That depends on what resource you use. In Canada the Ordinary of the Mass is in the CBW III, which is also our national hymnal. To deal with the changes to the Ordinary the CCCB has released a Supplementary to the CBW III, called “Celebrate in Song”. It contains the new translation of the Ordinary of the Mass, plus 4 Mass Settings (one the ICEL chant, 3 new compositions) and 40 new hymns (new to us but mostly OCP & GIA).
Seems like an all too typical problem: People whose views are in error are believed and respected.
Thanks for correcting. I see a book in the pew, and have little understanding of what it takes to get it there, but am grateful all the same.
The UGCC also does the Divine Liturgy in English. Many of their parishes have two Divine Liturgies, one in each language.It is awkward. I don’t know how Marty Haugan or whatever his name is, plans on revising his Mass of Creation to make it work. Maybe we’ll finally be rid of it. crosses fingers
The text were meant to be sung in Latin, not English. They had to revise the chants to make the English work. I still don’t understand why we had to go and start using the vernacular while the Ukrainian Catholics still have their Divine Liturgy in Ukrainian.Sigh Now I’m getting envious of the Ukrainian Catholics here.
Interesting. I have never been to one that was in English.
Not always. I’ve been to parishes that don’t use CBW III. Instead they only use Breaking Bread, which is re-released every year. I’m not looking forward to these new “hymns” from OCP. The CBW always gave me a faint moment of happiness because there was at least a chance of an actual hymn being sung and not Gather Us In, or some other ditty. I prefer the psalms out of CBW III. They’re less sing-songy, and more chanty.
Some parishes definitely change their ‘book’ every year but in the long run, in Canada, it’s much cheaper to simply use the national hymnal, which will last for 15+ years.
Nice TheMc you never cease to be boring!
Yep, those Anglo-Saxon barbarians are everywhere. See what Cranmer started?
A reappraisal of each of the vernacular translations was supposed to be done. The English one has made the biggest waves, partly because the changes are greater than most other languages will require, but especially because of the dominance and introverted nature of English-language media, especially in the US.
It’s not a new liturgy. It is simply an updated translation for the English Missal.
The priests have had years to voice their comments and concern. The ICEL began work on this translation in 1999.
And I would agree.
The ICEL, who wrote the translation, is primarily conposed of Bishops. The US Bishops have had parts of the translation on the agenda to discuss and vote upon at nearly every semi-annual meeting for the last 5 years.
Which Vatican II document are you referencing? I don’t doubt you but I don’t recall a document that gave power to translate the liturgy to the laity as a whole.
I think that there are many Catholics who have not kept themselves informed over the last several years who are misinformed about this issue. One thing that has happened in the Church, and it’s a bit of a double-edged sword, is that the Church’s actions on such things as the liturgy are very public and transparent. EWTN airs coverage of each Bishops’ meeting and there are tons of documents available to anyone with an internet connection. But because it is easy for individuals to get their own information, some pastors* may *have become lax about disseminating information from their central position.
Believe it or not, there are non-Ukrainian speakers who belong to the UGCC.Yep, those Anglo-Saxon barbarians are everywhere. See what Cranmer started?
haven’t checked… I am hoping they do … actually they probably do
Upon closer examination, one would find that the “new” translation is much closer to Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer put out in the 16th century, especially the Gloria, Creed, Holy, Holy, Holy, the Our Father and ?. As one might expect, the Church of England had the earliest copyrights on this translation, which was declared invalid by (1) Quo Primum and (2) Pope Leo XIII. (Not to mention Cranmer was later burned for being a heretic.)
It was announced two years ago, the clergy have been instructed upon the few and subtle changes, and it is not a “new” liturgy, just a new translation of the Editio Tercia of the Forma Ordinaria Missale Romanum.
All that means is that Cranmer could translate Latin a LOT better than the ICEL of the 70’s
All that means is that Cranmer could translate Latin a LOT better than the ICEL of the 70’s
Not necessarily. A first year Latin student would still have a problem with Cranmer’s “The Lord BE with you,” (no subjunctive in the Latin, theologically questionable) “Lift up your hearts/we have lifted…” (no lift in the Latin), “hallowed,” “trespasses,” “forever and ever,” “hosts” and a few others as well I’m sure that we’ve essentially grown up and accepted without question. [edited]All that means is that Cranmer could translate Latin a LOT better than the ICEL of the 70’s
