New Order of the Mass... wow!

[BlestOne]

My priest and I got into a discussion about the English (Norvus Ordo) vs. The Tridentine Mass and he told me some of the highlights of the new order that was approved for the Mass. He also told me where to find it and I thought I would share…

usccb.org/liturgy/missalformation/OrdoMissaeWhiteBook.pdf

Notice that the response will no longer be And also with you in the Introductory Rite…

Check out the changes to the pennetintial rite…

And the Gloria is closer to the Latin…

Wow just Wow!!! So many changes!!! What do you guys think???
I love the new responses!!!

 

[Chuy]

It’s not called the “Novus Ordo” by the Church nor is it limited to “English.”

It’s properly called the “Mass of Pope Paul VI”, the “Pauline Mass” or simply the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

 

[Aramis]

I believe that the original poster is speaking of the new English Translation of the Mass of Paul VI.

Which returns the English closer to the Latin of the OF.

It’s not been promulgated yet.

 

[japhy]

My priest … told me some of the highlights of the new order that was approved for the Mass.

Notice that the response will no longer be And also with you in the Introductory Rite…

Check out the changes to the pennetintial rite…

And the Gloria is closer to the Latin…

I am very pleased with the changes as well. I incorporated the “and with your spirit” change this week, into the Bible Study I facilitate. We’re looking at the Second Reading (which is almost always by Paul, since this is the year of Paul), and next week’s Second Reading ends with “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.” I took that as an opportunity to introduce the group to a) the Latin text behind what we say at Mass, b) the change coming in a couple years, and c) the reason for the change.

 

[BlestOne]

I am very pleased with the changes as well. I incorporated the “and with your spirit” change this week, into the Bible Study I facilitate. We’re looking at the Second Reading (which is almost always by Paul, since this is the year of Paul), and next week’s Second Reading ends with “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.” I took that as an opportunity to introduce the group to a) the Latin text behind what we say at Mass, b) the change coming in a couple years, and c) the reason for the change.

I too was pleased with the changes. My priest and I were discussing the way the English didn’t mean the same as the Latin when he told me to check the proposed changes out online. I actually read some of the changes to my teenage son and one of the things he had struggled with during confirmation was corrected and he was much relieved. You know it always astounds me that when a teenager really struggles with a part of the mass, you know all those years of teaching and struggle are worth it. My dh was very interested in the changes too and we discussed the importance of them. He is a convert and some of the nuances kind of escape him until you give him the biblical reference and/or historical references.

 

[paperwight]

I actually read some of the changes to my teenage son and one of the things he had struggled with during confirmation was corrected and he was much relieved. You know it always astounds me that when a teenager really struggles with a part of the mass, you know all those years of teaching and struggle are worth it.

It would be very interesting if you could share what it was that your teenage found difficult, as a representative of that age-group. But not if it’s too personal. of course.

 

[japhy]

My priest and I were discussing the way the English didn’t mean the same as the Latin when he told me to check the proposed changes out online.

Sometimes, we might think the current English translation is right (or “good enough”), but when we see this new translation, I think it makes the potential problems with our current translation apparent.

Take the Creed, for example. (This is my favorite example because it’s very easy to demonstrate.) We currently say that God is the creator “of all things, seen and unseen”. Now, I haven’t personally seen Antarctica. I haven’t seen the moons of some distant planet in another solar system. I haven’t seen the inner workings of the atom. But I believe God created them. But… that’s not what the Creed is talking about! The Creed isn’t talking about what the average human experience allows us to see, it’s talking about things which cannot be seen. The Creed really says “all things, visible and invisible”. All those things I mentioned are, in the end, visible. What is invisible? The spiritual world. God is the creator of the material world (the visible) and the spiritual world (the invisible). God created the angels, He creates each and every soul, He fashioned Heaven. That is the invisible.

Why does the Creed say this? Because it says we believe in one God who made both the visible and the invisible! This was to refute a heresy that there were two gods, an evil one who created the material world, and a good one who created the spiritual world. No, the Christian believes in ONE God who created both the material and the spiritual, and that makes both the material and the spiritual creations good!

 

[JReducation]

I’m just curious. How did the English translation get so messed up? My native language is Spanish. The proposed translation is the one that we have used in Spanish since the vernacular was introduced into the liturgy. The Spanish Conference of Bishops and the Episcopal Conference of Latin American Bishops hammered this out more than 30 years ago.

Was that an American problem or one of the English speaking world?

Another question . . . I recently heard a traditional Catholic say “Holy Ghost”. Where did that come from? I know that it was used in English before the changes in the liturgy, but it was also an incorrect translation from the Latin to the English. Why bring it back?

In Spanish, French, Italian, Portugese, and Latin the term is Holy Spirit. Ghost is a different word. The Latin word for ghost would be closer to the English word for phantasm (sp?). In the Latin languages Holy Spirit is translated as Espiritu Santo. While Holy Ghost is translated as Fantasma Santo. Fantasma is something like Casper.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Psalter]

It’s not called the “Novus Ordo” by the Church nor is it limited to “English.”

It’s properly called the “Mass of Pope Paul VI”, the “Pauline Mass” or simply the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

As a matter of fact, it WAS promulgated as the “New Order of the Mass” or “Novus Ordo Missae”.

 

[chewchoo]

I’m just curious. How did the English translation get so messed up? My native language is Spanish. The proposed translation is the one that we have used in Spanish since the vernacular was introduced into the liturgy. The Spanish Conference of Bishops and the Episcopal Conference of Latin American Bishops hammered this out more than 30 years ago.

apparently the bishops here didn’t hammer it out as well i have read a number of articles that spoke of dissent during that time.

 

[cam100]

I’m just curious. How did the English translation get so messed up? My native language is Spanish. The proposed translation is the one that we have used in Spanish since the vernacular was introduced into the liturgy. The Spanish Conference of Bishops and the Episcopal Conference of Latin American Bishops hammered this out more than 30 years ago.

Was that an American problem or one of the English speaking world?

Another question . . . I recently heard a traditional Catholic say “Holy Ghost”. Where did that come from? I know that it was used in English before the changes in the liturgy, but it was also an incorrect translation from the Latin to the English. Why bring it back?

In Spanish, French, Italian, Portugese, and Latin the term is Holy Spirit. Ghost is a different word. The Latin word for ghost would be closer to the English word for phantasm (sp?). In the Latin languages Holy Spirit is translated as Espiritu Santo. While Holy Ghost is translated as Fantasma Santo. Fantasma is something like Casper.

Fraternally,

JR

Jimmy Akin produced an explanation of the use of “Holy Ghost” vs “Holy Spirit” here: cin.org/users/james/questions/q131.htm

I think the name “Holy Ghost” has been retained in traditional circles simply due to a preference for the old. I’ve never heard a good reason for retaining it, actually. If someone knows of one, I’d be interested in hearing it.

 

[JReducation]

Jimmy Akin produced an explanation of the use of “Holy Ghost” vs “Holy Spirit” here: cin.org/users/james/questions/q131.htm

I think the name “Holy Ghost” has been retained in traditional circles simply due to a preference for the old. I’ve never heard a good reason for retaining it, actually. If someone knows of one, I’d be interested in hearing it.

I can fully appreciate a preference for tradition, but this is not tradition. This was bad English.

I want to hear this explanation too. If you want to maintain tradition, you maintain what was right, not the mistakes. English is the only language that I know that uses the term Ghost. Every other European language (except German) uses Spirit from the Latin “spiritus”.

JR

 

[joecap]

Those of us who are much younger than myself (52) may not remember that a lot of these changes are the way we used to have Mass.
I remember as an altar boy in the late 60’s, we used to have the “Prayers at the foot of the Altar”.
We altar boys would be kneeling prostate at the foot of the altar reciting the “Confetior” (sp?)-The Penitential Act- in Latin (we had to memorize it) as well as the Kyrie in Latin.

I remember how reverent we sounded murmuring the prayers.
Even though it was Latin, we understood what we were saying and I really enjoyed it.

 

[japhy]

I’m just curious. How did the English translation get so messed up?

That’s a very good question. The new translations introduced a lack of continuity with the Latin-English personal missals that many people had in the previous decades. The new translations weren’t even continuous with the “interim” (as they turned out to be) translations in the mid-1960’s.

Basically, the ICEL (International Council for English in the Liturgy) came up with a considerably less accurate translation of the liturgical texts, and the USCCB and Rome approved it. I don’t know how or why.

Another question . . . I recently heard a traditional Catholic say “Holy Ghost”. Where did that come from? … In Spanish, French, Italian, Portugese, and Latin the term is Holy Spirit. Ghost is a different word.

“Ghost” comes from the German “geist”. The German translation of Spiritus Sancte is Heiligen Geistes (“Holy Ghost”). A “geist” in German is a “spirit”, although probably more in the sense of anima rather than spiritus.

 

[JReducation]

That’s a very good question. The new translations introduced a lack of continuity with the Latin-English personal missals that many people had in the previous decades. The new translations weren’t even continuous with the “interim” (as they turned out to be) translations in the mid-1960’s.

Basically, the ICEL (International Council for English in the Liturgy) came up with a considerably less accurate translation of the liturgical texts, and the USCCB and Rome approved it. I don’t know how or why.

“Ghost” comes from the German “geist”. The German translation of Spiritus Sancte is Heiligen Geistes (“Holy Ghost”). A “geist” in German is a “spirit”, although probably more in the sense of anima rather than spiritus.

The bold is mine. I understand that German uses Geistes. But my problem with the traditional English Speaking Catholic who uses Holy Ghost is that he or she is not preserving the Latin term, but a translation from the Latin to the German to English.

If the idea is to preserve tradition, stick to the source. If it was written in Latin, go from Latint to English.

JR

 

[nicolep]

I love the changes. It’s going to take some getting used to since I’ve been saying it the other way for so long. It will be well worth. It’s my understanding that it’s going to take a few years to get this implemented though.

 

[benedictgal]

The bold is mine. I understand that German uses Geistes. But my problem with the traditional English Speaking Catholic who uses Holy Ghost is that he or she is not preserving the Latin term, but a translation from the Latin to the German to English.

If the idea is to preserve tradition, stick to the source. If it was written in Latin, go from Latint to English.

JR

I can certainly understand your confustion. However, if you were to loook at some of the older prayer books in English, as well as some of the bibles, like the Douay-Rheims, you will find that the term “Holy Ghost” is used. In fact, there are older Catholics who will say “Holy Ghost” when praying the Apostles Creed during the recitation of the Rosary or the Angelus.

Remember, too, that a lot of our words in English have their root in German.

 

[janman55]

Those of us who are much younger than myself (52) may not remember that a lot of these changes are the way we used to have Mass.
I remember as an altar boy in the late 60’s, we used to have the “Prayers at the foot of the Altar”.
We altar boys would be kneeling prostate at the foot of the altar reciting the “Confetior” (sp?)-The Penitential Act- in Latin (we had to memorize it) as well as the Kyrie in Latin.

I remember how reverent we sounded murmuring the prayers.
Even though it was Latin, we understood what we were saying and I really enjoyed it.

As a fellow 52 year old I remember the very same feelings you describe.

 

[JReducation]

That’s a very good question. The new translations introduced a lack of continuity with the Latin-English personal missals that many people had in the previous decades. The new translations weren’t even continuous with the “interim” (as they turned out to be) translations in the mid-1960’s.

Basically, the ICEL (International Council for English in the Liturgy) came up with a considerably less accurate translation of the liturgical texts, and the USCCB and Rome approved it. I don’t know how or why.

I understand that it is easier to go from Latin to the Romance languages than it is to English. Therefore, some accomodations have to be made because there are words that don’t even exist in some languages. For example, the word “care” does not exist in the Romance languages. You can’t say that “God cares for us”. You have to say that “God worries about us.” or is “preoccupied with us”. Therefore you stick closely to the Latin and say “God loves us”. You don’t try to go from English to Spanish. It doesn’t work.

That being said, I can’t understand for the life of me how the 24 or 26 Spanish speaking nations of the world and different Episcopal Conferences managed to get the translation as close as possible to the original Latin, and still insert certain words that are more common in certain countries, including some indigenous words that have become part of Spanish in South America and Arab words that have become part of Spanish in Spain. For example, among Spanish speaking Catholics there is no word for Lord. The word is Sir. But it is equivalent to Lord, because Sir is what Lords were called in Spain. The word Allah is still used among Spanish speaking Catholics in Spain, because of Spain’s 800 years of Muslim occupation. Many Spanish words were originally Arabic, not Latin. Where we would say “Oh God” in English, a Spaniard would say “Oh Allah” and a Latin American would say “Ay Dios”

However, in the missal the translation used would use the word God, from the Latin Deus. The word Yahweh would never be used in Spanish, because it does not appear in the Latin text. The translation would be Sir (to mean Lord) or God.

In the Gloria the Romance languages say “Peace to men of goodwill” not “peace to his people on earth”.

Before communion we say “Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof” nor “Lord I am not worthy to receive you”.

In the Our Father we say “Forgive us our offenses as we forgive those who offend us” and “do not let us fall into temptation” rather than “lead us not into temptation”. We respond to the priest with “And with your spirit.” At the end of the scripture readings or mass we do not say, “Thanks be to God”. We say, “Let us give thanks to God”. It conveys the spirit of community and it invites the community to offer a thankful response to what God has done. The idea of the Romance language translators was to preserve the call to Thanksgiving and Adoration through the liturgy from beginning to end.

When I first heard the English translation of the Our Father, many years ago, I thought it was odd that we prayed that God would not lead is into temptation, as if he would.

I thought it was the cultural way of speaking, until I realized that Americans don’t speak this way. Then I wondered, why do they pray this way?

Oh well, someone will figure it out little by little.

JR

 

[JReducation]

I can certainly understand your confustion. However, if you were to loook at some of the older prayer books in English, as well as some of the bibles, like the Douay-Rheims, you will find that the term “Holy Ghost” is used. In fact, there are older Catholics who will say “Holy Ghost” when praying the Apostles Creed during the recitation of the Rosary or the Angelus.

Remember, too, that a lot of our words in English have their root in German.

I understand that it comes from the German Geistes. I speak German fluently. But what I don’t understand is the mentality of going from the German to English instead of Latin to English. I’m only speaking about the language of prayer, not conversational English.

To preserve tradition, one must go to the source. The original language of liturgy is Latin, not German.

I’m confused by the mind-set, not the words.

JR