The Tablet report on Novo Ordo translation

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

malcolm_davies

Guest
THE UNITED STATES bishops’ committee on the liturgy (BCL) says there are “real difficulties with the translation” of the most recent English draft of the Ordo Missae (Order of Mass), following the rejection of nearly half of its proposed changes to the original text by the International Committee on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) – the group overseeing the translation.

Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pennsylvania, who is the BCL’s chairman, sent all the American bishops a copy of the newest English translation of the Ordo a month ago and invited them to make line-by-line suggestions to improve it. In a letter accompanying the text, seen by The Tablet, Bishop Trautman said the BCL was “convinced … that the translation of the Order of Mass is one of the most important matters to have ever come before” the bishops’ conference. He said the revised text was “much improved over the first draft” (which was completed in early 2004) but he expressed concern that there were still “problematic passages … phrases [that] were seen as infelicitous to English spoken in the United States”. He also said there were questions about “the intelligibility of some words”.

With his invitation Bishop Trautman enclosed a letter from ICEL’s chairman, Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds, that justified the latest translation of the Order of Mass as having taken into account many suggestions made by the 26 English-speaking bishops’ conferences across the globe, especially the request to shorten lengthy sentences and eliminate archaic words.

Bishop Roche said the new text retained some of the expressions that the bishops’ conferences judged to be “foreign to contemporary usage” in order not to restrict liturgical vocabulary “so much that it became boringly repetitive”. He said: “Some of the choices we have made are simply matters of taste over which the commission was divided.” Such cases, he said, were decided by a majority vote of ICEL’s 11 bishop members.

This latest text retains many of the transliterations from the Latin that were present in the earlier draft, reflecting the strict guidelines laid down by the Vatican in its 2001 instruction Liturgiam Authenticam (“The Authentic Liturgy”). Substantial word and syntax changes in the Gloria, the Sanctus, and in the various Eucharistic Prayers have been retained in the latest translation of the Order of Mass and it is unclear how much power the bishops’ conferences will have in altering the final draft, which is expected to be completed early next year.

One translation that seems destined to remain, despite widespread objection by a great number of liturgists and bishops, is the people’s response to “the Lord be with you”. English-speaking Catholics have always responded, “and also with you”. However the latest small group of bishops overseeing ICEL’s translations are insisting on changing that to, “and with your spirit”, in order to identically mirror the Latin “et cum spiritu tuo”.

ICEL, which has translated all the liturgical texts into English in the past 40 years, was reorganised after the Vatican created the 12-member Vox Clara Commission in 2001. The new group has exerted pressure over ICEL to ensure a more literal translation of English texts for worship. The translation of the new Roman Missal (issued in Latin in 2000), of which the Order of the Mass is the major element, is the first major task of the reformed ICEL. Bishop Roche said the committee is still working on the other prayers that constitute the 1,300-page book used to guide the celebration of Mass. No deadline has been fixed for the completion of the entire Missal, but it is anticipated that it will be at least another two years before the finalised text is ready to be implemented in English-speaking dioceses around the world.
 
Sometimes I get really frustrated with the USCCB. When the new Catechism was released years ago, its translation into English took nearly 4 years because the Bishops fought tooth and nail to have more “inclusive language” written in.

Needless to say, those 4 years were wasted and the Vatican won. But that was 4 years that the American faithful had to go without the new Catechism because of political correctness. Ugh…:rolleyes:
 
Sounds like Bishop Trautman, et al., are behaving as petulent children because they realize that their little forty-year old liturgical text holiday is near its end.
 
We could cure all of this easily by simply going back to Latin. 😉
 
40.png
Wolseley:
We could cure all of this easily by simply going back to Latin. 😉
Amen to that ! That was what the Latin Mass was all about.
Every year the English language morphs a bit.
 
The Latin langauge in the Vatican morphs as well. Maybe not in the Mass, but they do create new Latin words (words for things like car, computer, cola, cell phone, you know things that weren’t around 1500 years ago.

I read the report in my diocese’s newspaper about the conference. They put all the liturgical stuff on the back burner.
In all reality, there are bigger issues than wheter to say and with your spirit or and also with you.
 
Some of the ‘repetitiveness’ (like in the Confiteor) is repetitive to show the significance of certain parts of the prayers. I’m not holding my breath for an acceptable translation- unless the pope forces the English-speaking world to use a certain translation. I have little faith in the USCCB- they remind me of the English bishops under Henry VII, who put their own national pride before God.
 
40.png
mike182d:
Sometimes I get really frustrated with the USCCB. When the new Catechism was released years ago, its translation into English took nearly 4 years because the Bishops fought tooth and nail to have more “inclusive language” written in.

Needless to say, those 4 years were wasted and the Vatican won. But that was 4 years that the American faithful had to go without the new Catechism because of political correctness. Ugh…:rolleyes:
Appears to be 7 years for a Mass in English from the date of the New, New, New Mass in Latin-to-english. God forbid that they let us use the Latin until they resolve what “Spiritu” means, so far they think it means “non-pronounce”. It sounds more like a soap advertisement. I thought the 1970 missal Romanum was the “excellent” one approved by Paul VI?
Now we are assured it was not as good as it could be, 2 times over.
Gotta wonder how God felt about those millions of “less than the best” masses.
I gave up on the Pauline Mass when the Anglican Use appeared in a nearby city.
Then I stumbled into an indult one evening in 2002, and that was it! It not only changed my ideas about the mass but changed my whole outlook on the Catholic Faith. I’ve come to love the Faith like never before.
I would consider going back to the Pauline mass, or its current morphism as a different form of the Faith.
That’s just how I was affected.
Now, I just look at the rangling, revisions, ICEL mischief and confusion of the Pauline perfomance as someone outside looking in. It’s as far away from my daily or Sunday concerns as Japan deciding to import US beef or the weather in Alaska.
I feel sorry for those who have no practical choice within 50 miles.
I have heard the point about “don’t AWOL” on the Pauline mass, just stay and fight to get it right in “your” parish. Well, God expects to be worshipped each holy day, NOW not in the future time unknown. My first obligation is to the Faith and its practice, not church liturgy politics. I only have a limited time to raise my kids in the proper faith.
When the episcopate cannot see where “Spiritu” means “Spirit” and not a fly-over word, I know the mass is in the wrong hands. A 4yr old could discern that much.
How hypocritical to claim that the Latin cannot be understood by the laity when they themselves freeze up over “Spiritu”…for 5 years and no end in sight.:o
They are a gross embarrassment to the Catholic, the Faith, and are “monkeys” to the world.
Even the poor Episcopalians can see that what the ICEL is and has done is totally distorting the Catholic faith. It boggles me to hear catholics defending this bunch of linguistic terrorists. Unfortunately, every time you put money in the collection, you are supporting the ICEL and its mother, the USCCB so they can continue to confuse and obfuscate. Do you think that they would come to agreement if they had no more funds for airfares, meals, and “vacation” meetings? :yup:
 
I put the blame on this latest fiasco squarely on the shoulders of our bishops. They are the ones that backhandedly voted-in Bp. Trautman as the chairman of the BCL, knowing his divisive history with the Holy See, and his utter disdain for anything even remotely traditional in the liturgy.

The ICEL, on the other hand, has done a wonderful job of re-inventing itself at the behest of the Vatican. I was particularly impressed with the overall initial translation of the new Ordo Missae last year.

Of course, once our own bishops and their so-called “liturgists” got ahold of it, they began tearing it to shreads. What a shame!
 
I know this is a Latin issue, one that I do have a vested interest in though as I am joining the Carmelites, but I must comment on something here.
40.png
malcolm_davies:
One translation that seems destined to remain, despite widespread objection by a great number of liturgists and bishops, is the people’s response to “the Lord be with you”. English-speaking Catholics have always responded, “and also with you”. However the latest small group of bishops overseeing ICEL’s translations are insisting on changing that to, “and with your spirit”, in order to identically mirror the Latin “et cum spiritu tuo”.
I find this very annoying, especially when this comes from a, supposed, Catholic periodical.

As if all English speaking Catholics are Latin Catholics.

We Byzantine Catholics are also English speaking Catholics and we have always used “and with your spirit”.

The “and also with you” just seems odd to me. It sounds like “Yeah, you too” to me.

I do believe that the current translation is a mess and many bishops seem to want to keep the mess rather than have a more proper translation.

What is this idea of “foreign to contemporary usage” mean? The Liturgy should be something different.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
I know this is a Latin issue, one that I do have a vested interest in though as I am joining the Carmelites, but I must comment on something here.

I find this very annoying, especially when this comes from a, supposed, Catholic periodical.

As if all English speaking Catholics are Latin Catholics.

We Byzantine Catholics are also English speaking Catholics and we have always used “and with your spirit”.

The “and also with you” just seems odd to me. It sounds like “Yeah, you too” to me.

I do believe that the current translation is a mess and many bishops seem to want to keep the mess rather than have a more proper translation.

What is this idea of “foreign to contemporary usage” mean? The Liturgy should be something different.
Actually, it is about english as much as Latin. So, carry on.
RE: What is this idea of “foreign to contemporary usage” mean?
Newspeak for never saying what you mean in plain terms. The translation is: Not ecumenical enough and toooo religious concerning man having a soul or spirit.
Or, newspeak for "How can we “destroy a Religion, if we keep using its traditions.”
The truth is, we have publicans and tax collectors designing the liturgy of the catholics whose Faith is completely anathema to them.
The best thing B16 could do is hit the Gong and in 1 sentence say something like, “The spirit has spoken to the churches again, and thus we dissolve the ICEL as it denies the spirit.”
Thank you and God Bless. …more sauerkraut please
 
40.png
Chatter163:
Sounds like Bishop Trautman, et al., are behaving as petulent children because they realize that their little forty-year old liturgical text holiday is near its end.
:D:D:D
 
I think that “and with your spirit”, gives a sense to people that the priest is NOT some guy up there in front of us, but is infused with Holy Orders and doing the service of the Body of Christ [church] in this case the Holy Mass. Maybe it will make some thing click inside those in the pew.:hmmm:
 
40.png
Bulldog:
I think that “and with your spirit”, gives a sense to people that the priest is NOT some guy up there in front of us, but is infused with Holy Orders and doing the service of the Body of Christ [church] in this case the Holy Mass. Maybe it will make some thing click inside those in the pew.:hmmm:
That’s pretty much what the Epicopalians said in the link I gave earlier.
 
I pray for the day when the Reign of Terror which is the fruit of Vatical II will be routed and the true LATIN Mass of Pius V restored.

Do the Communists and Masons in (temporary) power in the Church think we are morons that we would ever give up the beauty of the true Mass Christ gave us for a putrid mess of all religions intermixed. The Holy Ghost is in charge, then, now and forever!.
 
We could cure all of this easily by simply going back to Latin. 😉
We actually had a very good Missal in the late sixties, the one in use when I got married in 1967 comes to mind. The translation was quite good, perhaps not as literal as the latest revision but better than the VII version.
 
I pray for the day when the Reign of Terror which is the fruit of Vatical II will be routed and the true LATIN Mass of Pius V restored.

Do the Communists and Masons in (temporary) power in the Church think we are morons that we would ever give up the beauty of the true Mass Christ gave us for a putrid mess of all religions intermixed. The Holy Ghost is in charge, then, now and forever!.
How on earth did you find time to dig up a thread whose last post before yours was more than five years ago?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top