9 CHAPTER 9: TRANSLATION OF SCRIPTURES AND THEOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTIONS
**Learning Objectives**
By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:
– Understand the translation methodology Bailey employed in rendering the Bible into Malayalam
– Analyse the theological significance of vernacular scripture for the missionary enterprise
– Trace the production and reception of the Malayalam New Testament (1829) and complete Bible (1841)
– Compare Bailey’s translation approach with other Indian language Bible translations
– Evaluate Bailey’s broader theological and liturgical contributions to Malayalam Christianity
—
### 9.1 The Need for a Malayalam Bible
When Benjamin Bailey arrived in Travancore in 1816, the Syrian Christian community possessed the Bible in Syriac—or, more precisely, portions of it. The Peshitta, the standard Syriac version of the Bible, had been the sacred text of the Syrian Church for centuries. But Syriac was not the spoken language of Kerala’s Christians. It was a liturgical language, understood only by the educated clergy who had studied it. For the vast majority of worshippers, the words of scripture remained inaccessible, mediated through priests who might themselves have only imperfect comprehension of the ancient tongue.
This situation was, from an evangelical perspective, intolerable. The Reformation principle of *sola scriptura*—scripture alone—rested on the assumption that the Bible was available to all believers in a language they could understand. The great achievement of the English Reformation, from William Tyndale to the King James Version, had been to put the Bible into the hands of ordinary people in their mother tongue. The CMS missionaries saw themselves as extending this same reformation to the Christians of Travancore. Before they could reform the Syrian Church’s doctrine or practice, they had to give its people access to the foundational text of the Christian faith.
The need went beyond the existing Christian community. If the gospel was to be proclaimed to non-Christians, it needed to be available in their language. A missionary could preach to a limited audience; a printed Bible could speak to anyone who could read, at any time, in any place. The translation and distribution of vernacular scriptures were not optional extras in the CMS strategy—they were central to it.
Bailey understood this from the beginning of his missionary career. His printing press, his linguistic studies, his educational work—all were oriented, ultimately, toward the goal of producing and disseminating a Malayalam Bible. The translation project that he undertook would consume decades of his life and would stand as the single most significant achievement of his literary career.
—
### 9.2 Translation Methodology and Collaborative Process
Translating the Bible is a task of extraordinary complexity. The translator must navigate between the demands of accuracy and readability, between fidelity to the original languages and sensitivity to the target language’s idioms and conventions. The task is further complicated when, as in Bailey’s case, the target language has no existing Christian vocabulary, requiring the translator to coin new terms or adapt existing ones to express theological concepts for which no equivalent exists.
Bailey’s approach to translation was methodical and scholarly. He worked from the original languages—Hebrew for the Old Testament, Greek for the New—consulting the best critical editions and commentaries available to him. His library at Kottayam included lexicons, grammars, and scholarly works that enabled him to engage with the biblical text at a high level of competence. While he was not a biblical scholar in the modern academic sense—he had not studied at a university—his decades of sustained engagement with the text gave him an expertise born of practice.
The translation process was collaborative. Bailey worked closely with a team of Malayalam-speaking assistants—Syrian Christian scholars, converts, and language informants—who reviewed his drafts, suggested improvements, and ensured that the translation was idiomatic and natural. The names of most of these assistants are lost to history, but their contribution was essential. A European, however skilled in the language, could never match the intuitive feel for idiom and nuance that a native speaker possessed. The Malayalam Bible was a joint production of British missionary and Indian Christian, though the title page bore only Bailey’s name.
The method Bailey employed was one of successive revision. He would produce a draft translation of a book, have it reviewed by his assistants, revise it based on their feedback, and then have the revised version tested by being read aloud to groups of listeners. This practice of oral testing—hearing how the text sounded when spoken—was crucial in a context where many potential readers would encounter the Bible through public reading in church rather than private study. A translation that looked good on the page might prove awkward or unclear when read aloud, and Bailey adjusted his text accordingly.
The translation went through multiple editions over the years. Bailey was never entirely satisfied with his work; he continued to revise and improve the text as his understanding of both the biblical languages and Malayalam deepened. The New Testament that appeared in 1829 was revised for later editions, and the complete Bible of 1841 incorporated further refinements. This commitment to continuous improvement reflected both Bailey’s scholarly conscience and his printer’s understanding that a published text, unlike a manuscript, could be corrected and reissued.
—
### 9.3 The Malayalam New Testament (1829)
The publication of the Malayalam New Testament in 1829 was a landmark event in the history of Kerala Christianity. After years of labour, the foundational Christian text was available in the language of the people, printed by the press that Bailey had established, in the type that he had designed and cast.
The volume that emerged from the CMS Press was a substantial book, carefully printed and bound. The title page announced, in Malayalam, that this was the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, translated from the original Greek into the Malayalam language. Bailey’s name did not appear on the title page—the translation was presented not as the work of an individual but as the word of God in Malayalam.
The reception of the New Testament was enthusiastic within the Syrian Christian community and among the mission’s supporters in England. Here was tangible evidence that the CMS mission was fulfilling its purpose. The Syrian Christians, whatever their reservations about the missionaries’ reforming agenda, could not but welcome access to scripture in their own language. Copies of the New Testament were distributed to churches, to schools, and to individuals who could afford them. For those who could not, the mission made provision, recognising that the word of God should not be restricted to those with means.
The linguistic quality of the translation was praised by contemporaries. Bailey had achieved a style that was both dignified and accessible, drawing on the resources of Malayalam literary language while avoiding the obscurity that would have made the text inaccessible to ordinary readers. Certain of his word choices—the terms he coined or adapted for key theological concepts—entered the vocabulary of Malayalam Christianity and shaped the way generations of believers expressed their faith.
The New Testament of 1829 was not, of course, perfect. Later translators would identify infelicities, inaccuracies, and places where Bailey’s theological commitments unduly influenced his rendering of the Greek. But these criticisms belong to the normal process of scholarly improvement. The significance of the 1829 New Testament lay not in its perfection but in its existence. For the first time, Malayalam-speaking Christians could read or hear the foundational Christian text in their own language.
—
### 9.4 The Complete Malayalam Bible (1841)
If the New Testament of 1829 was a landmark, the complete Malayalam Bible of 1841 was a monument. The Old Testament presented even greater translation challenges than the New. Its Hebrew was more difficult, its cultural world more remote, its range of genres—law, history, poetry, prophecy—more diverse. Translating the Psalms, with their compressed poetic imagery, required a different set of skills from translating the legal codes of Leviticus or the narrative of Kings.
Bailey had been working on the Old Testament translation alongside the New for many years, and portions had been published separately before the complete Bible appeared. But the publication of the entire scripture in a single volume, or a uniform set of volumes, represented the culmination of more than two decades of sustained effort. The complete Bible was a substantial physical object—a book of many hundreds of pages, printed on imported paper, bound in the CMS Press bindery, representing an investment of resources and labour that testified to the importance the mission placed on vernacular scripture.
The translation choices Bailey made in the Old Testament reveal his theological orientation. He tended toward formal equivalence—a word-for-word approach that sought to reproduce the original as closely as possible—rather than dynamic equivalence, which prioritises natural expression in the target language. This approach, characteristic of evangelical Bible translation in the period, reflected a high view of scriptural inspiration that extended to the very words of the text. If every word was inspired, the translator’s duty was to reproduce those words as exactly as possible, even if the result was sometimes awkward in the target language.
Yet Bailey was not a mechanical translator. His prose, particularly in narrative passages, has a clarity and flow that suggest a writer who understood that communication required more than word-for-word reproduction. In the Psalms, he achieved a poetic register that suited the material while remaining accessible. In the prophetic books, he managed the difficult task of rendering Hebrew poetry in Malayalam forms without losing the distinctive character of the original.
The complete Bible of 1841 was dedicated, in a printed preface, to the Syrian Christian community and to all Malayalam-speaking people. Bailey expressed the hope that the scriptures would be “a lamp to the feet and a light to the path” of those who read them, and he acknowledged the assistance of the many people who had contributed to the translation. The preface, characteristically modest, made no great claims for the work but expressed the translator’s prayer that God would use it for the spiritual benefit of the people of Travancore.
—
### 9.5 Comparison with Other Indian Language Translations
Bailey’s Malayalam Bible was produced in a context of vigorous Bible translation activity across India. The Serampore Baptists—William Carey, Joshua Marshman, and William Ward—had produced translations in multiple Indian languages, including Bengali, Sanskrit, Hindi, and Marathi. The CMS and other societies were at work on Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and other major languages. Translation was, in many ways, the defining activity of the early Protestant missions in India.
Comparison with other translations reveals both common challenges and distinctive features of Bailey’s work. The challenge of finding appropriate terms for key theological concepts—God, sin, salvation, grace, faith—was universal. Indian languages had rich religious vocabularies, but they were vocabularies shaped by Hindu, Buddhist, or Islamic thought. Using a Sanskrit-derived term for “God,” for example, risked importing Hindu conceptions into the biblical text. Using a more generic term might fail to convey the specificity of the biblical concept.
Bailey navigated these terminological challenges with characteristic pragmatism. He drew on Syriac loanwords that were already part of Syrian Christian vocabulary, adapting them where necessary. He coined new terms where existing vocabulary was inadequate. He sometimes used Sanskrit-derived words, particularly for concepts that had parallels in Hindu thought, while distinguishing Christian usage through context and explanation. The resulting theological vocabulary was a creative synthesis that shaped the development of Malayalam Christian discourse.
Compared to Carey’s Bengali Bible, Bailey’s translation was more conservative in its use of Sanskrit terminology. This reflected both the different religious contexts of Bengal and Travancore and Bailey’s own theological preferences. Carey, working in a context where Sanskrit learning was prestigious and Hindu reform movements were engaging with Christian ideas, had been willing to use Sanskritic terms that might resonate with educated Hindus. Bailey, working primarily with a community that already identified as Christian, could draw more heavily on the Syriac heritage and on the emerging Malayalam Christian vocabulary.
—
### 9.6 Liturgical Works and Book of Common Prayer Translation
Bailey’s translation work extended beyond the Bible to liturgical and devotional materials. As an Anglican missionary, he valued the Book of Common Prayer as a repository of Christian worship and doctrine. Making this resource available in Malayalam was a natural extension of his commitment to vernacular Christianity.
The translation of liturgical texts presents challenges distinct from Bible translation. The language of prayer and worship has its own rhythms, its own conventions, its own relationship to the spoken word. A prayer must be speakable—it must flow naturally when read aloud, allowing the worshipper’s voice to inhabit the words without stumbling. Bailey’s experience of hearing his translations read aloud, honed through the Bible translation process, served him well in this work.
The Malayalam Book of Common Prayer, produced by Bailey, included translations of the principal services: Morning and Evening Prayer, the Litany, the Holy Communion service, and the occasional offices (baptism, marriage, burial). These translations allowed Malayalam-speaking Anglicans to worship in their own language while remaining connected to the global tradition of the Anglican communion.
Bailey also produced a Malayalam hymnal, translating English hymns and composing original ones. Hymnody was central to evangelical worship, providing a means of teaching doctrine, expressing devotion, and building communal identity. The hymns that Bailey translated or composed entered the repertoire of Malayalam Christian worship and contributed to the development of a distinctive musical tradition within Kerala Christianity.
—
### 9.7 Theological Tracts and Apologetic Works
Beyond scripture and liturgy, Bailey produced theological tracts designed to explain and defend Christian doctrine. These ranged from simple catechetical materials for new converts to more sophisticated apologetic works addressing Hindu and Syrian Christian audiences.
The tracts addressed a range of topics: the nature of God, the person and work of Christ, the way of salvation, the authority of scripture, the errors of “popery” (a standard evangelical concern, directed at Roman Catholic teaching), and the differences between evangelical faith and Syrian Christian traditionalism. They were written in accessible Malayalam, designed for wide circulation among the literate population.
Some of Bailey’s apologetic works engaged directly with Hindu beliefs and practices. He critiqued idolatry, argued for the uniqueness of Christ, and presented Christianity as the fulfilment of the deepest human spiritual longings. These works were, by modern standards, often polemical and lacking in sympathetic understanding of Hindu traditions. They reflected the evangelical conviction that Christianity was not one valid path among many but the unique and necessary way of salvation. This conviction, while it drove the missionary enterprise, also generated tensions with the Hindu majority that would persist throughout the mission’s history.
For the Syrian Christian community, Bailey’s theological writings had a different emphasis. Here, the concern was not to convert from one religion to another but to reform what the missionaries saw as a degraded form of Christianity. Tracts addressed the need for personal conversion, the sufficiency of scripture, the importance of a learned clergy, and the errors of superstition. The tone was that of one Christian addressing another, urging a return to what the missionaries understood as authentic biblical faith.
—
### The Enduring Impact of Bailey’s Theological Work
The Malayalam Bible that Bailey produced served the Christian community of Kerala for generations. Even after later translations were produced—revised versions that incorporated advances in biblical scholarship and changes in the Malayalam language—Bailey’s translation retained a place of honour. Some congregations continued to use it well into the 20th century, valuing its linguistic qualities and its historical significance.
More important than the specific translation was the principle it established: that Christianity in Kerala should be vernacular Christianity, rooted in the language and culture of the people. This principle, once established, could not be reversed. The Syrian Christian community, which had preserved its faith in Syriac for centuries, increasingly embraced Malayalam as its language of worship and theological discourse. The transition from a Syriac-literate clergy to a Malayalam-literate laity transformed the character of Kerala Christianity, creating a more participatory, more biblically-informed, and more culturally engaged form of Christian life.
Bailey’s theological vocabulary, forged in the translation process, shaped the way Malayalam-speaking Christians thought and spoke about their faith. The words he chose, the phrases he coined, the cadences he established—these entered the bloodstream of Malayalam Christian discourse and persisted across denominational boundaries. In this sense, Bailey was not merely a translator of theology but a creator of theological language, a shaper of the conceptual world in which subsequent generations of Kerala Christians would live and worship.
—
**Key Takeaways**
– The translation of the Bible into Malayalam was central to the CMS strategy, driven by the evangelical conviction that all believers should have access to scripture in their mother tongue.
– Bailey’s translation methodology combined scholarly attention to the original languages with collaborative review by native speakers and oral testing through public reading.
– The Malayalam New Testament (1829) and complete Bible (1841) were landmark publications that made scripture accessible to Malayalam-speaking Christians for the first time.
– Bailey’s translation choices, including his approach to theological vocabulary, shaped the development of Malayalam Christian discourse.
– Beyond the Bible, Bailey translated liturgical texts, hymns, and theological tracts, creating a comprehensive body of vernacular Christian literature.
– The principle of vernacular Christianity that Bailey’s work established transformed Kerala Christianity from a Syriac-dependent tradition to a Malayalam-engaged faith.
—
**Discussion Questions**
1. Why was vernacular scripture so central to the evangelical missionary enterprise? What theological convictions underpinned this priority?
2. Consider the challenges of creating Christian theological vocabulary in a language shaped by Hindu religious concepts. How might Bailey have approached this task?
3. What were the advantages and limitations of Bailey’s tendency toward formal equivalence in translation?
4. How did the availability of a Malayalam Bible change the experience of Christianity for ordinary believers in Travancore?
—
**Primary Source: Bailey’s Preface to the Malayalam Bible (1841)**
*”The translation of the Holy Scriptures into the Malayalam language, which is now presented to the Christian public, has been the labour of many years. In this work, the Translator has endeavoured to render the original text with fidelity, while expressing the sense in such language as might be understood by the common people. He is deeply sensible that the translation is imperfect, and that a better might be made by abler hands. Yet he trusts that, such as it is, it may be blessed by Almighty God to the edification of His people and the spread of His truth in this land.”*
*(Bailey, B. (1841). The Holy Bible in the Malayalam Language. Kottayam: CMS Press. Spelling and punctuation modernised.)*
—
**Further Reading**
Darlow, T. H., & Moule, H. F. (1903). *Historical Catalogue of the Printed Editions of Holy Scripture in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society*. Bible House. (For bibliographic details of early Malayalam Bibles.)
Israel, Hephzibah. (2011). *Religious Transactions in Colonial South India: Language, Translation, and the Making of Protestant Identity*. Palgrave Macmillan. (For scholarly analysis of Tamil Bible translation, providing comparative context.)
Sugirtharajah, R. S. (2002). *Postcolonial Criticism and Biblical Interpretation*. Oxford University Press. (For critical perspectives on missionary translation practices.)
—
