Tough Time With New Wording At Mass

[Phemie]

Yes, we did, but I don’t recall if there was any official interim translation before ICEL. Of course, nearly everyone before 1960 DID have a “translation”–the one that was in their missal! And those tended to be pretty uniform and pretty closely matched the Latin original.

Of course, it was not just the English translation that changed. It was the Latin as well. A good deal of the Latin–and it’s corresponding English translation–was removed from the Mass, including for example the preparatory “prayers at the foot of the altar.” Even today, some of those come back to me fully formed, even the priest’s parts–in Latin of course; that’s a result of years of altar serving.)

There was no official translation before the 1970 Missal, which we really didn’t see for a few years after that. Different countries used different ones and even different dioceses used different ones.

 

[Seeker1961]

I recently returned to the Church after a 5 year absence and the new words are tricky for me. However, I know the solution. Attend Mass regularly and I will memorize them because I am using them frequently! That’s how I learned all the other ones in Latin and in English. Repetition!

 

[acacia12]

I recently returned to the Church after a 5 year absence and the new words are tricky for me. However, I know the solution. Attend Mass regularly and I will memorize them because I am using them frequently! That’s how I learned all the other ones in Latin and in English. Repetition!

My thoughts exactly

 

[ProVobis]

And those tended to be pretty uniform and pretty closely matched the Latin original.

Much of it wasn’t. For example, before the minor elevation:

Interlinear: Per quem hæc omnia, Domine, semper bona creas,
By Whom these all, Lord, always good things you create,

sanctificas, vivificas, benedicis, et præstas nobis.
You sanctify, You give life to, You bless, and you give to us

EC Missal: By Whom, O Lord, Thou dost always create, sanctify, quicken, bless, and bestow upon us all these good things. (also Fr. Lasance)

St Joseph: Through Whom, O Lord, You always create, sanctify, fill with life, bless, and bestow upon us all good things.

My Sunday Missal: Through whom, O Lord, Thou dost ever create, hallow, fill with life, bless and bestow upon us all good things.

St. Andrew: Through whom, O Lord, Thou dost always create, sanctify, quicken, bless, and bestow upon us all these Thy gifts.

ICEL 1: Through him you give us all these gifts. You fill them with life and goodness, you bless them and make them holy.

ICEL 2: Through whom you continue to create all these good things, O Lord; you make them holy, fill them with life, bless them, and bestow them upon us.

 

[Phemie]

Phemie, out of curiosity, when did the French change? Or did they at all? I think you mentioned that the consecration is “for you and for the multitudes” which would probably be more cognative of the Latin.

I was in grade 6 when we started using French so it would have been either late 64 or winter 1965 because I remember trudging through the snow from the parish hall, where grades 6 (French & English) & 7 English were housed, to the old school house where the Sister who taught grade 7 French would spend the lunch hour teaching us the responses that were coming.

At some point the translation had us go to an informal ‘Lord’s Prayer’ where we address God in the second person singular rather than the formal or ‘polite’ second person plural. That probably coincided with the translation of the 1970 Missal because originally we were using the formal version that I still use if I’m praying outside of Mass.

In response to 'Le Seigneur soit avec vous" we have always replied ‘Et avec votre esprit.’ Funny how we address God in the second person singular but the priest in the formal second person plural.

The Consecration is “pour vous et pour la multitude” which is ‘the many’ rather than simply ‘many’, which would be ‘plusieurs’.

As far as the Third Typical Edition goes, I know a French Translation is in the process of being approved but I have no idea when we will get it. We have our own version of ICEL, called AELF, L’Association épiscopale liturgique pour les pays francophones (Afrique du Nord, Belgique, Canada, France, Luxembourg, Suisse)

The only Mass I’ve attended in French since the English translation was promulgated was last Christmas’ Midnight Mass and I didn’t notice anything different at that time. The French GIRM has been translated and is on the Vatican website but also in a book called “L’art de célébrer la Messe” (The Art of Celebrating Mass).

 

[Chatter163]

I didn’t understand why these things had changed. I used to think that my memory was going bad, that I’d incorrectly been recalling things from Anglican churches instead of Catholic churches. But when I went to an EF mass, I saw the side-by-side translation, and it clicked. “Et cum spiritu tuo” literally translated means “and with your spirit”. It’s closer to the original Latin – closer to tradition than before!

Such irony here, because so many of us pointed out the deficiencies in the old ICEL so many years ago–in the 1970s and 1980s–but at that time anyone who made similar criticisms was dismissed as reactionary or a disloyal crank. I realize that for many or most people in the pew, this has all seemed new, but the translation concerns go back forty years, and the work of retranslation goes back a decade, This was a long time in the making, and drafts were available on the internet for several years before.

I still have my “1965 translation” hand missal. That was the translation I believe was widely used for English Masses in the United States. It had side-by-side English and Latin although it was designed to be primarily for English Masses. My missal seems to be “hiding” at the moment so I can’t look it up but I’m quite certain it says, “for many”. “For all,” must have come later.

Correct. “For all” was one of many items that was not present in any of the 1965-1969 interim texts and only appeared in the final missal.

My high school teacher told us to hold off buying hand missals in 1963 as a lot of changes were expected back then. I never saw the 1965 or 1967 missals; I just remembered that they dropped Psalm 42 and the Last Gospel and then had the priest facing the people and speaking the Mass out loud in whatever translation he could find. Much of it sounded very weird. There was no standard until the ICEL came along, but they started their work even before Vatican II convened. In fact, they had so much influence, many other translations (Spanish, etc.) were based on their work and not the Latin. Even today the Spanish consecration has the “for you and for all men.”

ICEL did not start work before the council, as they did not come into existence until late 1963, when the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy was promulgated, giving approval to “the parts of the Mass that pertain to the people” being in the vernacular. The translations used from 1965-1969 were used throughout the USA, and were made by the U.S. bishops’ conference, largely based on existing unofficial translations from people’s missals.

And I remember Sr. Mary Jean Patrice making us practice saying, “Ay-men” if the priest said, “The Body of Christ,” and, “Ah-men,” if the priest said, “Dominus vobiscum.” This was in 1965 and 1966 as we were practicing for our First Communions. (Our First Communion Mass turned out to be in English.)

This is very interesting, a fictitious dichotomy. IME, people still say “Ah-men” when singing the response at an English Mass.

Yes, we did, but I don’t recall if there was any official interim translation before ICEL. Of course, nearly everyone before 1960 DID have a “translation”–the one that was in their

All of the translations that were used between December, 1964 and December, 1969 were the authorized translations made by the U.S. bishops’ conference. These were intended to be temporary but, as others have pointed out, they were quite simialr to what we have again now., just as they were similar to the various unofficial and unauthorized translations that had appeared in people’s hand missals prior to 1965.

 

[PrincepsAuguste]

I don’t mind the new translations so much as I mind the new music. None of the new Glorias or Holies have quite matched the grandeur that was the old Creation mass settings for those.

 

[SMHW]

There may not have been an “official” English translation prior to the ICEL translation but I believe that in the United States there was a fairly standard translation used.

This is a page from my hand missal. I believe the English-Latin Sacramentary mentioned was widely used in the USA.

NIHIL OBSTAT:
John A. Goodwine, J.C.D.

Censor Librorum
​

IMPRIMATUR:

• Terence J. Cooke, D.D., V.G.

**This New Missal has been diligently prepared with **the invaluable assistance of a special Board of Editors, including specialists in Liturgy, Sacred Scripture, Catechetics, Sacred Music and Art.

The official texts of the Ordinary and the Proper are reproduced with permission from the Roman Missal with English translations and the new English-Latin Sacramentary—both approved by the National Conference of Bishops of the United States and published by authority of the Bishops’ Commission on the Liturgical Apostolate, 1312 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005. © 1964 and 1966 by the National Catholic Welfare Conference, Inc. Scriptural Verses adapted from the Book of Psalms © 1950 and 1955 by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. English translation of the Orations, Prefaces, and similar material copyright © 1957, 1961, 1966, by P. J. Kenedy & Sons.

All other texts, illustrations and special “sense-line arrangement” for congregational recitation (based on poetic structure) Copyright 1966 by Catholic Book Publishing Co., N.Y.

Music acknowledgments on p. 1385

 

[Chatter163]

There may not have been an “official” English translation prior to the ICEL translation but I believe that in the United States there was a fairly standard translation used.

This is a page from my hand missal. I believe the English-Latin Sacramentary mentioned was widely used in the USA.

Correct.The translations of the interim period were all produced under the aegis of the bishops’ conference. The translations in Latin-English people’s missals before 1965 were the ones where there was no official translation of the Latin.

 

[SMHW]

I still have my “1965 translation” hand missal. That was the translation I believe was widely used for English Masses in the United States. It had side-by-side English and Latin although it was designed to be primarily for English Masses. My missal seems to be “hiding” at the moment so I can’t look it up but I’m quite certain it says, “for many”. “For all,” must have come later.

Actually my old missal does not have side-by-side English and Latin. The Latin is in small print at the bottom of the page.

 

[Chatter163]

Actually my old missal does not have side-by-side English and Latin. The Latin is in small print at the bottom of the page.

Let me guess: Your missal is from the interim period, most likely c. 1967? As more and more of the Latin in the Mass was being replaced by the vernacular, some missal publishers, most notably the St. Joseph Missal, began to shrink the Latin into footnotes, rather than opposite columns and pages.

 

[SMHW]

Let me guess: Your missal is from the interim period, most likely c. 1967? As more and more of the Latin in the Mass was being replaced by the vernacular, some missal publishers, most notably the St. Joseph Missal, began to shrink the Latin into footnotes, rather than opposite columns and pages.

1. I can’t remember if I got it in 1966 or 1967 but it would have been that general time frame.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

I’m starting to get the new translation much better. I still have to reed the Creed. I had it very well memorized in the old translation and can’t seem to get the new one fully in my head. I’ll get there haha…Gloria isn’t a problem for me because we sing it and I’m part of music ministry.

 

[ProVobis]

Let me guess: Your missal is from the interim period, most likely c. 1967? As more and more of the Latin in the Mass was being replaced by the vernacular, some missal publishers, most notably the St. Joseph Missal, began to shrink the Latin into footnotes, rather than opposite columns and pages.

I don’t know how long they’ve been in existence but St Joseph Missal was not much known for its Latin content. Even in the pre-Vatican II missals, the propers were solely in English. I questioned their authenticity. Made the Mass readings difficult to follow, especially if you were unsure whether you had the right Mass for the day. They were easy to hold, they did have nice pictures and print for the ordinary of the Mass, though. But for the EF, I would suggest any missal but the St. Joseph’s. And hopefully some day I’ll find a missal which has the Latin in larger font than the English.

 

[SMHW]

I don’t know how long they’ve been in existence but St Joseph Missal was not much known for its Latin content. Even in the pre-Vatican II missals, the propers were solely in English. I questioned their authenticity. Made the Mass readings difficult to follow, especially if you were unsure whether you had the right Mass for the day. They were easy to hold, they did have nice pictures and print for the ordinary of the Mass, though. But for the EF, I would suggest any missal but the St. Joseph’s. And hopefully some day I’ll find a missal which has the Latin in larger font than the English.

My missal would probably suffice for an EF although I don’t recall ever using it at a Latin Mass. I keep it around as a reference book. (My junior high self must have somehow known that I would use it again 30 years later.) It served me well at daily Mass for the three to four years it was in use as an English language missal.

 

[ProVobis]

ICEL did not start work before the council, as they did not come into existence until late 1963, when the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy was promulgated, giving approval to “the parts of the Mass that pertain to the people” being in the vernacular.

You may be right on that. Pope John XXIII was quite opposed to using the vernacular; he foresaw problems and he stated so in his Veterum Sapientia which he issued right before convening the council. And since he didn’t sign any of the council documents (SC was the first one, I believe), it probably wasn’t until he died (in 1963) before anyone took action into producing actual vernacular texts to be used inside the liturgy.

 

[thomasf]

Our Bishop celebrated the mass on last sunday and he admitted he didn’t know the new creed and had to use the cheat sheets added to the missles to say it.

 

[ProVobis]

In response to 'Le Seigneur soit avec vous" we have always replied ‘Et avec votre esprit.’ Funny how we address God in the second person singular but the priest in the formal second person plural.

That’s interesting. I enjoy reading about these linguistical quirks and nuances.

In the Polish, it is usally better to avoid the second person singular altogether (The third person “pan” or “pani” is commonly used instead even with God) but in the response alluded to it is “I z duchem twoim” (second person singular). The priest’s part is “Pan z wami” (second person plural).

 

[SMHW]

Originally Posted by SMHW

I realize this is slightly off topic even though it does deal with knowing what to say and when… I have often mentioned this little anecdote when one of those, “How do you pronounce amen?” threads sprung up. I’ve gotten the sense that most people thought I was crazy. But in the Los Angeles Archdiocese of the early 1960s, where a significant portion of the clergy was born in Ireland but trained in the United States, it was taken for granted that the word amen had both Latin and English forms. That idea carried over into the Mass. (Ay-men was the typical pronunciation used by the composers of the early folk Masses of the 1960s and 1970s.)

Ay-men is still the default pronunciation I hear at spoken English Masses. But even contemporary Catholic composers stopped using the ay-men pronunciation for sung Mass parts sometime around 1980.

 

[houseofsaul]

I don’t have a problem with the new wording but I must admit that unless I’m being vigilant “And also with you” comes tripping off my tongue, particularly before the Gospel when I’m not following the card. I have not memorized the Gloria or the Apostles Creed yet.

“And also with you”…Me too same problem. I guess being an old dog I dont want to learn new tricks, lol