BREAKING: Pope Francis gives local bishops more responsibility for Mass translations

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimR-OCDS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is Latin the word of God? No. Using Latin in mass therefore cannot be anything more than a cultural tradition. To treat it as that which could make or brake the value of mass would be to make a false idol of it or at the very least inflate its actual importance. Its not dogma.
 
Last edited:
John XXIII disagrees with you, and profoundly so. And btw, there isn’t some simple binary option here of, “dogma” or “mere cultural expression,” as if the one is sacred and the other can just be tossed at a whim.
 
Last edited:
NewEnglandPriest said:
And in a culture that says religion is weird, pompous and unconnected to reality this new translation not very helpful.
Click to expand...
I recall a few years ago a prior parish priest remarking to me that the (then) new English translation adopted quite intentionally a “less everyday” form of language.
 
NewEnglandPriest said:
And in a culture that says religion is weird, pompous and unconnected to reality this new translation not very helpful.
Click to expand...
Young people are no longer religious by default but by choice. The culture is very much against Catholic teaching. If young people come to be practicing Catholics they have decided to be, in the context of their time, profoundly counter-cultural. So the WORST thing the Church could do to attract them, is to try align itself closely with the culture, downplay the sacred, subject them to more of the same thing they seek an escape from.

Look at how young people are embracing the Latin Mass, and how it’s generally considered a truism that young Catholic Priests are more ‘traditional’ (not necessarily meaning Old Rite, there are many points on the tradition compass before we get there) than the near-retirement Priests. This is for the same reason. Young people no longer need to throw off the shackles of a so-called ‘oppressive’ or ‘rigid’ tradition, but rather have been deprived of and seek tradition, reverence and beauty.

Imitating ‘the world’ will not help, young people have had an absolute belly-ful of the world. If they wanted to be in the world it’s easier than ever. They come to/stay in the Catholic Church because they want something different - something transcendental.
 
That is an overly simplistic view of Church affairs that has only one result: everything other than “dogma” becomes some throwaway at the whim of a pope.
 
Vadne said:
That is an overly simplistic view of Church affairs that has only one result: everything other than “dogma” becomes some throwaway at the whim of a pope.
Click to expand...
I never said tradition is unimportant or should be thrown away at a whim. I said that we should not idolize tradition. The mass isn’t less significant just because of a change in expression. If somebody feels that way then there is a problem.
 
Last edited:
The reasons why it fell out of use can be debated till kingdom come. However the reality right now is what it is.
 
Vadne said:
Liturgy does not demand words of a sixth grader. Hieratic language has been the norm in liturgy for centuries. The Latin texts of the Novus Ordo don’t exclusively display words of “ordinary speech,” let alone only sixth grade words.
Click to expand...
Indeed. When I was in 6th grade, I had to learn the Latin responses needed to be an altar server. Between serving at the altar and using the Latin-English missal, it was impossible not to become familiar with their meaning and translation. Even today I can remember them, not only the server’s part but the priest’s part. The new translation is very close to what I recall from then.

I don’t necessarily advocate a wholesale return to Latin for the whole of the OF Mass. But many Latin responses and hymns can be incorporated into it.

At one time it was possible to travel anywhere in the world and hear the exact same Mass. That’s no longer true, but there should be as much unity as possible.
 
“NewEnglandPriest said:
(http://www.praytellblog.com/index.p...ory-elected-chair-of-usccb-liturgy-committee/).
the new one doesn’t just make a mincemeat wreckage of what the Latin actually says.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but the old one wasn’t a meandering mouthful.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
That is always the challenge of translation, is it not? Balancing fidelity and fluidity is no easy task and one will always have a product that displeases some. Oh well, I like the basic ideas, that seems to be common sense, that the people best able to translate to a language are the people who use that language.

Personally, I like the new and the old translation, but for different reasons. The old was much more fluid and easy to understand. The new required some work to understand which gave occasion in my parish for catechesis.
 
Of course, the old had 40 years to be drilled into one’s conscious and subconscious. And I’m not sure that the current idea that language should be ‘fluid and easy to understand’, when it comes to liturgy, is what we should be striving for. In my 60 plus years, I’ve found that the superficially ‘easy’ often winds up being simplified to the point of being flat-out wrong.

Here we are trying to educate our children and encourage them to succeed. What person, beyond a genius or a highly gifted person, succeeds ‘easily’? For the vast majority of us, we need to ‘plug away’ at things. And when things get harder, we don’t walk away, we buckle down and patiently and with time and effort, we get better and things get, not so much ‘less hard’, but more ‘do-able’.

IF we had found in the last 40 years that an approach in language which involved making books, articles, liturgies ‘simple’ even if that meant not being true to the original work, had as a result a higher degree of understanding and more eagerness to participate and to grow, THEN we might have ‘left the old translation alone’. Sadly, if anything, we have found that people’s understanding and ability have slid further, are even LESS, than they were 50 years ago.

The way to have things improve is not going to be easy. It is going to take time. It is, for many, going to involve in a way going back and ‘re-learning’ things which they thought they already knew. That isn’t going to sit well with people. But for our descendants, it’s the right choice we’re making now that is going to lead to better communication in the future. . .thank GOD, because today’s climate of ambiguity and 'words mean what I think they mean, if you think they mean something else, too bad on you" is like living in “1984”.
 
https://www.osv.com/OSVNewsweekly/A...leID/23166/Leeway-in-liturgical-language.aspx

Leeway in liturgical language? What the pope’s recent change to canon law does and doesn’t do Kurt Martens OSV Newsweekly
9/14/2017
Leeway in liturgical language?

The Sept. 9 announcement of the motu proprio Magnum Principium, changing canon 838 of the Code of Canon Law, has not generated a shortage of comments and commentaries, not in the least on social media. Some bluntly said that the new English translation of the Roman Missal can simply be substituted with the old translation. That is not how the new canon 838 reads. Others believed that Pope Francis moved the authority to approve translations of liturgical texts into the vernacular completely to episcopal conferences. That too is incorrect.

…

Not a revolution

First of all, the new or revised canon does not have the force of law yet: such will happen on Oct. 1. Until such moment, the current version of the canon still applies. That is a basic principle of law. Moreover, when the new canon obtains the force of law, it is a utopia to think that we would see a new English translation of the Roman Missal. From a merely economic point of view, such is simply not realistic.

…

Let us be clear: The intervention of the Apostolic See on translations of liturgical books in the vernacular does not disappear. That would have been a revolution. What happens instead is this. In the second paragraph of the original canon, the reference to translations of liturgical books into the vernacular disappears. The revised second paragraph still holds that the Apostolic See orders the sacred liturgy and publishes liturgical books. Any adaptations approved by episcopal conferences according to the norm of law still require recognitio of the Apostolic See.

In other words, nothing changes with regard to that point, and the same standard of review continues to apply for these actions. In addition, the Apostolic See is to continue to exercise vigilance that liturgical regulations are observed faithfully everywhere.

…

Realistic expectations

Can we just go back to the old English translation of the Roman Missal after the motu proprio Magnum Principium, as some have suggested? The answer is no: the new English translation of the Roman Missal, approved in 2011, was duly promulgated and is the norm, thereby abrogating any previous translations. The new canon clearly states that it pertains to episcopal conferences to prepare translations of liturgical texts in the vernacular and that it is for Rome to confirm such translations. The old translation is gone, and would have to go through another approval process before it can be used again.

When it comes to sacred liturgy, only the Apostolic See, episcopal conferences, and the diocesan bishop have authority according to the norm of law. Pastors and other priests need to follow the properly approved liturgical books and have no right per canon 838 to change the liturgy. The people of God has the right to expect that.

More at link. I had to edit due to character limitations on forum.
 
pnewton said:
Personally, I like the new and the old translation, but for different reasons. The old was much more fluid and easy to understand. The new required some work to understand which gave occasion in my parish for catechesis.
Click to expand...
I would have thought you as a musician would have preferred the older translation for the rhythm and meter. 🙂

Seriously, I thought the music of Proulx and Peters, for example, was enlightening to some extent. Too bad with the newer translation it became obsoleted.
 
As a historical note, there was a 1998 translation which never made it to the final cut. I wonder what difference that would have made.

isgodcatholic.wordpress.com

The Lost 1998 Translation of the Mass

Did you know that when the ICEL (International Commission on English in the Liturgy – a Joint Commission of Catholic Bishops Conferences) published their own translation in 1998 they had a tr…
isgodcatholic.wordpress.com isgodcatholic.wordpress.com
 
Puerto Rico may be a US territory, but Puerto Rico has its own Bishop’s Conference. Since the majority of the Spanish-speaking are from Mexico, the USCCB has approved for use Mexico’s 2nd Edition Roman Missal.

The USCCB is working on using Mexico’s 3rd Edition Roman Missal as the base text for their own version, which will include certain feasts from other Latin American countries. The final translations still need ultimate approval from the Holy See, but Pope Francis’ motu proprio will definitely speed up the process.
 
Last edited:
EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo read the message and it said it still had to have approval from the Vatican? Yes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top