Response to the new English translation

[ProVobis]

I’m not opposed to Mass in Latin, nor Mass in the vernacular.

We’ve had lots of vernaculars since the Tower of Babel and they’re not going away. And neither is the ICEL or any other translation committee. And I’ve been on enough study lists to know you’ll never have two exact translations on any three-line sentence and you will usually get guesswork and disagreements and tension as a result.

But we have only one source to protect and cherish.

 

[Organist1995]

I have heard parts of the new translations, and i like them. I am 15 years old, and i do not see why some adults are so upset at them. There is a question on my mind- when it comes to new mass settings, some companies are excepting pre-orders, but they will not ship them out. How close will they cut it? When can the hymnals be changed, So people can follow along with the order of the mass? I understand the new translations can NOT be used before the implementation, but does this mean the new hymnals can not be in the pews before hand either? Does anyone know anything about this?

 

[crazzeto]

I have heard parts of the new translations, and i like them. I am 15 years old, and i do not see why some adults are so upset at them. There is a question on my mind- when it comes to new mass settings, some companies are excepting pre-orders, but they will not ship them out. How close will they cut it? When can the hymnals be changed, So people can follow along with the order of the mass? I understand the new translations can NOT be used before the implementation, but does this mean the new hymnals can not be in the pews before hand either? Does anyone know anything about this?

You are too young then, to really remember what it was like to be caught up in the “spirit of vatican ii”… I was born in '78, and saw the tail end of it… People had an attitude that the “driery old Catholic Church with it’s cold Catherdrals and dead languages was dead. Now there’s a new progressive Catholic Church…yadayada…”.

Thing is, Popes John Paul II (who started us on this course) and Benedic XVI (who skillfully finished it) may have done a good job bringing things back to center. That said, it’s not like the aging spirit of Vatican II crowd is just gone. It’s also not like this is just about the mass alone, it’s about a whole lot of the Church. The Moral Doctrines, the Theological Doctrines. The war is being fought in the liturgy, but it is for the very soul of the Church.

That’s why these people are up in arms. The new Missal goes a long way to bringing us back to center.

 

[ProVobis]

Thing is, Popes John Paul II (who started us on this course) and Benedic XVI (who skillfully finished it) may have done a good job bringing things back to center. That said, it’s not like the aging spirit of Vatican II crowd is just gone. It’s also not like this is just about the mass alone, it’s about a whole lot of the Church. The Moral Doctrines, the Theological Doctrines. The war is being fought in the liturgy, but it is for the very soul of the Church.

That’s why these people are up in arms. The new Missal goes a long way to bringing us back to center.

The “new Missal” only affects the English-speaking church-going population within the Church, which is percentage-wise small but politically significant. I understand some of the other other Missal vernaculars have already been put on notice after this. As far as who should get credit for preserving the Latin, realize that most, if not all, Popes since Pope Victor (2nd century) have been Latin-speaking and I doubt if that will be changing soon.

 

[crazzeto]

The “new Missal” only affects the English-speaking church-going population within the Church, which is percentage-wise small but politically significant. I understand some of the other other Missal vernaculars have already been put on notice after this. As far as who should get credit for preserving the Latin, realize that most, if not all, Popes since Pope Victor (2nd century) have been Latin-speaking and I doubt if that will be changing soon.

ProVobis -

1. Politically significant is the keyword burried in there… There has been a tendancy in the past (certainly) for the UK to follow the US culturally, then the rest of Europe (all languages) to continue following suite. So regardless of the state of other missals, the state of the English translation is hugely significant for the battle against the “spirit of vatican ii” heresy (as good a name as any).
2. My comments don’t reflect the state of the latin Missal which hasn’t changed since 1962… The latin Missal, while having not changed, has lost significance with Vatican II due to the very heresies that has so gripped the Church. Thus, my comments properly read say:

By retranslating the english Missal to more closely reflect the Latin missal, the Church is taking a significant blow against the “spirit of vatican ii” heresies which has taken place in the past.

Again, the battle ultimitly is about far more than the liturgy. Anyone touched by “the spirit of vatican ii” knows this very well. You don’t even have to have been personally affected, just look at all these so called “Catholic Groups” out there claiming to be acting in good faith according to “the spirit of vatican ii”, then promptly spout heresy that has nothing to do with that council.

They say things like women should be allowed to be priests, they claim that differentiation between formal clergy and the common priest hood of the believer has always been vege at best. They say that Church should have a repersentitive governece answerable directly to the lay believers. This is the so called “spirit of vatican ii”, which the new Missal seeks to combat.

God bless,

 

[ProVobis]

1. Politically significant is the keyword burried in there… There has been a tendancy in the past (certainly) for the UK to follow the US culturally, then the rest of Europe (all languages) to continue following suite. So regardless of the state of other missals, the state of the English translation is hugely significant for the battle against the “spirit of vatican ii” heresy (as good a name as any).

It may have been the other way around too. Attempted Mass (and Bible) translations into English have been on the agenda plate since well before Cranmer and Henry VIII. Fortunately the Anglo-Saxon barbarianism doesn’t appear to be major problem anymore. But you’re right, the English translations are much more vulnerable to political pressures and the possibility of sexist, racist, and other inferences are always carefully scrutinized. In fact the very words of the English consecration (“for you and for all men”) were changed almost on the spot before any bishop or the Pope could even object. Like the consecration formula isn’t a big deal?

1. My comments don’t reflect the state of the latin Missal which hasn’t changed since 1962… The latin Missal, while having not changed, has lost significance with Vatican II due to the very heresies that has so gripped the Church.

Maybe, but do realize that the new Mass was promulgated in Latin as well and even the author of the OF (Bugnini) was reportedly dead set against an all-vernacular Mass. In fact, very few in their wildest dreams in 1962 would have pictured an all-vernacular Catholic Mass before the end of that decade. Some still can’t accept it.

 

[crazzeto]

It may have been the other way around too. Attempted Mass (and Bible) translations into English have been on the agenda plate since well before Cranmer and Henry VIII. Fortunately the Anglo-Saxon barbarianism doesn’t appear to be major problem anymore. But you’re right, the English translations are much more vulnerable to political pressures and the possibility of sexist, racist, and other inferences are always carefully scrutinized. In fact the very words of the English consecration (“for you and for all men”) were changed almost on the spot before any bishop or the Pope could even object. Like the consecration formula isn’t a big deal?

The only thing I would suggest here is that your taking a historical view so long, that the USA as we know it today didn’t even exist… The world dynamic has changed completely, it’s been Amerocentric for a while now. Whether or not that continues will remain to be seen, but it’s safe to say that particularly with English now being considered “the universal language of the world” the English translation of the Missal is no small deal.

Maybe, but do realize that the new Mass was promulgated in Latin as well and even the author of the OF (Bugnini) was reportedly dead set against an all-vernacular Mass.

We can point to this individual or that who opposed the venacular, we can also point to very significant individuals (not all heretics it should be said) who were all for it. Again, it’s worth saying Mass in the venacular is not something that happened overnight, it was already a huge discussion topic by 1900, and if it was already a huge discussion topic then, then we can be assured that it’s roots grow far deeper than that.

Mass in the venacular isn’t something that will ever go away, it is here and it is here to stay. This is why the new, far more (literally) faithful translation is important.

The original translators tried to do a good thing by making the Mass more accessable and easy to understand in the modern world. What couldn’t be forseen by these folks (or I should say obviously wasn’t forseen) was that sects within the Church would take this as “a clear sign” that it was out with the old Church and it was time to make up new rules.

This is what all the fuss is about. The new translation is a clear statement from Rome you can not dispense with “the old Church” in favor of a new, more modern church which conforms to modern sensabilities. This would be a horrible rupture, and a sign that indeed the gates of hell has prevailed over the Church. This can’t, and won’t happen.

 

[ProVobis]

The only thing I would suggest here is that your taking a historical view so long, that the USA as we know it today didn’t even exist… The world dynamic has changed completely, it’s been Amerocentric for a while now. Whether or not that continues will remain to be seen, but it’s safe to say that particularly with English now being considered “the universal language of the world” the English translation of the Missal is no small deal.

Has it? English and English-speakers do not control the Church or Catholic theology. It’s exactly the vernacular that’s crept into the very heart of Catholic worship which allows governments and countries to think they can control Rome. Luther, Henry VIII, Calvin, etc. had high contempt against Rome centuries ago and their first attacks came at the expense of having a universal language that has its very roots on the cross itself.

It’s also a very arrogant view that English is anywhere near being the universal language of the world. Seeing how English-speaking countries, led by the US, report dropping math, science, and reading scores, I don’t see how sustainable that position would hold, even if it were true.

There was a reason why the Council of Trent opposed the all-vernacular Mass, Pope John XXIII effectively banned vernacular in the liturgy, and Vatican II voted to preserve Latin. Of course, there are benefits to the vernacular, especially when attempting to convert, but eventually the world will see the benefits being quickly outwighed by the costs as those councils and encyclicals had tried to warn against.

As I stated in a previous posts, there are legitimate options, such as other vernaculars or Latin, to those who disapprove or dislike using English in the Mass. I hear the Polish and Hispanic Masses inter alia are very popular.

 

[crazzeto]

ProVobis:

Actually, yes the world dynamic is completely different… Has the doctrine of faith? No. Has Holy Mother Church? No. But if you want to pretend this doesn’t mean the entire world dynamic has changed in the way described then well, your asleep.

Are things different on a high level view? Say Gods? Perhaps not, but in terms of where the ebs and flows are yes. The cultural influence now flows instead of from the heart of Europe (specifically Rome) out, from the USA out…

So yes, there is a different world dynamic. Holy Mother church has identified the english missal as being critical to combating the heresy of modernism. You can claim all you want that the Latin Missal is there, and that it stands unchanged (by and large true) over the last 1,500 years. That’s fine and good, but due to the imprudent course taken by many after Vatican II, the Latin Missal no longer has the influence it once did.

It’s much harder to come by lay believers who can connect with it anymore, this is just a sad truth that can not be denied. So if you want to bring the layety back enmass, you need to look outside of the official language of Holy Mother Church.

Instead you must look to English, the new universal language… Not of the Church, but of the West certainly, if not globally.