New Missal and translation in 2011

[Eric_Olsen]

Not sure this has been addressed or not but when I read the statement about the new missal going into affect advent of 2011, I read that “no other missal” will be allowed to be used or something like that. Can someone clarify? I am thinking that no other missal of the OF rite can be used. Something tells me, correct me if I am wrong, that liberal priests and Bishops are going to twist it around to mean that no other missal at all, including the EF missal of 1962.

 

[lutherlic]

Not sure this has been addressed or not but when I read the statement about the new missal going into affect advent of 2011, I read that “no other missal” will be allowed to be used or something like that. Can someone clarify? I am thinking that no other missal of the OF rite can be used. Something tells me, correct me if I am wrong, that liberal priests and Bishops are going to twist it around to mean that no other missal at all, including the EF missal of 1962.

I think the “no other missal” text you read is probably referring to the various other English translations of the OF Mass. I doubt any attempt to read this as applying to EF would be left to stand very long.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

It was in a statement from Cardinal George where he announced the new translation. He basically misspoke. What he meant to say is that this is the translation for the Ordinary Form of the Mass and other translations will no longer be used. You can read the full statement at usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-149.shtml

Don’t go looking for problems where none exist.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

I read the statement and I am not exactly looking for problems but clarification in case someone tries to use his statement as an excuse for not allowing the EF form.

It was in a statement from Cardinal George where he announced the new translation. He basically misspoke. What he meant to say is that this is the translation for the Ordinary Form of the Mass and other translations will no longer be used. You can read the full statement at usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-149.shtml

Don’t go looking for problems where none exist.

 

[Corki]

I read the statement and I am not exactly looking for problems but clarification in case someone tries to use his statement as an excuse for not allowing the EF form.

I believe Cardinal George mispoke. But playing Devil’s Advocate, here. Even if the Cardinal (or anyone using his words) intended to do away with all other Missals, he does not have the authority to do so. While a bishops’ conference votes on the translation, the actual approval for any missal comes only from Rome. Only Rome can dictate the use or supression of the Missals and the translations.

If you took the Cardinals words literally, that would mean that the actual Missal (written in Latin) and the translations in all the other languages of the world (which are not changing at this time) would be illicit. That’s clealy absurd.