Tridentine Mass in the vernacular?

[OraLabora]

Depends on how you translate actuosa. (The authoritative version is the Latin one.) Note they didn’t use the word activa. A claim could be made it translates better to “actual” which in Spanish and Polish is closer to meaning “current.”

Hmm, Google Translate gives “active” as the translation of “actuosa”. So does my Oxford Latin-English dictionary.

FWIW, SC also uses “active” for French, “attiva” in Italian, “activa” in Spanish. I doubt so many translators in the Vatican got it wrong.

I don’t think your dog will hunt…

 

[ProVobis]

I doubt so many translators in the Vatican got it wrong.

Well, if one goes by dynamic translations…

 

[Denise1957]

I agree, Denise.

It is my contention that any Catholic growing up with the Latin Mass had a pretty good idea of what was going on and what was being said. By the time I was 12 or 13 I had the Mass pretty well memorized. I was not an alter boy, but I paid attention and could look up latin words that were new to me.

I always thought it was really neat that we Catholics had our own “language”. We could go to Mass anywhere in the world and understand it. Sort of like an exclusive club,with a secret code. One of the little things that made us exceptional.

Do miss it? Sort of. The use of the vernacular and the change of rubrics are in most ways personally acceptable. After all…“Ite Missa est.”

( I always wonder how they got “The Mass is ended” from that)

Well said.

Regarding your last point about translating, “Ite Missa est,” I have to wonder what the correct English translation would really be, if there is one. Maybe it’s one of those things that can’t be translated easily into English.

My old Saint Andrews daily missal, which was in use before the 1962 missal, translates “Ite, Missa est” into “Go, you are dismissed.”

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t think your dog will hunt…

Here’s what Fr. Z says then, and he knows more Latin than I do.

I have stated that actuosa conveys a more interior sense. The Council Father’s could have used the word activa conveying a more exterior participation. In short, what the Church really means by “active participation” is an “active receptivity” that has nothing to do with either being passive or with being busy at Mass.

wdtprs.com/blog/2006/03/the-true-meaning-of-active-participation/

 

[Confiteor_Deo]

Well said.

Regarding your last point about translating, “Ite Missa est,” I have to wonder what the correct English translation would really be, if there is one. Maybe it’s one of those things that can’t be translated easily into English.

My old Saint Andrews daily missal, which was in use before the 1962 missal, translates “Ite, Missa est” into “Go, you are dismissed.”

My missal translates it that way too. I think it literally translates as: Go, the dismissal it is. In regular English: Go, it is the dismissal. I’m not sure though so someone can correct it.

 

[Denise1957]

My missal translates it that way too. I think it literally translates as: Go, the dismissal it is. In regular English: Go, it is the dismissal. I’m not sure though so someone can correct it.

Thanks. If “Go, it is the dismissal” is the literal translation, I can see how it would be too clunky, and would have to be revised a bit to say…“Go, you are dismissed.”

What I find interesting it that in the old version, with either translation, the faithful are the subject, since it is the faithful who are being “dismissed,” whereas in the new translation, the Mass itself is the subject…“The Mass is ended.” Hmmm…

 

[ProVobis]

Thanks. If “Go, it is the dismissal” is the literal translation, I can see how it would be too clunky, and would have to be revised a bit to say…“Go, you are dismissed.”

What I find interesting it that in the old version, with either translation, the faithful are the subject, since it is the faithful who are being “dismissed,” whereas in the new translation, the Mass itself is the subject…“The Mass is ended.” Hmmm…

Just goes to show,

not everything is perfectly translatable, especially into English. And for a lot of reasons. So the preservation of theology is no way guaranteed.

.

 

[otjm]

Here’s what Fr. Z says then, and he knows more Latin than I do.

wdtprs.com/blog/2006/03/the-true-meaning-of-active-participation/

Acutosa as an interior sense means something, as opposed to passive. It is a bit hard to be acutosa - have interior participation, if you don’t have a clue as to what is being said.

The actuosa/activa bit has been exemplified by those who seem to think that the document meant they were to sue their hands in a gesture back to the priest when replying “and with your spirit”, etc. We can all agree the bishops did not mean that. But it is also clear they wanted at least some vernacular, so the people could actively interiorly participate, rather than warming the pew and saying whatever devotion they were partial to.

it really is not all that dense, folks.

 

[otjm]

Ite, missa est.

Missa may come from Mitto, Mittere, Misi, Missus, except that in going through the present, imperfect, future, perfect, pluperfect or future perfect, there is no missa unless it is the feminine form of the perfect passive participle of mittere (to send)

However, in Late Latin, Vulgar Latin, and Ecclesiastical Latin, the noun missa, missae means Mass according to other scholars.

so, it could be translated “Go, it is dismissed” or “dismissal”, or “Go, it is the Mass”.

Anyone taking a foreign language will soon learn that there are phrases in one language that simply do not abide a word for word translation to another. Saying Go, the Mass is ended is not an inaccurate translation; simply not a word for word translation.

 

[ProVobis]

FWIW, SC also uses “active” for French, “attiva” in Italian, “activa” in Spanish. I doubt so many translators in the Vatican got it wrong.

Depends on what they were translating from. If they all followed the ICEL’s lead into English, and translated from the English, any mistranslation would have been compounded, like what happened with “pro multis.” A real Tower of Babel, if you ask me. That’s why it was important to retranslate the English several years ago. It’s better now in the literal sense, but still far from perfect.

 

[graciew]

Acutosa as an interior sense means something, as opposed to passive. It is a bit hard to be acutosa - have interior participation, if you don’t have a clue as to what is being said.

The actuosa/activa bit has been exemplified by those who seem to think that the document meant they were to sue their hands in a gesture back to the priest when replying “and with your spirit”, etc. We can all agree the bishops did not mean that. But it is also clear they wanted at least some vernacular, so the people could actively interiorly participate, rather than warming the pew and saying whatever devotion they were partial to.

it really is not all that dense, folks.

In Spanish,actuoso/a is a word no longer used. Meaning : diligent,solicitous,careful. From actuosus,Latin.

 

[ProVobis]

In Spanish,actuoso/a is a word no longer used. Meaning : diligent,solicitous,careful. From actuosus,Latin.

I can see why.

 

[otjm]

In Spanish,actuoso/a is a word no longer used. Meaning : diligent,solicitous,careful. From actuosus, Latin.

Thank you. Never having taken any Spanish, I would have no clue; and given that the last class I had in Latin - in college - ended in 1966, it would be polite to say that my recall is dusty.
It is, at times, amusing to see how others translate a word; one definition of actuosus is “acting with extravagant gesture”, and “active, busy, energetic”.

Neither of which fit Father Z’s definition.

But even assuming that Father Z is correct, and that was what the Bishops of the world intended when they signed the document (interior participation), the bishops intended to resolve what was an all-too-common problem during Mass, and that was a de minimis participation by those who did not have a missal, had little or no training in Latin, and said their rosary or other devotional during the times when the priest was reciting Latin, only to pause during the elevations, and then returning to their devotions.

 

[ProVobis]

Hmm, Google Translate .

As I understand it, Google Translate doesn’t really translate. It simply searches for uses of the phrase or word and returns whatever its algorithm is designed to do. I managed to change the translation of “sursum corda” once and actually I was successful…for about five minutes. Someone else must have insisted on the original translation of “lift up your hearts” when everyone knows there is no “lift” or “your” in the Latin.

 

[graciew]

Thank you. Never having taken any Spanish, I would have no clue; and given that the last class I had in Latin - in college - ended in 1966, it would be polite to say that my recall is dusty.
It is, at times, amusing to see how others translate a word; one definition of actuosus is “acting with extravagant gesture”, and “active, busy, energetic”.

Neither of which fit Father Z’s definition.

But even assuming that Father Z is correct, and that was what the Bishops of the world intended when they signed the document (interior participation), the bishops intended to resolve what was an all-too-common problem during Mass, and that was a de minimis participation by those who did not have a missal, had little or no training in Latin, and said their rosary or other devotional during the times when the priest was reciting Latin, only to pause during the elevations, and then returning to their devotions.

I have always found ethymology very interesting. And same as you ,my latin comes.from.long ago ,High School. Nevertheless , Spanish still keeps.quite a good connection when it comes to Latin.
So I enjoy " tossing " these traslations and delight in all you guys know about almost everything.

 

[graciew]

I can see why.

Hahahaha. It had to be you ! Haha

 

[Denise1957]

Just goes to show,

not everything is perfectly translatable, especially into English. And for a lot of reasons. So the preservation of theology is no way guaranteed.

.

And I have found, too, that different languages may see things differently. Having studied Scottish Gaelic twenty years ago, I was surprised to see that there’s no possessive form. In that language, one cannot say…“I have a car”, or “I have a daughter.” Instead, one would say…“This is the car that is at me”, or “with me,” or…“This is the daughter that is at (or with) me.” There’s no “I have…,” or “This is my…”
It’s a different way of looking at life and things. I think it’s why the Scottish and Irish are just a tad bit different than other Europeans, or the British. Or a little weirder, depending on how you look at it.

I suspect that it’s similar with other languages, especially those that are non Indo-European. I don’t happen to think that English, in particular, lends itself to spiritual matters very well.

 

[OraLabora]

Depends on what they were translating from. If they all followed the ICEL’s lead into English, and translated from the English, any mistranslation would have been compounded, like what happened with “pro multis.” A real Tower of Babel, if you ask me. That’s why it was important to retranslate the English several years ago. It’s better now in the literal sense, but still far from perfect.

It would really surprise me to see French, Italian and Spanish translators work from an English translation of the Latin rather than directly from the Latin. After all these are Latin-derived languages.

As a clue, “pro multis” has always been rendered as “pour la multitude” in the French liturgy, of which I attend weekly.

Although “Deo gratias” at the end of readings was recently changed from “nous rendons gloire à Dieu” to “nous rendons grace à Dieu” to better reflect the Latin.

As someone who has a small translating business, I try to make translations not only readable but also conversational, without diluting the meaning. It’s often a challenge as OTJM points out. Liturgy is a bit different than conversation or reading of course, but a wooden-sounding translation is a distraction to good liturgy, which should convey a sense of grandeur, mystery and beauty. Liturgy is worship with all the senses, and worship needs flow with beauty, awe and also some simplicity.

Here I have to confess my own prejudice: to me, Latin and the Latin-derived languages do this better than English. I’ve always found the English liturgy a bit wooden, regardless of the translation used, but that could just be my unfamiliarity with it. I’ve also heard French liturgy pretty badly mangled. However, the chanted Eucharistic Prayer always seems to flow better in French than in English. As do the people’s responses.

I’ve always kind of suspected that this may be why so many US Catholics so much want a return to Latin, while in my part of the world, the demand is practically zero. The French, to me, just seems to work so much better at least for the Ordinary of the Mass, responses, etc. Alas we have no shortage of our own hokey and un-singable hymns. Vivement, un propre chanté dans la langue du peuple!

 

[OraLabora]

As I understand it, Google Translate doesn’t really translate. It simply searches for uses of the phrase or word and returns whatever its algorithm is designed to do. I managed to change the translation of “sursum corda” once and actually I was successful…for about five minutes. Someone else must have insisted on the original translation of “lift up your hearts” when everyone knows there is no “lift” or “your” in the Latin.

Yes, but then there’s my Oxford Latin-English dictionary… which concurs with Google in this instance.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Thanks. If “Go, it is the dismissal” is the literal translation, I can see how it would be too clunky, and would have to be revised a bit to say…“Go, you are dismissed.”

What I find interesting it that in the old version, with either translation, the faithful are the subject, since it is the faithful who are being “dismissed,” whereas in the new translation, the Mass itself is the subject…“The Mass is ended.” Hmmm…

The Roman Liturgy developed in Roman culture. The earliest Roman non-Jewish Christians would have understood it as a soldier understands a command. No military commander would shout ‘the formation is ended, go in peace’ or ‘go folks are dismissed’…it would be the same message conveyed sharply without unnecessary verbiage ‘Company, Dismissed!’ Now go kick the enemy’s behind!