Will the world-wide Church share in the new, accurate missal?(English, at least)

[The_Reginator]

I had great hope for the new translation of the missal
– to better reflect the way Mass was celebrated for more than 1500 years.

Then I watched this:
gloria.tv/?media=39403

Here’s the text:

Motion Against Liturgical Translations Did Not Pass

USA

On Tuesday, a motion from Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie to reject liturgical translations proposed by the Vatican failed to garner sufficient votes from the U.S. bishops. The prelates went on to approve the new liturgical texts. They will be implemented in the U.S. beginning in 2010. Bishop Trautman has headed the bishops’ liturgy committee in the past and is a strong supporter of gender-neutral translations. He tried to stop the vote on the new liturgical texts. Trautman claimed that handing the translation of antiphons for the Psalms to the Congregation for Divine Worship was in violation of Church laws, because the Second Vatican Council has established that, in general, translations must be approved by the bishops of the territories where they will be used.

Will it be up to the Bishops in each country to approve of the new missal?

Also, when will this come into effect? Advent 2010? (I haven’t heard even a peep from the pulpit, so I’m guessing it won’t be this Advent.)

 

[ProVobis]

I had great hope for the new translation of the missal
– to better reflect the way Mass was celebrated for more than 1500 years.

As I understand it the EF Mass, which is closer to the one celebrated for more than 1500 years, will remain in Latin. Only the English OF (started in 1969 and revised since) will be affected by the new translation. But why the gloom if it doesn’t? It’s still the Mass.

 

[Rolltide]

Also, when will this come into effect? Advent 2010? (I haven’t heard even a peep from the pulpit, so I’m guessing it won’t be this Advent.)

We don’t have an official date yet for when this will come into effect, but the date of Advent 2011 has been batted around a lot…

 

[bpbasilphx]

\ I had great hope for the new translation of the missal
– to better reflect the way Mass was celebrated for more than 1500 years.\

Did you actually think a different text and rite for the Mass was being promulgated and then translated into English?

 

[ljubim]

\ I had great hope for the new translation of the missal
– to better reflect the way Mass was celebrated for more than 1500 years.\

Did you actually think a different text and rite for the Mass was being promulgated and then translated into English?

It’s not a* direct *translation, I think he means. There are slight differences, mainly the order of certain things. People do get tied on this, though. My main qualm is the tabernacle being moved in newer churches, but that has nothing to do with the new translation

 

[The_Reginator]

As I understand it the EF Mass, which is closer to the one celebrated for more than 1500 years, will remain in Latin. Only the English OF (started in 1969 and revised since) will be affected by the new translation. But why the gloom if it doesn’t? It’s still the Mass.

Did you actually think a different text and rite for the Mass was being promulgated and then translated into English?

What I was getting at was the fact that the O.F. Mass is to be slightly(?) (re-worked) / re-worded to be closer to the Latin Mass we celebrated for centuries.

I love the Latin Mass and I learn more from it. The O.F. Mass is still the Mass but (from my personal experience) with far less reverence. Any step to bring it closer to the E.F. is progress!
(I also wish that the Church would bring back the alter rail and that it became common practice throughout the world to receive kneeling and on the tongue (for those who are physically able). )

 

[ProVobis]

What I was getting at was the fact that the O.F. Mass is to be slightly(?) (re-worked) / re-worded to be closer to the Latin Mass we celebrated for centuries.

I love the Latin Mass and I learn more from it. The O.F. Mass is still the Mass but (from my personal experience) with far less reverence. Any step to bring it closer to the E.F. is progress!
(I also wish that the Church would bring back the alter rail and that it became common practice throughout the world to receive kneeling and on the tongue (for those who are physically able). )

I too prefer the EF. But I would be happy if the Holy Ghost were returned, the Sidney Poitier Ay-men were changed back to Ah-men, and the actual “Et cum spiritu tuo” and the Latin Nicene Creed and Gloria were used in the OF all the time. Guess that’ll never happen though.

 

[The_Reginator]

I too prefer the EF. But I would be happy if the Holy Ghost were returned, the Sidney Poitier Ay-men were changed back to Ah-men, and the actual “Et cum spiritu tuo” and the Latin Nicene Creed and Gloria were used in the OF all the time. Guess that’ll never happen though.

Harrumph!

Seriously though, I wonder if we’ll see any such changes in our lifetime. (The rest of my lifetime isn’t as long as it used to be. )
And I’ve read that the OF won’t be going back to “Et cum spiritu tuo” but rather “And with your spirit”.
Now if only the rumours about the change in the timing of the exchange of peace were to appear …

 

[revert_jen]

I too prefer the EF. But I would be happy if the Holy Ghost were returned, the Sidney Poitier Ay-men were changed back to Ah-men…

Nothing prevents individuals from saying Ah-men. I do. It’s too weird going back and forth between sung Ah-men and spoken Ay-men. I know I’m not alone either.

I’m afraid I’m too culturally illiterate (or possibly too young) to know how Sidney Poitier comes into it.

About the original subject of the thread, I’m afraid you’ll find that Bishop Trautman is not a totally unbiased source for liturgical information. I would look for confirmation elsewhere before getting worried.

–Jen

 

[ProVobis]

I’m afraid I’m too culturally illiterate (or possibly too young) to know how Sidney Poitier comes into it.

He sung “Amen” in the movie “Lilies of the Field.” I believe it was around 1963. I don’t think he started the ay-men; however, he sure made it popular and it really caught on. But traditionally (whatever that means these days) it is ah-men.

 

[The_Reginator]

Nothing prevents individuals from saying Ah-men. I do. It’s too weird going back and forth between sung Ah-men and spoken Ay-men. I know I’m not alone either.

–Jen

Years ago I heard somewhere that Ay-men is American and Ah-men is Canadian/British. So I ALWAYS say Ah-men. (And there is no letter ‘zee’ in my alphabet! )

 

[SMHW]

He sung “Amen” in the movie “Lilies of the Field.” I believe it was around 1963. I don’t think he started the ay-men; however, he sure made it popular and it really caught on. But traditionally (whatever that means these days) it is ah-men.

I tried to research ay-men versus ah-men once but didn’t have much luck. My best guess is that ay-men is of Irish-British origin.

What I do know is that ay-men had been the usual Catholic pronunciation for English language devotional prayer long before most people imagined that the Mass would ever be in English. Catholics instinctively used ay-men for English and ah-men for Latin. (It was usually only Protestants who used ah-men when praying in English.)

My parents (born in 1929 and 1932) grew up saying ay-men when praying in English.

 

[IHeartAquinas]

I’ve never said anything but ah-men as far as I can remember. Though, my parish growing up was 90% old women in hats (gotta love those hats!) and the priest was probably eleven million years old (May perpetual light shine upon him). Although the parish I belong to now, I have noticed a resounding “ay-men” throughout the mass, but always “ah-men” after the Creed. Dunno what’s up with that.

 

[Phemie]

		 		  		 		 			 			 	Quote:
 	 		 			 				 					Originally Posted by **revert_jen** 					[forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5970487#post5970487) 				
			*Nothing prevents individuals from saying Ah-men. I do. It's too weird going back and forth between sung Ah-men and spoken Ay-men. I know I'm not alone either.

–Jen*

Years ago I heard somewhere that Ay-men is American and Ah-men is Canadian/British. So I ALWAYS say Ah-men. (And there is no letter ‘zee’ in my alphabet! )

I’m French Canadian so for me ah-men is just natural and I use it whether I’m at a French or English Mass. In my English parish I hear ah-men a lot and it’s probably got a lot to do with the age of the parishioners, most of whom would have heard ah-men before Vat. II.

How many people sang the Sidney Poitier “Ay-ay-ay-men” at their parish when? I know they used that setting at many parishes that I attended over the years.

 

[japhy]

And I’ve read that the OF won’t be going back to “Et cum spiritu tuo” but rather “And with your spirit”.

The Ordinary Form has always had Et cum spiritu tuo. It is simply the English translation of the Ordinary Form that hasn’t been accurate; the French, Spanish, German, Italian, and Portuguese translation accurately render Et cum spiritu tuo.

Although I do wish that Latin was used more widely around the world in celebrations of the Ordinary Form… y’know, like Vatican II intended…