With the recent announcement of the approval of the new Missal for English speaking Roman Catholics, quite a bit of blog time has be revolving around that announcement. One of the funnier pieces I read on a blog stated the following:

"Someone wondered somewhere if people who are attached to the old modern rite might be given the privilege of having it celebrated for their stable group, or will they be forced out of the Church for clinging to tradition?"

Just some humor for a Saturday evening. No darts please!

On a serious note, I have frequently begun to think about the tragic loss of a common ecumenical liturgical language, primarily in the response to the salutation "The Lord be with you."

"And also with you" has become widely accepted, so widely, in fact, that about a decade ago I was in an ecumenical chaplaincy confernce comprise mainly of Baptists; yet when the person appointed to offer the opening prayer used that salutation, to a man all responded "and also with you."

Come Advent, we simply won't know whether to answer "and with YOUR spirit"; "and with THY spirit" or "and also with you."

Yes, this translation will be more faithful to the Latin. But what will we lose?

You left out the unofficial but common rejoinder of the celebrant: "Thank you".

Cringeworthy in the highest.


Not much.

Thanks be to God, I've never heard that. And I have never, ever, even considered saying that.

I once even hear "You're welcome" after "Thank you"--but that was in Bristol, VA, which is part of the Diocese of Richmond, which, I was told by someone who lives there, "Isn't really the Catholic Church". How odd that it abuts the Diocese of Arlington, which is one of the more conservative and liturgically straight-laced jurisdictions. Bishops matter, it would seem.

It has, I must admit, crossed my mind to shout "You're welcome" when a dubious cleric says "Thank you" following a response to a blessing. Ugh!

Fr. Serge

I have a 1965 English missal. It's amazing how close the new missal is to the 1965 one. In many instances, the translations are word-for-word the same.

In about the early 80's I was at Sunday Mass at the local RC parish. As I recall it, the priest told this story about one of the auxiliary bishops (Baltimore Archdiocese). The bishop was about to speak to the congregation but for some reason he thought the microphone wasn't on but in fact it was. So he says, THEre's something wrong WITH this microphone. The THE and WITH were just enough rote (THE Lord be WITH you.) that the congregation duly responded, "And also with you."

I like the way in which those who promoted this "translation" liked to claim that "And with your spirit" was merely a semitism for "same to you, bud". Taft absolutely demolished this ignorant or disingenuous attempt to justify poor scholarship or deliberate invention. Among other things, he noted the theological roots of "and with your spirit", as well as the unfortunate fact that in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, the oldest and most semitic of semitic liturgies, the response is "with you and with your spirit", which puts a most definitive end to any discussion of "and with your spirit" just meaning "and also with you".

What did Archimandrite Robert say about 'and with your spirit'?

I've heard this as well.

My response is this: If there are folks who clamor for the 1970 ICEL translation around in 40 years, I could forsee the pope making some allowance for them to use the old translation. That is, if they're around in 40 years.

And if we think of mirroring the the Extraordinary Form movement, when the first stage of the indult comes into play, say in 20 years, they would have to travel ungodly distances to attend Mass in an run down neighborhood and of course be treated as second-class Catholics since they're not "with the new times." That is, if they're clamoring for the old translation in 20 years.

I'm for restoration of the Old Roman Rite, myself, together with the Gallic rite, the Sarum rite, the Old Ambrosian Rite and the Mozerabic Rite. Let a thousand Western liturgies bloom! Anything but the banality of liturgies designed by committees.

Pretty much what I noted: that the expression is not an empty greeting, but speaks to the indwelling Spirit within the the celebrant, which is, of course, the active sacramental power at work in the liturgy. Its "redundant" presence in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari shows this is not just a semitic "back at ya'", but refers specifically to the Spirit that moves within the Church.