"And with thy spirit"

  • Thread starter Thread starter dgj23112
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dgj23112

Guest
Having grown up Anglo-Catholic, I’ve responded for over 50 years with “and with thy spirit” when the priest said “the Lord be with you”. But, recently, having heard an explanation of why I would respond “and with thy spirit”, I’ve begun to seriously question why I wouldn’t respond “and also with you” instead. Granted, the second form is incredibly trite and pedestrian sounding (which, according to many, is reason enough to reject it), yet, I’m still struggling with the reasoning I heard. Please elaborate and elucidate.
Many thanks…
 
dgj23112 said:
Having grown up Anglo-Catholic, I’ve responded for over 50 years with “and with thy spirit” when the priest said “the Lord be with you”. But, recently, having heard an explanation of why I would respond “and with thy spirit”, I’ve begun to seriously question why I wouldn’t respond “and also with you” instead. Granted, the second form is incredibly trite and pedestrian sounding (which, according to many, is reason enough to reject it), yet, I’m still struggling with the reasoning I heard. Please elaborate and elucidate.
Many thanks…
Click to expand...
It addresses that indwelling Grace that comes with Holy Orders. That is why St. Paul addressed St. Timothy (a bishop) in that way (2 Tim 4:22). Even in Kione Greek, it’s not a normal way of addressing people.

And that is why we respond that way to our clergy (and no one else), it refers specifically to the Ontological change that happens when a man receives Holy Orders.
 
I believe the new language in the new mass is actually “and with your spirit.” I agree with you that “and also with you” makes a lot more sense in a mass said in the vernacular. They also changed some words in the creed. My friends and I used to joke and call the creed at the ordinary from mass “the We Believe.”. No longer can say that because they say “I believe” now. But they also changed “one in being with” to consubstantial (?). I have never heard that word, but it looks very close to the Latin word used in the Creed. I am guessing that is why they made the change. And I bet that they changed to “and with your spirit” for the same reason. Seems arbitrary to me, but there you have it.
 
1571 said:
". No longer can say that because they say “I believe” now. But they also changed “one in being with” to consubstantial (?). I have never heard that word, but it looks very close to the Latin word used in the Creed. .
Click to expand...
If you heard of ‘Transubstantial’ or Transubstantiation, the roots are very similar.

The old translation had “One in Being”. That was theologically problematic, as ‘Being’ is a statement of existence. But since there is no existence apart from God, it really wasn’t saying much about Christ. The keyboard I am typing on now is “one in being with the Father”, there is no other way to exist.

But Consubstantial is different. Substance, or what something IS is different between God and my keyboard. My keyboard is not God, and my God is not the keyboard. They are different in Substance. But Christ is NOT different in Substance. He IS God. Thus He is CON (with) SUBSTANTIAL (Substance) with the Father.
 
1571 said:
they also changed “one in being with” to consubstantial (?). I have never heard that word, but it looks very close to the Latin word used in the Creed. I am guessing that is why they made the change. And I bet that they changed to “and with your spirit” for the same reason.
Click to expand...
Just to add to Brendan’s posting:

Jesus is consubstantial with the Father – the two are ‘of the same substance’.

A priest is definitely not consubstantial with either Jesus or the Father – the priest is not ‘of the same substance’ of God!

However, there is something theologically significant in the response “and with your spirit.” It speaks to a change-in-being that occurs in ordination: a priest is ordained in a way that configures him to Christ, the head of the Church. In this way, the priest is acting in a way that saying “and also with you” doesn’t capture, but “and with your spirit” does. It doesn’t mean that the priest is the same as Christ, but he certainly is configured to Christ.

Perhaps this is what dgj is referring to – to him/her, it doesn’t sound right to give voice to that configuration to Christ that a priest embodies. Without further details from him/her, though, we won’t be able to tell what the issue s/he’s having is… 😉
 
Brendan said:
It addresses that indwelling Grace that comes with Holy Orders. That is why St. Paul addressed St. Timothy (a bishop) in that way (2 Tim 4:22). Even in Kione Greek, it’s not a normal way of addressing people.

And that is why we respond that way to our clergy (and no one else), it refers specifically to the Ontological change that happens when a man receives Holy Orders.
Click to expand...
]Thank you for posting this answer. It was extremely informative. It never ceases to amaze me how much I learn on CAF.
 
Brendan said:
It addresses that indwelling Grace that comes with Holy Orders. That is why St. Paul addressed St. Timothy (a bishop) in that way (2 Tim 4:22). Even in Kione Greek, it’s not a normal way of addressing people.

And that is why we respond that way to our clergy (and no one else), it refers specifically to the Ontological change that happens when a man receives Holy Orders.
Click to expand...
Interesting explanation since I have not thought of this before.

My understanding is that there is no change in the meaning of “And also with you” compared to the “And with your spirit.” The changes is in the word “you” to “your spirit”. It just mean that ‘you’ refer to you as a person. If one’s name is John, ‘you’ is referring to John, not because John is a priest. Originally the word ‘you’ is used in the translation when the NO was introduced because this is the common understanding of referring to a person which was what most people would understand.

Many years have passed and now we have been very familiar with the usage of the NO of the mass. The changes to ‘spirit’ is to denote a more accurate description of referring to a person. We are composed of body and spirit but to God it is our spirit that makes a person that He sees in us. So when ‘spirit’ is being used, it brings a meaning in a language that is from the perspective of God Himself.
 
dgj23112 said:
Having grown up Anglo-Catholic, I’ve responded for over 50 years with “and with thy spirit” when the priest said “the Lord be with you”. But, recently, having heard an explanation of why I would respond “and with thy spirit”, I’ve begun to seriously question why I wouldn’t respond “and also with you” instead. Granted, the second form is incredibly trite and pedestrian sounding (which, according to many, is reason enough to reject it), yet, I’m still struggling with the reasoning I heard. Please elaborate and elucidate.
Many thanks…
Click to expand...
In the original Latin Mass the saying is: “Dominus Vobiscum” (The Lord be with you) and the response is " Et cum spiritu tuo (And with thy spirit)
The English in parenthesis is an exact translation of the original Latin. This has been in the Mass for over 2,000 years; so, who are we or anyone else to change it?
 
George_Stegmeir said:
In the original Latin Mass the saying is: “Dominus Vobiscum” (The Lord be with you) and the response is " Et cum spiritu tuo (And with thy spirit)
The English in parenthesis is an exact translation of the original Latin. This has been in the Mass for over 2,000 years; so, who are we or anyone else to change it?
Click to expand...
As I see it there is no changes. The earlier translation of ‘you’ instead of ‘your spirit’ is to mean the same thing. The only reason why it was translated to ‘you’ for the English speaking population is to avoid the initial confusion when the NO was introduced. Glad that we have reverted to the literal translation.
 
Reuben_J said:
Many years have passed and now we have been very familiar with the usage of the NO of the mass. The changes to ‘spirit’ is to denote a more accurate description of referring to a person. .
Click to expand...
To the priest or Deacon specifically. as this is only in reference to someone in Holy Orders. If, at a Communion Service lead by a lay person, we would say “and also with you”
But there is much more to this response. When a man is ordained a priest, the Holy Spirit comes upon him in a unique way, enabling him to perform the sacred rites of the Mass and consecrate the Eucharist. By responding, “And with your spirit,” we acknowledge the Spirit’s activity through the priest during the sacred Liturgy. We are referring to the “spirit” of the priest, the very core of his being, where he has been ordained to offer the sacrifice of the Mass.
Click to expand...
catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re1092.htm
In the church of Antioch and Syria preachers like St John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia were saying that the word “spirit” in the response referred to the charism or grace of the priesthood which the bishop or presbyter had received.
Click to expand...
“In saying ‘and with your spirit’,” says Theodore, “they do not refer to his soul, but to the grace of the Holy Spirit by which his people believe that he is called to the priesthood” (Baptismal Homilies, 15, 37).
Click to expand...
catholicherald.co.uk/features/2011/01/27/why-%E2%80%98and-with-your-spirit%E2%80%99-is-right/
“We can best understand the ‘Et cum spiritu tuo’ as a popular consensus in the work of the priest, not that the congregation here gives the priest authority or power to act in its stead, but that the congregation once more acknowledges him as the speaker under whose leadership the united group will approach almighty God. Thus in the greeting and its response we have the same double note that reappears at the end of the oration [opening prayer]; the ‘Dominus vobiscum’ seems to anticipate the ‘per Christum’ of the close of the oration, and the ‘et cum spiritu tuo’ is a forerunner of the people’s agreement expressed in the Amen” (The Mass of the Roman Rite, Volume 1, Page 365).
Click to expand...
zenit.org/en/articles/and-with-your-spirit
 
Brendan said:
To the priest or Deacon specifically. as this is only in reference to someone in Holy Orders. If, at a Communion Service lead by a lay person, we would say “and also with you”%between%
Click to expand...
I don’t think a lay person is ever to use “The Lord be with you,” when leading a Communion service. That is always restricted to a deacon – at least in the rites I’ve seen.
 
Gorgias said:
Just to add to Brendan’s posting:

Jesus is consubstantial with the Father – the two are ‘of the same substance’.

A priest is definitely not consubstantial with either Jesus or the Father – the priest is not ‘of the same substance’ of God!
Click to expand...
Jesus is consubstantial with the Father regarding his divine substance. Jesus is consubstantial with Man regarding his human substance. Read the Fourth Ecumenical Council.

Consubstantial means “of one/same substance with x”.
 
dgj23112 said:
Having grown up Anglo-Catholic, I’ve responded for over 50 years with “and with thy spirit” when the priest said “the Lord be with you”. But, recently, having heard an explanation of why I would respond “and with thy spirit”, I’ve begun to seriously question why I wouldn’t respond “and also with you” instead. Granted, the second form is incredibly trite and pedestrian sounding (which, according to many, is reason enough to reject it), yet, I’m still struggling with the reasoning I heard. Please elaborate and elucidate.
Many thanks…
Click to expand...
Well, first off, if you’re Anglo-Catholic, why would you even have the option to respond “And also with you?” Does your church use the BCP 1979 or BAS?

On the Catholic side, we’ve already since dropped “And also with you” for over a year now.
 
1571 said:
I believe the new language in the new mass is actually “and with your spirit.” I agree with you that “and also with you” makes a lot more sense in a mass said in the vernacular.
Click to expand...
FWIW, the ICEL first considered changing the priest’s part to “May the spirit of the Lord be with you” to which the congregation was to respond “And also with you.” So what happened? They decided to change the priest’s part back to the original but kept the newer response. Thus the awkwardness of that translation which didn’t seem to fit.
No longer can say that because they say “I believe” now. But they also changed “one in being with” to consubstantial (?). I have never heard that word, but it looks very close to the Latin word used in the Creed. I am guessing that is why they made the change. And I bet that they changed to “and with your spirit” for the same reason. Seems arbitrary to me, but there you have it.
Click to expand...
“Consubstantial to the Father” appeared in some pre-1900 Latin-English missal.

This actually is truer to the Latin as the Patri (Father) is in the dative case.
 
Out of curiosity, why have we translated it “and with your spirit”? Isn’t English a Germanic language? Shouldn’t it be something more like “and with your ghost?”
 
ChemicalBean said:
Out of curiosity, why have we translated it “and with your spirit”? Isn’t English a Germanic language? Shouldn’t it be something more like “and with your ghost?”
Click to expand...
The Mass is a latin language, hence the use of spirit. Besides many people (and children) would be concerned with saying ghost. 😉
 
Zekariya said:
The Mass is a latin language, hence the use of spirit. Besides many people (and children) would be concerned with saying ghost. 😉
Click to expand...
That’s just it. Much hay has been made of the change of translation to “your spirit” rather than “you”, not just because there is a Latin cognate of the word spiritus, but because it somehow “recalls an ontological change of the clergy” in the response.

The term spirit is pretty ambiguous, actually. There are spirits in a liquor shop, and yes we know the difference! But how about use of the phrase “That’s the spirit!”, or “Spirit of St. Louis”, or everybody’s favorite “the Spirit of Vatican II”, or “spirit vs. letter, of the law”.
Suddenly spirit is mere motivation or willpower, or anything that can evaporate quickly without being a visible gas! Inanimate objects and concepts now have spirits. People have collective spirits.

If we wanted to hammer home that we acknowledge (and reverence?) some mystical quality about an individual clergy in our response to “The Lord Be With You”, that is distinctly non-corporeal and individually human, why not use the word “ghost” in English, in the same way that I believe in German the response is “und mit deinem Geiste”.

Yes, “ghost” elicits a viceral reaction, and images of Casper and bedsheets and Halloween, but even those connotations lead us to an awareness of the soul, much more than “spirit” does. If we want to elicit a thought-provoking response in the assembly to educate them (like the way that “consubstantial” is defended), I think we would do well to consider “ghost”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top