New translation of the Mass coming your way!

[FrRobSST]

CatholicNerd:

Pray that we have a pontiff who will revise canon law in such a way that the Vatican could directly intervene when a dispute like this arises in a particular country.

Indeed. After all, what is the point in claiming universal jurisdiction if you won’t lay the smack down on issues like this?

Rob+

 

[SouthCoast]

FrRobSST:

In revisiting this from earlier, I have to revise some of my thoughts…

I realize that Latin and English are separate languages, but the Gloria translation really goes to show where being overly literalistic can get one into trouble. The current Gloria text, when sung solemnly, is gorgeous.

The Creed has some serious problems - specifically surrounding the phraseology concerning the nature of the term begotten, born, and other thing surrounding the Incarnation.

As for some other comments on “And with your spirit”, having used this formulary now for several years, I can tell you that people are very comfortable with it after some initial confusion. I can always tell if a Lutheran, Episcopalian, or Latin-rite Catholic in communion with Rome has shown up at Divine Liturgy because when everyone else is saying “And with your Spirit” they blurt out “And also with you”. (Side note, it makes it useful to me so that I can make an announcement concerning non-communicant attendence at Divine Liturgy - it’s easy to tell if a Protestant has come to Liturgy - they stay seated at odd times, they don’t cross themselves, etc… but the only tipoff about Catholics in communion with Rome being in attendence is the “with you/ your spirit” difference.

At any rate, I will be interested to see the remainder of the Liturgy later tonight when I get some time.

Rob+

Rob,

Who exactly ARE you in communion with? Do you consider your mass valid and licit?

-Michael

 

[kmktexas]

JKirkLVNV:

I will miss “Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again.” To me, that was the most profound and simple way to “say” the Mystery of Faith.

See, that is one thing that I hope is the first to go. It always sounds sing-songy and it only seems to exist in the English. There are only three choices in the Latin (and BTW in the Spanish translation). It is bad enough that they added a whole new section out of whole cloth instead of just translating the Latin, but they made it the “A” choice. “Dying you destroyed our death …” is a much more beautiful expression of the mystery of faith. Just my opinion.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Hooray! They removed that troubling “for us men” phrase from the Creed. The inclusive language crowd will be so proud. Of course, I know a priest who’s dropped that phrase for years, so it won’t be a change for him. That’s the great thing about being a priest. You own the Mass and you can change it any way you see fit.

Now, we need to work on getting the other part changed to: “became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made person.”

I can’t imagine the final draft is going to be anything like what was linked to. I don’t trust our bishops as far as I can throw them. They’ll find some way to dumb it down and make it even more insipid than the current translation.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

mommy:

I don’t like it.

I don’t like the Change in the Gloria, why change it? And I don’t like “And with your spirit.” I also dont like the change in the Creed.

Maybe I’m just a creature of habit. Or may I like that I’ve just now got everything memorized, and I like it the way it is.

The changes are advisable (necessary seems too strong a term) because they more clearly reflect the actual Latin text of the Mass, and thus also the theology of that text.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Dr. Bombay:

Hooray! They removed that troubling “for us men” phrase from the Creed. The inclusive language crowd will be so proud. Of course, I know a priest who’s dropped that phrase for years, so it won’t be a change for him. That’s the great thing about being a priest. You own the Mass and you can change it any way you see fit.

While that may be true in practice, in reality, no individual owns the Mass. That is what disobedient priests do not understand. In changing the texts of the Mass they not only break their promise of obedience but they also do injustice to the Church as a whole whose liturgy they have violated.

 

[gelsbern]

I think Dr. Bombay was being facetious with his reply.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

JKirkLVNV:

I will miss “Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again.” To me, that was the most profound and simple way to “say” the Mystery of Faith.

I dislike “and with your spirit.” It sound awkward. Better to go all the way and say “and with thy spirit.” I think “thees” and “thys” would sound beautiful, but then I’m sure I’m in the 0.000000000001 portion of the Church who feels that way.

I’m glad of the “go, the Mass is ended.” Too many celebrants dink around with it.

I hate the “and with your spirit” response, even adding a “thy” to it would not fix it.

In the Byzantine Divine Liturgy we reply “And with your spirit.”

“And with your spirit” sounds too much like “yeah, you too” for me.

 

[gelsbern]

ByzCath:

I hate the “and with your spirit” response, even adding a “thy” to it would not fix it.

In the Byzantine Divine Liturgy we reply “And with your spirit.”

“And with your spirit” sounds too much like “yeah, you too” for me.

I am looking at the Byzantine Rite (St. John Chrisostom) and they say “and with your spirit”

ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/liturgy/liturgy.html

esoptron.umd.edu/UGC/liturgy3.html

Now I am really confused. You don’t like your own rite?

The “and with your spirit” is the correct translation of “et cum spiritu tuo”

the “and also with you” sounds more like the “yeah, you too”

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

gelsbern:

I am looking at the Byzantine Rite (St. John Chrisostom) and they say “and with your spirit”

ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/liturgy/liturgy.html

esoptron.umd.edu/UGC/liturgy3.html

Now I am really confused. You don’t like your own rite?

The “and with your spirit” is the correct translation of “et cum spiritu tuo”

the “and also with you” sounds more like the “yeah, you too”

Thanks for pointing out my l mistake.

No I love my rite as I love all the rites of the Catholic Church, that last comment of mine should have been this…

The line I have as saying "I hate the “and with your spirit” response, even adding a “thy” to it would not fix it."

Should read I hate the “and also with you” response, and the adding of a “thy” to the “and with your spirit” is an unnecessary anachronism.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

gelsbern:

The latin is “pro multis” and it translates into “for many” however ICEL has translated it as “for all” and that has been the basis of the wedge driven between many traditionalist and the conciliarists.

Dear Father Deacon,

If you follow the Masses which Pope Benedict has been celebrating, including the one for the funeral of the late Pope John Paul II, you will have noticed that the new Pope uses “pro multis” - a statement which will not be lost on those who “have ears to hear.”

He is also in favour of turning the priests around again for Mass so that they are facing East. He devotes Chapter 3 of his “The Spirit of the Liturgy” (pub. September 2000) to laying out the reason why the priest must face East.

This chapter of his book is on the Net…

THE ALTAR AND THE DIRECTION OF LITURGICAL PRAYER
by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)

catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Dossier/2000-10/article.html

 

[gelsbern]

Well for me, I never had a problem with the new Mass nor with “For All”, but prayerfully if the changes do occur that it will bring reverence back to the Mass.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I have to admit, the Pauline Missal looks much more similar to the Pian when it gets a translation that does it justice. This translation is definitely a step toward reclaiming the sacredness of the liturgy.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Fr Ambrose:

He is also in favour of turning the priests around again for Mass so that they are facing East. He devotes Chapter 3 of his “The Spirit of the Liturgy” (pub. September 2000) to laying out the reason why the priest must face East.

This chapter of his book is on the Net…

THE ALTAR AND THE DIRECTION OF LITURGICAL PRAYER
by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)

catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Dossier/2000-10/article.html

While I do have hopes that he will reorient our priests toward the east, you’ll notice that at the end of his chapter he says this may be too radical a change and that it might be enough to place the crucifix between priest and people so that all are oriented in that way toward the Lord. In a wild attempt at anticipating possible liturgical initiatives, this new translation might come to be less influential than it could have if Benedict’s influence leads to more use of the actual Latin.

 

[rcn]

Andreas Hofer:

While I do have hopes that he will reorient our priests toward the east, you’ll notice that at the end of his chapter he says this may be too radical a change

I think those of you who are expecting such revisions are setting yourselves up for a big disappointment. Ratzinger was never in charge of the CDF - most recently, that was Arinze’s job - and he won’t be now either. He will put another Cardinal in that post, and as Pope I don’t see how Ratzinger will have the time to revise the Mass. There is nothing wrong with the Mass as it is presently written.

 

[gelsbern]

The mass has already been retranslated it just a matter of it getting out to all the priests. As far as the orientation of the priest, I can’t see how Pope Benedict wouldn’t have enough time to write a quick memo stating as such.

 

[gelsbern]

rcn:

I think those of you who are expecting such revisions are setting yourselves up for a big disappointment. Ratzinger was never in charge of the CDF - most recently, that was Arinze’s job - and he won’t be now either. He will put another Cardinal in that post, and as Pope I don’t see how Ratzinger will have the time to revise the Mass. There is nothing wrong with the Mass as it is presently written.

The mass has already been done it just a matter of it getting out to all the priests. As far as the orientation of the priest, I can’t see how Pope Benedict wouldn’t have enough time to write a quick memo stating as such

 

[rcn]

gelsbern:

I can’t see how Pope Benedict wouldn’t have enough time to write a quick memo stating as such

His first mass as Pope, in the Sistine Chapel with the cardinals, was said in the conventional manner facing the people. I really do believe that expecting him to say anything further about this issue is a fantasy.

 

[TNT]

PNewton has a hissy fit when I state my doubts about the NOM being a True and Proper Sacrifice as declared in the Trent Anathema. Not the True part, but the PROPER part.

Now, if the NOM is PROPER as it stands, WHY must there be these constant attempts at revising the Vernacular?
Would these changes defacto be an admission by the Pope/Vatican that there are:
Most Proper
More Proper​

Less Proper
Not Proper

**Where is the current vernacular in these choices? **
After all, a common remark on this thread is: “MORE reverent”.translation hoped for!
If the translation is changed, how can the exact same level of **PROPER be maintained?
I see it as going either up or down in the level of “reverence” and therefore, its “PROPER” level.
Is a bad vernacular just as PROPER as a faithful literal translation?

**

 

[TNT]

mommy:

I don’t like it.

I don’t like the Change in the Gloria, why change it? And I don’t like “And with your spirit.” I also dont like the change in the Creed.

Maybe I’m just a creature of habit. Or may I like that I’ve just now got everything memorized, and I like it the way it is.

GEE!
How fast a Neo can become a “trad” when it’s THEIR tradition that’s being gored!

Trads are constantly being ridiculed for " why change it?" and “I also dont like the change”! and “I like it the way it is.” when it came to the TLM getting gored by the NOM.