US priests dislike Mass translation, survey finds [CNAU]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This business about translation is something I don’t understand. There are many different English translations of the Bible, and that is thought to be ok, right? So, why is it a big deal that everyone should agree on the translation for the mass service? Why couldn’t those churches who prefer the old translation use that one, and those that prefer the new use that one? I guess I don’t understand why this is such a big deal. Maybe someone could explain?

Thanks!
 
Interesting survey and even more interesting results. I was led to believe that “everyone” wanted and needed these changes. That making these changes was going to “bring back” the liturgy. Looks like it is not bearing the fruits that were anticipated.
 
mafh said:
This business about translation is something I don’t understand. There are many different English translations of the Bible, and that is thought to be ok, right? So, why is it a big deal that everyone should agree on the translation for the mass service? Why couldn’t those churches who prefer the old translation use that one, and those that prefer the new use that one? I guess I don’t understand why this is such a big deal. Maybe someone could explain?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
The previous translation of the Mass was done by the method which is called, I think, “dynamic equivalency”. While that is a valid method for some translations, Rome did not feel that the previous translation was done as well as it could have been done and wanted a translation that was more literal to the Latin.

Language has meaning. Using one word as opposed to another is a judgment call, and when it becomes too dynamic, intent and meaning can be lost in part. Precision in liturgy has great value as the liturgy is the foundation of our worship of God. That is not to say that the previous translation was sloppy, and those who might propose that do an injustice to the translators. It was not sloppy, but it also was not precise.

The liturgy is not something we do as individual communities; it is something we do as a Church. The language is more formal than the previous translation, and one of the complaints for a very long time (and well merited) is that we have lost formality. The liturgy is not some semi-formal gathering of believers designed to talk about loving one another and doing good, and designed to send us out into the world feeling good about who we are; it is our central act of worship. And worship, in some circumstances, has become too casual and too malleabale in the hands of some priests who seemed to think they were experts in liturgy.

The entire article is worth reading.
 
Boulder257 said:
Interesting survey and even more interesting results. I was led to believe that “everyone” wanted and needed these changes. That making these changes was going to “bring back” the liturgy. Looks like it is not bearing the fruits that were anticipated.
Click to expand...
The whole article at Catholic News, along with the comments, and the article in full from National Catholic Reporter is worth reading. NCR is generally not something I would wrap a dead fish in, as I have too much respect for the fish. However, this one had some interesting news: CARA also did a poll, not of priests but of laity, and 70% of the laity polled responded positively to the changes.

So I am not so sure that I would say that it is not bearing fruits that were anticipated. Noted ( I think in the comments in the piece in Catholic News) was the fact that the poll done of the priests does not indicate by age or date of ordination how priests answered, and that is perhaps a critical lack of information. From the information in the articles, it appears that the poll was widely sent to all dioceses and hopefully to all priests. That in itself could result in skewing.

I am not a betting man, but I would bet dollars to donuts that the ordination range of what is often referred to as the John Paul 2 priests voted strongly in favor of the new translation; however, from the way the poll was taken, that is not provable. Just MHO.

As with any information, one needs to be cautious. Neither poll surprises me; if I was surprised by anything, it was that NCR was honest enough to include CARA’s findings.
 
Catholic_Press said:
May 21, '13 6:00 am
For every two US priests who prefer a new set of Vatican-ordered English translations of the Roman Catholic Mass, there are three others who say they do not, according to a survey, reports NCR.http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/cathnews/RSS/~4/gpj6wN10-Bw

More…
Click to expand...
Looks like someone trying to stir the pot to cause trouble. The survey is useless. Preist don’t like lots of things, make no difference, they are under a vow of obediance, this is not a democracy and the bishops are not guided by polls.
 
FAB said:
Looks like someone trying to stir the pot to cause trouble. The survey is useless. Preist don’t like lots of things, make no difference, they are under a vow of obediance, this is not a democracy and the bishops are not guided by polls.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Reminds of an old saying when serving in the U.S. Air Force:

Do not question authority…just obey orders. 😉
 
mafh said:
This business about translation is something I don’t understand. There are many different English translations of the Bible, and that is thought to be ok, right? So, why is it a big deal that everyone should agree on the translation for the mass service? Why couldn’t those churches who prefer the old translation use that one, and those that prefer the new use that one? I guess I don’t understand why this is such a big deal. Maybe someone could explain?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Because theologically the old translation left a lot to be desired as my former Pastor told me. It is the English speaking world that has such an issue with the new translation. I also speak Spanish and no one I know had an issue with the minor changes.
 
I just think it is rather funny how the trads discussed how to impart the mutiny when they didn’t like things, but as soon as the pendulum starts to swing the other direction they shout “obedience!” smh

I consider myself traditional in many ways, but personally, I absolutely DESPISE when we label ourselves. It just makes it easier for us and for others to divide and conquer.
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
I absolutely love the changes.🙂
Click to expand...
Me too. I fear for those that don’t understand them. That they won’t get as much out of it. But for those of us that took the time to educate ourselves I think the changes are wonderful.
 
Nicea325 said:
Because theologically the old translation left a lot to be desired as my former Pastor told me. It is the English speaking world that has such an issue with the new translation. I also speak Spanish and no one I know had an issue with the minor changes.
Click to expand...
I too noticed the “por todos” to “por muchos” change in the words of consecration. No big deal.
 
otjm said:
The whole article at Catholic News, along with the comments, and the article in full from National Catholic Reporter is worth reading. NCR is generally not something I would wrap a dead fish in, as I have too much respect for the fish. However, this one had some interesting news: CARA also did a poll, not of priests but of laity, and 70% of the laity polled responded positively to the changes.

So I am not so sure that I would say that it is not bearing fruits that were anticipated. Noted ( I think in the comments in the piece in Catholic News) was the fact that the poll done of the priests does not indicate by age or date of ordination how priests answered, and that is perhaps a critical lack of information. From the information in the articles, it appears that the poll was widely sent to all dioceses and hopefully to all priests. That in itself could result in skewing.

I am not a betting man, but I would bet dollars to donuts that the ordination range of what is often referred to as the John Paul 2 priests voted strongly in favor of the new translation; however, from the way the poll was taken, that is not provable. Just MHO.

As with any information, one needs to be cautious. Neither poll surprises me; if I was surprised by anything, it was that NCR was honest enough to include CARA’s findings.
Click to expand...
My point is not about who likes it or not. It was supposed to bring people closer to God. I think all it did was further divide. It definitely didn’t heal anything, as is evident in the different polls.
 
Nicea325 said:
Because theologically the old translation left a lot to be desired as my former Pastor told me. It is the English speaking world that has such an issue with the new translation. I also speak Spanish and no one I know had an issue with the minor changes.
Click to expand...
Maybe nobody had problems with the Spanish changes because Spanish is a direct descendant from Latin anyway, so maybe it was already closer to the original? English is further removed from Latin, so maybe the changes had a bigger impact?
 
mafh said:
Maybe nobody had problems with the Spanish changes because Spanish is a direct descendant from Latin anyway, so maybe it was already closer to the original? English is further removed from Latin, so maybe the changes had a bigger impact?
Click to expand...
Yes and No. Yes Spanish is one of a several Romance languages which derived from Latin and closer to it. And no because the former English version was a “watered-down” translation which theologically was not sound or techincally correct-again as my former pastor stated. In fact before the new translation, months leading up to it, he would have a column in the weekend bulletin explaining the changes and it really made sense.
 
Nicea325 said:
Yes and No. Yes Spanish is one of a several Romance languages which derived from Latin and closer to it. And no because the former English version was a “watered-down” translation which theologically was not sound or techincally correct-again as my former pastor stated. In fact before the new translation, months leading up to it, he would have a column in the weekend bulletin explaining the changes and it really made sense.
Click to expand...
I didn’t follow the translation process in the 60’s but I have noticed that “Sursum corda” is translated as “W górę serca” (Upwards hearts) in the Polish but “Levantemos el corazon” in the Spanish (more of “Let us lift the heart” as it’s in the subjunctive). But the Spanish translation seems closer to the English “Lift up your hearts”* which leads me to believe many of the translations done earlier were from the translated English and not the original Latin.
 
I like most of the new translation just fine. However, if I didn’t know the old translation of “one in being with the father” for the creed, I wouldn’t have any clue what “consubstantial with the father” meant. I’d have to look it up.
 
=Catholic Press;10776187]May 21, '13 6:00 am
For every two US priests who prefer a new set of Vatican-ordered English translations of the Roman Catholic Mass, there are three others who say they do not, according to a survey, reports NCR.http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/cathnews/RSS/~4/gpj6wN10-Bw
Click to expand...
More…
Click to expand...
What makes this worthy of a POST?

How amny people DO LIKE change?🤷

They are entitled to their OWN opinions so long as it does NOT effect the Souls in their charge.

Rom.13: 1 “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”

Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Acts 20: 28-30 Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, [singular] which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Douay Rheims Bible
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top