Word “one” being removed from Collects in Australia

[JohnLilburne]

Today in Australia the end of the Collect at Mass is:

“Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.”

But this will be changed on 29 November 2020 to:

“Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
God, for ever and ever.”

In New Zealand the change has already been made. An article of 29 July 2020 at Wording change for Opening Prayer at Mass | NZ Catholic Newspaper has: “The NZCBC recommends this change be implemented at all Masses from August 1 this year onwards, or earlier if priests prefer.”

In the Universalis app on my phone the “one” is not included.

Cardinal Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments wrote letters about this on 13 May 2020. Including the word “one” before God, he wrote: “can serve to undermine the statement of the Son’s unique identity within the Trinity which the Latin formulas so strongly convey and, on the other hand, it can also be interpreted as saying that Jesus Christ is “one God”. Either or both of these interpretations is injurious to the faith of the Church.”

More information is at https://www.catholic.org.au/images/Changes_to_the_Collects_in_the_Roman_Missal.pdf and https://mediablog.catholic.org.au/change-to-prayers-during-mass-due-in-november/

[Excerpt from the English translation of The Roman Missal, (c) 2010, International Commission on English in the Liturgy Corporation. All rights reserved.]

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

Unfortunate when considered in light of the Old Testament and the Jewish people’s emphasis on “the LORD is our God, the LORD is One”.

 

[InThePew]

I would have thought the CDW would have better things to do but anyway, I try to remember to change it when I read the collect at mass and, most of the time, I remember!

 

[Anesti33]

Are we to understand that this is a universal change coming in Advent? It is not confined to New Zealand?

 

[Bithynian]

What an odd change. I always thought that the ‘one God’ clause was a parenthetical statement ‘Jesus Christ … you (i.e. the Father) … the Holy Spirit, [all three of whom are] one God, forever and ever’.

 

[phil19034]

If that change is going to take place, then they should simply change the last line back to the way the English translation from the Latin read back in the 1962 missal:

“Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
God: world without end. Amen"

 

[InThePew]

Are we to understand that this is a universal change coming in Advent? It is not confined to New Zealand?

Definitely not confined to NZ/Australia since we use the same standard ICEL translation as the rest of the anglophone world. As to when you might expect it… well, let’s just say that the Prefect of the CDW doesn’t tend to let me in on such plans… couldn’t possibly think why!

 

[BartholomewB]

Yes, three persons, one God. That sounds quite straightforward. Have people been misunderstanding it as “one god among many”? As in, “Mars is one god, Jupiter is another”?

 

[FiveLinden]

“Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
God, for ever and ever.”

This seems to me to be ambiguous.

Does the word ‘God’ in the last line mean that the person addressed, with Jesus and the Holy Spirit is God, or does it assume that and address God by that name?

 

[Bithynian]

Have people been misunderstanding it as “one god among many”?

That was my first impression, but it seems so unlikely considering we have the same thing at the beginning of the Nicene Creed, ‘credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem…’, but I wouldn’t think anyone would claim the Father is one particular God, the Son another, and the Holy Spirit another.

I think the most immediate issue facing Card. Sarah and his fellow bishops is that the English translation is not harmonious with the Latin typica, and the Roman Rite has (probably) never included unus in that particular collect. From a quick Google search, it seems to be present in the Ambrosian Rite and, most probably, the Sarum Rite whence it entered into English currency via the Book of Common Prayer.

Does the word ‘God’ in the last line mean that the person addressed, with Jesus and the Holy Spirit is God, or does it assume that and address God by that name?

Following Card. Sarah’s letter and the Latin text itself, the ‘God’ in the last clause is Jesus himself. Translated more loosely: ‘Through our Lord Jesus Christ your Son who, being God, lives and reigns for ever and ever with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit.’

Even in Latin, the syntax of the clause ‘(unus) Deus per omnia saecula saeculorum’ can be understood differently depending on punctuation and how you interpret the sentence structure.

 

[Aulef]

This new text seems to be more in line with the literal translation from the latin formula.

Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum Filium tuum, qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus, per omnia saecula saeculorum

Besides, ‘God’ is in singular and between comas, which allow us to deduce that there is only one God.

 

[Pitcairn17]

This change strikes me as the kind of thing which, if it were being proposed by a “liturgical committee” somewhere, Card. Sarah would - understandably - speak out against.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Seems reasonable to me. The Latin collects for the EF use the form,

Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, Filium tuum, qui tecum vivat et regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus, per omnia saecula saeculorum.

“Deus” = God. The phrase reads, …" in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God…"
I don’t see the word “One” in there anyplace.

Unfortunate when considered in light of the Old Testament and the Jewish people’s emphasis on “the LORD is our God, the LORD is One”.

If it’s so unfortunate, then why wasn’t the Tridentine Mass written to say “One God” in Latin in the first place?
Also, I’m not sure what the Jewish people have to do with this as they neither believe in Christ nor in the Trinity. “The LORD is one” was a statement of monotheism.

Translated more loosely: ‘Through our Lord Jesus Christ your Son who, being God , lives and reigns for ever and ever with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit.’

I read a lot of old English missals and translated Collects for a daily devotion I do, and I’m pretty sure I have seen some translations of collects that use the words “being God”. I mostly run into that when I am translating a collect that was already translated from Latin into French or Spanish (such as for a saint who is on the calendar in France or Spain but not in England or USA) and then I’m translating it again into English with Google.

“Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
God: world without end. Amen "

The only difference is the “world without end” part . “Per omnia saecula saeculorum” literally means “for all of the ages of ages”, and is a Latin idiom as I understand it, so it doesn’t really matter if you translate it as “for ever and ever” or “world without end” or “unto the ages of ages”. As much as I like the old “World without end” because it reminds me of my childhood, I think “for ever and ever” is probably a more correct translation.

 

[BartholomewB]

It must surely be a mistake to keep fiddling around with translations, whether of prayers or the lectionary, making minor adjustments here and there apparently at random. It can only lead people to assume that the exact wording doesn’t matter, because what one lot of bishops have changed today another lot are quite likely to change again tomorrow. Who needs to memorize something so impermanent? All these years we’ve been saying “one God” and “lead us not into temptation” and “for you and for all men,” and now it’s just “God” and “for many” and “do not let us fall into temptation.” Who knows what they’ll change next!

New translations for Lectionary and LOTH? Liturgy and Sacraments

Scotland recently approved use of the ESV translation for their new Lectionary - does anyone know the situation for England & Wales, are they expected to follow suit and when will this start to be in general use? I also heard that the current version of LOTH was under revision and wondered if any of you good people had more information on this. With thanks in advance. God bless

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It must surely be a mistake to keep fiddling around with translations, whether of prayers or the lectionary, making minor adjustments here and there apparently at random.

I personally find it annoying myself, and I still haven’t gotten used to praying the new version of the Gloria, which also wrecked every musical setting for it that I remember fondly from my younger days.
But a lot of it seems to stem from translation issues. This is one of the big benefits of using the Latin for centuries. If you compare say 3 or 4 old English missals where they have the English translation of the Latin, there are often these types of minor differences in the wording of the translated prayers. I don’t think the Church authorities worried too much about these minor differences back in the day, because the priest was praying the same Latin whether the translation said “God” or “being God” or “one God”. Cardinal Sarah would probably rather we just go back to praying the Latin.

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

I’m simply saying that this is one instance, in my opinion, where the English translation was an improvement upon what I see as ambiguity in the Latin, and it breaks with our ancestral traditions (meaning, we do still call Abraham “our father in faith”, right? - we aren’t suddenly polytheists). I just think the wording is clumsy, and to revert to the 1962 ending would be even worse. My two cents; this whole thing is obviously above my pay grade.

 

[Anesti33]

What I wonder is, at what point do all parishes purchase new Missals.

By the way, get used to wrecking musical settings. The vernacular does this by design. No musical setting is safe in the vernacular, but you know what is safe? Musical composers’ jobs. Palestrina could write material that would henceforth be used for 500 years, but Owen Alstott will be called back every 10-20 years to rewrite everything from the ground up. Job security FTW!

 

[Shakuhachi]

If it’s so unfortunate, then why wasn’t the Tridentine Mass written to say “One God” in Latin in the first place?
Also, I’m not sure what the Jewish people have to do with this as they neither believe in Christ nor in the Trinity. “The LORD is one” was a statement of monotheism.

The Tridentine Mass probably should have had it because it does connect us with the faith in One God that Jesus proclaimed. Like it or not, the Jewish people are our ancestors in faith. we pray their Psalms and Jesus is the fulfillment of their prophecies.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Like it or not, the Jewish people are our ancestors in faith.

This has nothing to do with “liking” the Jewish people. I occasionally pray the Shema Yisrael myself. It’s bothersome that you seem to be trying to make my remark into anti-Semitism.

I’m simply pointing out that Cardinal Sarah’s reason for this change has to do with the Trinity.
The Jewish people are not invoking the Trinity when they prayed that prayer in the OT or when they pray it now.

It’s pretty easy to see the Cardinal’s point. If you know your Catholic theology well, then you understand “one God” as meaning the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. If you don’t know your theology well, then it’s possible to interpret the translated words “one God” as meaning Jesus is one of three Gods or that Jesus on his own is the one God. Furthermore the word “One” does not appear in the Latin, and the word “One” is not necessary to convey the proper meaning.

I’m all for acknowledging Jewish tradition as the roots of our faith, but not on an issue completely unrelated to Jewish practice, where the use of the word “one God” is in a different context than the Jewish usage, “one God” does not proceed naturally from the Latin, and “one God” could cause catechetical confusion. Furthermore, Cardinal Sarah is about THE most expert and orthodox cardinal on the rites of the Mass that I know of. I’ve listened to him speak for a whole hour on the words of the Mass. He’s practically a modern-day Dom Prosper Gueranger. I defer to his expertise.

 

[Anesti33]

the Roman Rite has (probably) never included unus in that particular collect.

It’s not in a particular collect, this is a formula that is used to close dozens and dozens of collects. There are only 2-3 of these formulas; they’re reused in the Roman Missal whenever a prayer is closed like that.