Bishop Criticizes 'slavishly Literal' English Translation Of M

[Nihil Obstat]

My formal catechetical instruction has been almost nil through my entire life. I figured it out on my own.
My Catholic school did nothing for me past about grade four when we memorized the sacraments and the symbols associated with them. Past then everything I've learned has been either in homilies or in private research (vast majority being private research).

I am the poster child of poor catechesis. What I've been taught has been the bare minimum, asinine and truly dumbed down, or outright wrong. I learned this stuff anyway. I am proof that it can be done.

I'm frankly sick of being coddled. I don't want a simple translation that misses important points. I want the very best that can be offered. As Catholics, we deserve nothing but the very best. For a priest or bishop to assume otherwise is insulting to every Catholic, especially those like me who have had to do a lot of hard work on their own.

Edited November 2, 2009 by Nihil Obstat

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 01:07 PM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
The purpose of Vatican II reforming the Liturgy, was to bring the people to more active participation in the Mass, rather than just having them pray quietly in the
pews, as they did in the pre-Vatican II days.

Participation is still possible without understanding all the words. However, the goal of Vatican II was for fuller participation, not greater isolation.

Jim
[/quote]

Actually, Vatican II did NOT do away with the Latin Liturgy. It was others who had an agenda all their own...that buried it and choked it...

And in most Latin Liturgies, participation is 100%. Isolation? Not when you are on fire with the company of the Almighty God. Or have you forgotten why we go to Mass? Is it not to worship Jesus Christ? It's not to say as many prayers as we can together or hold hands during the Our Father and feel all warm and fuzzy. Not every soul who speaks words through their lips are actually "participating" in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Many pay lip service to Christ, and it means nothing. How many actually think of the words they are speaking in the Mass? How many Catholics know what the Creed means? How has all this "participation" made us a stronger Church? You can walk into a catechism class and discover, most do not know the basic tenets of our Faith. Like I mentioned before, we can honestly say the changes in the Mass did nothing but make Catholics less likely to understand the Mass and even more apathetic and naive about what our Faith is...because without the attention given to God alone, and more to us, we lost focus on what the Holy Sacrifice is all about...

...what these translations are trying to bring is a greater description of what is actually happening during the Mass. Such words don't exist in our human language, but we try the best we can...

Correct me if I am wrong, but if the source of this post's topic is the magazine "U.S. Catholic", then I must mention this is a magazine which works to undermine the teaching authority of the Church. "U.S. Catholic" celebrates the "spirit of the American Church," and many of their writers are dissenters of the Faith. I spoke with a member of the Claretians who publish this magazine, and he told me that we Americans should believe with our own hearts what we feel is right, and we shouldn't keep "God in a box." We need to look at God outside of what the Church teaches us...

...in other words, question the teaching authority of the Church...
...I have read many of the articles of this magazine, because the Claretians used to staff my parish...I have also read many letters written to this magazine, and also of the comments left online. Sadly, most comments criticize the "elitist snob" who sits in St. Peter's Chair in Rome these days...

So, maybe this is the air of this story...that celebrating Mass with such words is "elitist" and works to divide our Church rather than unite...but that seems to be an ongoing rebellious attitude of this magazine, and has been ever since its inception...

[size="1"][i]inception[/i]: Middle English incepcion, from Latin inception-, inceptio, from incipere to begin, from in- + capere to take
Date: 15th century
: an act, process, or instance of beginning :[/size]

Edited November 2, 2009 by dominicansoul

[StColette]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 09:00 AM' timestamp='1257170423' post='1995185']
The reality is, Sunday Mass is attended by a wide range of Catholics. There are some who are well educated, some who are less. You also have those who don't have the mental capacity to learn more than what they're dealing with now. Mass should be simple enough for the majority to understand without taking advance courses in liturgical study.
[/quote]


Sorry, I don't buy the fact that we should simplify the Mass because some people don't have the capacity to learn. St. Therese was practically labeled an idiot in school and didn't understand a lot Church teachings but still became a Doctor of the Church. Quite an accomplishment for someone others considered simple minded. It is often those that can't grasp the complexities that often get the most out of something. It is not necessary that we understand every single word to know what is taking place. Even a deaf person can understand what is taking place at the Mass just by watching the Priest. I know many people, adults & children, who are illiterate and can tell you what takes place during the Mass.

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='StColette' date='02 November 2009 - 02:59 PM' timestamp='1257188359' post='1995315']
Sorry, I don't buy the fact that we should simplify the Mass because some people don't have the capacity to learn. St. Therese was practically labeled an idiot in school and didn't understand a lot Church teachings but still became a Doctor of the Church. Quite an accomplishment for someone others considered simple minded. It is often those that can't grasp the complexities that often get the most out of something. It is not necessary that we understand every single word to know what is taking place. Even a deaf person can understand what is taking place at the Mass just by watching the Priest. I know many people, adults & children, who are illiterate and can tell you what takes place during the Mass.
[/quote]


I think you're mistaking St Theresa for St. Bernadette.

The Mass in its current form, is simple to understand, yet still beautiful. I don't see the need to change it toward what they came up with. In fact, I think understanding will digress with the new liturgy.

Jim

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='02 November 2009 - 06:34 PM' timestamp='1257186848' post='1995305']
My formal catechetical instruction has been almost nil through my entire life. I figured it out on my own.
My Catholic school did nothing for me past about grade four when we memorized the sacraments and the symbols associated with them. Past then everything I've learned has been either in homilies or in private research (vast majority being private research).

I am the poster child of poor catechesis. What I've been taught has been the bare minimum, asinine and truly dumbed down, or outright wrong. I learned this stuff anyway. I am proof that it can be done.

I'm frankly sick of being coddled. I don't want a simple translation that misses important points. I want the very best that can be offered. As Catholics, we deserve nothing but the very best. For a priest or bishop to assume otherwise is insulting to every Catholic, especially those like me who have had to do a lot of hard work on their own.
[/quote]
If I had any more +1s to give, this would have gotten one.

[quote name='StColette' date='02 November 2009 - 06:59 PM' timestamp='1257188359' post='1995315']
Sorry, I don't buy the fact that we should simplify the Mass because some people don't have the capacity to learn. St. Therese was practically labeled an idiot in school and didn't understand a lot Church teachings but still became a Doctor of the Church. Quite an accomplishment for someone others considered simple minded. It is often those that can't grasp the complexities that often get the most out of something. It is not necessary that we understand every single word to know what is taking place. Even a deaf person can understand what is taking place at the Mass just by watching the Priest. I know many people, adults & children, who are illiterate and can tell you what takes place during the Mass.
[/quote]
Good point. St Jean Baptiste Vianney could also be a good example.

[JimR-OCDS]

dominicansoul

[quote]Actually, Vatican II did NOT do away with the Latin Liturgy. It was others who had an agenda all their own...that buried it and choked it...[/quote]

Vatican II stated that Latin should be preserved, however, it allowed for use of the vernacular. But beyond that, Vatican II stated that the primary purpose for the change was to have fuller active participation of the faithful in the Liturgy. In time, only the Vernacular was used, because the positive effect of fuller particpation was such, that the Bishops, approved liturgical text 100% in the vernacular. Their agenda? You seem to think the US Council of Catholic Bishops have a deviant agenda at play. Please inform us what that agenda is?

[quote]And in most Latin Liturgies, participation is 100%.
[/quote]

The participation is following along in silence, while the priest says the Mass and the altar boys mimic by rote, the responses.

There is no way a person is going to be more part of a Mass in a language he/she doesn't understand, than one in their own tongue. It'd be like trying to listen to an song in a foreign language verses your own. It may be beautiful, but its even more beautiful when you understand the words. So it is with the Mass.

[quote]Isolation? Not when you are on fire with the company of the Almighty God. [/quote]

Oh please, we're talking about "ACTIVE," participation by the people, not lofty ideals of individuals.

[quote]Or have you forgotten why we go to Mass? Is it not to worship Jesus Christ?[/quote]

You're trying to tell me that Jesus only listens to prayers in Latin?

Jesus is present at Mass, regardless of the language that is used. He's not limited by our human
levels of righteousness and piety.



[quote]It's not to say as many prayers as we can together or hold hands during the Our Father and feel all warm and fuzzy. Not every soul who speaks words through their lips are actually "participating" in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Many pay lip service to Christ, and it means nothing. [/quote]

Well I wouldn't presume to know what's in the hearts of my fellow Catholics at Mass.


[quote]How many actually think of the words they are speaking in the Mass? How many Catholics know what the Creed means? [/quote]

Gee, you're making a case here for keeping the language understandable, certainly not changing back over to Latin.


[quote]How has all this "participation" made us a stronger Church?[/quote]


How has it not?


[quote]You can walk into a catechism class and discover, most do not know the basic tenets of our Faith. Like I mentioned before, we can honestly say the changes in the Mass did nothing but make Catholics less likely to understand the Mass and even more apathetic and naive about what our Faith is...because without the attention given to God alone, and more to us, we lost focus on what the Holy Sacrifice is all about...[/quote]

So by using Latin, we would've prevented all this?


[quote]...what these translations are trying to bring is a greater description of what is actually happening during the Mass. Such words don't exist in our human language, but we try the best we can...[/quote]

But they won't. As the Bishop stated in his article, which you seem to not have read, is that the language being used in the new translation, has no meaning to today's English speaking people.



[quote]Correct me if I am wrong, but if the source of this post's topic is the magazine "U.S. Catholic", then I must mention this is a magazine which works to undermine the teaching authority of the Church. [quote][/quote]

Really and you can prove this?



[Jim

[Lil Red]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 09:08 AM' timestamp='1257174495' post='1995207'] why the confessional lines are empty.

If the Church has been failing on basic education of Church doctrine, how will making the language of the Mass more complex help?

Jim
[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
when a young, newly ordained priest was stationed at my parish this summer (and two summers ago, a different young newly ordained priest was here) - he used big words, had homilies of substantial 'heft', and the confessional lines exploded...literally he would hear confessions all the way up until it was time to say Mass. now, the 'regular' priest uses 'small words' and has dumbed down homilies and the confessional lines are empty.

[Slappo]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
Slappo




So we'll improve things by using language that has little understanding for today's English speaking person?
[/quote]

No, my point is the Church is failing on basic education because those educating are only interested in modernity not dogma. Hey, lets make multiple translations of the Eucharistic prayer so that those saying mass in the hood can relate to the gansta culture!

"The Lord be with you dawg"
"And with you homie dizzle"

The Church does not seek modernism, nor should her translations. Should it be incomprehensible? No. But the translations being presented are not incomprehensible. They take paying attention to, but they are not incomprehensible.


[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
How Catholic of you. If they can cut it, throw them out.
[/quote]

How Catholic of Jesus... considering he'll SPIT OUT the lukewarm. The Church excommunicates to heal, the chaff are separated from the wheat so as to not kill the wheat and themselves be warned. (except in end times where it is separated for judgment)

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
The new translation is the literal from Latin, so its not common among any of the English speaking nations.
[/quote]

Exactly, meaning we can't seek to make it common amongst the Americans as that would become nonsensical to the other countries.


[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
Maybe they have more compassion for the poor than you do, instead of telling them to either learn it, or get out. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif[/img]
[/quote]
You mean more compassion for the poor than the rest of the bishops around the world?

Also I never said learn it or get out, chaff aren't the unlearned, but the lukewarm. The lukewarm aren't the stupid, but those with accedia towards their faith. The lazy, the slothful, those that don't care, those that would rather use contraception and forget about it then think about the moral implications of doing so. Those are the chaff that should be separated, and will be. Those that care will be willing to make an effort to learn, or will be content enough with not knowing and simply praying.


[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
With recent appointments to higher level positions in the Vatican from Bishops of the USCCB, I doubt your statement here is factual.
[/quote]

Then go read the minutes from their last meeting. I'm sure Rexi can post a link if you can't find them.

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
The purpose of Vatican II reforming the Liturgy, was to bring the people to more active participation in the Mass, rather than just having them pray quietly in the
pews, as they did in the pre-Vatican II days.
[/quote]

As a great FSSP priest once said. Mass is Calvary. Who best participated in Calvary other than the Mother of God herself, the Theotokos. How did Mary participate at the crucifixion? With silence and interior prayer. Maybe we should go tell the Early Fathers that Mary had it wrong because she was "just praying silently at the foot of the cross" rather then actively.

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
Participation is still possible without understanding all the words. However, the goal of Vatican II was for fuller participation, not greater isolation.
[/quote]

What is participation? What is fuller participation? Is it being an extraordinary minister of holy communion? Is it being a lector? No. It is entering into the sacrifice of the mass in the very depths of your soul. It is, come time for the offertory, uniting yourself with the sacrifice placed on the altar and offering yourself too as a sacrifice during the Holy Mass. FULL participation in the mass is possible without understanding all the words. Unless that is, you want to say that St. Therese did not fully participate in mass, along with many of the other saints who were not fluent in latin.

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 10:07 AM' timestamp='1257185257' post='1995293']
Jim
[/quote]

Marcus

[JimR-OCDS]

Slappo


[quote]No, my point is the Church is failing on basic education because those educating are only interested in modernity not dogma. Hey, lets make multiple translations of the Eucharistic prayer so that those saying mass in the hood can relate to the gansta culture!
"The Lord be with you dawg"
"And with you homie dizzle"
[/quote]

You can provide us with the current Eucharistic prayer that says this, or are you just being sarcastic? [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/detective.gif[/img]

[quote]The Church does not seek modernism, nor should her translations.[/quote]

The current form of the Mass is not modernism. Where'd you got this idea?

[quote]Should it be incomprehensible? No. But the translations being presented are not incomprehensible. They take paying attention to, but they are not incomprehensible.
[/quote]

The translation isn't incompreshensible any more than Chinese would be is incomprehensible if we learn it. However, its never going to be understood as well as in the vernacular understood by the people in the pews.


[quote]How Catholic of Jesus... considering he'll SPIT OUT the lukewarm. The Church excommunicates to heal, the chaff are separated from the wheat so as to not kill the wheat and themselves be warned. (except in end times where it is separated for judgment)[/quote]

So by this then, you believe Jesus would throw out those who don't understand the liturgical text that are coming? I think you're misinterpreting Scripture and certainly misunderstanding the words Jesus used here.


[quote]Exactly, meaning we can't seek to make it common amongst the Americans as that would become nonsensical to the other countries.[/quote]

As the Bishop in the article states, its not proper English. There isn't any English country that uses the tearms expressed in the new translation.


[quote]You mean more compassion for the poor than the rest of the bishops around the world?
[/quote]

We're talking about the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the English translation of the Mass. Their concern out of compassion, is for the poor among their flocks, who will attend Mass. They don't disconnect people from the Mass by making it so vague and "slavishly literal," that it loses all meaning.

[quote]Also I never said learn it or get out, chaff aren't the unlearned, but the lukewarm. The lukewarm aren't the stupid, but those with accedia towards their faith. The lazy, the slothful, those that don't care, those that would rather use contraception and forget about it then think about the moral implications of doing so. Those are the chaff that should be separated, and will be. Those that care will be willing to make an effort to learn, or will be content enough with not knowing and simply praying.[/quote]

Gesh!

Jim

[Nihil Obstat]

Jim, you seem to talk a lot about the average Catholic. I wonder why you haven't yet responded to my comment above, and the one directly preceding that.

[StColette]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 02:09 PM' timestamp='1257188986' post='1995316']
I think you're mistaking St Theresa for St. Bernadette.

The Mass in its current form, is simple to understand, yet still beautiful. I don't see the need to change it toward what they came up with. In fact, I think understanding will digress with the new liturgy.

Jim
[/quote]

Yep I swapped them lol Pregnancy brain! The point still stands though. One doesn't have to have a great capacity for learning in order to understand something. One also doesn't have to know the meaning or definition of every word that is used in the Liturgy. I don't think a change in some words is really going to bring that great of a problem. Frankly, I would venture to say that many Catholics don't know the meaning of words used currently during the liturgy. Personally, I don't know any Latin at all and have gone to EF Masses and I still understand what is taking place. I've gone to Spanish NO Masses, and I frankly can't understand a word of Spanish, and I knew what part of the Mass we were at and what was taking place. Changing the vocabulary or changing the language doesn't take away from the physical elements of the Mass, which even a child below the age of reason can grasp and understand, if only taught and instructed.

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='02 November 2009 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1257193810' post='1995355']
Jim, you seem to talk a lot about the average Catholic. I wonder why you haven't yet responded to my comment above, and the one directly preceding that.
[/quote]


I didn't realise that a response was required.

Your overcoming poor catechises has nothing to do with making the language of the Mass less intelligible to the average English speaking Catholic.

Its wonderful that you saw fit to get higher education in Catholicism.

However, when it comes to the Mass, don't assume that everyone has your aptitude for academic study.


There are many Catholics, and yes, I've been involved with many Catholics over the course of my 58 years, who for whatever reason, are not going to go beyond what they learned in CCD or Catholic School. For whatever reason, are just not academically inclined and will not go out and read a book on the translation of the new Liturgy. They get what they get from either trying to figure it out at Mass, or from what their priest explains to them.

Are they just lazy stupid Catholics, which the tone of some of the post in here seem to suggest?

No, some have learning disabilities. Distancing them from the Liturgy with terms and words that are out of their normal understanding, does nothing to serve them, which is the mission of the Church.



Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

StColette'

[quote]Yep I swapped them lol Pregnancy brain! [/quote]

Well, St Bernadette is my favorite Saint, and St Theresa is my spiritual sister, so
I kinda guessed you had them mixed up. No problem.


[quote]The point still stands though. One doesn't have to have a great capacity for learning in order to understand something. One also doesn't have to know the meaning or definition of every word that is used in the Liturgy. [/quote]


Correct, but then why go another step and make it even more difficult?

[quote]I don't think a change in some words is really going to bring that great of a problem.[/quote]

I see stumbling blocks when it comes. In fact, in my parish, the first few Masses will be train-wrecks, as people will automatically respond with "and also with you," instead of "and with your spirit." And "I Believe in God, " instead of "We Believe in God."

Heck, as it is, this week the pastor read a statement from our Bishop, that he is suspending reception of the Precious Blood, until the flu season is over. Also, we're not to shake hands or touch during the offering of peace, instead, just bow. We'll people tripped over that and of course our parish holds hands during the Lord's Prayer, so, half the parishioners knew enough not to hold hands, others did as they always do, including the pastor and lectors, they held hands. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[quote]Frankly, I would venture to say that many Catholics don't know the meaning of words used currently during the liturgy. [/quote]

So again, why further complicate it?

[quote]Personally, I don't know any Latin at all and have gone to EF Masses and I still understand what is taking place. I've gone to Spanish NO Masses, and I frankly can't understand a word of Spanish, and I knew what part of the Mass we were at and what was taking place. Changing the vocabulary or changing the language doesn't take away from the physical elements of the Mass, which even a child below the age of reason can grasp and understand.[/quote]

But lets be honest, which Mass do you comprehend easier and more fully, one in your language or the one's in foreign languages?

I've attended Mass in France. I don't speak French, but I knew where we were in the Mass. However, when I attended Mass in English at Lourdes, I was more fully involved. In fact, I was flying.


Jim

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='02 November 2009 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1257194591' post='1995364']
I didn't realise that a response was required.

Your overcoming poor catechises has nothing to do with making the language of the Mass less intelligible to the average English speaking Catholic.

Its wonderful that you saw fit to get higher education in Catholicism.

However, when it comes to the Mass, don't assume that everyone has your aptitude for academic study.


There are many Catholics, and yes, I've been involved with many Catholics over the course of my 58 years, who for whatever reason, are not going to go beyond what they learned in CCD or Catholic School. For whatever reason, are just not academically inclined and will not go out and read a book on the translation of the new Liturgy. They get what they get from either trying to figure it out at Mass, or from what their priest explains to them.

Are they just lazy stupid Catholics, which the tone of some of the post in here seem to suggest?

No, some have learning disabilities. Distancing them from the Liturgy with terms and words that are out of their normal understanding, does nothing to serve them, which is the mission of the Church.



Jim
[/quote]
You missed the point of my post. I am exactly the kind of person this particular bishop is worried about. I managed. I proved that it is more than possible.
Yes, some people have learning disabilities. We don't have special learning disability Masses. We already expect them to learn what the Mass is about and what is going on. Some understand it at the level it is at. For some people, I'm sure it's well beyond what they understand. Should we simplify it even further so that even those with the most severe learning disabilities can understand? That is not the point of the Mass.
On the other hand, I have no problem arguing that the majority of those complaining about a Mass that uses somewhat more complicated language actually are being lazy. I, like some other posters here, believe that this is due to poor catechesis.
[quote]There are many Catholics, and yes, I've been involved with many Catholics over the course of my 58 years, who for whatever reason, are not going to go beyond what they learned in CCD or Catholic School. For whatever reason, are just not academically inclined and will not go out and read a book on the translation of the new Liturgy. They get what they get from either trying to figure it out at Mass, or from what their priest explains to them.[/quote]
So we should make the Mass nice and easy so that people who don't like reading don't have to? I don't actually think you can be a good Catholic merely by going to Mass every Sunday. I think everybody should pick up a Bible or the CCC once in a while. You can't expect the homily to provide a comprehensive "how the be a perfect Catholic" by going to Mass once a week.

[dominicansoul]

[quote]Jesus is present at Mass, regardless of the language that is used. He's not limited by our human
levels of righteousness and piety.[/quote]

than what's your argument? You just agreed with what we've been trying to say for 7 pages now...

Edited November 2, 2009 by dominicansoul