'Slavishly literal' translation of missal criticized

Perhaps they should have a good, old-fashioned grammar-teaching NUN help them with their grammar. 8)

Seriously, is making the faith incomprehensible to all but Latin scholars really the solution for bringing people back to the church? You can't think critically about sentences that are incomprehensible--or maybe that was the point. The Vatican wants us all so busy memorizing that we don't have time to argue.

Or, it could simply be a matter of incompetence.

Either way, it's discouraging.

I was sad I had to miss the lecture because I had a class at the time (a good class, but I wanted to go to the lecture). While I am in no way supportive of Bishop Trautman's position, I did want to hear it.

I am a big fan of wonder and awe, and I believe that this new translation will far better provide that for us, as well as provide a great number of teachable moments as the more technical language is used. Accessibility is important, but our laity are intelligent and they are very capable of learning. Accuracy is also important since lex orandi lex credendi. I think, though it is different than what is familiar, the new translation is ultimately both accessible and accurate for teaching and expressing the Faith.

I admit there are a few spots that seem a bit awkward, but I believe proper phrasing will greatly help that. I.e. if one proclaims the prayers with the present cadence for the same prayers (e.g. the Confiteor), it sounds off, but if one reads with a different cadence and pauses at different places, it sounds just fine.

"And with your ghost." This is the really effectual and literal translation of Et cum spiritu tuo .

I commend it to the translators - it is not slavishly literal, un like the bulk of their contorted "lit-speak".

Who translated the new text? What committee, in what country?

I totally agree with Bishop Trautman. Poor grammar is no substitute for translation.

Kudos to Bishop Trautman for defending the English liturgy from an infusion of sacred boilerplate.

Judging by his reported comments, its clear to me at least why Bishop Trautman tenure was so unsuccesful and he is a "former". As for reference to the word "slave". One ought to read the works of St Paul, perhaps come to a clearer understanding of true spiritual meaning of the word in Holy Scripture. One would be edified... Alleluia!

Bravo Bishop Trautman! It seems that the new text will be taking a step backward in the attempt to attain the Vatican II Council's call for full, conscious and active participation in the liturgy. If everyone is trying to figure out the words, how will they be able to activily participate? Maybe there could be a new St Joseph's Missal developed for the people that has the old text on one side and the new on the other so we can translate what is being said. It could be designed just like it was before Vatican II when once side of the prayerbook was Latin and the other was English :)

Are the other bishops listening? These considerations need to be understood and addressed.

Lex credendi, lex orandi...control the language and you control thoughts & actions...this is all a power struggle of the hierarchy controlling the poor little "pray, pay, & obey" peasants.

Well, we're not having it...we're educated people and we realize that translating a translation literally word for word actually negates the real meaning of any passage.

Rome seems to continually fear the movement of the Spirit...perhaps they should lock themselves in an upper room and throw away the key.

Bishop Trautman must be applauded for his outspokenness. We lay people can only hope that many more bishops (perhaps all of them?) in the English-speaking countries follow suit.

I agree. I wish Bishop Trautman had been on the translating committee. Was he left out because he was too plain-spoken? Some of St. Paul's complex sentences could have better been changed to two or more simpler ones, in my view.

I'm glad someone is speaking out. Let's face it, this is all about power. These bishops have no power over us in the bedroom or the polling booth so now they want to have power over the way we pray. As if there are not enough empty churches, they want to empty more.

Hurray for Bishop Trautman, who has courageously continued to speak up about the "emperor's new clothes." Would that more bishops have his courage and faith to stand up to the bullies at the Vatican who push for their own agenda in a show of power. Jesus asked us to spread the good news to everyone. How can we do that by speaking in incomprehensible and elitist language that only serves to divide? There is no good reason to literally translate the Latin to an esoterical English that no one can understand.

Thank you, thank you, Bishop Trautman. There is a big difference between "kind admittance" granted by a rule keeper and a "welcome" given by one who has eagerly awaited your arrival.

If Church leaders are not interested in making the mass understandable and inspiring, what hope is there for the future of our church?

thanks Trautman. Keep at it. You reflect the mind of the people.

Thank you, Bishop Trautman, for making your excellent points. We Americans are proud to be a simple people, and I'm especially happy that he's seen fit to even include Americans that use English as a second language. I give thanks for his clear-eyed view of our society and for his deliberate inclusion!

GIVE 'EM HELL IN NOVEMBER BISHOP! Bravo Bishop Trautman! Thank you for also pointing out that much of the "reform of the reform" baloney doesn't quite square with the written/documented Constitution on Sacred Liturgy.

Poor Bishop Trautperson. He is going to go down fighting, isn't he? After all, what has he got to lose? He is 2 years away from retirement, so he and some of the other aging last bastions of progressivism are tooting their horns in a vain attempt to keep things from changing. The irony of these folks is that they are now the reactionaries of change, just as so many bewildered Catholics were labeled during the changes that were erroneously "inspired" by Vatican II. What goes around, comes around.

What a pity! My weekday missal, which has done valiant service since 1977, is now distinctly shabby. And the Table of Movable Feasts ran out in 1999. I was hoping that the new version would replace it in time to give me at least a few years before I popped my clogs. Looks as if I'll have to hold on to the old one after all.

The "slavishly literal" translation of the Latin to which Bishop Trautman objects is valid when one only considers "pastoral" needs. There is another issue, however, that makes me more sympathetic: more people in the world speak and understand English than Latin and, therefore, use English as the basis of translation of Mass texts into their own languages.

If we produce translations that, in the English speaking world, are more beautiful, even appropriate, for those who speak English, we make accurate translations of liturgical texts more difficult for others. I know we can say "So what? That's not our problem." but you have to concede that a translation that is "slavishly literal" from the Latin does help others who have no training in Latin.

I'm not particularly worried about English words that people don't use in everyday speech. If someone doesn't understand "ineffable" or "consubstantial," that's an occasion for catechesis. How many, NOW, can give an accounting of the meaning of "God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, Begotten, Not Made, One in Being with the Father"??? "Begotten" isn't a very common word, either, and we've survived.

And isn't "Credo" properly translated "I believe"? I thought we were translating the "approved Latin text of the Mass," not the Creed as produced by the Nicene Council.

Thank you, Bishop Trautman! We don't want to have dictionaries in our seats along with the hymnals.

Hooray for Bishop Trautman! I trust he will say the same and more to his brother bishops during the November USCCB meeting.

I have browsed through the proposed translations of the Eucharistic prayers. . Wouldn't you all agree that "dewfall" is most assuredly a word used commonly by everyone. . .from pre-schoolers to Alzheimers patients? It appears in the words of amnesis/institution in Eucharist Prayer II "Let your Spirit come like dewfall. . ."! Not only meaningless but also biologically incorrect. "Dew" does not fall on vegetation; it emanates from within the plant because of cooler air meeting the warmer leaves/grass. . whatever.

One could go on with the "vouchsafe we beseech Thee", "August presence" [what about the other eleven months!?], "gibbet of the cross". . Huh? Whatsa gibbet? and so on and on.

If that mishmash is approved I predict the self-styled purists will have a fit as we commoners simply revert to Americanese words we are already so used to. "Oh, look! those Vatican II priests are practicing aberrations!"

Bishops, let's get real and stop the silly nonsense euphemistically called "reform of the reform". No wonder people walk away. Often that is really a healthy self-preservation!

For the non-Catholic, this dialogue is interesting in that we do not always know exactly what is being described. Bishop Trautman's words and thoughts are helpful. Understand that we recognize that all Western religious denominations are heavily influenced by what Catholics say and do. As an American, some 25% of all churched imdividuals are Catholic in their practice or leaning.

Right on, Bishop Trautman! The present translation "isn't broken," and so does NOT need the major repair being proposed. In my 42 years of proclaiming the word of God, I've never found anyone confused by the present texts. Rather, they are inspired by them. We need not return to "heaven's phone number -- et cum spiri 220" from the old Tridentine liturgy. There are so many other really important things our bishops need to do!

He acknowledged that "there are those who disagree with the way the liturgical reform of Vatican II was interpreted and implemented" and who maintained that "a reform of the reform" was necessary to stem what they saw as "diminishing religiosity [and] declining Mass attendance" tied to the Mass texts.

I certainly don't agree with this statement. Declining Mass attendance has nothing to do with the mass text. It has to do with the disdain that many of the clergy have for the laity. It has to do with the fact that the church has become irrelevant and refuses to bring itself into the 21st century. It has to do with the fact that the church has meddled in politics and have become only one sided in its thinking. There are many more reasons that many catholics have quit going to mass, but they have nothing to do with the mass text unless you are one of the latin rite catholics who have always dislked Vatican II. The new text sounds like the church's way of excluding the people once again and eventually it will be only Latin, back to the people type of liturgy. If this happens, I hope we have an uprising and even separate churches if necssary.

Amen. But how may years too late to have the too few bishops stand up for the people of God.

it is not only difficult for the average lay person it is also (or will be) difficult for the average priest. I hope the Bishop can influence a more pastoral translation.
One wonders if we are heading back into prior era of reality.

Bishop Trautman is absolutely correct about the English language problems in the new Roman Missal. I wish more U.S. bishops agreed with him. Unfortunately, I'm afraid, he is also a voice crying out in the wilderness, a prophet ahead of his time.

Thank you, Bishop Trautman, for injecting common sense and a pastoral approach to this issue.

Bless you for your Wisdom and Pastoral Concern for those of us who desire a simple expression of our deep faith. We do NOT need the squabbles of linquists and liturgists who have lost touch with the deep faith of the faithful while trying to achieve control and presteige for themselves.

Thank you, Bishop Trautman. I do hope your words resonate loudly and clearly to those who wish to take the Church away from the reforms of Vatican II and People of God.

You are a most articulate and advocate for us.

Interesting!

Good for Bishop Trautman. It's about time someone in the US hierarchy stood up to the men in Rome. Now we must call on the Bishops, in their November meeting, to reject the translation and continue with what we have become accustomed to over the last 40 years.

Thank you Bishop Trautman for speaking out about this arcane translation soon to be imposed on American Catholics. Who decided that for millions of American Catholics we should make these unwelcome translations? The sheep are not as dumb as we used to be, and we expect a voice in decision-making. Perhaps there is time for the American Church to oppose any translation before millions of dollars are spent on new liturgical books, hymnals, revisions, and a plethora of verbose instructional/indoctrination/persuasion programs. When and if the new translations are mandated and published, I will stand silent when the new prayers and responses are to be spoken. The next step will be absence from liturgy. American Bishops, speak to Rome in behalf of your people. Don't be satisfied with being Vatican "flunkies."

Thank God there is a Bishop to speak on behalf of the People of God! Thank you, Bishop Trautman! Praise God, you are concerned with "...a translation of the missal that is accurate, inspiring, referent, proclaimable, understandable, pastoral in every sense -- a text that raises our minds and hearts to God." May your courage, pastoral leadership and liturgical critique be heard and positively responded to by your brother Bishops.

Wonderful article. Bishop Trautman, you are right on the mark. I wish you were OUR archbishop.

I'm very glad a bishop is speaking up about this issue. I dread when we ask the Lord to be with the celebrant's spirit.....what about the rest of him/her?

Those who feel "sacred language" is important have the option of the Latin Liturgy. If that helps them be closer to God, Deo Gratias.
But for many of us,this new 'translation' will not lead us closer to God because it disrespects us and our language. PLEASE let the rest of us celebrate liturgy in a manner grow closer to God.

Joe

The concerns of Trautman and othrs about translation of some parts of the new Missal are interesting. Many priests are reasonably happy with the collect and eucharistic prayers that we presently use. Why change at all to the new? For example, who wants to recite the retranslated first eucharistic prayer that contains one sentence 108 words long?
We need to take inspiration from the Lefebrites who were finally rewwarded by their persistence in sticking to the latin Roman rite that they so dearly loved.
Is there any real need for this new missal at all? There does not appear to be any agitation from parish communities to revise what exists. Why not dump the project altogether?