The reform of the O.F. Mass is closer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Malkin71
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Malkin71

Guest
The U.S.C.C.B. has recently launched a new website about the changes commin to the O.F. Mass. The website has allthe changes to the laity and the Priest part. They also are going to have a section to answer questions. The change is comming sooner than people think. “Pro multis” is the correct translation “for many”. The reform of the reform has begun. The course the the church has been on is being corrected. This is only the begining.

usccb.org/romanmissal/examples.shtml

“Deo Gratias”!!!
 
The U.S.C.C.B. has recently launched a new website about the changes commin to the O.F. Mass. The website has allthe changes to the laity and the Priest part. They also are going to have a section to answer questions. The change is comming sooner than people think. “Pro multis” is the correct translation “for many”. The reform of the reform has begun. The course the the church has been on is being corrected. This is only the begining.

usccb.org/romanmissal/examples.shtml

“Deo Gratias”!!!
This has been 10+ years in the making. This is nothing new.

Yawn.
 
This has been 10+ years in the making. This is nothing new.

Yawn.
Actually, it’s not been 10 years in the making since the changes were prompted by the promulgation of Liturgiam Authenticam, which was released backin 2001. Thus, it’s been in the works for eight years. Remember, it takes a long time to undo 40 years worth of damage. It is also nothing to yawn about, as this is something of the highest importance
 
Ive read the changes, but I have to be honest. I have not attended an English Mass, I mainly go to Spanish Mass and the changes are something we already say in Mass, as far back as I can remember. Is this just a change in the Enlgish Mass?
 
Actually, it’s not been 10 years in the making since the changes were prompted by the promulgation of Liturgiam Authenticam, which was released backin 2001. Thus, it’s been in the works for eight years. Remember, it takes a long time to undo 40 years worth of damage. It is also nothing to yawn about, as this is something of the highest importance
Albeit that I do not voluntarily attend the OF, I don’t disagree about the importance of the forthcoming changes to the English version of the OF. At the same time, though, a delay of even 8 years makes me wonder how seriously the matter is taken by those “in power.”

Yes, it takes time to start to undo 40+ years worth of damage, but that may be begging the question. For example, the OF itself appeared within 4 years, and the miserable ICEL “translation” of same was there right from the start. This time around, it’s merely a translation (absent the quotes) of the OF, and it’s already been in the pipeline for 8 years … and counting.

There doesn’t seem to me to be a valid reason that a mere translation has had to take so long. And again, it’s only a translation of the editio typica, which means that it can only begin to undo the damage caused by the ICEL. 🤷
 
Ive read the changes, but I have to be honest. I have not attended an English Mass, I mainly go to Spanish Mass and the changes are something we already say in Mass, as far back as I can remember. Is this just a change in the Enlgish Mass?
If you live in the United States, you may soon find some changes to the Mass in Spanish, as the USCCB approved a new Roman Missal for use here. In Texas, at least down here in the hinterland, we are using the Roman Missal approved for use in Mexico. From what I understand, the USCCB tackled this one first and it is ready to be sent to Rome for the necessary recognitio. However, I think that they are waiting to get the English completed so that they can send both of them to Rome. Nonetheless, if the USCCB does not vote on the final English translations (or, if some members try to stall them), the Holy See admonished them and noted that the translations will go with or without the USCCB.
 
Actually, it’s not been 10 years in the making since the changes were prompted by the promulgation of Liturgiam Authenticam, which was released backin 2001. Thus, it’s been in the works for eight years. Remember, it takes a long time to undo 40 years worth of damage. It is also nothing to yawn about, as this is something of the highest importance
I am talking about the Roman Missal, not merely Liturgiam Authenticam. So is the Bishops’ web site. The third edition of the Missal was promulgated in the year 2000, and it certainly took time to prepare, that’s why I said 10+ years. I first heard about the Missal revision in 1998, so I know it was in progress at least that far back.

I agree the Missal revision is important.
 
A question about the revision, if someone would mind answering. I know the material that’s out there is not final, but I noticed something about the Gospel:

From the USCCB Web Site
  1. The deacon, or the Priest, then proceeds to the ambo, accompanied, if appropriate, by
    ministers with incense and candles. There he says
The Lord be with you.
The people reply:
And with your spirit.
The deacon, or the Priest:
A reading from the holy Gospel according to N.
and, at the same time, he makes the Sign of the Cross on the book and on his forehead,lips, and breast.
The people acclaim:
Glory to you, O Lord.
Currently, I make the Sign of the Cross on my forehead, lips, and breast as well. Is this practice going to be phased out for the people? This revision does not mention this practice at all.
 
A question about the revision, if someone would mind answering. I know the material that’s out there is not final, but I noticed something about the Gospel:

Currently, I make the Sign of the Cross on my forehead, lips, and breast as well. Is this practice going to be phased out for the people? This revision does not mention this practice at all.
That practice will remain. It is not mentioned in the Roman Missal, but it is mentioned in the GIRM (the General Instruction of the Roman Missal). No change there.
 
If you live in the United States, you may soon find some changes to the Mass in Spanish, as the USCCB approved a new Roman Missal for use here. In Texas, at least down here in the hinterland, we are using the Roman Missal approved for use in Mexico. From what I understand, the USCCB tackled this one first and it is ready to be sent to Rome for the necessary recognitio. However, I think that they are waiting to get the English completed so that they can send both of them to Rome. Nonetheless, if the USCCB does not vote on the final English translations (or, if some members try to stall them), the Holy See admonished them and noted that the translations will go with or without the USCCB.
Well, I’m kinda confused now. I live in Arizona, and the new translation, is what the parishes around my area have been saying for years. So if the new translation is what is going to be used as the standard for English Masses, what is the proposed changes for the Spanish, since we are already using the new translation?
 
Well, I’m kinda confused now. I live in Arizona, and the new translation, is what the parishes around my area have been saying for years. So if the new translation is what is going to be used as the standard for English Masses, what is the proposed changes for the Spanish, since we are already using the new translation?
The Spanish missal and lectionary are not being revised for translation errors, as is the case with the English. The better word would be reviewed. The Spanish books that we use in the USA are perfectly fine as far as the translation goes. They have none of the errors of the English. But what they want to do is to rework them in a North American Spanish edition.

The idea of a North American Spanish is not a new one. It did not begin in Church circles. Today, when more than 30% US citizens are first language Spanish speakers and have a Spanish that is very properly a Spanish of the United States, it is becoming more common in educated circles to use that register of Spanish instead of the Mexican, Caribbean, Latin American or Spanish.

When the committee met to discuss the Spanish in the mass, it was found that many of the words, though they are correctly translated, are not universal to all Spanish-Speaking North Americans. A simpel example: vosotros vs. ustedes or tu and su. Both are correct. The question is which is the appropriate form for American Spanish. Like this, there are many little details in the missal that are going to change.

Then of course there are the movements of certain elements. But those have nothing to do with language. That has to do with uniformity.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
The Spanish missal and lectionary are not being revised for translation errors, as is the case with the English. The better word would be reviewed. The Spanish books that we use in the USA are perfectly fine as far as the translation goes. They have none of the errors of the English. But what they want to do is to rework them in a North American Spanish edition.

The idea of a North American Spanish is not a new one. It did not begin in Church circles. Today, when more than 30% US citizens are first language Spanish speakers and have a Spanish that is very properly a Spanish of the United States, it is becoming more common in educated circles to use that register of Spanish instead of the Mexican, Caribbean, Latin American or Spanish.

When the committee met to discuss the Spanish in the mass, it was found that many of the words, though they are correctly translated, are not universal to all Spanish-Speaking North Americans. A simpel example: vosotros vs. ustedes or tu and su. Both are correct. The question is which is the appropriate form for American Spanish. Like this, there are many little details in the missal that are going to change.

Then of course there are the movements of certain elements. But those have nothing to do with language. That has to do with uniformity.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Ah, thank you for clearing that up. Yes I do agree with certain words not universally spoken by all Latin Americans. Although in your example regarding vosotros and ustedes,the former is a more proper way of speaking, and tends to have its roots to European Spanish.
 
Ah, thank you for clearing that up. Yes I do agree with certain words not universally spoken by all Latin Americans. Although in your example regarding vosotros and ustedes,the former is a more proper way of speaking, and tends to have its roots to European Spanish.
This is true. But we are not Europeans and the Spanish language academy of the Americas now recognizes the USA as the fourth/fifth Spanish-Speaking nation in the world.
  1. Spain
  2. Mexico
  3. Venezuela
  4. USA/Colombia
Since there is no international or national recognition of the USA as an English only nation, the tendency in the Church is to recognize the USA as a bilingual nation, so that USA Spanish is considered a branch of Spanish as legitimate as USA English.

North Americans are going to have to make the transition to the idea that the USA is a bilingual nation. This is not a bad thing. There are many nations in the world that are multi-lingual, even in Latin America and Europe. How many official languages does Switzerland have?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
After reading the posts - particularly as regards varied Spanish, Colombian or Latin American translations - has anyone gotten the same feeling as myself? It hits you between the eyes. ALL THE MORE REASON why Latin should have just stayed in place to begin with. No matter your country of origin / nationality, we all spoke one language during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. We didn’t need to be fluent in Latin - just the responses of the Mass in our Missals.

Now, there’s discussion over how a particular nationality has worded their Mass when speaking in their vernacular.

One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. For less than an hour a week - we all spoke one language, prayed one prayer, and it didn’t matter where we were born. **For centuries - it was what it was. Now, we have to worry about undoing “40 years”? **
It really makes you think.
 
For less than an hour a week - we all spoke one language, prayed one prayer, and it didn’t matter where we were born. **For centuries - it was what it was. Now, we have to worry about undoing “40 years”? **
It really makes you think.
Nor did it much matter where one lived.

IMHO, liturgical languages, (whether Latin in the Roman Church, or OCS, or Aramaic, or Coptic, or Ghe’ez, etc in the East and Orient) have several advantages, one of those being that they are a unifying factor and impart a sense of identity within the Particular Churches irrespective of a geographic location.
 
The U.S.C.C.B. has recently launched a new website about the changes commin to the O.F. Mass. The website has allthe changes to the laity and the Priest part. They also are going to have a section to answer questions. The change is comming sooner than people think. “Pro multis” is the correct translation “for many”. The reform of the reform has begun. The course the the church has been on is being corrected. This is only the begining.

usccb.org/romanmissal/examples.shtml

“Deo Gratias”!!!
Thanks for sharing the link! As for myself, I am looking forward to it!
 
Please tell me, what was so wrong with the current translation?

I hate change.😃

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top