Sede Vacante and the Liturgy

[johnquinn39]

Has the Liturgy itself entered a period of the above?

[musicus]

Fixed your Latin.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sede_vacante

[musicus]

To which vacant episcopal (or papal) seats are you referring? Habemus papam, so it's not that (unless one is a sedevacantist). Then again, we are a goodly number of bishops short of a conference, both in England and Wales, as well as elsewhere...

[JW]

I have to say that I don't think the English church is going backwards liturgically. I know this is sweeping, but so is the title of this post. For every step backwards we have at least 2 steps forwards. As has been enjoined recently on the hierarchy, bishops are not primarily managers. It could be argued that there are more than necessary in England and Wales for the numbers of laity anyway.

We now have a poor translation of the Mass but it has encouraged people to think again about what happens at Mass. I can't see this translation remaining in place as long as the last one did. For example, inclusive language has disappeared from parts of the Mass, but both the hymnals approved for use in England & Wales have had their hymns altered to be inclusive.

The permission to use the Tridentine rite and the Ordinariate rite allow the Church to embrace (a few) more people, who wish to worship in a more traditional way, and so the Church is enriched. However, there is little sign of these rites being taken up by the vast majority of parishes and it seems clear that the vast majority of the laity remaining in the Church have no intention of returning to pre-1960's liturgies.

I think the church has come a long way from the Masses of the 1970's (Michael row your boat ashore, anyone?). There are far more serious issues than Liturgy that demand to be addressed by the Church - and I do not share the sudden apparent optimism at the change of Pope: an emphasis on the poor, while completely laudable, will not solve our problems. Many other elephants in the room need to be acknowledged and dealt with.

[gwyn]

I think the current translation is beautiful. God of power and might? What was that all about? And from where?

[Nick Baty]

I think the current translation is beautiful.

While I manage to listen, I understand very little of it. After a while a just nod off.

God of power and might? What was that all about?

A depiction of God in glory and majesty. I have no idea what "hosts" means.

[musicus]

I think the current translation is beautiful.

Hmm. But is it English? When has "merit to ..." EVER been English?

Details aside, the new "translation" certainly isn't vernacular - capable of being understood by ordinary people - as Sacrosanctum Concilium intended. I know quite a few highly educated priests who regularly stumble over it. Sunday by Sunday, the readings put it to shame.

The German hierarchy has got the right idea. Is it too late for ours to grow a backbone and give us a noble, simple and correct English vernacular translation?

[johnquinn39]

Okay, what I am saying is that there is a vacancy in liturgical matters.

Highly competent liturgists / composers have been silenced and replaced by latin mass enthusiasts who clearly have a very limited knowledge or interest in the musical tradition of the church.

[moderated]

Loud - mouthed literalists have set the agenda, and forced their worthless silly translation on the People of God.

[johnquinn39]

FAO Gwyn


http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com ... criptures/

[gwyn]

I didn't for a moment suggest that it might be perfect, but it has a beauty. The Confiteor is a more true rendering of its Latin original, "And with your spirit" knocks "And with you as well" (or whatever it was) into a cocked hat.

I'd like to see the Old Trad Mass and the new one brought together into one Latin/English Mass (which could be celebrated in either language) retaining the best aspects of each. The prayers at the foot of the altar in the Trad Mass are beautiful and now sadly denied us.

[johnquinn39]

I didn't for a moment suggest that it might be perfect, but it has a beauty. The Confiteor is a more true rendering of its Latin original, "And with your spirit" knocks "And with you as well" (or whatever it was) into a cocked hat.

I'd like to see the Old Trad Mass and the new one brought together into one Latin/English Mass (which could be celebrated in either language) retaining the best aspects of each. The prayers at the foot of the altar in the Trad Mass are beautiful and now sadly denied us.

The current confiteor is silly grovelling rubbish. 'And with your spirit' is meaningless. Latin is a language no-one understands.

[johnquinn39]

FAO Gwyn

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

[gwyn]

I don't see how something that was held holy for centuries, whether in English or Latin, can overnight become grovelling rubbish. That is an unfortunate statement.

If you seek an example of real liturgical grovelling, look no further than the Anglican confession for Morning and Evening Prayer in the 1662 BCP.

[Nick Baty]

And there you make a good point, Gwyn. It's "liturgical grovelling" when heard with 21st century ears. It was probably great in 1662.

I don't think anyone is saying anything is rubbish. But, just because it is English, doesn't mean it's a language we understand.

[JW]

I'll shut up after this post:

Tomorrow's prayer over the Offerings:
Latin:
"Deus, qui humani generis utramque substantiam praesentium munerum et alimento vegetas et renovas sacramento, tribue quaesumus, ut eorum et corporibus nostris subsidium non desit et mentibus."

English: "O God, who in the offerings presented here provide for the twofold needs of human nature, nourishing us with food and renewing us with your Sacrament, grant, we pray, that the sustenance they provide may not fail us in body or in spirit."

Any priest who has not prepared this carefully beforehand may well stumble. Whether or not even 50% of the congregation will understand it has to be a matter for debate. Languages do not translate directly, especially Latin. The language, both Latin and English, harks back to an era when only the educated were expected to understand the Mass. Everyone else had to pay up and shut up (i.e. put a coin in the collection and say their prayers in silence). Surely we have moved on?

The skilful translator is also an interpreter, teasing out the meaning of the words and presenting them in an English that is intelligible, whilst maintaining the literary style of the original.

This is accepted by the translators of the Roman Missal in places, for example in the Confiteor: 'Peccavi nimis' is 'greatly sinned' instead of "sinned too much" or "sinned exceedingly" ; "maxima culpa" is translated as "most grievous fault" instead of "greatest fault"; "omission" is translated as "what I have failed to do" instead of 'omission'. Whether or not it is necessary for a modern English translation to follow the Latin triple repetition of sin is debatable and is presumably part of the reason for accusations that it is "grovelling." That the Confiteor translation may be better than some of the others could, of course, be because, as with all the Peoples' parts, it was heavily influenced by the former translation.

By the way, the Latin confiteor has changed from the Tridentine version which does not mention sins of omission. It also omits the old references to Peter and Paul and the grovelling reference "et tibi pater". Most would agree that these are improvements: it's an example of the Mass developing with time. And I won't mention (yes I will!) the Eucharistic Prayer's 'pro multis' when the Pope is emphasising that everyone is redeemed - I wonder when he will have the courage of his convictions!

While on the Eucharistic Prayer, if the church didn't adapt the Mass over the centuries, we would only be using EP1.