FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? (/showthread.php?tid=68438)

Pages: 1 2


Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - VoxClamantis - 04-11-2014


Nothing screams out "stability," "eternal," ancient," "rooted" than a Mass that changes every week. Missals are expensive, too, ya know? Sheesh. Glad to be trad! From US Catholic:




Will the latest Catholic Mass translation get another overhaul?
By David Gibson| 14 Comments | Print this pagePrint | Email this pageShare
News Parish Life Prayer and Sacraments



(RNS) A new translation of the Mass has been used in the nation’s Catholic parishes for less than three years, but there are signs that the language—often criticized as stilted and awkward—could be in for another edit.

“We’ve tried it, we’ve lived with it, we think it needs correction,” Atlanta Archbishop Wilton Gregory told a conference on liturgical reform last month in one of the most public and high-level expressions of discontent with the missal, as the Mass text is called.

Gregory was seconded by Bishop Robert Lynch of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, in an echo of comments last year by Bishop Robert Brom, now retired as head of the San Diego diocese, who said “the new missal needs corrective surgery and this should take place without delay.”

Reopening that process would be a momentous step.

The latest translation was approved only after a tortuous, decade-long struggle between those who wanted words and phrasings that sounded more like the original Latin text and those who thought that the proposed vocabulary sounded pompous and incomprehensible.

Vox Wrote:Think what could have been done if this liturgical nonsense were stopped, the TLM were restored everywhere, and that DECADE'S worth of energy and focus could've been put into coming up with a majorly kick-ass RCIA program that has bones and MEAT to it. Alas.

“It’s the creed! It’s not the SAT prep,” as comedian and practicing Catholic Stephen Colbert put it.

But with a big shove from the Vatican, which essentially took over the process and mandated the Latinate language, the more formal text won out.

Words such as “consubstantial” became part of the Mass, Jesus was not “born of the Virgin Mary” but is now “incarnate of” her, and before taking the host Catholics now say, “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof” instead of “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you.”

Vox Wrote:Awwwwwwwwwwww! Poor babies have to learn a new word and mimic an old Roman centurion! Harrumph!

That language dismayed some in the pews but was especially problematic for priests and bishops who have to say Mass every day, and a new survey released this week appears to give further impetus to a reform of the reform.

The national poll of priests and lay leaders in parishes around the country found that more than half of the 444 clergy who responded reject the new missal, by a margin of 52-42 percent.

Just 27 percent said the new translation has lived up to expectations. The smaller number of lay leaders who responded tended to be more positive about the changes.

The study was commissioned by the Godfrey Diekmann Center for Patristics and Liturgical Studies at St. John’s School of Theology in Collegeville, Minn., and carried out by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University. The survey is based on 539 interviews, with a margin of error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.

The results were first published at the blog Pray Tell, which is operated by the Rev. Anthony Ruff, a Benedictine and liturgist at St. John’s who has been critical of the new Mass.

Among the other findings of the study:

* 75 percent of clergy and lay leaders say “some of the language of the new text is awkward and distracting.”
* 58 percent of clergy say they do not like the more formal style of language in the new text.
* 39 percent of clergy think the new missal is an improvement on the previous translation.
* 50 percent of clergy and lay leaders say the new translation urgently needs to be revised.

Vox Wrote:They really need to stop pouring time and money into the old rusted-out Pinto and start driving that perfectly fine Mercedes they've got in the garage.

The Rev. Anthony Cutcher, president of the National Federation of Priests’ Councils, said the data should push the bishops to modify the texts.

“Armed with the latest data, we can take this opportunity to help craft a revision that stays true to the text and at the same time is accessible to all,” Cutcher told Pray Tell.

Critics of the new missal have also been buoyed by last year’s election of Pope Francis, who has shown himself to be far more relaxed about liturgical customs and a big change from Pope Benedict XVI, who was a stickler for old-fashioned rites and a chief proponent of the new English translations.

Moreover, bishops in other countries have in the past year taken advantage of the change of popes to call for a halt to implementing the new translations in their respective languages.

But church officials and experts in liturgy in Rome and the U.S. also cite numerous factors working against another effort at changing the language of the Mass.

One is that Francis has so many other problems and reforms he needs to address that tackling the liturgy—which is always one of the most divisive issues for church officials and Mass-goers—is relatively low on the list. In addition, he has not yet revamped the Vatican congregation that oversees liturgical matters, and the holdovers from Benedict’s pontificate are unlikely to welcome any changes.

Vox Wrote:The liturgy, the means by which we're given access to the "Source and Summit of the Faith" is a low priority. That's just --- sad. And it's "divisive", eh? The rite wherein the bread becomes THE Body of Christ we all share in is "divisive." It wasn't that way before they started playing games with the rite, was it?

Above all, they say, the American bishops are still catching their breath after such a long struggle with Rome, and one that they wound up losing. “I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of further changes, but (the bishops) are just tired of it,” said one U.S.-based liturgy expert.




Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - PrairieMom - 04-11-2014

I have to admit "consubstantial" irritated me. The 1st generation translation from 1965 that I have states "of one substance" ... to me that's clearer.

Actually, quite frankly, the 1965 translation is pretty good. It has the latinized language structure, but with enough allowances for modern English it flows nicely. Plus, it keeps a good chunk of the TLM, only in English.

Maybe someone should propose to these guys that we should go back to the 1965 translation? Then we'd make everyone happy (or everyone unhappy, depending if you're a half-full, half-empty kind of person)!


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - CaptCrunch73 - 04-11-2014

CaptCrunch73 Wrote:But the more fundamental problem is people take polls and expect God's law to change based on their whim. There was a recent post about this from TCP.

"So when we think of voting on what is or is not moral, sanctioning what is or is not popular, we are giving into the authority of people and not the Divine Revealed Laws of God.

The consequences of this is evident every time you watch the news.  Murders, raping, stealing and wars.  And yet everyone, Catholics and non alike, want to judge what is and what is not moral by democratic decision.  When will we wake up to reality.  We are selfish. We want pleasure.  We are greedy.  We will steal and kill to get our drugs.  We will use and then discard our sex partners.  We will kill unborn babies, up to 9 months, because it is lawful and convenient.  People say it is good to blow up innocent people for political reasons.  Cartoon child pornography is ok because of freedom of speech."

CaptCrunch73 Wrote:Add "we will systematically destroy the Mass and Catholic tradition to the list above"!

http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2014/04/06/gods-laws-do-not-depend-on-votes-of-approval-or-disapproval/


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - salus - 04-11-2014

Go back to the Latin Mass, things were much more orthodox when people "knew" nothing 


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - formerbuddhist - 04-11-2014

Just abolish the Novus Ordo and any use of the vernacular and return to the traditional Mass and the Latin language. As long as the Mass is in the vernacular its going to be updated as the languages change or some activist group pushes for something.


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - Heorot - 04-11-2014

The use of vernacular is no judgment of orthodoxy or catholicity in a rite; the Orthodox and others use vernacular liturgies, and with great reverence. It's not because of the language, but because of the hearts of those celebrating. If you have reverential & pious love for the Lord in your soul, you will celebrate reverently with almost anything you're given. The problem lies far beyond the mere words. We need conversion and repentance...

My only problem with the new translation is "consubstantial". It is simply not a word in English, and it sounds very pedantic. It's like "conundrum", which comes from the students of Oxford university in the 1500s as "quonundrum" - a word made-up to sound pompous, and to describe those who are pompous. If you're going to force the divine liturgy of Christ to be "understandable" for most people, don't try to make up latinate words.

That being said, most people probably don't pay attention at Mass anyway. I find that the vernacular Masses tend to have a good deal of spacing out on the part of the laity. It's in their own language, and it just seems so normal and non-special that we can just breeze through. What % of Catholics would remember where the readings were even from, let alone what they substantially said,10 minutes after Mass? Whoever was so obsessed with implementing vernacular at all costs didn't seem too well-versed in human nature.

In fact, it seems to me that all the radicals - political, ecclesiastical, philosophical - do not understand human nature. It's the only way they can come up with the pompous garbage which is their contribution to history.

Quote:and before taking the host Catholics now say,

Interesting vocabulary. We "take" the host. We do not "receive" anything. It's about us and our effort. That about sums it up.


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - aquinas138 - 04-12-2014

(04-11-2014, 09:53 PM)Heorot Wrote: My only problem with the new translation is "consubstantial". It is simply not a word in English, and it sounds very pedantic. It's like "conundrum", which comes from the students of Oxford university in the 1500s as "quonundrum" - a word made-up to sound pompous, and to describe those who are pompous. If you're going to force the divine liturgy of Christ to be "understandable" for most people, don't try to make up latinate words.

It has been in English usage in theology since the 15th century, and outside of theology since the 16th.  From the OED:
Quote:1.

a. Of one and the same substance or essence; the same in substance.

1576  T. Newton tr. L. Lemnie Touchstone of Complexions i. viii. f. 61,  Not able.., to attracte & digest that nourishment yt is moyste, nor to make it lyke and consubstantial with the body and members.
1603  J. Florio tr. Montaigne Ess. ii. xviii. 385  A book consubstantiall to his Author.
1605  J. Sylvester tr. G. de S. Du Bartas Deuine Weekes & Wks. i. vi. 217  As in Spring-time, from one sappie twigg There sprouts another consubstantiall sprigg.
1650  tr. Bacon Hist. Life & Death 59 in Sylva Sylvarum (1651) ,  The Livelesse Spirits are next Consubstantiall to Aire; The Vitall Spirits, approach more to the Substance of Flame.
1817  S. T. Coleridge Biogr. Lit. 63  Grant that an object from without could act upon the conscious self as on a consubstantial object.

b. Theol. Said of the three Persons in the Godhead; esp. of the Son as being ‘one in substance’ with the Father. Sometimes also said of Christ's humanity in relation to man.

1483  Caxton tr. J. de Voragine Golden Legende 25/3  Jhesu cryst..in essence consubstantial by generacion.
a1530  W. Bonde Pylgrimage of Perfeccyon (1531) iii. f. Clxxxxviiiv,  The sone..is consubstancial, that is to saye, he is of one nature & substaunce with the father.
1561  T. Norton tr. J. Calvin Inst. Christian Relig. i. f. 30,  When the Latines meant to expresse the word Omoousion, they called it Consubstantiall, declaring the substance of the Father and the Sonn to be one, so vsing the word substance for essence.
a1613  E. Brerewood Enq. Lang. & Relig. (1614) xxv. 180  In their conceits..the humane nature of Christ, was not consubstantiall to ours, but of another kind.
1667  H. More Divine Dialogues (1713) 559  St. Augustin..calls the Holy Ghost, The substantial and consubstantial Love of the Father and the Son.
a1711  T. Ken Hymnotheo in Wks. (1721) III. 281  The Word his consubstantial Beams display'd.
1724  D. Waterland Crit. Hist. Athanasian Creed vii. 104  This creed makes no mention of Christ being consubstantial with us, in one nature, as he is consubstantial with the Father in another.
1875  E. White Life in Christ (1878) v. xxviii. 474  The apostolic writings seem to lay far greater stress on the real distinction in the Persons of the Godhead than on any idea of consubstantial Unity.

2. quasi-n.

1640  G. Watts tr. Bacon Of Advancem. Learning iv. ii. 203  Consubstantialls are Willingly intertained with a kindly embrace, and properly intenerate and supple.
1762  L. Sterne Life Tristram Shandy V. xl. 139  It is inherent in the seeds of all animals, and may be preserved..by consubstantials, impriments, and occludents.
1866  J. M. Neale Sequences & Hymns 200  Then..Did he recite the Creed that told of the Consubstantial.



Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - trident59 - 04-14-2014

What needs to be done is to adopt the 1962 Roman missal.


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - CaptCrunch73 - 04-14-2014

(04-14-2014, 02:15 AM)trident59 Wrote: What needs to be done is to adopt the 1962 Roman missal.

Well, there is some truth to this, if the Missal remains in Latin it avoids all this translation problems.


Re: Latest Mass Translation Already Dated? - Zea mays - 04-14-2014

consubstantial really threw our director of religious education, as she went on to state to all the kids gathered  that the church no longer believes in transubstantiation but consubstantiation.