MERGED: Excited about the new translation/Countdown/New Translation 11/27

[AntalKalnoky]

The feature of the new Mass Wording is ** the Greater Humility it will word To the Lord. ** The Current wording seems more worded to focus on Us as superior: “Lord, Hear Our Prayer” suggests Us telling Our Lord to pay attention to Us; Big Mistake. That concept was explained by a USCCB representative Monsignor in a first presentation in June. I can’t wait to humbly Request Our Lord, instead of the current ‘telling’ Our Lord.

And more Accurate translations of the Earlier Latin!. Only a few more weeks! Thank you, Lord and His Church!.

 

[AntalKalnoky]

“Consubstantial” is a Confusing modern concept word invented by men; “One in Being with the Father” is a far more Accurate Human Description of the Latin Wording intent. ** The feature I most wait for is the new **Humility by us wording To our Lord/Saviour. A Monsignor from the USCCB in June Briefed Parish Leaders with that Rarelly mentioned Concept, so significant. “Lord, hear Our Prayer” suggests we are telling Our Lord to listen up to our request! BIG MISTAKE in current wording, and Latin Intent. The Lord is King, not us!
Only a Few more weeks...............by Our Lord's Church. :signofcross::byzsoc:

 

[AntalKalnoky]

The word “Consubstantial” has always been a difficult to understand new word invention of us humans. “One in Being with The Father” is more expressive wording attempt, by Holy Mother Church of Our Lord.

Thank You, Lord!. Only a few more weeks…:byzsoc:

 

[runningdude]

Just a thought - Is it possible the ‘consubstantial’, whilst used here in a different context, is too close to Luthers’ re-interpretation of ‘Transubstantiation’ to be comfortably used? Less knowing people may beome confused?

My Lord Jesus Christ is consubstantial with God the Father - Not with a piece of bread!

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

The feature of the new Mass Wording is ** the Greater Humility it will word To the Lord. ** The Current wording seems more worded to focus on Us as superior: “Lord, Hear Our Prayer” suggests Us telling Our Lord to pay attention to Us; Big Mistake. That concept was explained by a USCCB representative Monsignor in a first presentation in June. I can’t wait to humbly Request Our Lord, instead of the current ‘telling’ Our Lord.

And more Accurate translations of the Earlier Latin!. Only a few more weeks! Thank you, Lord and His Church!.

Exactly! It’s changes like this that make me longing for the new translation. I will say at first I had doubts about changes such as the “I am not worthy to have you come under my roof” but when I learned the history if it and how the translations were approached then I wad completely on board!

And I’ve heard that they are going to look at the translations of the sacraments next-yea!

 

[Pug]

I’ve attended some classes on the new translation up at the seminary. Our teacher is someone who had a direct hand in the translation. After hearing him talk about the reasons and the higher language that the liturgy will have…I’m so excited about the new translation now that I can hardly wait!

Anyone else out there that can’t wait either?

I was exited about it, but now I am less so. I still would like the translation to arrive, but now I am more interested in that so that the irritating articles in the bulletin will stop. For example, I read that “and also with you” is a folksy greeting, where we just say “hi” to the priest. Yeah. So glad you told me that’s what I’ve been doing all these years. I feel so enlightened. (sarcasm)

I guess I’m irritated about it because I had been looking forward to it as an opportunity for people to grow in their understanding of the mass and not as an opportunity to make the congregation feel they have been attending crippled masses and that they have been living their faith under a cloak of blindness.

 

[paperwight66]

To be honest, I find it a bit bemusing that there is any excitement. We have been using it in the UK for a few weeks and, in our parish at least, we are now word-perfect most of the time. It really isn’t that big a difference and doesn’t make the Mass seem any more reverent, imo.

Actually. a lot of the changes seem almost ‘change for change’s sake’, in other words, minor re-arrangement of word order or vocabulary that hardly seem worth printer’s ink. I’m talking about the words used by the congregation. The words for the priests are more changed and more formal and they seem to find them difficult to say smoothly. No doubt that will come with time.

In our parish we certainly didn’t have any classes, just a note on the bulletin that cards would be available after a certain weekend.

I think if someone is expecting Mass to be transformed they are going to be disappointed.

 

[YoungTradCath]

At our parish, we’ve been going over the revised wording put to music with the cantor. I was happy that for the first time in many years we actually sang “Lamb of God…” three times, instead of all those other titles that used to get inserted at the Agnus Dei (“Bread of life…”, “Prince of peace…”, “Our risen Lord…”. Good titles, but not “Lamb of God”!). So far, so good.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

I guess I’m irritated about it because I had been looking forward to it as an opportunity for people to grow in their understanding of the mass and not as an opportunity to make the congregation feel they have been attending crippled masses and that they have been living their faith under a cloak of blindness.

I think that revealing this unpleasant fact is not a bad thing. I wouldn’t call the mass crippled but the translation has been seriously inaccurate. People should understand that in order to fully appreciate the new translation. I believe the result of this will be very positive.

That said, I am very excited about the new translation.

 

[Pug]

I think that revealing this unpleasant fact is not a bad thing. I wouldn’t call the mass crippled but the translation has been seriously inaccurate. People should understand that in order to fully appreciate the new translation. I believe the result of this will be very positive.

That said, I am very excited about the new translation.

Having an accurate translation is an excellent thing, agreed. I suppose I can appreciate that it might be helpful to know how some people misunderstand the current words. The misunderstanding proposed in our bulletin that I mentioned above is so preposterous to me that I never would have guessed it’s existence on my own. In a different article, they hinted that people understand the words “one in being” to mean that the Father and the Son are one in the same way as ordinary men and the Father are one, since being created by God *supposedly *means we are one in being with him. That boggled my mind. It almost sounds like pantheism.

To my relief, today’s article was much less astonishing (on the topic of pro multis).

 

[jimrob]

Generally, I like the new translation. It’s certainly a much better translation to the Latin than the previous one. I also find it’s closer to Mass in Italian.

Much of the previous English translation was a paraphrase of the Latin. The intention was to make the language simple so that everyone could understand it, but it did tend to read like an insurance company prospectus. There is some beautiful prose in the 1963 Latin Missal, especially in the Eucharistic prayers and this is now revealed in the new translation.

 

[StevenFrancis]

A plus one here. I’m a convert to Catholicism in late life. One of the things that I feel I kind of missed out on, (in my parish anyway), is the majesty of the liturgical practice that had imagined would be there. The deep reverence for the opening and reading of the Gospel. The great respect and awe shown to the eucharist. I THINK I would have preferred the mass prior to 62 when it was in Latin, (but in point of fact, I have no way of knowing that, other than looking through an old missal, and seeing it on EWTN). The new missal, (and hence mass), seems to be much closer to the meaning and feel of the latin used in the Church for close to 2000 years. At least it draws the English closer to the interlinear Vulgate/DR bible I have. I love it. We’re already working on it at our parish, and having classes after every mass. I’m in the process of relearning our parts. They bring the awe and reverence to sharper focus for me. I REALLY like the priests new parts, and the Eucharistic prayers I’ve heard so far. And we even get a little latin in the Agnus Dei now!!!

Thank you Bishops,

Blessings,

Steven

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

The misunderstanding proposed in our bulletin that I mentioned above is so preposterous to me that I never would have guessed it’s existence on my own. In a different article, they hinted that people understand the words “one in being” to mean that the Father and the Son are one in the same way as ordinary men and the Father are one, since being created by God *supposedly *means we are one in being with him. That boggled my mind. It almost sounds like pantheism.

To my relief, today’s article was much less astonishing (on the topic of pro multis).

Goodness, that explanation sounds weird. People sometimes complicate things and possibly make it worse for those who are not clear about what these things mean. Glad that ‘pro multis’ was explained in more clear terms.

 

[Yellow_Belle]

Not me.

Been using it since September in my diocese. Can’t say it makes much of a difference.

 

[Pug]

Goodness, that explanation sounds weird. People sometimes complicate things and possibly make it worse for those who are not clear about what these things mean. Glad that ‘pro multis’ was explained in more clear terms.

Thanks for listening, Contra Mundum. I haven’t wanted to mention anything at the parish about these articles, so your ear was helpful! I’m feeling better about all this. You are right that well-meant explanations sometimes go a little awry, even if the person doing the explaining knows their subject. It happens.

 

[RobbyS]

According to our class…one in being with the Father is more of an explanation rather than a true translation from the Latin. There are quite a few of those in the old translation. It’s not a “new” Mass…its a better translation of what was a VERY poor translation…and in some spots they put explanations rather then translations.

It is an explanation that explains nothing and ignores the history behind the term. Like others that has come from the liturgical reform it is vague to the point of meaninglessness. If it had said, “having the same nature as the father,” it would have come much closer. The council wrestled with the problem of expressing the dogma they had in mind and came up with the Greek equivalent of “consubstantial.” When they did was to vest a technical philosophic term with a new meaning, for it refers to the divine and it is NOT a Biblical term. Perhaps the translators were thinking back to that controversy, but I rather think they it is the 'methodism" of their theology, that is the notion that theology is something felt rather than thought out. And they have a certain contempt for the uninitiated, a clerical disrespect. for the ability of the ordinary layman. So many who object to the changes do tend to look down their noses. But it should tell them something that Fundamentalists still love the KJB with its archaic language instead of the newer versions, because they love sacred language and are turned off by the banaity of the new versions.

 

[RobbyS]

A plus one here. I’m a convert to Catholicism in late life. One of the things that I feel I kind of missed out on, (in my parish anyway), is the majesty of the liturgical practice that had imagined would be there. The deep reverence for the opening and reading of the Gospel. The great respect and awe shown to the eucharist. I THINK I would have preferred the mass prior to 62 when it was in Latin, (but in point of fact, I have no way of knowing that, other than looking through an old missal, and seeing it on EWTN). The new missal, (and hence mass), seems to be much closer to the meaning and feel of the latin used in the Church for close to 2000 years. At least it draws the English closer to the interlinear Vulgate/DR bible I have. I love it. We’re already working on it at our parish, and having classes after every mass. I’m in the process of relearning our parts. They bring the awe and reverence to sharper focus for me. I REALLY like the priests new parts, and the Eucharistic prayers I’ve heard so far. And we even get a little latin in the Agnus Dei now!!!

Thank you Bishops,

Blessings,

Steven

You are lucky you didn’t have to live through the Kumbaya liturgies of the first ten years.

 

[RobbyS]

The word “Consubstantial” has always been a difficult to understand new word invention of us humans. “One in Being with The Father” is more expressive wording attempt, by Holy Mother Church of Our Lord.

Thank You, Lord!. Only a few more weeks…:byzsoc:

it does not say what the Council Fathers intended. Arius–if he knew English–could subscribe to it.

 

[RobbyS]

What an outlandish and warrantless allegation.

In the last forty five years, I have meet many priests who have scant respect for the findings of the early council. Anecdotal, but not warrantless. But why should you be scandalized. The whole history of the Arian controversy is that most BISHOPS defected from the view of the Council and followed the Emperors into heresy. To be sure, most took the fudge position, the Semi-Arian position rather than the straight dope. But Arius was “cleared” by subscribing to it. Athanasius and other supporters of the Council were deposed. My guess is that if one were to subject many priests to trial and required to explicate their understanding of the Creed, they could not–either out of ignorance or because they are dissenters–to the satisfaction of their Church inquisitors.

 

[BrushedByAngels]

I absolutely love it

Now bring back the communion rails and we will be all set