the priority is the musicality of the text, giving a perfect Byzantine setting to the hymns,
at the cost of sacrificing the word, which is primary in Orthodox worship. The language and
terminology chosen are almost the same as in the translations of the first period.

These publications were translated for the Albanian Church in America and in the homeland, but the
commemoration of Archbishop Theofan’s name, as Primate of the Albanian Church in America and, to
some extension, of the Church of Albania, creates a liturgical non-uniformity, which is the
paradox of Noli’s work. The Orthodox Church of Albania did not accept these publications for use
in worship, yet for lack of alternatives these books are still used there, while they are accepted
in the Albanian Church in America because of Noli’s name as a founder, and especially because the
Archdiocese, as a practical matter, has neither the leadership nor the staff with the theological
and language background to read and evaluate these translations.

The English translations (1949-64) are liturgical and biblical, but all Bishop Noli’s work was
intended for liturgical use. This period is a turning point in Noli’s life because his work turns
from the strictly national to widely universal. The English publications are a result of the
movement for an American Orthodox Church, for which Bishop Noli was the pioneer with his preaching
and especially his liturgical translations. These translations are different in their philosophy
because Noli is creating a Liturgy on a Russian foundation, both in typikon and in the musical
settings. His ideology was to create an “ecumenical” liturgical canon for all Orthodox Churches in
America, which, in Noli’s work, is moving away from the Byzantine tradition. At the same time, he
hoped to earn canonical recognition for his church status, which was opposed by the Greek Church.

While the language is one of Noli’s achievements in the Albanian translations, the English ones do
not have a uniform style. The intention of giving priority to the musicality of the text appears
more strongly here, which required that Noli make many changes in the text. Theologically, though,
the English translations are better interpretations of the liturgical terms. These publications
have a historical importance and were used in the USA not only by the Albanian Church. Today,
however, their use is limited, even in Albanian parishes. The mention of Bishop Fan Noli’s name in
the liturgy poses the same paradox as in the Albanian translations of the second period and, in
addition to the quality of these translations, prevents Noli’s work from being widely used in
North America.
 

(This article was published in three issues of Illyria: June 28-July 8, 2002, V. 12, 1152-54).  


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com