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

[RebeccaJ]

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??

lol whyme, why do you think? Did the blood oaths and nude anointing need to be removed from the Liturgy of the Word? Was the translation from a English Mason temple ceremony to an English Mormon temple endowment such very difficult thing to do? Last I checked, they were word for word the same, until the Mormon church changed them. So, if the mormons are going to go back to tradition, then they should go back to using the original endowment ceremony.

 

[peary1]

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.

in Christ
Steph

The intent of Vatican II was to retain the Latin in the Novus Ordo Missae. A special dispensation had to be given by the Vatican in order for the language in the Mass to be said in the vernacular. That is still necessary and, from what I understand, is something that needs to be renewed from time to time. Using any other language than Latin in the Mass is not an entitlement; permission is given.

 

[Peter_J]

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

I also note that the new creedal text says “and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man” and “he suffered death and was buried” (both of which are similar to the wording used in Dominus Iesus).

 

[Corki]

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??

They aren’t changing the wording of the Mass. They are correcting the translation of the Mass when it is said in English. This isn’t just for the US - it affects all of the Churches in English speaking countries.

It wouldn’t be a fair comparison with changes in the Morman ceremonies since those are in English to begin with. The Mass is in Latin and must be translated into other languages.

Don’t you get standard translation from the Vatican? Why do you get so much leeway in doing your worship? Thank you.

No, there is a Vatican “committee,” Vox Clara, that oversees the translations but they are done by representatives of all of the countries using a given language. So for the English translation, the representatives came from the US, UK, Canada, Australia etc. The Bishops councils of each country then get to vote on them and then they go to the Vatican for approval and/or corrections.

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

That isn’t a change. Bowing at the words of the incarnation is already in the GIRM. This and other gestures are actually GIRM issues and not directly due to the new translation.

 

[Corki]

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).

No need to guess. What has been approved is on line here

The Our Father is on page 39 and it looks the same to me.

 

[Marauder]

The Archdiocese of Washington newspaper has a good explanation of the changes and a good summary.

The summary is included here.

The most significant changes approved by Rome include:

• Whenever the priest says, “The Lord be with you,” the people will respond, “And with your spirit.” The current response is “And also with you.”

• In the first form of the penitential rite, the people will confess that “I have greatly sinned … through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault.” In the current version, that part is much shorter: “I have sinned through my own fault.”

• The Gloria has been translated differently and the structure of the prayer will have changes from the current text.

• The opening of the Nicene Creed changes from "We believe … " to “I believe …” Other changes in the prayer also have been made.

• Before the preface, when the priest says, “Let us give thanks to the Lord our God,” instead of saying, “It is right to give Him thanks and praise,” the people will respond, “It is right and just.”

• The Sanctus will start “Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts.” The current versions says “Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might.”

• The new response at the Ecce Agnus Dei (“Behold the Lamb of God”) is: “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.”

There article itself can be found here:
catholicstandard.org/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=1820&SectionID=2&SubSectionID=&S=1

 

[why_me]

This article will explain more about the changes:

beliefnet.com/story/193/story_19332_1.html

It seems that the changes are substantial and American catholics will need to do some adjusting.

The changes in the mormon temple ceremony were basically done to bring the temple ceremony in line with the 20th century. But the meanings and symbolisms stayed the same.

One can say the same for the changes in the American mass.

 

[why_me]

The Archdiocese of Washington newspaper has a good explanation of the changes and a good summary.

The summary is included here.

There article itself can be found here:
catholicstandard.org/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=1820&SectionID=2&SubSectionID=&S=1

There is also something about ‘morning dew’ in the Mass but I can not find it anywhere. I did hear it on NPR.

 

[Marauder]

The changes in the mormon temple ceremony were basically done to bring the temple ceremony in line with the 20th century. But the meanings and symbolisms stayed the same.

One can say the same for the changes in the American mass.

The Catholic church isn’t doing this change to bring the Mass in line with the 20th century they are actually just making the English translation of the Mass more in line with the original Latin.

 

[Marauder]

There is also something about ‘morning dew’ in the Mass but I can not find it anywhere. I did hear it on NPR.

Eucharistic prayer 2 now has the following line (said by the priest):

Make holy, therefore, these gifts, we pray by sending down your Spirit upon them like the dewfall.

You can find it in the link provided earlier:
usccb.org/liturgy/missalformation/

 

[Brendan]

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

Huh?

That is been part of the current Mass since it was promulgated.

In the Traditional Latin Mass, there was a genuflection, but it was replaced with a ‘profound bow’ (a bow from the waist) in 1972.

Here it is in the current General Instruction for the Roman Missal ( 2002)

1. The Creed is sung or recited by the priest together with the people (cf. above, no. 68) with everyone standing. At the words *et incarnatus est *(by the power of the Holy Spirit . . . became man) all make a profound bow; but on the Solemnities of the Annunciation and of the Nativity of the Lord, all genuflect.

Note that on Christmas and the feast of the Annunciation, we genuflect instead of bow.

This should be happening NOW in your parish, not as part of the new translation.

 

[Peter_J]

The Archdiocese of Washington newspaper has a good explanation of the changes and a good summary.

The summary is included here.

There article itself can be found here:
catholicstandard.org/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=1820&SectionID=2&SubSectionID=&S=1

It’s strange that the article doesn’t mention “which will be poured out for you and for many”. I guess they didn’t consider that a significant change.

P.S. Not to get off topic, but does anyone whether Anglican liturgies typically use “for all” or “for many”?

 

[zaffiroborant]

This article will explain more about the changes:

beliefnet.com/story/193/story_19332_1.html

It seems that the changes are substantial and American catholics will need to do some adjusting.

The changes in the mormon temple ceremony were basically done to bring the temple ceremony in line with the 20th century. But the meanings and symbolisms stayed the same.

One can say the same for the changes in the American mass.

The changes are to correct translation, not to bring it in line with the 20th century. Most of the changes are things my parents and aunts & uncles have commented on since the Mass was first in English.

Correcting translation is nothing like removing blood oaths (and accompanying pantomime) and nude anointing.

 

[rpp]

It is important to point out that in fact no changes to the Mass have been made. However, certain translations have been clarified. Nothing has changed. If the OF Mass were celebrated in Latin instead of English, which some parishes do, then nothing would change.

 

[Corki]

It’s strange that the article doesn’t mention “which will be poured out for you and for many”. I guess they didn’t consider that a significant change.

I can’t speak for the writer, but it may be because that change was part of an earlier directive. It was included in this translation but there wasn’t a choice.

 

[Marauder]

It’s strange that the article doesn’t mention “which will be poured out for you and for many”. I guess they didn’t consider that a significant change.

The article was mainly addressing the changes in the responses by the congregation. It wasn’t really addressing the changes to the parts the priest says in detail (other then just saying that things have/are changed). If I remember right there was another article in the same paper that mentioned that change.

 

[peary1]

Originally Posted by tundramom
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.”
Originally Posted by Chris Molter
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.

**I think the changes are for the better. They should have retained the translation exactly from the Latin instead of taking liberties with it.

In our parish, and at every Mass (there are 5 each Sunday, 1 on Saturday), nobody bows during “by the power of the Holy Spirit He was born of the Virgin Mary and became Man.” But the Missalette instructs us to do so. Reason? Laziness? Not caring? No reverence? Ignorance?

The next thing they should do is reinstate the Latin in those parts of the Mass that have been suggested. **

 

[Harpazo]

Wasn’t it ICEL’s fault that the liturgy was so poorly translated into English? The Maronites had the same problem and will be getting a more accurate translation of the Divine Liturgy from the Arabic.

Alloho minokhoun,
Andrew

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

From what I have seen and read the the changes to the English translation of the Missal for Catholic Mass is going to restore it back to the translations used before the VII. ( not say a return to the form of the Mass) just a return to the wording used. the No form is not changing.

 

[tundramom]

The intent of Vatican II was to retain the Latin in the Novus Ordo Missae. A special dispensation had to be given by the Vatican in order for the language in the Mass to be said in the vernacular. That is still necessary and, from what I understand, is something that needs to be renewed from time to time. Using any other language than Latin in the Mass is not an entitlement; permission is given.

I didn’t know that. Thank you for clarifying. I love it when we can al learn from each other.

in Christ
Steph