Ship of Fools: Editions of the Roman Missal

Thread: Editions of the Roman Missal Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025734

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

Today I picked up a copy of the smaller chapel edition of the new Roman Missal for Africa at my nearest branch of Pauline Books and Media for £65 Sterling.

It looks quite a handsome volume with a blue cover and attractive gold artwork and lettering on the cover. The printing inside is rather plain, though, with only black and red used. I think the style of print used is the same as that found in The Liturgy of the Hours for Africa.

The illustrations in the missal are very interesting in that they depict biblical scenes in the context of African culture.

The missal is good value at £65 when compared with the CTS chapel edition at £115, although the printing and interior artwork of the latter is of better quality. Nevertheless the Pauline Publications edition might serve well as a book of the chair or as an altar missal for a smaller church or chapel if the propers for feast days relative to England, Scotland or Wales are not required.

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

I now have following editions of the latest translation of the Roman Missal in my book collection:-

CTS chapel edition for England, Scotland, Wales and Australia

CTS softback study edition as above

Veritas chapel edition for Ireland

Pauline Publications chapel edition for Africa

Magnificat chapel edition for the USA

CTS Daily Missal

CTS Sunday Missal

CTS de-luxe Sunday Missal

In addition I have the latest Midwest Theological Forum large-print daily missal on order. A veritable battery of missals!!

Not a bad collection for a layman!! I also have the Midwest Theological Forum NO study missal in Latin.

Posted by SFG (# 17081) on :

An impressive collection!

I'm thinking of getting a chapel edition. Which do you recommend?

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

In my opinion the Catholic Truth Society chapel edition is the best.

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

PS It is also noteworthy that the Pauline Publications chapel edition of the Roman Missal for Africa also has the texts of the Gloria, Creed and Sanctus in Latin.

Incidently, does anyone know if the new edition of the Roman Lectionary for Africa using the Revised Standard Version of the bible has been published or is in use in African dioceses yet?

I believe it is to be published by Ignatius Press.

Posted by Mary LA (# 17040) on :

Hi Antiphon -- yes the new lectionary is used in some English-speaking parishes in the Western Cape (South Africa) and I believe in Nairobi, Kenya, but it has not been implemented in that many rural parishes, as far as I know.

Posted by Fuzzipeg (# 10107) on :

The reason is that the lectern version is not out yet as it was sent back because it was of poor quality...I imagine the binding wasn't up to scratch but that's only guess work.

Churches may use the pew version if they wish or stick to the old one until the big one becomes available.

We are sticking to the old one for the moment.

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Antiphon:
Incidently, does anyone know if the new edition of the Roman Lectionary for Africa using the Revised Standard Version of the bible has been published or is in use in African dioceses yet?

Certainly it is the New Revised Standard Version, isn't it?

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :

I doubt it. There has been immense trouble getting the NRSV approved. The Holy See will not give its recognitio unless some adaptations are made, and the copyright holders of the NRSV, I believe, won't allow those alterations. So there has been an impasse. From what I understand, here in England they have given up trying.

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
I doubt it. There has been immense trouble getting the NRSV approved. The Holy See will not give its recognitio unless some adaptations are made, and the copyright holders of the NRSV, I believe, won't allow those alterations. So there has been an impasse. From what I understand, here in England they have given up trying.

Is it to do, at least in part, to the gender neutralisation of things that shouldn't be gender neutralised, (such as some messianic references in the psalms, and such like)?

This is my one of my main personal problems with the NRSV.

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

I knew about the troubles with the NRSV, but it doesn't make too much sense that they would start using the Revised Standard Version. It is much too far a reversion in language, far more than the missal revision.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

The Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition is is used in the English edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church; and is widely used in books and apologetics. It tends to be favored by orthodox Catholic writers and apologists and it's used for the the well-known "Ignatius Bible".

As far as I know the lectionary or lectionaries that were recently published by Ignatius Press use a second edition of the RSV-CE they published in the last few years. The revisions have to do with typesetting and the modernization of some language.

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Michael Astley:
Is it to do, at least in part, to the gender neutralisation of things that shouldn't be gender neutralised, (such as some messianic references in the psalms, and such like)?

This is my one of my main personal problems with the NRSV.

Yes, spot on.

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :

Thank you, Triple Tiara. I suspected as much.

It's one of the first checks I make with bible translations with which I'm unfamiliar if I'm hoping to use them for comparative purposes. If Psalm 1, reads "Happy are those" or some similar nonsense rather than "Blessed is the Man", it is usually an indication that at least part of the traditional Christian understanding of Christ's revelation in the Old Testament has been cast to the wind, which is fine if, for academic reasons, people want a purely scholarly text removed from any context of faith, but I just don't believe that approach gives a proper Christian formation in Scripture.

Posted by SFG (# 17081) on :

The Magniicat version of the Roman Missal looks good on their website but am I right in thinking its not available in the UK. CTS seem to have secured the market in the UK.h

Posted by Stranger in a strange land (# 11922) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
I doubt it. There has been immense trouble getting the NRSV approved. The Holy See will not give its recognitio unless some adaptations are made, and the copyright holders of the NRSV, I believe, won't allow those alterations. So there has been an impasse. From what I understand, here in England they have given up trying.

How reliable would you think that understanding is TT? I was still hearing 3-5 years. (Though, personally, I am more than happy with our currently authorised RSV based lectionary)

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

Hi SFG

Yes, the CTS edition of the Roman Missal is the only edition published in the UK and is the only one authorised for use in England, Scotland and Wales and also in Australia.

Having said that, my nearest branch of Pauline Books and Media has had other editions in stock, including those from the USA, Ireland and South Africa, so it is possible that some churches are using other editions unofficially as they are often cheaper than the CTS edition.

Posted by Stranger in a strange land (# 11922) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
I doubt it. There has been immense trouble getting the NRSV approved. The Holy See will not give its recognitio unless some adaptations are made, and the copyright holders of the NRSV, I believe, won't allow those alterations. So there has been an impasse. From what I understand, here in England they have given up trying.

How reliable would you think that understanding is TT? I was still hearing 3-5 years. (Though, personally, I am more than happy with our currently authorised RSV based lectionary)

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :

Well, at a talk by someone from the Liturgy Office, before the publication of the Missal itself, the question of the lectionary was raised. His answer was that they had hoped an NRSV lectionary would co-incide with the new Missal, but that had to be pushed back at least five years, but he wouldn't bet on anything less than 6 years for a new version of the lectionary. That's why CTS suddenly produced Missals with the readings in them. It had originally been suggested this would be a waste of money if we were soon to have a new lectionary translation. The production of those Missals suggests a new lectionary is not due any-time soon.

Posted by Stranger in a strange land (# 11922) on :

Thanks. So we in the Ordinariate will have another new (alternative) missal and then another new (alternative?) lectionary! I hope there will be instructions against mixing and matching or it will all get rather messy.

Should have stuck with Latin ;-)

[ 20. May 2012, 21:19: Message edited by: Stranger in a strange land ]

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Stranger in a strange land:
Thanks. So we in the Ordinariate will have another new (alternative) missal and then another new (alternative?) lectionary! I hope there will be instructions against mixing and matching or it will all get rather messy.

Should have stuck with Latin ;-)

Undoubtedly there will be instructions, but they will of course be in Latin, and will only use words that do not translate exactly into English. [Snigger]

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

Sorry for the double-post...

My neighbor had a Catholic wedding yesterday, and I got to wondering whether there has been a new translation of the wedding rite. Has there? I don't really keep up on the Rites.

Posted by Fuzzipeg (# 10107) on :

The great thing about the RSV New Testament was that it was the perfect crib for the Greek Testament.....

Surely that is a good enough reason to use it!

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
Sorry for the double-post...

My neighbor had a Catholic wedding yesterday, and I got to wondering whether there has been a new translation of the wedding rite. Has there? I don't really keep up on the Rites.

No, there has been no change.

Posted by St.Silas the carter (# 12867) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
Sorry for the double-post...

My neighbor had a Catholic wedding yesterday, and I got to wondering whether there has been a new translation of the wedding rite. Has there? I don't really keep up on the Rites.

Not yet. Eventually the rites for all the sacraments (Except, I believe, ordination) will be re-translated, and in (I assume at the pace) 15 years down the road, the breviary. I assume the Book of Blessings will be re translated as well.

Posted by PaulTH* (# 320) on :

I would highly recommend the CTS New Daily Missal. It's a tad expensive at £45, and in practice I hardly use it, as I get my daily readings from Magnificat magazine. Yet I agree with the very traditionalist priest Fr Tim Finigan that the New Jerusalem Bible is a lame duck translation, best abolished at the earliest opportunity. Not much work would be needed on the RSV, but the mills of God grind slowly.

When doing my own Bible reading, I use the Douay Rheims translation, because so much in the Jerusalem version makes me gag! As TT has said, the fact that these new missals have been produced suggests that there will be no new lectionary any time soon. Except for the Ordinariate, which will follow the old Anglican tradition of Sundays after Trinity etc, rather than Ordinary Time. If the RSV or the ESV can be authorised for the Ordinariate, surely the rest of the Catholic Church in England could follow suit.

Posted by CL (# 16145) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I would highly recommend the CTS New Daily Missal. It's a tad expensive at £45, and in practice I hardly use it, as I get my daily readings from Magnificat magazine. Yet I agree with the very traditionalist priest Fr Tim Finigan that the New Jerusalem Bible is a lame duck translation, best abolished at the earliest opportunity. Not much work would be needed on the RSV, but the mills of God grind slowly.

When doing my own Bible reading, I use the Douay Rheims translation, because so much in the Jerusalem version makes me gag! As TT has said, the fact that these new missals have been produced suggests that there will be no new lectionary any time soon. Except for the Ordinariate, which will follow the old Anglican tradition of Sundays after Trinity etc, rather than Ordinary Time. If the RSV or the ESV can be authorised for the Ordinariate, surely the rest of the Catholic Church in England could follow suit.

The RSV-CE and lectionary was approved for use in the Ordinariate back in March.

[ 23. May 2012, 21:00: Message edited by: CL ]

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
If the RSV or the ESV can be authorised for the Ordinariate, surely the rest of the Catholic Church in England could follow suit.

Well, the RSV is authorised in England, but not widely used.

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

I have just received my copy of the Midwest Theological Forum large-print Daily Roman Missal. It is a very handsome book with a padded bonded leather cover and gold-edged pages. The cover artwork is the same as that found on the MTF altar editions of the Roman Missal.

This book could well be used as a substitute altar missal if required, or as a book of the chair, a substitute lectionary or as an all-in-one travelling missal/lectionary for a priest in the USA or even in the UK or elsewhere if he would be prepared to use the NAB lectionary in an emergency.

It is a pity, though, that the collects, prayers over the offerings and post-communion prayers are not given in both Latin and English as they are in the CTS Daily Missal. However, the MTF large-print missal might well be used on the altar if a priest wished to say only the Eucharistic Prayer in Latin, as Pope Benedict did at all his masses in the UK in 2010. All the prefaces are given in both Latin and English, as are all the EPs, including those for reconciliation and for special gatherings.

I was slightly annoyed, however, to be charged an extra £32.45 Sterling by HM Customs for importing this book from the USA into the UK!! This is the first time this has happened in several years of buying books from the USA.

It strikes me that CTS might well consider producing a de-luxe large-print edition of its own Daily Missal in a similar style to the MTF one.

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

I've just ordered a set of the Ignatius Press two-volume RSV Roman Lectionary from the Anglican Use Parish of Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio, Texas in the USA. The parish has all the existing stocks of this edition of the lectionary which is now out of print. I believe that it has also been authorised for use by the Ordinariate groups in the UK.

The lectionary costs $100, with $25 shipping costs within the USA and $50 to other countries. It can be ordered on www.atonementparish.blogspot.co.uk

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

I have now receieved my Ignatius Press two-volume Roman Lectionary using the RSV, with which I am very pleased. Both volumes are very handsome and I think they are superior in both binding and printing to the current edition of the lectionary published by HarperCollins and using the Jerusalem Bible which most RCs in the UK are currently required to use. The Ordinariate, however, use the Ignatius Press edition.

I understand that Ignatius Press are no longer printing the lectionary. I wonder if they may consider a reprint at some point now that it is in use by the Ordinariate, as well as by RCs in the Antilles.

I believe that the African RC Bishop's Conference has also authorised the RSV lectionary published in three volimes by the Daughters of St Paul, but I have not yet seen a copy of this.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

Has the version of the RSV been amended to correct the near-heretical use of 'thee' and 'thou' for God while using 'you' for individual humans?

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Has the version of the RSV been amended to correct the near-heretical use of 'thee' and 'thou' for God while using 'you' for individual humans?

I agree that it's linguistically questionable but near heretical? How so? The OCA does this.

Posted by Clavus (# 9427) on :

And the answer to Angloid's question is 'Yes'. The Ignatius Lectionary is the Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition, which finally dispenses with the 'thees' and 'thous'.

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

I took delivery of a copy of the 2008 amended edition of the official Vatican Press Missale Romanum (Novus Ordo) today. It is so far the largest missal I own!!

Incidently, has anyone seen a copy of the new edition of the Roman Missal which is used in New Zealand? I believe that it contains some texts in Maori.

Posted by Antiphon (# 14779) on :

As a matter of interest I purchased my copy of the 2008 Missale Romanum from www.Vaticanum.com for 180 Euros plus I think 25 Euros shipping by DHL. The missal arrived at my home address within 24 hours of leaving Italy and its progress was trackable online.

The missal I purchased was the half-calf leather edition. A full-calf edition is also available for 450 Euros.

In contrast, at www.paxbook.com the same altar missal is on sale for 302 Euros; I think this is also the half-calf leather edition. Therefore, it pays to shop around!!

Posted by Percy B (# 17238) on :

Given that some consider the neo archaisms of the new translation of the missal cumbersome, are there still some churches using the former version, or a hybrid?

- either RC or AC I mean.

[ 08. February 2013, 22:11: Message edited by: Percy B ]

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
Given that some consider the neo archaisms of the new translation of the missal cumbersome, are there still some churches using the former version, or a hybrid?

- either RC or AC I mean.

Our Anglo-Catholic (USA Episcopal) shack uses the Daily Roman Missal (Opus Dei-affiliated publisher; Sceptre, I think) at weekday low Masses, mainly on greater feast days such as those of apostles. A celebrant can use the entrance antiphon before beginning the p. 355 rite; the alleluia/tract; the prayer over the gifts; the Communion antiphon; and the proper Prayer After Communion; and possibly the collect of the day as the concluding collect of the Prayers of the People. Most celebrants choose some subset of that.

Anyway, we haven't bought the latest Missal and are sticking with the previous one for the time being. I don't know of any plans to change that.

Posted by Percy B (# 17238) on :

This week's issue of The Tablet - the liberal RC magazine, says a good number of RCs including clergy, are unhappy with the new translation of the missal. What a shame. It must have been costly in many ways to change.

Oblatus and other Anglo Catholics can at least revert to the earlier edition as a resource - mind you presumably such editions soon will be out of print.

Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
This week's issue of The Tablet - the liberal RC magazine, says a good number of RCs including clergy, are unhappy with the new translation of the missal. What a shame. It must have been costly in many ways to change.

People tend to dislike change. What remains to be seen is whether the dislike continues. This is a unique situation in which elderly Catholics may someday be telling their grandkids about the days when the mass essentially regressed from an easily-understood language to a more complex and official style. Time will tell, I suppose, but I do predict a revised and middle-ground English revision in the next ten to twenty years or so. Perhaps once they start struggling with more faithful translations in French and Italian the translation issues will come more to light with The Head Honchos. English is not a secret code of Latin, nor is French or Italian. They don't translate perfectly, and some compromises that were made could have been handled differently. That said, it could have been much, much worse.

Posted by Pommie Mick (# 12794) on :

I understand that the NRSV was/is approved for use in Catholic churches in Canada?

Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
This week's issue of The Tablet - the liberal RC magazine, says a good number of RCs including clergy, are unhappy with the new translation of the missal. What a shame. It must have been costly in many ways to change.

Oblatus and other Anglo Catholics can at least revert to the earlier edition as a resource - mind you presumably such editions soon will be out of print.

I refuse to say "consubstantial" in the Nicene Creed. I don't think I'll be damned for saying the perfectly good English of "Being of one substance with the Father".

It would have been more honest to revert to Latin in the Extraordinary Form than the dog's dinner of the new translation.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pommie Mick:
I understand that the NRSV was/is approved for use in Catholic churches in Canada?

It is approved for private use by Catholics, but not in the liturgy.

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
I refuse to say "consubstantial" in the Nicene Creed. I don't think I'll be damned for saying the perfectly good English of "Being of one substance with the Father".

For a rather different perspective. (Relevant part of the video is from about 4mins30 onwards). Gosh, consubstantial as a powerful tool to bear witness to your faith.

[ 14. February 2013, 20:30: Message edited by: Triple Tiara ]

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
This week's issue of The Tablet - the liberal RC magazine, says a good number of RCs including clergy, are unhappy with the new translation of the missal. What a shame. It must have been costly in many ways to change.

You are trusting The Bitter Pill on this? Seriously?

In the US 70% of Catholics consider the new translation a good thing. I see no reason why the numbers in the UK should be greatly different. Certainly the switch has gone over very smoothly in my parish, which is a quite standard "novus ordo" place.

Posted by Bostonman (# 17108) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
I refuse to say "consubstantial" in the Nicene Creed. I don't think I'll be damned for saying the perfectly good English of "Being of one substance with the Father".

As a literalist, I prefer the clearer "standing under with the Father."

(joking)

Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
For a rather different perspective. (Relevant part of the video is from about 4mins30 onwards). Gosh, consubstantial as a powerful tool to bear witness to your faith.

I suspect "consubstantial" was used in order to provide a close rhyme to "branch" in future church contemporary rap music:

"Consubstiantial....and the branch'll...be a part...of the vine you heart"

Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
This week's issue of The Tablet - the liberal RC magazine, says a good number of RCs including clergy, are unhappy with the new translation of the missal. What a shame. It must have been costly in many ways to change.
You are trusting The Bitter Pill on this? Seriously?

In the US 70% of Catholics consider the new translation a good thing. I see no reason why the numbers in the UK should be greatly different. Certainly the switch has gone over very smoothly in my parish, which is a quite standard "novus ordo" place.

"And with your Spirit" has worked well with us in Kildareshire, because of its difference from the previous version, however The Confiteor and Gloria produce even more mumbling than was usual, except for the bits that cross over from the previous translation.

For some reason the 1970-1973 line "we raise them up to the Lord" has stuck in the heads of the average person in the pew here, along with "It is right to give him thanks and praise".

One of the hallmarks of the average Irish Catholic congregation, apart from the well remarked on lack of any kind of singing, is the internalisation of the responses. Missals are extremely rare here and the missalettes are more commonly used as reference for the printed notices rather than the cut down version of the Mass printed, limited to the responses, the Confiteor, Gloria and Credo. The new versions don't appear to be read much, and one priest seems to have the habit of using the Confiteor when the missalette indicates the Kyrie and responses instead- cue confusion and more resonant mumbling than usual.

I would suspect that only in Irish Opus Dei type circles would there be full, clear and enthusiastic responses using the new translation, in contrast to when I was in St. John the Baptist in Bath a year ago - clear responses, good and passionate hymn singing, incense, communion in both kinds and - gasp - coffee after Mass would be somewhat alien to the Irish Catholic experience.

A shame.

Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on :

I should say that it was St. John the Evangelist - one of the finest Catholic Churches in England and where I worshipped for the three month period I lived in Bath.

S. John the Baptist is of course a FiF church in Bathwick, and I would of course be absolutely certain that their singing, incense, responses and indeed coffee is second to none.

[Smile]

Posted by PaulTH* (# 320) on :

I feel lucky to have entered the Catholic Church at a time when we were preparing to change to the new missal, bacause I often refused to use some of the paraphrase, dynamic equivalence of the previous version, preferring to give my responses in Latin. I now have no such problem, and unequivocably support the change.

The survey in the Tablet said that those who prefer Mass in the Extraordinary Form, which I certainly do, almost all prefer the new version. As a member of both the Latin Mass Society(which promotes Mass in the Extraordinary Form) and the Association for Latin Liturgy(which promotes the use of Latin in the Ordinary Form), I believe that the Latin Rite Church should make much more use of this ancient resource, but it's important to have a vernacular form which accurately reflects the meaning of the liturgy, and I believe that the present translation does this much better than its predecessor.

Posted by Percy B (# 17238) on :

When I have attended RC mass recently I have not noticed people having problems with the responses, they seem to have got into it quickly.

However, I am not sure that is the main issue. What I find more problematic is the rather arcane turn of phrase the latest translation favours, at times it almost becomes unintelligible, especially if read fast.

Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
When I have attended RC mass recently I have not noticed people having problems with the responses, they seem to have got into it quickly.

However, I am not sure that is the main issue. What I find more problematic is the rather arcane turn of phrase the latest translation favours, at times it almost becomes unintelligible, especially if read fast.

I notice quite a bit of problems with the people's participation. I suppose it depends on the church.

As for the phrasing, I have thought a lot about this. Many priests try to come to a full stop at each one of the subordinating commas, roughly at the point where the periods would have been in the Sacramentary. Some of them seem to think that they are making a multi-clause sentence easier to comprehend by pausing frequently. Unfortunately, the clauses depend on each other, and pausing too long between them actually damages comprehension.

Over time, the priests will develop a better sense of the inflections and pauses necessary to unite many clauses of one unnecessarily lengthy sentence. Episcopalians in the US have always had rather complex collects, and their priests do an excellent job at it. I would suggest American Catholic priests spend some time visiting their Episcopal colleagues' churches to listen to their speaking patterns.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0