Bishop Criticizes 'slavishly Literal' English Translation Of M

[Slappo]

[quote name='philothea' date='31 October 2009 - 08:05 AM' timestamp='1257001514' post='1994389']
I don't know if you are being misleading or if you honestly don't know. The new translations are more accurate translations of the Latin, which is the official universal language of all masses. You don't even need to know Latin to see the difference.

[i]Et cum spiritu tuo.[/i] Does NOT mean "And also with you." It literally means, "And with spirit yours." No way to translate that accurately into English except as "And with your spirit."

As for [i]Dignum et iustum est.[/i] How could you possibly get "It is right to give him thanks and praise"? There aren't even enough words there. Literally, it's more like: "right and just is." So again, the new translation is correct.

If there's a problem with the mass text itself, it should be fixed in the Latin, and for everyone, not just fiddled with arbitrarily for Americans.
[/quote]

[i]Et cum spiritu tuo[/i] does not literally mean "and with spirit yours" nor does [i]dignum et iustum est[/i] literally mean "right and just is"

You are translating Latin into English without adjusting the differences in word order used in Latin and English. In Latin the verb is traditionally at the end of the phrase, but I guarantee you the Romans did not read those phrases and think "right and just is" or "and with spirit yours".

Tuo is genetive (possessive) and therefore shows whose spirit we are talking about I.E "Your spirit"
Est is the 3rd person singular of the word "to be" which in this form means "he/she/it is. Dignum and Iustum are in the accusative case which shows us that "est" is not referring to dignum or iustum but something previously stated, therefore appropriately translated literally as "he/she/it is right and just."



As for the other posters comments on "meet and just" as opposed to "right and just": Dignum has many meanings that are very similar... the English word "Dignity" comes from dignitas or dignus in latin.

dignum here is not translated as "right" in the sense of right or wrong, but more along the lines of: worthy, of the dignity that deserves, meet, right (as in the use of "the right reverend *clergy*")

[Apotheoun]

I posted this in another thread, but it fits here too:



The following excerpted text, which is taken from the book [u]The Church at Prayer: The Eucharist[/u] by Robert Cabie, explains why the translation "and with your spirit" is better than the paraphrase "and also with you."

[size="3"]"Peace to you" (or "to all") was the formula used in Antioch and Constantinople. In the West and in Egypt "The Lord be with you" was also used. The response everywhere was "And to (with) your spirit." The response, like the celebrant's greeting, was of Semitic origin, and we would expect it to have been translated into Latin and Greek with a simple "And to (with) you." That is not what happened, and the reason is to be found in the commentaries of the Fathers: "He gives the name 'spirit' not to the soul of the priest but to the Spirit he has received through the laying on of hands" [Narsai of Nisibis, Hom. 17]. The assembly, then, has a celebrant who presides in the name of the Lord; it comes into being in response to a call from God; it is the image of a Church of which Christ, here symbolized by His minister, is the head.[/size]

[philothea]

[quote name='Slappo' date='31 October 2009 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1257019694' post='1994478']
[i]Et cum spiritu tuo[/i] does not literally mean "and with spirit yours" nor does [i]dignum et iustum est[/i] literally mean "right and just is"

You are translating Latin into English without adjusting the differences in word order used in Latin and English. In Latin the verb is traditionally at the end of the phrase, but I guarantee you the Romans did not read those phrases and think "right and just is" or "and with spirit yours".

Tuo is genetive (possessive) and therefore shows whose spirit we are talking about I.E "Your spirit"
Est is the 3rd person singular of the word "to be" which in this form means "he/she/it is. Dignum and Iustum are in the accusative case which shows us that "est" is not referring to dignum or iustum but something previously stated, therefore appropriately translated literally as "he/she/it is right and just."



As for the other posters comments on "meet and just" as opposed to "right and just": Dignum has many meanings that are very similar... the English word "Dignity" comes from dignitas or dignus in latin.

dignum here is not translated as "right" in the sense of right or wrong, but more along the lines of: worthy, of the dignity that deserves, meet, right (as in the use of "the right reverend *clergy*")
[/quote]

I know, but thank you for the more precise explanation. I was just pointing out that someone could figure out which translation was closer to the original while not even knowing Latin!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='31 October 2009 - 11:40 AM' timestamp='1257003630' post='1994395']
Show me where the current translation is theologically inaccurate.


Jim
[/quote]
Show me where the new translation is inclusive.

There's nothing theologically inaccurate about saying that it is right to give God thanks and praise. The theological error is more a catechetical error; the statement of the faith of the Church contained in the Latin is that it is right and just to give God praise. The current translation lacks mention of the justice due to God and is therefore catechetically improper and theologically incomplete.

[mortify]

Nothing wrong with desiring beautiful language in mass, rather than a dumb down 5th-grader level presentation of the Sacred Text.

Edited October 31, 2009 by mortify

[Aloysius]

the mass is not a theology classroom to begin with. don't you have any sense of experiencing something and learning its deep meaning without necessarily understanding all the words? the complicated words are there to be looked into more deeply; but the average man who doesn't understand them still walks away edified for having joined in the prayer with those who did understand them.

the whole didactic mentality of liturgy has absolutely destroyed true worship of God to begin with.

have you ever read through a poem that just expressed something deep, that maybe flew into wild structures sometimes or used uncommon words that you didn't understand at first if at all, but you couldn't help but step back after the poem and say "that moved me"

can you listen to a piece of music without understanding its rhythm and time signature... and (especially with modern music) maybe miss a few words from the lyrics because they're not enunciated or they're hard to hear because of the louder instrumentation, but the music still moved you?

that poem loses its effectiveness when you understand it at face value immediately. that music loses its touch when the words are clear and enunciated, or when complicated time signatures aren't applied.

and the liturgy loses its entire value when it becomes a lesson in theology trying to make everyone understand each and every point... the didactic way bishops such as Trautman want to treat the liturgy is exactly the type of thing that made Francis refuse to let his friars learn theology. let them live it and then they will learn it... let them experience the fact that the things being said are truly ineffable by sometimes saying things that they can't "eff" as it were, lol.

that's always been the value of Latin in Catholic liturgy; of Old Church Slavonic in Eastern Liturgies; of Hebrew in Jewish synagogues (which Christ himself would've spoke in the Temple even though the everyday language was ARAMAIC).. and it is a good enough reason to AT LEAST use some non-regular use words.

oh, and see Apo's post for the deeper reasons of "and with thy spirit"... it was not a common Latin phrase, ever. it was always a phrase of deeper theological meaning.

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='01 November 2009 - 03:27 PM' timestamp='1257049629' post='1994689']
the mass is not a theology classroom to begin with. don't you have any sense of experiencing something and learning its deep meaning without necessarily understanding all the words? the complicated words are there to be looked into more deeply; but the average man who doesn't understand them still walks away edified for having joined in the prayer with those who did understand them.

the whole didactic mentality of liturgy has absolutely destroyed true worship of God to begin with.

have you ever read through a poem that just expressed something deep, that maybe flew into wild structures sometimes or used uncommon words that you didn't understand at first if at all, but you couldn't help but step back after the poem and say "that moved me"

can you listen to a piece of music without understanding its rhythm and time signature... and (especially with modern music) maybe miss a few words from the lyrics because they're not enunciated or they're hard to hear because of the louder instrumentation, but the music still moved you?

that poem loses its effectiveness when you understand it at face value immediately. that music loses its touch when the words are clear and enunciated, or when complicated time signatures aren't applied.

and the liturgy loses its entire value when it becomes a lesson in theology trying to make everyone understand each and every point... the didactic way bishops such as Trautman want to treat the liturgy is exactly the type of thing that made Francis refuse to let his friars learn theology. let them live it and then they will learn it... let them experience the fact that the things being said are truly ineffable by sometimes saying things that they can't "eff" as it were, lol.

that's always been the value of Latin in Catholic liturgy; of Old Church Slavonic in Eastern Liturgies; of Hebrew in Jewish synagogues (which Christ himself would've spoke in the Temple even though the everyday language was ARAMAIC).. and it is a good enough reason to AT LEAST use some non-regular use words.

oh, and see Apo's post for the deeper reasons of "and with thy spirit"... it was not a common Latin phrase, ever. it was always a phrase of deeper theological meaning.
[/quote]


Very good points. I attended an EF Solemn Mass today and even though I know a bit of Latin, I got lost a lot in amny places (in terms of meaning), but it spoke to my heart anyway, and was absolutely beautiful. In the Little Prince, Antoine de St Exupery said, "It is only with the heart that one can see clearly. What is essential is invisible to the eye." And that kind of goes for the ear and the mind too! Sometimes the meaning is in the words, and goes straight to the heart, bypassing the intellect completely!

That being said, I do love big words too!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='nunsense' date='01 November 2009 - 12:46 AM' timestamp='1257050794' post='1994702']
Very good points. I attended an EF Solemn Mass today and even though I know a bit of Latin, I got lost a lot in amny places (in terms of meaning), but it spoke to my heart anyway, and was absolutely beautiful. In the Little Prince, Antoine de St Exupery said, "It is only with the heart that one can see clearly. What is essential is invisible to the eye." And that kind of goes for the ear and the mind too! Sometimes the meaning is in the words, and goes straight to the heart, bypassing the intellect completely!

That being said, I do love big words too!
[/quote]
I have tons of Latin and it's still easy to get lost at an EF Mass.

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Raphael' date='01 November 2009 - 03:47 PM' timestamp='1257050873' post='1994705']
I have tons of Latin and it's still easy to get lost at an EF Mass.
[/quote]

Especially a Mass like this one. Two incredible hours of heavenly beauty at a sung Solemn Mass.

From the leaflet...

"Works by Renaissance contemporaries Victoria and Guerrero with full Propers for All Saints by William Byrd, all sung for the very first time in Australia in the liturgy for which they were composed." Nuova Cappella Ciulia choir, Directed by Nicholas Dinopoulos

But once again, words fail.... sometimes I stopped listening to the Latin words they were singing, and just let it all wash over me and take my heart up to the altar... sweetness.

[Luigi]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='01 November 2009 - 12:27 AM' timestamp='1257049629' post='1994689']
"the mass is not a theology classroom to begin with."
Alleluia! I agree completely. Mass is many things - layer after layer of thought, feeling, community, inspiration, edification, impression, expression, and I don't know what all; learning can and sometimes does occur, but it's not the objective.

"don't you have any sense of experiencing something and learning its deep meaning without necessarily understanding all the words?" Sometimes Bob Dylan songs, but they're not in the same league as Mass. I've had poetry profs who got all excited about trying to make us understand every reference & nuance in Gerard Manley Hopkins' poems & stuff, but I think it's stupid. I'm all about clarity - say what you mean, mean what you say.

"the complicated words are there to be looked into more deeply;"
At Mass, I don't the words to be the mystery; I want the mysteries of the faith to be the mystery. I want the words to give expression to the mysteries in a way that I can understand - as well as to my own thoughts, feelings, inspirations, impressions, and I don't know what all - that I'm experiencing there. Sometimes I really like a song (Bob Dylan or otherwise) because it pinpoints what I've been feeling/thinking but been unable to express. I want the language of Mass to do that for me, too - help me figure out and give expression to what I've been thinking/feeling but haven't been able to pinpoint. I want the words to clarify for me what's going on here; I want to walk away chewing on that, not on the words. The current wording of the Mass does that very well for me, at least when it is prayed honestly and reverently.

"but the average man who doesn't understand them still walks away edified for having joined in the prayer with those who did understand them." See, I don't buy that. I used to have really old relatives who prayed the rosary all through Mass (a habit they developed in pre-Vatican times); simple people without training in Latin or theology, they didn't understand what was going on at Mass. They attended dutifully (the Church told them they needed to, so they did), and they wanted to have a religious experience while they were there, so they did what they could understand. The idea that "the man who doesn't understand them still walks away edified for having joined in the prayer with those who did understand them" is completely foreign to me. It reminds me of children who can sing the national anthem perfectly even though they don't understand a word of it - it's a cute little performance, but there's no intellectual engagement going on. In fact, many people I know can't tell me the meaning of the Star Spangeld Banner's lyrics - they've had twenty-thrity-forty years of repetition without consciousness.


"the whole didactic mentality of liturgy has absolutely destroyed true worship of God to begin with."
Could well be - I don't know.

have you ever read through a poem that just expressed something deep, that maybe flew into wild structures sometimes or used uncommon words that you didn't understand at first if at all, but you couldn't help but step back after the poem and say "that moved me" - see comments re Gerard Manley Hopkins. I'm pretty sure I get time out of purgatory for having tried to make sense of him.

"can you listen to a piece of music without understanding its rhythm and time signature... and (especially with modern music) maybe miss a few words from the lyrics because they're not enunciated or they're hard to hear because of the louder instrumentation, but the music still moved you?"
Yes, music can move me. And words can move me. And words set to music can move me. But I don't go to Mass so that I can come away feeling good. Many of the Pentecostal churches emphasize that aspect of worship, but in my opinion, it reduces God to a recreational drug.

"that poem loses its effectiveness when you understand it at face value immediately. that music loses its touch when the words are clear and enunciated, or when complicated time signatures aren't applied."
Right, but there's a difference between simplistic and simple. Few poems are simpler than the 23rd Psalm, but it's not simplistic - it's retained its powerful meaning over some couple dozen centuries. The same applies to the Song of Songs, the Our Father, and most of the other prayer texts in Judeo-Christian tradition. Most folk songs - whether several centuries old or today's country music hit - follow the same simple-yet-effective chord progressions.

and the liturgy loses its entire value when it becomes a lesson in theology trying to make everyone understand each and every point... No comment on this section.

"the didactic way bishops such as Trautman want to treat the liturgy is exactly the type of thing that made Francis refuse to let his friars learn theology. let them live it and then they will learn it..."
I didn't know this about Francis, but I agree with him. And it relates to what I'm talking about. Mass ought to be comprehensible to those who attend, precisely so that they can experience the fullness, richness, blessings, sacramental aspects, and I don't know what all else to as great an extent as possible. If the language of Mass is targeted over the heads of the people who go, they'll miss a good deal of that.

"let them experience the fact that the things being said are truly ineffable by sometimes saying things that they can't "eff" as it were, lol."
I've had a couple of what I guess you'd call ineffable experiences in church, but I guess I'm just not of an ineffable bent of mind. I go to Mass to talk to my father. If Dear Old Dad talked in such a way that I left feeling ineffable but confused, I don't know if I'd visit him every week. I go to church to have a meal with my brother(s and sisters); if my biological brothers & sisters made me feel ineffable but left out of the conversation, I think I'd start to order carry-out.

"that's always been the value of Latin in Catholic liturgy; of Old Church Slavonic in Eastern Liturgies; of Hebrew in Jewish synagogues (which Christ himself would've spoke in the Temple even though the everyday language was ARAMAIC).. and it is a good enough reason to AT LEAST use some non-regular use words."
Sacred langauges - more special because they're reserved for ritual use. And that's useful for exclusive religions. But the catholic church's mission is to spread the Word of God - and knowledge of God, understanding, and all the rest of it - to the whole world, not just people who were born into the religion, not just to those who live in a particular locale.

"oh, and see Apo's post for the deeper reasons of "and with thy spirit"... it was not a common Latin phrase, ever. it was always a phrase of deeper theological meaning."
I can't believe that we still use "thee, thy, thou" in the Catholic church. When I was in the Boy Scouts, one of the junior leaders (who was also a seminarian) used to make us say the Hail Mary without using thee-thy-thou; he did it as a punishment. It was very difficult at first because it's a frozen text, but once I figured it out, it made so much more sense with you-your-yours that I've never gone back to saying it the old way except for public recitations. None of which changes the ritual meaning of "and with your spirit" as explicated by Apo.

A very thought-provoking post - thank you.

[Aloysius]

those who said the rosary during mass truly understood what was going on much more than many people who understand every single word of what the priest says. because the mysteries being contemplated in the rosary are the mystery of the mass.

again, it's the difference between prose and poetry. if we view the liturgy as prose, those who misunderstood a single word are considered to have missed its meaning; if we view it as poetry, we see that those who get the whole thing and maybe miss out on a word or two, while uniting to the meaning of that word, have truly understood it and been edified. slowly they'll begin to more deeply understand each jot and tittle based upon the context of living through the liturgy so constantly.

sacred languages are NOT about being an exclusive religion, but about being a transcendent religion, which is what Catholicism is. the Latin Mass was equally foreign to the Spanish man and the Native American who both found themself faced with it... and somehow it included them all because of what you think of as its exclusivity.

it is precisely when you view the words themselves as non-mysterious that you lose sight of the real experience of the mystery. you can mentally chew over it all you want, but it is when the linguistic part of our brain goes into overdrive trying to connect with something higher than itself that we really experience the mystery. and it's not about "using emotion" as in protestantism; it's about grace building upon nature. the nature of sacred language (be it "a sacred language" or just more formal usage of the common language) is the mystery, and we experience it when we encounter it that way... we don't just understand that there's a mystery, we experience it in the most human way possible--the linguistic way.

as soon as the liturgy tries to explain these mysteries "in words you can understand" it starts to be didactic rather than truly organically worshipful. when you understand the mystery, you understand it'll never be 'in words you can understand' but always in words beyond your grasp; I personally know the meaning of the word ineffable, but ineffable is by nature beyond my grasp... there is no similar word that can be placed there that can truly be beyond my grasp.

don't scoff at the form of the words, for ours is a linguistic religion, a religion of the WORD made flesh. every encounter with our religion ought to be an encounter with a WORD which challenges us. when that becomes literally true and there are actual words that challenge us, it does nothing but enhance our religion by making a truly incarnate tangible experience of that spiritual reality.

and thanks whatever else I am, I at least try to be thought provoking

[Apotheoun]

The words of the liturgy are intended to both reveal and veil the mystery.

It is important to remember that the "mystery of faith" can not, like a mathematical equation, ever be solved. It will always remain a mystery as we stretch infinitely into eternity at the eschaton.

[JimR-OCDS]

I think its important to remember, that not every Catholic in the pew on Sunday, has the aptitude to understand complex phrases which require theological study.

There are those who have simple minds, but also simple hearts and faith.

If you read the Bishops criticism, he stated that the Mass should remain simple. Perhaps its the poor and elderly
he has in mind?

Its not about being conservative or liberal. Its about compassion for all who attend Mass, and bringing them into the liturgy along
with the college professors and lawyers.

Jim

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 01:14 AM' timestamp='1257084874' post='1994782']
I think its important to remember, that not every Catholic in the pew on Sunday, has the aptitude to understand complex phrases which require theological study.

There are those who have simple minds, but also simple hearts and faith.

If you read the Bishops criticism, he stated that the Mass should remain simple. Perhaps its the poor and elderly
he has in mind?

Its not about being conservative or liberal. Its about compassion for all who attend Mass, and bringing them into the liturgy along
with the college professors and lawyers.

Jim
[/quote]

And yet these same poor and elderly will often choose to attend a Latin Mass (like the one I went to today) which they probably don't understand any more than I do, and it is totally voluntary because this church also offers the N.O. Mass. Beauty is beauty - not only to professors and lawyers!

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='nunsense' date='01 November 2009 - 11:39 AM' timestamp='1257086363' post='1994786']
And yet these same poor and elderly will often choose to attend a Latin Mass (like the one I went to today) which they probably don't understand any more than I do, and it is totally voluntary because this church also offers the N.O. Mass. Beauty is beauty - not only to professors and lawyers! [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img]
[/quote]


Some attend a TLM, to bring back memories of the old days, when they could do less at Mass than in the NO form.

I grew up with the TLM. Parishioners for the most part, sat and watched while the priest and altar boys said the Mass A few followed along in the missal, others prayed the Rosary, some fell asleep.


There was a reason why Vatican II called for reforms in the Mass. Go read what the reasons were.

Jim