What exactly is going to change in the mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Silyosha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Silyosha

Guest
I know a new, revised ordinary form of the mass is coming about during advent of this year. (Is the time frame right?) I attend the EF the vast majority of the time, but I have absolutely NO problems with the OF as long as it’s liturgically appropriate and said correctly and reverently, proper music, etc…(No debates allowed on what “appropriate” and “proper music” mean…this thread is not for that!! :)) So, my question is, what is going to change? Are there simply going to be stricted regulations on what can and cannot be done (which I’ve been told by several people), or are there going to be major changes made (which I’ve been told by several others)?
Thanks for your time! 🙂 +
 
In the US, the GIRM for this Third Edition of the Roman Missal has already been implemented, so you won’t see any change in what “happens” at Mass. You’ve already had your changes in posture in the last couple of years.

What you will see is a fairly big change in the language of the prayers, because it is the new translation from Latin to English that is being implemented in November. The translation we are using now was done in the early 70s and was done based on ‘dynamic equivalence’, IOW, translate the ‘thought’ or ‘meaning’ rather than the actual sentence.

In this new translation, we are getting ‘formal equivalence’, closer to a word for word translation. The language is more formal, some would stay ‘stilted’, but is much closer to what the Latin says than the present translation. Certainly, in this translation, we are actually “asking” God for something rather than “telling” Him to give us what we want.
 
Hmm…good explanation. Thank you! This is helpful.
It’s interesting how much a particular translation in comparison with another can change the entire meaning (or at least implication) of the prayer. I saw a link once with the new translation of the mass all in one place, looking kind of like an online missal, but I don’t know where I saw it. I could definately see a difference.
I’m glad this is happening. I suppose this change will further establish a greater level of solemnity even in the OF mass, which is something I feel strongly about.
 
Wow, that link is even better than the one I mentioned…thank you!! 🙂
 
My question would be: why?
Why do they need to change this?
 
Padraig1972 said:
My question would be: why?
Why do they need to change this?
Click to expand...
Because the current English translation is a poor translation; it’s out of synch with the actual Missale Romanum Pp. Paulus VI Editio Tercia. Due to the odd translation, the US and UK have, generally, not been using the Editio Tercia, but IIRC, the Editio Prima…

And because your bishops and the Pope have decided it’s time the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa get with the program and actually pray the same prayers as the non-english speaking Roman Catholics.
 
Padraig1972 said:
My question would be: why?
Why do they need to change this?
Click to expand...
Because the words change meaning over time. As well as the politics. The Latin text does not change its meaning. Other vernacular texts will be changing too.
 
Aramis said:
And because your bishops and the Pope have decided it’s time the **US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa **get with the program and actually pray the same prayers as the non-english speaking Roman Catholics.
Click to expand...
Of course, everyone always forgets Canada:rolleyes:
 
JDZwiers19 said:
Of course, everyone always forgets Canada:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I hadn’t heard whether the CCCB had accepted the new translation… 👍

And for the rest of y’all, Canada’s the place where we get hockey players and actors from…
 
Aramis said:
And because your bishops and the Pope have decided it’s time the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa get with the program and actually pray the same prayers as the non-english speaking Roman Catholics.
Click to expand...
With the everchanging meanings in the English, do you really think this can happen overnight when this has been tried for over 400 years if not longer? I think all we can do is try to be current, but that’s true of any vernacular. As more people get to study the Latin, I expect more changes down the road.
 
ProVobis said:
With the everchanging meanings in the English, do you really think this can happen overnight when this has been tried for over 400 years if not longer? I think all we can do is try to be current, but that’s true of any vernacular. As more people get to study the Latin, I expect more changes down the road.
Click to expand...
Really, I don’t think continual changes in translation will help anything. A stable liturgical English needs be developed. And, if it is, there are enough Catholics in the US to keep a pull back towards the liturgical english.

See, Church Slavonic, over the last 1000 years, has kept the slavic tongues generally mutually intelligible, and further, from drifting too far afield. The drift seems to have been in an orbit around Church Slavonic, rather than the shotgun of the last 400 years of English language history… Even then, the KJV and D-R have both slowed English drift in those places where they were in heavy use.

On the other hand, having a good and literal translation will come as close as any who do not fluently think in latin can come to universal meaning of the prayers, and it will be valid longer than the dynamic equivalence of the Editio Prima’s translation.

Also, remember, latin was originally chosen for being the vernacular… 1600 years ago or so. It codified, and for hundreds of years, did for French, Norman, Spanish, Portugese, and Italian that the synthetic Church Slavonic did for the slavics: hold them in orbit and keep intelligibility high between them.
 
Aramis said:
Really, I don’t think continual changes in translation will help anything. A stable liturgical English needs be developed. And, if it is, there are enough Catholics in the US to keep a pull back towards the liturgical english.
Click to expand...
If it happens it will be only for a generation or so. English was never designed with a divine purpose.

Listen to how the English language has changed as its been transformed from its Germanic (barbaric) roots:

1066andallthat.com/english_old/beowulf_prologue.asp

1066andallthat.com/english_middle/overview_video.asp

And how many today even understand Shakespeare?

If anything it’s been the borrowing of Latin (and French) roots that has made the English language anywhere near compatible with the Latin.
 
Padraig1972 said:
My question would be: why?
Why do they need to change this?
Click to expand...
Aramis said:
Because the current English translation is a poor translation;
Click to expand...
But I could use the argument that the older English translation was also poor. For example, as was noted on another thread, any first year Latin student wouldn’t translate “Dominus vobiscum” as “The Lord be with you” or “Sursum corda” as “Lift up your hearts.” or “debita” as “trespasses” or “sanctificetur” as “hallowed be.” But since these examples are so ingrained in the English mind, it seems, that they chose not to change them to their truer meaning. Not at this time anyway. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top