The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionIs the new missal good prayer?
by Tom Gallagher on Dec. 01, 2011
The anecdotal reactions to the new English-language prayers officially implemented Sunday break down into predictable categories. Those who dislike the changes describe them as simply bad and unreadable English, inhibitors to authentic prayer. Those in favor of the changes commonly use the term "poetic" in praising the new prayers. The quiet middle seems philosophical about accepting the new missal. Most appreciated the efforts by local parishes to prepare the congregations for the change-over.
Here are some reactions I collected Sunday.
At the Mass I attended, one octogenarian woman kept leaning over to the 40-something woman next to her and saying, "This is stupid. This is stupid. I'm never going to learn these changes," she said. After Mass, the older woman kept bemoaning the changes as she left the building.
One gentleman in his mid-60s and not well disposed to the changes summed it up this way: "We have ordained senior men making changes to align the English language that many don't speak well nor deeply understand, with their personal predispositions. It is not only sad! It is outrageous! Attention that one directs to the changes impedes his or her attentiveness both to personal and communal prayer."
A married mother of five children was philosophical about the changes and said, "Change is change, never easy, but we have been preparing for these changes for quite some time now and week one went well!"
A married mother of eight grown children and in her late 70s said, "I like the translations but would like more time to understand them and because of the simplistic nature of the changes they should not have a major impact on the responder."
A friend in his late 40s said to me that given the preparation in advance of implementation of the changes, all went well. He pointed out that the celebrant used Preface I of Advent and Eucharistic Prayer I (Roman Canon). My friend said that he "paused to reflect and ponder God's 'serene and kindly countenance' as He looked upon our offerings after the Mystery of Faith. It's a beautiful idea, really, to imagine God's countenance. Leaving aside the question whether people know what a 'countenance' is, I guess."
A 70-something woman said to me that she likes the changes and said that she recalls some prayers from before Vatican II.
Another friend appreciates the changes because the process of change makes us re-think the prayers of the Mass.
"My first thoughts are favorable insofar as we are forced to rethink what we say and why we say it," said an active Catholic professional in his mid-50s. "Instead of 'going through the motions,' we need to re-address 'language' and that should make us think about what we are saying. Change is always tough and no one wants re-learn the Mass, yet the changes are somewhat small and manageable, nothing earth-shattering. On the whole, I would say, "It's fine".
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
A well-educated priest friend of mine is quite pleased with the changes and told me: "I find the new texts much more prayerful and poetic, leading me to a deeper reflection on the words. Hopefully, the seemingly endless debate around the new translation will not cause a loss of the season of Advent."
In Sunday's New York Times, Reverend Daniel Merz, associate director of the Secretariat of Divine Worship of United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the new translation had been widely discussed.
"I don't think there's ever been a document that's been so consulted in the history of the world," he said. He called the new text more poetic than the simple language used for the last 40 years.
"Over time, we have realized that there is a better way to pray," he said. "Not that the old way was bad, but we hope and believe that this new way is better."
Notwithstanding the questionable logic of the view that there is a "better way to pray," the words of the poet and critic Samuel Taylor Coleridge are worth remembering. According Coleridge, prose is "words in their best order," while poetry is "the best words in their best order."
One thing is for certain. There is no unanimity as to whether the new prayers have achieved good prose or good poetry, let alone good prayer.
An ecumenical opportunity was
An ecumenical opportunity was lost. Why weren'y scholars from other denominations invited to participate in the translation process? The English in the current Episcopal,Lutheran,and Presbyterian liturgical books puts the Roman Missal,3rd edition to shame.
The average Catholic has no
The average Catholic has no problem with the new translation. I assume because you are so unhappy wyhe new traanslation and so pleased with the translation of our Protestant bretheren that you are now attending one of their churches.
Amen!
Amen!
Please do not speak for the
Please do not speak for the average catholic.
Yes. "anonymous" I am really
Yes. "anonymous" I am really a Protestant. I say the Rosary and Chaplet of Divine Mercy every day. I pray the Divine Office and frequently the Stations of the Cross. I have even been known to do a Novena once in a while. Not bad for a Protestant.
In addition, I prefer Eastern
In addition, I prefer Eastern Liturgies and the Mass in Latin. Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli would really enjoy my company.
The answer to your question
The answer to your question is quite simple: Our (former) ecumenical partners tried to participate but were UN-INVITED quite purposely by the Vatican, so that the Vatican can now boast that our "Catholic" texts will no longer confuse the "faithful".
Through this action, our church has shown itself to be completely untrustworthy in ecumenical matters. It has unilaterally abrogated ecumenical agreements with a number of English-speaking Protestant and Anglican Churches to use common texts for certain portions of worship (e.g., Gloria, Credo, "And also with you".) This was done even though the present pope has spoken fairly recently of the desirability of common texts. (These texts have been used by -- besides us for 30+ years -- the Episcopalians, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and others.)
This is a clear violation of the Vatican Council II's document on Ecumenism. The fact that this violation was undertaken deliberately and with malice aforethought indicates exactly the motive for this entire liturgical charade: The undoing of Vatican II. It shows a complete lack of respect for the authority of an ecumenical council, and a lack of respect for the notion of the rule of law generally.
This is one reason why the current spate of press accounts about how well or poorly various congregations implemented the changes, is driving me crazy. This whole business is about power, abuse of power, and ecclesiology primarily; only secondarily does it have anything to do with liturgy.
Read John Wilkins' history of this whole debacle. The article appeared in Commonweal for Dec. 2, 2005 and is available on the internet. It is called "Lost in Translation". Wilkins is the respected former editor of the English Catholic periodical The Tablet.
Yes, the bad faith is
Yes, the bad faith is palpable. But what do you expect when the "holy father" is the former head enforcer, who at a stroke of the pen downgraded the churches which you mention to "ecclesial communities." Surely the One True is not liable to agreements made with such insignificant entities.
Rejoice ! the more the center wobbles like this, the closer we are to the utter unravelling of the triumphalist church apparatus and all its accoutrements.
"Those in favor of the
"Those in favor of the changes commonly use the term "poetic" in praising the new prayers."
This from people who do not read poetry.
And when they do, find it inscrutable, but like that . . .
Meanwhile I am waiting for my new copy of Rosenthal's "Running to Paradise: Yeats's Poetic Art" to come in the mail out to this far desert outpost in hopes this particular poetic art may become, even for me, less inscrutable, and that even my ancient knees might also Run to Paradise.
Poetry, to prove universally and profoundly evocative, like the yearnings of our own soul, often intentionally remains inscrutable, undefinable.
And so do these cheerleaders praise these forcibly imposed so-called "new prayers?"
Do they open to words the ineffable song of the heart, liberating the soul to our sight?
As does Mr. Yeats?
or remain stuck like an inscrutable rock?
I detect a
I detect a disconnect.
Poetic? Are you kidding? How is dry toast poetic? Consubstantial? How is this poetry exactly? Like the word "magisterium", "consubstantial" is a word most US Catholics could not explain if you paid them. (Even Paul Turner's booklet "Understanding the Revised Mass Texts, second edition, page 22 fails to approach what this means because it would take up too much space, I guess. He ends with "We don't use it -consubstantial - for anything else. But it is describing a very unusual thing - the nature of jesus Christ. He is not like anything or anyone else." Sounds like a second grade religion text book. Good try, but really? The Greek philosophical ideas that underpin how we express our faith and liturgy in the West need to be explained to people or we won't ever get it. So maybe there is a deeper challenge here anyway.
Just because Fr. Mertz says the new Roman Missal translation is poetry doesn't make it so. Wishful thinking, yes.
In time it will all become rote if each person does not enter into the liturgy for its own sake. Perhaps we need to help one another do this; if homilies were better prepared and delivered, maybe elements of the mass would come together for people. The homily can connect what is disconnected.
I don't think these changes are helpful, really. Language is important and these new words trap us in a way of thinking that actually supports 1) individualism and 2) patriarchy. And what was old has become new again. Why do we Catholics do this to ourselves?
In a nod to some Catholic publishers that may be dying on the vine, it seems like planned obsolescence by ICEL (egged on by the oral majority pressuring the USCCB and the Vatican) will inject new life into at least a few Catholic publishers, especially those who make those big, gorgeous red books. Oh! And all those royalties they will have to pay ICEL so ICEL can 1) administer the royalties 2) make sure all printed texts are in conformity with the approved original and 3) pay these translators that someone thinks are God's gift to the English speaking Catholic world.
Excellent revenue stream.
I loved "We believe" now its back to me, me, me.
But there's nothing to be said, is there? (I am not going to say "grievous", so sue me. Why do I resist? Because I have spent a lifetime trying to be a faithful disciple of Jesus in the Church. I hope I have not done anything grievous - and if I have and didn't realize it, it's not a sin anyway. The sinner "whales" as they say in Vegas, probably aren't in church anyway, and if they are will this language contribute to their transformation? Do they even know what "grievous" means? Most say "grieve-ee-us" anyway. Only God knows.)
I mean, why couldn't they leave the translation alone and help us delve into the meaning of the mass? Why did the powers that be not invest time and treasure to review the USCCB's PRO LIFE PLAN that is more than 10 years old and has not had a measurable effect at all in terms of the number of abortions? How about a Family Life plan so that spousal and child abuse can be addressed? Poverty? Education?
Sure, they explained the new words from the old, but any depth of understanding of the liturgy? Nope. They assumed that everyone attending mass realizes what's going on. Think again. Thank God they go, yes. Thank God for all those who participate in the liturgy.
For a while people will pay attention because they don't want to make a mistake but I hope the translation police will pay attention to the needs of their families and neighbors, that we can all live the liturgy in daily life. I think Jesus would like that most of all.
And throw in a little peace on earth while we are at it.
(There are always Eastern Rite parishes to go to, such as Melkite or Maronite; now that's poetry - and no conflict or bickering on blogs or splitting hairs about non essentials while ignoring what is essential: love of God and neighbor.)
Thanks for the opportunity to offer my perspective.
Fine comments Thinking. It
Fine comments Thinking. It is not poetic it is clumsy and awkward.
Question: In the creed, if Jesus is eternally "born" of the Father then he is not equal. So does this new Missal rehabilitate Arian?
The Liturgy of The Eucharist
The Liturgy of The Eucharist in American Episcopal Churches from the revised 1979 Prayer Book is really quite beautiful and most definitely a product of Catholic thinking and theology. It is hardly "Protestant" and it evolved over many years with active participation from lay and clerical bodies within their Church. It is really quite beautiful and mirrors all of the concepts that came from the Second Vatican Council. The Roman Missal that has been foisted on the Church by a right wing Pope will not survive. Sorry to disappoint those who think it is just swell. Most Roman Catholics I know have not only attended Mass at Anglican Churches, they have received Holy Communion their as well. It is the ecumenical love and understanding that makes this possible. The least thing I am concerned about as a Catholic is to have The Bishop of Rome's approval. They have not earned my respect.
Wow. With all the "comments"
Wow. With all the "comments" from parishioners in the article, I would pretty much thing this was written over 40 years ago during the implementation of the Pauline mass of post Vatican II!
The New Missal is about
The New Missal is about obedience. How obedient are the priests in implementing it? How obedient are the laity in mouthing the prayers? How importance is Obedience to a German Pope who was raised to raise his hand in salute to the Feuher? Once obedience has been established, what can we expect next? Who can be suspicious of changes in minor gestures and verbage? Why not get with the herd and be a follower? It is all about giving one human being what they want, and does it matter if the one human being who wants this is the Pope or the Feuher? After all, what is being asked is so minor, who cares? Would Jesus even care? Or, would he see it a another hypocritical method of straining knats. While everyone uses their brains to figure out the gestures and the words, what sufferings and persecutions don't we see right in our midst that Jesus in fact is asking us to care about? What true reforms in the corrupt church are we missing? I feel sorry for Catholics. "Jesus took pity on them, for they were sheep without shephards."
"We're trying to get into
"We're trying to get into heaven, not pass the SAT!"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/colberts-divine-judgment-_n_112...
The changes will not be
The changes will not be enough to cause people to leave or churches to close or bring an end to Catholicity as we know it. The core issues, however, are not the words per se, rather the process that was hijacked and the raison d'etre for the changes. By shifting the focus to the words and phrasing, the emphasis is removed from the process and the core issues. Whether those are of interest or concern now is moot and largely forgotten basically because, in my opinion, we have short memory spans, we are losing the foresight of history, and live in a Twitter culture. Some of the wording is awkward, not poetic. And as the creatures saw in Orwell's 'Animal Farm,' some of us are more equal than others.
There was also EXTREME
There was also EXTREME displeasure in many of the people of the Church when the Mass changed after the Second Vatican Council. What did we see? The changes eventually were accepted and the world moved on.
The same will be true here.
"The changes eventually were
"The changes eventually were accepted and the world moved on." What!? Pete, Pete - if you are honest (oops, I meant correct) we would not be in this state. The forces of retrenchement have been fighting and reediting history silently and not so silently since day one....
"Is the new missal good
"Is the new missal good prayer?" I guess the first step in answering would be to ask "what is prayer". For my money, there is no prayer outside of the personal acknowlegement that one is in the presence of God. In my simple perspective, I think that is the essence of prayer. Words and actions within that consciousness and appropriate to it are brought into that prayer, shape it, direct it, becomes the language, the dialogue of prayer.
In principle then, I would think that the new translation could assist in prayer. Being more stylistic, antiquarian and "foreign" to our "vulgar" (common) life language and actions the new missal and increasing re-formalization of ritual can be an assist to prayer. They tend to take us out of our usual and its distractions.
But, Gallagher asks, are they "good prayer". Well, for one thing, the more formal,obscure and structured the less children are welcome - they make noise, they distract, they act like, well like....children. And then there are things like "consubstantial" and "under my roof". Words "send me"; words like these perk my imagination and I giggle (silently, of course) with what forms in my mind, like inviting a scientist to go camping. Then there's "And with your spirit". One really doesn't usually begin a sentence with a conjunction,and I imagine the object of my good wishes as a ghostely being, ontologically superior hovering over the "man" and the Isaac Asimov's "Foundation Trilogy" comes to mind and I know I must reread....
I snap awake and recall that I am in the presence of God and catch myself wondering why, if this is a return to my old "Roman Missal" thingy why did the powers that be keep that concession to ecumanism, you know "...for you are the kingdom, the power..." when it isn't in my "seenteenth edition, revised and brought up to date..." side-by-each latin english? Then, then, I think about what is really behind all this translation, how it was done, why, and where it is heading....
Is it good prayer? Not for me, not by a long, long shot. Ite missa est.
Of Mindless Missals,
Of Mindless Missals, Christmas Chaos, and Trampling Courts
With the "advent" of the New Missal, I couldn't help but notice the blatant irony of Messing With The Mass and Liturgical minutae; while at the same time we are immersing ourselves in the readings of the prophet Isaiah - a prophet who so virulently attacked empty ritual and excessive sacrifices - who asked that the zealous priests rend their hearts and not their foreskins. At one of my favorite and most "holy" times of the year, we are mired in "dumb and dumber" directives from the hierarchy; a clerical hierarchy who might take time this season to mull over some of the following verses from Isaish:
"What need have I of all your sacrifices?"
I am sated with burnt offerings...
Trample my courts no more
Bringing oblations is futile
They are become a burden to me
I will turn My eyes away from you;
Though you pray at length,
I will not listen." Isaiah 1:11-16
Listen up Church
Sincerely,
Rick Folker, MASM
Kansas City, MO
First, the words, now the
First, the words, now the gestures:
http://www.ucanews.com/2011/12/02/kneel-stand-hold-hands-bishop-aims-to-...
http://home.catholicweb.com/covingtondiocese/files/decree.pdf
The Panzer-Pope and his minions are winning the liturgy wars! And have they got PLANS for future world domination:
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/#367249884124725975
The Missal violates
The Missal violates liturgical ethics by deliberately constructing prayer texts in such a way as to require Catholics in the pews to humiliate and shame themselves before God.
This is not healthy prayer, unless of course you have committed a horrific sin that particular week.
I have read many comments
I have read many comments about the new missal. I don't think a lengthy period of preparation was the right approach. After all, spoiled food still tastes bad on the palate regardless of the preparation involved. And so the New Roman Missal 3rd etition. It is faithful to the Latin Typical Edition in Rome, fine, then keep it there. We are not in Rome and our culture and traditions are not Roman. We don't speak or read Latin and most importantly we don't pray in Latin. Vatican II taught us the importance and intrinsic value of each culture. Now we are told our worship is acceptable only if it is in the words of the Roman culture. This sounds medieval. We rarely use poetry either except for the Psalms and the new missal can hardly compare with the Psalms. The whole thing is just too flowery and feminine, foppish and in some instances embarassing, such as in Eucharistic prayer II the phrase ..."like the dew". I blush every time I read it. How stupid it sounds!. I could go on but let it suffice to say that I speak for many who are as frustrated as I and (we) don't think time will heal it.
I am a priest, and I feel the
I am a priest, and I feel the new missal suffers from several deficiencies. First, as many have already noted, the English of the new translation does not flow well. Its cadence and rhythm leave much to be desired. If I had produced English translations of Latin similar to those found in the new missal back in my seminary days, the professor would have failed me. I say this from the perspective that a translation should reflect the manner in which people actually use the language. A literal translation may be accurate and understandable, but that does make for good English. Second, and more serious in my opinion, is the lack of accessibility of the new missal. I am pastor of poor parish where most of the members are not well educated. While most have graduated from high school, they tell me that they have never encountered many of the words in the new missal. Also, I have a large percentage of native Spanish speakers in my parish. They want to start attending English Masses, and I am anxious to have them do so as well. This trend is especially true among the children of immigrants. However, as they learn English on the conversational level, they lack the vocabulary to understand the new translation. I have even heard this comment from foreign born priests working in the United States. I fear the new translation will alienate our immigrants. And immigrants represent the future of the Church in the United States. Do we really want them to perceive the English liturgy as inaccessible?
Post new comment