Interesting reaction of Revised Roman Missal from a well-written teenager
  • Bobby Bolin
    Posts: 417
    Interesting News Story
  • Bobby Bolin
    Posts: 417
    By the way, I learned about this through Jerry Galipeau's blog from WLP. Some of the comments on this story were also interesting.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    "Reporter" means "Distorter."

    I'd be careful about the spin that comes out of that rag.

    Since he is one of the twelve in the country, I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

    This is a ploy:

    Just because Erik has "studied Latin", we are all supposed to accept EVERYTHING he says and subscribe to his theology? In the words of Obi Wan Kanobe, "I don't think so!" (besides... he is only 16!)
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Erik said:

    "The problem, though, is that the Latin itself seems to be hyperbolically critical of humanity. It might aim to promote humility, but inevitably it fosters guilt instead. It promotes a vision of human nature as overwhelmingly and inexorably sinful-- a vision more in line with the heretical Janesenist doctrine of centuries past than Catholic dogma."

    FALSE

    Nothing "in the church" is "in line with the heretical Janesenist" doctrine. Erik takes the position of relativism, where the word 'sin' and the proper feeling of guilt directly connected to a right conscience is completely dismissed.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Eirk said:

    "Why are we only praying that people "of good will" receive peace? This seems to say that people who are without "good will" are not deserving of peace."

    Well, Satan and his cohort, Wiccans, those in the occult and new age are not deserving of peace, Erik. We are the Church Militant, and we FIGHT against them. Remember?

    People who are not of good will, are unable to attain peace.

    Here are other ways to say it that really drive it home:

    Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests. NIV

    "Glory to God in highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased." NLT

    "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to people who enjoy his favor!" ISV

    "Glory be to God in the highest Heavens, And on earth peace among men who please Him!" WNT

    ...and the list goes on. God does have a preference for his own children. Don't be fooled. You don't want to be against God or those who understand this spiritual principle or you might find yourself fighting against God himself. Don't go there.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Erik said:

    "Ultimately, the whole affair just begs the question of why the Latin Mass has any particular spiritual significance. It's certainly not Scripture, and it's often just an amalgamation of various communal prayers used throughout Europe for several centuries. In fact, many early bishops would write their own Masses or translations to best fit their community's needs. And that's the essence of Mass. The reason why we come to Mass in the first place rather than just praying by ourselves is the interaction with others that has spiritual importance. In the Mass the people become the Body of Christ, conceived as the organic whole Paul writes about in the famous passage from 1 Corinthians: “for the body is not one member, but many.”

    Wow! And this is why the rag is the rag. Erik does not understand the theology of the Mass in the least. Most of the Mass IS scripture, and in fact the consecrating words are the central most scriptural part.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Erik said:

    "The problem with the new translation and indeed the notion of a codified Latin Mass at all is that it destroys the communal and egalitarian nature of the act. Rather than an act of communion through which the churchgoer relates to God, it becomes an individualistic act through which the churchgoer relates to "experts" in Rome. It sets certain people above others in terms of their knowledge of a dead language and of dogma -- concerns that clearly distract from the message of God. If the Mass has any meaning, it must be grounded in communal concerns and vision-- not an effort to include as many four-syllable words as possible."

    In the end, I fear for your soul, and the publisher of this drivel.
  • Bobby Bolin
    Posts: 417
    Well, it is good to see there are a couple discussion points :)
  • Heath
    Posts: 934
    Fr. Z had a nice take on the this article as well.

    http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/11/of-fishwrap-and-sandals/
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    To be honest, I think nostalgia probably plays a large part in this young man's assessment of things. He was raised on this translation, and internalised it as part of his faith. To be told now, "actually, you know, this translation was kind of a well-meaning, but bad, idea", is gonna shake his faith a little, so out come the rationalisations or disagreements instead.

    I find it hard to go from one Orthodox parish, with one English translation in use, to another Orthodox parish using another slightly different translation (most translations were approved only by language... Greek > English separately from Russian > English, for example). It's sad that we can't all just use the same translation, and there are pros and cons to each (e.g. I personally dislike "forever and ever" as a translation rather than "unto ages of ages"). In this case, he's experiencing this through time--it's sad that his past self and fond memories can't use the same translation as his future self and fellow believers.

    I dunno. There's lots of things going on here. But I think a lot of it is, "hey, I grew up saying this, and it means a lot to me."
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Jam:

    We all grew up saying it for a lot longer than Erik, and it means a lot more when we say what it really means (aka the 'correct' English translation)

    (ie., Gloria - those of us who said it in Latin, knew what we were missing in the English all along. Unfortunately, almost all English speaking people didn't know, don't care, and now (in ignorance) think that they are being 'deprived of it's real meaning'... what a loss (of faith).

    Tis why I refuse to compose music in English. It gets discarded along with the bogus translation every few years. They are already working on MR4 ya know!
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    I recall that, after a mathematics lecture several years ago by a then "young lion" in the field, during which the speaker dismissed as "trivial" a number of cutting-edge results from the previous few years (some of them by distinguished mathematicians in attendance at the lecture), someone remarked, "You know, Jim is really pretty smart. In fact, he's almost as smart as he thinks he is."

    Since it could easily be said that I'm getting on in years, I'll relate another mathematician story. At an important mathematics conference many years ago, a group of mathematicians were chatting when up walked one of their colleagues, named Pierre, who quipped, "You know, Michael A****h must be getting old. I just spent thirty minutes talking with him and understood everything he said." I should point out that this Michael was one of the deepest mathematical thinkers of his time and was well-known to be rather cryptic at times. After Pierre had left the group, someone in the group spoke up, "You know, Pierre must be getting old. He just spent thirty minutes talking with A****h and thought he understood everything Michael said."
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 2,046
    Oh, I dunno, Francis, I think Wiccans are deserving of peace. But they won't get it until they accept Christ and His Church.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Yea... they get it AFTER conversion... meanwhile, they are definitely on the dark side of spiritual reality.

    Jeffrey: were you the one who was once a wiccan? someone on this board mentioned that a while back, but can't remember who it was.
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 2,046
    'sme
    "Dark side of spiritual reality" is true, but sounds overly lurid. I've never met a Wiccan who was possessed, though some have been heavily shadowed by Satan. Evil is a little more banal than that. The primary problem with Wicca is the belief that one can ascertain right and wrong through application of "An it harm none". That is THE Original Sin: that we have taken to ourselves the knowledge of good and evil. But in that, the difference between a Wiccan and many Protestants (or liberal Catholics!) is one of degree, not of kind. Oh yeah, there's that polytheism thing...but in practice, most I've known have either believed in one God, or no Gods. After all, if the Gods are real, They might demand something of you. ;-)

    We now return to our regularly-scheduled musical programming.
  • Andrew Motyka
    Posts: 944
    What's frustrating, to me, about this article, is that they set the author up to be an authority, and then he steps waaaay outside his field. His opening paragraph is about how faithful the new translation is to the Latin. As a Latin scholar (which I will not dispute), he has now addressed what he is competent at doing.

    He then goes into his disagreements with particular phrasings, etc., which are in the Latin. If you have a dispute with the words of the Mass in the editio typica get a liturgical theologian to talk about it. When your competence is language, address the language. The whole thing is a bait-and-switch. It reeks of the same mentality of "Stephen Hawking is a brilliant quantum physicist. Let's ask him about theology" stuff that you read so frequently.
  • SkirpRSkirpR
    Posts: 854
    What's frustrating, to me, about this article, is that they set the author up to be an authority, and then he steps waaaay outside his field. His opening paragraph is about how faithful the new translation is to the Latin. As a Latin scholar (which I will not dispute), he has now addressed what he is competent at doing.

    He then goes into his disagreements with particular phrasings, etc., which are in the Latin. If you have a dispute with the words of the Mass in the editio typica get a liturgical theologian to talk about it. When your competence is language, address the language. The whole thing is a bait-and-switch. It reeks of the same mentality of "Stephen Hawking is a brilliant quantum physicist. Let's ask him about theology" stuff that you read so frequently.


    ditto x 1000
  • irishtenoririshtenor
    Posts: 1,296
    This might not be very charitable of me, but I am very ticked off about this.

    Who the heck is this CHILD to be discussing the Third Edition of the Roman Missal? Who is this CHILD to be voicing his opinions in a national newspaper about the serious, profound theological underpinnings of the Roman Missal?

    What are we supposed to do with this TEENAGER'S opinions? Am I supposed to be impressed by this precocious youngster and rally around his ideas?

    He is 16 years old. He is a high school student. In 10 years, once he has learned a little something about our faith and our world, then maybe I'll be curious about what he has to say. He is not an expert, by any means, and yet the NCR gives him this huge platform. I'm appalled.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    "In 10 years, once he has learned a little something about our faith and our world, then maybe I'll be curious about what he has to say."

    I'm 26, and I don't want to say "consubstantial", and I think the 2010 modifications were a shame. Although I'm all in favor of getting rid of the old "translation", and the 2008 version is a massive improvement.

    The point, which is clearly missed here, is that it's a counter to the favorite memes of those on the traditional end of the spectrum: "Only old worn-out hippies dislike the new translations," and "all young people love Latin, ad orientem, chant, and the new translation." A la the really-creepy-sounding "biological solution" of certain bloggers. It's a nice fantasy land where the problem sectors in the church will just go away because the younger, wiser generations will replace them and finally usher in the True Doctrine. Clearly the author does not live in this fantasy land.

    What do people in my generation think of the new translation? Mostly that it's bad because "the church is going back to pre-Vatican II", whatever that means. To me, they could replace the old ICEL with vulgar rap lyrics and it'd be an improvement. I have a few friends (each and every one a church musician) my age who think it's a good thing, but they're in the minority among my Catholic Generation X/Y associates. Oh, and I have quite a few who vehemently reject the use of vernacular in liturgy at all - again, all church musicians.


    I think that our response should be to be honest about the translation's shortcomings, exuberant about its high points, and eager to seize this unique time in church history where we can lead public worship back to a sense of the sacred. The progressives (both old AND YOUNG) are trying to play political games with this translation. I say let them. While they're impotently protesting through blog and petition, we have the Missal Chants to teach people, and thus put Gregorian chant in its proper place as the normative music of the Latin Rite.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Gavin:

    Do you think you will be comfortable with 'consubstantial' when you are 36?

    Point being, it's not really years that make the difference, it's attitude of heart.
  • Aristotle EsguerraAristotle Esguerra
    Posts: 1,185
    As they say, "Traddutore, tradditore."

    On a not-completely-unrelated note: any homilists here want to tackle "consubstantialem"* in their preaching, using the different ways the Church has translated it into English—not just the (at least three different ones used in the past half-century in the) Latin Rite but also the other apostolic rites?

    *Offer applies to other controversially translated word or phrase.
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    @Jam

    No disrespect intended, but I'm 16, and I can see through this article like a piece of glass. Once you get past the title, anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see that there is really no critique of the translation itself here. If he's such a latin expert, then he would have seen years ago that the old translation was the problem, and that all of these things have been prayed for years. He is critical not of the translation, but of the texts of the Mass itself. It doesn't take ANY knowledge of latin to write what he wrote. It doesn't even need the knowledge of the existence of the latin. All that was needed for his essay was a literal translation of the texts of the Mass. Their flouting of him as a "latin expert" is just another way to try to get around the point that this is simply another idiotic article about how terrible the actual texts of the Mass are.

    Even worse: see the comments at the article...

    "Give him B16's job!!"
    "There is indeed hope for our future young generation if there are more forward thinking persons such as he..."
    "So,walking away from the Mass equates to walking away from Jesus?"
    "I have decided I cant attend mass anymore for the seeable future [because of the NT]"
    "[This] should be required reading for pastors of parishes, not to mention our bishops."

    At least some of the commenters have their heads on straight:

    "Um, I think Erik needs to lay off the Latin and take a few courses in Theology."

  • irishtenoririshtenor
    Posts: 1,296
    You're right on, BY.

    Keep on fighting the good fight, all. Truth will out. Our bishops will be strong, despite criticism like this. I fully believe that our Church will be stronger in the long run, having come through this turmoil. We've persevered through worse, to say the least!
  • marajoymarajoy
    Posts: 781
    I wonder if there was a 16 year-old writing a similar article, but saying, "wow, this new translation is amazing...I love rock music, but this translation really helps me to pray..." we would be all over that; like, "look at what the youth of the nation are saying!" So, that's just the thing that NCR is trying to utilize...
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    marajoy

    That would be harmless. This article spouts errant theology. Big dif.
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    @ Ben Yanke

    It's not that he's 16 or whatever, it's that he grew up praying that way, and that's what he's used to. That is going to bother some people. It obviously doesn't bother you, which is great, because these translations are so much better... (I studied Latin too). And I'm gonna go to an OF Mass during advent just so I can say "and with your spirit" in a Catholic church and not immediately blush and fumble because it was the wrong thing to say (I also have a tendency to say "Lord have mercy" during the petitions of the people as well... Orthodox habits are not easily changed...)

    anyway. I'm just trying to understand where he is coming from rather than just be annoyed by it. Judging from the attitudes I encountered while at FUS concerning this and some other liturgical things, most opposition is usually just some form of, "but this is what I grew up doing". And I mean, you can't blame everyone for that. some people's faith is very deeply ingrained and they are very faithful, but they just didn't know any better. and then what they did while well-meaning but ignorant, well, they get defensive about it later if they hear about what it should have been like. Because, you know, they meant well, and they were moved, and so on and so on.
  • jpal
    Posts: 365
    Not directly relevant, but while we are on the subject of the new translation and youth...
    for junior high
    for teens
    for adults
  • amindthatsuits
    Posts: 857
    The young gentleman writes very well, but he is not well-formed in doctrine.

    The credential question is right ont point:As with many a professor, he thinks that skill in one area grants him the right to pronounce on other areas--and with so many professors who wander afield, he only ends up parroting an "educated" (i.e., elite) line, and nothing more. The comments section IS interesting in that regard...everyone saying the same thing in high dudgeon.

    However, I am queasy whenever children are used to advance the agendas of their elders. As a college teacher, I have always looked askance at very intelligent youngsters coming to college early. That year or two of growth makes a world of difference. I WAS able to write about as well as this young writer at 17--but I was a teenage basketcase. My sentences sounded reasonable, but I had miles to go before I had adult understanding to go along with the vocabulary. As for the "conservative" who launched into the kid on the NCR website, intending it for the kid to see--he fully deserved the scorn he got. The kid is, when all is said and done, a kid, but whoever that was, is stunted. The axes do tend to come out here, but the young author is unlikely to see them.
Add a Comment