Gaining Perspective on the Catholic Liturgy's New Translation

For the past several months, Catholics across the country were put on notice that a new English translation of the liturgy would take place. On Sunday (Nov. 27) at Mass it happened. We were provided with cards outlining the new words of worship. However, like the well programmed Catholic robots that we are, the old responses sputtered from our mouths, even while staring at the printed cards with the new translation.

When I first heard about the changes, I was a bit miffed. Not because I was particularly wedded to the old translation, but I wished that other priorities, such as separating governance leadership from ministry and more attention to social justice issues, would take preference over updating the 1973 English translation of the liturgy. I even signed a petition insisting that my church re-evaluate the decision to enforce the new translation. But with the realization, last Sunday, that the changes were indeed moving forward, I sent a text during Mass to a priest friend about one of the more formal changes. "Consubstantial is suppose to be easier to say than 'one in being'? Really? Really?" He encouraged me with a text back that read "hang in there."

I received other words of encouragement from Joel Osteen. Yes, Joel had something to say about the changes to the Catholic liturgy. Well, not exactly, but I was able to apply what he said in his weekly broadcast to my responses to the changes in the liturgy. I watch Joel on Sundays before going to Mass in order to receive some spiritual motivation. Joel is typically on point with what I need to hear to inspire me to be a better person and today was no exception. He talked about putting things in perspective. Putting things in perspective allows you to be more positive and sets you up to give praise rather than complain about a situation. Thus, armed with inspiration from Joel, I attended Mass and was able to put the new liturgy changes in perspective:

As a black kid living in the inner city I grew up with the Mass being said in Latin; I am happy that the new words of worship are still in English. Praise God.

Although many moons ago, I actually majored in theology in college; at least I understand what "consubstantial to the Father" means. Praise God.

I am not a priest, nor could I ever be in the Catholic Church; I don't have to worry about leading the liturgy and the messing up the entire congregation. Praise God.

The new language is more stylized and more formal, but I can still wear my jeans to Church. Praise God.

It will take about 30 years before we get used to these changes and there is a need for another new translation. By that time, the words might even translate to lived experience with real changes for church governance and achieving social justice. Praise God.

 

 

 

Follow Deborah Plummer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/diversitypro

Comments

[PETER TIMINGS]

05:27 PM on 12/03/2011

Since the Mass is a principal rite of the Catholic Church, one might expect the Scriptures to support it. They do not. The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913 edition) explained why: “The chief source of our doctrine . . . is tradition, which from the earliest times declares the impetratory [entreating] value of the Sacrifice of the Mass.” Yes, the Roman Catholic Mass is based on tradition, not the Bible.
No matter how sincerely held, a tradition that contradicts the Bible is unacceptable to God. Jesus reproached the religious leaders of his day: “You have made God’s word ineffective by means of your tradition.” (Matthew 15:6)

[RedIvan88]

12:56 AM on 12/04/2011

It actually has a lot of Scriptural basis.

Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:14-20, John 6:32-35, John 6:51, John 6: 54-58,

[PETER TIMINGS]

04:35 AM on 12/04/2011

What did Jesus mean by his statement at John 6:53-57?
“Jesus replied: ‘I tell you most solemnly, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you. Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in him. As I, who am sent by the living Father, myself draw life from the Father, so whoever eats me will draw life from me.’”—John 6:53-57, JB.
Is this to be understood as meaning that they were literally to eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood? If so, Jesus would have been advocating a violation of the Law that God had given Israel through Moses. That Law prohibited the consuming of any sort of blood. (Lev. 17:10-12) Contrary to advocating such a thing, Jesus spoke out strongly against breaking any of the requirements of the Law. (Matt. 5:17-19) So what Jesus had in mind must have been eating and drinking in a figurative sense, by exercising faith in the value of his perfect human sacrifice.—Compare John 3:16; 4:14; 6:35, 40.

[PETER TIMINGS]

04:39 AM on 12/04/2011

Did Jesus instruct his disciples to have not merely a memorial of his death but a rite that would actually renew his sacrifice?
According to The Documents of Vatican II: “At the Last Supper, on the night when He was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood. He did this in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the Cross . . . ”—(New York, 1966), edited by W. M. Abbott, S.J., p. 154; italics added.

Jesus himself said: “Do this as a memorial of me.” (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24, JB) At Luke 22:19, Kx and Dy read: “Do this for a commemoration of me.” NAB reads: “Do this as a remembrance of me.” Jesus did not say that what he did at the Last Supper was a sacrifice of himself or that his disciples were to renew his sacrifice.
Heb. 9:25-28, JB: “He does not have to offer himself again and again, like the [Jewish] high priest going into the sanctuary year after year with the blood that is not his own, or else he would have had to suffer over and over again since the world began. Instead of that, he has made his appearance once and for all . . . to do away with sin by sacrificing himself. Since men only die once, and after that comes judgement, so Christ, too, offers himself only once.” (Italics added.)

[Indigo1941]

05:06 PM on 12/03/2011

Bene dictum.

[dlplummer]

06:36 PM on 12/02/2011

I have to laugh at those who are dismayed that I would text during Mass...actually much quieter than talking aloud and was part of my conversation or prayer with God. Thanks for attempt to parent me.

[cheeseheadnate]

02:53 PM on 12/05/2011

Instead of them worrying about your text on a religious matter, they should pay attention to the parking lot after mass. How many parishioners run to their cars so they can get out of the parking lot fast? God Bless thanks for the article, I too grew up in the roman catholic church and don't care for the updates/changes.

[mike swift]

05:47 PM on 12/02/2011

The mass was never meant to be said in English. In fact, no major religion uses the vernacular in their worship of God. The Orthodox Church uses biblical Greek not Modern Greek. Jews use ancient Hebrew. Buddhist use classical Chinese not modern Chinese. Hindus use Sanskrit. Furthermore, the dialogue mass (where the people answer the priest) has only been in use for the last hundred years or so. Why all theses changes in the last 50 years in the Catholic Church? Why not attend the mass as it was for nearly 2000 years, in Latin. Find a traditional Latin Mass near you with the traditional Latin mass directory.
http://www.traditio.com/nat.htm

[ManuOB1]

04:37 PM on 12/02/2011

Yes, for Catholics it takes extra effort to pray the Mass; would that people put as much effort into living their faith in their daily lives out "in the world."

[jaabirllx]

03:21 PM on 12/02/2011

Nothing is more central to a religion than its prayer, and the central prayer of the Catholic Church is the mass, and the sad hash that Paul VI allowed his liturgical experts to make of liturgical reform was complicated by the intransigence of the people who created the English mistranslations of the new rite. Apart from traditionalists, few people are noting that the very same people who issued & policed the imposition of Paul VI's ritual are the very same ones who were instrumental in committing & in shielding the sexual criminals.

[johnnybic]

05:17 PM on 12/04/2011

You dishonor the memory of a great pope in your intransigent and slavish adherence to your traditionalist bias. And you are grossly misrepresenting the role of "traditionalists" in the sex abuse scandal. Marcial Maciel was one of the most conservative voices in the Church since Vatican II and one of the worst sexual offenders. There are many like him.

[jaabirllx]

06:23 PM on 12/06/2011

Conservative Catholics believe that Vatican II was a true Council badly implemented, that the mass of Paul VI was a good reform, but again, badly implemented. Traditional Catholics believe that Vatican II is a spurious Council, and that Paul VI's mass is a laicized and protestantized rite, and that the collapse of confession, of reverence at mass, are all the poisoned fruits of the bad seed. This makes conservative Catholics the severest critics of traditional Catholics. The Conciliar reforms, which were supposed to bring on a flowering of spirituality, instead brought these evils, even things which are thought of as 'conservative' -- like Opus Dei, like EWTN, like Steubenville U. in the US, like Focolare or Communion and Liberation -- none of which have much to do with traditional Catholic belief, all of which are anchored in the years immediately prior to & after Vatican II.

[dunphyp]

06:34 PM on 12/01/2011

Texting during the Mass? Is that what it's come to? Why go?

[ElizabethD]

08:15 PM on 12/01/2011

Yeah, during Mass we need to give our full attention to praying the Mass, to me it's not a great idea to text during Mass. But, this is an okay article by someone who seems to have a fine capacity to adjust to and understand the new translation.

I don't think it will take 30 years to get used to it though!! I am a daily Mass goer and it's Thursday of the first week of Advent and I'm pretty close to getting it right without the assistance of a pew card, though I'll still an aid for the next few Sundays to help with the Gloria and Creed.

I used to wear jeans to Mass. Then I stopped doing so on Sundays because jeans seem work clothes (Sunday is a day of rest) or informal (Mass is truly Important, and encounter God). I started thinking about it more deeply, what would I wear at the last supper, the foot of the cross, the Resurrection? We are actually present to these events at Mass. Eventually it led me to want to wear modest long skirts. Feedback has been entirely positive. Although before I was very much a jeans person and was not a feminine dresser at all, I find that I actually really like being a long skirt wearer. I get my clothes from Goodwill or St Vinnie's and I pick mostly simple things in solid colors, it is a dignified and sort of timeless look.

[WritingOn]

04:51 PM on 12/02/2011

My priest (a young guy) is famous for watching a teenaged girl text during Mass for several weeks. Finally, he approached her mother and got her number. The next time her phone was out during church she recieved a text that read "I am God. I can see you.

Interestingly, her phone was never seen again during Mass.