Slowing down on the new Mass translations
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
By Bryan Cones
Comments (34)
A new blog and Facebook campaign is asking the bishops to slow down on implementing the new English translations of the Mass, planned for 2010. It's based on an America essay by the pastor of the Seattle cathedral. I've signed up, you can too.
There's plenty of precedent for experimentation: The much-maligned original liturgical reform of the late 1960s included several years of experimentation with provisional translations. That led to improvements that eventually made it into the 1970 translation of the Roman Missal.
There's also precedent for a little grassroots activism: The enemies of the modern liturgical reform have relentlessly lobbied bishops and Rome for the last 30 years, and despite their small numbers, they have in effect won the expansion of the Latin Mass and a profound change in how liturgical translations are done.
It's time for those of us who continue to support the liturgical reforms of Vatican II--vernacular that makes sense, legitimate cultural adaptation, expansion of scripture in the liturgy, full participation of the faithful--to speak up. Maybe it's not too late. We'll be stuck with these translations for decades; it's now or never!
Posted in: In preview mode
Please Provide Prospective--not bias ideology
By CatholicJoe (not verified) on Friday, March 18, 2011"enemies of the modern liturgical reform have relentlessly lobbied bishops and Rome for the last 30 years, and despite their small numbers, they have in effect won the expansion of the Latin Mass and a profound change in how liturgical translations are done."
This statement is pure propagand at its best! Are the numbers really small? What's this assumption based on? You can't throw out slander just like that.
I've read the reforms of the missal and they're fine! They don't scare me.
I occasionally attend Latin Mass and I feel it could be reformed a bit! Why do I go!? Because, ironically, these parishes allow me to focus on God. At my old parish, I caught a guy saying the rosary in the parking lot because he could focus better out there than in the chatter-box Church.
Go to an FSSP or CKSP parish or an orthodox one...you'll see it's more than just the Mass! It's the environment, the devotion, etc. You get homilies that are honest, sobering with the FULL TRUTH.
New Translation of the Roman Missal Resources
By Matthew Plese - CEO of CatechismClass.com (not verified) on Wednesday, November 17, 2010I am the President and CEO of CatechismClass.com, and I would like to point out that CatechismClass.com has recently unveiled a new lesson on our website to help explain the New Translation of the Roman Missal. We have developed a 40-page document outlining the changes in the Liturgy from the perspective of the priest as well as the congregation. The text goes through the changes in the Liturgy over the past 2,000 years to best explain the reasons for the changes in this New Translation.
Chapter 1: The Source and Summit of the Christian Life
Chapter 2: A Brief History of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
Chapter 3: The Need for a New Translation of the Roman Missal
Chapter 4: What We Will Say (Changes for the Participants)
Chapter 5: What We Will Hear (Changes for the Celebrant)
This report is intended for the average Catholic to read and is a great tool for pastors to purchase and share with their congregations, CCD classes, RCIA students, etc, etc.
Here is a link for more information on the resource:
A matter of language
By Joseph S. O'Leary (not verified) on Monday, March 1, 2010I prayed the Third Eucharistic Prayer last Sunday and was pleased to note again how clear, eloquent, effective it is. The new translation of it is a total mess and in no way more accurate than the present text. Just consider this:
"Look, we pray, upon the oblation of your Church, and, recognizing the sacrificial Victim by whose death you willed to reconcile us to yourself, grant that we, who are nourished by the Body and Blood of your Son, and filled with his Holy Spirit, may become one body, one spirit in Christ."
Would any enthusiasts for the new translation care to justify this text as a replacement for:
"Look with favor on your Church's offering, and see the Victim whose death has reconciled us to yourself. Grant that we, who are nourished by his body and blood, may be filled with his Holy Spirit, and become one body, one spirit in Christ."?
The issue is not an ideological one. It is simply a question of a bad, incompetent translation, that has not been properly checked by the bishops (only FIVE of them had offered any comments or suggestions before the November 2009 meeting, though the text was on their desks for months.)
You've got to be kidding......
By Anonymous (not verified) on Thursday, March 4, 2010Give me a break. The liturgy needs a spring cleaning of unprecedented proportions. If you think that orthodox Catholics like myself are going to let the likes of you to continue to have your way.......you are mistaken. The current liturgy in the Novus Ordo....is almost a joke. You people are scared of Latin? You think you'll continue to have your way? All this liturgical abuse which you call the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? I don't think so. And neither does Pope Benedict. He's on our side. You people are borderline Heretics. Period. I shall now stop typing and offer a rosary......and pray to Our Blessed Mother for your souls.
Pax
Pax? or Pox?
By Joan Krebs Glenview, IL (not verified) on Wednesday, November 17, 2010After your diatribe against we who are distressed about not only about flawed translations but also about the process in which they came to be I find it difficult to accept your signature of "Pax". You called us "scared"; you intimate that the whole thing is rightly about winners/losers & that it's our turn to be losers - AND - that Benedict XVI is "on your side"; you accuse us of "liturgical abuse";you label us "borderline heretics". To cap it off you, like a
Pharisee, presume, because you aren't "like the rest" of us, to pray the rosary for our souls. Do you feel better offering us PAX (which, spoken in Latin, carries the sound of POX)? At least by this double-entendre you convey your true emotions and I applaud you for that even if it offended me which it did.
It is IMPORTANT to stick to
By Lloyd Baltazar (not verified) on Wednesday, February 3, 2010It is IMPORTANT to stick to our Roman Catholic theology. If you are a true Roman Catholic, you are, by the decree of Roman doctrine to accept that the Roman Catholic faith is the supreme Christian faith above anything else in the world. There is no salvation outside the church, and this is stressed in the accurate translation of the Eucharistic mass.
We, as Roman Catholics must assert the fact that while Jesus Christ died for all, NOT ALL will be saved. Therefore, the Eucharistic mass cannot be offered to ALL, but only to Many----referring to those who are loyal to Christ, his Church and the Roman Catholic faith.
The problem with the English language is that everything comes loose with the modern translations that were proposed by evil Protestants in Vatican II. The richness of the original Latin Text is IMPORTANT to preserve because it goes hand in hand with our tradition. If we allow these devil protestants to "simplify" our faith and modernize them according to their liberal/safe translations, it is only a matter of time that our Church might be totally desacralized! And I refuse to see that day come!
New Translation of the Mass
By Lloyd Baltazar (not verified) on Wednesday, February 3, 2010Americans, by nature and culture are very liberal people. I am not culturally an American and I TOTALLY understand the importance of having an important accurate translation of the Mass from the original Latin Text.
VATICAN II produced MANY MANY MANY MANY heresies and heretics. While their intent may be genuine, it goes against the traditions of our holy Mother, the Church. Tradition and austere religious practice is important in the celebration of the Eucharist. We, as Roman Catholics CANNOT afford to lose the richness of the Latin mass as we must try our best to be as accurate if we use the English language. If not, then let us just go back to the original Tridentine rite.
EITHER Roman Catholics use the accurate Latin translation or we go back to the original Tridentine Mass! Either of the two is the ONLY acceptable option. LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI, LEX VIVENDI!
Vat II said you can't change
By Fred (not verified) on Saturday, January 23, 2010Vat II said you can't change the Mass. But that's what the current English translation does. Notice French, Italian, Spanish, German and Portugeese speaking Catholics all have a literal transaltion.
A chunk of the Glory to God... is deleted. Holy Church becomes Church, rather than being incarnate of Mary Jesus is simply born and scriptural reference after scriptural reference in the Latin is diluted.
If you don't know what consubstantial means (for eg) than look it up. It doesn't help to learn about ones faith. Us English speakers do have brains :)
If we are to have Mass in English lets pray it properly.
If we don't like it when the uber-trads whine then let's not be hypocrites and lets accept the authoity of the Church.
"no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority." Vatican II, Constitution on the Liturgy, para. 22, #2.
You're actually incorrect
By Quotidianum (not verified) on Monday, November 29, 2010You're actually incorrect about other languages: most others do not have literal or accurate translations, either. Most languages, including all of those you mentioned, excluding French, have the inaccurate "for all" translation, as well. The only languages of which I am aware wherein the original, thousands-of-years-old "pro multis" is accurately translated to "for many" are French (et pour la multitude) and Polish. There is also a problem with the translation in English and other languages of "unto to the remission of sins," which is the original, to "for the forgiveness of sins."
As it is now, some people say the translations were "sloppy," some people will attribute possibly more malevolent motives to the inaccuracies. My mom was a teenager with a little Latin schooling, and she remembers the first time she heard "for all" and she said, "huh?" The same with the prayer, "Lord I am not worthy to receive you..." and others. There are many people who don't think some of the "sloppiness" was merely that, but that's another story (especially for the words of consecration).
At any rate, these corrections are long, long overdue, and the Church and faithful will benefit greatly from them. I'm not interested in delaying them one bit. Advent 2011 seems to far away for me. I'd like them to start on Sunday!
Before you mess with the Mass
By Jim (not verified) on Monday, January 11, 2010Go to any parish in America and attend Mass for a week. Count how many people use the missalette for the prayers. If your experience is like mine, it won't be many. Why? Because it's the same every week, and most adults have memorized the Mass. There's a lot of comfort in that.
And, if this new translation is perceived as change for the sake of change, there will be a lot of resistance. When you attend Mass on Sunday, count the number of people who make the required bow during the Creed.
The thing that revisionists forget is how many Mass goers would say the rosary during the Latin Mass. The historical reason for ringing the bell at the consecration was to alert the people-how else would they know? The vernacular Mass makes it accessible to the people.
U.S. Catholic insists on a civil and respectful dialogue on our website, following our Comment policy. Comments should be charitable, on topic, and brief. U.S. Catholic reserves the right to delete comments deemed inappropriate. We encourage you to choose your words wisely.
