Via Gerald is some good news indeed.
LOS ANGELES – The nation’s Roman Catholic bishops signed off Thursday on a new English translation for the Mass that would change prayers ingrained in the memories of millions of American parishioners.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops voted at its biannual meeting for a new translation after a brief but vigorous debate over several small changes in wording. The 173-29 vote on the Order of the Mass was aimed at satisfying Vatican calls for a translation that’s closer to the Latin version.
So this was no close vote that would have further delayed the changes. It does not take a prophet to figure out who some of the 23 dissenting votes were. The majority more than likely saw the writing on the wall that were not going to be able to continue delay or make any changes that would pass muster at the Vatican.
I remember a couple years back my pastor complaining about the English translations in the Mass and how inferior they were and it looks like every passage he pointed out to me has been corrected. So let us see if the prophets of doom are right and that this will cause "chaos and real problems" in the Church.
24 comments
Novus Ordo Fix-o
Jeff reports that Gerald reports that the AP reports that the bishops approved the new (read: proper) translation of the Mass.
And so, as Jeff said in his post’s title:
“And also with you And with your spirit”
Not too fast. They also sent in 62 adaptations, which were basically changes on the translation as given to them. I hope Rome has a good laugh at them and deep sixes every one of them.
A good day indeed! Finally! It is about time that we got back to a closer translation of the text and not some 60’s time-warp rendition of our sacred texts.
What does this mean for those of us behind enemy lines in Soviet Canuckistan?
I can see some folks getting really upset about this.
I’m thinking it will come from the people whose hands are in the oranz (spelling?) position along with Father’s at this point of the Mass. They like to say, “and also with you!” with gusto and extend of one of those hands towards the priest at the same time.
So, what is a helpful, brief response that I might give them?
Anyone know when this will go into effect? I’ve been saying many responses under my breath in latin (“et cum spirito tuo”, “Domine non sum dignus…”, etc.) for quite a while, as the current translation is, well, awful.
Maybe, just maybe, the Vatican will take another step toward orthodoxy and drop Eucharistic prayers 2, 3, and 4 in favor of, you know, the ROMAN CANON.
How do we get a list of the 23 who voted against the proposal?
Speaking of non sum dignus… here’s hoping we get the translation that says “i am not worthy to have you enter under the roof of my mouth…”
Even better, maybe something can start the ball rolling to ditch the current horribly deficient English translation of the Scriptures that we have to use. They are as weak and watered down as the current sacramentary is.
29! After all the hype about this bishop and that bishop feeling bad about the changes.
29! ?? !!!!
Crushed like a chicken bone. It’s about time the US Bishops do something right and mostly together (save the 29 sniffy boys). Prayers do work! God’s will is produced by US bishops! The Holy Spirit actually is guiding our glorious church! And now we should have Bishop Chaput interviewed and have him saying … “And now I’m goin’ to Disney World!”
Yee-haa! Bring on “consubstantial.” Bring on “And with your spirit!” Bring on “And my soul shall be healed!” God is good. We do truly believe in the Eucharist. We really do believe the mass is where we sit with the Angels and profess our love for God.
29?
Their names should be presented to our German Shepard as a reminder of who goes when they hit retirement age. I mean just for the sake of the faithful that they “lead.”
I’m with Father Joe. I am still in shock about the Gospel reading that had the fetal John the Baptist moving (rather than leaping)in St. Elizabeth’s womb. How does one find the parallelism with King David dancing and leaping before the Ark of the Covenant in that translation?
I would be interested in seeing the 63 exclusions, though.
In Christ’s peace and joy,
Robin L. in TX
“my soul shall be healed” is out. Apparently, that’s too fancy. It still is “I shall be healed”.
All in all, I’ll stick with Latin.
SOME good stuff was approved; SOME was not.
Perhaps the Roman review will save the rest of the good stuff.
In any case, it’s two years out before the new one hits the pews.
Correct me if I’m wrong, and I’m serious here… but isn’t it the Vatican who decides which translations are used? Or is this the ‘inmates running the asylum’ where the American Bishops tells the Vatican what to do?
Please clarify. Thanks. 🙂
Lisa
Anyone know if the phrase “…Happy are those who are called to His supper” has been upgraded? (Isn’t “…”Happy are those who have been called to the wedding feast of the Lamb” ? )
Whoops — I meant “Isn’t *it* ‘Happy…’ ” 😉
“How do we get a list of the 23 who voted against the proposal?”
What would happen if we got such a list? I think they actually vote by secred ballot – though I am not sure.
As far as “Consubtantial” goes, surely you have heard by now that that is one of the adaptations. If given the recognitio of the Holy See, we will continue to proclaim Jesus “one in being” with the Father.
Speaking of the translation, “i am not worthy to have you enter under the roof of my mouth…” such is not a good translation either – “Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum…” says nothing about the “roof of my mouth” – thought I like the connection made there in the mind of the communicant, but this is actually a reference to the Centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant. A proper translation of that text would read: “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof…”
Oh, and as far as the Ecce Agnus Dei is concerned Margo, you are very close “Beati qui ad cenam agni vocati sunt” is: “Blessed are those who are called to the supper (or banquet or feast) of the lamb.” Obviously, the nuptial character of that feast is understood.
So any word on correcting the “pro multis” in the consecration? Maybe “for the multitudes”?
I think “And with *thy* spirit” sounds much better…
As I am told “Pro Multis” will continue to be translated as “For all” – but I don’t know whehter that is the ICEL text or whether that was a USCCB adaptation.
Personally, I’m disturbed by the changes.
Granted I’m only 21, grew up in a liberal Catholic family, etc. However,I feel this will just drive me, and several other young Catholics (judging from the ones I’ve talked to) further away from the church. I’m comfortable with the way things have been. I’ll continue saying them, loudly. Not under my breath, as some might hope. Sure, I might get thrown out of the church, but…
Sorry, this is touchy for me. I’ve had faith issues for a while now, and this is just distancing me further from a church I already have issues with.
John,
Study what the words were in the Latin, before the vernacular changes. Then study what they are going to be when the changes come.
Give the church the benefit of the doubt (assume that the church knows what it is doing)
Don’t distance yourself from the Eucharist until you understand why you are distancing yourself.
just my .02
I have two comments on this. First, with all of the difficult issues the Catholic Church is facing, I find changing the English translations to be about as useful as the New Jersey House of Representatives voting unanimously to proclaim the blueberry muffin to be the state muffin. A lot of fluff and not much content.
Second, there seems to be an assumption that all truth in our Catholic Faith was frozen centuries ago with the Latin Rite. This seems like a step back towards a Mass comprehended by the few.
Comments are closed.