The U.S. Bishops have approved a new translation of the Missal, which could be in use by 2011. To see basically what what the texts look like, click here (pdf). The new translation is more faithful to the Latin, and corrects some rather free translations that many of us have wanted changed.
Now that the new translation is coming, I have one piece of advice for the bishops and parish pastors: educate us about it. Seriously bishops, please prepare your flocks for this new translation. Let us know *why* we have the new translations. Let us have plenty of time to look over the translations. Yes, *I* know why we need the new translations. And I am sure most of you do as well. However, your average Catholic may see this as yet another pointless change (and people don’t like change). We know, and the bishops know, that this is an important change, and I think we need to make sure all Catholics at least understand the significance of this change.
I, for one, welcome this change, and hope that it is implemented properly so that it can enrich the American Church as soon as possible!
David Bennett
Jennifer
asimplesinner
Fr. J.
Chad T.
Jorge Flores
Jonathan B
carmelbennett
nicenehobbit
Jason S
jaybird68
papaz
Dave Hartline
faceman
Mr. Bennett,
I wholeheartedly agree. Even the one small change which was discussed on “The World Over” (the return of the response “and with your spirit”) cheered my heart. I have felt the substitute was seriously lacking even as an Episcopalian when their 1979 BCP was issued. Praise be to God.
Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer
But the substitute was clearer! I’ll go along with it, but some change seems only busywork. Perspective: Are priests who have to say Mass secretly and thus keep it pared down to the bone going to trouble their heads or flocks over these changes? To be purposely less catholic with that part of the Church makes me feel even more like we are the bored-royalty wing.
Carol,
The present translation really is rather “dumbed down” English in many places. Any translation of a sacred text (including the Mass) ought to be in somewhat dignified, exalted language that uses the best grammar and a good, straightforward … but not simpleminded … vocabulary.
I don’t know what’s clearer. I just know “And with your spirit” is a better translation than “and also with you.” I’m also really liking “it is right and just” for dignus et justus est. I’m a fan of this translation, i think.
Carol,
This is only an issue with the English translation and while there may be cases where persecuted Catholics celebrate the mass in English, my guess is that it is extremely rare. The only issue we’d probably have to worry about is angering US Catholics who have to miss a couple minutes of the NFL pregame show on Sundays.
Annie,
I agree. I’m liking this too. But, I’m also a language type person and think fidelity to the original is always better.
The only problem I have is with the absolution after the Confiteor. “May Almighty God have mercy on us and lead us with our sins forgiven to everlasting life.” I know it is actually more faithful to the Latin but “May Almighty God have mercy upon us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life.” just sounds better and has been the English translation of the Latin long before Vat. 2.
Hobbit,
I agree with you on that point. I didn’t catch the wording of the absolution until now.
Overall, I think it is an improvement, and brings the English translation into line with translations in other languages.
now the revision of the liturgical words was quietly closer to the TLM or Traditional Latin Mass. this language defined as a sacred language of our church. being sacred it must remain sacred in any places inside the church. The catholic church only has the divine authority to teach to thy faithful
You need a different Bible translation too. Went to a Catholic wedding a year or two back, and your translation is whack kindergarten talk. It might as well have been in pig latin, that’s how childish it sounded.
I just finished reading the translation and the whole controversy seems a tempest in a tea-pot. For those who wanted “corrected” liturgy, I have a feeling God knows what we mean and hair-splitting is not a wonderful Christian virtue. For those who opposed the changes, why? The sense and meaning are still there, and besides, one of the few things on the Pope and the Bishops’ job descriptions is, “Catholic liturgy.” Let them do their job. The only silly translation was adding the word “roof” to the translation. It may be biblical, but it makes no sense in the context of the mass or the reception of the sacrament that is going on at that moment.
Leave translations to the clergy–the laity have enough to do without getting ourselves knotted up in their cassocks.