Soon we will hear reviews of the new, corrected translation from England

Soon we will hear reviews of the new, corrected translation from England.

The new, corrected version is now in use in England for the Order of Mass.  The Proper will be implemented at the end of November.

Fr. Finigan, His Hermeneuticalness, has a post about using the new version.

I hope people in the UK will send in their feedback.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Soon we will hear reviews of the new, corrected translation from England

  1. Ezra says:

    In the UK at the moment, and got to experience the new translation. The church had settled on having the Gloria and Agnus Dei in Latin (not sure if this was their norm) which meant I didn’t get the full whack of the English, but generally people seemed to be making an effort. The only response which didn’t seem to be used by more than 50% of the congregation was “and with your spirit”. I suspect dropping that instinctive “and also with you” response will take time.

  2. iudicame says:

    “The only response which didn’t seem to be used by more than 50% of the congregation was “and with your spirit”. I suspect dropping that instinctive “and also with you” response will take time.”

    Why not just say it in latin as well – Short, simple, easy to catechise and easy to comprehend. Also gets in the proper pronunciation of the vowels and a rolling R.

    m

  3. John Nolan says:

    In my small parish we have been using parts of the new translation for some weeks now, including all the people’s responses. This morning we heard the Preface and Eucharistic Prayer for the first time. Apart from a couple of hymns we have put the music on hold, as the PP wants the congregation to become familiar with the spoken texts before singing them. Meanwhile I am practising the schola in the chant settings and the aim will be a sung Mass with the Common in Latin. They already know a couple of Kyries, Gloria VIII and Credo III – I am looking forward to doing Gloria XV and Credo I. The PP is keen on the idea of chanted Propers and I have signed up for a few sessions with the JHNILM at the Birmingham Oratory where they are rolling out the Graduale Parvum, which I gather the bishops here are going to push.

    I have to confess I have always disliked the vernacular Mass and still prefer the Latin (in either form) but am much happier with the new version and can certainly tolerate doing some chant in English. I do think congregations will need to be reminded about the hierarchy of angels, now that Cherubim, Seraphim, Thrones, Dominions and Powers have been restored to the Prefaces!

  4. rhetoric57 says:

    Maiden Lane at 11:30 soon made the adjustment to ‘and with your spirit’.

    And without any fuss Communion was received kneeling at the altar rail and mostly on the tongue.

    I felt no earthquakes from Glasgow.

    Tim

  5. sawdustmick says:

    It’s a Breath of fresh air !

    But then two Parishes near me have been using the new translation for about a month. I have been told that my responses are louder (I like to think more audible, and a definite affirmation of Praise of Almighty God) since we have been using the new translation !

  6. Supertradmum says:

    Heard it today in the parish church in Walsingham. Is a great improvement, and most people were happily following the small booklet passed out for the occasion. The priest gave a fantastic sermon on the translation and why it was necessary, along with a mini-history of the Mass. I am just relieved to be saying “I believe”. Still, I would have been much happier with the deletion of the acclamation after the Institution, as it is anti-climatic and unnecessary. Also, I was hoping the “kiss of peace” would be eliminated. The congregation did quite well following the hand-out.

  7. Marianna says:

    Father, I am very upset. We had the new translation this morning, but they seemed to be doing their best to drown it out, so to speak. So they used the third version of the Confiteor, instead of Version one, in which we remember “my fault, my fault, my most grievous fault”. Probably that would not have been “affirming” enough… As for the Gloria, they didn’t attempt the new version at all; we just got the same terrible “musical” setting we’ve always used. They did try to chant the parts of the Mass they couldn’t actually avoid, such as “and with your spirit”, but, since they didn’t practice beforehand, the result was chaos. And the chant would have sounded strange anyway, given that it was juxtaposed with the usual dreadful 1970s hymns, and that all the music was accompanied by amplified guitars and electronic drums (electronic drums, for pity’s sake…)

    Then, when you add that the noise level in the church (coming from the congregation talking, I mean) was deafening before Mass, and high enough during it that I couldn’t hear the readings or Canon properly, and you will understand why I now feel like crying. I’d been looking forward to this day so much. Things will be better next week, when I go to the earlier Mass (which I usually do), but not much.

  8. Supertradmum says:

    Can priests read the directive from Rome that drums and guitars are not liturgical instruments?
    17 Pope Benedict XIV, Encyclical Annus Qui, n. 90; Pope Pius X, Motu Proprio Tra le sollecitudini, n. 19. Principle upheld by Vatican II,Sacrosanctum Concilium(1963), nos. 112, 120, and by the Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram(1967), nos. 4, 63.

    Particularly, musical “bands” are strictly prohibited, as well as all “frivolous” instruments:

    The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like. among others, see site below and http://www.musicasacra.com/publications/sacredmusic/pdf/liturgy&music.pdf

    http://matthewhoffman.net/music/#sdfootnote17sym

  9. At the Mass I attended, the priest was so focused on the new translation that he actually forgot the blessing at the end of Mass! Fortunately, one parishioner cried out: “Father, can we have a blessing, please?” I was also amused by the little child who, during the consecration of the wine, said: “Mummy; the priest didn’t say the cup!” Only once did I slip up and say, ‘And also with you’, which I thought was OK.

    All in all, people seemed quite happy and found the experience quite enjoyable; I did at least!

  10. It was a huge improvement on the old translation. We had a few slip-ups from the congregation, but nothing major. Practice makes perfect.

    The funniest bit, for me, was when Fr. Finigan made a most unusual departure from the text. After the opening “The Lord be with you – and with your Spirit” he stopped to remind people that we would be using the new translation (he has been “warning” us it was due for quite some time, you understand!) and that the leaflets were available. There was a low scuffling noise as a few people went to the back to get their leaflets. We then had the Confiteor… and there was more scuffling as a few more people realised that “And with your Spirit” wasn’t the only change…

    If I might be so bold, here are my own thoughts on the new translation!

  11. Simon_GNR says:

    I don’t know what’s happening in the rest of the United Kingdom, but here in England and Wales we have started using the new translation for the Ordinary of the Mass: the full introduction of all the new texts for the Propers comes in on Advent Sunday, I believe. At my parish church the priest has been gradually introducing us to the new translations over the last month or two, and he has been giving very clear and helpful catechesis on the reasons for the new translation, and has emphasised many times that the new English version of the Missal is much more faithful to the original Latin.

    I’ve read Fr Finigan’s post and he sums up my feelings very well – for the first time one can worship at an English language Mass knowing that the words we are saying are a true and accurate translation of the Latin.

    I’ve not heard many comments about the changeover – people in our parish are taking it very much in their stride. What comment there has been has been positive, and I have heard no-one express regret or sorrow that the translation we have used for almost 40 years is being consigned to the dustbin ‘[“trash can” for American readers!] of history. The introduction of the new translation is going smoothly in our parish (in the Diocese of Hallam, England). It is rather difficult for me to get out of the habit of the reflex response of “And also with you” rather than “And with your spirit”, but I dare say it’ll start to come naturally in a few weeks.

    Having now got a decent translation of the Missal, can we now move on to a better translation of the Bible for the readings at Mass? The Jerusalem Bible, which appears to be almost universally used in England and Wales is truly dreadful, in my view. Why can’t we simply change to the Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version, the use of which in the liturgy is, as I understand it, permitted, but which no-one seems to use?

    One question to which I have never been able to get an answer is this: “Back in the 1970’s, how could Cardinal Heenan and the then Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales ever have agreed to such an inaccurate translation of the Missal being introduced?” Or, were they forced to by the powers that be in Rome? Surely many bishops must have objected to such an inaccurate version?

  12. AnAmericanMother says:

    If you think the Jerusalem Bible is bad . . . you should see the abysmal New American Bible.
    It is inaccurate, overly colloquial and too familiar in its tone. No awe, no respect . . . not even good English.
    For somebody raised on the King James Version it’s almost unbearable to listen to. I find myself muttering the “correct” version under my breath sometimes. But I have the Douay on my iPhone side-by-side with the Vulgate, so I can read along and see how badly they messed up the translation today . . . .
    The Psalm today was the 95th, and that always throws me into a tailspin because I had it every morning for 45 years in the Episcopal service. The Cranmer translation is SO much better, whether read or chanted in plain chant or Anglican four part. It’s engraved on my hard drive and I don’t think I will ever get it out of the memory — especially since we sing an English choral setting with the old BCP words from time to time.

  13. tecumseh says:

    All baloney I’m afraid Father . . .we have whole Diocese dying whilst they fiddle about patching up a disasterous mass . . .and all the parish ninnies who haven’t been to a proper mass for decades faff about standing up and sitting down in all the most distracting places . . .then they have some feel good guilt free coffee . . . .I despair . . .thats why, even now the SSPX is the only game in town . . .come on Papa show us the future liberate the SSPX . . .at the point of a gun if needs be . . .but for Gods sake . . save us from the Novus Ordo Ninnies . . .puulleeeaazze .

  14. chiners says:

    I thought the first outing of the new translation went very well; in the main service I used the confiteor and the Roman Canon. The choir did a pretty good job with a new setting and, apart from a lot of ‘and also with you’s the faithful seemed to go with the new texts.
    Afterwards, though, I was confronted with someone who was distraught by the changes; who had wept through the service and didn’t feel they would be able to go through again the ‘blasphemy’ of the new wording. I was informed that many other people were unhappy and the person I spoke to couldn’t understand why the laity were not resistin the imposition of these foreign changes.
    Sadky I didn’i feel able to give any helpful advice, being uterly umable to emphathise with the position being taken.

  15. mhazell says:

    Simon_GNR: hooray! Someone else from the diocese of Hallam! Which parish, if you don’t mind me asking?

    As far as my experience goes, it has been fairly positive so far. A few people got mixed up with “and with your spirit” to start off with, my wife among them, but by the end of Mass most people were starting to get the hang of it all. It’s just a shame we’re still stuck with the awful propers until Advent, but one step at a time, I suppose.

    I have to say, it is thoroughly liberating to finally be able to say “Et cum spiritu tuo” in English! And, on a slightly egotistical level, it’s nice to be able to be a part of history. In fact, my wife and I went to the very last old new Mass on Friday morning, and the very first new new Mass (vigil) on Saturday evening. That’s how much we’ve been looking forward to this! :-)

  16. esiul says:

    Oh my, I’m so glad you let us see what the English are doing with the changes.
    I hope things will go smooth over here. We are suppose to have instructions coming up this month.
    I really look forward to Advent. Am debating whether to order a Roman Missal for myself
    since it definitely will not have English and Latin side by side. Before I invest, I think I should wait.
    Keep us informed as to how it goes in England.
    Thanks.

  17. PhilipNeri says:

    All went well here at Blackfriars, Oxford. I was a little lost when the familiar cue words didn’t pop up as expected and there seems to be a daunting number of Little Booklets involved in implementing this new translation. Special attention was required to keep up. . .so, there’s at least one noticeable benefit of a much improved, much needed new translation!

    Fr. Philip Neri, OP

  18. Dorothy says:

    The Mass I attended was in Gloucestershire, at the edge of the beautiful Cotswold Hills, in the English diocese of Clifton which is centred on the south-western city of Bristol. The Mass went really well! There was a lovely spirit among those present, very focused but cheerful, and a great sense of unity between the priest and the congregation. Once or twice the priest had a slight struggle with the unfamiliar sentence construction; here and there someone forgot and said “And also with you”; but all in all it was a fine start.

  19. Josephus Muris Saliensis says:

    It is disappointing, however, that the CTS people’s booklet contains so little music, when this is one of the great riches of this new edition, and so much part of the Holy Father’s wish for the sacred liturgy.

    The Missal contains so much to inspire us, bilingual settings for the Ordinary, solemn and simple tones for the versicle and prayers, three tones for the Pater Noster, and so much more. What use is it in the altar Missal if the choir and people cannot see it?

    See here: ICEL

    We have just downloaded the online music and made a simple booklet in inDesign for us to learn the most usual music for a fully sung Mass. How many communities will trouble to do this?

  20. Simon_GNR says:

    AnAmericanMother:
    I too was brought up in the Anglican tradition and came to love the Book of Common Prayer and the Authorised (King James) Version as well as the RSV. I’m very familiar with Psalm 95 (94), the Venite at Matins (Morning Prayer.) Now for the first time we have a Mass in English that has some degree of beauty and grandeur in its language, but is still some way short of Cranmer’s majestic prose (pity he was a heretic!) One point about the BCP translation of the psalms – I believe they are not Cranmer’s work but are taken from Myles Coverdale’s 1535 translation of the Bible.

    The Prayer Book psalms are great for singing to Anglican chants and are one of the jewels of the Anglican tradition that I hope will become established as part of the liturgical life of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham.

    mhazell: I thought *I* might be the only person from the Diocese of Hallam on here! I’m from St. Joseph’s parish, Retford, priest Fr. Bill Bergin.

    I think the new translation will be a great success – I just can’t quite understand how anybody can reasonably object to the introduction of an accurate translation from the Latin!

    What I’d really like to happen is for the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo) in Latin to be used sometimes. I’m not aware of any parishes anywhere around here that have it, even occasionally. I think that the Ordinary Form in Latin could in some ways be the best of both worlds – the beauty of the old language but the modern audibility and visibility of the Canon of the Mass. Any thoughts on this?

  21. AnAmericanMother says:

    Simon,
    I’m sorry, I was just using Cranmer as shorthand. He pulled together not just Coverdale’s work but some other people’s as well. I think it was C.S. Lewis who pegged him as in many cases an editor — but a very good one.
    I do hope that we will be able to adapt material from the Ordinariate for use in other parishes! (as I said, we often sing an English setting of the Venite with the old words – usually as an offertory anthem).
    As for the NO in Latin — our parish is already moving in that direction, every First Sunday the Ordinary of the Mass is chanted entirely in Latin. Our younger priests continue to add prefaces, the occasional collect, etc. with enthusiasm. And our newest young priest is chanting the Ordinary in Latin when he celebrates the daily Mass, which throws some of the regular attendees for a loop — but they are getting used to it (and those of us Latin enthusiasts who attend make sure to chant our responses as clearly and well as we can!) Eventually we may get an entire NO Mass in Latin.