New Translation of the Mass

[recidite_plbs]

I don’t voluntarily attend the vernacular OF, so this issue is not of much concern to me,

Thanks so much for pointing that out, not that it had a shred of relevance to your actual response to the OP. I am glad though that you are able to feel so much more superior to anyone that doesn’t normally elect to attend mass in the “usus antiquor”. Perhaps I ought to qualify my response with the fact that I no longer voluntarily attend mass in either form, not that it is in any way relevant to what I’m about to say…

One issue that will delay any translation are the copuis propers for local observations that have been authorised by the diocesan Ordinary. Westminster Cathedral for example has authorised propers for a votice mass for St John Southworth that would be said in place of a mass for a priest-martyr. These will all need authorisation and impramatur in addition to the normal propers, though I would assume these would fall into the proper authority of the local Ordinary ex committee (unless anyone can confirm otherwise). Taking the office of Vespers as just one example, Solemnes has been promising a revised vesperal for about 20 years that has the antiphons and psalm tones for the Canticle of the Lamb, yet it is still to appear. This has forced churches/cathedrals with choirs that sing the office to either revert to the 5 psalm “EF” format from the Liber Usualis, or to commission their own vesperal (Westminster Cathedral has done the latter which is an excellent interpretation). The net result is a lack of commonality accross the Latinate church. I expect that the ICEL are keen to avoid a repetition of this circumstance in regards to the mass.

 

[peregrinus_sg]

One issue that will delay any translation are the copuis propers for local observations that have been authorised by the diocesan Ordinary. Westminster Cathedral for example has authorised propers for a votice mass for St John Southworth that would be said in place of a mass for a priest-martyr. These will all need authorisation and impramatur in addition to the normal propers, though I would assume these would fall into the proper authority of the local Ordinary ex committee (unless anyone can confirm otherwise). Taking the office of Vespers as just one example, Solemnes has been promising a revised vesperal for about 20 years that has the antiphons and psalm tones for the Canticle of the Lamb, yet it is still to appear. This has forced churches/cathedrals with choirs that sing the office to either revert to the 5 psalm “EF” format from the Liber Usualis, or to commission their own vesperal (Westminster Cathedral has done the latter which is an excellent interpretation). The net result is a lack of commonality accross the Latinate church. I expect that the ICEL are keen to avoid a repetition of this circumstance in regards to the mass.

Not to worry. The English Bishops have already prepared and approved the propers for the English dioceses during the last Low Meeting. The Australian Bishops have done theirs too. The Irish Bishops are even better, they have approved, obtained Rome’s recognitio and published the propers electronically, with the hardcopy version in the pipeline. The American Bishops are among the slower ones, but they will consider the propers in their Fall meeting.

As for the revised translation of the Divine Office, no one knows when that’s coming out yet. The current texts will probably stay with us for quite a while longer. But for those who use the British texts, they’re generally better off than the ICEL ones.

 

[Alindawyl]

As for the revised translation of the Divine Office, no one knows when that’s coming out yet. The current texts will probably stay with us for quite a while longer. But for those who use the British texts, they’re generally better off than the ICEL ones.

Hah, that hadn’t even crossed my mind. We’ll all need new breviaries.

I R guuud at thinking ahead

 

[dennis01]

There is also the fact that the entire Missal has been divided into separate books, each translated on its own and then submitted to the national conferences for discussion & approval or discussion & revision. Then once all the conferences have approved a book it is submitted to Rome who may accept or request changes. Multiply that by at least, what, 8 books and it makes for a very slow process.

It didn’t help that the USCCB rejected books that all the other conferences had accepted thereby further delaying the process.

why did the usccb reject the books, and what books were they?

 

[japhy]

why did the usccb reject the books, and what books were they?

Certain US bishops did not like the language (either the words or the sentence structures). For example, one north-eastern bishop thought the words “ineffable” and “wrought” were beyond standard comprehension. Another thought the word “dewfall” wasn’t accessible to most Americans.

The solution is not to dumb down our liturgical language. The solution is to STOP the dumbing-process of our people. If children don’t know what dew is, they should wake up earlier and see it on the grass, or at the very least, their parents (or teachers) should explain it to them.

 

[malphono]

Thanks so much for pointing that out, not that it had a shred of relevance to your actual response to the OP. I am glad though that you are able to feel so much more superior to anyone that doesn’t normally elect to attend mass in the “usus antiquor”. Perhaps I ought to qualify my response with the fact that I no longer voluntarily attend mass in either form, not that it is in any way relevant to what I’m about to say…

Sorry but that nasty remark was totally uncalled for. What? A poster is not allowed to qualify a comment?

If it’s any of your business (which it is not), I feel superior to no one. Apparently, however, you do, whether you attend Mass or not in any form … that is your problem.

 

[recidite_plbs]

Sorry but that nasty remark was totally uncalled for. What? A poster is not allowed to qualify a comment?

If it’s any of your business (which it is not), I feel superior to no one. Apparently, however, you do, whether you attend Mass or not in any form … that is your problem.

Guess what? I don’t do fluffy. I’m challenging and I’m actually prepared to say what I think and stand by it. I’m not “internet brave” or a “keyboard warrior” either, I’d have said the same thing in person.

I don’t see my non-practicing of the religion I was brought up in as a problem, more as a matter of indifference. It’s an idifference borne of being sick and tired of people at both ends of the spectrum (liberal and conservative) trying to assert their moral superiority on those of us who resided in the middle ground. It was one of the reasons I stuck 2 fingers up to the RCC and walked away. When I see comments that start “It’s not a problem for me because I wouldn’t voluntarily go to an OF” (sic) then it reads to me as “I’m just letting you all know that I’m above this Vatican 2 nonsense which makes me seperate from the great unwashed, and you can work out for yourselves for what reasons I view one form of mass superior to the other and why I would wish to be seen to be attaching myself to it, but I’ll lower my standards to look down my nose and comment on such antics as keeps you lower orders amused”.

Anyway, you read nasty into my comments, I read unneccessary intellectual snobbery into yours.

Best left there rather than drag the topic off any further, eh?

 

[recidite_plbs]

As for the revised translation of the Divine Office, no one knows when that’s coming out yet. The current texts will probably stay with us for quite a while longer. But for those who use the British texts, they’re generally better off than the ICEL ones.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it isn’t a massively onerous task, surely? Psalms 1 and 3 of the Sunday office are mostly unchanging (Dixit Dominus and Salus et Glora, or the Canticle of the Lamb), and the second psalm rotates on a 4 week basis (and still includes Confitebor Tibi et al). The weekday psalms again have a 4 week cycle and are the same as those found in the Liber. The only significant differences are the antiphons, which have always varied from community to community and locality to locality anyway. The issue is writing psalm tones. Again, there are many variations on the theme, but the Liber has more than enough variation endings on the 8 tones that all that is really required is editing it into a single volume for use at parish level. The Salus et Gloria is about the only thing you won’t find in the Liber and the challenge will be writing psalm tones for it that could work with the tones for the antiphons in the various propers. Again, a case of judicious editing.

What I’m driving at is I don’t understand why or what has prevented Solemnes from issuing a vesperal if it’s not church politics at some level.

 

[japhy]

When I see comments that start “It’s not a problem for me because I wouldn’t voluntarily go to an OF” (sic) then it reads to me as “I’m just letting you all know that I’m above this Vatican 2 nonsense…”

The person who made that comment specifically mentioned the vernacular Ordinary Form Mass. Perhaps, since you’ve been away from the Church, you don’t know that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (the “new” Mass) can be celebrated in Latin as well? A Mass celebrated in Latin is not necessarily the “old” Mass.

 

[recidite_plbs]

The person who made that comment specifically mentioned the vernacular Ordinary Form Mass. Perhaps, since you’ve been away from the Church, you don’t know that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (the “new” Mass) can be celebrated in Latin as well? A Mass celebrated in Latin is not necessarily the “old” Mass.

I do know that.

Irrespective of whether the author attends or does not attend the vernacular of the OF or Latin, the comment was irrelevant to the point then made. It struck me that the comment was designed to exclaim some form of intellectual snobbery. I think I’ve said my piece on that.

 

[peregrinus_sg]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it isn’t a massively onerous task, surely? Psalms 1 and 3 of the Sunday office are mostly unchanging (Dixit Dominus and Salus et Glora, or the Canticle of the Lamb), and the second psalm rotates on a 4 week basis (and still includes Confitebor Tibi et al). The weekday psalms again have a 4 week cycle and are the same as those found in the Liber. The only significant differences are the antiphons, which have always varied from community to community and locality to locality anyway. The issue is writing psalm tones. Again, there are many variations on the theme, but the Liber has more than enough variation endings on the 8 tones that all that is really required is editing it into a single volume for use at parish level. The Salus et Gloria is about the only thing you won’t find in the Liber and the challenge will be writing psalm tones for it that could work with the tones for the antiphons in the various propers. Again, a case of judicious editing.

What I’m driving at is I don’t understand why or what has prevented Solemnes from issuing a vesperal if it’s not church politics at some level.

I think there are 2 different tasks here: one is to translate the texts, and the other is to set the texts to chant. Neither of which is really that easy… unless you are so inspired and gifted by the Holy Spirit.

I would be a lot more cautious in attributing politics as the sole driver of the process. Solemnes has been doing a marvelous job helping the Church rediscover, as well as setting new liturgical texts from the liturgical renewal, into the Gregorian chant tradition. Nowadays, they are the chant masters and their work has spread to many parts of the world. Their work in Latin already takes a lot of time and effort, researching and composing. And since the English liturgical texts has not stabilised (one hopes that they will, after the revisions following Liturgiam authenticam), would it be reasonable to expect the monks of Solemnes to pay some attention to texts in the English language?

Adapting chant for Latin texts into English isn’t child’s play either. Anyone can do something, but not everyone’s work will be beautiful. It is a long overdue work and it is great to see more and more musically gifted individuals work to adapting Gregorian chant into English. There has been quite a few chant settings for the new Order of Mass floating around, but we can only wonder how many parishes will use them when the new translation comes out. The hindrance is more likely due to ignorance and well-intended foolishness, than politics.

 

[PL35Katie]

Well I really didn’t realize this was such a hot topic, but I thank everyone for all this information! However long it takes and however different the new translation will be, I hope we can all support and pray for those who are working on it. I, for one, am excited to hear what they have decided when it finally is finished! God bless!