Textual Changes to the Roman Missal coming First Sunday of Advent

[Trigger]

Has this been discussed?  I took two workshops on the revised Third Edition Roman Missal last weekend.  The changes are small, but significant - it's a real shame that the USCCB has decreed that they cannot be implemented over a period of time, that we must wait until 11/27 and then change it ALL.  People are going to be confused and upset, if there is no catechesis on these changes from the pulpit (this is being strongly encouraged, but you KNOW not all priests are going to do it).  Heck, you should have heard the heated discussions during the keynote address and workshops alone!

In other countries, parishes plan to introduce the changes one or two at a time, in the weeks leading up to Advent.  I think this is the proper way to do it, and I'm really disappointed in the US Catholic Bishops for being so hard-headed.

The bishops in Ireland and Australia are flat-out refusing to implement the revised Missal.

I'm glad I took these workshops, because I gained a much better understanding of the reasons for the changes; however, the general consensus amongst the participants (priests, deacons, non-ordained religious, lay ministers, and general laity from all over my diocese) seems to be that, even after ten years of working at this thing, Rome still didn't get it quite right.  I agree with that assessment.

You can find lots of good info here.

Specific changes in the congregation's parts

Specific changes in the priest's parts

Most of the liturgical music will have to be changed, as well.  It's gonna be a bumpy ride.  I sure hope we don't lose even more people over this.

Let's discuss ...

[lilyka]

The gloria part is old and probably was part of Catholic liturgy at one time.  My children can all sing this from memory and was probably one of the first hymns they learned.

Same with the creed.  This is almost word for word how the old Greeks say it (the Bishop has given us the translation he would like us to use but it is hard to change).

"And with your Spirit" is also an Orthodox thing.

Honestly to me it sounds like hey are trying to go back to an older version/translation of the Liturgy.    None of this wording is new.  

Also it doesn't look as though the changes are that big if that is all there is.  Just a few wording choices that take things back to am more traditional wording.

[Tradd]

nm

Edited by Tradd - 5/25/11 at 4:15pm

[KempsMama]

We've been discussing the changes for awhile in our parish, and there have been weekly articles in our bulletins, as well as discussions.  I love the new changes.  The reason the bishops n Ireland are refusing has to do with gender issues, which is a bunch of huey in my opinion. 

[Fay]

Looks like a better translation of the original Greek to me.  :)

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by Fay 

Looks like a better translation of the original Greek to me.  :)

 Actually, the whole purpose was to make everything a better translation of the Latin.  And to make better references to Scripture in the liturgical prayers.
 

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by KempsMama 

We've been discussing the changes for awhile in our parish, and there have been weekly articles in our bulletins, as well as discussions.  I love the new changes.  The reason the bishops n Ireland are refusing has to do with gender issues, which is a bunch of huey in my opinion. 

 There was a lot of discussion in my workshops over why they didn't simply take out the word "men" in the Creed, and have it state "for us and for our salvation" (which I say, anyway).

It's not exactly hooey, it's Rome's subtle way of maintaining their patriarchal (and slightly misogynistic) stance. Many priests in attendance agreed that this would have been the right time to just omit the word "men" from the Creed.

[Fay]

The Roman Catholic Mass as we know it is based on an ancient Greek paleochristian liturgy.  Part of the reason for this new translation is the hope for healing the schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches.  The Byzantine Catholic Church published a new translation of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom about 2 years ago, and the Roman Catholic translation of the Mass is very similar to the Byzantine one, which brings the Roman and Byzantine liturgies a tiny bit closer to the wording of the Orthodox liturgies.

[PatienceAndLove]

because "for us men and for our salvation" is more correct in the original Latin.

The whole "patriarchal (and slightly misogynistic) stance" argument is old and stale.

[bax]

I'm not RC, but was interested in the thread. If you look at the Greek, the word anthropos is in there ("for us anthropos and our salvation")--and of course the Latin homines is a translation of the original Greek--so it makes sense to have something in there to correspond to anthropos/homines, or humankind. To my mind, reminding believers that Christ came to save us human beings, not just us [who are speaking the creed, that is, believers], is an important distinction.

Seems to me that it's not a question of what the original said--it's clear that the creed is not saying that Christ came to save male gendered people--rather, the question is, what is the most appropriate translation given today's English usage?

"Men" has consistently been used in the past in English to refer to humans; however, English is a living language and connotations (and denotations) are changing. These days, it can sound proper/formal to use "men" to refer to humankind--or it can sound confusingly gendered--or just kind of fusty and old-fashioned.

I wonder if this choice is more akin to the way people sometimes use British spellings on their wedding invitations (even when they're not British)--trying to sound formal and traditional--and less about imposing patriarchy. I also wonder what translations might be better. "For us human beings" sounds kind of sci-fi. "For all of us people" sounds a little too folksy. Hm. Not an easy project!

[lilyka]

I agree.  We say "for us men and for our salvation"  I have always taken that to mean "mankind" and not "the folks with penises".  i always have thought of myself as "man" in the sense that God made Angels, God made Men and God made animals.  I am not Angels or Animals.  I am Man.

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove 

because "for us men and for our salvation" is more correct in the original Latin.

The whole "patriarchal (and slightly misogynistic) stance" argument is old and stale.

To your first point - not really.  As others have noted, the more accurate translation would be "mankind" or "humankind".
 

To your second point - not in my Diocese, it isn't.  And not to a whole lot of Catholic women everywhere, either.  What's stale is Catholics who think it's perfectly acceptable for their church to consider women second class.

Originally Posted by lilyka 

I agree.  We say "for us men and for our salvation"  I have always taken that to mean "mankind" and not "the folks with penises".  i always have thought of myself as "man" in the sense that God made Angels, God made Men and God made animals.  I am not Angels or Animals.  I am Man.

I agree. Which is why they should have taken this opportunity to change the wording to "mankind", IMO.

Another for instance .... in the Apostles' Creed, the phrase "He descended to the dead." has been changed BACK to "He descended into hell;", even though the translation from Latin should be "the place of the dead" - which makes more sense anyway.

Again, the general consensus at this workshop (comprised of clergy, non-ordained religious, and laity) was that Rome seems to have overlooked a lot of nuances in translation.

It's frustrating that, after ten years of working on this, they seem to have still missed the mark.
 

[moonshoes]

Oh my goodness. Now because we say "man" we must all be the victims of a vast conspiracy to demean women? Ridiculous.

I personally think it is outrageous to suggest that Holy Mother Church is a backwater of misogyny. I can tell you that to say to all Catholic women that we are being oppressed and treated like second-class citizens is so incredibly offensive. There is no place on earth that understands the value of women like the Church.

For a group of laity and religious to get together and be so self-righteous and indignant that the Vatican isn't doing things their way and therefore must be wrong is, well, ummm, prideful.

And may I just say thank goodness they will have to take out the Protestant "music" and maybe do something Catholic for a change.

[moonshoes]

Originally Posted by lilyka 

"And with your Spirit" is also an Orthodox thing.

Honestly to me it sounds like hey are trying to go back to an older version/translation of the Liturgy.    None of this wording is new.  

"And with your Spirit" is in the Tridentine (Latin) mass. It is also what is said in Italian and Spanish.

[Trigger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moonshoes 

For a group of laity and religious to get together and be so self-righteous and indignant that the Vatican isn't doing things their way and therefore must be wrong is, well, ummm, prideful.
 

That's not what I said at all.  They/we are pointing out that the Vatican missed the mark.  Because they did.  Some of the translations are simply incorrect.

You're the one who seems to be getting indignant here.

[moonshoes]

Perhaps I am. It might be better to say things like "in my opinion" or "it is possible that" instead of blanket statements. For example, one might say, "In my opinion the Vatican missed the mark because...."

 

To say the translation is incorrect is, again, a matter of opinion.

[lilyka]

It would seem that those groups that cling to the Liturgy in its oldest forms use this wording.  It makes perfect sense that in an effort to clarify things and rectify inaccuracies they would go back to the wording that has been used from the beginning.  it is no surprise to me that several groups known for having a more traditional and unchanging liturgy use this wording.  I really applaud the Vatican for taking a second look at this and going back.
 

Originally Posted by moonshoes 

"And with your Spirit" is in the Tridentine (Latin) mass. It is also what is said in Italian and Spanish

[mamabadger]

Originally Posted by lilyka 

I agree.  We say "for us men and for our salvation"  I have always taken that to mean "mankind" and not "the folks with penises".  i always have thought of myself as "man" in the sense that God made Angels, God made Men and God made animals.  I am not Angels or Animals.  I am Man.

Yes. Also, in our church (Orthodox) the congregation usually says the Creed together, and women as well as men say "for us men and for our salvation." For that matter, so do boys and girls, who are also not "men" in the other sense, and nobody seems to feel the Creed excludes small children. 

[CherryBomb]

Originally Posted by moonshoes 

Oh my goodness. Now because we say "man" we must all be the victims of a vast conspiracy to demean women? Ridiculous.

I personally think it is outrageous to suggest that Holy Mother Church is a backwater of misogyny. I can tell you that to say to all Catholic women that we are being oppressed and treated like second-class citizens is so incredibly offensive. There is no place on earth that understands the value of women like the Church.

For a group of laity and religious to get together and be so self-righteous and indignant that the Vatican isn't doing things their way and therefore must be wrong is, well, ummm, prideful.

And may I just say thank goodness they will have to take out the Protestant "music" and maybe do something Catholic for a change.

Missed you, moonshoes!

[moonshoes]

same here - glad that things are going well for you!