Survey on priests' dislike of Missal may be inaccurate [CNA]

[ProVobis]

Sure. More and more I question why we ever “went vernacular” in the first place.

To be fair, some vernaculars (like Polish) work better than others. English, for a lot of reasons, doesn’t seem to work that well. But that won’t stop them from trying to make it work. Look at all the versions of the English Bible.

 

[Lucky7]

To be fair, some vernaculars (like Polish) work better than others. English, for a lot of reasons, doesn’t seem to work that well. But that won’t stop them from trying to make it work. Look at all the versions of the English Bible.

Let’s face it. The English language a huge pain in the patootie.

 

[larsont7]

Let’s face it. The English language a huge pain in the patootie.

Truer words were never said. That was one of the reasons why Latin remained the language of the liturgy, because it was unchanging. English, on the other hand, changes almost daily it seems. What sounds “poetic” and “flows nicely” today will probably sound like gobble-de-gook in ten years.

As to the other arguments brought up (receive vs. enter under my roof; all vs. many), I like the fact that the new translation goes back to the words of Sacred Scripture.

 

[ProVobis]

Let’s face it. The English language a huge pain in the patootie.

The problem with any English translation is that it seemingly develops a life of its own and away from the Church. Ask Cranmer et al.

 

[gracepoole]

Truer words were never said. That was one of the reasons why Latin remained the language of the liturgy, because it was unchanging. English, on the other hand, changes almost daily it seems. What sounds “poetic” and “flows nicely” today will probably sound like gobble-de-gook in ten years.

Maybe. But there is plenty of beautiful literature written in the English language that’s just as poetic today as it was years/decades/centuries ago.

As to the other arguments brought up (receive vs. enter under my roof; all vs. many), I like the fact that the new translation goes back to the words of Sacred Scripture.

“For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.”
2 Corinthians 3:6

 

[ProVobis]

As to the other arguments brought up (receive vs. enter under my roof; all vs. many), I like the fact that the new translation goes back to the words of Sacred Scripture.

Nevertheless the “for all” text had many defenders in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. Many sermons were based on the concept. I’m not sure this survey is that inaccurate.

 

[ProVobis]

Maybe. But there is plenty of beautiful literature written in the English language that’s just as poetic today as it was years/decades/centuries ago.

Then why do we need Cliff’s Notes to know what they were talking about?

 

[gracepoole]

Then why do we need Cliff’s Notes to know what they were talking about?

I teach college-level literature courses, so my answer to your question is you haven’t been in any of my classes.

 

[ProVobis]

I teach college-level literature courses, so my answer to your question is you haven’t been in any of my classes.

So, let me ask you the same question I asked 50 years ago. Is there an ideal period in the history of the English language (Old English, Middle English, Elizabethean English, etc.) which can be used as an English standard going forward? Any suggestions?

 

[manualman]

I find it hard to believe that people can be going to mass weekly for a year and a half and still don’t have the corrected responses come naturally yet. And I’m no kid anymore, either. I have 40+ years of habit to break too.

I, for one, appreciate the grown up vocabulary used in the liturgy. And if you don’t comprehend consubstantial, I’ll send my 6th grader over to explain it to you.

Seriously though, if it’s that hard to get used to, try going to daily mass a couple times a week so you get more frequency. A lil’ more grace won’t hurt either!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

manualman

I find it hard to believe that people can be going to mass weekly for a year and a half and still don’t have the corrected responses come naturally yet. And I’m no kid anymore, either. I have 40+ years of habit to break too.

Yet it’s still happening despite your dissapointment.

I, for one, appreciate the grown up vocabulary used in the liturgy. And if you don’t comprehend consubstantial, I’ll send my 6th grader over to explain it to you.

When we said;

eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God, begotten, not made,
one in Being with the Father.

It didn’t require much explanation.

Consubstantial, is akin to a foreign language, being it’s rarely if ever used by common English speaking people.

Seriously though, if it’s that hard to get used to, try going to daily mass a couple times a week so you get more frequency. A lil’ more grace won’t hurt either!

I go just about everyday and will always use the missal. But I did that before the New English Translation came out. It helps to keep my mind focused.

Jim

 

[ProVobis]

I find it hard to believe that people can be going to mass weekly for a year and a half and still don’t have the corrected responses come naturally yet. And I’m no kid anymore, either. I have 40+ years of habit to break too.

I, for one, appreciate the grown up vocabulary used in the liturgy. And if you don’t comprehend consubstantial, I’ll send my 6th grader over to explain it to you.

Seriously though, if it’s that hard to get used to, try going to daily mass a couple times a week so you get more frequency. A lil’ more grace won’t hurt either!

I think the point of the article was the priest’s acceptance of the new language, not the congregation’s. I’ve managed to learn a few of the responses in the Spanish Mass in just a few Spanish Masses, so it’s not a big deal to pick up on a small number of responses, which most don’t even bother to make anyway. The priest has to cover a lot more, not even having to mention now that his sermons deal now with “for many” rather than “for all.” That IMO is a big change.

 

[jilly4ski]

Let’s put it this way. Saint John’s University, is a lovely institution (despite the heretical theology coming from the theology department and the monastery). Ideal setting on several lakes, beautiful woods and trails, good community, and classic tight knit college campus feel. With very austere LOTH and daily Mass. And I got a good education there, as a political science major, (with a Presbyterian minister as the professor for my mandatory theology classes, and he was much better and much more respectful than many of the sisters and “catholics” who taught theology).

However, they are not and have never been a research institution. Their math department is tiny, and psychology is considered the major that is relatively easy if you don’t know what to do, after management and communications. The only degree beyond a bachelors they offer is a masters in theology. Of which it appears this study was a student project. Lets just say I am highly suspicious even without the report from the experts that it is flawed.

 

[Ohana]

I still find myself wanting to say “It is right to give Him thanks and praise.” well, because it just is! I don’t mind the “unworthy for You to come under my roof” because that is all I said until I was about 24.

I think the changes for the people are not so great that we won’t get used to it, even if consubstantial is a bit silly, The other issue is that the changes for the priests is more extensive, so they have had much more to get used to and really have to use the missal. I was at Mass with a retired older priest this weekend who had difficulty seeing the text, and lost his way from time to time. Kind of a burden for a man who was filling in for an ill pastor. Fortunately, he had a very supportive deacon with him.

I have more difficulty with the return to exclusive language. Some of it is really excluding and hurtful. We had a passage from Paul last week that talked about brothers, then followed up with becoming sons. I realize that Paul was writing out of his Jewish experience, but really, it felt very exclusionary. It was hurtful and distracting and stimulated the thought, “so what am I chopped liver!”

Maybe at least that part will change if, as Pope Francis has said he wants, there is an increase in women theologians and in other roles in the Curia.

That being said, this is no place to be applying bad science! It sounds as if this poll was certainly that!

 

[manualman]

It didn’t require much explanation.

Consubstantial, is akin to a foreign language, being it’s rarely if ever used by common English speaking people.

There is a serious problem with this line of reasoning. If people today are ignorant of the philosophical idea of ‘substance’ versus ‘accidents’ then they likely are clueless about what the Eucharist really is too. If they understand substance then they aren’t likely to have a problem with ‘consubstantial.’

The assertion that we should simply accept that people don’t comprehend substance and dumb down the creed implies that it is OK for people to be ignorant about the nature of the Eucharist.

Sure enough, if you ask the average guy in the pew today detailed questions about the Eucharist, they mostly get it wrong.

As usual, the solution to ignorance is education, not the perpetuation of ignorance.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

There is a serious problem with this line of reasoning. If people today are ignorant of the philosophical idea of ‘substance’ versus ‘accidents’ then they likely are clueless about what the Eucharist really is too. If they understand substance then they aren’t likely to have a problem with ‘consubstantial.’

The assertion that we should simply accept that people don’t comprehend substance and dumb down the creed implies that it is OK for people to be ignorant about the nature of the Eucharist.

As usual, the solution to ignorance is education, not the perpetuation of ignorance.

You’re confusing the linguistics with what people will understand within the context of the Mass.

Before we used “consubstantial,” in the Creed, most people knew what the words of the previous version meant because it was in their contemporary language and easy to discern.

Your assertion that because they have trouble using the word consubstantial, they must also have a problem understanding the nature of the Eucharist, is flawed.

I understand consubstantial and the nature of the Eucharist, but I still had an easier time with the previous translation than the use of the word, “consubstantial.”

Perhaps you just have an intolerance of people with less intellectual capabilities than yourself ?

It’s the way you’re coming across.

Jim

 

[manualman]

Perhaps you just have an intolerance of people with less intellectual capabilities than yourself ?

It’s the way you’re coming across.

The opposite, actually. Lol, I haven’t had any formal education in theology or philosophy since 8th grade religion class. If I can pick this stuff up and comprehend it, anybody can. It’s just a matter of caring enough to make the effort.

 

[ProVobis]

Why isn’t there a big outcry to get the translation right for these? Maybe because a translation isn’t needed to understand what they represent and this country doesn’t need translation wars?

 

[manualman]

Why isn’t there a big outcry to get the translation right for these? Maybe because a translation isn’t needed to understand what they represent and this country doesn’t need translation wars?

And maybe because they aren’t sacred???

 

[ProVobis]

And maybe because they aren’t sacred???

Sacred like English?

How did it work out for the Protestants?