Are modern translations of prayers just as approved/valid?

[Anesti33]

I am sure Stephen was talking about people who said rote prayers without the prayers coming from their heart as truly their own.

No, actually he was referring to changing the words of the liturgy, etc.

And saying rote prayers without them coming from my heart is still efficacious. It is better that I show up, attend Mass, and recite the responses than remaining silent, even if they do not “come from my heart”. It is better to recite a rosary during a time of spiritual dryness and even disbelief, than not praying that rosary at all.

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

No, actually he was referring to changing the words of the liturgy, etc.

But there is an important distinction here. Sacraments require proper form and matter — that includes proper words.

Prayer in general doesn’t fall into that category, yet numerous times per week (or day?) we see scrupulous people (or sometimes just unforgiving contrarians) on this forum who worry themselves into terrible anxiety / insist that because someone inadvertently said “In the name of the Father, the Son…” and omitted “and of the” - - they’ve surely committed some mortal sin. The notion that every prayer has to be an exercise of precision is problematic and doesn’t help.

Your earlier comment beginning with “Oh yeah” was needless snark.

 

[Anesti33]

I agree, and for the OP you are correct, but @Stephen459 sent us down a derail trajectory that I had to address. So I apologize for going off-topic, but I stand by what I said vis-a-vis the particular circumstances I outlined.

 

[Bithynian]

To change a “thee” to “you” is not a problem.

I’d also like to note that the T-V distinction (in respect to using a particular pronoun for addressing God) didn’t feature in any of the ancient languages used in the first several centuries of the early Church. Koine Greek, Latin, Classical Hebrew, Middle Aramaic and Classical Syriac used the same pronouns for addressing God as they did for Joe the next door neighbour.

 

[Dorothy]

Thank you for that information; I don’t know about such things. Although I do remember that somewhere in scripture Our Lord Jesus Christ calls us “friends”.

Have a blessed day!

 

[Montrose]

Well, mainly, “thee” and “thou” are intimate, familiar terms of endearment, and “you” lacks this connotation. So those using the older forms are taking a more intimate stance in relation to God or Mary. It’s something to think about.

Thee, thou etc was simply the vernacular of the day. It is not any longer. I much prefer using you and do not accept it lacks intimacy.

 

[Elf01]

Perhaps you would feel it more readily if you spoke a language that still incorporated the formal/intimate distinction, like Spanish or French or Italian.

From what I recall of French, the Hail Mary uses the formal you.

 

[Wesrock]

Well, mainly, “thee” and “thou” are intimate, familiar terms of endearment, and “you” lacks this connotation. So those using the older forms are taking a more intimate stance in relation to God or Mary. It’s something to think about.

Modern English doesn’t have that distinction. If they were praying even just 300 - 500 years ago I’d agree with you.

 

[Angannas]

Oh yeah? Try changing “This is My Body, this is … My Blood”
Or what about the magical “I absolve you…”
Or even as a layperson, try changing up the old, tired, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

‘The servant of God is baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’ is perfectly valid, although illicit in the Western Church