The New Roman Missal – A Direct Hit

I really like the revised Roman Missal.  The responses, the prayers – all good.

But it got me thinking.  We all know that the more liberal members among us aren’t all that hep to the new translation.  They’ve been complaining about it all year long.  Read any Catholyc publication – National Catholic Distorter, USCatholyc – and you’d come across a new piece every week harping about the new translation.  It was predictable and tiresome.  Embarrassing, even.

And, if I might add, hypocritical.  Let me illustrate:

Here’s what Catholycs say on the issue of so-called women’s ordination:

And on the issue of married priests:

And here’s what they say when the topic of homosexuality comes up:

But when it came to the revised Roman Missal:(Fr Michael Ryan, Seattle)

You remember the “What if we just said wait?” campaign started by Ryan, right?  Even with over 22,600 signatures (a fair percentage of them being “anonymous”), the implementation still went ahead.  It’s as if Rome ignored them. Heh.  So here we are, the 1st Sunday of Advent, and the new translation is in full effect.

By the way – the “What If We Just Said Wait” crowd have put up a survey at their site, looking for people’s reactions and experiences to the new Roman Missal. Maybe you should go on over there and tell them what you think.  Let’s flood their survey with positive, affirming, Church supporting responses.  Click here and head over to their site, and look for the “Take our brief survey on the Roman Missal” link.

So I’d say the revised Roman Missal has squarely hit its target.  Too bad so sad, Catholycs.  Long live the new corrected translation!

About these ads

25 responses

  1. Okay, I’ve done it. I’m glad that the choices were “fair-minded”–not biased in such a way that I’d hesitate to answer the questions because the choices were too constricted. And it only took like two minutes to do, for those who are worried about time.

    Like

    • Yes Siarlys, your right about “Every translation is incomplete,distorted, or plain wrong, in some respects”. That’s why you need to get rid of the KJV, a verison inspired by work of heretics like Wyclif, Luther, and Tyndale. It’s missing seven books, and and has false doctrines like faith alone written into the translated text. Get a Douay-Rheims Bible SJ, it’s free of doctrinal and moral error.
      I like the new translation of the liturgy. One only has to compare it to the langauge used in the TLM to realize it’s closer to the traditional wording than the NO we have been using all these years. And contrary to Siarlys, I’m not interested in any “new insights”. I want the traditional insights that were there all along, but hidden by bad translations.

      Like

      • Stephen, the arrogance of your humility is overwhelming. I don’t advocate getting RID OF the Jerusalem, Douay, or Vulgate, much less your latest infatuation. I remember receiving my own copy of the Revised Standard Version when it was THE talk of the Presbyterians. I later took another look and found it shallow and sterile. I once heard a Sunday School teacher explain why she liked the NIV, “because it makes everything clear.” My suspicions were immediately aroused — ten layers of meaning intended by the Original Author could be obscured or effaced, because the translation team wanted to “make clear” one of the ten, or an eleventh. What I have come to love about the King James translation is not it’s inerrant authority, but the fact that the archaic English leaves a poetic sense that allows the Holy Spirit room to work on the mind of the reader. But unless I care to take your fallible word for it, I have no reason to think that the versions you mention are “free of doctrinal and moral error.” I believe that doctrine per se IS moral error. And you probably knew before you wrote that I adore Wycliffe, far more than Luther. But who knows? You may be right. My universalism has to allow for that as one possibility.

        Like

  2. I entered my pro-corrected translation comments at the What If We Just Said Wait website you linked to. I’m curious to see if it stays up. Actually I just copied and pasted some of what I said on my own blog because I’m into this new revised Roman Missal.

    By the way, those giant puppets on your header are kind of scary and kind of funny.

    Like

  3. I’m thrilled the corrected translation is here!

    What if we just said to the “What if…” crowd… nyaah nyaah nya nyaah nyah.

    Ok – admittedly a childish comment, but very satisfying nonetheless.

    Like

    • What I don’t get is why the “What if…” crowd doesn’t just declare themselves Protestants. Or, they could declare themselves the True Catholic Church and denounce the authors of the new translation as heretics. There have been periods when two, or even three Popes reigned simultaneously. Of course “Bishop of Avignon” has a hollow ring to it.

      Like

  4. Pingback: MONDAY MORNING EDITION | ThePulp.it

  5. More devoit, more reverant language oriented towards God not man, any wonder the “catholycs” didn’t want it?
    Also, I am sure the “Just Say Wait” gang won’t like my comments either, esp where I point out the new translation better reflects the eternal truths taught by the Catholic Church.

    Like

    • Why should they like your comments? You don’t like theirs. They should, if they have any confidence in their own faith, respond to critics with the language of H.L. Mencken, “Dear Sir, You may be right,” or that of Mike Royko, “I may be wrong — but I doubt it.”

      Like

  6. Just took the survey and noticed I didn’t get the results. Wondering if they’ll ever post them. Our parish did a pretty good job of preparing us for the whats and whys of the changes. Father encouraged people to be open to the changes, even if it’s hard at first. He’s mostly positive about the change, which is good. I think when the pastors (including bishops) send out positive messages and are enthusiastic, then the rest of the laity are more likely to view the change in the same light. That’s why it’s such a shame when there are groups like “Just Say Wait” around. “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” Eph 4:29

    Like

  7. I’m surprised they don’t like the new translation, after all, in the Gloria, instead of “peace to all men” we gave them “Peace to people of good will.” Inclusive, no?

    I like the new translation. I like that I am forced to concentrate on my responses, rather than respond automatically like a Borg.

    Like

  8. @theLarryD,

    Thank you for posting the link. I added my 200¢ worth, strongly in favor of the corrected translation. Inasmuch as one must give one’s ZIP code in responding (and I live in the Seattle area), I don’t suppose my comment will endear me to Fr. Ryan, if he happens to read it. But that is very much his own personal problem. I have viewed the uncorrected transalation as insipid and banal ever since it was first published (when I was still Episcopalian) in 1979—and I was not alone. The reason that book took until 1979 was that they had to go back and include the earlier Rite before they could get it to pass their General Convention. I was Episcopalian at the time that they still (exclusively) responded “and with thy spirit.” In many ways I felt like I had arrived home in 2008 when I began attending a Catholic Church and even more so when my wife and I were received into the Catholic Church at Pentecost 2010. I just got another dose of that feeling on Sunday with the revised translation of the Mass. All praise be to God!

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

    Like

  9. Thanks for the link to that site, LarryD. I did the survey. I like that there is a place for commentary too. Wanna know what I wrote? Ok, well, I’ll tell ya anyway:

    I love the new translation!

    My only disappoinment is that the music for the sung responses is not what I hoped for, which would be more along the lines of traditional, worshipful music that actually lifts the soul.The new melodies are more of the same bad music in use now — ie, the Marty Haugan, David Haas stuff. That type of music is too reminiscent of the cheesey melodies we should be moving away from. Not only were the melodies of that stuff bad, but worse, the lyrics are often questionable at best, and downright protestant at worst–typical and representative of the passive-aggressive/mildly-dissident liturgists of the 70s and 80s. The faster we can put behind us that period in our history, the better! The new translation is an excellent start!

    Like

    • Georgette,

      If your Pastor and music director are open to suggestion, you might suggest that they take a look at the Simple English Propers, set to purpose-composed Gregorian chant. The hardcopy are currently out of print, but I believe that a new production run is in progress. Also, the documents of Vatican II and the recent guidance from the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (2011 GIRM) which accompanies the corrected translations has made it abundantly clear that “removes the discretion from the music team to sing pretty much whatever it wants. The new text, which pertains to the new translation of the Missal that comes into effect on Advent this year, makes it clear beyond any doubt: the music of the Mass is the chanted propers of the Mass. There are options but these options all exist within the universe of the primary normative chant. There can be no more making up some random text, setting it to music, and singing it as the entrance, offertory, or communion.

      There is more detail, including citations from the 2011 GIRM covering The Entrance, The Psalm, The Offertory, and Communion, at: http://www.chantcafe.com/2011/07/dramatic-changes-in-music-rubrics-for.html

      I hope that is of some small help.

      Pax et bonum,
      Keith Töpfer

      Like

  10. I loved it, especially the priest’s prayers! They were very deep and beautiful. And the phrase “people of good will” – that’s what it’s all about, right? People of Christ, following him, not heir own arguments, their own opinions, their own relativistic yet domineering points (which are really just girly feelings gussied up with “big words”). I sense myself being better able to pray with more conviction and certainty.

    I did get exasperated when, on a FB post by our awesome orthodox associate pastor, one of the many female lay pastoral associates of our office whined “I have to say when I heard ‘poured out for the many’ instead of ‘all’, it felt a bit uninviting (for lack of a better word right now). And I don’t like using ‘I believe’ in the Nicene creed instead of ‘we believe’. I think in the original Greek and/or Hebrew it was ‘we’, was it not.”

    Really? Are you THAT obtuse?

    Sorry. Need to be more charitable. Need to keep repeating, need to be more charitable!

    Welcome Home to Keith and your wife! You sound like an awesome new member of our Roman Catholic Family!

    Like

  11. I loved the new translation and let them know it on their survey! Our parish has been working on the sung responses for several weeks, it was great to put it all together this weekend.

    Like

Comments are closed.