English Liturgy Translation Guidelines

[m231134]

What is the difference between the guidelines utilized for the original and the new English translation of the Liturgy?

Are there currently or have there been any other language translations which have gone through a re-translation into their language?

My assumption is that the change to the Liturgy was written in Latin, then was translated into all of the various native languages, and that the Vatican approved of all of the native language translations. Is this correct?

 

[Phemie]

What is the difference between the guidelines utilized for the original and the new English translation of the Liturgy?

Are there currently or have there been any other language translations which have gone through a re-translation into their language?

My assumption is that the change to the Liturgy was written in Latin, then was translated into all of the various native languages, and that the Vatican approved of all of the native language translations. Is this correct?

Yes, the Roman Missal is issued in Latin and then translated into the various languages, such translations have to be approved by Rome.

This particular edition of the Roman Missal is also being translated to French. They hope to have that translation in use by 2012.

I’m sure there are other translations underway but French and English are the ones with which I’m familiar

 

[curlycool89]

What is the difference between the guidelines utilized for the original and the new English translation of the Liturgy?

Are there currently or have there been any other language translations which have gone through a re-translation into their language?

My assumption is that the change to the Liturgy was written in Latin, then was translated into all of the various native languages, and that the Vatican approved of all of the native language translations. Is this correct?

I believe that the 1st English translation was also based on different translation principles that the new one. I believe they more or less used dynamic equivalence for that one, and the new one of course is using a more stringent literal translation. Both are ways of translating something, and both ways will loose meaning through the translation (you simply can’t go between 2 languages and get a perfect translation, especially not from a Romantic language like Latin into a West Germanic language like English).

 

[laszlo]

Here is the document (2001) which ordered the new translation, and made the guidelines

Nevertheless, it has been noted that translations of liturgical texts in various localities stand in need of improvement through correction or through a new draft.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20010507_liturgiam-authenticam_en.html

 

[Ricardus]

With all the anticipation (pro and con) of the upcoming “new” English translation of the Mass, I’m very surprised there haven’t been more comments from folks in my age group (and older) regarding the apparently now forgotten English translation of the Tridentine Mass that was used in American parishes such as mine, after Vatican II but prior to the implementation of the Novus Ordo.

I recently perused an online copy of the upcoming new translation and was amazed at how similar it is to the post-Vatican II but pre-Novus Ordo vernacular (English) Mass that I served as an altar boy during the school years 1966-67 and 1967-68. The similarities are absolutely striking, and I for one am very much looking forward to the new translation’s implementation this Advent.

 

[MarkThompson]

With all the anticipation (pro and con) of the upcoming “new” English translation of the Mass, I’m very surprised there haven’t been more comments from folks in my age group (and older) regarding the apparently now forgotten English translation of the Tridentine Mass that was used in American parishes such as mine, after Vatican II but prior to the implementation of the Novus Ordo.

I recently perused an online copy of the upcoming new translation and was amazed at how similar it is to the post-Vatican II but pre-Novus Ordo vernacular (English) Mass that I served as an altar boy during the school years 1966-67 and 1967-68. The similarities are absolutely striking, and I for one am very much looking forward to the new translation’s implementation this Advent.

Actually, I have heard quite a few people remark on the similarities. Only 286 more days to go!

 

[ProVobis]

What is the difference between the guidelines utilized for the original and the new English translation of the Liturgy?

Are there currently or have there been any other language translations which have gone through a re-translation into their language?

My assumption is that the change to the Liturgy was written in Latin, then was translated into all of the various native languages, and that the Vatican approved of all of the native language translations. Is this correct?

Actually there has been at least one re-translation since the original, that of the removal of “men” in the “for you and for all men” in the consecration formula itself. I don’t have the timeline on this but it was removed obviously because of protests by the feminists.

 

[ProVobis]

With all the anticipation (pro and con) of the upcoming “new” English translation of the Mass, I’m very surprised there haven’t been more comments from folks in my age group (and older) regarding the apparently now forgotten English translation of the Tridentine Mass that was used in American parishes such as mine, after Vatican II but prior to the implementation of the Novus Ordo.

Those translations (going all the way back to Cranmer) weren’t forgotten and actually used in the post-Vatican II Masses, as you stated. The ICEL translations overlayed those older translations (which did have some problems) and became used in the Mass as early as 1967 (if not before), before the Novus Ordo (the OF) was promulgated. Incidently, some of that ICEL language became used in many Protestant liturgies as well.

 

[Digitonomy]

Those translations (going all the way back to Cranmer) weren’t forgotten and actually used in the post-Vatican II Masses, as you stated. The ICEL translations overlayed those older translations (which did have some problems) and became used in the Mass as early as 1967 (if not before), before the Novus Ordo (the OF) was promulgated.

Quick question, what is the status of these previous missal translations - were they ever abrogated or is there some other reason we can’t apply the logic of Summorum Pontificum?

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

Forgive me if this question is too simple, I don’t have the high level of expertise as many here. Why are we getting a new translation anyway? Was there something wrong with the one we’re using now?

 

[SMHW]

Forgive me if this question is too simple, I don’t have the high level of expertise as many here. Why are we getting a new translation anyway? Was there something wrong with the one we’re using now?

Without going into a discussion of the merits and lack thereof of the current translation, I will just say that it has come to be acknowledged that dynamic equivalence translations (which is pretty much what we have now) don’t stand the test of time as well as more literal translations (which is what we will be getting).

And laszlo has already posted a reference to the documents…

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

So if our translation was not accuate does that mean our Masses were not valid? Does this mean the Church gave us bad instruction?

 

[PacoG]

So if our translation was not accuate does that mean our Masses were not valid? Does this mean the Church gave us bad instruction?

**Once again the need for a sticky by the moderators on what invalidates a Mass. **

All that is needed for a valid mass and consecration is a validly ordained priest, wheat bread, grape wine, the intent to do as the Church does (confect the Body and Blood of Christ) and the words “This is my body” and "This is … my blood).

As bad these translations have been, they have not invalidated the Mass or the Eucharist.

 

[Digitonomy]

So if our translation was not accuate does that mean our Masses were not valid?

No.

OurLadyPerpHelp:

Does this mean the Church gave us bad instruction?

Possibly. Keep in mind this is instruction in the discipline of exactly how to order and word the ceremony that comprises our Holy Mass. Not instruction as in dogmatic teaching.

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

**Once again the need for a sticky by the moderators on what invalidates a Mass. **

All that is needed for a valid mass and consecration is a validly ordained priest, wheat bread, grape wine, the intent to do as the Church does (confect the Body and Blood of Christ) and the words “This is my body” and "This is … my blood).

As bad these translations have been, they have not invalidated the Mass or the Eucharist.

Please forgive me if my question upset you.

One thing I’ve come across are the words at Consecration: Jesus said “for many” yet the Mass said: “for all”. Now, if a priest changes the words of the Eucharistic Prayer or Consecration I believe that is a big no-no. How then did the Mass change the words of the first priest, Jesus Christ when He instituted the Sacrament?

It also begs the question, if the translation wasn’t as good as it should have been, what else needs to be improved?

 

[ProVobis]

Quick question, what is the status of these previous missal translations - were they ever abrogated or is there some other reason we can’t apply the logic of Summorum Pontificum?

Those old translations were never official in the Latin Rite. The priest certainly could not use them at Mass. Our handmissals, however, were imprimatured by a Catholic bishop, meaning that the Church didn’t necessarily approve them but they didn’t contain any theological error for us to be able to follow the Mass. Since they were never official, then they really can’t be called abrogated. The logic of SP is a difficult one to apply here. Remember both the EF and OF were promulgated in Latin with permission to use different official and approved (and timed) versions of the OF. And the bishop can limit the use of them in his own diocese; for example a bishop in France can allow only French OF Masses if he saw fit. The vernacular is still an indult.

 

[ProVobis]

It also begs the question, if the translation wasn’t as good as it should have been, what else needs to be improved?

That is a good question. Translations of the Mass have been going on into the English languages for well over 500 years. I doubt if the ICEL (International Council on English in the Liturgy) will be disbanded after November of this year. Many still see areas of concern in the theology.

 

[Digitonomy]

Those old translations were never official in the Latin Rite. The priest certainly could not use them at Mass.

I was under the impression that some English and other vernacular masses were permitted prior to promulgation of the typical Novus Ordo missal.

If true, that’s what I was talking about, as presumably those were approved, if only by indult. So if the mechanism was an indult, I assume the indult would have to be withdrawn or expire through some other means. If not true, my mistake.

 

[ProVobis]

I was under the impression that some English and other vernacular masses were permitted prior to promulgation of the typical Novus Ordo missal.

They were permitted for a few years in the 60’s under imprimaturs, I believe.

If true, that’s what I was talking about, as presumably those were approved, if only by indult. So if the mechanism was an indult, I assume the indult would have to be withdrawn or expire through some other means. If not true, my mistake.

That’s my understanding as well. The Latin OF is not an indult so bishops have no control over its extent. Any priest can use it anytime without permission.

 

[PacoG]

Please forgive me if my question upset you.

Your question didn’t upset me.

What frustrates me is the inattentiveness of the Moderator. A lot of people worries could be set at ease with a simple sticky about what invalidates the Mass. I have decided to take up this cause and repeatedly post about it until the powers that be finally hear me.

It would be nice if others joined my cause.