L
LindaCamp
Guest
Can someone please tell me what will be the biggest change coming up in the new liturgy?
I can’t seem to make heads or tails out of it! Thanks!
I can’t seem to make heads or tails out of it! Thanks!
- Status
D
Dirt
Guest
More acurate translation of the latin and hopefully increasing the Sacred aspect of the Sacrifice of the Mass.
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
The New Liturgy is only for the States?
Never heard of it, though.
D
DebChris
Guest
The New Liturgy is not only for the United States. It is for all English speaking congregations. I work in the Middle East. A couple of weeks ago, my parish had a Deepening the Faith session about the new changes. When the Mass was translated from Latin into the vernacular, it was a sense translation rather than a literal translation. The new changes are a move toward a more literal translation of the Latin. In languages where the translation was literal, there is no new liturgy.
One of the changes is with the Confiteor, which returns to the longer form including “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault” mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa].
One of the biggest changes I see is with the Nicene Creed. There has been an emphasis during the last few years on the communal nature of the Mass and our shared belief. “We believe” now becomes “I believe” which is a more personal statement.
The priest will no longer lift the lectionary at the end of the Gospel and say, “This is the Gospel of the Lord.” He will merely say, “The Gospel of the Lord.” Lectors will say, “Word of God,” rather than “This is the Word of the Lord.” There are no changes in the proper of the Mass, so readings will remain the same.
One of the changes is with the Confiteor, which returns to the longer form including “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault” mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa].
One of the biggest changes I see is with the Nicene Creed. There has been an emphasis during the last few years on the communal nature of the Mass and our shared belief. “We believe” now becomes “I believe” which is a more personal statement.
The priest will no longer lift the lectionary at the end of the Gospel and say, “This is the Gospel of the Lord.” He will merely say, “The Gospel of the Lord.” Lectors will say, “Word of God,” rather than “This is the Word of the Lord.” There are no changes in the proper of the Mass, so readings will remain the same.
C
Corki
Guest
It’s not really a new liturgy - it’s a new English translation of the Mass. It is for all of the English speaking countries or those that use English Missal translations - not just the US. However, all countries aren’t implementing it on the same date.
Linda, the only thing changing is the words that are said in English. They will reflect a closer translation from the Latin original. Most of the changes are in what the priest says. The congregational responses that are changing are summarized here.
old.usccb.org/romanmissal/samples-people.shtml
D
Digitonomy
Guest
This has been the case in the US for a number of years now, although I couldn’t tell you what year the change occurred or why.
Likewise, lectors in the US currently say “The Word of the Lord.” at that point.
P
ProVobis
Guest
The biggest change is in the Consecration. No more “for all men” or “for all” translation of pro multis.
M
mburn16
Guest
“The word of the Lord” is indeed the standard in the US at the moment…the change from “for all” to “for many” - that one I could see causing some uncomfortable shuffling among English [speaking] Catholics. It conveys, unfortunately, a rather exclusive view of salvation.
B
brgregmack
Guest
I think “I believe” is a deeper theological expression of unity, for we come together as one body in Christ.
D
DebChris
Guest
It’s easy to forget how things differ and that I used “The Word of the Lord” after readings in the US. I read the words in the Lectionary. Here the words are “This is the Word of the Lord,” at least until Advent. In the US, the NAB is used for the liturgy. Here we use the RSV, the same translation used in the UK, Australia, and other countries.
“This is the Word of the Lord,” somehow indicates totality whereas “The Word of the Lord” does not. At least that is the explanation given during the Deepening the Faith session concerning the new liturgy. All lectors are required to attend these monthly Deepening the Faith sessions.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I think you might be right. However, it probably isn’t the best literal translation because “multitudes” is the cognate of “multis” in the English, not “many.” (In French is pour la multitude.) The “many” was probably selected as that’s what the translation is in the old Latin-English handmissals.
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
I don’t think that’s why it’s changing. The reasoning there is that “credo,” the first word in the Latin original (“Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipoténtem…”), is in the first person. It translates as, “I believe…,” not, “We believe…”
P
ProVobis
Guest
The demonstative pronoun can also be ambiguous. What exactly is “this,” for example?
Besides the Latin is “Verbum Domini” not “Hoc est verbum Domini,” where some kind of miracle may be implied.
L
LindaCamp
Guest
sounds like it will take a bit of practice.
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
There already is a sense of limited salvation even in the current translation. The next clause reads, “So that sins may be forgiven.” The key word here is “may.” It doesn’t say that all sins will be forgiven, and so not all will be granted salvation. Everyone is offered salvation, yes, to be sure, but not everyone accepts salvation. The “for all” part doesn’t mean that everyone will be granted salvation, but people seem to overlook the next clause, and think that it is.
People are getting all bent out of shape because the new phrase will be “for many” instead of “for all,” as if it changes the meaning. It doesn’t. There already is a sense of limited salvation, but people just don’t realize it because they hear that “all” thus thinking otherwise, without giving thought to the next clause.
The Latin phrase reads “pro multis.” “Pro” certainly does mean “for,” but “multis” certainly does not mean “all.” “Multis” means, as ProVobis posted, something more along the lines of “multitudes,” and ICEL chose to translate it as “many.” Either way, the limited sense of salvation is preserved, whereas in the current translation, it is still, but people hear “all” and think it means that everyone will be granted salvation. Not so. As I said, everyone is offered salvation, but not everyone accepts the offer.
T
Thomas_Francis
Guest
It conveys the Truth of salvation, and puts the English Masses back on track with the rest of the Church. It’s what all the other rites and all the other languages use.
Salvation is exclusive. It is exclusive to those that are in communion with the Body of Christ. As our Lord has said, there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth for those who are left outside the banquet.
Here is a video from this very website describing why they are changing.
B
brgregmack
Guest
While what I expressed may not be the reason for the change, I still think “I believe” is a better expression of Church unity. We are ONE body, and not a confederation of individuals who can have their own opinions on doctrine.
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
Fair enough.
P
Phemie
Guest
But in this case it is still the individual who is making a profession of faith.
M
mburn16
Guest
In this context, “may” implies capacity for something to occur, not the likelihood of the event. Ponder the difference between “you may do that” and “I may let you”…this is an example of the former.
“The multitudes”, at least to those here the USA, would convey a neutral viewpoint - it would neither say “all”, not that it could not be “all”.
“for all” - as if it was a guarantee - is inaccurate. But “for many” implies that it is not even AVAILABLE to all, which is equally inaccurate.
If I look at a group of people and say “many of you will be saved”, it implies that it is not even possible that all of them could be.
The most accurate thing to say is that “everyone COULD be saved”
- Status