Opinions of the New Mass Translation [edited]

  • Thread starter Thread starter BernadetteM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve heard it’s supposed to be ready for use starting in Advent of 2010, but that might get pushed back a year if the remaining sections aren’t approved of quickly enough and if the preliminary liturgical catechesis doesn’t get off the ground soon enough.
Actually, I think that they are still holding firm to Advent 2010. Bishop Serratelli made a very telling statement to the USCCB. From what I gather, he told them that if they did not move to adopt the whole thing by November, the USCCB would no longer be able to have a say in the matter. So, the figurative line in the sand has been drawn.

I have emailed my bishop, urging him to please vote yes on the translations. It would be great if all of us sent word to our respective bishops and archbishops asking them to do the same.
 
Is there a link to the New Mass. First I have heard of it.
It’s not a new Mass. It is a revised translation of the Ordinary Form of the Mass to bring the English-language Roman Missal into conformity with the Latin original.
 
Certainly the new texts will get some getting used to before they flow off our tongues. I’ve noticed though how memorable they are… even before we’re supposed to use the new texts, I’ve actually got phrases from the new text etched in my mind that makes me cringe when I hear the existing translations.

To get used to the cadence of the new texts, it might be helpful to record and hear yourself reading the texts. And try to read the texts slowly, I’ve noticed that it helps greatly.
I too can’t help hearing the new translation in my head when I am at Mass.

But, isn’t it interesting that the Bishops and others think we need a long period of adjustment to get used to the new translations but they expect us to pick up all the OCP and LifeTeen paraphrases at the drop of a hat? If we can sing the famous sheepless Agnus Dei, I think we can learn “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grevious fault”. :cool:
I’ve heard it’s supposed to be ready for use starting in Advent of 2010, but that might get pushed back a year if the remaining sections aren’t approved of quickly enough and if the preliminary liturgical catechesis doesn’t get off the ground soon enough.
I don’t want to wait another year (stomping feet). I think pinning implementation on the catechesis is putting the cart before the horse. It will be hard to teach the new words to parishioners who are mostly in Church only for Mass until the missal publishers put out the new translation. Better to print them, use them and teach as you go IMHO. Even then, if the new translation follows the pattern of the new GIRM and RS, some Bishops won’t require it be implemented in their dioceses. And parishes with non-disposable missals will have all kinds of excuses not to replace them. We are still waiting in Galveston-Houston for RS to become required. 😦
 
Quoted from another poster:
**
My favorite part is:

P-“The Lord be with you”
R-“And with your spirit”
**

I have heard noises about this revised translation, though know very little about the details, beyond the change noted above. I must confess, it has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve heard. I understand that this comes from some “original latin” version, which is a dubious reason to begin with. But, even so, it’s just grammatically offensive.

Why does anyone think that’s it’s an appropriate response when the priest greets us with “The Lord be with you” to say “And with your spirit” instead of the current “And also with you.” ?

This change simply ignores half of the body/soul composite standing before us at the altar. Why should we only wish the Lord to be with the priest’s spirit and ignore his body? And if that’s OK, then why doesn’t the priest offer for the Lord to be with our spirit as well? I would be less bothered, I think if the statements of the priest and the congregation were consistent with one another.

I just cannot wrap my head around this one in any satisfactory manner and as such I find myself skeptical of all of the revised translation.

I appreciate the link to the PDF. I’ll take a look at it as well to see what it offers. In the mean time, I welcome all comments here.
 
Quoted from another poster:
**
My favorite part is:

P-“The Lord be with you”
R-“And with your spirit”
**

I have heard noises about this revised translation, though know very little about the details, beyond the change noted above. I must confess, it has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve heard. I understand that this comes from some “original latin” version, which is a dubious reason to begin with. But, even so, it’s just grammatically offensive.

Why does anyone think that’s it’s an appropriate response when the priest greets us with “The Lord be with you” to say “And with your spirit” instead of the current “And also with you.” ?

This change simply ignores half of the body/soul composite standing before us at the altar. Why should we only wish the Lord to be with the priest’s spirit and ignore his body? And if that’s OK, then why doesn’t the priest offer for the Lord to be with our spirit as well? I would be less bothered, I think if the statements of the priest and the congregation were consistent with one another.

I just cannot wrap my head around this one in any satisfactory manner and as such I find myself skeptical of all of the revised translation.

I appreciate the link to the PDF. I’ll take a look at it as well to see what it offers. In the mean time, I welcome all comments here.
Actually, when ICEL was established, the group rushed through the translations, working off a French document that seemed to have justified paraphrasing. Thus, it is not the newly revised translation that should be met with skepticism; rather, it is what we currently have in use today.

When ICEL brought up its revision to the Ordination Rite, the prefect of the CDWDS (at that time) called into questions that particular body of work. Even though Jorge Cardinal Medina is not a native English-speaker, he had a good enough grasp of the language to realize that ICEL was conducting some pretty faulty translations. This led to a review of all of the translations for liturgical use and the promulgation of the document Liturgiam Authenticam which mandates that all of the texts used for the liturgy be completely faithful to the Latin text and not mere paraphrases. Furthermore, as a result, a subcommittee called Vox Clara was created to guide ICEL in the new translations. This is truly a gift to the Church because the English-language faithful will finally use language that is consistent with the rest of the world.

The phrase “and with your spirit” is certainly appropriate because, although we are bodies gathered in the Church, we are not the only ones present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. With all due respect, your response only considers the bodies in the pews and not the unseen cloud of witnesses that join us at every Mass.

It is important that all of us be saying the exact same thing at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The Italian and Spanish translations kept the fidelity to the original Latin translation, which is the norm for the wording.

To completely dismiss these translations is, as I see it, to completely misunderstand what happens during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and make “us” the focus, rather than the Triune God. We are engaged in something Extraordinary here. As Jesus told the pharisees, “you have Something greater here”. Thus, it is not something ordinary and common. We are gathered to offer fitting and due worship to God the Father, offering Him the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus, through the Holy Spirit. The translations are not about us; rather, they are about offering God authentic worship in Spirit and in Truth.
 
The phrase “and with your spirit” is certainly appropriate because, although we are bodies gathered in the Church, we are not the only ones present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. With all due respect, your response only considers the bodies in the pews and not the unseen cloud of witnesses that join us at every Mass.
I think you’re missing my point here. We’re not talking about bodies gathered in the pews, we’re talking about the one standing at the altar. “and with your spirit” is the response from the congregation to the priest. It still makes no sense.

As I’ve started reading through the annotated pdf file, I find this foot note regarding the “and with your spirit” response most interesting:

5 “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen” (Gal 6:18). “The Lord be with your
spirit” (2 Tim 4:22).

Now, if this is what was being said at the mass, it would make much more sense.
 
Can’t wait for the new translation to come into use.
“and with your spirit” is the response from the congregation to the priest. It still makes no sense."
The Latin says:

“Dominus vobiscum.” (The Lord be with you)

“Et cum spiritu tuo”

Et = and
cum = with
spiritu = spirit
tuo = your

If you have a problem with the new translation then you have a problem with the Latin which is the typical version.
 
“The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen” (Gal 6:18).
“The Lord be with your spirit” (2 Tim 4:22).

Now, if this is what was being said at the mass, it would make much more sense.
What makes you think that’s not what’s being said at Mass?“And with your spirit.”

Another common response is made five times during the Mass: after the priest’s greeting at the beginning of Mass, right before the Gospel is read, during the Preface of the Eucharistic Prayer, at the Sign of Peace, and right before the final blessing. The older English translation of the Mass rendered it as “And also with you,” but the new translation properly conveys the true sense of this response:

Et cum spíritu tuo.
And with your spirit. {Gal. 6:18; 2 Tim. 4:22}

When the priest says “The Lord be with you,” he is not simply saying the religious equivalent of a secular “Good morning” or “How are you?” Our response, then, cannot be misunderstood as a “You too.” This greeting from the ordained minister and our response to him say more than any secular greeting or exchange of pleasantries can; the proper liturgical greeting also grounds the celebration of Mass firmly in the business of Heaven (the presence and power of God) rather than the business of earth (the weather and our personal dispositions). These words connect us to the sacred act we are participating in, drawing us out of our common worldly surroundings.

Why “your spirit” instead of “you”? This question was addressed by the USCCB in the August 2005 issue of the newsletter of the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy:
The expression et cum spiritu tuo is only addressed to an ordained minister. Some scholars have suggested that spiritu refers to the gift of the spirit he received at ordination. In their response, the people assure the priest of the same divine assistance of God’s spirit and, more specifically, help for the priest to use the charismatic gifts given to him in ordination and in so doing to fulfill his prophetic function in the Church. (Vol. XLI, question 7)Why does the priest say “The Lord be with you” rather than “The Lord is with you”? Twice in Scripture, an angel appears to someone with the greeting, “The Lord is with you.” (Judg. 6:12; Luke 1:28) These angels were delivering a message from God Himself. But there are also times in Scripture when a man says “The Lord is with you” and he turns out to be wrong! One such example is Nathan, a prophet during the reign of King David. (cf. 2 Sam. 7:3-4)

In the New Testament, only the Mother of the Lord is told that the Lord is with her; every other time the phrase is used (by St. Paul in his letters), he writes it as a prayer: “The Lord be with you.” The difference is that whereas the angel Gabriel had it on the highest authority (God) that the Lord was truly with the Blessed Virgin, St. Paul offers a prayer that the Lord be with his fellow Christians, rather than simply presume that He was. Therefore, the priest at Mass begs God for His presence with His people, and the faithful respond with the same prayer in mind.
Praying the Mass: The Prayers of the People, pp. 28-30​
Also note that “English is the only major language of the Roman Rite which did not translate the word spiritu. The Italian (E con il tuo spirito), French (Et avec votre esprit), Spanish (Y con tu espíritu) and German (Und mit deinem Geiste) renderings of 1970 all translated the Latin word spiritu precisely.” (USCCB Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy Newsletter, vol. XLI)
 
I must confess, it has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve heard. I understand that this comes from some “original latin” version, which is a dubious reason to begin with. But, even so, it’s just grammatically offensive.
What makes this the “dumbest thing” you’ve ever heard?

The “original latin” is the Latin text which has been used for over 1500 years. You could go back even further to the Greek text of the early liturgies (still in use) where this phrase is used. What is dubious about the English translation accurately rendering the Latin original it comes from? (Were you even aware that the “typical” edition of the liturgical books is still published in Latin?)

How is “and with your spirit” more “grammatically offensive” than the redundant “and also with you”? Both start with “And”. So what?
This change simply ignores half of the body/soul composite standing before us at the altar.
See, that’s why there needs to be liturgical catechesis before these translations get used, or else people are going to think the wrong things about them. The reply et cum spiritu tuo is not an exclusive statement regarding the priest’s soul or spirit. You can see my previous reply for the explanation.

Do you think that people, for 1900+ years, have been saying a “stupid” thing in the liturgies spoken in Greek and Latin? I’d bet the Aramaic liturgies use “spirit” too.
I just cannot wrap my head around this one in any satisfactory manner and as such I find myself skeptical of all of the revised translation.
Are you as skeptical of all human beings because of one that you can’t “wrap [your] head around”? Be fair.

Please accept that there are some things you simply might not understand the first time you hear or read them. It might not “come to you” immediately, and you might come up with the wrong explanation. That is why Vatican II called for the liturgical catechesis of the laity and clergy: so that they would KNOW what they were saying and doing and hearing. Too bad that got ignored in the tumult of changes that occurred in the latter half of the 1960’s.
 
In addition to all the wonderful explanations of “And with your spirit” given by various posters, I would like to add that this phrase orignated from semitic greeting. In semitic language, “spirit”, “body” and “soul” indicates the whole person, while highlighting a particular aspect of the human person. The early Church adopted this semitic greeting unchanged in her liturgical dialogue. Hence, when the assembly responds to the ordained Priest or Deacon “And with your spirit”, we are connected with the Church’s Jewish heritage and are speaking of the whole person of the ordained minister, while highlighting that aspect of him that is invisible to the human eye, most in the image of God and most precious to him.

The Church could have used a different greeting, but she chose to translate this Jewish greeting literally into Greek and Latin for her liturgies. Perhaps it is because the greeting emphasises spiritual realities (the human person that we can see is more than just a meat-machine). Perhaps because she sees in this single phrase polyvalent meanings that express the richness of her faith. A literal translation into English today will preserve the richness of this greeting, after we have been impoverished by the monotonous sense provided in the existing dynamic translation “And also with you”.
 
I agree with all the replies my post has received. Yes it appears that the younger generation has a longing for the reverence that the New Mass will have.

Also I think that the more traditional Catholics will welcome it greatly. There will always be people who are unhappy with any change, but in time the Mass will grow on them.

Let us all pray pray pray for a great outcome. We as Catholics should follow the Head, who is our Holy Father as the Holy Spirit has inspired him to do God’s will.

I find it sad to see so many clergy rebel against him on so many issues. Of course we all have minds of our own but as Catholics we should understand that Christ gave Peter the keys and the authority to bind on earth and in Heaven. I don’t think you can go wrong when you follow his lead.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette
This new translation is good, but will it bring more reverence back to the Mass. I highly doubt it. Why?. Because it will take more than just the new missal. It will also take new rubrics as well. Like priest required to face east, EMHCs being drastically reduced, and used only in emergencies. Less if not no altar girls. Altar girls cannot be priests in the future. Basically the rubrics of the TLM, being incorperated into the new missal. If you have a new novus ordo missal but retain the bad things of the old novus ordo missal, your defeating the purpose. Also will the dreaded NAB translation still be used. Or will the more appropriate RSV CE or Douay be used.
 
Is there a time frame for these changes? And is a new Mass book available yet?
 
I’m having a hard time not being impatient with these repeated identical questions. Please read the thread (it’s not that long!) or at least search the thread for questions identical to yours.

The new translation is expected to be ready for use by ADVENT 2010; the whole translation has not been approved by all the English-speaking Bishops’ conferences yet. South Africa jumped the gun and started using the incomplete translation immediately, and there’s been a bit of a crisis there. Why? No preliminary catechesis, for one thing.

The new translation is in several pieces. The only publicly available piece I know of is found on the USCCB Committee for Divine Worship web site for Formation on the Roman Missal. You can download the complete text of the Ordo Missae I (the “Ordinary of the Mass I”) as a PDF with scriptural annotations.
 
I’ll say a prayer for your patience. I have been reading the thread but missed the references.
Hope you day gets better
 
In addition to all the wonderful explanations of “And with your spirit” given by various posters, I would like to add that this phrase orignated from semitic greeting. In semitic language, “spirit”, “body” and “soul” indicates the whole person, while highlighting a particular aspect of the human person. The early Church adopted this semitic greeting unchanged in her liturgical dialogue. Hence, when the assembly responds to the ordained Priest or Deacon “And with your spirit”, we are connected with the Church’s Jewish heritage and are speaking of the whole person of the ordained minister, while highlighting that aspect of him that is invisible to the human eye, most in the image of God and most precious to him.

The Church could have used a different greeting, but she chose to translate this Jewish greeting literally into Greek and Latin for her liturgies. Perhaps it is because the greeting emphasises spiritual realities (the human person that we can see is more than just a meat-machine). Perhaps because she sees in this single phrase polyvalent meanings that express the richness of her faith. A literal translation into English today will preserve the richness of this greeting, after we have been impoverished by the monotonous sense provided in the existing dynamic translation “And also with you”.
Now that makes sense! Thanks for sharing.
 
It took 40 years to correct the translations, i’m wondering how long it will take to implement the changes after Advent of 2009. maybe double the time it took to correct the changes :rolleyes:

There is some consolation on the other hand, that being all these problems have been specific to the English speaking world, since the Italian, Spanish etc texts are faithful to the Latin texts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top