Congratulations to our Catholic friends on finally being able to welcome the new Mass translation this weekend. Liz Tenety tells you everything you need to know to get ready for it.
Any Catholic readers have any thoughts about it? Excited? Scared? Angry? Confused? Tell us.
I think I’d be over the moon. If you missed it the first time I posted it, check out Anthony Esolen’s essay praising, indeed celebrating, the new trantlsaiton translation.
Kirt Higdon says: I’m mostly indifferent; the changes are minor and the Mass is the Mass. I do wish the translators had used “one in substance with” rather than “consubstantial” in the translation of the Creed. They mean the same thing but the former is a simple English phrase while the latter is a technical term used only in the creed or in theology textbooks and not one person in a thousand in the pews is going to know what it’s supposed to mean.
Mary Russell says: I’m very much in favor of it and excited about it. The collects and prayers are wonderful. We got a very good preparation at our parish, with Franciscan priests who carefully explained the philosophical, theological and Scriptural differences between the old and new translations.
There was a very long discussion about the Esolen article over at dotCommonweal from a liberal Catholic perspective.
Nate says: Soooo excited. The old Collect translations were right out of the Moral Therapeutic Deist’s playbook. The Latin would be some rich theological point about, say, salvation or what have you, and it would be translated into English as:
Oh God, you are nice. Help us to be nice too. Amen.
The new translations aren’t perfect, but it’s better than what we’ve had. Of course, given that we are all MTD’s now, these better translations of the Latin might freak us out. 
And I’ll respectfully disagree with Kirt. I’m happy we’re saying consubstantial…and ‘with your spirit’ as well, among other changes. A few weird words does a congregation good, me thinks. Good stuff all around.
Sam M says: Not excited. If you are going to go back, go back to the Latin.
It’s just… when does this sort of thing stop? A while back, I recall someone finding an original egyptian recipe for beer. It was thousands of years old. Or maybe they actually found some residue and reverse engineered the recipe. Someone tried it. It was terrible.
I guess in this case, the idea is that the original is better. Doesn’t sound that way to my ear. One of the prime benefits of the mass is its familiarity. Maybe it’s not perfect. But its ours. Messing with the language seems to…cheapen it. Just let it be.
I have to admit, however, that I also strongly objected when it was decided we needed to hold hands during the Our Father. I also dislike having to bow on the way to communion. These seems like trifling things. Years on, they still seem like conscious interruptions.
You want original, go back to the Latin. Why not Aramaic?
Noah G. says: I’m excited. I’ve only been a Catholic for going on 8 months, so I’ve had minimal exposure to the liturgy, but I had a good amount of experience with the Episcopal liturgy before that, which was similar. I can’t believe the Nicene Creed is changing though, I didn’t know that until reading the article you linked to. This is bigger than I’d thought.
Anyway, yeah, I’m all for it. Including “a few weird words” thrown in here and there.
Clare Krishan says: oh Rod you’re so parochial – “our Catholic friends” – really?
Our Spanish-speaking Catholic friends have never prayed anything else ! Six of the ten regions of English-speaking Latin rite Catholics (South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, England-&-Wales, Scotland, Phillipines) each with its own independent episcopal conference have been praying the new Order of the Mass for some time already (using former Propers, only now available/approved with the actual published version of Missal). India, Pakistan, Ireland and Canada are the ones doing catch up with the US Roman Catholics… consecrated religious will still pray their Dominican/Franciscan/Benedictine Rites, Ukrainian Catholics will still be praying their English-language version of an ancient Slavonic rite, Maronite Catholics with still be praying their English-language version of an ancient Syriac rite… Anglican Ordinariate Catholics will still be praying their newly approved and revered Sarum-based Rite… katholikos is Greek for universal… not identical, ‘cos then we’d be the panomoiόtypos church, the
‘alloverselfsametypes’ (a humanist anthropomorphism if ever there was one). No, we’re the homoousion aka consubstantial body of Christ, ie the one Holy catholic Apostolic church !
Bugg says: Why mess with it? The emphasis on “The Spirit” has a New Age feel that rings hollow.
Do think the different ending is probably a bit more respectful.
“Go in peace, to lvoe and serve the Lord”
“Thanks be to God”-
Always sounded as if we were all quite happy to be done with Mass rather than embracing Christ’s example in the coming week.
There are in NYC a number of places you can go to a Latin Rite Mass. Have no idea if other dioceses are as acommodating as NY and Brooklyn.
As to real substantive improvement, enough with the constant interruption of music. Seems there are more thana few bishops who are frustrated Broadway producers. Further would help if homilies consisted of one solid bullet point explained concisely rather than a long, meandering stream of almost nothingness.
maxsnafu says: Church liberals hate it. Therefore I love it.
Hector says: Bugg,
They’re not ‘messing with it’. The ‘new’ translation is actually closer to the pre-Vatican II translations of the Roman Missal into English (used by some Anglicans) as well as to the traditional Anglican liturgies. ‘And with thy spirit’ is a more faithful translation from the Latin (as is the case with some of the other changes they’re making).
bones says: I like the changes! It’s somewhat exciting to be part of a historical moment like this.
Now having said that, I probably won’t actually notice the changes for another 4-5 years. I attend Mass with young 3 kids, the eldest being 3, whom require about 80% of my attention.
Roland de Chanson says: Until they start calling the “Spirit” the “Holy Ghost” again and put back the “thous” and “thees”, I shall remain aloof from all the masonic mummery.
Rod, I think your “High Elvish” comment went into the wrong thread. But I’m still laughing, moreso now that I know the context!
bones says: And the other 20% is used when I’m freed up for hymns. I don’t know why, but les enfants terribles are best behaved with mum and dad are singing.
In lieu of the FT essay, my reaction is complete surprise. I had long heard that the English translation was poor and incomplete, but I’d never seen it explained just how poor and incomplete it really was.
I’m excited. I’ve had a countdown widget on my blog for, what, nearly two years now?
Words do matter. I like to think of it this way: imagine a husband and wife; the husband tells his wife all sorts of nice things, but never actually says the words “I love you.” After years of marriage she has a tearful breakdown in which she complains about this, and he says, “Dynamic equivalence, honey! When I say, ‘You look nice today,’ or ‘Dinner was terrific,’ it really *means* ‘I love you.’ And what about my actions–don’t they count? Why should I actually have to use that ancient but clunky and shopworn phrase when I talk to you?”
All of the changes point to realities which we’ve sort of taken for granted in the old “dynamic equivalence” translation. Take the bit from the Sanctus: “…God of power and might,” vs. “…God of hosts.” The first says: God is powerful and mighty. Well, okay. The second points to Isaiah 6:3, which, of course, is Isaiah’s vision of God in the temple, surrounded by angels–the heavenly host. You could say that “God of power and might” is the equivalent of “God the all-powerful and holy commander of the heavenly army,” but so much of the scriptural connection is simply lost in the first version.
And it’s that way with pretty much everything that is changing. If anything, Catholics in America may be surprised at how scripturally rooted the new translation is, at how often they find that the words (especially those prayed by the priest) connect automatically back to passages in the Bible, as they do in the Latin and as they were always supposed to in the vernacular.
David J. White says: As suggested by a poster on Fr. Zuhlsdorf’s blog, perhaps in years to come, aging Baby Boomers will drive for an hour or more, on the third Sunday of the month, to the remote parish where the bishop has given permission for them to have the “old Mass”, where they will once more take out the lovingly-preserved felt banners and tie-dyed vestments, and carefully open their battered, taped-up copies of Glory & Praise while the guitarist strums the opening chords of the Entrance Hymn by Dan Schutte.
David J. White says: It’s just… when does this sort of thing stop? A while back, I recall someone finding an original egyptian recipe for beer. It was thousands of years old. Or maybe they actually found some residue and reverse engineered the recipe. Someone tried it. It was terrible.
When I was a graduate student at Penn, a reception was held at the museum where beer was served brewed from a Sumerian recipe (it was contracted out to a microbrewer). 100 bottles were brewed, and it was called Ninkazi (they even had labels made up), and I’m told it tasted something like mead. (Alas, I was not invited to the reception.)
When does it stop? Presumably, it stops when you think you’ve gotten it right, or at least as right as you are going to get it.
The truly awful translation in use the past 40 years was intended to be temporary. Of course, so was the postwar partition of Germany. That took 45 years to fix, so in some ways I supposed the revised translation is a few years ahead of schedule.
What dismays me is reading about priests who are arguing against the theology supported by the revised translation, as opposed to the current (for not much longer one). Since the revised translation is a much closer reflection of the Latin, this means that these priests are really arguing against the theology of the official Mass text (which is the Latin one) — and supports the arguments of those who have been saying for years that the awful translation we’ve been using really inculcated a different theology.
I guess in this case, the idea is that the original is better. Doesn’t sound that way to my ear. One of the prime benefits of the mass is its familiarity. Maybe it’s not perfect. But its ours. Messing with the language seems to…cheapen it. Just let it be.
And yet that argument doesn’t seem to have gone very far when the familiar traditional Mass was ripped away from people 40+ years ago.
There are in NYC a number of places you can go to a Latin Rite Mass. Have no idea if other dioceses are as acommodating as NY and Brooklyn.
Actually, you can attend a Latin-Rite Mass in every RC parish in the country. Of course, in the vast majority of them, the Latin-Rite Mass will be celebrated in English, according to the post-Vatican II Novus Ordo. But it’s still a Latin-Rite Mass. If you mean the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite, somewhat inaccurately called the Tridentine Mass, or even less accurately the “Latin Mass”, then I agree, there are many fewer places where that can be found. (Any Mass celebrated in Latin is, strictly speaking, a “Latin Mass”; it is possible in some places to fine the Novus Ordo celebrated in Latin — as the Council Fathers of Vatican II actually intended.)
cecelia says: I really like it – as has been said by many here – I think it is more elegant.
I think if your parish prepares people helps them to understand the why – the transition will go easier.
Next up I hope – gettting rid of some of the post vatican II hymns. Although I appreciate the youngers have an attachment to some of those newer hymns.
Peterk says: as someone who has been attending Tridentine Masses for decades the translations are not new. Now we are back to being Catholic
caroline says: What exactly does “And with your spirit mean?” Is it like saying “and with your soul”?
David J. White says: Caroline: here is a link to a brief article discussing it:
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re1092.htm
MIke says: perhaps in years to come, aging Baby Boomers will drive for an hour or more, on the third Sunday of the month, to the remote parish where the bishop has given permission for them to have the “old Mass”, where they will once more take out the lovingly-preserved felt banners and tie-dyed vestments, and carefully open their battered, taped-up copies of Glory & Praise while the guitarist strums the opening chords of the Entrance Hymn by Dan Schutte.
And then a different Pope can acquiesce to the complaining and martyrdom of the First Word Catholics who think the world revolves around them and their needs. As a non-Catholic, I’ve often wondered if the world would be a better place if the liturgy warriors spent as much time living out the meaning of the Mass as they did complaining about the words and music.
Matt says: The changes are not huge, but one or two are fairly significant. The new translation is just a band-aid on a cancer patient. The RCC has been rotting from the inside out, not because of problems of doctrine, but because the don’t follow their doctrine. If they were Jews, I’d call them “self-hating.” the worst offenders are the US bishops who, while demanding allegiance from the priests and laity, don’t seem to want to extend their own loyalty to the Pope, Church, and to Jesus; they’re too busy playing patty-fingers in the holy water dish with leftists.
I hope the RCC in the USA comes to its senses soon. We need them–yes, even those of us in other denominations need them to anchor everybody. As the RCC careens toward insanity, the rest of us have hurried ahead to beat a path to perdition that the US bishops seem to want to go down. My own Church (Episcopal) gave up the Holy Ghost years ago. It is flat-out heretical, if not pagan. Our alleged primate (a good term for her) is to religion what Joe McCarthy is to free speech. Some of us hold out hope, but only the kind of hope a death-row inmate has for a last minute stay of execution.
Please, Catholics, we need you to not just roll with the correct translation, but to pick up the ball and run, demanding more orthodoxy out of your leaders. The Mass is a nice start. How about a proper translation of your Divine Office (Liturgy of the Hours)? How about providing an example for the rest of us to follow? If its true that the Church ‘subsists in’ the RCC, then you owe it to us other churches to guide the way and bring us back to the right path, not to follow us.
Help us, Benedict Kenobi, you’re our only hope!
Sam M says: I don’t know. This strikes me as getting really excited because someone came up with better lyrics for the Star Spangled Banner. With at least some people arguing that the lyrics are worse.
I don’t care which translation is used. I feel like it’s a sideshow.
I know. That means I am not familiar enough with the history of the liturgy. So be it.
But again, right now, I feel like I would if someone were arguing about the words of the national anthem. In which case I would say… wait. You think that’s really what matters?
You know. The whole “under God” thing in the pledge of allegiance?
Change it. Keep it the same. Whatever. I lean towards keeping it the same because I usually lean towards that. But beyond that, if they thing translating it into a hip-hop version would be good for inner city churches, I wouldn’t care.
I believe the VAST majority of Catholics are similar to me in this regard.
Roland de Chanson says: When does it stop?
It stops when we get a pope with testiculos bene pendentes.
Ivan K. says: I have no confidence that this translation will accomplish anything. It’s hard to grasp the cruelty and iconoclasm that occurred post-VII. Churches torn down, or at least interiors wrecked, to be replaced by modernist eyesores. New vessels, vestments, missals that tyrannically imposed the 70′s aesthetic, possibly the ugliest in the history of humankind. Music that never aims higher than commercial jingles, ‘Rainbow Connection’ and ‘Margaritaville.’ All of this came from a profound hostility toward the Catholic tradition, and toward Catholic theology. Everything and everyone was to be loved and affirmed except the Catholics who saw value in the pre-Vatican II Church. These were to be cruelly and ruthlessly suppressed and excommunicated.
I was reborn when I discovered the Tridentine Mass, and Catholic Traditionalism. I can’t see myself ever going back to the Novus Ordo. These tweaks and refinements don’t do anything to address the revolution that occurred post-VII. It’ll still be the same modernist world-view, but with a few different words.
Noah G. says: OK, I just read the First Things essay (had to wait ’til I could print it out, I have trouble reading long essays/articles/etc from the computer).
Anyway, now I’m really excited. (as opposed to just being “excited”)
I knew the first translators had dumbed it down but I had no idea to what extent.
My video and notes are here:
http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/reform-on-pope-b-new-missal-is-now-in.html
Joseph D'Hippolito says: The fact that Catholic prelates spend more time issuing guidelines for a new translation of the Mass rather than trying to ferret out the corruption within bespeaks of an institution straining gnats and swallowing camels.
IOW, falling apart, lacking a moral compass.
the new trantlsaiton
Yikes. That Beaune must be good stuff, Rod.
I think the changes are a good thing, as the translation will be better (if not exact), though I can’t call myself excited over it. It’ll be confusing for a while, especially for those who aren’t clued in to the coming changes, but the laity will figure it out and life will move on. I’ve read elsewhere that some folks are upset about them, but I really don’t see why they would be.