The most sweeping changes to the Catholic Mass in 40 years will be rolled out in 2011, the U.S. bishops announced Friday (Aug. 20) after receiving formal approval from the Vatican.
The new English-language translation of the Roman Missal, the official text of prayers and responses used in the Mass, will be implemented on Nov. 27, 2011, the first Sunday of Advent and the beginning of a new liturgical year.
Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Vatican approval was granted on June 23, with additional changes approved on July 24.
It isn’t your fault–the Pew headline on the story was wrong. It is not a “New Mass,” but a new translation of the Mass more faithful to the original Latin.
So among other things they will become more like my 1928 parish, where we say, “And with thy Spirit.”
I’ll want a copy for myself.
And thus ends the experiment in which the Vatican acted as if it cared whether all Christians speaking the same language should use the same wording for the prayers we hold in common. Likewise, thus ends the experiment in which the Vatican acted as if Roman Catholics could be trusted to translate those prayers into their own language. The reason it has taken two decades to approve an English version of the Revised Roman Missal is that every effort by English-speaking bishops to provide an idiomatic translation was frustrated by Italians and Germans in the Curia who insisted that they were better equipped to write an English liturgy than Americans and Englishmen. They eventually got their way.
Senior Priest- Look here http://www.nccbuscc.org/romanmissal/
[i]The reason it has taken two decades to approve an English version of the Revised Roman Missal is that every effort by English-speaking bishops to provide an idiomatic translation was frustrated by Italians and Germans in the Curia who insisted that they were better equipped to write an English liturgy than Americans and Englishmen.[/i]
That will be news to Mgr. Andrew Wadsworth. As to your point about not trusting the Anglophone hierarchies with the job; that’s the point – they couldn’t, and to a great degree still can’t, be trusted.
The ecumenical argument is irrelevant.
From the US Conference of Bishops site.
1. Why was there a need for a new translation?
The Missale Romanum (Roman Missal), the ritual text for the celebration of the Mass, was promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970 as the definitive text of the reformed liturgy of the Second Vatican Council. That Latin text, the editio typica (typical edition), was translated into various languages for use around the world; the English edition was published in the United States in 1973. The Holy See issued a revised text, the editio typica altera, in 1975. Pope John Paul II promulgated the third edition (editio typica tertia) of the Missale Romanum during the Jubilee Year in 2000. Among other things, the third edition contains prayers for the celebration of recently canonized saints, additional prefaces for the Eucharistic Prayers, additional Masses and Prayers for Various Needs and Intentions, and some updated and revised rubrics (instructions) for the celebration of the Mass. To aid the process of translation of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments issued Liturgiam Authenticam, in 2001, an Instruction on the vernacular translation of the Roman Liturgy which outlines the principles and rules for translation. In 2007, the Congregation for Divine Worship issued the Ratio Translationis for the English Language, which outlined the specific rules for translation in English.
2. Who completed the work of translation?
The process of translation was a highly consultative work of several groups. The International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) is chartered to prepare English translations of liturgical texts on behalf of the conferences of bishops of English–speaking countries. The USCCB and the other member Conferences of Bishops received draft translations of each text from ICEL (called “Green Booksâ€) and had the opportunity to offer comments and suggestions to ICEL. A second draft (called the “Gray Bookâ€) was then prepared by ICEL, which each Conference of Bishops approved (a Conference reserves the right to amend or modify a particular text) and submitted to the Vatican for final approval. At the level of the Vatican (the Holy See), the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments examined texts and offered authoritative approval (recognitio) of texts, granting permission for their use. The Congregation was aided by the recommendations of Vox Clara, a special committee of bishops and consultants from English–speaking countries convened to assist with the English translation of the Missale Romanum.
3. What’s new or particularly different about the revised translation?
From the Ratio Translationis comes this explanation:
The unique style of the Roman Rite should be maintained in translation. By “style†is meant here the distinctive way in which the prayers of the Roman Rite are expressed. The principal elements of such a style include a certain conciseness in addressing, praising and entreating God, as well as distinctive syntactical patterns, a noble tone, a variety of less complex rhetorical devices, concreteness of images, repetition, parallelism and rhythm as measured through the cursus, or ancient standards for stressing syllables of Latin words in prose or poetry. (no. 112) The texts of the revised translation of the Roman Missal are marked by a heightened style of English speech and a grammatical structure that closely follows the Latin text. In addition, many biblical and poetic images, such as “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof…†(Communion Rite) and “…from the rising of the sun to its setting†(Eucharistic Prayer III) have been restored.
RE: #4 –
The head of the committee that produced the new English translation was George Cardinal Pell; last I checked, he was neither Italian nor German, but Australian. In fact, here is the
membership of Vox Clara as of 2009:
Despite the prevailing mythology, the dreaded Vatican is actually an international community. The current heads of powerful departments include an American, a Canadian, and a Spaniard (who followed a Nigerian). There is also an Argentinian, a Brazilian, a Slovenian, and, yes, an Italian.
Dale Rye, #4, “And also with you,” is not a translation of the words, “Et cum spiritu tuo.” It is a revision of the Latin under the guise of a vernacular translation. “I have sinned through my own fault,” is likewise a revision of the words, “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.” In the former instance, the revision negates what was, in the original, an acknowledgement of the divine soul in each of us. In the latter, the revision minimizes the idea that a sense of unworthiness is what precedes true repentance.
One need not be an English scholar, or even have English as one’s first language, to see that the original translators of the Mass into English had taken the opportunity to rewrite, dilute, and eliminate language that made them theologically uncomfortable. The Vatican was right to insist that a new translation be written that was faithful to the original. I look forward to attending Mass a little over a year from now and hearing and reciting the words of this beautiful new translation.
I’m delighted. Another obstacle to swimming the Tiber has been removed. Now if they could do something about the music….
Dale–the biggest complainers about the translations that I read were in the American and English Catholic Media. The translation we were using was pathetically pedestrian, also in the opinion of many lacking in beauty or reverence and showing a callous disregard for doctrinal accuracy and faithfulness to the original Latin. In a universal Church, if it is Italians and Germans who are more sensitive to such issues and willing to be up front on the issues, then Glory Be To God.
We are so lucky to have the fabulous and meaningful language of Cranmer’s Prayer Book and the beautiful Coverdale rendering of the Psalter. Common Worship is pretty good too, and then there are the Hymns and worship songs. Much for our cousins to ponder.
Mind you, in someone like James MacMillan’s sublime Masses, there is something for us to learn and take to our bosom.
Many good changes in what I briefly perused, such as the elimination of the words, “by the power of” in the Incarnatus of the Nicene Creed, and also the correct rendering of the Words of Institution to say, “poured out for you and for many” as opposed to “you and for all.” Too bad Enriching Our Worship is moving further in the opposite direction, and picking up where Vatican II left off.