Replies

The language often lapses into sentimentality and emotionality in place of the noble simplicity of the Latin. A focus on transcendent realities in the Latin prayers too often shifts in the English prayers to a focus on the interior dispositions and desires of those who pray. The overuse of the word "hearts" when the word is not present in the Latin text weakens the use of the term on those occasions where it actually occurs. Likewise, the overuse of the term "sharing" flattens and trivializes the content conveyed by the Latin word participes and consortes.

The guy doesn't like English, OK? This is inside baseball, as far as I'm concerned. Let's just stick with the English translation we've got now, as most of the American Church is familiar with it.

Battling the Vatican over a new translation is NOT worth the effort.

"that the desire for constant variety, typical of many consumerist societies, not come to be regarded in itself as constituting a cultural value capable of serving as a vehicle for authentic inculturation; "

Ouch!! Ha!!!

Let's just stick with the English translation we've got now, as most of the American Church is familiar with it.

That is what ICEL is trying to do. They keep sending up translations they know will be rejected, and figure that they will get a couple more years with the 1970 version. The Vatican seems to be tiring of the game, and will be translating it on their own soon.

Being a bit more Machiavellian, if that is possible, I would do something a bit different. I would say that the 1970 Latin typical edition and all translations thereof expire on July 1, 2003. If there is not a suitable translation into the vernacular by then, all priests will use the latest Latin Typical Edition, and will not be allowed to use the vernacular until a translation is approved.

I'd bet it would take about 3 months, and no way it would take to July 1, 2003, before ICEL would submit a serious effort.

patent

The guy doesn't like English? Oh, come on, Sinky! Please don't take us for fools. We all know what's going on here, and what the end game is.

The bishops desire to change the ancient, vertical, God-centered worship into a modern, horizontal, community-centered sharing. Catholic Churches become Catholic Communities. The Sacrifice of the Mass becomes the communal meal. This tranlation tiff is just the latest skirmish in a long battle between the Roman Catholic Church and "we the church".

Like all liberals, they understand the power of incrementalism. "Oh pooh, all this fuss over a couple words. Ridiculous! Don't be so petty, you stodgy bureaucrats- just do it MY way and let's get on with it."

The guy doesn't like English, OK? This is inside baseball, as far as I'm concerned. Let's just stick with the English translation we've got now, as most of the American Church is familiar with it.

Sink, you're starting to sound like a conservative all the sudden (wanting to "conserve" the mediocre liturgical texts we've used for the past 30 odd years). Using your logic, we should never have changed from Latin in the first place because "most of us were familiar with it."

Naturally, I disagree completely. We need to be more progressive when it comes to getting the translations right. It is commonly agreed that the translations done in the 1960s were flawed and inaccurate. In the spirit of reform, why don't we update them to reflect the more transcendent, reverent, mysterious, and accurate view of Catholicism that so many are yearning for today?

Benedicat te Omnipotens Deus...