The RCC changes the wording of the Mass in the USA...but why??

  • Thread starter Thread starter why_me
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

why_me

Guest
The RCC changed the wording of the Mass in the United States. Much will be different in a couple of years in the Mass. But why the change?? I would compare this to changes in the Mormon temple ceremony. What do you all think of the changes in the Mass??
 
The mass has never remained the same since the first century. One thing has remaned and thats the Eucharist. I think the changes stem from trying to bring back tradition to the liturgy but remain its english content. I guess in a sense changing the liturgy of the mass is compared to changing in the LDS temple cerimony. we believe though we have the authority to do so.
 
What specific changes are you talking about?

No changes are undertaken without sound reasoning (cf. the directive prohibiting the use of the tetragrammaton in liturgical celebration, discussed in this thread), so I’m sure any such changes are correct.

I know nothing of Mormon ceremonies. Under what guidelines and authority are they changed?
 
the recent changes that have been announced are changes in the English translation from the Latin, which is the official version, to correct laxities in the current translation so that the meaning of the various phrases in English corresponds more nearly to that of the Latin and to their historic meaning. Catholic liturgy is discussed on its own forum, not this one.
 
These “changes” involve changing use of English words to better match their original Latin. Translations completed in the 70s were poorly done.
 
why_me said:
The RCC changed the wording of the Mass in the United States. Much will be different in a couple of years in the Mass. But why the change?? I would compare this to changes in the Mormon temple ceremony. What do you all think of the changes in the Mass??
Click to expand...
**The Mass has generally remained the same since the first century. It has a general Confession, the Liturgy of the Word as the first portion, and the Liturgy of the Eucharist as the second, and Thanksgiving. This has remained standard.

The change in the wording of the Mass is only the translation from the Latin. There has been much leeway given to ‘interpretation’ over the past forty years, and now the time has come (which, in my opinion, should have been there from the very beginning) to translate verbatim from the Latin as was intended. As far as the rubrics are concerned, or the celebrated Liturgy, they will remain the same. I don’t know what this has to do with the Mormon temple ceremony, though.**
 
peary1 said:
**The Mass has generally remained the same since the first century. It has a general Confession, the Liturgy of the Word as the first portion, and the Liturgy of the Eucharist as the second, and Thanksgiving. This has remained standard.

The change in the wording of the Mass is only the translation from the Latin. There has been much leeway given to ‘interpretation’ over the past forty years, and now the time has come (which, in my opinion, should have been there from the very beginning) to translate verbatim from the Latin as was intended. As far as the rubrics are concerned, or the celebrated Liturgy, they will remain the same. I don’t know what this has to do with the Mormon temple ceremony, though.**
Click to expand...
Don’t you get standard translation from the Vatican? Why do you get so much leeway in doing your worship? Thank you.
 
Harris said:
Don’t you get standard translation from the Vatican? Why do you get so much leeway in doing your worship? Thank you.
Click to expand...
I guess you have to live in this country to understand. One of the major problems with this ‘free’ society is that people think they can do whatever they want and then impose it on the rest of us. Unfortunately, this has happened in the Catholic Church here at times.
 
First of all, the Mormon temple ceremony changed because people on the outside were finally able to know it for what it was.

It was changed to make it appear more “christian” than it really is.

The Mass changed because of language. So that the people hearing it could understand what was being said. It’s not just the US. The GIRM was brought into every parish after much study just a few years ago. It was simply a clarification of what we already did.

No comparison at all.

in Christ
Steph
 
peary1 said:
I guess you have to live in this country to understand. One of the major problems with this ‘free’ society is that people think they can do whatever they want and then impose it on the rest of us. Unfortunately, this has happened in the Catholic Church here at times.
Click to expand...
Thanks.
 
“changed the wording of the mass” “I would compare this to changes in the Mormon temple ceremony.”

Um, no. The new wording is simply a more literal translation of the original Latin, and it will only be noticeable in a few places. Nothing else about the mass will change. It will still be the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist, just as it has been for near two thousand years.
 
First, the Sacrament of the Eucharist is part of the mass. It is coupled with the Liturgy of the Word, so that both the Word of God and the Word of God are given to the faithful.

Second, we must understand how the translations were and are done. There is a tiny bit of leeway in the rubrix that allows for cultural differences in masses. FOr example, music can be different from one nation to another. Litergical dance is basically banned in the US and Europe, but there are some provisions for a limited amount in Africa. The prayers MUST be the same. The readings are provided. The order cannot be altered, but there is some room. Now, when the Mass was allowed in the vernacular, the bishops of each area had to provide a translation. Basically, some idioms may not translate from Latin vrebatum. Further, things may take on different meanings in local dialects. What the US bishops did, and it was not bad on paper, was try to provide a mass that would be approved by Rome but not seem “stuffy” or “old.” What we got was a poor translation.

One reason that it took so long to fix is that the bishops who did this in the first place had to die off or retire so that more traditional ones could do their thing.
 
Mickey said:
What are these changes? Is there more gender neutral language?
Click to expand...
Not to my knowledge.

For example, the mea culpa is translated more faithfully. There are some other wording issues. Someone on-line (grain of salt here) say that the Our Father is going to be changed to more closely resemble the early texts (I doubt it).
 
the biggest change I see other than language is the partial bow at “by the power of the Holy Spirit He was born of the Virgin Mary and became Man.”

in Christ
Steph
 
Mickey said:
What are these changes? Is there more gender neutral language?
Click to expand...
Exactly the opposite. This isn’t a “PC” mutilation. It’s not a perfect fix (what is, nowdays?), but it’s an improvement:

examples:

The creed now begins “I believe” (credo) instead of “we believe”

et cum spirito tuo is now “and with your spirit” instead of “and also with you”

pro multis is now translated as “for many” instead of “for all”

the three “mea culpas” have been restored.

The info is available here:usccb.org/liturgy/missalformation/index.shtml

If you see the catechetical resources at the bottom there’s a PDF for the changes to the “parts of the people”, and the full version is available as well
 
chris_molter said:
The creed now begins “I believe” (credo) instead of “we believe”
Click to expand...
Ah, they are moving closer to the East. If only they would remove the Filioque clause. 😃
chris_molter said:
et cum spirito tuo is now “and with your spirit” instead of “and also with you”
Click to expand...
Again, this what the East says. Bravo! I wonder how long it will take for the people to adopt it.
chris_molter said:
The info is available here:usccb.org/liturgy/missalformation/index.shtml

If you see the catechetical resources at the bottom there’s a PDF for the changes to the “parts of the people”, and the full version is available as well
Click to expand...
Thank you. I will review this.
 
Mickey said:
Ah, they are moving closer to the East. If only they would remove the Filioque clause. 😃
Again, this what the East says. Bravo! I wonder how long it will take for the people to adopt it.

Thank you. I will review this.
Click to expand...
Its really not moving closer to the East, or really moving at all, because Latin, the official language of the Mass, has always said “Credo(I believe)” never We believe(which, based on my very limited latin may be Credemus)
 
SenorSalsa said:
Its really not moving closer to the East, or really moving at all, because Latin, the official language of the Mass, has always said “Credo(I believe)” never We believe(which, based on my very limited latin may be Credemus)
Click to expand...
I was Roman Catholic for 37 years and it was always recited as “We believe…”

It is good to see that they are correcting it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top