NO Mass translation

  • Thread starter Thread starter PatienceAndLove
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PatienceAndLove

Guest
My mother and I were discussing the new Mass translation, and I couldn’t really explain the changes to her.

Would someone be so kind as to explain to me, so that I might explain to her, the changes in wording that will be occurring within the NO Mass? Also, why is this new translation important?
 
Are you referring to the words of cosecration in the NO that are being reverted to “for you and for many” intead of “for you and for all?”

“for you & for all” implies universal salvation. Christ did suffer for all, but we have to accept His suffering for us & live lives that reflect that. All can be saved, but not all will chose to be saved. “For you and for many” shows that [not to mention it is the more accurate translation of Christ’s actual words.]
 
I know that wording is being changed, but I have no idea what wording, so anything is helpful
 
LittleMother said:
Are you referring to the words of cosecration in the NO that are being reverted to “for you and for many” intead of “for you and for all?”
Click to expand...
The new translation I saw proposed by the ICEL did not include this change. It was on Fr. Z’s blog. But it was only proposed.
 
Another important change is the return to Et cum spiritu tuo… “And with your spirit” instead of “And Also with you.”

This is a return to the correct latin, which is still in the NO, just not in the North American English NO.
 
My understanding is that the Holy Father has already made the chage (for you and for many) mandatory, but has given 2 years for eveyone to comply.
 
I know another difference (and some may see this as a small thing) and that is in the Credo, which itself is a word that means “I believe”. In our Mass we say “We Believe”. The correct translation would be “I believe”. There are many other places where the translation is not completely accurate although it is “close”.

My pastor has told me that the original English translation was hurried, and in his opinion, the result was a bit clumsy. The new, and more correct translation will not be a product of speed, for sure, and if not elegant, will at least be accurate. Elegance, of course, would be a plus, in keeping with the solemn nature of the Mass.

However, some may resist any change to the status quo, even if it is to change “slightly inaccurate” to “accurate”, because of the disruption that change represents. I hope that is not so. If there is any delay, I suspect it could be related to that, but I don’t actually know. It just seems likely to me.
 
My pastor has told me that the original English translation was hurried, and in his opinion, the result was a bit clumsy.
Click to expand...
Lots of the translations were made BEFORE the New Mass was promulgated in 1970. English started appearing in the liturgy as early as 1965 if not earlier. The “for all” phrase, for example, was inserted into the canon(s) in 1967.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top