On November 27, Catholic masses in the U.S. will adopt a new order of mass. It’s supposed to be closer to the Roman mass while still in the vernacular. Apparently it’s already been rolled out in other parts of the world. Anyone got opinions about this? For those who have been to the new style mass, what’s the biggest differences? And do you prefer the new mass, the older modern mass, or the Tridentine Latin mass?
So, far, the differences strike me as fairly trivial. A FEW of the new phrasings (or, rather, the new OLD phrasings, like “And with your Spirit”) are a bit clunky, but I don’t see anything worth getting excited about, positively OR negatively.
It’ll take a while to get used to it, but the changes aren’t glaring, and will be second nature in a few months.
StG
The Apostle’s Creed (Nicene Creed) has been revised.
Sounds like the Arians are at it again!
I don’t like it. I used to be able to walk into church and join in (not that the mood very often took me, but I could have if it had!). Now they’ve changed all the words. I don’t see that the new translation is different enough to have been necessary; that is, to be so much more accurate that it had to be changed, surely it should have been quite different to the old one. It isn’t that different: it just makes everything a little bit unsettling. I really don’t like the fact that they’ve changed the Creed. I have a … variable … relationship with Catholicism, but those words have been the declaration of faith for all my life, when I had faith and when I didn’t. I don’t like the changes. I don’t think it’s rational dislike, though, or not entirely.
“And with your spirit” makes me feel like there might be Kool-Aid in the chalice.
The translation is much more accurate, which is good. And the style is more formal, which I much prefer to the ghastly pared down stuff that came out in the 1970s.
So what are they calling this new mass, Mass Effect 2.0?
…d&r…
May a non-catholic drop an opinion without being too far off topic? I rather preferred the Latin. There was something musical about it when there was no hope of understanding it. I find the English words very distracting.
I have a CD of Gregorian Chants that I listen to. I really enjoy them.
I don’t find “consubstantial” to be any clearer or more precise than “one in being.”
Definitely agree.
The other changes are a bit clunky at times (a little overly-wordy, to me), but I really wonder whether people are going to get “Consubstantial.” Yes, it means the same thing, but it’s a mite theologically technical for lay use. Not to mention exotic. I fully encourage adult education, too, but you need to use language people understand.
Heh, I prefer Latin to English because I have a greater chance of understanding the Latin than the freaking King James’ that you guys are so damn fond of… it’s pretty sad when it turns out that I recognize the story of the Samaritan woman from the same couple words in English (which I’m supposed to be able to speak), German (uhhhh… nur eine kleine bitschen and please speak slowly) and Greek (I can say “good morning, good afternoon, good night, please, squid” without thinking back to my “roots of Spanish” lessons). But I prefer Spanish or Italian or French to Latin, for the same reason.
I’m having to guess, but I think what the OP is talking about is some minor changes in phrasing which went into effect in Spain years ago. I still say the Credo the old way, with the bit about “the visible and invisible”: I like that part (I don’t link “the invisible” to “the spiritual”, much less to “the supernatural”*; I link it to “things we can’t see with the naked eye” and to “things we don’t know yet”, so to me that part is about the search for knowledge), and it’s what comes up automatically. I see wanting to take it out for the horroroscope-guzzlers, but in my case I don’t think that particular bit is likely to lead me into heresy…
Many of the other changes are largely irrelevant to me, because frankly I need to think hard to remember when was the last time I attended a Mass which followed the book exactly. Between sung parts, Children’s Mass, multilingual priests and whatnot, the last time IIRC was in Vigo during the summer of 2008 (parish of St Augustin and yes, the priest was an Augustin). My new at-work parish is Dominican, but I haven’t been there yet so I don’t know how kumbayah their adult Masses are. They do have a Children’s Mass, which Augustins usually avoid, so I’m hoping for Spanish-standard kumbayah-ness.
- If something exists/happens, it’s by definition part of nature. If it’s part of nature, it’s natural. So assuming that, say, ghosts existed, they’d be natural, no supers there.
Pretty clunky, if you ask me. The new version of the Nicene Creed definitely sounds like it was translated by someone with a tin ear.
I agree. If you’re going to use the vernacular, it doesn’t make sense to me to use words that people don’t really understand the meaning of.
I do not like it at all. Seems like a waste of time. Not enough was changed to make it worth the change. And yeah, a lot of it sounds clunky.
Ymmv. I also really wanted my wedding in Latin.
Eh, it doesn’t seem like that big of a deal to me. I figure if I don’t like the changes, I can just wait 30 years for the next clarification. One of the things I like about the Catholic Church is that it just keeps on truckin’, regardless of each generations’ revisions.
I’m not old enough to remember Latin Mass as a standard thing. I’ve been to a few Latin masses said as special celebrations, and while they were nice in a historical sort of way, I didn’t find anything especially more (or less) valuable about them.
If they want accuracy shouldn’t it be in Aramaic, Jesus didn’t speak Latin!
Former Catholic here…you’re right, it does sound clunky. I don’t see how changing the wording really improves anything, and the thought of a room full of people reciting “I” instead of “We” just doesn’t seem to flow properly.
I’m not pleased with it – particularly with the changing of the Creed. The Creed is the result of the smartest men of a generation getting together, and in addition to fighting about doctrine, dedicated themselves to creating a creed that would work as well in the alleyways of Athens and the streets of Smyrna as it did in the Imperial Palace of Constantinople. It’s Latin was written for the streets of Rome and Salerno. I’m not behind taking something that was written for everyone and say it in Latinate English.
The Apostles Creed & the Nicene Creed are two different creeds, and AFAIK, the main change to the Nicene Creed (consubstantial) is definitely not pro-Arian.
It doesn’t bother me at all. It is very much like the translation I grew up reading in the 50s when my missal had Latin on the left page and English on the other. When they changed it after Vatican II no one seemed to care what we thought. I can’t believe all the explanations and meetings the parishes are having now. Just start it. In a couple months everyone will be used to it.