FYI.
Deacon Robert

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=54532

New English translation of Missal is complete

Nov. 2, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) has completed a draft of its English translation of the Roman Missal.

The ICEL draft, which was unveiled on November 1, will now be submitted to the bishops' conferences of the English-speaking world. Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds, England, explained that ICEL will solicit comments on the draft, make appropriate changes, and hopes to complete the English translation by the end of 2008.

The ICEL draft is a translation of the Latin that appears in the 3rd edition of the Roman Missal. That official Latin version was released in 2002.

The process of translating the Roman Missal into English has been complicated by lively debates about the principles of liturgical language-- a debate that prompted the Vatican to set up a new committee to join in the consultations. The Vox Clara committee, chaired by Cardinal George Pell of Sydney Australia. In March 2004, the Vox Clara committee welcomed a new translation, which provided a more accurate rendering of the Latin original.

Among the most notable changes proposed in the new translation are:

The Creed begins with "I believe," rather than "We believe"-- in a simple and accurate translation of the Latin " Credo ."
When the priest says to the congregation, "The Lord be with you," the response is now: "And with your spirit"-- again, a faithful translation of the Latin " Et cum spiritu tuo. "
The use of "inclusive language" is generally avoided, so that masculine pronouns are more broadly used-- especially in cases where the pronoun might refer to Jesus or to God.
The latest draft is being submitted by ICEL for comments by the Vatican and by the 11 episcopal conferences represented in ICEL, which includes the bishops of Australia, Canada, England and Wales, India, Ireland, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, Scotland, South Africa, and the US.

It mat be generally avoided but it is not completely avoided:

Changes
The following will be the most obvious changes to the lay people's responses when the revised Missal finally becomes available:

* 'And with your spirit' instead of 'And also with you';

* 'through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault' as well as 'and you my brothers and sisters' instead of 'and you here present' in the Confiteor;

* 'peace on earth to people of good will' instead of 'peace to his people on earth' and 'Only-begotten Son' for 'Only Son of the Father' in the Gloria;

* In the Nicene Creed, 'I believe' instead of 'We believe', 'all things visible and invisible' for 'seen and unseen', 'by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary' instead of 'born of' and 'for us and our salvation', with 'men' deleted;

* 'Pray, brothers and sisters, that the sacrifice which is mine and yours [not our], may be acceptable';

* 'We proclaim your death, O Lord, and profess your resurrection until you come in glory' instead of 'Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again';

* 'Behold the Lamb of God ... Blessed are those called to the banquet of the Lamb ... Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word, and my soul shall be healed'.

These are just a few examples of the many improvements that will be found in the revised Missal. Apart from being more accurate translations from the Latin originals, while allowing for reasonable fluency, the wordings are also far more in keeping with the sacred mysteries being celebrated in the Mass than the often dumbed down language presently in use.

http://www.ad2000.com.au/articles/2007/jun2007p3_2551.html

The Lectionary text will be taken from the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version), corrected according to the Latin of the New Vulgate. An International Commission for that work has now been set up, with Melbourne auxiliary Bishop Mark Coleridge playing a prominent role. The NRSV translation (like its predecessor the RSV) is generally superior to that of the Jerusalem Bible being presently used in Masses (with its “happy” preferred to “blessed”).

While the NRSV contains some questionable use of inclusive language, this is to be carfully monitored in terms of doctrinal precision.

http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/liturgy/new_mass.shtml

I believe that what pertains to the "Ordinary" of the Mass will be applicable in English worldwide.

The Lectionary, however, varies from country to country. In the USA, the NAB -- the copyright being owned by the USCCB -- will continue to be used, as I understand it.

I am thrilled that this new translation will replace the present one. One thing I dont understand about this article is that the USCCB already approved a translation last year and is waiting for Vatican approval. Why is ICEL just now coming out with an international version? This whole process is very muddy to me. Anybody know?

Fr. J.

Father J.,

I think that last year's vote by USCCB was the last Episcopal Conference of English-speakers signing on to the ICEL reformed language. They did that with their own suggestions for "improvement" and requests for exceptions. I think the process thereafter was to be:

a) ICEL reviews all suggestions from Bishop Conferences, incorporating into new texts where appropriate, then issues their final version (which is, I think, what this article is reporting);
b) The Congregation gets this, reviews, and makes any changes it deems appropriate;
c) Pope signs off;
d) Translation is promulgated;
e) Bishops conferences decide on implementation date.

At least, that's my understanding.

Best regard,
Michael

It looks like Rome is loosing the fight for the heart and soul of the Church. Pope Benedict XVI calls the church to embrace Holy Tradition. The reformers call us to embrace the Modern World. The reformers are winning. Doubly sad for us Byzantine Catholics as our bishops embrace the Modern World and encourage those who seek faithfulness to Tradition to go away.

Unfortunately, "horizontal inclusive language" is becoming an aspect of ordinary English; even one of our moderators just used it in referring to members of this list. Does that make him a radical feminist?

Jeff

Profanity has as well.

But not on this website, nor by the moderators (that I've seen). The argument has been made that this is an accepted pattern of speech nowadays, even in formal situations, and not necessarily one that should startle, offend or dismay; the fact that it does get used here by regular posters provides some evidence in favor of that argument.

Jeff

Jeff,

That, or perhaps the return to teaching English using actual grammar books?

Michael

Now there's a novel idea! Bring back those old-timey, big chested, broad-shouldered, chunky English teachers with buns. Learning how to diagram sentences would be a great start.

I assume you mean by the term "buns," hair buns! ;-)

Oh My! Lets hope so! Yeeeeesh!!

Alexandr

Yes, the gray hair buns. But now that you mention it, they did seem to have light-blocking capabilities with the other kind as they lumbered down the hallways.

There I on the other hand had this idea of sweet lady teachers holding a tray of freshly baked buns, possibly nice sticky cinnamon? Shades of St Agatha!