What if we just said, 'wait'

[presbyter]

No one seems to have mentioned those who are objecting to the translation on the grounds that in style it is:

1. stilted, awkward and even contrived

or

2, effete, affected and precious

or

3. all of the above.

or

4. that for those in the pew (and celebrants?), some of it might seem abstruse, perhaps to the point of being recondite.

Are we really getting a "flowing vernacular text suitable to the rhythm of popular prayer"?

Liturgiam Authenticam 20

20. The Latin liturgical texts of the Roman Rite, while drawing on centuries of ecclesial experience in transmitting the faith of the Church received from the Fathers, are themselves the fruit of the liturgical renewal, just recently brought forth. In order that such a rich patrimony may be preserved and passed on through the centuries, it is to be kept in mind from the beginning that the translation of the liturgical texts of the Roman Liturgy is not so much a work of creative innovation as it is of rendering the original texts faithfully and accurately into the vernacular language. While it is permissible to arrange the wording, the syntax and the style in such a way as to prepare a flowing vernacular text suitable to the rhythm of popular prayer, the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet.[20]

[from the pews]

I''m a bit confused by Northern Tenor's statement that there is a theological difference between 'And also with you' and 'And with your spirit.' Why? What's it got to do with Chrysostom? I'm even more confused by the reference to the laicised priest - unless it's an ad hominem comment?

[contrabordun]

No one seems to have mentioned those who are objecting to the translation on the grounds that in style it is:[...]

Well no. Possibly because it's much easier to put up a straw man objection and demolish that, than to address the actual weaknesses of what we are about to receive.

[presbyter]

I''m a bit confused by Northern Tenor's statement that there is a theological difference between 'And also with you' and 'And with your spirit.' Why? What's it got to do with Chrysostom?

I think mcb has already posted explanatory links in a previous thread. However, Jungmann seems to be getting some adverse comments in other forums, so I'll go and look up the two footnotes he made that seem to be causing controversy and I'll try to find the particular Chrysostom Homily to which he adverts. Not this very instant though!

[presbyter]

By the way - I do disagree with those who would relegate the "Dominus vobiscum...." dialogue to a merely phatic function. It's much more than a snippet of social interaction and in the liturgy, "et cum spiritu tuo" has always been used in addressing someone who is ordained.

[mcb]

I think mcb has already posted explanatory links in a previous thread.

This one.

[from the pews]

Thank you - it's great to feel confident your questions will be answered. Am I right in thinking that 'et cum spiritu tuo' is a literal translation of a Semittic phrase which presumably the Latin speaking Christians found bemusing until Chrysostom gave it a theological gloss? If so, when I'm repeating the phrase 'And with your spirit', I shall take comfort in the fact that I am part of a long tradition of bewildered laity.

[Reginald]

Contrabordun: Am I really the only person to have heard objections to the 'obsequious tone' of the translations? The irony being that since the collects, for example, are couched in courtly language with its associated deference one would rather expect the translations to reflect the same. I had a post removed once for naming a name so I'll avoid doing that here, I am however happy to assert that there are prominent persons who are reluctant to use EP I and have stated privately that they will use it even more rarely if they are required to say such phrases as "this pure victim, this holy victim, this spotless victim".

Perhaps I'm missing something here but the new translations are coming - and no amount of grassroots resistance will change that. What service do we do to the people we serve if we promote rebellion against our bishops and the Holy Father? Isn't that what the petition is about? Perhaps those of you who deal with adults are comfortable with that, but school teachers need to be thinking about millstones! The plain fact is that sometimes we are called to obedience. From the moment that Jesus decided against a secret ballot to decide who would be the Rock we've known that the Church is not a democracy - and from the moment that the ink dried on John 21 it's been part of our brief to have our belts fastened around us by other people and to be led where we would rather not go. I know that my 'obey the speed limits' mentality irritates some people, but it genuinely is how I see the world.

I haven't tried to assert that the new translations are perfect, but I honestly believe that they are an improvement on what we have at the moment. I expect to see a few more attempts at a perfect translation before I go to meet my maker and I'll greet them as warmly when they come along. I resent the implication that I would rather eliminate the vernacular from the life of the Church, not least because it has brought many blessings to me and those I love. That's not to say that I don't go out of my way to get a Novus Ordo Latin fix from time to time - but why should I feel the need to apologize for it? As I said before, ICEL 1 was not intended to be the definitive translation and I sincerely believe that it has significant defects. The Gregorian Missal is available online and any member of the Forum could quickly check the fidelity of the existing translation against its Latin original - never mind the ordinary of the Mass look at the Collects.

[presbyter]

Here's Jungmann - Volume 1 page 363

"Both the greeting and reply are ancient................ Et cum spiritu tuo, a formula which betrays its Hebrew origin and has many parallels in St Paul. (references supplied) We render its full meaning by saying simply, "And with you too."

And the footnote:

This is a Semitism: Spiritus tuus = your person = you. Still it is to be remarked that even Chrysostom (in II Tim hom, 10,3) had already referred to "thy spirit" to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In fact, in his first Whitsun sermon (n 4) he sees the word "spirit" in this counter-greeting an allusion to the fact that the bishop performs the sacrifice in the power of the Holy Spirit. That is the reason the Dominus vobiscum was even at an early age restricted to those with major orders, bishops, priests and deacons, and not given to subdeacons who were numbered among the highest orders only since the 13th century.

Presumably our current ICEL "and also with you" is a piece of dynamic equivalence based on Jungmann's scholarly insights.

St John Chrysostom on 2 Tim 4:22

Ver. 22. The Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.

There can be no better prayer than this. Grieve not for my departure. The Lord will be with you. And he says, not with you, but with your spirit. Thus there is a twofold assistance, the grace of the Spirit, and God helping it. And otherwise God will not be with us, if we have not spiritual grace. For if we be deserted by grace, how shall He be with us?

Grace be with us. Amen.

I have yet to find an online edition of the Pentecost Sermon (unless you want the Greek text)

[contrabordun]

I resent the implication that I would rather eliminate the vernacular from the life of the Church

I didn't mean you personally, and I apologise if my post suggested I did. Per my response to NT, I was referring to the fact that there are good and bad arguments on both sides of this debate. I suggest that little light, and much heat will be generated by dwelling on the bad ones. There are good and valid objections to this translation (see presbyter's posts): address them before looking for hidden agendas.

[presbyter]

St John Chrysostom

The only online editions of the Pentecost Sermon I can find are scanned pages in Greek or Latin. Sorry.

[presbyter]

Ah! I find the relevant passage quoted in "A Contemporary Catholic Systematic Theology" - Michael Glazier. p 227f

John Chrysostom Pentecost Homily :

"If the Holy Spirit were not present, there would be no pastors and teachers in the Church, since they come about through the Spirit, as Paul also says, 'in which the Holy Spirit has made you pastors and overseers' (cf Acts 20:28). Do you see how this too comes about through the Spirit? If the Holy Spirit were not present in our common Father and Teacher, you would not, when he came up into this sanctuary a moment ago and gave you all the greeting of peace, have exclaimed to him together 'And with your Spirit'. That is why you exclaim those words to him, not only when he goes up into the sanctuary, or when he addresses you, or when he prays on your behalf, but especially when he has taken his place at this holy table, whenever he is about to offer this dread sacrifice. Those who have been initiated understand what I am saying. He does not touch the gifts until he has first wished you the peace that comes from the Lord and you have exclaimed to him: 'And with your Spirit'. With that reply you remind yourselves that he who stands there does nothing, and that the gifts that lie on the altar are not the achievements of human nature. Rather, the grace of the Holy Spirit, which is present and descends upon us all, fashions that mystical offering. For while the one who stands there is a human being, God is the one who works through him. Hence, do not attend to the nature of the one you see but regard the grace that is unseen. What is going on up here in this sanctuary is not human at all. If the Spirit were not present, the Church would not hold; but if the Church does hold, it is plain that the Spirit is present."

I hope that helps you, from the pews .

[presbyter]

There are good and valid objections to this translation (see presbyter's posts)

But in my case, "And with your Spirit" is not one of them.

By the way Dominus vobiscum - The Lord be with you....... is a product of the translation of a certain Thomas Cranmer.

[presbyter]

By the way - I do disagree with those who would relegate the "Dominus vobiscum...." dialogue to a merely phatic function...........

Off topic but please indulge my curiosity. As the sands of time have flowed over the last few centuries, "God be with you" has contracted to "Goodbye" and even " 'bye!". Does anyone know how the recipient of the original farewell should have responded?

[contrabordun]

There are good and valid objections to this translation (see presbyter's posts)

But in my case, "And with your Spirit" is not one of them.

Mine neither, as it happens. It was the one NT picked: I was just continuing a general principles discussion using his specific example.