New Missal Changes

[JimR-OCDS]

Rolltide

In these phrases, the priest first asks the Lord to be with us, but God does not dwell within us in the same way that he dwells within the priest during the Mass. That is why we respond “And with your spirit” instead.

God does dwell within each of us the same way he does the priest. The difference at Mass is the priest in Christ en persona.

Also, “and with your spirit,” was a response commonly used in the streets of the 1500’s Europe.

The literal translation from Latin, “and with your spirit,” makes the response obscure.

This emphasizes the importance of Apostolic Succession and the unique role of the priest in being able to have the spirit of Jesus within him to perform the miracle of transubstantiation.

The transubstantiation is performed by the Father, which is why the prayers of the Mass are too God the Father, not to Jesus. It is the priest, en persona of Christ who prays to the father to transform the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Since this is one of the major differences between our faith and Protestantism, it’s an important emphasis. You may be interested to know that virtually every other translation in the world renders this phrase “And with your spirit”. We are simply falling in line with the rest of the world.

Because the rest of the world used the literal translation from Latin, which again, was based culturally more than theologically.

Anyway, the new translation is coming or already hear for some.

We have to be obedient and go along heart-fully until told otherwise.

Jim

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I say we give ourselves some time to adjust to the new changes. You know, 40 years or so. It’s not really fair to prejudge something when we haven’t allowed ourselves time to get used to it. After a decade or two when contrary to some opinion even the puir slowwitted gowks (as Fr. Z would say) have managed to inculcate within themselves a decent understanding of ‘breakteeth woids’ and the world hasn’t come to an end, we can probably all enjoy an unheated, humorous, and loving conversation about learning to ‘trust’ again.

 

[Rolltide]

Rolltide

God does dwell within each of us the same way he does the priest. The difference at Mass is the priest in Christ en persona.

You are, of course, correct, but it still the reason for the difference in the wording. This is what I was trying to say, but not very well.

I guess I needed to be a little more precise in my language.

 

[Rolltide]

Rolltide
Because the rest of the world used the literal translation from Latin, which again, was based culturally more than theologically.

The Latin translation is the official translation of the Mass, and so all translations MUST be based off of the Latin translation (although I’m not sure if this was dictated by Vatican II or Canon Law). In fact, although Vatican II permits the use of the vernacular, it does not technically require it.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Latin translation is the official translation of the Mass, and so all translations MUST be based off of the Latin translation (although I’m not sure if this was dictated by Vatican II or Canon Law). In fact, although Vatican II permits the use of the vernacular, it does not technically require it.

Latin is the official language of the Church when it comes to Church law and teaching, not necessarily when it comes to worship, otherwise we’d be required to say all of our prayers
in Latin.

Fact is, even correspondence between the Vatican and the individual Bishops is done in that Bishop’s own vernacular.

Before Vatican II and for a little while after, it was done in Latin, but then, Bishops were fluent in Latin. Not so anymore.

Jim

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Latin is the official language of the Church when it comes to Church law and teaching, not necessarily when it comes to worship, otherwise we’d be required to say all of our prayers
in Latin.

Fact is, even correspondence between the Vatican and the individual Bishops is done in that Bishop’s own vernacular.

Before Vatican II and for a little while after, it was done in Latin, but then, Bishops were fluent in Latin. Not so anymore.

Jim

Well, they can all learn. It’s not that difficult. We’ve had 40 year periods in our history where things have been done ‘differently’ and then changed. Moses didn’t let the Israelites wander in the desert for all time. . .

 

[Rolltide]

Latin is the official language of the Church when it comes to Church law and teaching, not necessarily when it comes to worship, otherwise we’d be required to say all of our prayers
in Latin.

Fact is, even correspondence between the Vatican and the individual Bishops is done in that Bishop’s own vernacular.

Before Vatican II and for a little while after, it was done in Latin, but then, Bishops were fluent in Latin. Not so anymore.

Jim

The Second Vatican Council stated in Sacrosanctum Concilium, 36:

1. Particular law remaining in force,** the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.**
2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.
3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.

On 28 March 2001, the Holy See issued the Instruction Liturgiam authenticam. This included the requirement that, in translations of the liturgical texts from the official Latin originals, “the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet.”

And from Philly.com:

"Why the emphasis on Latin?

Although Latin is a so-called “dead” language, Roman Catholic leaders continue its use as the official language of the church.

This is in part because the meaning of Latin words is less likely to change from century to century. No modern community speaks Latin as its native tongue, so it’s thought to be a universal language - one that can be understood throughout the world without regional bias or misunderstandings.

Church leaders say this helps ensure theological precision and safeguard orthodoxy."

 

[daveqdimal]

My 2cents worth on the change.

I think the whole objective in making the change is to make the sacrament more accurately adhere to the tenets of our faith and make the Mass increase our consciousness of what it is, the visible sign of an invisible reality. In the process, the changes deepens our understanding of our faith and increase the solemnity through better words and ceremonial process. I dont think its a question of a better language between Latin and english. I dont think its anachronistic in a way that seeks for instance to hold our celebration in a cemetery as the early christians did to evade persecution. I dont think it is changing the essence of the sacrament and injecting immoral or inconsistent doctrines against our authentic and constant catholic tradition. Our church founded by our Lord Jesus Christ had promised the Holy Spirit so that our church is guided it in its teaching and gave authority to our leaders in loosening and binding church rules and regulation. I will abide by it and as one change require, i will beat my heart three times to show my humility and obedience to my faith.