homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Eccles: And with your Spirit (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Eccles: And with your Spirit
Ronald Binge
Shipmate
# 9002

 - Posted      Profile for Ronald Binge     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Irish conservative Catholic commentator Kieron Wood criticises priest for his comments on the revised Eucharistic Prayers:


Kieron Wood letter

Posts: 477 | From: Brexit's frontline | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Ronald Binge
Shipmate
# 9002

 - Posted      Profile for Ronald Binge     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
So, how can the report that the German bishops were able to send back their translation for review be explained?

erm, the English-speaking bishops of the world have been doing the same?

This is NOT a Vatican translation. Do you want me to restate the whole process again????

Eh, no.

I'll leave this issue alone now.

--------------------
Older, bearded (but no wiser)

Posts: 477 | From: Brexit's frontline | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175

 - Posted      Profile for Shadowhund   Author's homepage   Email Shadowhund   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
All those things were said when we got a vernacular liturgy. I admit this is slightly different in that we are used to some English phrases, which come automatically. As has been said, it will take time, but it will happen, within a few months even. In South Africa I encountered the rite already in use - EVERYONE said "and with your spirit" (except me).

Two further points: no bishop has the authority to say "not in my diocese" - and if he does he will be pulled up very short and very fast.

Secondly, the politics is a fascinating thing. Truth is, this translation has had far more input over a much broader spread of people than the previous ICEL ever allowed. The process is fascinating, and every Anglophone Bishops' Conference not only got a vote, but were allowed to suggest alterations. That was not the case previously, where they either had to accept it or reject it. This is not a translation written by flunkies in Rome, but the result of real international collaboration, with Rome exercising the last word only.

The allegedly more liberal former ICEL was anything but. In effect it set itself up as a Congregation of Rites for English speakers, and tried to cut Rome out of the picture. There was no recourse against its "expertise". That ICEL was pulled into line and that Rome demanded it be reconstituted was a painful experience, but absolutely necessary.

Amen to all of this. I have heard Msgr. Bruce Harbert, onetime chairman of the retooled ICEL and still a consultant, and his observations confirmed all of this. The number of years put into this project has been considerable, especially when compared with the short turnarounds in post-VII period.
TT's point CANNOT be emphasized enough. However, there has been a problem, exposed by the liberal Catholic liturgists, where a hidden hand, possibly in the Vox Clara middle management, made all sorts of arbitrary changes to the text that was approved by the bishops, mostly, though not exclusively, in the Collects, presented that version of the missal to the Curia, who then signed off on it. While I believe that the liberals have done a service to complain about this, their complaints are just a tad disingenuous as (a) the text approved by Vox Clara is more sympatico with the translation principles supported by liberals than the translation principals upheld by the Vatican and the English speaking Bishops Conferences, and (b) the high-handed tactics of the Vox Clara operatives is precisely the same kind of mediocre, crony-ridden high-handed tactics used by pre-Bruce Harbert/Andrew Wadsworth ICEL - the ICEL that the liberals champion.

--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"

A.N. Wilson

Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235

 - Posted      Profile for Trisagion   Email Trisagion   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's not Vox Clara but the CDW that have done the post approval tinkering. It won't be known in some quarters as the Missale Morronicum for nothing

Having reviewed a large sample of these tinkers, I reckon about 1/3 are an improvement, 1/3 are no better and no worse (which begs the question why they're there at all) and 1/3 are egregiously bad.

--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse

Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowhund:
However, there has been a problem, exposed by the liberal Catholic liturgists, where a hidden hand, possibly in the Vox Clara middle management, made all sorts of arbitrary changes to the text that was approved by the bishops, mostly, though not exclusively, in the Collects, presented that version of the missal to the Curia, who then signed off on it.

[Disappointed] It's funny how tactics like this span the nations and the denominations.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry for the double post...

Has anybody heard about updates to the language of the Marriage, Burial, and other rites that are not contained within the Missal itself?

Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175

 - Posted      Profile for Shadowhund   Author's homepage   Email Shadowhund   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
It's not Vox Clara but the CDW that have done the post approval tinkering. It won't be known in some quarters as the Missale Morronicum for nothing

Having reviewed a large sample of these tinkers, I reckon about 1/3 are an improvement, 1/3 are no better and no worse (which begs the question why they're there at all) and 1/3 are egregiously bad.

The sample I saw had about the same 1/3 ratio of good, indifferent, and ugly.

I wonder: where was Gus DiNoia in all of this?

--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"

A.N. Wilson

Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Noirin
Apprentice
# 16194

 - Posted      Profile for Noirin   Email Noirin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
Hopefully there will be plenty of engagement. The new translation set out to be a faithful translation, and in some regards, it is not. ... To make things unambiguous (and to take care of the posture issue once and for all), I'd add in directions about sitting, standing, and kneeling. Then that issue could be resolved under the guise of "New Missal, New Rules"!

lots of good stuff here Martin, thanks. In Ireland, Veritas is preparing congregational laminated handouts with the changes. I'm pretty sure other countries have similar stuff. The US Bishops website has loads of info too.
I like the idea about putting in the GIRM instructions too, might as well drive everyone potty at the same time!!! I'd also like if they put in the plain chant as its much easier to sing the changes rather than say them!

Posts: 14 | From: Co Clare, Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Noirin
Apprentice
# 16194

 - Posted      Profile for Noirin   Email Noirin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by angelicum:
Bishops conferences have of course no "right" to do so. They are not a mini-Magisterium. The liturgy belongs to the Church, not to the Irish Bishops Conference.

If this is truly representative of the standard of argumentation from Irish priests, its no wonder that the Catholic Church is dead in Ireland.

lol!!so true :-) but they probably need support ... these guy have put themselves into an awful corner with this. They may feel that they won't use the new translation ... but when they can't do Mass cover for a brother priest (for holidays, illness etc), they will find themselves in a very sad and lonely place. Bishops need to engage with them immediately to prevent any more of this megaphone debate!
Posts: 14 | From: Co Clare, Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Noirin
Apprentice
# 16194

 - Posted      Profile for Noirin   Email Noirin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
I was rather under the impression that the Irish bishops' Conference had been deprived of all such rights when they were placed under Visitation last year. I suppose they could try telling the Vatican what to do, but it doesn't sound like a course destined for success I have to say!

o sweet Lord ... one has nothing to do with the other!! The following is a time line which might give a sense that this has been happening for yonks and isn't related to the Visitation at all!

OK - Since 1963 the, over 1.1 billion Catholics in the world, celebrate Mass in their own language. The text every language group across the world uses is translated from a common Latin text. To prevent confusion, this is not translated anew in each country, but once for each language.

In 1964, an international commission was set up for the English language. It has representatives from the Bishops conferences of Australia, Canada, England and Wales, India, Ireland, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Scotland, South Africa, United States of America, as well as the associate member conferences of Antilles, Bangladesh, CEPAC (Episcopal Conference of the Pacific), Gambia-Liberia-Sierra Leone, Ghana, Kenya, Malaysia-Singapore, Malawi, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea and the Solomons, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe (see http://www.icelweb.org/)

In 1970 it produced its first approved translation of the Roman Missal (which contains the Order of the Mass in English), in 1975 its second. Since 1987 ICEL have been preparing for a 3rd edition. In 2000, as part of Jubilee celebrations, Pope John Paul II announced that the 3rd edition would be prepared and from 2002 – 2010 ICEL have engaged with all the bishops conferences to produce this 3rd edition. Basically: they sent a preparatory text (first translation from the Latin), a green book (for comments), a grey book (to vote on, bishops could add amendments which were also voted on, and a final document went to the Congregation for Divine Worship for recignito. The decree for recignito was given last March, the Pope got a bound copy in April.

The process has not been without controversy, to put it mildly, and has been strongly influenced by the 2001 document ‘Liturgicum Authenticam’. In March 2010, the final text was recognised by the church as the new norm for all English speaking congregation, and at their meeting in June 2010, the Irish Bishops press release stated that they ‘welcomed the recent completion of the translation of the Third Edition of The Roman Missal and its approval by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. Bishops look forward to its final editing and its use at Masses in Ireland towards the end of 2011. Bishops will engage in diocesan and parish programmes to help our congregations to understand and appreciate the new translation of the Mass so that the changes will serve, in the words of the Holy Father, “as a spring board for a renewal and deepening of Eucharistic devotion all over the English speaking world”. ‘

Posts: 14 | From: Co Clare, Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
coniunx
Shipmate
# 15313

 - Posted      Profile for coniunx   Email coniunx   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I hear a sepulchral nag pointing out that if "men" = "adult humans", then statements such as "ordination to the sacred ministry is confined to men" simply means not ordaining children. You can't have it both ways.

[Overused] I think you just out-lawyered the Magisterium.
Er, scarcely. I think they are well aware of the difference between 'homo' and 'vir' in Latin; the fact that English has generally used the same term (man) for both) is not going to affect that.

If there was any doubt on that, the RCC has women altar servers by virute of just such a distinction: the use of 'homo' and 'vir; in the same canon (230) providing different meanings.

Posts: 250 | From: Nottingham | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I wonder how this new translation is being introduced.

An RC friend told me of a diocesan evening to 'introduce' it. It involved information-giving but discussion was not expected. It felt like it was being imposed without any consultation.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Noirin
Apprentice
# 16194

 - Posted      Profile for Noirin   Email Noirin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
good point Leo. The problem is ... what is the point of discussion?? Is the diocese willing to act on the opinions expressed? If not, its cruel to people to pretend that they have a choice. If it is, then it probably would have swung into action ages ago

Thats the problem with this ... its deeply personal, hugely invasive and yet the text of the liturgy belongs to the whole church not just to a particular diocese (and not just to some clerical planks in Rome either!!)

Transparency requires that we don't patronise

Posts: 14 | From: Co Clare, Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think it was Triple Tiara who made the point earlier in the thread that the RCC was not like the Anglican Communion, but had one universal rite rather than local variants of it (except of course for Milan etc). Which we outsiders can hardly argue with.

But it can hardly be a matter of principle, provided all the variants express the same doctrine. It's clearly not in accordance with the centralising tendencies of the present Vatican regime to allow more variants than the strictly limited and historic ones. But the differences in culture among English-speaking Catholics, let alone those of other languages, are vast, and if the liturgy is going to be incarnated in its context surely it would be wise to allow for this.

--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!

Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
But the terrible truth is, Angloid, that the individual national/language-group conferences could not really be trusted to translate the normative text in ways which did not sacrifice faithfulness to the actual meaning of the text on the altar of "comfortable" compromise.

The evidence? The many prayers in the old ICEL text which are not even rough paraphrases of the normative Latin.

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Surely there are two sorts of variant. Non-literal translations (or even very different versions) which don't contradict the essential doctrines expressed in the liturgy, and different versions which as you suggest water down those doctrines. I can see that the Vatican needs to guard against the latter, but why should they be responsible for the nuts and bolts of the translation, especially if the first language of most theologians is not English?

[edited to clarify]: what I mean is, the translations/ versions should be first of all the responsibility of local churches, submitted to the authorities for theological but not linguistic approval. Not the other way about.

[ 07. February 2011, 22:04: Message edited by: Angloid ]

--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!

Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Angloid, do read Noirin's post above which sets out the whole process that has taken place. That shows that your objection in your final edited paragraph above does not apply. This is NOT a translation produced in Rome. And let's get this "johnny foreigner who doesn't speak English" myth out of the way. There are a great many English speakers from all parts of the globe who work in Roman dicasteries. As it happens, the fellow who worked for some time in the Congregation for Divine Worship and dealt with English matters was a young Irishman. (I think he has now been replaced).

What Trisagion alludes to above is an extremely odd thing that has taken place regarding the editing of the Propers (Collects, Prefaces and so on), not the Ordinary of the Mass. This is all still a bit opaque because, unlike the Ordinary of the Mass, the authorised Propers have not yet been released. Like Trisagion, I have seen a whole raft of exerpts, with the Roman edits, and I concur with his judgement. But I know for a fact that there is ongoing discussion between ICEL and CDW about the matter and the end result is not yet clear.

I cannot agree with your position that "as long as the translations do not contradict doctrine that's okay". The liturgy should not simply not contradict doctrine, it should convey it. Lex orandi and all that.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
TT: [Overused] I bow to your greater knowledge and of course experience as an insider. As I have said, I'm commenting as a sympathetic (I hope) outsider. Perhaps there is a greater gulf than we sometimes realise between our churches' perspective. Not so much concerning doctrinal differences (we're well aware of those) but cultural assumptions.

--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!

Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596

 - Posted      Profile for Ceremoniar   Email Ceremoniar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
And let's get this "johnny foreigner who doesn't speak English" myth out of the way. There are a great many English speakers from all parts of the globe who work in Roman dicasteries. As it happens, the fellow who worked for some time in the Congregation for Divine Worship and dealt with English matters was a young Irishman. (I think he has now been replaced).

One curial wag of my acquaintance commented that the two languages that one needed a working knowledge of in the Vatican are Italian and English. We expected him to say Italian and Latin (or even Polish at the time--now German, one would suppose), but he said that unless one were directly in the Pope's service, Italian and English were the most useful.
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
... unless one were directly in the Pope's service, Italian and English were the most useful.

In almost every country in the world these days the most useful languages are the national language and English.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm honestly not trying to be difficult, but isn't Latin the national language of the Vatican?
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636

 - Posted      Profile for BroJames   Email BroJames   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Apparently not
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I see. Thanks.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah well, both the question and the answer actually raise more questions than the apparent answer!

One needs to distinguish between "The Vatican", as in Vatican City State, and the Holy See, which is the curial operation of the Catholic Church, but is often loosely referred to by everyone as "The Vatican" - incorrectly. Very little of the Curia is actually located in the Vatican, but is spread all around Rome.

The working language of both is essentially Italian. The legislative and authoritative language of the Holy See is latin, but it's not the lingua franca.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Perhaps everybody should say mass in Italian! It would sound beautiful (unlike the Dalek-speak of this English 'translation') and it would be hard for the bureaucrats to criticise its inauthenticity.

--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!

Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Surely this was one of the main reasons why the Catholic church continued the celebration of Mass in Latin.
Latin pronounced in the Italian fashion can indeed be beautiful,but is not necessarily so.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490

 - Posted      Profile for k-mann   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
I'm honestly not trying to be difficult, but isn't Latin the national language of the Vatican?

Latin is mostly used, and is a kind of unofficial 'official' language. That language, however, is not spoken.

--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich

Katolikken

Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
Latin is mostly used, and is a kind of unofficial 'official' language. That language, however, is not spoken.

This would also make a good disclaimer for Ecclesiantics.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
As you say, putting the word "man" in there is a bad translation

Whatever else this may be, it isn't a bad translation. In Latin, it is:

"Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem."

Which means, "for us men and for our salvation."

Now the idea of "men" may have changed in both Latin and English, but nobody with a brain in their head is going to think that "men", in this sense, excludes women, because it is, or was, only a generic term for humanity.

Personally, I would have left the word out of the new translation, but in almost all respects, I think its dignified language is a vast improvement on the paraphrase, flat version, which English speaking Catholics have had to endure for over 40 years. And worse damage was done. The modern C of E Rite, Common Worship, has copied so much of the awful translation of Novus Ordo. I hope it will be corrected along wth the Roman Rite.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Now the idea of "men" may have changed in both Latin and English, but nobody with a brain in their head is going to think that "men", in this sense, excludes women, because it is, or was, only a generic term for humanity.

And yet, and yet, this is exactly what feminist theologians, and others—all assuredly with brains in their heads—have been telling you for years. The message still hasn't sunk into the brain in your head. Neither of you is witless. You just disagree.

[ 12. February 2011, 01:07: Message edited by: The Silent Acolyte ]

Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
In Latin, it is:

"Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem."

Which means, "for us men and for our salvation."

No, it doesn't.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
mimmi
Shipmate
# 15829

 - Posted      Profile for mimmi   Email mimmi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Is it possible to see a version of the new mass online. I'm following the discussion but don't have the text. [Hot and Hormonal]
Posts: 91 | From: NW England | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Texts are all available here.

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
mimmi
Shipmate
# 15829

 - Posted      Profile for mimmi   Email mimmi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks, Hart, for the link. I'll need time to think about them - just had time to glance through, but I can see the points we are making.

On a positive I like the dismissal words at the end.

"Go and announce the Gospel of the Lord"

But I thought this was just a new translation. I can't remember anything quite like that in the older version.

Posts: 91 | From: NW England | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Noirin
Apprentice
# 16194

 - Posted      Profile for Noirin   Email Noirin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
These are the resources my local diocese is recommending -

Websites (each has resources, texts and timetables):

The Catholic Bishops Conference of New Zealand
- Announcing their first steps of implementation in Sept 2010 - here
- A 'readable' 22 page introduction to the changes:here

The US Bishops wesbite is here
- A full copy of the Order of the Mass is: here

The England & Wales Bishops conference has similar details here

Theres also an 'international' DVD with a library of videos, essays, etc on the theme – Its called ‘ Becoming One Body One Spirit in Christ’, and is available here

[Link fix.]

[ 12. February 2011, 23:18: Message edited by: Mamacita ]

Posts: 14 | From: Co Clare, Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Edgeman
Shipmate
# 12867

 - Posted      Profile for Edgeman   Email Edgeman   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:


An RC friend told me of a diocesan evening to 'introduce' it. It involved information-giving but discussion was not expected. It felt like it was being imposed without any consultation.

Yeah, I mean, this kind of non-consultative imposation of liturgy has NEVER happened in the modern church.They ought to be ashamed. [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
http://sacristyxrat.tumblr.com/

Posts: 1420 | From: Philadelphia Penns. | Registered: Jul 2007  |  IP: Logged
mimmi
Shipmate
# 15829

 - Posted      Profile for mimmi   Email mimmi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Quite a few Anglo Catholic churches use the missal, or use it as a resource. I wonder if they will go on to 'and with your spirit' or settle in Common Worship.
Posts: 91 | From: NW England | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I recently asked a weekly-attending good RC friend about how the parish had been planting seeds for the new Missal. The response was, "What? [Confused] "

My friend is very intelligent, and cares about such things. Still, there has been no mention about the new missal. I had to spend a little time explaining where the new texts could be found online, and the rationale behind some of the changes.

Upon seeing the texts, the reaction was [Roll Eyes] .

Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278

 - Posted      Profile for Oblatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
My friend is very intelligent, and cares about such things. Still, there has been no mention about the new missal. I had to spend a little time explaining where the new texts could be found online, and the rationale behind some of the changes.

Upon seeing the texts, the reaction was [Roll Eyes] .

Back in my RC days as a youth, I don't recall any preparation for the 1970 Missal; on the First Sunday of Advent we brought our brown St. Joseph (1965) Sunday Missals as usual but began using the Monthly Missalettes instead. Lots of differences, and Father had a new, eerie-sounding cordless microphone. We were asked to pray a psalm whose text had strange accents over some of the words. I remember that as a very odd Sunday indeed. Sort of exciting, but Father's new voice over the PA system made it all a bit creepy.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
mimmi
Shipmate
# 15829

 - Posted      Profile for mimmi   Email mimmi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I was in Pauline books - Kensington High Street, yesterday looking at Lent stuff. I notice the missals on sale were all the current ones, no 'and with your spirit' ones.

There were some pamphlets about the new mass that seemed to be teaching aids.

Posts: 91 | From: NW England | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596

 - Posted      Profile for Ceremoniar   Email Ceremoniar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
My friend is very intelligent, and cares about such things. Still, there has been no mention about the new missal. I had to spend a little time explaining where the new texts could be found online, and the rationale behind some of the changes.

Upon seeing the texts, the reaction was [Roll Eyes] .

Back in my RC days as a youth, I don't recall any preparation for the 1970 Missal; on the First Sunday of Advent we brought our brown St. Joseph (1965) Sunday Missals as usual but began using the Monthly Missalettes instead. Lots of differences, and Father had a new, eerie-sounding cordless microphone. We were asked to pray a psalm whose text had strange accents over some of the words. I remember that as a very odd Sunday indeed. Sort of exciting, but Father's new voice over the PA system made it all a bit creepy.
An excellent point. For many RCs, the tranition to the new Order of Mass also introduced microphones at the same time.
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008  |  IP: Logged
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mimmi:
I was in Pauline books - Kensington High Street, yesterday looking at Lent stuff. I notice the missals on sale were all the current ones, no 'and with your spirit' ones.

There were some pamphlets about the new mass that seemed to be teaching aids.

Well, yes, the new Missal has not actually been published yet, so you will still only find the old ones.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
mimmi
Shipmate
# 15829

 - Posted      Profile for mimmi   Email mimmi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's what I thought. I just looked to see if any had got published yet.

It must be quite a publishing rush, with having to get altar books, smaller copies, texts for people to follow.

Posts: 91 | From: NW England | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38

 - Posted      Profile for Honest Ron Bacardi   Email Honest Ron Bacardi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
PaulTH wrote:
quote:
Now the idea of "men" may have changed in both Latin and English, but nobody with a brain in their head is going to think that "men", in this sense, excludes women, because it is, or was, only a generic term for humanity.
Not sure what you mean by the meaning changing in Latin, but homo has always meant human. Man, as in a male person, is vir.

Same sort of thing in the Greek. Both languages are explicitly inclusive.

Which, incidentally, is why translating Psalm 1 v1 as "Blessed are they", "Blessed is the person" etc. is a mistranslation, because the original has the exclusive, male meaning. It is a messianic psalm.

--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic

Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Peter's Bark
Apprentice
# 16074

 - Posted      Profile for Peter's Bark         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Homo, like 'man' in English, can mean either 'human' or 'male person'. An example of the latter is 1 Cor 7:1 - bonum est homini mulierem non tangere.

--------------------
You can recognise me by progressive elimination... Just eliminate all the progressives.

Posts: 20 | From: Essex, UK | Registered: Dec 2010  |  IP: Logged
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38

 - Posted      Profile for Honest Ron Bacardi   Email Honest Ron Bacardi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's quite a complicated counter-example you have chosen there, Peter's Bark.

I think in that instance it is just picking up on the Greek which has the same construction. Which seems to be because in Greek the words for man and woman also mean husband and wife, which would make the recommendation potentially highly ambiguous about married people, exactly the opposite of what was intended.

I don't know enough of examples elsewhere in Latin where that minority usage is also used - it may be that it is also reserved to avoid ambiguity also. Perhaps someone could advise? But I think that excepting that, the general rule applies.

--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic

Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Peter's Bark
Apprentice
# 16074

 - Posted      Profile for Peter's Bark         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
How about Matthew 19:5 - propter hoc dimittet homo patrem et matrem et adherebit uxori suae (for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife)?

--------------------
You can recognise me by progressive elimination... Just eliminate all the progressives.

Posts: 20 | From: Essex, UK | Registered: Dec 2010  |  IP: Logged
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38

 - Posted      Profile for Honest Ron Bacardi   Email Honest Ron Bacardi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Probably similar reasons I guess - if you need to use the word in close proximity to the words connoting husband/wife status, you would use that construction.

I think the problem is that all this presupposes a direct one to one correspondence between the meanings of these words in Latin or Greek, and in English. But the usage is not the same - it may be OK to generalise but there are exceptions.

Of course we have the same problem just within English - man also used to mean not only both a person, or a male person, but also a married male (as in "man and wife"). Though that use has largely died out save for the occasional colourful expression.

--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic

Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
FCB

Hillbilly Thomist
# 1495

 - Posted      Profile for FCB   Author's homepage   Email FCB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mimmi:
On a positive I like the dismissal words at the end.

"Go and announce the Gospel of the Lord"

But I thought this was just a new translation. I can't remember anything quite like that in the older version.

That is right. This is a recent change in the Latin text, which will be reflected in the new English translation. You can read about the change
here.

--------------------
Agent of the Inquisition since 1982.

Posts: 2928 | From: that city in "The Wire" | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745

 - Posted      Profile for Ecclesiastical Flip-flop   Email Ecclesiastical Flip-flop   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Perhaps everybody should say mass in Italian! It would sound beautiful (unlike the Dalek-speak of this English 'translation') and it would be hard for the bureaucrats to criticise its inauthenticity.

A nice idea, but English-speaking people who speak Italian are in the minority. As an Italian speaker, Mass in that language would suit me fine.

--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!

Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools