Return of 'I believe'

[JimR-OCDS]

The words will (and should) change to accurately reflect the Latin. It will change to “And with your spirit”

It doesn’t need to reflect the Latin, literally, but rather, reflect what we mean and how we understand the words.

Also, this is still in draft phase, it can still change.

Jim

 

[Sure]

It doesn’t need to reflect the Latin, literally, but rather, reflect what we mean and how we understand the words.

Also, this is still in draft phase, it can still change.

Jim

I don’t think the translation is technically in a draft phase, it is merely awaiting a recognitio from the Holy See before being implemented. I seriously doubt that the Holy See will make changes that move away from a literal translation of the Latin.

From Liturgiam Authenticum:

“The Instruction repeats the call of earlier papal documents for an approach to the translation of liturgical texts that sees it not so much a work of creative inventiveness as one of fidelity and exactness in rendering the Latin texts into a vernacular language, with all due consideration for the particular way that each language has of expressing itself.”

Although “And also with you” might be more in line with the way we commonly speak, the goal in the translation is not common everyday language. Again in Liturgiam Authenticam:

“…[L]iturgical language can be expected to diverge from ordinary speech…”

 

[Michael_Welter]

“. . . And with your spirit” implies that the Lord should be with us even after we shed our earthly bodies. So I don’t see the Church moving away from that any time soon.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

“. . . And with your spirit” implies that the Lord should be with us even after we shed our earthly bodies. So I don’t see the Church moving away from that any time soon.

And by saying “And also with you,” would exclude the Lord being with us after death?

Jim

 

[saayra]

As a catechist it is my responsibility to teach 5th grade children in my parish the meaning of the Nicene Creed. When we recite “We believe” together I realize that some of my young students do not yet believe everything we profess as Catholics. This does not make it a sham to encourage them to say “we believe” in unison since the object is to declare that these are the teachings of the Magisterium with regard to the faith of the Church. If you look around at Mass you might notice that not everyone utters the words of the Creed. Whether all the people present when it is recited believe or not, the Creed makes it clear what the Catholic Church teaches about the essentials of the faith. You won’t find this wonderful clarity in every single christian denominational gathering that you might have occasion to visit. What a pity.

 

[benedictgal]

It doesn’t need to reflect the Latin, literally, but rather, reflect what we mean and how we understand the words.

Also, this is still in draft phase, it can still change.

Jim

Jim, Liturgicam Authenticam mandates that the texts need to conform to the Latin. Yes, “and with your spirit” is one of the changes that Rome is insisting upon.

Now, when we renew our Baptismal promises during the Easter Vigil, what is the response we give to the priest’s questions?

Do you reject Satan?
I do.

Do believe in God the Father, Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth?
I do.

Do you believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried, and on the third day rose again, and is seated at the right hand of the Father, and will come again to judge the living and the dead?
I do.

During Mass, I’ll say the Credo in Latin. At least I’m sure that I’m saying the right thing. Of course, I’ll say is quietly, so as not to confuse the person next to me. Oddly enough, in Spanish, it’s Creo (I believe).

 

[JimR-OCDS]

benedictgal

Jim, Liturgicam Authenticam mandates that the texts need to conform to the Latin. Yes, “and with your spirit” is one of the changes that Rome is insisting upon.

I take this to mean, conform to the meaning, not necessarily the literal translation, which can distort the meaning for the contemporary mindset.

Jim

 

[benedictgal]

benedictgal

I take this to mean, conform to the meaning, not necessarily the literal translation, which can distort the meaning for the contemporary mindset.

Jim

Yes, it should conform to the literal translation. The one that we have right now if faulty (according to Liturgicam Authenticam) Cardinal Arinze dismissed your argument for the contemporary mindset, as did Cardinal Pell (in several statements). The big bone of contention is the word consubstantial. While some of the U.S. bishops want to retain the faulty translation, everyone else on the ICEL seems to want to use consubstantial. Rome is heavily suggesting consubstantial.

In Spanish, there seems to be no problem with saying “and with your spirit”. So, that sort of torpedoes your argument.

 

[Sr_Sally]

If its understood that the “we” refers to the Catholic Church then “we” is definitely proper even though, obviously not every individual in the “we” doesn’t believe.

When “I”(actually the latin credo) was used, only the priest said it, so he could speak for himself on the matter. Asking the whole people to say “I” is asking at least some of them to say something which may be false, yet it would be true if “we” was used.

This has always been my understanding also. We say “we” because we are talking about ‘we, the Catholic church’. I like it that way. However, when the church publishes a new translation and instructs us to say it differently, I will.

 

[benedictgal]

This has always been my understanding also. We say “we” because we are talking about ‘we, the Catholic church’. I like it that way. However, when the church publishes a new translation and instructs us to say it differently, I will.

Sr. Sally, what about the Baptismal promises that we make and renew? As I indicated in my earlier post, when the priest asks us (or, as infants, our godparents):

Do you reject Satan?
Do you reject sin?
Do you believe in God the Father, Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth?
Do you believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried, on the third day rose again, is seated at the right hand of God the Father and will come again to judge the living and the dead?

Our answer is “I do”, not “we do”. In fact, the Apostles Creed starts with the words “I believe”. “We believie” seems to me to be an innovation introduced to the English-language Roman MIssal (at least the one approved for U.S. use). In Spanish, “Creo”, which is English for “I believe” is used.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Yes, it should conform to the literal translation. The one that we have right now if faulty (according to Liturgicam Authenticam) Cardinal Arinze dismissed your argument for the contemporary mindset, as did Cardinal Pell (in several statements). The big bone of contention is the word consubstantial. While some of the U.S. bishops want to retain the faulty translation, everyone else on the ICEL seems to want to use consubstantial. Rome is heavily suggesting consubstantial.

That was about the Creed, not the “and with your spirit.”

In Spanish, there seems to be no problem with saying “and with your spirit”. So, that sort of torpedoes your argument.

So then we translate Latin into the incomprehensible english, becaue it fits spanish understanding?

Jim

 

[benedictgal]

So then we translate Latin into the incomprehensible english, becaue it fits spanish understanding?

Jim

Jim, don’t be facetious. Have you even read Liturgicam Authenticam? I would refrain from making facetious statements without reading the appropriate liturgical documents, rather than shooting from the hip.

 

[Sr_Sally]

Yes, that is true. I am simply speaking about the reason for the “innovation” as I understood it. Currently, “we” is what is in the approved translation. When the translation is changed, I will say what is approved in the new translation. In the meantime, I do not presume to set my Latin skills above that of the Church’s

Sr. Sally, what about the Baptismal promises that we make and renew? As I indicated in my earlier post, when the priest asks us (or, as infants, our godparents):

Do you reject Satan?
Do you reject sin?
Do you believe in God the Father, Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth?
Do you believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried, on the third day rose again, is seated at the right hand of God the Father and will come again to judge the living and the dead?

Our answer is “I do”, not “we do”. In fact, the Apostles Creed starts with the words “I believe”. “We believie” seems to me to be an innovation introduced to the English-language Roman MIssal (at least the one approved for U.S. use). In Spanish, “Creo”, which is English for “I believe” is used.

 

[Sure]

So then we translate Latin into the incomprehensible english, becaue it fits spanish understanding?

Jim

“And with your spirit” is incomprehensible??? Are you kidding? It’s not the way we normally converse, but then again, the liturgy is NOT supposed to be the way we normally converse.

As I quoted before from Liturgiam Authenticam:

“…[L]iturgical language can be expected to diverge from ordinary speech…”

 

[benedictgal]

“And with your spirit” is incomprehensible??? Are you kidding? It’s not the way we normally converse, but then again, the liturgy is NOT supposed to be the way we normally converse.

As I quoted before from Liturgiam Authenticam:

Suire, I think Jim is arguing just for the sake of arguing. No amount of documentation will convince him.