Today (a day late, apologies) I can publish the fifth of our Position Papers, on the Vulgate and the Ancient Latin Psalters. Talking about different Latin versions of the Bible may seem nit-picking, but just as the Latin orations of the 1970 Missal are not the same as the Latin orations of the 1962 Missal, so the Scriptural basis of the reformed Missal is different, and in important ways. The 'Neo Vulgate' is the 'reference point' for the Ordinary Form, and of translations of it into the vernacular. This is an important way (thought not the only one) in which the continuity with our Catholic predecessors represented by the ancient liturgical tradition is not maintained in the Novus Ordo, even when that is said in Latin.
As this paper explains, however, a modern Latin translation of the Psalms had already begun to be used for new feasts from 1945, the Pian Psalter (or 'Bea' Psalter, as it was prepared by Fr Augustin Bea, later a leading liberal Cardinal in the Second Vatican Council). This means that all the new or revised feasts from 1945 to 1962, including the new Holy Week services, and the feast of St Joseph the Worker which fell yesterday, use this Psalter which was, with the minimum of face-saving language, condemned by the Second Vatican Council for failing to use Christian Latin, and failing to account for the Psalms to be sung.
Most important of all is the issue of the 'tradition of interpretation', which is explained in some detail in the paper and illustrated in the Appendices. In maintaining this tradition of interpretation it appears that the Extraordinary Form, leaving aside the use of the Pian Psalter in certain places, seems to accord with the demands of Sacrosantam Concilium and the Instructions implementing it, Variationes legitimae and Liturgian authenticam, better than the Ordinary Form.
For all these reasons we wouldn't want to see the Neo Vulgate being used for any new Propers for the Extraordinary Form. We also need to point out the problem we already have with the Pian Psalter.
Here is a short video of the Schola Abelis of Oxford singing the Communion antiphon, with Psalm verses, for the feast of St Joseph the Worker, in 2009. This is the strange, un-euphonious Pian version of the Psalm which represents, as the paper below argues, a non-organic intrusion in the 1962 Missal. (More on this Mass here; videos of the Pian-Psalter propers of the feast of the Assumption here.)
The next paper will be published on 15th May, on Liturgical Pluralism.
Comments can be sent to positio AT fiuv.org
Pdf of this paper here. Full set of papers, including the introductory disclaimer, can be downloaded from the FIUV website.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIUV Positio 5: The Use of the Vulgate and the Ancient Latin Psalters
1 One
difference between the two Forms of the Roman Rite, which is at once deeply
rooted and complex, is the use, in the Extraordinary Form, of the ancient
Vulgate translation of the Bible, associated with St Jerome, with certain
adaptations, in the Lectionary, and the ‘Roman’ and ‘Gallican’ Psalters in the
Propers. While the 1974 Graduale Romanum uses the ancient chant texts, the
Ordinary Form is otherwise based on an entirely new Latin translation, the Nova Vulgata Editio, the ‘Neo Vulgate’.[1] It is the purpose of this paper to
explain the value of the texts found in the 1962 Missal, and to what extent
reform is appropriate. Christian and Classical Latin Style
While this paper is not primarily concerned with the
Office, the revision of Office hymns under Pope Urban VIII is worth noting. The
versions published in 1629[2]
were intended to conform to the Latin style of the Augustan age. The revised
hymns are generally regarded as harder to sing, and partly for this reason the
Dominicans, Benedictines, Cistercians, Calced Carmelites, and Carthusians, never
adopted them.
The Pian Psalter (and also the Canticles used in the
Office, which were revised at the same time), overseen by Fr (later, Cardinal)
Augustin Bea, S.J., and authorised in 1945,[3]
was again modelled on the Augustan style.[4] This
Psalter was allowed as an option in the Office, and was employed in the
composition of proper texts for new or revised feasts from 1945 onwards (see
Appendix A).
Contrary to this classicising tendency, however, Christian
Latin has its own value. The great Dutch classicist Christine Mohrmann[5] observed
that, in the ancient Latin translations of scripture, Latin vocabulary with
pagan associations was replaced by archaic, foreign, or freshly minted terms; translations
of great fidelity led to the incorporation of Greek and Semitic idioms, syntax,
and even elements of grammar. The result was a Latin register with a strong
identity, instantly recognisable as Christian, closely associated with
Scripture, and suitable for the liturgy, in a way strikingly reminiscent of the
advice of the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam.[6] Particularly
noteworthy is the fact that the Latin Psalters which emerged from this
tradition imitated the rhythmic construction of Hebrew poetry, and are well
suited to Chant.
5 The value of Christian Latin was decisively vindicated
in the Constitution on the Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium. On hymns it says
simply
To whatever extent
may seem desirable, the hymns are to be restored to their original form.[7]
On the Psalter, the Constitution says that revision of the Psalter
is to take into
account the style of Christian Latin, the liturgical use of psalms, also when
sung, and the entire tradition of the Latin Church.[8]
The Septuagint and the Tradition of Interpretation
6 While the Old Testament of the Neo Vulgate is based on the
Masoretic Hebrew text, the Vulgate and the ancient Latin Psalters depend upon
the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. The Instruction Variatates legitimate (1994) describes the
Septuagint’s production as ‘an enrichment of the Scriptures’ ‘under divine
inspiration’,[9] a
judgment which reflects the consensus of the Fathers.[10] It
reflects both a more ancient Hebrew manuscript tradition and a more developed
theological understanding, than the Hebrew versions directly available to us.
It is noteworthy that it is used in the New Testament, in some cases precisely
because of its variance with the Hebrew.[11] It
was the Septuagint which was the basis of Scriptural commentary and exegesis by
the Greek Fathers, and by using Latin translations based on the Septuagint,
Latin Fathers and Doctors were able to work in continuity with them.
7 In short, the Septuagint translators’ own reading of
the Old Testament forms a key link in a tradition of interpretation adopted and
developed further by the New Testament authors and the Fathers, Doctors, and
scholars of the Church right up to modern times. It is this tradition of
interpretation which is reflected in the liturgical use made of the Old
Testament, especially the Psalms, in the ancient Latin liturgical tradition.
8 The importance of the ‘entire tradition of the Latin
Church’ is referred to in the passage of Sacrosanctum
Concilium quoted above, and is reaffirmed emphatically in Liturgiam authenticam:
The effort should be made to ensure that the
translations be conformed to that understanding of biblical passages which has
been handed down by liturgical use and by the tradition of the Fathers of the
Church, especially as regards very important texts such as the Psalms and the
readings used for the principal celebrations of the liturgical year; in these
cases the greatest care is to be taken so that the translation express the
traditional Christological, typological and spiritual sense, and manifest the
unity and the inter-relatedness of the two Testaments.[12]
The preservation of this tradition of interpretation in the texts of
the 1962 Missal, by contrast with the Neo Vulgate, is illustrated in Appendix
C.[13]
9 The restoration of ancient liturgical texts by Pope St
Pius V,[14]
Pope Clement VIII,[15]
and Pope St Pius X,[16] demonstrates
a profound respect for the authentic and ancient texts (see Appendix B), and
raises the issue, related to that of the tradition of interpretation, of continuity
of worship. When we use the ipsissima
verba of countless generations of our Catholic predecessors, we respond to
the same liturgical occasions by reflecting upon the same texts.[17]
As Pope Benedict XVI has expressed it:
The diachronic aspect, praying with the Fathers and the
apostles, is part of what we mean by rite, ... Rites are ... forms of the
apostolic Tradition and of its unfolding in the great places of the Tradition.
... Because of the historical character of God’s action, the ‘Divine Liturgy’
... has been fashioned, in a way similar to Scripture, by human beings and
their capacities. ... The authority of
the liturgy can certainly be compared to that of the great confessions of faith
of the early Church.[18]
1 While
the Pian Psalter[19] and the
Neo Vulgate[20] were
prepared with accuracy in mind, they inevitably reflect the scholarly consensus
of their own day. In general, profound changes have taken place in Biblical
scholarship since these translations were prepared. The difficulty of
establishing a definitive original text is increasingly recognised,[21]
and many of the simple rules of thumb which used to guide scholars have been
questioned.[22] The
reality is that all translations are based on scholarly judgements subject to
revision in light of the accumulation of evidence and changing scholarly
fashions. The need for a stable Scriptural basis for the liturgy means that we
must accept that our liturgical texts will not always accord with the latest
scholarly consensus.
On
this point an important distinction is made by Pope Pius XII in his encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu.
Hence this special
authority, or, as they say, authenticity of the Vulgate was not affirmed by the
Council [sc. of Trent] particularly for critical reasons, but rather because of
its legitimate use in the Churches throughout so many centuries; by which use
indeed the same is shown, in the sense in which the Church has understood and
understands it, to be free from any error whatsoever in matters of faith and
morals; so that, as the Church herself testifies and affirms, it may be quoted
safely and without fear of error in disputations, in lectures and in preaching;
and so its authenticity is not specified primarily as critical, but rather as
juridical.[23]
The Church’s use of the Vulgate
does not commit her to the proposition that it is the most accurate possible
translation of the inspired Hebrew text; rather, it reflects the Church’s own
interpretation of the text, and is guaranteed as not introducing into the text
any moral or doctrinal error.
Conclusion
1 The
ancient texts used in the Church’s liturgical tradition are a treasure. They
represent a great achievement of Christian scholarship, and are the culmination
of the development of a Christian style which is of immense importance in
Christian culture.[24]
Furthermore, by using them today we are able to use the very words of many of
our forefathers in the Faith, and, most importantly, are able to appreciate the
homiletic, exegetical, and liturgical use they made of them. The value of the
diachronic continuity this represents has been emphasised by Sacrosanctum Concilium, Liturgicam
authenticam, and Pope Benedict XVI. It
follows that the use of the Vulgate and the ancient psalters should be preserved
in the Extraordinary Form, and that any new Propers should make use of these
versions.
The
presence of elements of the Pian Psalter in the 1962 Missal clearly disturbs
the ‘stability’ across the Missal of the Psalter, ‘the fundamental prayer book
of the Christian people’, so desired by Liturgiam
authenticam.[25] The
Instruction Il Padre, incomprehensibile (1996),
addressing the Eastern Churches, expresses the matter clearly:
The first
requirement of every Eastern liturgical renewal, as is also the case for
liturgical reform in the West, is that of rediscovering full fidelity to their
own liturgical traditions, benefiting from their riches and eliminating that
which has altered their authenticity.[26]
In light of the judgement of Sacrosanctum
Concilium there seems no doubt that the Pian Psalter and Canticles, and the
revised Office hymns of Urban VIII, amount, in another phrase of Il Padre, to a ‘non-organic intrusion’[27] in
the liturgical tradition represented by the 1962 Missal and associated
liturgical books. All things considered, therefore, they should ideally be replaced
respectively by the corresponding passages of the Gallican Psalter, the Vulgate
Canticles, and the authentic Medieval Office hymns.
Appendices
Appendix A: The Pian Psalter (and Canticles) found in the 1962 books
In the
Praeparatio ad Missam: Psalms 83, 84, 85, 115 and 129
In the Gratiarum Actio post Missam: the Benedicite and Ps 150
In the
reformed (1955) Holy Week: Holy Thursday: Psalm 21
(which accompanies the stripping of the altars)
Easter Vigil, in the Lauds which follows it:
Benedictus
1 May, Joseph Opifex: Introit Psalm verse; Gradual response and verse; Tract; Offertory.
31 May, BMV Regina: Introit Psalm verse; Gr
15 Aug, Assumption: Gradual response and verse.
3 Sept, Pius X: Introit antiphon and psalm; Gradual response and verse; Alleluia verse; Tract; Double Alleluia for Paschaltide.
Pro aliquibus locis, 6 May, Dominic Savio: Introit psalm; Gradual, Alleluia, Tract, Offertory.
Pro aliquibus locis 6 July, Maria Goretti: Introit antiphon & psalm; Gradual response & verse; Alleluia; Tract.
(It is worth
noting also that the 1962 Breviarium Romanum with the Vulgate psalter
retains the Pian Psalter for the Office of Christmas and Easter, which have a
psalter proper to them for their feast and octaves, as well as antiphons,
chapters and responsoria used for the offices of saints composed after
1945, St. Joseph the Worker, St. Pius X, etc..)
Appendix B: Historical examples of the restoration of authentic liturgical texts
1570 Missale Romanum
3rd Sunday of Advent, Introit
Antiphon (Philipians 4:4-6): ‘Gaudete in Domino semper:
iterum dico, gaudete. Modestia vestra nota sit omnibus hominibus: Dominus enim
prope est. Nihil solliciti sitis, sed in omni oratione petitiones vestrae
innotescant apud Deum.’
Psalm: (Ps 84:2) ‘Benedixisti, Domine, terram tuam:
avertisti captivitatem Jacob.’
1474 Missale Romanum
Psalm verse had been replaced by ‘et pax Dei quae exsuperat
omnem sensum custodiat corda vestra et intelligentias vestras in Christo Iesu’
(Philipians 4:7, continuing the text of the epistle used in the antiphon).
4th Sunday of Advent (and Advent Ember
Wednesday), Introit
Antiphon (Isaiah 45:8): ‘Rorate caeli, desuper, et nubes
pluant justum: aperiatur terra, et germinet Salvatorem.’
Psalm (Ps 18:2): ‘Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei: et opera
manuum eius annuntiat firmamentum.’
1474 Missale Romanum
Psalm had been replaced by ‘Et iustitia oriatur simul ego
dominus creavi eum…’ (continuing the text of Isaiah used in the antiphon).
1908 Graduale Romanum
26th December, St Stephen, Introit: Psalm 118:23
‘Et enim sederunt principes, et adversum me loquebantur’ (early
chant manuscripts)
1871 Graduale Romanum
Had used ‘Sederunt principes, et adversum me loquebantur’
(text changed presumably on stylistic grounds)
10th Sunday After Pentecost, Introit: Psalm 54:17
‘Dum clamarem ad Dominum…’ (early chant manuscripts)
1871 Graduale Romanum
Had used: ‘Cum clamarem ad Dominum…’ (text changed
presumably on stylistic grounds)
The unrestored texts continued to be used in later editions
of the Missale Romanum.
Appendix C: Ancient Latin texts and the Neo
Vulgate
Easter Sunday Introit Ps 138 [139] v
18, Roman Psalter:
‘Resurrexi
et adhuc tecum sum.’ (‘I am risen and still am with you.’)
(Gallican
Psalter: ‘exsurrexi et adhuc sum tecum’: ‘I have stood up…’: this text was also
interpreted as a reference to the resurrection by St Augustine, who had this
reading.)
Neo
Vulgate: ‘Si ad finem pervenerim, adhuc sum tecum.’ (‘If I were to have arrived
at the end, still I am with you.’)
The
tradition of interpretation, as referring to the Resurrection, represented in
the liturgical use of this text, is excluded by the Neo Vulgate.
Feast of St Andrew: Ps.138.17,
‘Mihi autem nimis honorati sunt amici tui, Deus: nimis
confortatus est principatus eorum.’ (‘To me Thy friends, O God, are made
exceedingly honourable; their principality is exceedingly strengthened.’)
Neo Vulgate: ‘Mihi autem nimis pretiosae cogitationes tuae,
Deus; nimis gravis summa earum.’ (‘But to me your thoughts are extremely
precious, O God, extremely weighty the sum of them.’)
The tradition of interpretation, as referring to the
Apostles, is excluded by the Neo Vulgate.
Liturgia
Horarum Monday after Lent IV, the Office of
Readings
Leviticus
16:13-14, and a passage from Origen expounding it.
Lev
16:13-14 in the Vulgate, following the Septuagint, reads: ‘he shall take some
of the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it with his finger seven times upon
the Mercy Seat towards the
East’ The significance of the East is expounded by Origen. But the Neo Vulgate,
following the Masoretic Hebrew text, reads “... and he shall
sprinkle it with his finger seven times against the front of
the mercy seat”.
Ps 19(18):6-7 gave the Greek and Latin
Fathers, who read it in the more or less identical texts of the Septuagint and
the ancient Latin psalters, a tradition of exposition according to which the
Eternal Son placed his Tabernacle in the sun of the Bridal Chamber of the
Virgin’s womb and comes forth as the Giant of two substances, human and divine,
to run his incarnate course. The Neo Vulgate confuses this imagery, which is
fundamental to three Office hymns: Conditor
alme siderum, Veni redemptor gentium, and Fit porta Christi pervia.
[1]
The Neo Vulgate Psalter was first published in 1969, the New Testament in 1971,
and the complete Bible in 1979. Liturgiam
authenticam 37 describes it as ‘the point of reference as regards the
delineation of the canonical text’: ‘Novae Vulgatae editionis esse referenda quoad
textum canonicum Sacrarum Scripturarum definiendum.’ Cf. para 24
[2] An
edition of the Roman Breviary containing them was published in 1631.
[3] AAS 37, 1945, pp65ff
[4] Bea
calls the Augustan age a ‘better period of Latin’ (‘di quel migliore periodo
della latinita’) Biblica 26 (1945)
pp203ff. Bea describes the ancient Latin texts as using ‘a vulgar and later
Latin’ (‘latino volgare e posteriore’, and calls his own, Augustan-syle Latin
‘a Latin choiceworthy, more classical’ (‘un latino piu scelto, piu classico’).
[5] Christine
Mohrmann, Vigiliae Christianae I
(1947) pp114-128 and 168-182; see also her ‘Liturgical Latin’
[6] Liturgiam authenticam 27: 1. archaisms, ‘seeming
inelegant expressions’ (‘vocabula aut locutiones specie inelegantes continentu’)
deriving from a literal rendering, and other factors, can contribute to ‘a
sacred style that will come to be recognised as proper to liturgical language.’
(‘stylum sacrum, qui et tamquam sermo proprie liturgicus agnoscatur.’) Cf. para
40 on avoiding the ‘manner of speech’ used in non-Catholic or non-Christian
religious language (‘loquendi consuetudine communitatum ecclesialium non catholicarum,
aut aliarum religionum’). Cf. the Instruction Varietates legitimate (1994) 53: ‘certain words in in current Latin
use (memoria, sacramentum) took on a new meaning in the Christian faith.’
[7]
Sacrosanctum Concilium 93: ‘Hymni, quantum expedire videtur, ad pristinam
formam restituantur’
[8]
Sacrosanctum Concilium 91: ‘respectu habito latinitatis christianae, usus
liturgici etiam in cantu, necnon totius traditionis latinae Ecclesiae.’
[9]
Instruction Varietates legitimate (1994)
9: ‘…the translation of the Bible into Greek introduced the word of God into a
world which had been closed to it and caused, under divine inspiration, an
enrichment of the Scriptures.’ (‘Versio librorum sacrorum in graecam linguam
verbum Dei immisit in mundum, qui ei clausus erat, atque, Deo inspirante, ad
Scripturas ipsas locupletandas induxit.’)
[10]
St Augustine wrote ‘With regard to whatever is in the Septuagint that is not in
the Hebrew manuscripts, we can say that the one Spirit wished to say them
through the writers of the former rather than the latter in order to show that
both the one and the other were inspired.’ (De
Civitate Dei 18.43). See Richard Smith SJ “Inspiration and Inerrancy” in
Brown et al. ‘Jerome Biblical Commentary’ (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1969)
pp499-514, pp511-12.
[11] The
most famous example is that of Isaiah’s prophecy (Isaiah 7:14) that ‘a Virgin
shall conceive’, in which the Septuagint translators look forward to the Virgin
birth with a clarity lacking in the Hebrew text. The Vulgate ‘virgo’ follows
the Septuagint ‘hē parthenos’; the Hebrew
‘almâh’ could equally be translated ‘a young woman’. See Richard Smith op. cit. p511: ‘Frequently
in the [New Testament], the [Septuagint] is cited rather than a [Greek]
translation based directly on the [Masoretic Text]. Moreover, at times the
[Septuagint] is cited in support of basic Christian doctrines precisely because
the Hebr[ew] text does not support the doctrine in question.’
[12] Liturgiam authenticam 41: ‘Opera detur,
ut translationes ad intellectum locorum biblicorum ab usu liturgico ac
traditione Patrum Ecclesiae transmissum conformentur, praesertim cum de
textibus magni momenti agitur, sicut psalmi et lectiones in praecipuis
celebrationibus anni liturgici adhibitae; his in casibus diligentissime curetur
oportet, ut translatio traditum sensum christologicum, typologicum aut
spiritualem exprimat atque unitatem et nexum inter utrumque Testamentum
manifestet.’ Again: ‘translators are strongly encouraged to pay close attention
to the history of interpretation’.[12] And
again: ‘Certain expressions that belong to the heritage of the whole or of a
great part of the ancient Church, as well as others that have become part of
the general human patrimony, are to be respected’.
[13] Cf.
Peter Jeffery ‘Translating Tradition: a chant historian reads Liturgiam authenticam’ (Collegeville:
Liturgical Press, 2005) pp33-39
[14]
Leading to the 1570 Missale Romanum.
[15]
Leading to the 1608 Missale Romanum.
On Clement’s restoration of the authentic liturgical text (as opposed to the
Vulgate) see Peter Jeffery ‘Translating Tradition: a chant historian reads Liturgiam authenticam’ (Collegeville:
Liturgical Press, 2005) pp50-52
[16]
Leading to the 1908 Graduale Romanum
[17]
This instinct was well articulated by Anglican scholars editing a Latin version
of the Book of Common Prayer in 1865, wishing to incorporate ‘those very words
which take their origin from most distinguished Doctors ... Leo ... Gregory ...
which have been dear to our predecessors Bede ... King Alfred the Great ...
Osmund and Anselm, and others through many centuries, in their devout dealings
with heaven (in pio cum coelis commercio cordi fuere)’ W. Bright and P. G. Medd
‘Libri Precum Publicarum Ecclesiae Anglicanae Versio Latina’, (Rivington, 1865)
[18]
Spirit of the Liturgy p164-167. See also ‘In the history of the liturgy growth
and progress are found, but not a rupture. What was sacred for prior
generations, remains sacred and great for us as well.’
[19] For
example, the Pian Psalter was published on the eve of the discovery of the Dead
Sea Scrolls, which in some cases vindicated the Septuagint over the Masoretic
Hebrew text, which was the basis of the Pian translation. See Raymond Brown,
D.W. Johnson and Kevin O’Connell: “Texts and Versions” (in Brown et al. ‘The
New Jerome Biblical Commentary’ (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1986) pp1083-1112,
p1086: in the Qumran Manuscripts ‘many alternative readings and expansions for
which medieval Hebrew manuscripts in the [Masoretic tradition] have no
counterpart, but which were often already known Greek or Samaritan sources, are
here found…’
[20] Again,
the Neo Vulgate’s New Testament was based upon the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament, in its first two
editions (1966 and 1968). These used a system of marking variant readings A, B,
C, D, indicating their ‘relative degree of certainty’ in the view of the editors,
which was much criticised and abandoned in later editions. Reviewing the 4th
edition, Professor J. K. Elliott referred to ‘the bizarre and often criticised
system of allocating rating letters’; calling it ‘arbitrary and fluctuating’;
and concluding that ‘even here the editors acknowledge that this “standard
text” is in flux and may be changed’. J. K. Elliott ‘New Testament Textual
Criticism: the Application of thoroughgoing principles’ (Leiden: Brill, 2010)
pp557-558
[21] E.
J. Epp and B. R. Gaventa ‘Junia: the First Woman Apostle’ (Augsburg Fortress
Publishers, 2005) p5, on the problem of establishing a stable and precise
‘original authorial text’. One of the influences here was a perception among
classicists (e.g. Rosalind Thomas) and New Testament scholars (e.g. Loveday
Alexander) that in dealing with an age before printing made possible definitive
‘editions’, study of ‘Literacy’ and its relationship with ‘Orality’ has much to
teach us about the purpose, genesis and evolution of different types of text.
[22] To
give just one example, the assumption that longer versions of a text were more
likely to be interpolated, than shorter versions truncated, has lost favour.E.
J. Epp ibid: ‘both this simplicity
and the accompanying innocence of New Testament textual criticism began to
erode’.
[23]
Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Divino afflante
Spiritu (1943) 21
[24]
Cf. Pope Paul VI Apostolic Letter Sacrificium
laudis: ‘For this language [sc. Latin] is,
within the Latin Church, an abundant well-spring of Christian
civilisation and a very rich treasure-trove of devotion.’ (‘cum sit
in Ecclesia Latina christiani cultus humani fons uberrimus et locupletissimus
pietatis thesaurus’)
[25] Liturgiam authenticam 36
[26] Il Padre, incomprehensibile 18
[27]
Ibid 58
