US priests dislike Mass translation, survey finds [CNAU]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reading these comments made me go back and do a little research. I suppose that these sort of arguments are what led to this:

Pope St. Pius V; Quo Primum 1570 a.d.

"From the very first, upon Our elevation to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our mind and energies and directed all out thoughts to those matters which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy, and We strove with God’s help, by every means in our power, to accomplish this purpose. For, besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, there were stipulations for Us to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal and the Breviary. With the Catechism published for the instruction of the faithful, by God’s help, and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy praise of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper - for its most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass - We deemed it necessary to give our immediate attention to what still remained to be done, viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.

Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses."
papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/p5quopri.htm

And Pope Pius XII; Mediator Dei 1947
“59. The Church is without question a living organism, and as an organism, in respect of the sacred liturgy also, she grows, matures, develops, adapts and accommodates herself to temporal needs and circumstances, provided only that the integrity of her doctrine be safeguarded. This notwithstanding, the temerity and daring of those who introduce novel liturgical practices, or call for the revival of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics, deserve severe reproof. It has pained Us grievously to note, Venerable Brethren, that such innovations are actually being introduced, not merely in minor details but in matters of major importance as well. We instance, in point of fact, those who make use of the vernacular in the celebration of the august eucharistic sacrifice; those who transfer certain feast-days – which have been appointed and established after mature deliberation – to other dates; those, finally, who delete from the prayerbooks approved for public use the sacred texts of the Old Testament, deeming them little suited and inopportune for modern times.”
papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12MEDIA.HTM
(one should read this in it’s entirety)

The Mass is the single most important form of Catechesis for most Catholics. If one wanted to confuse the Faithful, modifying or tinkering with the Mass would be one’s first choice. Some of us take the time to research and learn of our history. Most do not. As we have seen throughout history, the people are easily led by new shiny objects. Only when the shine fades do they realize the damage done.
I do not suppose myself to be a scholar, nor do I elevate myself to be able to cast judgement on the Magesterium or the Council. I simply look at cause and effect. And the effects of the wholesale changes incurred in the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae of 1969 are troubling. Added to this the liberties taken by many as pertains to Church ornamentation, Liturgy styles and homily content and one can begin to understand what has happened. H.H. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI was trying to repair this. His writings on the Mass are evidence as to how He saw the need of “reform of the reform”.
We shall see.
 
Kevin12 said:
Whether Paul even know Latin is unknown - in any case, all his letters, including to the Romans, were in Greek.
Click to expand...
We don’t know that for a fact; the originals don’t exist. According to a PBS documentary, Paul found a “significant” number of Christians in Rome only a few years after Christ. And we know how quickly Christianity subsumed the Roman Empire, where in the West Vulgar Latin was spoken. Don’t forget too, FWIW that Saul took on the name of Paulus when he became a Roman citizen.

But in whatever language:

Matthew: “for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgivenss of sins.”

Mark: “This is the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.”

Luke: “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.”

1 Cor: “This cup is the new covenant in my blood.”
 
porthos11 said:
It has just come out that the methodology for this survey did not use true random sampling, but only opened up the survey to anyone who wanted to answer. Any researcher or statistician worth his salt would rip his hair out if he ran into this kind of sloppy “sampling”.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that it is pointless. The English Mass isn’t going away (to the dismay of a few) regardless of which translation is used. What the priests and congregation like or dislike matters little. Besides neither translation is as good as the Polish translation. 🙂

Soon the novelty will wear off and they’ll be working on another translation, just like they do with the English Bible.
 
I am actually in a Master of Fine Arts Program for Creative Writing. My school is one of the lucky few that also has a literary translation program - and in fact, Latin is what I am translating, though from the classical poet Horace. I am also in the poetry program, which is actually my main focus. I am also the only poet using rhyme and meter, both in my translations and poetry. I try, as much as possible in translation, to be faithful to the original in terms of meaning, but I use meter in particular to convert the Latin meter and overall musicality into an appropriate English musicality. If I didn’t or if I tried to jam Latin rhythms into English where they won’t be heard, I feel like I would be doing the original a disservice by making something musical into something flat.

And that is kind of how I feel about the new translation. I know that for many the resemblances to the Anglican Mass are unacceptable, but I cannot deny those elements made the old translation sound a lot better. I understand that the Mass needs to correspond to the Latin breviary as much as possible, but I feel that there must be some kind of compromise between what we currently have and the older translation - because even though I cannot exactly pin down how, the new translation sounds wooden, and it is my job (the university pays me - barely) to recognize the music of language. I just wish that those who rave about the beauty of the Latin Mass would recognize that English can be beautiful as well, and faithful to the breviary without having so much Latin shoehorned in directly.
 
I was puzzled with new or rather old version coming back. That’s how we talked in church 50 yrs ago - like the King James version that no one understands.
 
ProVobis said:
Sounds about right. I think the 1970 version was “for all MEN” but for PC reasons the “MEN” was removed.
Click to expand...
It is confusing because the Latin editions take so long to be adopted in their English translations. So does this look correct?

Latin Promulgated / English Published
  1. 1969 / 1974 US
  2. 1975 / 1985 US
  3. 2000* / 2011 US
  • Latin emended in 2008
1965 …for this is the chalice of my Blood of the new and eternal covenant: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: which SHALL be SHED for you and for many UNTO the forgiveness of sins.

1 …this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all men so that sins may be forgiven.

2 …this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven.

3 …for this is the chalice of my Blood, the Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.
 
Kevin12 said:
and in fact, Latin is what I am translating, though from the classical poet Horace.
Click to expand...
I believe he is the one who wrote: Nec verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus interpres. (As a true/faithful translator, you will take care not to translate word for word.)

On a side note, have you done any Cicero translations? There haven’t been too many translations of his “De Officiis” which supposedly inspired the early fathers of the Church.
 
Kevin12 said:
Whether Paul even know Latin is unknown - in any case, all his letters, including to the Romans, were in Greek.
Click to expand...
As St Paul was BORN a Roman citizen I believe one can safely deduce that he knew Latin.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
As St Paul was BORN a Roman citizen I believe one can safely deduce that he knew Latin.
Click to expand...
I looked into it and it would seem you are right - Roman citizens were required to know Latin. Nevertheless, the earliest copies of his his epistles are in Greek.
 
ProVobis said:
I believe he is the one who wrote: Nec verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus interpres. (As a true/faithful translator, you will take care not to translate word for word.)

On a side note, have you done any Cicero translations? There haven’t been too many translations of his “De Officiis” which supposedly inspired the early fathers of the Church.
Click to expand...
I did take a semester on Cicero in college, so I have translated him (though not that one), but only passages. My interest is in poetry too, so while I admire Cicero as a stylist, I am more interested in the poets. Seneca is probably my favorite prose writer.
 
Kevin12 said:
I am actually in a Master of Fine Arts Program for Creative Writing. My school is one of the lucky few that also has a literary translation program - and in fact, Latin is what I am translating, though from the classical poet Horace. I am also in the poetry program, which is actually my main focus. I am also the only poet using rhyme and meter, both in my translations and poetry. I try, as much as possible in translation, to be faithful to the original in terms of meaning, but I use meter in particular to convert the Latin meter and overall musicality into an appropriate English musicality. If I didn’t or if I tried to jam Latin rhythms into English where they won’t be heard, I feel like I would be doing the original a disservice by making something musical into something flat.

And that is kind of how I feel about the new translation. I know that for many the resemblances to the Anglican Mass are unacceptable, but I cannot deny those elements made the old translation sound a lot better. I understand that the Mass needs to correspond to the Latin breviary as much as possible, but I feel that there must be some kind of compromise between what we currently have and the older translation - because even though I cannot exactly pin down how, the new translation sounds wooden, and it is my job (the university pays me - barely) to recognize the music of language. I just wish that those who rave about the beauty of the Latin Mass would recognize that English can be beautiful as well, and faithful to the breviary without having so much Latin shoehorned in directly.
Click to expand...
Kevin, I think I understand your opinion, but the mass is not an entertainment event. The words of the Canon, the Collect, all of the parts of the Liturgy are for the edification and education of the Faithful as we offer our prayers, and supplications to G-D along with the ultimate Sacrifice of Christ. This, i feel, is one of the unfortunate developments from the Liturgy promulgated by H.H. Pope Paul VI. For some the Mass has become an entertainment event. A performance. People want to be entertained. Music must be upbeat, modern. Homilies must be fun, with jokes. Father is turned into a performer. We have lost the transendence, the Sacredness. The Verticle nature was turned horizontal and now it has become banal, lifeless and flat. People do not understand that the emphasis of the Mass is not for them, but for G-D. And i say this not to disparage the O.F. I attend a Diocesan O.F., and will continue to do so. A Sacred O.F., following the principles of Sacrosanctum Concillium such as one sees on EWTN’s Mass is still awe inspiring and directed toward G-D. As a poet you know words have meanings. And when one changes words meanings change as well. Our language in the liturgy should be elevated from the language we use in conversation. But not just to sound pretty to our ears. These words have meanings.
 
Pulvis said:
Our language in the liturgy should be elevated from the language we use in conversation. But not just to sound pretty to our ears. These words have meanings.
Click to expand...
In that case, both translations fail for the most part. We use “believe,” “visible,” “confess,” “healed,” etc. in everyday conversation. Women’s groups even use “This is my body.” It wouldn’t bother me if the Vatican just one day decided to ban English from the liturgy entirely.
 
Pulvis said:
Kevin, I think I understand your opinion, but the mass is not an entertainment event. The words of the Canon, the Collect, all of the parts of the Liturgy are for the edification and education of the Faithful as we offer our prayers, and supplications to G-D along with the ultimate Sacrifice of Christ.** This, i feel, is one of the unfortunate developments from the Liturgy promulgated by H.H. Pope Paul VI. For some the Mass has become an entertainment event. A performance. People want to be entertained. Music must be upbeat, modern**. Homilies must be fun, with jokes. Father is turned into a performer. We have lost the transendence, the Sacredness. The Verticle nature was turned horizontal and now it has become banal, lifeless and flat. People do not understand that the emphasis of the Mass is not for them, but for G-D. And i say this not to disparage the O.F. I attend a Diocesan O.F., and will continue to do so. A Sacred O.F., following the principles of Sacrosanctum Concillium such as one sees on EWTN’s Mass is still awe inspiring and directed toward G-D. As a poet you know words have meanings. And when one changes words meanings change as well. Our language in the liturgy should be elevated from the language we use in conversation.** But not just to sound pretty to our ears. These words have meanings.**
Click to expand...
When did I say a thing about entertainment? Every time the Latin Mass’s supposed excellence is mentioned by traditionalists, its supposed beauty is invoked as a proof - so I don’t think the other side can claim to be uninterested in “entertainment”, if you consider beauty entertainment.

Also “People do not understand that the emphasis of the Mass is not for them, but for G-D.” I’ve heard a lot of statements similar to this used to justify incomprehensibly literal translations, and I honestly cannot understand the idea that God is more pleased when the people in the pews don’t understand what is being said but the ritual conforms to certain traditional patterns. It makes the Mass sound like some kind of magic ritual used to appease an indifferent pagan god, rather than a celebration of the Incarnation.
 
Pulvis said:
Kevin, I think I understand your opinion, but the mass is not an entertainment event. The words of the Canon, the Collect, all of the parts of the Liturgy are for the edification and education of the Faithful as we offer our prayers, and supplications to G-D along with the ultimate Sacrifice of Christ. This, i feel, is one of the unfortunate developments from the Liturgy promulgated by H.H. Pope Paul VI. For some the Mass has become an entertainment event. A performance. People want to be entertained. Music must be upbeat, modern. Homilies must be fun, with jokes. Father is turned into a performer. We have lost the transendence, the Sacredness. The Verticle nature was turned horizontal and now it has become banal, lifeless and flat. People do not understand that the emphasis of the Mass is not for them, but for G-D. And i say this not to disparage the O.F. I attend a Diocesan O.F., and will continue to do so. A Sacred O.F., following the principles of Sacrosanctum Concillium such as one sees on EWTN’s Mass is still awe inspiring and directed toward G-D. As a poet you know words have meanings. And when one changes words meanings change as well. Our language in the liturgy should be elevated from the language we use in conversation. But not just to sound pretty to our ears. These words have meanings.
Click to expand...
Also, if this highlighted bit is the case, then why on earth did Jerome translate the Bible into Vulgar Latin rather than Classical Latin, with which he was eminently familiar? Though in the end, its not about the words being elevated, but with them being comprehensible.
 
curlycool89 said:
My guess would be that St. Paul said Mass in Latin for the Romans (assuming he knew Latin) and in Greek for most of the rest of them (since they were in Greek-speaking lands).

I’m basing that on the idea that Paul was reaching out to these communities but not trying to imperialize them (ie - not imposing Jewish norms on them and stuff), so it probably wasn’t in Aramaic or Hebrew (espeically since those languages would not have been known well in Greek and Roman lands). Paul also characterized himself as the apostle to the Gentiles and not to the Jews, so it would make sense that he would be reaching out to them in their language (of Greek, possibly Latin if he knew it).

If it makes a difference, the Didache seems to have been written in Greek originally and translated into Latin (or so a quick Google search tells me).
Click to expand...
So Paul said Mass in the vernacular? Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
 
The priest has to learn new Eucharistic Prayers as well as all the other responses. It is not easy. As my pastor has said, change can be a good thing. It keeps things fresh. I was around when the “one in being with the Father” translation came about. Even as a 15 year old I was insulted by the “dummying down” effect. I knew then that I understood “one in substance with the Father” which we had before. The new translation brings back the original context of the language and does not assume that we are too stupid to understand the terms.
 
YoungTradCath said:
I wouldn’t consider that survey, conducted by some St. John’s Collegeville people.
Click to expand...
Yes let us expand on this. Saint John’s in Collegeville is a nice institution as far as Universities and colleges go (you can avoid most of the junk that comes out of the theology department and avoid campus ministry).

However, Saint John’s is not and has never been a research institution. They are a teaching college. The only advanced degree they offer are Masters in theology. (M. Div and M. A). Their math department is pathetically small and their psychology major is the major you take if you don’t know what to do, but don’t want to take management or communications.

I would not trust any surveys, polls, studies based on human or social factors that come out of that institution, at least until they improve their reputation in such matters. And yes I went there. (They do have good chem/bio programs).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top